Jump to content

User talk:Dbiel/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Talk page archive July 2007 thru August 2007

Welcome

Hello, Dbiel, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  J Milburn 09:56, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted page RADb

Would it be acceptable to replace the deleted page prior to completing the referenced page?

What follows is what I posted on Ragib talk page

I noticed that you deleted the RADb redirect page, would it be OK to put it back as the following entry which would at least leave a definition for anyone searching for RADb until the referenced page is reworked. Thank you Dbiel 15:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

  1. REDIRECT Routing Assets Database

Please note that the "Routing Assets Database" page has been deleted due to a lack of notability. It is being reworked and should be back shortly Dbiel 15:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

It's probably best to wait until the Routing Assests Database page is done. Martinp23 19:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
It is hardly of any use having a redirect to a non existent article. So, as Martinp23 said, its best to wait till the page is put back up. If you are really interested in having the definition in place, create the article with a one or two line definition, include one or two link to claim notability, add {{stub}} to its end, and create the redirects. After that keep developing the article in your personal workspace and overwrite the article when done. --soum (0_o) 00:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal Work Space

How does one go about creating a personal work space for writing articles such that they do not get deleted during the development process?

You do it in your userspace. Your userspace is User:Dbiel/[whatever you want], and I have already created User:Dbiel/Routing Assets Database for you, to let you work on that. J Milburn 12:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I explained that in the post on the bottom of this page. They are article categories, and we do not want userpages in article categories, and so I used the <nowiki></nowiki> tags. J Milburn 12:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Why was Routing Assets Database deleted

I original came to Wikipedia trying to get information on "Routing Arbiter Data Base" (RADB) which lead me to the page "Routing Assets Database" After doing some additional reasearch I found that Routing Assets Database is more correctly abrevated RADb I created the additional redirect page RADb I also added some reference links to support the use of RADb and to beter explain it. Soumyasch has delete the page as "Blatant Advertising" but left both rediret pages in place. I strong disagree that anything on the page is "Blatant Advertising" If the Reference link is considered as such, then delete the link. Do NOT delete the entire page. Being new to Wikipedia I do not know how to proceed. I have looked at the dispute resolution process and find the instructions worthless in this situation as they read "Create a section for the RfC on the bottom of the article talk page with a brief, neutral statement of the issue." Since the page is deleted, and I can find no way of getting to it, how do you add anything to the bottom of the page? Please help. Even the helpme request is comfusing. In the welcome posted by my talk page it says to place it after the question, yet the template itself states put it before the question, what is up with that? Dbiel (Talk)

RADb

Hi, saw the note you left on my talk page. First of all, the content was something like this "Its a network run by this company. To access it, visit this link" or something similar. Well, it is advertising, if not blatant advertising.

Second, the article confuses between the generic technology Routing Assets Database (Routing Arbiter Database) and Merit Network's implementation RADb.

Thirdly, for something to be the subject of an article, it has to conform to the notability criterion (which, in a nutshell, says, it must be the subject of at least a handful of verifiable reiable secondary sources). I am afraid the article did not mention why it was notable (this has to be attributed) to reliable sources).

If you think the subject is important enough, you are welcome to recreate it. But, this time, please make sure, it establishes notability (and reword the offending lines to not sound as an advert. Tip: Do not say "visit this site", rather just include it in the External links section). And properly disambiguate between the generic network system and the implementation.

And finally, sorry for the misleading summary. I deleted it mainly because of notability concerns, with advertising being a secondary concern. I chose the edit summary from a list, and by mistake hit the wrong one. For the redirects, the deletion was quite sometime back. I do not exactly remember why I forgot to check what links to that page. Maybe I had some urgent errands to run or something. It was my fault. Sorry. I am not deleting them now, because I think the page will be back soon. :)

Regards, and all the best. If you need any help, feel free to contact me. If you want the deleted text, here is it:

Routing Assets Database, or RADB is run by Merit Network Inc.
It is a lookup database designed to make finding fundamental information about networks available. RADB can be accessed by going to http://www.radb.net.
RADB can also be defined as Routing Arbiter Data Base
Merit's Routing Assets Database is more accurately listed as RADb
Merit developed the Routing Assets Database (RADb) in the early 1990's as part of the NSF-funded Routing Arbiter Project. The RADb is a public registry of routing information for networks in the Internet.

--soum (0_o) 09:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your confusion about the processes here, Dispute resolution (DR) is used to settle disputes between what editors, regarding inclusion or deletion of content, or anything else. But, that means the editors must be having a dialogue between them (or warring over edits) which they cannot themselves resolve. Request for comments (RFC) is a part of the dispute resolution process, where you seek independent assessment of the situation from third parties. Both of these should be preceded by a dialogue between the editors.
For independent review of deletions, there is the deletion review (DRV) process, where you present your case, and the submitter, the deletor and others discuss the merits and demerits of the decision and decide whether to overturn the decision or to keep it deleted.
When you feel some article has been wrongly deleted, you should first contact the admin and explain why it should not have been deleted (as you rightly did this time :) ). Then you should try to reach a resolusion through mutual dialogue. Most cases can be resolved by this only. If no resolution is in sight, then it is taken to DRV. --soum (0_o) 09:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
That sometime happens. Most probably when the page was created, many other pages were also created around that time. So, this page got buried. Also, very few pages linked to it, so the chance of people stumbling upon this is quite low. Thats how it avoided the scrutiny. Now, when you edited it, it became visible again on Special:Recentchanges and by chance came into attention.
As for the content, this is all there was in the article body. Apart from this, there were a bunch of links to related articles. The article has been moved to your userspace (a sub page of your user page). You can work on it here, taking your time. When you feel its baked fully, you can move it to its original title. You can access it at User:Dbiel/Routing Assets Database. --soum (0_o) 12:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I see you are quite busy with the article. If u need a hand, just let me know. :) --soum (0_o) 15:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Response for the help you called for on my talk page

Well, you asked a lot of things, so I will address them one by one.

  • I have never personally used a helpme tag, but it is pretty ridiculous that the two templates argue with each other. I personally don't think it matters, but what is said on the tag itself is probably correct.
  • Looking at the page, that was brutal. Doesn't look like advertising to me, (as an administrator, I can view deleted pages). However, you did not provide links to prove that it is notable, and so Soumyasch may have deleted because of that.
  • The fact that the redirect pages were not deleted was clumsyness on Soumyasch's part, I should suspect.
  • The way you have proceeded now, just asking for clarification and help, is probably the best way. The conflict resolution stuff is pretty awkward, and generally only for use when chatting isn't an option. In any case, RfC would not normally be an option in dealing with deleted pages- for speedily deleted pages, contacting the deleting admin (or other admins) would be an option, and there is also the deletion review process. However, I would reccomend that you don't go through that, just have a chat with Soumyasch.
  • The text itself was fine in the original article, looked neutral enough to me. However, the issue of notability was not. Do you think you would be able to find two articles about the database in reliable sources? If you could get these, then very few people would say that it was non-notable, and so it would deserve a place on Wikipedia.

As a final note, I will contact Soumyasch, and have a chat with them. If you can find two sources, be sure to point them out to Soumyasch, and he/she will probably allow you to go ahead and recreate. Feel free to contact me if you need any further help, and thanks for putting time into this. J Milburn 09:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, Soumyasch contacted you in the mean time. I will not bother contacting them, then! J Milburn 09:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I should imagine that the notability issue was raised only when you began editing because Soumyasch noticed it on recent changes patrol- when you make a change to page, it shows up on a list, and a lot of people patrol that list, looking out for vandalism. As for the full text of the article, I have moved it (along with its history) to your userspace. You can find it at User:Dbiel/Routing Assets Database, and please note the <nowiki></nowiki> tags I have placed on it, so that the categories do not show up- we do not want user pages in article categories. Again, feel free to drop me a line if you need any help with anything, and I reccomend you give me a shout when you hope to resubmit it, so I can check out whether it looks good, policy-wise. J Milburn 12:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

RADb

Policy wise, its fine now, well done!. The only concern is the content. I am sure you are working on it. Meanwhile, the I edited the version you created to rephrase the info and make some formatting changes. Please take a look. --soum (0_o) 02:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure. The page is on my watchlist. I will know any changes you make. Good job. Keep up the good work. --soum (0_o) 16:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay, lemme know when the article is in a coherent enough state. --soum (0_o) 19:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Formatting and namespace usage help needed

I have been unable to find answers to the following 2 questions:

1) How do you insert paragraph indenting (both first line and entire paragraph)

2) What is the policy for user namespace usage

Is what I have been doing considered acceptable or not?

See my page User:Dbiel for the current list of pages in my namespace

Thank you --Dbiel 20:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

You indent by putting a colon (:) at the start of a pargraph. You want a larger indent, put two colons, and so on. User space usage guidelines are explained here. I don't think there is a way to indent just the first line of a paragraph, as that is considered improper when typing. Hope that helps. J Milburn 20:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

How to delete history?

What is the policy regarding deleting excess history entries? Note: this would only apply to consecetive history entries made by me in the process of building a page. I see no value in having 100 or more history entries over a short period of time if all of the entries are by the same user. It would seem to only clutter the database while providing absolutely no value except to show how disorganized a individual user is in their page creation/editing processes.

I'm pretty sure that developers are the only people that can actually delete history. Admins can delete history, but it's still stored on the database if an admin wants to restore it, which is why deleting a page also saves no space, since it still physically exists, it's just not viewable. --TeckWiz is now R ParlateContribs@ (Let's go Yankees!) 00:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
R, what about the Oversights as they can, technically, delete history since they can remove any diff from a history. ~ Magnus animum ∵ ∫ φ γ 01:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
It wouldn't be advisable though. All the text here is licensed under GFDL. To maintain the statute of attribution, the history is to be kept intact. --soum (0_o) 01:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Is it permited to edit a Disambiguation Link and if so where would one find a copy of the code block so the edited code could be used instead of the link itself ie {{disambig}} Also are links allowed to non Wikipedia sources within Disambiguation pages or should it be left as a broken Wikipedia Link even though there may be no intention to create such a page in the future. As an example see the page I am trying to develop in my name space, it is far from ready to be moved to the article name space but at least gives some idea where I am headed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dbiel/RADB PS I have been unable to find this specific information I have read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation , but it is possible that I failed to see the answer if it does appear there. Thanks for the help Dbiel 13:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Also note bad link found in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Table

see :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Table - 35 Bad Link in this Page Seems strange to find a bad link in a master help page

You can edit a disambiguation page to add or remove entries. The {{disambig}} at the bottom probably shouldn't be changed, as it expands to boilerplate text to help keep all disambiguation pages looking the same and to help the software identify them. (You would remove the nowikis if/when you move the userpage to articlespace; it's been nowikied because it isn't an article yet.) You should generally leave broken (red) links on a disambiguation page if there isn't an article rather than using external links; the disambiguation pages are just to distinguish between articles with the same name. Note also that there must be at least two existing articles that the page disambiguates between, or it will be deleted, and that entries on the page which would not make a good article shouldn't be there (see the notability guidelines for an example of what would be appropriate to become an article some day).
As for Help:Table, that information's copied across from meta:, which is a wiki just like Wikipedia, but which provides help, information, and coordination between wikis rather than encyclopedia articles. The link there is going to entirely the wrong destination and was probably added by mistake. To paraphrase an appropriate quote I heard recently: The Help pages are as accurate as Wikipedia itself.
Hope that helps! --ais523 13:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, but I would question the usefulness of a Disambiguation Page for an acronym if it is only for links to Wikipedia or sister pages. They should be in a special case that allows for definitions of some of the different uses of the term that may or may not be suitable as Wikipedia articles; otherwise one is saying the the only valid acronym is one the is of use in Wikipedia which from my point of view is very short sighted. I guess you could then say that the page actually is not a disambiguation Page but rather an article page on the subject of the specified acronym which resembles and acts like a disambiguation page. As such, should it be rewritten more like an article page with a separate reference link section? That would be another approach which would accomplish the same intended purpose.Dbiel 15:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I'm sorry can you show me a few examples? I'm not following what you are asking at all. :( Sorry, when you are ready for me or someone else to come look just add the {{helpme}} tag again. Again sorry for not understanding. —— Eagle101Need help? 16:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
The example would be the page referenced above that I am working on that ais523 would say would not meet Wikipedia requirements due to linking to only one Wikipedia article, yet note the number of other meanings for the term see: User:Dbiel/RADB
Note: remember, this is a work in process and is not formated properly at this time, but should be adequate for the purpose of this example. Dbiel 17:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I see, first thing, is you need to get rid of the external links, none of our disambiguation pages are supposed to have links to external sites. (those links should go inside stub articles that are decently sourced and cited. As for making the dab page right away, perhaps you should first wait and create a stub or two of a few of the other pages. It looks interesting though, I'd like to know what Radioactive D'Bazzar is (from a wiki article not an external link). Cheers! (and if you need help again just slap the {{helpme}} tag up. —— Eagle101Need help? 18:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Rice Allelopathy Data Base

Hi, as you asked, I took a look at the article. I did not delve too deep into the references, but from the initial impression, the article appears to be tending to focus too much on Prof. Rice rather than the database. Same with the references. Except for one, all others are about Prof. Rice with the DB just mentioned in an article about him. As such, I do not think the DB is notable enough on its own to get its own article (can it grow up to have significant amount of high quality content?) Like you said in your question, in an article about the database, the notability issue should apply to the db not to its author. On the same lines, the content should also be about the db, not its author.

But Prof. Rice seems notable enough for an article. And in that case, this being an important work of Prof. Rice, does deserve a section or two in that article. In case it becomes too large that the size of the parent article goes out of control, we can always spin it off into sub articles. --soum (0_o) 08:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review Rice Allelopathy Data Base and for leaving some very productive and useful comments. It is interesting how one thing spins of or leads into another. Started off with editing Routing Assets Database which brought the article to your attention resulting in you deleting it, which lead me to the redirect page RADB and previously to creating an additional redirect page RADb which lead to a changing RADB into a disambiguation page, but with links to only one article created problems, which lead into creating Rice Allelopathy Data Base which as I expanded it tended to be more about Professor Rice which may now lead into another new article about Professor Rice. Dbiel 13:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
:D lolz... good luck with that. --soum (0_o) 02:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Dbiel/Rice Allelopathy Data Base

Well, it certainly would not be speedily deleted, but it could use a little bit of copyediting. A few quick tips to improve article writing in general, obviously, it is almost impossible to do everything right all the time-

  • Use a specific stub type, not just the generic one. There is a full list here, but don't worry about putting it in the most specific category possible.
  • Use categories, not just stub categories!
  • Footnotes look like a great way to cite sources.
  • On lists, such as external links or references, use bulletpoints, by placing an asterisk at the start of the line.
  • Titles of articles should be placed in the first line, and bolded, as explained here, to give the article some context.

Hope that helps! J Milburn 15:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Use of Color in Wikipedia

In trying to find guidelines on the use of color in Wikipedia articles I was lead to the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Usability/Color

It would sure be helpful if a link was place at the top of that article (or at least in the discussion page) leading to a source of current information on the use of color. Is there such a document?

Hi there. Your answer can be found here, in the Manual of Style. You may add an appropriate link if you see fit. Happy editing to you! Teke 04:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Trying to understand wiki code

__FORCETOC__ {{wiktionarypar3|RAM|Ram|ram}} Dbiel 00:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

__FORCETOC__ forces the page to display a table of contents - I added it to Ram because, since it only has two sections, it normally wouldn't show the table; I wanted to make it abundantly clear to a user that if s/he was looking for an entry on an abbreviation, s/he should move to the second section.
{{wiktionarypar3|RAM|Ram|ram}} inserts the box on the right-hand side of the page that links a user to the respective Wiktionary entries. If it were used on a disambiguation with only one spelling, it could simply be {{wiktionary|DAB TERM HERE}}; for two spellings, {{wiktionarypar2|FIRST SPELLING|SECOND SPELLING}}, etc.
May I assume that your last edit means that we've come to a consensus on the formatting at Ram? If so, I'm glad that we were able to work it out so amicably. I hope to collaborate with you on further edits!
As a side note, it's good to sign all your posts, including those on your own talk page, with four tildes (~~~~). I didn't the first few posts I made to my own talk page, but another editor pointed out to me that it was just as useful to someone reading your posts there as it would be anywhere else. Cheers! PaladinWhite 00:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

How to save edits when hit by the "Edit Conflict" flag

Reversion habits

Please note, this is a personal habit developed by reading policy and watching or engaging in the limited number of discussions to which I've been a party in my limited history as an editor - it's not official policy. As far as I'm concerned, it's most appropriate and most considerate to revert an edit once - if the original editor feels the edit should stand, a discussion should be opened at that point. Wikipedia:Three-revert rule states that an editor may not revert an article more than three times in a single day - to me, it seems silly to revert the same edit more than once. The only way that will head is for each editor (Editor A, the author of the edit, and Editor B, the reverter) to revert and re-revert the article to their permitted three times, and then stop until the next day. Nothing gets accomplished.

If you're the one doing the reverting, as you were in this case, I think you did quite the right thing. A revert should be accompanied by (1) a meaningful edit summary, explaining the reason, if it's short enough, and/or (2) a new section on the talk page, if it's too long, (3) and possibly a post on the other editor's talk page, if you think it's a personal issue or misunderstanding between the two of you, specifically (note that this should never be done on its own; 1 and/or 2 and maybe 3) As you said, be bold! But don't be so bold that no one else knows why you're doing it.

I'm rambling. In summary, I think it's best, if your edit is reverted, to immediately open a discussion on the topic, in order to work out whatever issue exists before continuing to edit the article. If you're the reverter, then by all means, remove something that seems controversial. But let the other person (and all other editors) know why you did it!

Thanks for being a considerate editor and actively seeking to learn about the workings of Wikipedia. PaladinWhite 02:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Hard border

Where are you seeing this article show up? It may be the update for the list you are looking at only updates at discrete intervals. I had a look and the article only had the {{story}} tag? --Steve (Stephen) talk 05:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

It is reference on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wikify in section "WikiProject Wikify: Open Tasks" The code that displays it is {{WikiProjectWikifyTasks}} which is entered following my signature Dbiel 05:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Wikify: Open Tasks
Please format these articles to bring them up to standard
Well I see the problem is the template that is hard coded. I will fix the problem myself by editing the template. revised temple follows my sig Dbiel 06:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I think I beat you to editing it! --Steve (Stephen) talk 06:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Template editing must be different as I also edited it and did not get a conflict notice, but after reviewing the template in more detail it appears that many of the entries on it should be removed as the articles do not have the Wikify tag, had to click on 5 different articles before finding one that was tagged. Dbiel 06:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes (again)

(Sorry to keep bothering you about this) Now that you've fixed the problem on my subpage, do you want me to delete the test page that you created for it? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 15:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

No bother at all. Feel free to delete it. I am glad I was able to help a bit.Dbiel 16:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Done. Thank you for all of the help! The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 16:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

RADB disambig

Interesting to see a referenced disambiguation page! Don't mention how you are working on the article in your userspace- link to the article space version, if there is one, or link to where the article space version will be, otherwise it is a self reference, which we want to avoid. J Milburn 15:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The use of references was one of the points I was interested in getting some feedback on. I could not see any easy way to define the terms without creating a article page, yet some of the terms would not support having a separate article, yet do need some sort of definition or link to another site that would provide that information. References seemed, to me, to be the cleanest way to accomplish that
As to why the page is being work on in user namespace relates back to its history. It was originally a redirect page (and has become one again), but the page it was being redirected to got deleted which basicly forced me to try to rebuild them outside of the article namespace. The links currently used, would be changed before moving the page into the article namespace, per policy that states articles should not contain links to user namespace pages.
I guess my main question is: can this page (at this time) be used to replace the current redirect page (with the understanding that all links to my user namespace would be changed)?
I am still trying to figure out when development work should be done outside of article namespace so as to avoid the speedy deletion of poor qualitity drafts or stubs as was the case with Routing Assets Database which we did get a replacement stub created, but I continue to work on the deleted article in my user name space at User:Dbiel/Routing_Assets_Database. other articles being work in my user space include: User:Dbiel/Routing_Arbiter, currently totally unacceptable for article space due to copyright issues. User:Dbiel/Rice_Allelopathy_Data_Base and a shorter stub version User:Dbiel/Rice_Allelopathy_Data_Base/stub which I hope might be accpetable for use in the article namespace as a stub. And finally User:Dbiel/Elroy_Leon_Rice actually that page has not even been created yet. I find the development work a very slow process and want to avoid the speedy deletion previously experienced. Thank you for your assistance --Dbiel 19:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:California Infobox U.S. state.jpg

This has been resolved thanks to the help of User:Howcheng Dbiel (Talk) 02:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:California Infobox U.S. state.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Dbiel. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that at this time you do not meet the minimum requirement of 250 edits to mainspace articles (see under main here). Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. «Snowolf How can I help?» 21:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Infobox and metro

Thanks for the comments -- I think I was also looking for an excuse to start participating in Wikiproject Southern California! Best, -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Reply to [1]

Anytime! Let me know if you ever need someone to look something over again. :-) Hersfold (talk/work) 23:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Prophets

Actually, I was reverting to the original template, but you're right, I should've included an edit summary, please accept my apologies. Epson291 20:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. If it interests you, can you please help me confirm the Old Testament prophets as regarded by Christianity? I can only speak of Judiasm (I am not Christian) and I feel very uncomfortable by User:Java7837's edit's regarding Baruch, Neriah, Seraiah, Mordecai, Hannah, Abigail, Esther since he added numerous Bibical figures to his list of "Jewish prophets" that are not regarded as prophets by Jews or Christians (but some are by Muslims). So I quesiton his edits but accept them in good faith. The article he cited, Table of Prophets of Abrahamic Religions, is his creation in addition, it is not sourced.
Here are a list of the 55 people regarded as prophets of the scriptures by Jews, http://www.jewfaq.org/prophet.htm, included is the reason Daniel is not considered a prophet in Judiasm (while he is in Christianity). What I am asking is if Baruch, Neriah, Seraiah, Mordecai, Hannah, Abigail, Esther are prophets or not in Christianity (because I think they very well might be, if they are, I'll revert some more). Regards. Epson291 01:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles

Thanks for making the new article for Emperor School!!! I added tons of things including a new topic-the unfortunate incident of the fire last year!!! it looks great and i can't start a new article cuz i don't have an account but thanks!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.224.35.13 (talk • contribs)

Portugal (lead paragraph)

I still wonder if a less radical change on the paragraph would be better. Something like this:

Portugal is a developed country, member of the European Union (since 1986) and the United Nations (since 1955), as well as a founding member of the Eurozone, OECD, NATO and CPLP (Comunidade dos Países de Língua Portuguesa — Community of Portuguese Language Countries). Page Up 10:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I will go ahead and edit the article accordingly. Dbiel (Talk) 04:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

California site edit

Note: This is in response to your comment on my talk page (where I originally posted this message). Please feel free to reply on my page.

I suppose that's fine. I changed the article from "Cal-Berkeley" to "California (UC Berkeley)" for a few reasons. One, the athletic programs at Cal are never referred to as "UC Berkeley." Cal has a weird split-personality: academically, the school goes by "UC Berkeley", but the athletic program goes by "California", "Cal", or "University of California". If you check the school's athletic website, you'll notice that almost nowhere on that page do you see the name "Berkeley".

Second, most students and alums of the school (disclaimer: I'm a Cal alum) do NOT call the school Cal-Berkeley. That's the main reason I edited that part of the article. I replaced it with "California (UC Berkeley)" because, as I said above, our athletic programs go by "Cal". I added the "(UC Berkeley)" because often times people don't realize that "Cal" and "UC Berkeley" are the same institution.

Nonetheless, I suppose that just "UC Berkeley" fits within the context of that sentence ("The athletic programs of USC, UC Berkeley, etc..."). Thanks for giving me a heads up about your edit. Jsol5 09:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Re

Whats your point then? Are these 150 articles linking to the wrong page, because if they are then change them, not the blatant redirect. —Xezbeth 05:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Rambamfan

Hi, well firstly, User:Rambamfan's only contributions are for these links.

Secondly, information like this would probably be better served on Wikipedia (in English), does something like this exist here? I don't usually edit bible based articles here, since it's complicated and you start dealing with different interpretations and factuality. On the link, the only thing that is in Hebrew are names and names of books (i.e., "Moses", and "Genesis" are in Hebrew), and its probably safe to assume most people on Wikipedia don't have basic Hebrew, which makes it useless to them. Some of the information seems interesting though, like this, A Biblical Timeline, and this link is provided for translations of names.

I kind of the like the chart and the timeline, I could make articles for them, though the dates are really just approximate and should include later things.

If the link is kept, it should look like below, using the template to indicate it is in Hebrew/English. Epson291 18:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Lutheranism and the Eucharist

Copied from User talk:Drboisclair: Thank you for your edits to Lutheranism. When I originally change the word "are" to "become" was to avoid the assumption that this is the case at the time they are placed on the alter. Your edit "the consecrated elements of bread and wine are the true body and blood of Christ "in, with, and under the form" of bread and wine for all those who eat and drink it" is much better. Thank you. Dbiel (Talk) 20:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. It seems like much hinges on one word, a word that is heavily attested in ancient eucharistic liturgy ("that they may become for us the body and blood of Christ"), but for Lutherans "become" is Transubstantiation language.--Drboisclair 20:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


Response to Revert

I am Rambamfan responding to the revert of my link from the Aaron article to the website TanakhProfiles.org. It's true that this site can only be read by Hebrew readers. However, three points in defense of this link: firstly, English Wikipedia articles themselves occasionally do contain words in other languages - Aaron itself has two that I saw. Secondly, there are plenty of English articles which have information that is inaccessible even to the English reader. I have been unable to understand some Science and Math articles which certainly contain "languages" that are understood by only some readers. I imagine that readers who encounter articles on Wikipedia or who access links from Wikipedia which they don't understand, will move on. I don't feel unfairly treated by a page that's beyond me. Thirdly, it is not unreasonable for a reader of a Biblical topic to be directed to a site that contains Hebrew. I suggest that many students of Bible do possess some working knowledge of this Biblical tongue. If Wikipedia has a policy that is violated by my link, then I bow to the rules of the site. Otherwise, please restore my contribution. Rambamfan 11:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Response to Revert Response
Thank you for responding, and for being patient with me - I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. Your point about the inclusion of Hebrew on the Aaron entry is well taken. I understand the distinction of putting a link in the External Link section rather than the See also section, but don't know what to do if there is no "External Link Section". As well, I'm not sure what you mean about putting the link as "reference."
89.139.230.25 19:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thanks
OK, thanks for all your help
Rambamfan 08:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was inclined to agree with your initial advice to Rambamfan that the links to the Tanakh Profiles site do not belong in English wikipedia. Did you change your view on that? I ask because he has been adding more of the same today. See MOS on non-English links. (RSVP here.) Fayenatic london (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

My main objections were satisfied when the entry was moved out of the "See also" section and into the "External Links" section along with the reformating of the link to clearly identify the subject of the linked page with the addition of the (in Error: {{in lang}}: unrecognized language tag: hebrew/english) languageicon. Remembering also the the article subject finds its original roots back through the Hebrew language, I personally am fine with the links as long as they conform to the current format. They remain useless to me, but they are clearly identified as to what they are. I also relied on the advise of User:Epson291 as posted above which indicated that the site did contain useful information. Dbiel (Talk) 20:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll recommend the user to add the link given above by Epson291 for translations of names. Fayenatic london (talk) 20:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately it is not a translation link, but only a language identification icon. Dbiel (Talk) 23:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
It looks like I may have read your post wrong as I now see what you are talking about which you posted on Rambamfan's talk page. Sorry for my confusion. Dbiel (Talk) 02:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

SPAM

Thanks for the attempts to tidy up, but although Hormel says that the product name "should always be in caps", the Wikipedia style guide echoes that of most newspapers by saying to "follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment". We don't put the exclamation mark in Yahoo! throughout the body of the article, we don't capitalise Realtor, and so on. --McGeddon 09:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately your examples do not represent the same degree of confusion. Yahoo and Realtor can still be identified for what they are. spam and spam can not be distinguised between. spam has been come so common place to me junk email, that there is a greater need to distinguish between the two. Even the article itself uses SPAM to refer to the meat product and spam to refore to the electronic junk. Can you show a better example where there is as much confusion between the name of two different items as spam and spam, that can clearly be separated by following the SPAM spam case format?
To restate, where in the article Yahoo is there any confusion between the meaning of Yahoo! and Yahoo. Or in Realtor and REALTOR. SPAM and spam are clearly two different things and are frequently refered to in the same article.
To quote from the style guide:
but, don't invent new formats: MCI is standard English, while "Mci" is essentially never used.
Looking at http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/SPAM the lower case spellings are refer to as:
Alternative spellings:
Spam (in informal use)
spam (in informal use)
The article, I do not believe, can be called informal.
Is there a better place to have this discussion?Dbiel (Talk) 09:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello. It'd be better to have this discussion on Talk:Spam (food), so that other editors could see it and comment.
So far as I can see, email spam is only referred to in the "Email spam" section of the article, and the article itself is clearly titled "Spam (food)", with "Spam (electronic)" being a distinct article. If there was a section of the food article where it was unclear which type of spam was being discussed, it would make more sense to rewrite that section than to breach MoS:TM across the entire article. (If anything, referring to the two different spams as "spam luncheon meat" and "email spam" would be much clearer to the reader - any ambiguous sentence about email spam, written as lower case, would still be ambiguous.) --McGeddon 09:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
It'd also be more useful to put critical commentary of other editors ("It is bad enough that Wikipedia has chosen to ignore the case usage of Hormel's registered trademark...") on the talk page of the article, rather than in HTML comments of the article body. --McGeddon 11:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for help from Survir

Hello, Dbiel, I started editing some of Indian channel programs (TV Asia), but i have getting message everytime saying this is not catogorized, or referenced, or something else. the picture is right. I don't understand any of that! so would you please tell me how to reference and catorized a page!!! Also, i have used logos for the programmes, which should be fine cuz it's helping expand their show info. but i get message, the dispute picutre bla bla bla..... what does that mean my user talk is Survir. please help me User:Survir

Deletion

Hello Dbiel, this is your friend Survir. I posted an article but this user deleted it... I was going to edit more info today, but this stupid crapiest person deleted the article even though the picture an article were both had sources and references. this is his/her id FisherQueen. What should I do.

University of Saskatchewan

Noticed you were a member of Wikiproject Canada - Education.... Celebrate the Centennial University of Saskatchewan Anniversary in the year 2007 Would you please go to Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive and vote for this University of Saskatchewan article!!! Tell any and all other editors / U of S students you know who wiki to vote also please!!! Please help Celebrate the Anniversary of the U of S University of Saskatchewan Academics Talk Help to bring the article to feature status !!!SriMesh | talk 02:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for adding your vote to the U of S page, also thanks for your review, any assistance is much, much appreciated! SriMesh | talk 13:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello I didn't realize that there was a page...Gothic Revival architecture in Canada. I think it is awesome! Thanks for the link, and it will be most pleasant to read this new article. I wish I knew more of architecture, now that I am writing these articles SriMesh | talk 19:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello again. There were seven elementary schools of this style as well in Saskatoon as well as other buildings on the U of S campus...Buena Vista's architect was David Webster, who also designed King George, King Edward (no longer standing), Albert, Westmount (no picture), Caswell and Alexandra (no longer around) schools. Albert school is now a heritage site as well...there is a picture and some information on Wikipedia at Albert. Nutana School is a protected site. I don't know if St. Mary school (picture) is gothic style or not. It is included in the heritage society's protected buildings but may soon be torn down...SriMesh | talk 19:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Eli Whitney Students Program

Re: "A select number of students IS accepted each year and admissions is highly competitive." (Article: Eli Whitney Students Progam)

Here, the subject of the verb is "a select number," which is singular; being that the subject is singular, so too the number of the verb (to be); thus "is" rather than "are." However, if the subject of the sentence were students--e.g. "few students"--then you would have a plural number in the verb, "are" rather than "is." I hope this explains why I have undone your edits to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.132.143.49 (talk • contribs) {{helpme}}

Would like to the the POV from someone else with Wikipedia experience regarding the preceeding issue of is vs are. The OP definately does not understand Wikipedia as indicated by his posting of this entry at the top of this page (I have since moved it and titled it)But may be right in the case of the word choice even though it sounds very wrong to me.
The article is Eli Whitney Students Program and the entire sentence reads:
A select number of students is accepted each year and admissions is highly competitive.
I await your assistance, thank you in advance. Dbiel (Talk) 08:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I've left the template:helpme in case someone else wants to pitch in.
I'd definitely say are as it is the students that are being accepted (and are select) rather than just the number of students. That is, I'm assuming they are not spending lots of time deciding a number then picking that number of people off the street. When used in this sense the word number is acting as a special part of speech (in the same way that an actual number like a hundred students would) that I've forgotten the name of (see if it is on WP somewhere). For a similar example, I would (and I think others would) say My other pair of socks are in the wash not My other pair of socks is in the wash.
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 09:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
It is a quantifier functionally acting as determiner BTW, but WP seems to be weak on how these should be used, so I'll check a book to get you a definite answer...
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 09:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
In British English, are is correct.[2] In American English, it also seems very much prevalent, even if is not completely incorrect there.[3] --rimshotstalk 14:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with those who state that are is correct. One would not say "A number is accepted each year" unless referring to the acceptance of a certain integer, not a group of students. For the sake of the article, how about simply changing it to something like, "Few students are accepted each year..." Hoof Hearted 15:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Student prank image

I have replied on the talk page, and added it to my watchlist to keep an eye on the discussion. Any reponses to this message or further requests for help, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page. All the best, J Milburn 10:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Category Education

I think the removal of category education from the educational psychology article does agree with WP guidelines I've read somewhere. The principle is that an article should not appear in both a category and its subcategory, from which we can infer that the educational psychology article should not appear in both the education and educational psychology categories. The problem though is that this guideline leaves the education category with the uncategorized articles that are less likely to be the core articles attracting broad interest. Anyway, I'm happy to keep your edit. Of course, the real challenge is the time-consuming work of properly categorizing the many articles that show up in the education category. Nesbit 17:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for indenting! It's good fun this, isn't it? Hawker Typhoon 03:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Apology

I realise some of my comments in the Student talk thread may be interpreted as offhand - I didn't intend this to be the case. I also thank you for your patience and general conduct in the discussion, and although we seem to disagree on the fundaments of the issue in question, it's good to see mature, rational debate being conducted (overall), regardless of how trivial one might consider the issue. Yeanold Viskersenn 17:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank You

Hey wut's up buddy! Sorry if I offended you which I did not mean to.... I really do appreciate your help and will like to ask you for help in the future since you seem more experience than me. Sorry, i did not mean to delete your (I was just thinking that you can delete the message after reading it). I hope you forgive me.Survir 17:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

India-tv-stub

Hi Dbiel

Thanks for informing me that the coding of {{Stub}} is nonstandard. I'll ask an administrator to fix it. Yes, I've made c. 50,000 edits to Wikipedia and more than 20,000 of them relate to the stub sorting project. We try to avoid editors adding messages, how-to guides and similar notices to stub templates as we've had many problems in the past when people made mistakes in this kind of code. One error in code here messes up hundreds of articles. E.g. some people see it as an invitation to hide the stub categories as well, and that messes up the system completely and makes a stub template worthless. They are created because of the categories, not the other way around. Take a peek at a random 10 templates from WP:WSS/ST and you should hopefully see at most 1 template out of 10 that uses this kind of code, and this is merely an abandoned standard. Best. Valentinian T / C 18:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[[Category:category name|{{PAGENAME}}]]

Note sure if this is the right place to ask or not, but since the page partially refers to, or at least uses the syntax as part of a larger code line; I will start here. I have seen the syntax [[Category:category name|{{PAGENAME}}]] used and I am unable to under stand what it is trying to accomplish. It appears to be the same as [[Category:category name]]

The following syntax was also very confusing to me:

'''[[:Category:User en-B-5|professional]]''' level of '''[[:Category:User en-B|Bullshit]]''' It creates two separate links both of which do nothing except try to create the same new category page.

Can someone guide me in the right direction

TThe first use is the sort key. It will put the article in order based on what you put after the bar, when you look at the category. It is described on the Help:Category page. The second one with the leading : is just a link with a name to appear in the document after the pipe. GB 00:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I will try to answer your questions, but it would help to know exactly what you were trying to accomplish.
[[Category:category name|{{PAGENAME}}]] This syntax is commonly used in templates to make the use of the template much easier. The text category name is meant to be replaced with the actual name of the category you want to use, so in your case the text would read: [[Category:User en-B-5| {{PAGENAME}} ]]
{{PAGENAME}} is a very simple template that tells the software to replace the text {{PAGENAME}} with the current page name in this case {{PAGENAME}} displays the following: Dbiel/Archive 1 which I have coded to display as bold. You will note that it did not replace the entire page name, but only the part following the colon, for article space page names it would use the entire page name.
Now to the reason for using [[Category:category name|{{PAGENAME}}]]. With out the pagename template following the pipe symbol, all users pages would be found under "U" for user. |{{PAGENAME}}]] allows the following page name: User:Dbiel to be filed under D instead of U making the indexing much easier to use.
Next lets look at nowiki - it simply tells the software to ignore anything that looks like code and simply view and display the code as plain text. The next two lines are both the same except that the first line includes the nowiki code, the copy is: [[:Category:User en-B-5|professional]]
  • [[:Category:User en-B-5|professional]]
  • professional (without the nowiki code
It should be noted that Category:User en-B-5 does not currently exist but that Category:User en-5 does currently exist. Are you trying to create a new user box?
The colon (:) in front of the word Category when used in a link like Category:User en-B-5 tells the software to create a link to the category page. Without the colon it would add the page it appears on to the specified category.
[[:Category:User en-B-5|professional]] will create a link to the specified category page, but will use the copy that follows the pipe as the display copy for the link. So clicking on professional in the following link ( professional will open up the page named Category:User en-B-5 or in this case, since the page does not exist, it will open up an edit window to create the page.
[[Category:User en-B-5|professional]] (without the preceeding colon) will will add the page it appears on the the specified category and display it alpabeticly based on the copy that follows the pipe symbol. Note the displayed copy will be the name of the page it appears on (in this case User talk:Dbiel but it would be found under P for professional.
I have rambled on probably to much. I hope that this answers at least part of your quetions. Please feel free to ask additional questions it I did not explain it in a way you can understand it, or if I misunderstood the question. Hopefully I have managed to expain it correctly, but please keep in mind that I am not an expert and have only been active for about 3 months. Dbiel (Talk) 02:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
It looks like you have answered your own question very adequately, which I pasted into your talk page from where I found it! GB 02:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
This will probably sound like a stupid request, but could you tell me where you found it. I do not remember the question and would be interested in knowing what/why I was asking the question in the first place. It is easy to get lost in Wikipedia and I have been learning quite a bit lately. Thank you. Dbiel (Talk) 02:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge Articles

{{helpme}}. How does one go about suggesting that the following two articles be merged?

You have to add the template:merge at the articles. Please look at Template:Merge. --Thw1309 06:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually I had read that article several times, but was unable to make any sense out of it. I tried again, and this time it started to make some sense. I did manage to add the merge templates. Hope I did it right. I will turn the helpme flag back on for the purpose of asking someone to check the templates on the two paes to see if I did it right or not. Thank you. Dbiel (Talk) 07:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Student article

Will keep reading the talk page.... Sorry I don't know how I missed your first note on the talk page. There is really quite the conversation going there! I added my comment and will keep in touch thereon....SriMesh | talk 04:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Student Article

Dbiel - first, let me wish you a good afternoon. The floodwaters around my house have subsided, and I'm even considering removing the sandbags - so I'm in a rather good mood! However, my enquiry is - as you have guessed - based around the image on the 'student' article. I'm not sure what else is wrong with it, to be frank! All of the arguments against it have been refuted, and no-one has supplied any new arguments, so I'm intrigued as to why you still don't agree with its addition. I'm not trying to be facetious - I just don't understand what arguments remain? If a concensus hasn't been reached, it's customary to keep the page as it was before the argument appeared! I'd appreciate it if you could reply on my talk page, too! Thanks in advance, Hawker Typhoon 16:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied on user talk page as reqested Dbiel (Talk) 23:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

invitation - WP Zimbabwe

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Zimbabwe, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Part 13:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

University of Saskatchewan

Hello there. This is the first time I actively pursued improving an article to feature status. Perhaps Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive could be tried again later, maybe trying a peer review may be more to the point at the moment. I will try again, if you think it may be helpful. I noticed that when the North Sea went to the top, it did get quite a few editors working upon it, but maybe the U of S is too area specific, and more of a guideline for other editors as to layout and how someone not from the area perceives the article, may be of more help. I have changed it to be [[Wikipedia:Requests for expansion}]] as well as on WikiProject Reference Desk Article Collaboration, but also here, I think it may be too area specific for too much help there. So maybe this peer review may give guidance as to where the article may lead for development. I contacted some of the people from the page history to see if they would like to vote, a few did in fact. Sorry about not replying earlier. It was a bit frustrating to be so close and yet so far. After I list it at peer review, I will try again on ACID to see if with some pointers, ACID may do better. Thank you so much for both your comments and support! SriMesh | talk 00:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Show boogieimg.jpg

Yes, I did in fact edit the image and remove the yellow side border because it isn't part of the actually logo. That, and also that it looks "messy" with the border when incorporated into the article. You may also want to note that I did the same thing to Image:Comedycircus.jpg as well, which was also uploaded by Survir. Thank You. - Bhavesh.Chauhan (talk • contribs • count) 06:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Diplôme d'Études Supérieur Appliqué

Does article Diplôme d'Études Supérieur Appliqué belong in the English verion of Wikipedia. It is also strange that there is no link indicated to a copy in the French Wikipedia. Or making the question more general, where is the appropriate place to ask this kind of question? Dbiel (Talk) 06:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This question would best be directed to the article's associated talk page (Talk:Diplôme d'Études Supérieur Appliqué), where you can discuss improvements or changes to the article itself. Perhaps you may be interested in nominating the article for deletion (where Wikipedians discuss whether an article should be deleted) or proposing deletion, a deletion process that allows users to add a template ( {{prod}} ) to an article to nominate it for deletion. But first ensure you have a valid reason for doing so. -- Chris.B 10:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dbiel/Archive_1&oldid=1190110943"