Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in April 2007, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Meta

Foundation positions

Latest comment: 17 years ago21 comments14 people in discussion

These comments are related to global issues, such as stewardship or the language subcommittee.

langcom wiki

Have you had developer activate import feature here or there? Import one to another and merge things by hand would be less painless to merge things by hand on both two wikis from my experience. --Aphaia 21:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

No, import is not enabled. ~~It's not really needed, though; there are very few pages to import, and those have few enough authors that we can cite them in the edit summary.~~ Since we'll need to mirror all public pages, perhaps it would be easier to enable it after all. I'll ask the developers to do so; thanks. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 22:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Belrusian request (normative) in new languages

Hello,

We had this chat before, do I understand you right, that you are affiliated with the decision-making bodies on the new languages projects?

Could I know, is there any progress with our request at all? m:Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Belarusian_normative Yury Tarasievich 11:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Yury Tarasievich. Yes, I am a member of the Language subcommittee. The subcommittee is unfortunately slow getting into operation; several members are away during the holidays. Any progress will be noted on the request page itself; I suspect it will be among the first processed when the subcommittee is ready. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Why, good to hear that, thanks. Merry holidays to you. :) Yury Tarasievich 22:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry holidays. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 22:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, may I trouble you for info, again? I'm noticing that right on the December 27 quite a number of requests got approved, some of them quite particular, lingually. What's the status of our request processing? Yury Tarasievich 16:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Those requests were approved several months before the policy was implemented, but they were only categorized when old requests were converted to the new format. Only two requests have been approved since the policy was implemented; other requests are waiting for the language subcommittee to decide on a policy. If there is no progress very soon, I'll begin placing requests on the agenda under the current policy. —{admin} Pathoschild 21:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I lost you here -- do you mean policy for approval of requests (which is what page named in section header is conforming to) is not yet approved itself? What is current, then? Or do you rather mean there's yet another policy (Committee's) being prepared out there? Yury Tarasievich 07:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The current language proposal policy was created and approved by normal community discussion. There is debate within the language subcommittee on whether to use this policy or create a new one, but it is valid until a new policy is implemented. The procedural details which required the reform would most likely not change, only the language requirements. For example, it is possible future requests will use ISO 639-6 instead of ISO 639 1–3. —{admin} Pathoschild 12:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I see now. Thanks! Yury Tarasievich 13:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Abt temp admin status

I need to enter a line in monobook.js to link the js-based translitration file. Thats the reason why I need admin status. Thank you.--Eukesh 16:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

User Felisopus on italian wiki

Hello, dealing with this disagreement, I'd like to underline that in Italian wiki hasn't been any argument about this (amin, I haven't been notified of such an argument). I know there have been only some comments in the page dedicated to my election as admin. IMHO this discussion was needed, just because there were different opinions on this, too. Except for the 'disagreement' day, I've been working with the same burocracts that own the right to give or revocate my charge. It's my only opinion about this decision, I do not want "to flame" in English. :( Have a good time. Bye. Felisopus

Hello Felisopus. I was not aware of the current election (English); I removed your access based on a request linked to Progetto:Rimozione contributi sospetti (English), where you were given access until 17 January 2007. I assumed this was a routine removal. If I was mistaken, feel free to request that a local bureaucrat reinstate your access. I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. —{admin} Pathoschild 21:02:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There's not any mistake... Felisopus has misunderstood WM and it.wp policies :)--Nick1915 22:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Simple English checkuser

First off, thanks for the checkuser that you did earlier today. While looking around the Requests for CheckUser information page (and clicking the links for simple.wikipedia), I noticed that User:Datrio is still a checkuser there (see the list of checkusers). So, was this intentional? And secondly, does this need to be fixed? Thanks, PTO 03:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello PullToOpen. I noticed the same thing earlier and left him a message; he probably just forgot to remove it when he was done. —{admin} Pathoschild 05:03:38, 03 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I forgot, thank you for noticing. I removed my access there. Datrio 06:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Kabyle wikipedia conditionally approved?

Hi, there is 153 articles in the kabyle wikipedia test, check here, there are at least 25 persons who edited the project, of course we are still creating articles but I don't understand why you are asking to have a "sucessful project" while it is already one of the most successful projects in the incubator (no bots, no one-line articles, 153 articles in three months). I think that you did not have a good look at the test, you have just seen the main page, not the rest. Agurzil 23:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Agurzil. We're currently sorting through all the open requests, and will take a closer look at some of the successful requests soon. I apologize for the delay, but we're (finally) just getting to work. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 00:03:15, 01 March 2007 (UTC)

Great!! but please have a look at 5 random articles, that's just what I'm asking you here.Agurzil 00:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The test project looks very promising; we'll take a closer look in the near future. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:03:08, 01 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, good luck for your job then!Agurzil 00:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 00:03:41, 01 March 2007 (UTC)

Subcommittee roll call and logging

Hi, sorry for not being around recently; I'm currently without a stable internet connection (and will be for about two more weeks). I read new subcom mails today - I'll try to check what's going on more often; I'm definitely interested in further work of the committee (and hope it's not all about ISO codes :P). Thanks for letting me know. — Timi chal 09:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Sabine Cretella. Do you have any objections to publicly archiving your IRC and email conversations with the language subcommittee? —{admin} Pathoschild 22:03:07, 03 March 2007 (UTC)

As long as all private parts from e-mails are excluded (things that do not strictly belong to the language subcom or texts copies from third parties) I don't have a problem. See: in e-mails one often includes information that is from third parties and we may publish these parts only if these other people agree. --Sabine 06:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 08:03:06, 04 March 2007 (UTC)

Same here. — Timi chal 08:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, no objections. --Ascánder 12:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello from the Foundation

Hi, this is Sandy from the Wikimedia Foundation. I just got hired as Press Officer. I am working on a very important presentation for the office, and I was hoping that I could talk to you about commons, its benefits, etc. I also will be using this in a press kit, etc. Could you please email at [email protected]? I would greatly appreciate it. :) —unsigned by 24.73.86.239 22:50, 7 March 2007.

Thanks

Hi, thanks for tweaking my page for Wikipedia Rotuman. Have I followed sufficient steps in simply making that subpage, or do I need to start something in the incubator, OR do I also need to go through some process with this link. This link, coming off of the en.wikipedia mainpage, says that in order to make a wikipedia in a new language I need to go there. Is that an outdated instruction?

Thanks heaps Mattbray 08:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mattbray. Yep, that page is outdated, and I've just marked it as such. You don't need to do anything else, although starting a test project and developing a community would greatly accelerate the process. —{admin} Pathoschild 08:04:14, 01 April 2007 (UTC)

And more thanx from me! I could not spend as much time as I expected in mn.wikt but I could do all the things I had in mind there. :) --Piolinfax ^(@es.wikt) 12:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 19:04:18, 02 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Adminship on Uyghur Wikipedia

Hello ReyBrujo. Following the removal of Jose77's administrator access on the Uyghur Wikipedia, we're still left with a possible case of widespread copyright violation and sockpuppet abuse. To remedy this situation, I and a few other stewards would like to give you temporary administrator access on that wiki if ‏?????‎ does not object. This will also allow you to request checkuser information regarding Jose77 and Barat. Would you accept this? —{admin} Pathoschild 07:04:38, 01 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. I will gladly help purging the apparent copyright violations from Uyghur and request the checkuser. However, I am afraid we need someone who is Uyghur speaker to prevent new abuses (this time we were lucky the texts were copied straight from pages, but if they are modified, there will be no way to detect them). -- ReyBrujo 17:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Granted. MaxSem 17:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Administration

Latest comment: 17 years ago40 comments23 people in discussion

These comments are related to my use of administrator tools.

24.172.90.14

This is no longer an open proxy. Please remove the indefinite block. Thank you, [email protected]

Since it is only blocked on the English Wikipedia, I've listed it at w:Project:WikiProject on open proxies#Requested_Unblock. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[sbl] surgery-images

Hello

A few days ago my site was added to the spam list by Naconkantari,after Mdwyer's proposal. After reading the rules carefully I now know that this was done for good reasons and it was truly fair. As a result I contacted Mdwyer ,apologized for my mistakes,promised I would follow the rules from now on and asked him for a second chance. If you check my entry in the spam blacklist discussion you will see that Mdwyer(the one that initially requested the ban) actually proposes my removal from the spam blacklist. So i contacted Naconcantari using his discussion page (since noone answered my entry about my site)and his responce was "I'd rather have a neutral third party review this." So since I saw that you were an administrator ,and considering you to be a neutral party ,I decided to contact you :) I don't care that much if you unban my site or not. I just want a straight "yes" or "no".

Thanks in advance

Nikolaos Fostiras 19:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Nikolaos. Please be patient; someone will review your request eventually, probably myself when I next clear open requests this week. Unfortunately, that page is affected by relentless backlog. —[admin] Pathoschild 05:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok thanks :) —unsigned by Nfostiras (talk) 07:38, 11 October 2006

Well sorry for bothering you again for this issue :) I am really frustrated with my case. Let me be a little more specific.I have added my request for removal at the spam blacklist at about 15September 2006 . All I wanted was just a simple answer even if it was negative.During that date many requests have been answered other negative and other positively,some even the same day.So at the end of september I decided to contact NaconKantari(the one that initially added the ban) and his reply was "I'd rather have a neutral third party review this".So I waited some more time(during which I got no reply) and contacted you and you replied me "someone will review your request eventually, probably myself . So I was happy that my issue would be finally be resolved ! But all I got was a reply to the spam blacklist saying "I've notified the administrator who blacklisted the pattern" . Come on,this guy was the one that told me that someone else and not HIM should solve this issue. I feel like you play ping pong with me or something :P Yes I know that I should be patient but my issue hasn't been solved for more than one month when other people's request took a maximum of 10 days

Thanks in advance Nfostiras 12:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)nfostiras

Hello Nfostiras. The responses you've received do seem rather circular. This is caused by my mechanical approach to the backlog, which ensures a high efficiency in terms of clearing old requests faster than new requests appear. Unfortunately, it also means that discussions on my talk page are sometimes disjointed from the requests themselves. If the blacklisting administrator doesn't comment by the next time I clear the backlog (today), I'll judge the request without. —[admin] Pathoschild 18:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC) 18:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello,
I just want to thank you for solving my issue :) —unsigned by Nfostiras 00:35, 30 October 2006.

You're welcome. —[admin] Pathoschild 04:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[sbl] ideamappingsuccess.com

I noticed that you have archived my unaswered question on the spam blacklist removals with this edit Revision as of 04:09, 11 October 2006 - can I please have an answer - trully I am just trying to understand and produce clean good pages...Idea Map was my first page other than a few edits to other subjects.

I put up the Idea Map page, and I tried to put an external link to the main site of the author of the first book on the subject, I got a spam warning and could not save it. I subsequently found my way to the spam blacklist removal area and posted the question why... I was pointed to the rules and told to discuss them in the idea map page disussion area, which I did point by point with no answer there.

Second I was asking any admin to take a look at it and either remove the link from the spam blacklist where I do not see how it belongs or at least let me know where I am going wrong... I did what was asked and read the rules, also answered them point by point on the idea map page

The site is the best out there for content, has lots of examples (for example see: www.ideamapping.com/maps.cfm and www.ideamapping.com/additionalmaps.cfm and www.ideamapping.com/clientmaps.cfm) and is the website of the main autority on the subject...

She has also written to you guys, which I just noticed and you gave her an answer about the discussion to move it to the spam filter. But the links were not really spam in my oppinion - as it relates to all those areas, but this might be the problem that there was not a page up for idea map when the links were added and it was hard to see it realte without research in the matter...

Link belongs in brainstorming since I added "Team idea mapping" to the ways of brainstorming, I added it there a few weeks back with no problem.and I see that was considered spam which makes no sense.

Well I am frustrated and confused, please help.Sorry about the leghty message. Lenroc1999 16:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Lenroc1999. I didn't archive that discussion, although I did move it to the correct section; see Talk:Spam blacklist#ideamappingsuccess.com. I apologize for any confusion that caused. —[admin] Pathoschild 03:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Pathoschild, I was not referring to Jamies message but to my messages that were at 2 - 2.2 Jamies message you moved to the right place and I was not confused by that... but you archived my messages above that were part of a discussion on the same theme which was waiting for an answer anyway here are the 3 messages (I do not knolw how else to do it so I appologise for posting them here on your page but I think it illustrates the point) I am talking about copied from the history :

link to http://ideamappingsuccess.com is blocked HELP!!

Hi,

I feel that unjustly a link to the website Idea Mapping Success which is the site of the founder and book author of Idea Maping (which is also a new page I just added) can not be used due to the spam filter. I am wondering why as it already appears in a couple of related areas in wikipedia, however when adding it as an external link (as the site holding the most examples, both from the book, hiostorical and additional authors) to the Idea map page it triggered the spam filter.

please unblock it so it can justly be put into the page it belongs to. Please keep in mind that this was my first real article I published as well and I am willing to use any advice on how to make it better, so any help will be appreciated.

Thank you, --68.41.131.202 01:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Lenroc1999

Not done per [1] Naconkantari 19:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

please answer why not
Please explain why not? since I am new I would like to understand so I do not pester yoou guys uneccesarily. How is this a spam link? and why? who blacklisted it and under what reasons? how can i get it off the list. Please take the time to help since this is getting frustrating! Lenroc1999 13:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policy on external links, then reach consensus on talk pages of those articles you want your links to be added to, and only then submit request for removal. MaxSem 14:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I did what was asked - based on rules it should not be on the black list
Thank you very much for pointing me to the policy pages MaxSem, you should get a shield for helping a newby :) - I have studied them and politely request removal of the ideamappingsuccess.com link from the spam blacklist or help to relize against what rules it is? See the point by point answer of the rules for external links at the idea map discussion page and please remove from the blaklist as it clearily does not belong there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Idea_map Thank you, Lenroc1999 20:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

—unsigned by Lenroc1999 (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2006

I apologize for the mistake; I've restored the discussion under 'Proposed removals'. —[admin] Pathoschild 00:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much,
I am sorry about the confusion as well... but I appreciate the help. Can you please let me know how to get http://ideamappingsuccess.com off the spam list?am I doing the right thing?

Thank you again, Lenroc1999 19:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for the delay in response. Yes, your request is the right way to go about it. —[admin] Pathoschild 18:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The message that you kindly restored is been sitting on the spam restore list with no answer or action...and I am wondering if it will get an answer... This is my first wiki page and I was trying to go by the rules and actually provide some good content.Lenroc1999 22:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[sbl] DROHOBYCH

Hello I would like to contribute to DROHOBYCH but there is a spam protection filter for: Please remove this filter. (I did not wish to remove the generating external link because I checked it and looks like a valid and serious link) thank you —unsigned by 63.101.157.200 (talk) 15:13, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello 63.101.157.200. I apologize for the delayed response. Please provide more information: what page are you trying to edit on which project, and which URL is being blocked? —[admin] Pathoschild 18:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC) 18:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Archival???

Hi Pathoschild, why the hell did you archive so many requests from the Requests from new languages page? They weren't all as old as you seem to think. My very own request for a North Frisian Wikipedia and Wiktionary was doe this very november! You'll understand this will make it much more difficult to get these projects approved! Please put some of then back, this borders on sheer obstruction. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 12:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello Steinbach. The discussions to archive were not selected according to age, as you can see from the box noting the proposal's status on Requests for new languages/Wikipedia North Frisian 2. I apologize if this caused you inconvenience, but I assure you that the new policy ensures that any new request will be processed much sooner and more efficiently than the current requests would have been.

Please, do start a new request at "Requests for new languages/Wikipedia North Frisian 3" (after reading the Language proposal policy). Feel free to copy the templates from your original request, which I painstakingly converted to minimize the difficulty in transitioning to the new system. —{admin} Pathoschild 17:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Votes for new Wikisources

this and this aren't contradictory? 555 02:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

They are. The request was already open, but I haven't gotten around to copying it over to the Wikisource submission page. Feel free to do that yourself. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 02:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Wikipedia Palatinate German

Hello Purodha. I see you tried to place Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Palatinate German on the main page (though you used the wrong name). That request is currently closed; where you trying to re-open discussion? —{admin} Pathoschild 03:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes - I just a second after your question saved the request. I was wondering to follow the naming of the old request or follow the suggestion of the guiding page verbatim. Apparently I did it wrong. I am not so much attempting to spur a new discussion but to suggest the proposers and supporters to go for a test drive in the Wikipedia Incubator, so as to see the real support there is. (Btw., as a potential reader, I want it to succeed and do well as well, egoistic me :-) --Purodha Blissenbach 03:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] English Wikikids

How should I progress here? It's been a month in a half and according to New Project Policy it asked someone indepedent to start a interest poll. I want to know what to do next...Can you explain? T®eebark 01:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Treebark. I don't maintain that page, so I'm not aware of the project proposal process. I suggest waiting to see if anyone will respond on the Proposals for new projects discussion page. Alternately, you can discuss it in #wikimedia on the freenode IRC server. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't get IRC. Do you know who maintains the page? T®eebark 01:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope, but they should notice your comment on the talk page.

You can connect to IRC online from Wikizine.org. Simply enter your desired username (Treebark is free), select #wikimedia from the drop-down menu, and connect. Discussion is displayed in the large box, connected users are listed on the right, and you can enter comments in the small wide box along the bottom. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. T®eebark 01:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Wikipedia Belarusian rejected?

Would you care to explain this move? Who rejected it? Who conformed to what?

Does it have any significance that the WikiMedia is being cheated, for 2 years now, w/r to the nature of the Belarusian language, all academic sources and citations disregarded? Yury Tarasievich 08:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Yury Tarasievich. Please read the notice at the top of the request page stating that "This discussion was created before the implementation of the Language proposal policy, and it is incompatible with the policy. Please open a new proposal in the format this page has been converted to (see the instructions)." I'm sorry you feel that there is a conspiracy against Belarusians, but if so it had nothing to do with the closure of this request since all previous requests were closed. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't talking conspiracy as such. The request is 4 months old, and this is already 3rd policy to conform to, and nobody really does anything about the request, just pushing it around. Yury Tarasievich 07:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Fortunately, this policy is implemented and will not be superseded in the near future. Although it may change, no new requests will need to be retroactively closed. Requests should be processed promptly under the policy. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 07:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Wikipedia Upper Silesian

Hi
"Denied for duplication with existing wikis or proposals" Could you explain me where is duplication, or existing wiki? Did you mean Polish Wikipedia? --Nowis 21:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I didn't close the request, I just added the appropriate templates. I've updated the page with more information. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[rfl] Congratulations!

You are the best; you transformated the Requests for new languages in a better page, in my short time as administrator I tried about the cleaning of these page, but you did it. Thanks! --Taichi - (?!) 01:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for the encouragement. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 02:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Soft-blocking of TOR proxies

Hello. Given our conversation on the WikiProject on open proxies recently, would it be helpful if I gave you lists of Tor exit nodes I connect through that are not blocked at all, or hardblocked? For the ones that aren't blocked at all, I could sign once not logged in, and once logged in, anywhere. For the hardblocked ones, I could try signing somewhere other than the project they are block, or just put the information in my talkspace. Or are these links sufficient for your purposes? Armedblowfish (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Those lists, particularly combined with other lists I already use, are sufficient. Thank you. I'm working on ProxyDB, a proxy management system that will automatically list Tor exit nodes for soft-blocking and detect their block status on the participating wikis. Unfortunately, that project is still at least a month from completion. If you'd like to maintain the Tor subpage on Meta in the meantime, I can block them on the participating projects I administrate. —[admin] Pathoschild 18:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

One thing I'm confused about... depending on whether something is hardblocked, softblocked, or not blocked, what colors (or, in the code, yes/no/maybe) do I use? Armedblowfish (talk) 03:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

There's no distinction drawn between hard and soft blocks in the listings. ProxyDB will indicate hard blocks, though. —[admin] Pathoschild 03:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Using footnotes to show hardblocking, Armedblowfish (talk) 04:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

That's fine; you're the one maintaining the page. :) —[admin] Pathoschild 04:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

recreate Michael Laitman- RAMLAN

I can edit this page and then recreate, it haw do you thing?Ashpaa 18:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that page is outside the scope of Wikisource per the Inclusion policy. The content is more appropriate for Wikipedia, if it meets that project's notability guidelines. —[admin] Pathoschild 19:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

unblock Fratele lui Bonaparte

Hi Pathoschild. A few months ago, you indefinitely blocked User:Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? ([2][3]). Do you think you could unblock him now; I have reason to believe he will have cooled down by now and will not resume harassment. See it this way; you can always reblock him if things don't work out...--Theios tou Euthymiou 22:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC) (PS no, I'm not a sock of his)

It doesn't really matter whether or not you're a sockpuppet, since there are no problems with non-abusive secondary accounts. If the owner of the account will publicly state on their talk page that they intend to act in good faith from here on, I don't mind unblocking the account in goof faith. —[admin] Pathoschild 01:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! --Fratele lui Bonaparte, il cunosti? 22:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[sbl] 18speedtranny

Hi. Thanks for adding 18speedtranny to the spam blacklist [4]. Is there a delayed reaction when you add that here? I tried adding the latest http://www.myspace.com/18speedtranny to my WP user page and I was able to save[5]. Isn't it supposed to stop me from saving at all? Just curious... Thanks again! :) Wknight94 04:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Wknight94, and you're welcome. There is a small delay of usually less than half an hour. —{admin} Pathoschild 04:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry to be a pest but it looks like I'm still able to add 18speedtranny to my own user talk page [6]. Could it act differently depending on namespace? Am I testing this incorrectly? Wknight94 21:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The spam blacklist blocks only domains and their subdomains. Any other part of the path is not filtered. Naconkantari 21:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh. Well the URL being used is a myspace URL. Does that mean blacklisting is useless for a "www.myspace.com/whatever" URL? (This particular serial spammer apparently couldn't be bothered to maintain an actual domain so they switched to myspace a few months back). I see a few entries which are more specific:

flyingpirate\.com\/images\/phentermineonline
www\.comunalia\.com\/replica
www\.remus\.dti\.ne\.jp\/\~wings\/

Are you saying the path part is being ignored? Wknight94 22:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I've adjusted the pattern; it should block the site now. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Unused files

Hi Pathoschild,

go along. I don't need these files any more.

Yours, 84.56.39.149 (de:shannon) 08:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Shannon. Could you be more specific? I don't know which files you are referring to. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:50, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of statements

Hi and happy new year. May I ask you why you have deleted the statements of the steward candidates? I have never seen such archives deleted before. guillom 10:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Guillom; happy new year to you too. I merged the statements into the election page and noted the contributors in the history. There's no longer any reason to keep them separate, since the election page is inactive. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh ok, I hadn't seen the merge. Thanks :) guillom 17:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 01:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Block on en-Wiktionary

Hey, I was just blocked for a week at en wiktionary for "adding a internal link to a header." I feel as if this block is, not to be rude, totaly stupid. It is pretty clear from my edits on wikipedia and other wiki's I am there to help out, not to hurt the wiki. I am wondering if you will please unblock me. Have a nice week and god bless:) --James, La gloria è a dio 03:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Sir James Paul. I've moved the content of the page you created, "Crazy Blocking Policies at Wiktionary", to "Crazy Blocking Policies at Wiktionary" on Meta:Babel, where it should get more attention.

The block may have been a misunderstanding; some users on the English Wiktionary tend to be unusually on edge. Have you tried discussion or other steps of the dispute resolution process with the administrator who blocked you? —{admin} Pathoschild 03:03:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I have emailed the admin. It is a understatment to say they tend to be unusually on the edge. I do not know what would be a accurate statement. Words can not explain it:) Have a nice week and god bless:) --James, La gloria è a dio 03:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope you can resolve the dispute to your mutual satisfaction. Have a nice week as well. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:03:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I give you this smile as a reward for being kind with me and others. Peace:) --James, La gloria è a dio 21:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 07:03:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on my talk page

Hi Pathoschild,

a while ago, you move-protected my talk page due to vandalism. Now the cause has returned. Would you please infinitely block User:Ich glaube, Ich muß den Abtritt besuchen... This is probably the 20th incarnation of a user who has obviously been annoyed by my spam cleanups on some of the smaller wikis, where I have temp admin status. He/she/it appears to have developed an obsession for attacking me. No idea why...--Johannes Rohr 08:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Johannes Rohr. Could you provide more information? I don't know enough about the situation to block this particular user. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:03:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, never mind, it was probably a one-time throw-away account. Next time he'll return with a different name. So whether or not you block him/her, makes little difference now. I don't know where and how I managed to annoy this user, but it is most likely related to the smaller wikis which I monitor as temp admin. For a number of weeks, I am receiving massive vandalism on my various user pages, at de:, at [[:meta:]] and at the smaller Wikis including cho:, chy:, kr:. I honestly have no idea why he/she/it is doing that. I suppose he must be extremely bored and have far too much spare time. He keeps returning under user names like "User:Johannes Roar", "User:Johannes Rohr hätte gern eine Rennmaus in seine Gedärme", "User:Schutz Staffel" (see w:Schutzstaffel to see what it means), look at cho:Special:Recentchanges). He has moved my user and talk pages on various wikis to offensive titles, see also kr:Special:Log/move. I therefore had to move-protect all my existing user and talk pages and also to semi-protect the user pages. --Johannes Rohr 08:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Apology and request to be unblocked

I've been bad. I've been bastard. Kafziel blocked me for 2 months on Wikipedia. I cannot wait that.

I tried to apologize to him and he protected my own user page. I know I have bin acting like a trol, but Kafziel was really harasing me.

PLEASE help me, I promise to be nice if you promise to protect me from Kafziel, Kafziel drew me into this problem in the first place. Kafziel abused his admin raits. Thnx. CroDome 15:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[sbl] nationwidebillrelief.com and surfquotes.com

You are as guilty as the other editors. I gave the webmaster/user a final warning about spamming regarding the sites [7]. How can you over ride the information I have. First you said they spammed for a 5 month span. Not True . I gave a final warning in Sept. told him if there was any future spam regarding either site it would be banned. I have all the users A.B. listed on my watch list including the articles. These sites had not added a link since Sept. I had the information back then, so Iam upset that a user/editor can step in and start blacklisting sites because of problems he was having with a user. I gave my word. I would not be fighting so strongly if not. My word is a promise. If you look A.B. is trying to do it again, look at the content for [8]. This user added dsl-internet-service.blogspot.com which should be blacklisted for this spam. However, it is this users first edit. Why should the sites of ld.net cheap-online.net myinternetaccess.net myphoneservice.net steelecommerce.com be blacklisted? They did not make an edit or add a spam since last warning. A.B. has a problem with this user and tries to act on it. In fact how does A.B. know these users are connected. It could be a competitor trying to have these sites blacklisted. So until they add a link we shouldn't blacklist. I know it is more work but wikipedia.org expects us to give our best effort and if we don't have time let other editors do it. Just please review the content as I would not continue to go this far without fair reason. —unsigned by 72.24.79.46 23:51, 28 March 2007.

Hello anonymous. I'm sorry you disagree. However, edit 101226119 shows an edit adding one such link on 17 January 2007, long after you warned the user and shortly before being blacklisted. Note that the spam blacklist is primarily intended to counter spam, regardless of the motives of the spammers. If there is no need to link to such a site from a Wikimedia project, the gains (reduced workload and disruption) outweigh the disadvantages (unable to link to that site). —{admin} Pathoschild 01:03:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Editing

Latest comment: 17 years ago19 comments16 people in discussion

Thanks for the translation

And also thanks for copyediting. :) --Dbl2010 19:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 21:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for changing my vote

~~Hi! Can I ask why you voted against me? I'm not sure we know each other. Bastique 00:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)~~
Sorry...Pathoschild seems to have clarified it. Bastique 14:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Albertsab. I've moved your vote to the 'support' section, since your edit summary indicates that you probably misplaced it. This isn't the only misplaced vote recently; I've reformatted the page to help prevent future confusion. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 05:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for changing my vote.--Albertsab @cawiki 07:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 22:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks for moving my vote

Hello Pathoschild, many thanks for moving my Support to Guillom from the No section to its correct place, the Yes one. Cheers, Claudi--clamengh 13:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 22:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

No, thanks!

You have a wave of thanks for fixing misplaced votes, and seem to assume that the discussion about Bastique is also misplaced? I have to disapoint you - it is not, and I am quite unhappy to return it where it is supposed to be held over and over! Bastique have realised it it but it seems you haven't. -- Goldie ± ^(talk) 16:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you referring to the discussion I moved to your talk page and linked to? I wasn't fixing a misplaced vote; see Talk:Stewards/elections 2006-2#Threaded_discussions. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you take a peek (Commons category)

Can you take a peek (Commons category you've updated) at the current version here. I put a parent category back in, but the annotation is one I have no clue how to fix up correctly. Tis double concern as I stumbled into this handling an anti-English rant on my talk there. Thanks // FrankB 18:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I see no problem with the page; it doesn't link to the deleted category on Wikisource. —{admin} Pathoschild 00:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

This was the suspected fix needed. Either he caught the words 'suspected vandalism' in my edit summary, or stumbled on it himself. My problem was in not knowing whether it was appropriate it be there at all. Some non-English text does appear on some pages. I only picked on you since you had made changes back when, and I know your handle from here and there. Thanks anyway. Have a good holiday season! // FrankB 04:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Updated image?

Some days ago you made this edit: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Translation_requests/WMF/Our_projects/En:&diff=489373&oldid=486212 You replaced the normal wikipedia logo with a logo proposal from 2003. I think this was a mistake? I have changed it back. 89.98.115.21 14:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello anonymous. That was not a mistake; the 2003 logo proposal was originally on Meta as Wikipedia.png. Following a nomination for deletion closed 11 December 2006, I uploaded it to the Wikimedia Commons with the less ambiguous name Wikipedia schema.png. When I deleted Wikipedia.png (which was the Wikipedia schema on Meta), the Wikipedia logo that was on Commons with that name took its place. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Statistics

Hi. I was just looking over your statistics for the election, and I noticed an innacuracy regarding my nom: in the graphic consisting of this image, I see there's a small "oppose" bar under my name, but my nom closed unopposed: the only opposition was changed to neutral. I have no idea if you'd bother to fix something like that (probably not), but I thought I would mention it, in case you do want to fix it :-) Cheers, Redux 01:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Humm, also, Gurch's table shows that you had 4 "opposes", but I see only 3 in the election page. Did I miss something? Redux 02:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I assume the error in the graphic is my mistake when I made the data table, and the error in Gurch's table is an issue with the way it recognizes votes. I'll fix both after a while, to make sure I didn't miss any other errors. —{admin} Pathoschild 04:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Corr. of my signature

Hello Klemen Kocjancic. I've just fixed several broken links from various versions of your signature. It seems one of the links is still broken in your latest version; [[w:Uporabniški pogovor:Klemen Kocjancic|Fast reply]] should be [[w:sl:Uporabniški pogovor:Klemen Kocjancic|Fast reply]]; the extra prefix ensures it doesn't lead to the English Wikipedia, where the page does not exist. Thanks. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for corr. and head's up on my signature! Fixed. BTW As admin to you know if it's possible to find out on how many WP (projects) has a bot a bot-flag (or where to look or whom to ask? Regards, Klemen Kocjančič (Talk - Fast reply) 21:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. The easiest way to find out is to ask the bot operator. You can check individual wikis using Special:Listusers, but that's not practical if you want to check all wikis. —{admin} Pathoschild 04:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

re: Spelling changes

Hello Coelacan. Please don't change British spelling to US Old English spelling, as you did on Guerilla UK spelling campaign (despite the irony). Thanks. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 05:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

That page was just begging for it. It's completely out of my system now. Coelacan 04:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Geanwyrde. (: —{admin} Pathoschild 04:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Informative section title!

File:Interlingual Barnstar.png

Have a barnstar for all your hard work in standardizing all those old language requests and in streamlining the process! <3--Shanel 04:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! You deserve a barnstar of your own for all your help. <3 —{admin} Pathoschild 04:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Moving to MW.org

Hi Pathoschild - can you explain your recent modifications to the MW.org transwiki process? Our general approach has been to import the existing page and tidy it after import. That way the page still works properly on meta (no dangling links, etc.) in the interim period between tagging and importing. Additionally it removes duplication of content (each old revision is stored on the servers, and copied when imported. Making the changes on meta doubles the amount of space these revisions will ultimately require). Currently each page is properly vetted by the importer, at which point any links should be fixed, so there seems to be no reason to make these changes beforehand. If you have a good reason for this approach then I would like to know what it is, otherwise can you please revert your changes.

Also, you modified Template:MoveToMediaWiki to be a banner rather than a right-floated box. The meta community requested a floating box rather than a banner (as it originally was) so again, unless you have a good reason, can you revert this change.

Thank you for your interest in the project. If you would like to help tidy up meta pages that have been imported then please check the import log on MW.org.

Thanks —unsigned by HappyDog 23:08, 16 January 2007.

Hello HappyDog. I've restored the sidebox format for the template.

My recent edits did not change the MediaWiki transwiki process, but rather added a new category within that process for pages which can be transwikied with virtually no effort. These pages already contain the MediaWiki templates (which also exist on Meta) and corrected links (for example, m:anti-spam features instead of anti-spam features, which work on Meta as well). Moving these pages requires no more effort after the actual importing than removing the MoveToMediaWiki template.

The new category thus also serves to provide Meta users who cannot import from MediaWiki with a list of pages that need to be converted to MediaWiki, and reduces the workload for MediaWiki administrators. If you prefer that all pages remain categorized in Category:Pages ready to be exported to MediaWiki.org rather than split into two, that can be easily arranged while using DynamicPageList to list pages that still need to be converted.

Converting on Meta does not double the amount of storage space required unless one roughly doubles the number of revisions. This is not a problem, since storage space is cheap and the increase is minimal. If there are Meta users willing to do most of the work without breaking links on Meta, I see no real disadvantage. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 01:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no real objection to the work being done here, so long as it doesn't break things. However, I am also aware that this is a slow process, so there may be subsequent changes to the page that won't work on MW.org, despite having been marked as ready, so it would be wise for an importer to check the page at the time of import as well. Also, bear in mind that converting internal links to links back to meta will only work if the link targets stay on meta. On the whole, I feel it is better to fix these things when you do the import, but if you or anyone else wants to go ahead with this then that's fine - after all, you're right - it probably will save work for the admin doing the importing.

The space issue is not a major one I guess. My only point is that if you make revision X Y and Z to a page on meta and that page is imported to MW.org then you get two copies of revision X Y and Z (one on meta, one on MW.org). If you do it after the import you only get the one. To be honest, I doubt that with the amount of changes we are talking about it will make much of a difference.

Anyway - thanks for your input on this project. --HappyDog 02:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Fundraising summary

Pathoschild, I was delighted discovered your summary assessment of the recent fundraiser. Many thanks!! Jeremy Tobacman 01:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome; I'm glad you like it. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

GFDL-compliance of your archives

your new archive method seems to be directly violating the GFDL. --Connel MacKenzie 06:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Connel. My centralized archives (which began September 2005) are fully compliant with the GNU Free Documentation License. The edit log is not required for attribution; it's simply the best automated attribution method we have. The signatures under each comment are equivalent, and no other GDFL requirement is affected by the move. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:Deletedpage

Oh, we have a template for that!. Thank you. --.anaconda 04:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I just created it. You're welcome. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 05:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Meta:WikiProject on open proxies/Reviewed

The page is broken, have you noticed it? I have experimented and found that splitting the table into small ones does not help; in all cases row with certain number is bloken and conseqently the whole page as well.

I think that MediaWiki cannot handle so many templates with use of parser functions. If you look into HTML, you'll find: "". For me, there is no need to use {{#ifeq}} in Template:Proxyip (checking if project name is Meta makes no sense for me) so I removed it. Perhaps further simplifying of templates would help. Anyway, this should definitely not look like this; this page cannot be used for its purpose. --Derbeth 10:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Derbeth. I'm aware of the problem, but the page will go back to normal as we block them on all projects and move them to the blacklist. This was caused by a backlog on multiple projects, since I've been busy developing proxyDB. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Other comments

Latest comment: 17 years ago21 comments9 people in discussion

Happy Hallowe'en

Hope yours is the scariest!

Bastique 19:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I hope you ~~have~~ had a pleasant Halloween too. :) —[admin] Pathoschild 18:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

XFF feed

I'll very appreciate you with more information/pointers about XFF feed you mentioned on RfD. Now we have a troublesome AOL anon on Japanese Wikinews ... --Aphaia 17:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Aphaia. X-Forwarded-For (XFF) is a special header sent by AOL to the Wikimedia Foundation. This header provides us with the user's real IP address, instead of the address of the AOL proxy they are connecting through. Blocking AOL proxy users should now be as effective as blocking a normal dynamic IP address. For more information, see XFF project or ask in #wikimedia-tech on the freenode IRC server. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your information! I'll bring it up to the community to consider. Aphaia 08:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Untagged and or unsourced images

Pathos, what is the policy concerning untagged and or unsourced images here on Meta? I read around but could not find a policy page. --Iamunknown 08:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

There is none, although that may change soon. Images which may not be free should be proposed for deletion. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Changing usernames after unified login is implemented

Pathos, will username changes be possible if unified login is implemented? Thanks, Iamunknown 08:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Iamunknown. A single account can be unlinked from the unified account and renamed normally by bureaucrat, or all linked accounts can be renamed simultaneously. I don't think the latter feature is ready yet, though. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for beta. Wish you happy holidays! --Iamunknown 06:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks main page

Pathos, I have another question. What process would I need to go through to the main Wikibooks page changed? Specifically, to get an similar text image like is at the top of the Wikipedia page? And furthermore, would that even be legal? It seems like it could be in violation of Wikimedia copyright unless it is authorized by higher powers. Thanks in advance. --Iamunknown 23:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure; try asking the English Wikibooks community. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Another user already did. The English admins don't have that ability. I'll try asking a developer. — Iamunknown 19:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Addendum

I found it here. Thanks for the help. :-) Iamunknown 06:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

MetaProject on open proxies

I'm interested in verified status fo the MetaProject on open proxies, and I wondered what to do about it. I know I do not meet the edit no. requirement but I do have a resonably good knowledge of proxies.82.8.58.73 08:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello anonymous. The edit count is just a metric, not a strict requirement. The problem with allowing new users to verify proxies is that this makes the project more vulnerable to exploitation; it would be easy to falsely verify another editor's IP address as an open proxy, for example. Do you have an established editor who can vouch for you? If not, there is no easy solution to the problem. If you ask again in a few months, once you have an established local account, you'll be accepted readily. Thanks. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 18:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Standardised vote calculation on en:Wikisource

Dear Pathoschild, How did you get the same numbers from the two very different formulae?----Hillgentleman|書 03:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Hillgentleman. Are you referring to the SVC documentation or a particular use of the formulae? —{admin} Pathoschild 03:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The complicated [9] and the simple [10].--Hillgentleman|書 12:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to the difference between these two versions of the weighted support ratio constant formula:

Old	$\left({\frac {support}{support oppose neutral}}\times (support-oppose-neutral)\right)\Rightarrow \;round1$
Comparison of two versions of the WSRc formula
New	${\frac {\left({\frac {support}{support \;oppose}}\times 100\right)\times 1.75(support)}{500}}\times \left(support-1.3(oppose)\right)\Rightarrow \;round1$

The two formulae don't produce the same results. The examples are misleading when viewing old revisions of the page, since they're created from a template that always uses the latest version. For example, compare the following cases, where the 'Scenario' column counts support, oppose, and neutral votes.

Scenario	Old result	New result
Comparison of results
1/3/2 (strong opposition, low participation)	-0.7	-0
10/8/0 (no consensus, low participation)	1.1	2.1
75/25/0 (borderline, high participation)	37.5	58
10/1/0 (strong support, low participation)	8.2	27.7
100/10/0 (strong support, high participation)	81.8	314

—{admin} Pathoschild 20:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. As I can see, the difference between 10-1 and 75-25 has changed. Has the coefficient 1.3 meaning? --Hillgentleman|書 23:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. The coefficient is used to weigh the result, decreasing the value as the number and ratio of oppose votes increases. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Bumped here randomly and was wondering something. We want to discourage voting so I feel that calculation formula is a bit unhelpful. Also it doesn't put in the "validity" of votes into consideration. Just curious. --Cat out 11:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Cool Cat. These formulae were primarily designed for votes on the English Wikisource, such as Featured texts, where the support ratio of established users is the ruling metric. In such cases, voting is not discouraged (at least, not on that project), although we do of course try to address every opposing point where possible. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Default checkboxes for anonymous users on Special:Search

How does an administrator change the default checkboxes for anonymous users and users who have not specified what they would like to search? --Iamunknown 00:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Iamunknown. I don't think that is possible from the wiki, although it can be changed by editing or adding $wgNamespacesToBeSearchedDefault in LocalSettings.php. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

ProxyDB

Hi, Pathoschild

I am sysop and bureaucrat in pt: wikipedia and I ask for excuse for my bad English. We are with many problems because of pt:User:Sock, it uses many open proxies, makes many personal attacks. I already blocked some open proxy, but I liked to have access to your ProxyDB (http://www.pathos.ca/tools/ProxyDB/users.php) to help in the combat the vandalism.

best regards--Rei-artur 21:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Rei-artur. Unfortunately, the system is still far from complete and isn't ready for use. If you know any PHP or MySQL developers who would be willing to help, that would greatly accelerate development. —{admin} Pathoschild 08:03:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Localisation file

Hello, where can I find the French localisation file? Toira 11:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Toira. The French localization file can be viewed from the web at svn.wikimedia.org/svnroot/mediawiki/trunk/phase3/languages/messages/MessagesFr.php. Note that the web viewer does not output the correct encoding, so you will need to download the file with subversion software if you want an accurate version. —{admin} Pathoschild 14:03:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks pathos, I'm actually using dreamweaver, is that fine? Toira 22:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I would recommend against it; Dreamweaver sometimes adds unwanted code that wouldn't be accepted in a patch. I would suggest using an editor that doesn't do this, such as EditPad or Notepad . —{admin} Pathoschild 01:03:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Steward and Special:Makesysop extension

I've got four installations of MediaWiki on one WAMP Apache server - and I would like to try and get Special:Makesysop to work. I am trying to use it like on Special:Log/rights here where the format is:

USERNAME set rights for User:USERNAME@enwiki (or whatever the database name is) from sysop to sysop, checkuser, oversight

I tried once, and it didn't work.... the installation worked though, I set the steward flag in the database but cannot set it across multiple wikis like on here.

Any help is appreciated! --WiganRunnerEu 23:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I also can't get transwiki to work, even though I set the import sources in $wgImportSources.... what's gone wrong here?? --WiganRunnerEu 23:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The manual says:

To adjust user rights on any Wikimedia project, go to Special:Makesysop on Meta.

Note: "User rights management", in the "Restricted special pages" section, is the wrong page; you need "Make a user into a sysop".

The steward version of Special:Makesysop is slightly different from the bureaucrat version. You need to enter three things: the user name, the wiki, and the rights.

Enter a username:
Enter the user name (which must begin with a capital letter unless it is a user with a lower case username on a case-sensitive wiki) followed by @, and the wiki name, unless you are adjusting rights for meta. For meta, only enter the username.
For Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikinews, Wikiversity and Wikibooks, the wiki name is the language code followed by the word "wiki", "wiktionary", "wikiquote", "wikinews", "wikiversity" or "wikibooks" respectively. Minnan is an exception. You must enter "zh_min_nanwiki" with underscores for wikis in this language. For language codes with a "-" in the name, use an underscore instead of a hyphen (e.g. nds-nl becomes nds_nl). For a Wikisource subdomain, the syntax is user@XXwikisource where XX is the subdomain language code. For other projects, you need one of the following:
commonswiki

foundationwiki

incubatorwiki

mediawikiwiki

specieswiki

testwiki

wikimania2007wiki

For example: James@eewiki

All of the prefixes can be seen at download.wikimedia.org, including ones not listed here.
Click "Edit user groups". A new box will appear showing you what rights a user already has, and which other groups are available. To give the user new rights, choose which ones you want from the box on the right. You can select more than one by holding down the ctrl or alt key, depending on your browser. To remove user rights, highlight the ones to remove from the box on the left.
Click "Save user groups"

Other rights: As well as the standard administrator and bureaucrat rights, you can set Steward rights, which allows a user to set arbitrary rights for any other user on any wiki. There is also a CheckUser right; see the CheckUser policy. The "oversight" permission can also be assigned for hiding revisions containing inappropriate personal information.

I tried using it like this, but it didn't work for me - couldn't set user rights cross-wiki, even though oversight and checkuser work on my wikis! (I'm on MediaWiki 1.93). What's gone wrong?? --WiganRunnerEu 23:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello. The cross-wiki features are primarily intended for the Wikimedia Foundation; I have no idea how it can be enabled on a wiki outside Wikimedia. Try asking in #mediawiki on the freenode IRC network. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:03:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Administration

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Missing documentation from your user space

Template:Error:not substituted has, on its talk page, the following documentation:

This template simplifies coding in templates that use confusing ParserFunctions to check if a template is substituted (as described at User:Pathoschild/Help/Template special effects).

I assume that this erstwhile explanation now exists in another location. Could you point me to it, so that I can fix the "documentation" (and, not incidentally, complete my port of this functionality to en:Wikiquote)? Thank you for your assistance. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello. That page was deleted during cleanup, and I somehow missed the incoming links. I've restored the page. —{admin} Pathoschild 03:02:20, 06 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Pathos, thanks for reverting the edits of the move vandalbot tonight. Do you think we should do a Checkuser on Flameviper, because I think that the vandal might be him. Please see the discussion here. Real96 04:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Although I used CheckUser tools to help out, I'm not a local CheckUser and generally shouldn't use my steward access on this project. I suggest speaking with Mackensen or posting on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 05:02:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Great Deals

I noticed you blocked User:Gread Deals you should probably block this too User talk:Great Deals -- Reborn —unsigned by ChesterMarcol 03:40, 23 February 2007.

Thanks for pointing this out; Luna Santin already blocked him. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 03:02:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing

Latest comment: 17 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion

Untagged image

An image you uploaded, :Image:Governorial Coat of Arms of Puerto Rico.png, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 12:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Duly noted; I simply uploaded the image for an unregistered user. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot information

Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Wikipedia:Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. —{admin} Pathoschild 07:02:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

re: Template substitution

Hello Baristarim. Please substitute templates (use {{subst:anon}} instead of {{anon}}), especially when they contain a header. Clicking '[edit]' beside a template header leads to the template, not the current page. A user you welcomed responded on the template page. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 00:02:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sorry about that! :) I am still trying to nail down stuff like that. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers! Baristarim 00:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:02:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

re: Delete link when moving pages

Hello Mets501. I see you removed the link to delete redirects from MediaWiki:Pagemovedtext, providing JavaScript on the talk page that dynamically builds the delete link for administrators instead. This method is relatively clumsy; it requires that administrators find the MediaWiki page, notice the JavaScript code on its talk page, and install it before they can have a delete link. This will not work if they disabled JavaScript, which is not uncommon.

It is far simpler to add a link directly to the message and hide it with CSS from non-administrators (<span style="display:none;" class="admins">). Administrators can add a line (.admins { display:inline; }) to their CSS file to enable all such admin-only content project-wide. Does this alternative CSS method sound reasonable? —{admin} Pathoschild 02:02:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

That was actually the method I supported, but it was rejected by the community (if I can find the discussion I'll give you a link to it). It's much superior, but not acceptable to people (for some reason or another). Actually, maybe we can do something with the new wgUserGroups array in the sitewide javascript? Like the delete link would appear automatically if the user is a member of the "sysop" group. What do you think? —METS501 (talk) 04:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I've found the discussion you're referring to in the common stylesheet archives. That array makes things much easier. We could write a single script for administrators that generates content on all forms, with nonstandard attributes to pass data to the script more efficiently (ie, <span id="admins" placeholder="deletelink" title="$2"></span>). Coded properly, non-administrators will only have to parse the condition check. How does that sound? —{admin} Pathoschild 23:02:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Are you up to writing it? My javascript skills are less than I'd like them to be :-) —METS501 (talk) 23:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll write it sometime soon, then. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 00:02:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox hider

I like your new template! Those things are getting oppressive on some of the biographies I work on! Jokestress 05:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; the templates were bugging me too. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 05:33:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

For the most part, I like this template, but I'd like to politely request that you not use this anywhere, at least for the time being. The reason I ask is so that we don't end up with "competing standards" - multiple templates that do the same thing. With the discussion going on around the multi-banner template, this is only likely to complicate and confuse matters. Raul654 06:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure there would be a conflict; unless the multi-banner template contains information useful for casual readers leaving a quick comment, wouldn't it simply replace some of the templates inside the hidden box? Even with this template, combining some of the largely redundant templates is beneficial. —{admin} Pathoschild 06:33:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Look at Talk:Jane Fonda. If the articlehistory and multi-project templates were used there, there'd be almost as much reduction, but in a much more elegant way. As to the rest of those templates which would not be included - fixing those is the next step. So yes, your template it directly competes with the already-extant ones, but (and I don't mean this as an insult) it doesn't do nearly a nice a job of it. Raul654 06:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you link me to the multi-banner template? I haven't seen it yet, so I can't really discuss and compare it. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 06:43:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:WikiProjectBanners (currently on TFD, but it's a landslide keep).

In less than two weeks, it's been deployed (by hand, by many different people) on almost 1000 talk pages (strongly suggesting that it's been well received).

If you want to see it in action, take a look at this before and after Raul654 07:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

That template uses the same method, but does not affect many other templates and still leaves a large number of templates at the top of the talk page that are very confusing for a new user (I get a headache looking at some pages). I don't see any conflict; see an example (from Talk:Fuzzy Zoeller) of the multi-WikiProject template alone and combined with the hidden infobox template. Whereas the multi-WikiProject template still leaves over a third of my screen filled with bars of orange, combined with the hidden infobox template it reduces that to a single line in the top-right corner. —{admin} Pathoschild 07:43:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

re: infoboxes on Talk:Fuzzy Zoeller

Hello Tuxide. I noticed that you converted the hidden infoboxes on Talk:Fuzzy Zoeller to right-aligned box variants. I much prefer the hidden method, particularly on a page that receives heavy offsite traffic. This makes boxes that are relevant to casual editors more prominant (such as off topic warning and blp) by hiding the identically emphasized boxes relevant only to editors and tracking (WikiProjects, missing image tag, and media attention notes). The hidden infoboxes method reduces confusion, emphasizes important notices, and makes talk pages much more usable for both casual visitors and established editors. What are your objections to the hidden infoboxes method? Perhaps we can adjust it. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:02:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for asking me this question. My reason was that I didn't think the hidden template was prominent enough due to the size of the box, and the number of people who view the article and do not already edit, or understand Wikipedia. I generally use hidden templates on to-do lists, although yours could probably be made more prominent if it is not as minimal as it was, such as the archive box on Talk:Wal-Mart. As for the high traffic implications, if it's server performace you are concerned about, I am not as per WP:PERF (besides the XHTML gets loaded anyways whether or not JavaScript is hiding it). I believe the off-topic warning is still emphasized because I made all of the others smaller. If you want, do the same to the blp template (but remove the instance of it from the WikiProject Biography one). If you have any questions or ideas, please let me know. Regards, Tuxide 22:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think localizing this method to individual templates (as is done on the to-do and archive templates) is scalable. On pages with many such templates, this forces a user who wants to scan through the information to click several '[show]' link consecutively. On the other hand, it is relatively easy to click a single '[show]' link, scan through the information, and hide it again. If prominence is a concern, we could make the box more so as shown at right.

information for editors

My concern about high traffic is not performance, but user-friendliness. Particularly (though not only) when an article receives media attention, we should do our best to make the discussion page as simple, usable, and inviting to constructive comments as possible. The orange boxes are essentially warnings; they are designed specifically to attract attention and force viewers to read them before proceeding.

Given that, we do not want to intimidate a casual reader or editor by forcing them to read a full page (or two) of boxes written in Wikimedia jargon. The hidden infoboxes template is largely designed to provide easy access to information about the article for interested editors, while only displaying actual warnings and the information relevant to casual readers and editors by default. —{admin} Pathoschild 06:53:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your response. I like the bigger box; I would also suggest using a wordage to something more Slashdot/Digg-like to invite the casual reader can overwhelm himself if he wants to. For example:

Additional boilerplates below threshold

Cheeers, Tuxide 07:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that wording introduces some terms that could be simplified. For example, 'boilerplate' is not a very common word outside editing circles, and 'threshold' suggests a level-based system that doesn't exist on Wikipedia. What do you think of the box at right?

more information for editors

—{admin} Pathoschild 23:00:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It's the "for editors" thing that I'm not too big of a fan of, because it's not inviting enough. How about

more information

Tuxide 23:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

That version looks good. Do you object to re-adding that to Talk:Fuzzy Zoeller? —{admin} Pathoschild 23:16:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Questions

Latest comment: 17 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion

WP:UW & WP:UWLS

Hi P,

Hope you're OK? You are one of the original members of both these two projects, and I was wondering is there any reason why we can't merge UWLS is into UW? There is alot of synergy between, and it's just another contact point for people with UW questions. Cheers Khukri (en-wiki) 137.138.8.75 11:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I see no problem merging them. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi P, I could use your insight please if you could spare 5 mins. I seem to be running round in arguments circle with a respected editor who has come out at this late stage to say we should not change the level structure, and would appreciate a second thought before it becomes too entrenched or escalates. Please see here. Regards Khukri (en-wiki) 90.10.145.196 11:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC).

Hello Khukri. Titoxd's concerns about backwards-compatibility are well-founded, if inconvenient. I think a variant of Quarl's idea would be ideal. Templates that are already similar to the standardized system can be converted directly, but templates that are too non-standard to be converted without breaking expected severity could be deprecated over time. A standardized alternative might be created under a new name or with a prefix (I've used 's/' for 'standardized', but 'uw-' would work too). The legacy templates would then be gradually tweaked towards the standard, and eventually the standardized form would move in and replace them. —{admin} Pathoschild 19:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject on Open Proxies - inquiry about verified user status

Pathoschild, there has been some concern expressed on en:Wikipedia about the backlog around verification and blockade of open proxies (see discussion <= permalink as the content changes rapidly). I'm wondering whether you feel the need for additional participants, considering there are only five verified users currently. If you think there is a need for additional hands, I would be interested in learning what is necessary to effectively participate in the open proxy WikiProject. Regards, Ceyockey 16:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ceyockey. Any established user who can be trusted not to report false matches can be given verified status. The backlog is caused by far too much dependence on a small number of maintainers; backlog arises if any of those few users divert attention to other projects for a while. Anyone who would like to help should feel free to ask me or another verified user. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

:Template:Uw-test1

Hi Pathoschild, I note you recently edited this template. I attempted to use it but the auto signature is not working properly. I don't know enough about this code to begin toying with it. Can you take a look at it again? Regards, Accurizer 21:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you try substituting it with {{subst:uw-test1}}? —{admin} Pathoschild 21:01:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict... I was just writing you back to say I figured it out. Sorry to bother you. Regards, Accurizer 21:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay. —{admin} Pathoschild 21:01:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

MetaProject on open proxies verified status

I would like to apply for verified user status. G e o. 17:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Geo. Do you have knowledge of or experience with open proxies? In particular, do you understand the differences between anonymizing networks, open proxies, and zombie computers, and are you familiar with the necessity of proof described at WP:OP#Block? It's essential that possible open proxies not be blocked, since they'll also be blocked on all participating wikis. If you do understand all of this (or study up on it), I see no problem giving you verified status. :)

On an unrelated note, I've deleted pages you mistakenly created at "Talk:66.159.192.213" and "Talk:Tromaintern" instead of in the user talk namespace. —{admin} Pathoschild 20:02:45, 07 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have a working knowledge of open proxies. I will follow the evidence requirements. Anything I don't know I will of course study for. G e o. 04:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You're verified. The en-Wikipedia chapter is rather backlogged at the moment; your help is appreciated. —{admin} Pathoschild 05:02:50, 08 February 2007 (UTC)

I am also a user of Wikibooks, Meta, and Wiktionary (Same Username). G e o. Talk to me 19:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I cleared the backlog in To be Checked. Can you go in and block the proxies i identified? Also how do I get veried status on the Meta-Wiki, WB, and WT? G e o. Talk to me 04:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

That's a great help; I've verified you on Meta, you were verified on Wiktionary by Connel MacKenzie, and there is no Wikibooks chapter. I moved the proxies to Meta, and will block them later. :) —{admin} Pathoschild 06:02:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks G e o. Talk to me 16:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Using pywikipedia

I need help with my python bot. How do i use it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lava159 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Hello Lava159. If you're referring to the pywikipedia bot framework, there are instructions at m:Using the python wikipediabot. If you're referring to the pgkbot IRC bot, there are instructions at Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism/Bots. —{admin} Pathoschild 23:02:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Other comments

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Template:Civil2 proposed for deletion

I noticed that you have previously worked on Template:Civil2. I thought you should know that it is currently proposed for deletion. Please consider adding your comments at templates for deletion. -- Aylahs ^(talk) 16:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me, but I have no interest in the template. —{admin} Pathoschild 21:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Template:Hidden

I think I have fixed the [hide] instead of [show] error on the hidden template, but please feel free to review this and ensure this is the case. Ian¹³ /t 13:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It seems to be working everywhere; thanks. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

AWB Bug: Regex forms don't allow empty 'replace' fields - Fixed

Hi, Your AWB Bug has been fixed in SVN Rev 621

It will be included in the next release.

Thanks

Reedy Boy 21:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. —{admin} Pathoschild 22:02:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated message to bot owners

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 04:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary

Dividing line

Latest comment: 18 years ago6 comments1 person in discussion

Please do not remove the ---- that separate language sections. Thanks. —Stephen 14:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Is there an information, guideline, policy, or talk page concerning this? Inserting rules between sections is semantically incorrect and aesthetically displeasing. —[admin] Pathoschild 16:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Please be more careful rolling back good-faith edits. You removed several improvements and placed pages in several deleted categories (for example, see diff 1717612). Judging from the message on my talk page, you were attempting to re-add the redundant '----' dividers between language sections. Nonetheless, you also reverted my edits to pages where there was none. —[admin] Pathoschild 16:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I don’t know which pages you mean, but all of the ones I did seemed necessary. I don’t know why you claim that the ---- is redundant. Redundant means that the separating line appears even without ----, but when you remove it, I see no separation whatsoever. —Stephen 16:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see which one you meant, итд.. The reason I reverted that one was because you moved the {{see|}} line to a position below the language name. That belongs at the very top of the page. None of the rollbacks were made carelessly. —Stephen 16:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Blanket rollback are generally careless, whatever the intention. While your intent was apparently to edit a single detail per article, you undid all changes. It would have been far simpler, more collaborative, and less aggravating to simply edit that one detail, as is usually done on wikis. I'm not only referring итд.:

edit	intended change?	additional changes
TV	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from English abbreviations, Bosnian abbreviations, Serbian abbreviations, Vietnamese abbreviations to inexistant bs:Abbreviations, sr:Abbreviations; added redundant "abbreviation for..." for each entry under the "Abbreviations" header.
ТВ	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Serbian abbreviations to inexistant Category:sr:Abbreviations.
СССР	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Serbian abbreviations to inexistantCategory:sr:Abbreviations; added incorrectly formatted paranthetical note beside {{see}}; added redundant "(abbreviation)" for a definition under the "Abbreviations" header.
DF	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Portuguese abbreviations, Spanish abbreviations to inexistant pt:Abbreviations and es:Abbreviations.
ž	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Bosnian abbreviations, Serbian abbreviations to inexistant bs:Abbreviations, sr:Abbreviations.
npr.	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Bosnian abbreviations, Serbian abbreviations to inexistant bs:Abbreviations, sr:Abbreviations.
itd.	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Bosnian abbreviations, Serbian abbreviations to inexistant bs:Abbreviations, sr:Abbreviations.
SSSR	restore rules.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Bosnian abbreviations, Serbian abbreviations to inexistant bs:Abbreviations, sr:Abbreviations; added redundant "(abbreviation)" under the "Abbreviations" header.
итд.	move {{see}}.	removed {{abbreviation}}; changed categories from Serbian abbreviations to inexistant sr:Abbreviations.

Regarding the rules, I do see a separating line between each section without them. What skin are you using? It'd be far better to add the lines in the site stylesheet, so that there is no semantically incorrect or aesthetically displeasing extra lines. —[admin] Pathoschild 20:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

It wasn’t blanket rollbacks at all. When I saw what you were doing, I looked at a fair number of your edits and rolled back only what I felt needed to be done. You keep repeating "apparently to edit a single detail per article"...that was not the case at all. There were several, including order of sections, order of interwikies, order of "see also" links, and search routines. Repairing all the things you messed up, while keeping the very minor improvements, was going to be consuming a lot of time. I don’t know why you even want to change category links to templates in the first place ... and since I am the one who writes most of the Russian abbreviations and other articles, I know that the category link will continue to be used preferentially. I was not ready to spend an hours to save something of such questionable value. I don’t mind if you put it into the article, but please do not mess up the work that I have already done.

Also, interwiki links are alphabetized according to the place where an experienced speaker expects to find them. For example, Finnish (fi) is alphabetized as Suomi, not as Finnish. Chinese (zh) goes last, because that’s where users look for it. Japanese goes under ja. Dutch goes under nl. Spanish goes under es. They are not alphabetized according to the English translations of the language names. —Stephen 20:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

As for the rules, I do not see the separation. I use the default skin. The lines have been discussed at length and the decision on the English wiktionary is to have them. If you don’t like them, there is a way that you can make them disappear. Let me know if you are interested in the code to do this. Most of us want the lines, and the decision to have them was made long ago, subsequently debated, and the decision reaffirmed. The lines stay, but if you like, we can make them disappear for you. —Stephen 20:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? In none of these cases did I change interwiki link order, and I have no idea what you mean by 'search routines'. Until you're willing to explain more clearly what problem you see with my changes, or at the very least provide links to a content or talk page that does, I see no reason to change the way I edit or create articles— particularly given your unhelpful and unnecessarily hostile response. —[admin] Pathoschild 23:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

That’s why I only asked you to stop the one problem, the removal of the ---- separators. The other things I fixed myself. —Stephen 00:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

the abbreviations thing

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think some of this is what I was talking about on IRC the night you were doing the edits.. A few months ago - all of the non-english categories were changed from 'Category:LanguageName abbreviations' to 'Category:Language Code:Abbreviations' (not just for abbreviations.. I'm just using that as an example, many categories were changed). I'm not sure what the reasoning was behind this move, as I had just signed on to the project when it was done... fwiw.. --Versageek 23:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out; I wasn't aware of it, since most abbreviation categories used the proper noun format. The template would make it easier to standardise either way using a simple array. For example, {{User:Pathoschild/Template:language|en}} outputs English, which means we could use the more readable proper noun format without sacrificing the technical abilities of {{nav}} (which I gather is the reason for the original change). I'll propose it when we start working on the style guide. —[admin] Pathoschild 00:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Entry layout split

See brief comment at Wiktionary talk:Entry layout explained#Split this page. —unsigned by DAVilla 07:43, 29 October 2006.

Thanks; I've commented there. —[admin] Pathoschild 19:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Older RFD archive

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm not sure if you can use this coherently or not. I also have this same thing in expanded form, from the full XML dump if you'd like it.

--Connel MacKenzie 22:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll look through those when I finish merging the more recently old archives into the standardised system. —[admin] Pathoschild 22:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)