User talk:DeirdreAnne/Archives/2009/10

This page is a chronological archive of past discussions from the current talk page for the period Please specify dates with: {{Chronological talk archive|dates}}.

In order to preserve the record of past discussions, the contents of this page should be preserved in their current form. Please do NOT make new edits to this page. If you wish to make new comments or re-open an old discussion thread, please do so on the current talk page.

If necessary, copy the relevant discussion thread to the current talk page page and then add your comments there.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP POV and sockpuppets

Hi. This looks like the IP of a banned user, most likely NisarKand (talk · contribs) or Khampalak (talk · contribs). I have reverted his POV once (he is removing scholarly sources, for example the Encyclopaedia of Islam, and is replacing them with un-scholastic and unreliable references), but now he has restored his POV. Could you please take a look at it. I have explained my reverts on the respective talkpages. Thank you. Tajik (talk) 17:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user is continuing his disruptive behavior. It is also very clear that he has no idea of the subject, but simply removes authoritative scholarly sources and replaces them with unreliable tertiary internet-sources. Tajik (talk) 22:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Protected user talk pages

List here. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I was actually unaware that it was still there. You can go ahead and delete it. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 23:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy DeirdreAnne/Archives/2009's Day!

User:DeirdreAnne/Archives/2009 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as DeirdreAnne/Archives/2009's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear DeirdreAnne/Archives/2009!

Peace,
Rlevse
00:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History merge

RE: your comment regarding suggesting a history merge here. I had guessed that a history merge was not so bad when all the edits to the first page preceded the creation of the second page, such as when a userspace draft is cat and pasted into a new mainspace article? Is such a history merge complex? I will accept your request to not suggest history merges where not strictly necessary. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking is not supported by policy in copyvio cases

Re: "Blanking would not be sufficient and is not supported by policy in copyvio cases" from here.
(side point: In that discussion, I hadn't considered a copyright violation aspect) But just to clarify...

When copyrighted material is inserted into articles or other long lived pages is usually dealt with by editing out the material. It stays in the history, and I've not seen anyone get worked up about that.
In cases like this, however, where there is no need to keep anything, deletion is preferable.

Would you agree?
(Is revision deletion working yet?)

I'm not sure that G12 and "blatant" were really applicable, as any infringement was incidental and accidental and rectifiable by posting a note on the talk page (I won't suggest altering the history or the logs). A lot of pages are created from other pages as a template without attribution, and we don't get upset about their creation. I don't dispute anything, but would be interested in your thoughts if you think I have missed something. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:19, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Valued pictures 2

The closure here is an attack piece. I'd ask you to undo yourself and recuse. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 213 FCs served}`

Reads as a quite well considered summary of the situation to me. --jjron (talk) 13:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment of User:TrueColour and related Edit warring

Maybe you can have a look at post to Pmanderson's user talk. Also on the ANI page I made some comments with respect to his/her edits. While the hist doesn't show the "N" for "new", I think I created Penafiel City. Later I corrected the naming to Penafiel, Portugal. Pmanderson seemed to have look through my contributions and reverted the move with the notion " revert move vandalism ". My move was in no way vandalism. He violated WP:AGF and also violated WP:MOS, since the city is not normally called Penafiel City. Also the move of Anta, Ancash to Anta, Peru accompagnied by " revert move vandalism" is such an action.

Putting this together with move and all his/her actions on my talk page with respect to naming of Portugal articles, where s/he calls me to use names that are used by established sources, I think it is now pure harassment what s/he performs.

Thank you for your help. I think Pmanderson is really bad for Wikipedia spirit. TrueColour (talk) 00:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are not a deadline; but the longer this continues, the more work it will be to repair. TrueColour makes his moves to insert his own new text on the redirect; this makes simple reversion difficult.

For the other matter, I will consider how to recast it. There is a real problem here, as is manifest from his talk page, TrueColour does not write idiomatic English, but moves to a literal translation from the Portuguese, on the grounds that if Distrito is the Portuguese name, District must be part of the English name. I welcome non-native editors, like Markussep - but they should either have fluency in English or recognize they do not.

Suggestions are welcome. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by recognize? Why do you say this here on someone else's talk page, but never asked for such a recognition at my talk? I am well aware that I am not one of the users at Category:User en-N. Do you think that only en-N users are allowed to move articles? Why is this not written anywhere? Why for municipalities and districts you oppose vehemently the usage of the class identifier but Penafiel, Portugal you move to Penafiel City? Is it only power struggle, harassment and stalking? You may also update your knowledge about article naming in English WP at Talk:Districts of Portugal. I am looking forward to see your feedback there. TrueColour (talk) 23:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Puppet templates

Hi, Doug. While I have successfully emptied {{Checkedpuppeteer}}, the template {{CheckedPuppeteer}} still has near 200 transclusions, which is why I have the deprecated notice in the doc, not the template. Want to help me empty it before we put it to speedy? :) -- Avi (talk) 06:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I finished the remaining 40 or so.
I fixed the nominations. Please see {{db-t3}} for instructions how to correctly nominate templates under this criterion.
Template:Sockpuppeteerproven still has some 350 transclusions that need to be removed before that template can be deleted. Debresser (talk) 10:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It uses ~~~~~, with 5 tildes, which creates the time-stamp only without the user details. Debresser (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted Prodego's edits to Template:CheckedPuppeteer and left him a message on his talkpage. Debresser (talk) 19:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tested your first mapping question on your user page . It seems to work. -- Avi (talk) 22:02, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What else needs to be fixed?

Is there any other mapping that looks problematic? -- Avi (talk) 02:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Districts of Portugal

Things are going fast and content related at:

Not so at Talk:Districts of Portugal. No content related input, but now one user without input to the content, wants to start moving again. It is really waste of all our time. Like Husond, he wants to move before solving the naming dispute. I think there should be no single move before the naming matter is solved. That's why I stopped reverting Husond. BTW: Any time span defined for WP:BRD? A revert move after 12 days is that a reply to a bold move or is that a new move? Or on the other hand, could one revert to names changed without consensus, let's say over a year ago? Is there anything that you could add to Talk:Districts of Portugal, to prevent a new moving of all the articles? TrueColour (talk) 22:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To comply with the request made by User:Muchness, I started: Talk:Districts of Portugal#RfC. Correct procedure is important to me. TrueColour (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation for prospective CGUS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

This is to confirm, should Doug ever be nominated for
Comptroller General of the United States, that the sockpuppet
tag on his page was meant as a test, and in no way indicates
that Doug was suspected of any impropriety. -- Avi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.74
Comment: Most recent key: Click show in box @ http://is.gd/4xJrs

iF4EAREKAAYFAkrniZ0ACgkQDWKwGfgOKfkb3QEAigZMRbdgruhWSQaywCShy9fi
eBKVRlhbdCaf8PayaJ8A+gKzpyoyqm+GN31CVzhQKoER8cxUePK8azTsBq/t3M/v
=dp52
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Prva HNL copyvio???

Okay so what is this crap with blanketing half of the Prva HNL article and stamping it as copyvio? How can the prose text describing the league system be copyvio and even if it was couldn't you simply delete it or raise the issue at the article's talk page? Timbouctou (talk) 23:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]