User talk:Hersfold/Archive 30 (June 2009)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
← Previous archive - Archive 30 (June 2009) - Next archive →

This page contains discussions dated during the month of June 2009 from User talk:Hersfold. Please direct all current discussions there. Thank you.

Friendly Visit

Hello, Hersfold. You probably remember me from sockpuppet investigations when I used to be a vandal. I'm just here now to let you know that I've been off the block for over a month and wanted to apologized to my past troubles. I have steadily grown on wikipedia in experience and morality while contributing to articles, translating a bunch of stuff from german for wikiproject assyria, and joining in discussions on different talkpages. If you look in my contribs--you could see I've been busy interacting and see articles I've created. Recently I have begun joining the fight against vandals by reverting loads of unconstructive edits and will reapply in the future for rollbacker. I hope we are on good terms now and I invite you to visit my user page. Thanks:)SchnitzelMannGreek. 02:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

SchnitzelMannGreek has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

SchnitzelMannGreek. 02:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

  • By the way, I noticed that you have a "Real-Life Barnstar" for possibly saving a real life. If you want...can you explain please. I don't mean to get in your business, just curious:)SchnitzelMannGreek. 02:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back. It's always good to see a blocked user come back constructively. To answer your question, Wikipedia does on occasion get suicide or murder notes stuck into articles, collectively known as threats of violence. While most of the time these are clearly ridiculous, we do often take them seriously and will on occasion contact authorities to let them handle it in person. While I didn't call the police in that particular case, I have done so in the past. We very rarely notice anything happening on it from our end, but on occasion someone does get arrested for threatening to blow up their school, etc., and it's result of that. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 7

Hi! Do you have an idea yet whether you'll be able to make it? Cheers! bd2412 T 00:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't; I'd forgotten I was signed up to attend a camping trip this weekend instead. Thanks anyway! Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: User:Hersfold/Lockbox

To save you the time: Template:-! is only semi-protected (or would be were it not on your list), Template:Equals is not protected, and while its target is, it's only used on about 8 pages all of which are archives, Template:Editorial cartoon reference doesn't exist, and while Template:Comic strip reference is protected (by you), it's used on all of 4 articles and so doesn't strike me as a "high-risk template". Thanks. Gurch (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I've upgraded -! to full-protection; it's a template escape sequence used on over 500 pages, largely in articles. Little templates like that are particularly susceptible and hard to track down.
  • Equals I'm removing - you're right, it's hardly used, and it shouldn't be too big a deal. I actually might go through and replace all instances of it with = instead.
  • Editorial cartoon reference I'll remove, it got TfD'd so shouldn't be coming back anyway.
  • Comic strip reference I'd rather leave up for consistency; all the other citation templates are fully protected, and it could be argued that this one is more at risk because it's less used; damage to it wouldn't be noticed as quickly, and would render the citations in those articles worthless. I'm open to discussion on it, though.
Thanks again; if you feel I should have done something else here, let me know, of course. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment - Ireland Article Names

Some people are trying to start a discussion over there - can you go rule on whether or not it's an appropriate venue? Thanks.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll email the other clerks, but my gut instinct is that that poll subpage will be deleted or moved shortly. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

On Hold.

Hi Hersfold, I’m currently being censored, and prevented from commenting on this discussion, though a named party. I would very much like to contribute and hope that this discussion will remain open till I available to do so. Thanks --Domer48'fenian' 14:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean - that discussion does not appear to be at risk of being archived anytime soon, and you should be able to edit it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

A very bad block lifted but "I am hereby imposing a one week topic ban from Ireland article naming on Domer48, retroactive to the time of the second block. If in the next five days Domer48 engages in any project or article talk page dicussion on the topic he can be reblocked for the remaining time (user talk pages are ok, but not recommended" which prevents me from commenting. The way rules are applied I could possibly get blocked for posting this. Like I siad, I would like to post on it, but have to wait. --Domer48'fenian' 18:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Domer, if I blocked you for responding to a direct question from a clerk, I'd be deopped so fast my head would be spinning for a month. Don't worry about discussing it here.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Domer, if you have something to add, you may email the Arbitration Committee - their email address is listed at WP:AC. Otherwise I would recommend you sit out the temporary ban, which I'm sure was placed with good reason. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ford mustang AV8ER.jpg

LOL, this is user theoneintraining I completely forgot I about this commons account I forgot my password so I had to create another account just to reply to you after receiving a email from you. About the picture - I took that photo when I went to the USA last year. I dont have a clue what tag I needed to put on it and I dont give a fuck either, delete it/keep it I dont give a shit about the picture or wikipedia anymore (I had a bad experience with a admin on wikipedia). How do I delete my email address from commons?. Also just cause I used a couple of swear words dont get offended or anything (I know how sensitive you admins are). Again about the picture I really dont give a flying fuck what you do with it.--Theoneintraining2 (talk) 20:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not really my concern - I'm not an admin on Commons. Removing your email address there should be the same as it is here, though. The message my bot left should give you instructions on what is needed if you decide to come back. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
O.K. I was replying to [1] this message I received.--Theoneintraining2 (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hiya

Hey Hersfold!! Welcome back!! Its so good to see you back! --Legolas (talk2me) 09:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion extension?

Hi, your bot tagged my photo for deletion in 15 days. I am working on appeasing the copyright gods, but I'm not sure I can figure out who has to do what and get it done within 2 weeks-- is there some way to extend my time to deletion to July 15th? Thanks.Em gee vee (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You can try talking to the OTRS volunteers at commons:Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard, but I can't guarantee anything. I'm neither an OTRS volunteer nor a Commons admin, I just run the bot that spreads bad news. Sorry I can't help more. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The Lockbox

Hello... FYI, I've taken the liberty of adding three templates to the Lockbox. They are {{cite doi}}, {{cite doi}}, and {{cite doi}}, all of which are used by Citation_bot for auto-generating references. (I've also added them to Cenarium's list.) Hope this is OK, and thanks for taking the initiative to institute such a useful service. Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 17:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Thanks for the note! Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Request to participate in University of Washington survey on tool to quickly understand Wikipedians’ reputations

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington. In April, we met with some local Wikipedians to learn what they would like to know about other editors’ history and activities (within Wikipedia) when interacting with them on talk pages. The goal of those sessions was to gather feedback to help design an embedded application that could quickly communicate useful information about other Wikipedians. We have now created a few images that we feel represent some of what our participants thought was important. We would appreciate it if you took a few minutes of your time to complete an online survey that investigates whether or not these images would be useful to you. Your quick contribution would be very valuable to our research group and ultimately to Wikipedia. (When finished, the code for this application will be given over to the Wikipedia community to use and/or adjust as they see fit.)

Willing to spend a few minutes taking our survey? Click this link.

Please feel free to share the link with other Wikipedians. The more feedback, the better! The survey is completely anonymous and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. All data is used for university research purposes only.

Thank you for your time! If you have any questions about our research or research group, please visit our user page. Commprac01 (talk) 20:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Additional details about our research group are available here.

Some shameless thankspam!

User:Colds7ream/RfA

OTRS pending bot on Commons

Hi. I see there still are images with "OTRS pending" tags older than 30 days. Is it because your bot needs time to process the whole backlog, or is it a problem I should report to you? Regards, --Eusebius (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The bot can only handle a certain number of the categories at a time or it dies; I wasn't able to run it yesterday due to some server errors, but hopefully I'll be able to do so later today or this evening. Also, since I've been given no direction on how to handle the "OTRS received" templates, the bot is currently ignoring these for now, so they'll remain in the "backlog" until someone from OTRS takes care of them. One more run should clear out what's left of the backlog, those images excepted. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

2nd chance

See User talk:Berman619. You offered a 2nd chance and he has, after several tries, followed the instructions. You should review the changes, since you offered the 2nd chance. Mangojuicetalk 10:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Paloma Faith

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Paloma Faith. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Donnie Park (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for clarification

Why was this archived, when both of us had follow-up questions for the arbitrators? - jc37 08:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I was told that it had been inactive long enough to archive - if you still had some issues that needed clarification, you can contact the Committee or I can discuss with them about unarchiving the request. Sorry, they probably hadn't noticed that there were still open questions, the same as I - with all the requests we get, the clerks don't always read in detail and we occasionally miss some timestamps. Sorry about that, and for the delay in responding to you. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the response.
And no worries about the time, I've been somewhat on a wikibreak myself.
At this point, I'd like to follow whatever the process is, but I'm really not sure what that wuld be.
I suppose unarchiving would seem the easiest, but only if we could put a yellow flashing light of some kind on the request for clarification so that the arbs know that there is more to clarify.
What do you suggest? - jc37 23:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I'll check with one of the Arbs to see what they'd prefer. I'll let you know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
It sounds like the preferred course of action right now would be to post a new request, just with the questions you didn't have answered yet. Again, sorry this took so long to take care of. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Help for the Perplexed

Sorry, I'm new to the arbitration process. What does it mean that my Request for Clarification has been archived? Does that mean the ArbComm has decided to take no action and the request is closed? The discussion appeared to be continuing, so I'm curious why the decision was made to archive it now. If I try to reopen it, will that be viewed as harassment? How does this work? Thanks. -- Touretzky (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Requests for clarification don't generally lead to further action by the Committee - they're simply intended to help clarify why something was done or what exactly was meant by a given remedy. In your case, the main issue seems to have been why you were topic banned when you weren't active in the area for a while. The request was archived because no recent action had taken place on the request; the Arbitrators had responded to the request, and seeing no apparent further comments, it was placed onto the appropriate talk page for later reference. In summary, the view of the Arbitrators was that due to the intensely polarizing nature of the Scientology topic area, there were a wide number of editors in both pro- and anti-Scientology factions that were or had caused disruption to the area in the past. ArbCom was asked to handle this "battlefield" issue, and their solution was to restrict those editors who had or were presently contributing to the problem the topic area had become. As a result, many editors were topic banned, some of whom like yourself were not necessarily active at the time. This was done out of the interest of equality to all involved and is not intended to be punitive - rather, it is intended to allow the area to settle by removing the most aggressive editors and allowing others to enter the field, while giving those who are affected by the topic ban a chance to step back, see how things develop, and refamiliarize themselves with policies and guidelines. Your topic ban is remaining because it would be unfair to remove yours when many others would be remaining in place, and you stated yourself that you had not been active in the area, or in fact Wikipedia in general, for quite some time, thus rendering the issue somewhat moot. Again, more detailed responses can be read at the archived discussion.
If you feel as though your concerns were not adequately addressed, you are welcome to contact the Committee; I don't believe a politely worded question would be viewed as harassment, however the Committee did receive several similar requests to remove a topic ban from an inactive editor, all of which were denied for the same reasons yours was. Before contacting them, I would recommend you consider if it's really necessary to pursue this further; by your own admission, the topic ban will not adversely affect your editing, and it is not intended as a form of punishment. Continuing to ask about it when it's not going to affect you either way may be seen as trying to beat a dead horse. Should you wish to inquire further, however, I would recommend sending the ArbCom an email, with carefully reasoned explanations of why the topic ban is no longer necessary. It may also help to wait some time, at least a month or preferably two.
Sorry for the very long response, and for the delay in getting back to you (I've been out of the country), but I do hope this answers your questions. If not, however, feel free to let me know. I should respond rather sooner this time. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Need help with "MediaWiki internal error"

I have been editing the Elton John article. However, for the last two hours, my repeated attempts at saving give rise to this error message:

MediaWiki internal error.

Original exception: exception 'AFPUserVisibleException' with message '<abusefilter-exception-regexfailure>' in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.parser.php:1604 Stack trace:

  1. 0 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(1075): AbuseFilterParser::regexErrorHandler(2048, 'Only variables ...', '/usr/local/apac...', 1075, Array)
  2. 1 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(801): memcached->_flush_read_buffer(Resource id #487)
  3. 2 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(413): memcached->get_sock('enwiki:abusefil...')
  4. 3 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.class.php(469): memcached->get('enwiki:abusefil...')
  5. 4 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.class.php(448): AbuseFilter::recordProfilingResult('81', 0.028966188430786)
  6. 5 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.class.php(398): AbuseFilter::checkFilter(Object(stdClass), Object(AbuseFilterVariableHolder), true)
  7. 6 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.class.php(673): AbuseFilter::checkAllFilters(Object(AbuseFilterVariableHolder))
  8. 7 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.hooks.php(37): AbuseFilter::filterAction(Object(AbuseFilterVariableHolder), Object(Title))
  9. 8 [internal function]: AbuseFilterHooks::onEditFilterMerged(Object(EditPage), '{{pp-semi-prote...', , '/* 1990s */ cop...')
  10. 9 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Hooks.php(132): call user_func_array(Array, Array)
  11. 10 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/EditPage.php(956): wfRunHooks('EditFilterMerge...', Array)
  12. 11 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/EditPage.php(2503): EditPage->internalAttemptSave(false, false)
  13. 12 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/EditPage.php(449): EditPage->attemptSave()
  14. 13 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/EditPage.php(340): EditPage->edit()
  15. 14 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Wiki.php(520): EditPage->submit()
  16. 15 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Wiki.php(66): MediaWiki->performAction(Object(OutputPage), Object(Article), Object(Title), Object(User), Object(WebRequest))
  17. 16 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/index.php(116): MediaWiki->initialize(Object(Title), Object(Article), Object(OutputPage), Object(User), Object(WebRequest))
  18. 17 /usr/local/apache/common-local/live-1.5/index.php(3): require('/usr/local/apac...')
  19. 18 {main}

Exception caught inside exception handler: exception 'AFPUserVisibleException' with message '<abusefilter-exception-regexfailure>' in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.parser.php:1604 Stack trace:

  1. 0 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(1075): AbuseFilterParser::regexErrorHandler(2048, 'Only variables ...', '/usr/local/apac...', 1075, Array)
  2. 1 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(801): memcached->_flush_read_buffer(Resource id #123)
  3. 2 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/memcached-client.php(413): memcached->get_sock('enwiki:gadgets-...')
  4. 3 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/Gadgets/Gadgets.php(79): memcached->get('enwiki:gadgets-...')
  5. 4 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/Gadgets/Gadgets.php(55): wfLoadGadgetsStructured()
  6. 5 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/extensions/Gadgets/Gadgets.php(171): wfLoadGadgets()
  7. 6 [internal function]: wfGadgetsBeforePageDisplay(Object(OutputPage), Object(SkinMonoBook))
  8. 7 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Hooks.php(132): call_user_func_array('wfGadgetsBefore...', Array)
  9. 8 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/OutputPage.php(1011): wfRunHooks('BeforePageDispl...', Array)
  10. 9 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Exception.php(159): OutputPage->output()
  11. 10 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Exception.php(186): MWException->reportHTML()
  12. 11 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Exception.php(284): MWException->report()
  13. 12 /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/includes/Exception.php(343): wfReportException(Object(AFPUserVisibleException))
  14. 13 [internal function]: wfExceptionHandler(Object(AFPUserVisibleException))
  15. 14 {main}

The text I was attempting to change is here; the failure to save seems to be triggered by the workings of the abuse filter, so it would be a great help if you could tell me what what might be the problem? Cheers, Ohconfucius (talk) 10:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

  • The problem is now gone, I've integrated my edits, but I'd still be interested to know what the problem was. Thanks, Ohconfucius (talk) 12:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid I can't tell you what went wrong here - this error appears to be related to the Mediawiki software, which I don't have access to. You'd be better off asking at the Technical Village Pump. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Deolis

I have no idea what I'm supposed to do. Someone wants permission to use the picture of Deolis Guerra I took? The Miracle already used it in their program this year, so i really don't care.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Replied on talk page. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi. I've been suggested to be adopted so I'd like to see what adopting could do to help me. Thanks.

Nathan.tang (talk) 05:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nathan! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm unfortunately not taking any adoptees right now myself (I've just gotten back from vacation and have a bit of work to catch up on), but I'm glad you're interested in it! Adoption is a good way to work with another more experienced editor who can help show you the ins and outs of Wikipedia so it's not quite as much of a head-first dive into a cold and shallow pool. Wikipedia, as you've probably noticed, is a really big place, and it's easy to get caught up in some issues when you're not quite sure what's going on. An adopter would be able to help you through these issues, and help you get on the road to being really well involved. You can read through the adoption project page for more information, but that's really about the gist of it.
If you are interested in finding an adopter, go ahead and put the template code {{subst:dated adoptme}} on your talk page to let adopters know you're looking for someone. You can also just contact someone directly from this list as you did with me. While you're waiting for someone to take you on, though, feel free to look through my lessons to get you started - they may be a little out of date in places, but they're being used by several other adopters and should be good to get you started.
Anyway, welcome again! Sorry I can't take you on myself just now, but I'm glad you've signed up and are interested in getting involved further. Wikipedia may seem like a lot of work, but it can be a lot of fun and it's a great way to learn some really random things as well. If you run into any problems, feel free to let me know; usually I'm fairly quick about responding to messages. Happy editing! Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle usage

I did indeed use the "vandal rollback" option to revert the edits of User:Bibiki, as they are just nonsense and I am fed up to clean up behind him. User:Bibiki is a POV warrior, who wishes to denounce the Carabinieri with his POV, original research ideas and does absolutely nothing else on wikipedia!

  1. edits like these show that he came with an agenda [2], [3], [4]
No POV, no original research. The article was simply too one sided, conveniently ignoring some embarrassing historical truths. So I made it more complete. The edits that you refer to are old. Below are the latest (that you have reverted with no valid reason) - all well sourced and carefully phrased to strictly point to facts. There isn't a single predicate that is not supported by respected sources and in fact Carabinieri's own official site. Here's my latest edits that you reverted: [5]Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. interestingly there is a 3 year gap in his campaign... and he only edits the Carabinieri article even three years after he was the first time sent packing
Ad hominem. Instead of trying to attack me why don't you try to tell us how my latest edits (that I have aligned with wikipedia's ettiquette) are POV or original research.Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. his edits are nonsense: he himself admits that there was no resistance to Mussolini before 1943, but insists to denounce the Carabinieri for falling to participate in it (difficult I think to be part of something that did not exist), especially if you are the police of a state and sworn to the king of said state, who fully supported Mussolini - he has 0 sources for that, but continues to stubbornly add, even after editors tried to talk him out of it!
Misleading again. Also not polite to a fellow editor. Pointing to old edits. Discussion on this particular subject is on the carabinieri talk page [6] where everyone can see how you spread misinformation and deliberately use sophisms in order to advance your obviously biased agenda.Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. is wording is not encyclopedic at all: i.e. "The Carabinieri are not known to have been part of the Italian resistance movement" what else have they not been known for??? playing basketball comes to mind; also we would need to mention then that they are not known to have climbed Mount Everest as user:Jim Sweeney aptly observed; sources for this claim: a page listing the Military Operations of the Carabinieri... the conclusion, as this page does not mention any resistance operations before 1943 and therefore it is a good source to prove that the Carabinieri collaborated with the regime, is all his...
Referring to old edits again. The argument he mentions here has been smoked here [7]Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. his referencing is ridiculous i.e this blog or this that doesn't mention the things he wishes to insert, but he uses it as evidence for the personal opinion he took from the aforementioned blog... (the blog has pictures of the Carabinieri uniform and the other pages says the uniform was introduced in 1900-1902 - therefore the Carabinieri are disrespecting the people in the balkans, who will be insulted by the uniform of Carabinieri, when these people come to Italy)
Why are you doing this? My latest reference (that you deleted) was this one [8] where the official Carabinieri site itself says: "A version of this uniform is still used today for important ceremonies." Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. his knowledge of things like Cabal Cases and third opinions point to someone who is much more familiar with wiki-policy than a beginner - so the suspicion of User:Bibiki being a sock of some other POV warrior is high (compare with the extreme edits of another anti-Carabinieri POV warrior: [9], [10], [11])
Completely arbitrary, paranoid and false conclusions. The similarity of positions (and mind you the language used is quite different) can only be attributed to certain things about the Carabinieri actually being true and plainly obvious to anyone who cares to look with an eye that is not positively biased. Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
  1. further debate about the validity of this POV warriors imaginations, is a waste of time and he is a vandal and any further debatte with him (as tried on his talk page and on Talk:Carabinieri by various editors is a waste of time). Maybe you want to waste some of yours; but I had enough of it! --noclador (talk) 15:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Well let's let the evidence and our conduct decide who is the vandal here. Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I wasn't aware that this was quite this much of an issue. If that is the case, you may want to consider seeking some form of dispute resolution about the matter - I know you've said you've been at this a while, but inappropriate use of Twinkle won't help you out in the long run. Try to remain calm, and find some other way of dealing with this. Again, I wasn't aware this has been such an issue; please remember to assume good faith of all editors, particularly those who are just trying to help you out. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
well, I assumed good faith with User:Bibiki, but when one is immune to reason such POV behavior becomes just disruptive... as for you: I am not angry at you at all - I am thankful that you refused Bibikis request at unblock and if you felt that I was directing my annoyance at you, then please forgive me, as clearly I was not intending to do this. The above text I used twice before to explain the uselessness of discussing this any further, when Bibiki filed a Cabal Case and a Third Opinion request at the same time to force through his point of view. --noclador (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
noclador , as I have demonstrated multiple times, is biased and deliberataly tries to mislead the wikipedia administration in order to advance his nationalist agenda. He is consistently reverting my edits, no matter how well sourced, misrepresenting my actions and rudely addressing me in a manner that is not befitting the spirit of wikipedia. I hereby ask for the help and support of every democratic person on wikipedia. Help! I am being unjustly censored! Bibiki (talk) 22:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, please note, that after your suggestion to noclador regarding his twinkle usage, Ian Spackman almost magically appeared and did exactly the same (tagged my edits as vandalism), with noclador following up with an edit reversion on the edits tagged as "vandalism" by "somebody else". Please note that Ian Spackman, although a user with a non-Italian name, appears to have a single-sided interest in Italian issues [12] Bibiki (talk) 10:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I did not tag your edits as vandalism: I believe that you made them in good faith, in fact, though I don’t think they helped the article. My edit summary was ‘I don’t see the encyclopedicity of Bibiki’s last three edits: the ‘collaboration’ and the unchanged uniform. I have undone them.’ Ian Spackman (talk) 14:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
The latest edit on the page's history says that noclador "Reverted 3 edits by Bibiki identified as vandalism to last revision by Ian Spackman". I suppose then that this means that Noclador has again identified my edits as "vandalism"...

Veritee

thanks for your final comments, i will not change the edits ( thought i believe that the revised version is much inferior) , could you please close the matter and remove the notices..!!! thks and take care.--Netquantum (talk) 17:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I can't, as I've commented in the discussion. I still feel the article merits deletion anyway. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
what do you need exactly, its unclear ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netquantum (talk • contribs)
The article still has a highly promotional tone, and you have yet to provide references that are not clearly press releases or advertisements for the drink. You've provided little indication of why the drink is in fact notable as well. I would also recommend you stop commenting at the AfD - you've made your points several times now, and several editors have commented on your aggressive nature there. It may be best at this point to simply take note of what comments are being made so you know what improvements to make in the future. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


a good article for wikipedia is not necessarily an aticle that provides bad comments or wrong comments. we have lots of references here , i dont see what you mean by press releases. thks--Netquantum (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Please read WP:RS, WP:ADS, and WP:NPOV for more information on what I am talking about. This article fails to meet all of those guidelines/policies. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


I dont agree we have references from very reliable sources largest news papers in switzerland major references —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netquantum (talk • contribs)
Those references appear to be the result of press releases issued by the makers of the drink. Please read the guideline, and remember to sign your posts. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


i dont agree those are just articles from major swiss news papers...... some are good others are bad.


--Netquantum (talk) 18:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello Hersfold

Hello, Hersfold, just thought I'd drop in and say hi:) How's it going? I was just browsing on wikipedia and i clicked on a link to your page. I noticed you have quite a bit of barnstars--good job:D Feel free to visit my userpage and sign my new guestbook(the links on the userpage). Thanks:)SchnitzelMannGreek. 22:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Helo,Hersfold? I think you overlooked my post;)--SchnitzelMannGreek. 23:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I tend not to respond to general social-type calls, but hello, I'm fine. Thanks for the invitation, but I'm not much of a guestbook person either. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Notaussie

I have gone ahead and removed my block on User:Notaussie. I will watch the user's edits and reblock if there is any evidence that the account is still compromised. If you have any objections, please let me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine. I considered about doing it myself anyway. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Nyttend and Polaron

Forgive me for having to ask (you see, I've not needed to bother with this question in the past :-), but am I now expected to discuss all this with Polaron now? I don't feel like bothering with discussion tonight, especially as I've said a lot more than Polaron has in this whole mess, so I'd rather spend my editing time this evening in matters unrelated to this dispute and leave everything related to this matter for another time. Nyttend (talk) 02:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

And by the way, thanks for unblocking. Nyttend (talk) 02:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
You really should talk things over with him, yes. It's not necessary you do it now if you don't feel like it, but the point of these blocks (as you know) is to get the warring to stop so that discussion can start again. It's probably a good idea to back off for a little bit anyway. If you two need a mediator or something, let me know and I'll see what I can do. And you're welcome. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
That's why I said "for another time"; it's not like we'll not talk about it later. Nyttend (talk) 02:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Template

A template you created, Template:ACE2008Candidate, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted it. Thanks, I'd forgotten about that thing. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD backlog

Keegan (talk) 05:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Awww. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Hi, if the Michael Jackson thing hasn't been confirmed it should be removed, not rephrased to "reported". It also needs to be updated and respect needs to be paid to the discussion at WP:ITN/C. This really needs to be handled appropriately by the admins. --candle•wicke 23:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, things are a bit crazy right now all over the place. I'll be sure to take a closer look in a moment. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

HELLO

I have no earthly idea how you found that "attack," but keep in mind that sick person vandalized Mr. James Earl Jones' page with the claim that the man had died. I had actually believed this to be true and became very saddened, as I am a big fan of his. Jman5 (talk) 00:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

His vandalism doesn't excuse your response; if you encounter vandalism like that, issue a warning, not insults. I found your edit because it triggered a vandalism alarm on our IRC channels. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

Their was some sort of glitch in wikipedia for me so I thought I had reached my limit of accounts. But now it's fixed. :) Irunongames • play 12:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem, glad things are back to working. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Main Page

A couple of points regarding this edit:

  • It's a dummy edit, not a null edit;
  • It's never necessary to edit a page like that; ?action=purge will handle most cases; in rare cases, you can do an actual null edit (pressing edit and then pressing save without changing any of the wikicode).

Not a big deal, but a little extra info. Spread the word. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the tips. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Outing

No, thank you!

I was trying to figure out where best to report it (Request for Comment/User Conduct? Wikiquette Alerts? So many choices). I'm amazed and gratified that it practically reported itself. ;-)

--GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

No, if you ever see another instance of outing or posting of private information like that, it's best not to post about it much on-wiki, as you don't want it to spread out further than it needs to. The best thing to do is to contact the oversighters (their email is on WP:OS) and let them take a look at it. Quickly removing it as you did helps as well, as then it at least isn't on the live version of the page. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Flood of bot messages on my talk page

Hi Hersfold, I received a long series of bot messages on my Commons talk page from your bot. I do not consider this flood helpful in my OTRS work nor do I think that this improves the OTRS process. All the associated tickets are watched by me anyway. That means that if any updates are submitted, I will get notified by email. As long as nothing happens from the other side, I cannot do anything for this. Please feel free to notify the uploader because they can get active in these cases. I have marked the images for which I initially processed an OTRS ticket with {{OTRS received}} such that any OTRS member can be easily check the associated OTRS ticket but not to get flooded by bot messages when I cannot do anything for a hanging case. In addition to that, it is remarkable that your bot is even unable to join messages for the same ticket, i.e. I got a message for each of the associated images even if they belong to the same ticket (which can be easily seen from the {{OTRS received}} templates). I would be grateful if you could suppress such notifications on my talk page. To be precise: I want to have notifications to me in my function as OTRS member suppressed, not notifications in my function as uploader. And I also dislike the comment adding edits at the corresponding image pages. As I have all these images on my watchlist, this gets flooded as well for no good reason. Thanks for your understanding and for your work to improve the OTRS process which is otherwise very much appreciated. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 13:58, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I do apologize for the amount of messages you received - while the bot was running, I noticed your name kept coming up rather a lot. The notification for "received" images is a new feature I just added to the bot that was suggested by some other OTRS volunteers and users at the OTRS Noticeboard, intended to help remind volunteers to look into these images. I'm guessing most of them don't keep quite as close of track of their images as you do. I believe the main purpose of this notification is that these images have been sitting around for some time (more than 30 days) without complete confirmation. At this point, if the uploader hasn't provided any more confirmation after several requests by email, they should probably be deleted.
As for the one-notice-per-image-or-ticket thing, that is an intentional part of how this bot operates. While most of the bot's software at this point is quite reliable, internet connections aren't always quite that stable. Some weeks ago when running the bot, it kept running into server errors preventing it from editing, and if I'd attempted to run it during the Michael Jackson fiasco two days ago, the bot probably would have as a seizure from all the I/O errors. It is possible for me to group together notices by recipient and then only issue those notices at the end of the bot's run, however should it encounter any sort of problem during the run, these notices will not be given out. My bot is programmed to stop running immediately if it encounters any sort of connection error, is blocked, or has received new messages on its talk page. By issuing a single notice per image, not only does the bot use considerably less memory (it runs off my computer, not the toolserver), but I am assured that, at most, only one notice didn't get through the mail.
The bot does have an opt-out list for uploaders who either don't wish to receive notices from the bot, or for uploaders who it isn't worth notifying (Mangus Masake's upload bot, for example). This currently does not work for OTRS volunteers, however I will certainly look into adding that in now that I know it's likely to be an issue. Once it's up and running, I'll make sure you're the first on the list. Again, I'm sorry for the inconvenience this has caused; if at any point you notice my bot is causing other problems, please don't hesitate to let me know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks you for your kind response. Regarding the bot software: I would recommend a transactional approach by collecting all the information you need during a scan, storing all actions into persistent space, and by finally going through all queued actions, marking them as done as soon as they have been performed. If you use persistent file synchronisation (see fsync), this works even if you have a power outage while your bot is running. Another simpler approach would be to generate a notification per ticket and to remember which tickets your bot has already dealt with. Please keep in mind that I have processed tickets with more than forty associated images and I guess that no volunteer would be happy to receive individual notifcations in such a case.
I am grateful that you intend to support an opt-out for notifications directed at OTRS volunteers. I would appreciate it if you could put me on your current opt-out list until this feature gets implemented.
And, yes, I have your talk page on my watchlist and I regularly check my watchlist at en-wp. Hence there is no need to copy any responses to one of my other talk pages. Thanks and kind regards, AFBorchert (talk) 18:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I'll be sure to look into those methods you mentioned; in the meantime, I'm hoping tickets that large (wow!) are few and far between. Thanks for the suggestions!
You'll be happy to hear that the opt out list is now online, and should be working on the bot's next run. I'll announce that on the noticeboard shortly. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:05, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Wow, that was quick :) Thanks again for your support and regards, AFBorchert (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The e-mail is near

Hi Hersfold, about the e-mails from File:Constantino Leon-2.jpg, File:Virgen Purísima.jpg and File:Fiesta de enero 2009-1.jpg, the master of the page is sending me, now, the e-mails. Give me time please. THnks....and sorry, my english is bad. Digary (talk) 15:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem - the notices my bot left you were just a reminder, there's no deadline for anything. Thanks for looking into those! Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
No problem, have been erased.DX. Digary (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Our thanks.

Hello, Hersford. This is demonlegions, yes we thank you for allowing us a chance to proceed work on our article. We promise that we will meet all legal regulations and copyright rules. It has been sealed. And you Hersford will not be forgotten.

No problem. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

United States Census, 2005

Ummm. R3 specifically says "recently created" redirects. While "recently created" is a bit nebulous, I'm pretty sure that more than a year does not fit any definition of the term. I noticed you did this with both the 2005 and 2006 redirects. I'm specifically annoyed about the one listed above, since I had already denied the CSD twice, and told the submitter to take it to RFD where it belonged. To have him admin-shop like this, reverting the rejection multiple times until he found an admin willing to do the (IMHO) improper speedy deletion is not a good thing at all. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Oops. I misread the date - I thought they were created in 2009, not 2008. I'll restore them now, as you're right, that should go to RfD. Thanks for letting me know. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Albert Lebrun 1937.jpg may be deleted

The File:Albert Lebrun 1937.jpg which you uploaded has been tagged OTRS pending for more than 30 days. This tag indicates that an email setting out permission to use the file was sent to the OTRS team. Unfortunately, we cannot find any record that such an email has been received, and accordingly the file remains without permission. Unless the OTRS team receives evidence that permission has been granted within 15 days of today's date, the file will be deleted. If you have already sent the permission, please re-send it to "permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org" now. Please quote the file name in your email. At the same time, please leave a message at the OTRS noticeboard so that a volunteer can follow this up. Alternatively, you can contact an OTRS volunteer directly. HersfoldOTRSBot(talk/opt out) 21:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I have received this message from your bot on Commons. "File:Albert Lebrun 1937.jpg" is a derivative work, a cropped image, from "File:Hymans-Lebrun-Sorbonne-exposition-1937.JPG", which seems to have a perfectly valid OTRS permission :
The permission for use of this work has been verified and archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system.
It is available as ticket #2009051110008099 for users with an OTRS account. To confirm the permission, please contact someone with an OTRS account or leave a note at the OTRS noticeboard.
Ticket link: https://secure.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2009051110008099.
That's all I know about this matter. fr:User:Octave.H, Octave.H (talk) 22:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not an OTRS volunteer, unfortunately, so you probably need to let someone at the Commons OTRS Noticeboard (commons:COM:OTRS/N) know this so they can confirm things. Sorry about that - all I do is run the bot that leaves the notices. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the effort

I want to thank you for contacting User:Spellcast for me while I was effected by the range block of the IPs that I use. Everything has been sorted out. I would have gotten back to you sooner but I have been busy doing all sorts of fascinating things over the last few months. I think I now have some time to dedicate to this project. Sam Barsoom 23:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, glad things got handled. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Dance-pop again

Hey hersfold. Sorry to bother you again but Dance-pop's new sock User:Truth of the World: Welcome to the Show is again upto the same games of edit warring, going against consensus and NPAs. Just now the user nominated the Lady Gaga article for GA against strong disagreement from other regular users, when told not to do so, started name calling, personal attacks (started calling me Legalos as usual). I don't know what to do about him this time. ITs getting pretty annoying everytime. I really believed that this time he changed, but alas Im disppointed everytime. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Legolas, please post a sockpuppet investigation for this and ask for a checkuser on the matter. Be sure to mention User:Dance-pop's original account as well as the others he's used. You're right, this account does look very similar, but I'd prefer to be absolutely sure. If we get a checkuser to look into things, we may also be able to look into the possibility of a rangeblock as well. Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I will do that. PS how have you been? Me personally a little sad that MJ passed away. And.... Dance-pop is not my FAVOURITE user!! Grrrrr. :) --Legolas (talk2me) 03:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Raised an investigation here. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The World's Most Dangerous Ideas

I don't understand why you so hastely deleted The World's Most Dangerous Ideas article before I had a chance to merge and redirect to the Foreign Policy (magazine) article as I suggested on the Talk:The World's Most Dangerous Ideas page... --Loremaster (talk) 13:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that you had merged the article - another editor had reviewed the talk page and marked it for deletion, and when I read the discussion, I came to the same conclusion he had. If you need the content of the deleted article, I can restore the last revision for you. Sorry about that. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The Status Template

I have imported the script to my monobook.js. Please check if I am doing it correctly. Next is that, if I have done it correctly, on clicking the update links, I am able to reach the status page mentioned but the content is not being replaced and moreover, the page is not saving itself on its own. What is the problem? Maybe the links of the template must be updated!!! Next is that, see my talk page, the template is appearing but the subsequent text is not surrounding the box. The text surrounds my search archive box, and the talkback box but not this box! And if I type the template code below the other boxes, it appears in an odd way as below. Please modify the template such that subsequent text surrounds it. Link to the template page: User talk:Hersfold/StatusTemplate. Thanks a lot and hope I wasn't rude. Please answer below with increased intend and notify me by {{tb}}. --Srinivas 15:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The links on the status template will work in time - it takes some time for your browser's cache to clear out, sometimes upwards of a week. Unfortunately, there's not much I can do to help there; clearing the cache manually as my instructions say doesn't seem to help immediately for some reason. In the meantime, you can use the links to change your status manually; the template accepts the following codes:
  • offline
  • online
  • recently online (displays as "Busy" or "On IRC" depending on settings)
  • at work/in class
Case doesn't matter, just so long as everything is spelled right. As for your other questions, the template is designed to allow text to wrap around it; see the documentation page for an example. The status template should display well with the search and talkback templates if you put the status template on top; I'm not sure why it's appearing to the side when below as it did in your example. Sorry I can't be of more help. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC) (P.S. - if you respond, I prefer not to receive talkback templates; feel free to just leave your response on my talk page)
Okay! Thanks a lot for help. The status template is really good! --Srinivas 07:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I would suggest you to change the links to the following: (The following examples work for me:Srinivas. Change it so that it works for everyone with {{BASEPAGENAME}} or something such.)
Offline: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Srinivas/Status&action=edit&newstatus=offline
Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Srinivas/Status&action=edit&newstatus=online
Recently Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Srinivas/Status&action=edit&newstatus=recently online
At Work/In Class: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Srinivas/Status&action=edit&newstatus=at work/in class
In the above the spaces are not being counted as links but they are to be put in the url!
These are the links that the links js mentioned in your doc supports. These links replace the text and save themselves automatically automatically. --Srinivas 07:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
No no no, the above links are all not working, only online and offline are working. I would suggest you to change recently around to busy and at work/in class to around. The replace recently around and at work/in class to busy and around in the above urls respectively. --Srinivas 08:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hersfold/Archive_30_(June_2009)&oldid=1166515198"