Hi. I see that you had contributed to Dan Leno in the past. He was a well-known British musical comedy and music hall star around the 1890s. His article has recently been expanded and is headed for FA consideration. If you have time, please be so kind as to review the article and comment at this Peer Review. Thanks for any assistance! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:57, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to let you know that I appreciate the creation of your Persondata-o-matic tool, and thank you for releasing your code to the public domain, that’s damn brave! If I had more free time, I would like to port it to Linux (using Mono) so I can use it in my main computer... Congrats! —Fitoschido[shouttrack] @ 20 February, 2012; 10:10
Hi Fitoschido, glad you like it! I did this in C# just because I was already familiar with it - I tried Mono out a little but had issues. Honestly I think it'd probably be easier to recreate using mwclient and PySide (Qt for Python). Dcoetzee 10:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dcoetzee:
I don't know what I'm doing with this. glad to hear that someone is reading my page regarding Philip Walsted.
You took 2 photos off my page because you did not believe that I took them. I took them and I am in one of them. I took them with film and I have the negatives. After Philip Walsted's death, I distributed all of the photos you see on the web associated with Philip. I let the AZ Star, Echo, Tucson Citizen, Tucson Observer, several television studios, etc., have any photos they wanted to use. You will not find any copyright on any of those pictures (if you were to, please tell me and I may sue that party).
Philip Walsted was my partner, and on the 10th anniversary of his death, I thought it was time to chronicle this terrible episode for the history books. The photo I have not yet uploaded is of the memorial. The City of Tucson authorized a memorial, I paid for it, and took the picture(s) I will upload. I hope Wikipedia will see the value in this story.
Again, thanks for helping me - I hope I put this in the right place.
Sincerely, Jonathan
[personal info redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctorjonny (talk • contribs) 05:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any evidence either way, but I have no reason to doubt your claim. This is probably a reverse or backwards copyvio. The site is dated 2011-2012, and likely was created after your article. See {{Backwardscopy}}. I find it particularly ironic that a page dedicated to gratitude failed to give proper attribution. Dcoetzee 21:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The external website is definitely copying, text further up the page is copied from our Gratitude article, and the improperly spaced commas at "study , about the theme , participants" show how the external author crudely modified the wiki-text. And as it turns out, so is Pine: compare the text added here with the text from Gratitude as of 1 July 2010. This looks to me like unattributed internal copying of text. Franamax (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Following this discussion is it possible to change the output so that there's a message at the top that it shouldn't be relied on and manual inspection may still be neccessary. I've fixed it so that the copvio template will always use the version before it was added in the detector and so solved the problem in this specific case but I know the detector still won't work in some cases (e.g. google books) so the confusion that happened there could happen again. Dpmuk (talk) 21:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! Would you have any time to participate in a GA review or offer some guidance in the review of the above referenced article? The review is being made by an editor making claims of copyright violations and close paraphrasing. Maggie is unavailable and suggested that I contact you for assistance. My assertion is that there are times when close paraphrasing is permissible. In some areas, I have presented factual information, in which there are a limited number of ways to say the same thing. The article already went through the DYK process with nothing mentioned about copyright or close paraphrasing. I've received numerous comments that the article would most likely sail through the GAN review, so I'm puzzled. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 17:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
For the ingenious new script (Followed Users) that will save all us Vandal fighters just a little bit of time, it is my pleasure and honor to award you The da Vinci Barnstar. Achowat (talk) 13:16, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I hope it's helpful. Let me know if you have feedback. Dcoetzee 16:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm told there was a tool at RfA to get a user's non-automated edit count, but that tool now seems to be offline. I am proposing that Wikipedia Service Awards be based on non-automated edit count here. Is there another tool that you know of that will calculate a user's non-automated edit count? Pinetalk 04:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I don't know how any automatic tool could consistently distinguish automatic edits from non-automatic ones - some tools include a signal in the edit summary, some do not. And what about semiautomatic edits? Should those count as half or what? Dcoetzee 04:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, but that's not reliable in that sense :P I feel like hugglers do more constructive work than people manually making nonsense edits anyway, and edit count should remain an objective matter. Once all this subjective stuff is introduced some people feel less valued than others. Edit count is edit count! sonia♫ 05:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Edit count is a completely pointless metric that should be ignored entirely. It is not the absolute measure of a contributor's worth that everyone likes to pretend it is. Excluding types of edit based on their perceived worth doesn't change that. Gurch (talk) 14:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(o_O a gurch.) Well, yes, that too. Edit count is an entirely worthless way of gauging activity, but one that is often used nevertheless simply because it's an easy gauge. But my initial point was that I don't see any reason why, for those minded to use service awards, they should be illegitimized for semi-automation since that actually makes things more efficient. It's essentially discrimination on the basis of type of contribution, with the idea that some are more useful than others. Pine, said tool only counts the most common automatic edits, etc. And I really do think that's a terrible idea. Service awards in themselves are a bit of a terrible idea, but their use by some harms nobody else unless they are used as an actual metric of value. Taking them too seriously and being all "zomg we must make this more fair for the non-vandalfighters" kind of negates the fact that 1) they're just a bit of fun; and 2) hey, if vandal fighting is what you do best, sure it's something that can be done more quickly but it's nevertheless of more value than commenting repeatedly on ANI. sonia♫ 19:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I brought up this subject only in the context of possible changes to Wikipedia:Service awards. I agree that edit count is far from being a precise and accurate way to measure a user's contributions, but it's one of the few that are easily available. Pinetalk 03:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On your followed users script on the toolsever, only the last edit is showing from each user. How do I get it to show more than one edit? Also, I'm not seeing the start/stop following links anywhere (I'm on Chrome). —danhash (talk) 20:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm the follow/unfollow links should appear in your toolbox on the left-hand side, but I haven't tested on Chrome yet. Let me know your version and OS and I'll look at it. You can only see the most recent edit by each user, to avoid one user dominating the list, but I'm open to other suggestions on dealing with this issue. Dcoetzee 03:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To me, the tool is rather useless with only seeing one edit per user; it kind of defeats the purpose. It seems that there are a wide variety of potential uses for this tool however, so for some people that may be helpful. There are two options that are immediately apparent to me:
Combine all contributions from all users into one list. This is quite like article history pages, only instead of listing all edits to an article by all users who edited the article, it's a list of all edits by a specific list of editors. Same idea, different context. Or even simpler, it's just Special:RecentChanges constrained to a specific list of users.
List each users' contributions (all of them) in a different section, perhaps limited by date range or number of edits. This is more along the idea of the cross-wiki contribs tool, only with one section per user listing all their contributions on a single project rather than one section per project listing all contributions of a single user.
#1 would be useful for following edit wars or especially for discussions taking place in multiple locations. #2 would be helpful for keeping track of multiple, separate vandals. Both seem very useful but in different contexts. Perhaps what would be best is an option to toggle between the two modes. What might be helpful is multiple lists with user-defined titles and a configuration page to organize and manage them; for example, a user could have a "Vandals" list with all watched vandals showing up in mode #2 and a couple different WikiProject members lists showing up in mode #1. This route, obviously, is more complicated and would take longer to code.
I am currently on WinXP/Chrome 17, though I can test in Firefox later. I do have a lot of other user-scripts enabled (though none that off the top of my head should interfere), so if it works in Chrome for you I can try to troubleshoot my common.js. —danhash (talk) 16:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could the "Followed users" link be switched to use HTTPS, or at least be made protocol relative, so that when I'm using HTTPS on Wikipedia it stays HTTPS on the toolserver? —danhash (talk) 21:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed all links to be protocol-relative (in script and on server-side). Dcoetzee 23:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks! —danhash (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re your suggestions, Dan, several people have asked for it to list all contribs of followed users (in the selected time period), which I will make an option. I'm less sure about having multiple partitioned followed user lists, which seems evidently useful, but would require more careful interface design since I can't just emulate the familiar watchlist there. Dcoetzee 13:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that'd be a great change. As for multiple lists and the alternate view, I understand, and it certainly would be more work. Thanks! —danhash (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Any plans on adding this feature soon? —danhash (talk) 17:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could Person-o-matic get its list articles to do load from either a text page or blue links from a wiki page?
Example, I can generate a list of footballers without the short description parameter, but I don't think I can load this list into Person-o-matic. I can save this list into my sandbox or into a text file.
You have to set the file encoding to UTF-8 (Not Ansi which is probably the default). It's the way Dotnetwikibot handles files and I cannot really do anything about it. The other bug I don't know about though, since it's in the original version. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 20:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only name is filled in automatically currently (other automatic fill-ins are unimplemented). Dcoetzee 23:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In Alf Smith, birth and death date were already filled in. But, o-matic took the info and truncated it. Bgwhite (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that is a bug. I'll look into it... Dcoetzee 00:56, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is only barfing when birth place, death place and short description contains a pipe, ie "|". Looked at alot of articles and this is the time it does barf. FYI, I've got two people chomping on the bit to start working with this. It would be nice if this could get done sooner rather than later. Bgwhite (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixing this will require some work - I wasn't aware template parameters even could contain pipe characters. I'm going to have to replicate some of Mediawiki's template parsing to make sure I get this right. Dcoetzee 06:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Understand. People who love creating Ice Hockey articles have to abbreviate everything. For example, if the birth place is Quebec, Canada, they will do [[Quebec|QC|]], [[Canada|CN]]. Bgwhite (talk) 06:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a fix with some dirtyish regex that will work for links and templates inside the field values until Dcoetzee makes a parser. Works on Alf Smith and probably 99% of cases. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to check in the workaround for now, Hellknowz, and I'll review your changes and get those up on the project page ASAP. I'm also going to inquire about this "links in persondata" thing at Wikipedia:Persondata, maybe automatically removing them is something the tool should do. Dcoetzee 20:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did, it's in the last push. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! If one was to work on the source code and add features, how would one go about committing that to the "official" version? I understand you don't have a repository or alike set up for the project? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hellknowz, I didn't bother setting up version control because it was a quick thing, which was rather foolish because of course it turned out to be not so quick. :-) I'll get it up on github and get you push privileges. Dcoetzee 20:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, tell me when you do. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:41, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will need your Github username to give you privileges though... Dcoetzee 13:29, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Up at [2]. Feel free to submit anything, I'll code review it after check-in. Dcoetzee 04:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Open CCI request could use another admin opinion[edit]
Derrick, hi. :) There is an open image-related CCI that could use the input of another admin experienced in images. If you have time, could you review the Wikiwatcher1 request, currently third down here? I'm sorry that it's a lot of reading (replete with feedback from our legal team), but I have a feeling it will probably fall within an area that you already know, so it might not be too difficult for you. If you don't have time, that's perfectly fine. I'll seek elsewhere. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 13:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done. :-) Hope it was a bit helpful. Dcoetzee 05:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I stumbled across the article Donato Cabrera, which I am now in the process of de-peacocking and turning into something resembling an encyclopedia article instead of his personal publicity page. (His page on Commons, Donald Cabrera, is quite a doozy as well.) In the process, I discovered nine professional photographs of him that have been uploaded to Commons. There does not appear to be any evidence of permission having been secured from the copyright holder/photographer and they all appear (or at one time appeared) on Cabrera's website [3]. Could you check Commons:Category:Donato Cabrera and tell me what you think? Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I pushed another version with some changes (I listed them in push comment). Main change is guessing the birth/death date: here is a real example. Although a bit limited right now and needs a bunch more parsing, I pushed this so you can see what I'm going for. I don't know what exact direction you were planning to go, but I assume guessing values is the current plan? Also, I see that simple GUI is your design principle, so how much more GUIness can go onto the form? I added a few things that I would personally find helpful, but might at some point overwhelm users (think first-time AWB). — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I think I fixed "Sometimes removes/adds blank space on lines that were not edited.", which is probably because it did .Replace("\n", "\r\n") which would turn "\r\n" into "\r\n\n", adding another newline. I changed it to Regex with a lookbehind. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 13:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I use TUSC scripts but just have a TUSC ID token on my talk page. I'm not familiar with tools that want a TUSC username and password. What are those and how do I get them? Jojalozzo 01:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You register for a TUSC account at [4]. I think that's what you're asking? Dcoetzee 05:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just not used to having to use my TUSC password and got it confused with the TUSC ID token used to generate it. I generated a new account and have it working now. Jojalozzo 17:14, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dcoetzee. I noticed you message a little while ago at Adopt a user, regarding followed users. I installed it very soon afterwards, and have been playing with it for a few weeks. Thought you'd like a little feedback.
It's infuriating that my TUSC login keeps expiring. I have to log in again pretty much every time I want to check it (once a day or so).
You only see the editors most recent edit, meaning it's not particularly useful unless you are always refreshing it.
Overall, I don't think it's a bad system, I just don't think it actually helps me with anything in it's current form, so I'll probably be removing it. Keep on with it though, I'm sure it'll be helpful for some people! WormTT· (talk) 11:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem, I appreciate your feedback. There is a planned feature to show all edits by followed users. The log in problem annoyed me too and can definitely be fixed. Dcoetzee 23:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My followed user list is empty today. Is that a known issue? Jojalozzo 03:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Scheduling March Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting[edit]
P.S. You'll notice we're delivering this notice through Global message delivery, which means you can choose to have this message delivered to your home wiki's talk page. If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, please update your subscription.
My name is Laura and I am in Aaron Frank's law course. Thanks for getting us started on our wiki assignments last Saturday. I've been brainstorming topics for my wiki article and wanted to run one by you. I originally thought a page on CBE v. City of Richmond would be interesting. This is one of the first court cases related to CEQA and Climate Change in CA. Aaron said the topic is relevant to environmental law, but that it would be "hard to predict whether it will be of general importance on Wikipedia." He said it might be a good idea to check in with you on this topic. What do you think? I've poked around the cite and there are some general CA Climate Change pages and a page dedicated to Mass v. EPA (national court case dealing with CO2 regulation under the Clean Air Act).
If CBE v. City of Richmond is too "narrow", I was thinking it might be valuable to create a whole page dedicated to "CA Climate Change Litigation" (similar to the CA Climate Change page, but dealing with litigation instead of legislation). I could discuss cases such as..
CBE v. Richmond
Mass v. EPA (would have to be brief and refer to existing wiki page)
Associated Irritated Residents v. CARB
Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene
Ballona Wetlands v. City of LA
Do you have any thoughts on either 1) page dedicated solely to CBE v. City of Richmond or 2) page dedicated to CA Climate Change litigation?
Hi Laura, I think these are both excellent ideas. With respect to CBE v. City of Richmond, my main concern is you may struggle to find enough independent sources which discuss this topic - in a brief web search I only found a few scholarly or press references to the case. I think a general article called say Climate change litigation in California would be a great topic that would be interesting to a broader range of people, but naturally would not involve as much depth on any particular case. For discussing Mass v. EPA in said article, by convention you would creation a section briefly summarizing the case in a paragraph or two / relating it to other cases discussed, and at the top of the section put "{{main|Mass v. EPA}}" which provides a link that looks like this:
Looks great, good job! Both of you should be able to edit it by simply giving your partner the URL. Let me know if you need any other help. Dcoetzee 03:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, My name is Salote and Im Laura's partner for this Env Law project. So, I'm tasked with putting up our draft on Sandbox. I'm sure this was discussed in class, but just for confirmation, can Laura also be able to access my sandbox? or should/can we create a sandbox that we both can access and edit? Also, are we able to add footnotes to the body of our text?
Thanks
Ssoqo (talk) 00:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Ssoqo[reply]
Responded on your talk page. Dcoetzee 01:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, my name is Jaclyn Nagel. I am a student at Michigan State University, working with Jonathan Obar on an exploration of the Wikipedia adminship process. I would like to thank you for agreeing to be interviewed. I would love to set up a time that is good for you to have a Skype or email interview. Please let me know of some times in the next two weeks that would work, Sundays and weekday evenings are preferable for me. Also feel free to contact me with any questions on my talk page! Nageljac09 (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dcoetzee, I would love to talk to you soon about setting up an interview. Initially you requested a Skype interview but if you would prefer an interview by email that would not be a problem. Either way I would appreciate a response on here or my talk page with your Skype ID or email address if possible so we can set up an interview. Thank you again for agreeing to participate! Nageljac09 (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I shot you an email. I have a small favor to ask about it as well. I forgot to send myself a copy and wanted to forward part of it to mdennis. Could you send a version back to me, or copy the original in your response? Thanks :) Hope you're doing well. Ocaasit | c 22:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My followed user list is empty today. Is that a known issue? Jojalozzo 03:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Joja, sorry for the disruption, there appears to be an issue with Toolserver at the moment. The administrators should have it resolved soon. Dcoetzee 03:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done careful testing but I have noticed that the Follow/Unfollow user menu text is sometimes not synched with the current user talk page and appears to be whatever was correct for a previously visited user. I'm not sure but it may only behave that way for IP accounts. If you need more testing let me know. Jojalozzo 18:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The March Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting will be on 21 March 2012 at 20:00 UTC. We will have updates from countries around the world and Ayush Khanna will present some results of data analysis he's done on students' contributions. Instructions for joining are on the page linked above. I hope you can join us on Wednesday! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk)
Was this pre-BRFA btw? I couldn't find one (just doing random bureaucracy, you're not under investigation or anything :P ) - Jarry1250[Deliberationneeded] 20:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it's nearly 8 years old, and hasn't been used in over a year. As far as I recall it only ever used for semi-automatic disambiguation, which doesn't require approval. Dcoetzee 21:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I'm using your Followed users script and finding it very helpful. Especially loving the new integrated links in the top-right and in the toolbox - many thanks. It hasn't updated in nearly 24 hours though - somewhere between 9pm and 2am last night GMT, it stopped working for me. Any thoughts? ~Kimelea(talk) 16:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kimelea, I'm glad you find it useful! There appears to be a database update delay on the Toolserver which I can't do much about causing this - if it continues after a day or so let me know and I'll investigate further. Thanks! Dcoetzee 23:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eeeh, I just learned what replication lag is! There's a big red banner on the edit counter pages for any user. Maybe we could have one of them on Followed Users in a future version. :) Sorry for the false alarm! ~Kimelea(talk) 00:31, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a great idea, I could at least provide a notification. :-) I'll add that to the todo list. Dcoetzee 00:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ho hum. It's still down, because the database is still down... graph says the lag is at its worst for two and a half years. I think someone must've kicked a plug out. How did people track vandals before you wrote this?? ~Kimelea(talk) 14:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow that's very high. I see there's a thread at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Toolserver_replication_lag. It is possible for me to build a tool that queries the Mediawiki API directly, although it would be somewhat slower. In the meantime I'm afraid you're stuck with making a list of links to Special:Contributions for each user, opening them in different tabs in Firefox, and using Firefox's "Reload all tabs" feature (right click a tab, choose "Reload all tabs"). Dcoetzee 19:47, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good grief, really? :p I suppose that doesn't sound like such a big deal for people who are used to not having the tool! Looks like the lag might go off the chart, if that village pump thread is anything to go by - I'll learn to be patient. ;) ~Kimelea(talk) 20:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you meant to write "if a user does not have a correctly authenticated e-mail address" in the opening line. The first two paragraphs currently sound like you are reporting that email is completely broken. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, noted. Dcoetzee 01:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This scripts listing page is in dire need of cleanup. To facilitate this, I've created a new draft listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts cleanup. You're invited to list scripts you know to be currently working and relevant. Eventually this draft page can replace the current scripts listing.
Hi, Derrick. :) I've tried to use the CCI tool on two different users today, and for both I get the following response: "The MySQL server is running with the --read-only option so it cannot execute this statement" I have no idea what this means; is this a problem with Toolserver or the Contributor contribution surveyor? Any clarification you can provide would be appreciated! --Moonriddengirl(talk)
(talk page stalker)See my "followed users" question three sections up. :) Probably the same thing. It's a problem with Toolserver which will resolve itself eventually but might take ages. (days or weeks)... At least, that's my understanding! ~Kimelea(talk) 16:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you! And that's awful! I hope it resolves soon. :( --Moonriddengirl(talk) 16:54, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Turnitin updates (at your leisure, but it's starting to get exciting)[edit]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hey Derrick, I am trying to get this bot's source done but I need some help, I asked Pine on IRC and he told me to come and talk to you. I am planning to run the bot off of my Toolserver account. It is suppose to be an anti-testing bot based from X!'s source, but I am trying to remove all of the IRC crap that I really do not need. If you have some spare time and can help me, I'll give you the source that I modified myself. Thanks and cheers. Ceradontalkcontribs 09:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
[reply]
Thanks for your response regarding using footnotes. So, I've created a 'Work in Progress' page for our Env Law project with Aaron Frank. My partner is Laura (Leyoon) - the URL is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ssoqo/Climate_Change_Litigation_and_the_California_Environmental_Quality_Act. So this contains both our sections for the project, is there a way that we can both be made 'users' - I was going to copy and paste everything into Laura's 'Work in progress' page. We are still working on it, but if you have any concerns about how the page looks now, please let us know. Also, is there a tutorial on how we can use images on our page?
Hi Salote, you should use only one sandbox page, as you are currently doing, since you are collaborating on an article together, not create two pages (it's okay if Laura does not have a sandbox page). Laura can link the sandbox page from her user page if she wants to to let everyone know that she's working there. Images are challenging because finding images which are not copyrighted is difficult - generally speaking, you can't use it unless it was 1. created by yourself; 2. created by a United States federal employee in the course of their duties; or 3. published in the U.S. before 1923. If you want to use an image falling in one of these categories, you can click "Upload file" in the left-hand side, then click the small link reading "Commons Wizard". I'll review any uploads you make. I'm reviewing your article now and I'll leave any comments on the talk page of your user sandbox. Dcoetzee 22:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be possible to include a feature that compared an article with all its references (in HTML or PDF format)? I think it would be an incredible feature but I understand it would also take a lot of resources... Thanks for this incredible tool. Wonderful job. 85.50.155.250 (talk) 23:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's a good idea. The references definitely provide a starting place. It would be even nicer if it could compare against multiple source documents and indicate for each phrase its source. Dcoetzee 23:58, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was transferring text from my partners User Page to our "working" page on the class Wiki and I think I may have saved the information to the "actual Wikipedia domain"...the page name is Climate Change Litigation and the California Environmental Quality Act...did I make this mistake? We'd like to keep the page a "work in progress" until all the text has been finalized. I requested the page be removed by adding "db-g7" to the top. Can the page be deleted until we are ready to actually post? Thanks and sorry for the mistake!!
I also need a volunteer to lead the meeting! Will you help? Leave a message. It requires no advanced preparation, just the ability to welcome everyone and move us through the agenda. -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk)
Would you by chance be available at 3:30pm EST tomorrow (Thursday) for a conference call with some of Turnitin's execs and tech guys? I'm deciding whether or not to have the call this week or next, and your (and others') availability will influence that. Cheers :) Ocaasit | c 18:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ocaasi, sorry for the slow response - I can be available today at 3:30 if necessary, but please let me know very soon if I should be, or else suggest another time. Thanks! Dcoetzee 20:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again! Enjoying using Followed Users now that its server is running again. I've found a small bug in the integrated link in the toolbox. When I'm on a registered user's page (or talk page), the link correctly shows "follow user" if I'm not following them, and "unfollow user" if I am. But if it's an IP, the link is "unfollow user" even if I'm not following them. It is possible for me to follow a new IP from the toolbox by clicking the "unfollow user" link and then clicking the "follow user" link that appears in its place, but the bug means I have no way of knowing whether I am following them already (short of checking against my followed users list). ~Kimelea(talk) 03:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kimelea, thanks for advising me of this issue! I have a good idea what's causing it and will investigate at the first opportunity I have. Dcoetzee 02:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to help. :-) Dcoetzee 02:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Join us Monday for April Wikipedia Education Program meeting[edit]
Greetings,
I need your help to lead the next Wikipedia Education Program Metrics and Activities Meeting! Will you leave a message if you can help? It requires no advanced preparation, just the ability to welcome everyone and move us through the agenda.
The next meeting has been scheduled for Monday, April 23 at 20:00 UTC. See the meeting information page for joining instructions and a time converter. Hope to talk with you on Monday! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk)
Thanks for the responses, and I'm sorry about this; I was responding to the irony of WMF staff complaining about the board (already, when it's not even busy), while Nikkimaria does all the urgent work anyway, while another editor succumbed to logic by editcountitis. Add to that staffers aggressively moving posts to talk on the very first day, and one wonders what one can ask on that board and whether we're all working for the same goals. Anyway, I do appreciate the responses. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:06, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. I told them not to move posts to talk. I'll put that one back. I do agree that edit count is a very rough proxy for level of participation, but it is clear that most threads are started by you and a lot of text content on the board is generated by you. I think this is okay as long as you're being constructive, but please try to stick to specific criticism/suggestions for the program and requests for assistance, and avoid repeating criticisms you've already explained before recently in other threads, even if they have not yet been addressed - we don't forget that quickly. Dcoetzee 20:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No need to put it back, and the fellow who has editcountitis would have been wiser to note the number of threads started by me, which is a better rubric. I make boatloads of typos, and with my eyesight, can never see them until after the fact. Then, perhaps a more positive discussion about the threads I've started might revolve around what is the role of WMF/OAs and how can that be improved, and what is going on in these psych courses that the effect is so dramatic, how we can improve the content and the editing experience for all, and how we can minimize the dramatic not-so-positive effect on articles and established editors. For now, I'm still trying to figure out how the board is to be used, and the heavy-handed start by staffers was sub-optimal. "We don't forget that quickly"-- who is we? :) :) Good, maybe "we" will remember that I've been trying to get some attention on these matters for over a year, and having at least a board where I can bring issues now so they aren't all my problem to solve could be nice ... as long as it doesn't turn into a heavy-handed attempt to cover up issues. It's interesting that issues are viewed as "criticisms" ... as if we're on opposite sides of a battlefield, when the common goal should be improved articles and happy editors. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean the term "criticism" as a pejorative, constructive criticism of the program is valuable and can be conducted by anyone whether they are in the program or not (I've criticised the program myself on a number of occasions). As for we, I mean everyone reading the board - I understand your frustration, but once a general, long-term issue is raised it can take time to formulate solutions and address it and reiterating the issue with no new information doesn't help. Dcoetzee 21:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Except I seem to be chasing my tail with some passive-aggressive looking non-responses causing us to go in circles, which causes me to have to restate things over and over. :) Oh well, things will get better-- they sometimes do! Thanks for the effort, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would be really helpful if we could add a note when we follow a user to help remember why we are following them. Jojalozzo 01:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion! This is easy to do but I have to think of how it should be displayed - maybe some kind of pop up when you hover over the name? I'm not sure. Another potentially more useful feature is the ability to categorize users, e.g. vandals, friends, students, etc. Dcoetzee 03:53, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just because; long time no speak, and all that. Pesky (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yum! Thank you, I appreciate it :-) I hope you're doing well! Dcoetzee 22:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Oooh, mustn't grumble, mustn't grumble ..." lol! Things could be better. They could also be so much worse, heh! Pesky (talk) 22:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason the Windows .exe will not allow me to log in and will crash on my Windows 7 system. Any ideas? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've logged in the past just fine on Windows 7 and I can't now. Wikipedia has been experiencing extreme slowdowns this past week... takes me 45-60 seconds to load or save a page. I'm currently logged in with AWB, but when I try and start a new AWB, it hangs on the login. So, I have a feeling Wiki problems are the cause. Bgwhite (talk) 07:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I just downloaded it and was kinda nervous that it wasn't loading. AWB was very slow to the point of being useless. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, probably a timeout exception. I've never tested running it during database problems like the current ones. Try it again once they've cleared up and let me know if you have any further issues. Dcoetzee 09:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still not working, had it load late last night after several minutes, but by then I did not have time to use it. Guess I'll keep trying. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you have only tried AWB in the past 10 days or so, then Persondata-o-matic will not be much of an improvement. Everything has been slow. AWB was very fast, but now it's taking 30-60 to load or save a page. There also has been timeout exceptions when trying to save pages. Bgwhite (talk) 19:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it is recognized, I got to try the Persondata-o-matic, works properly, but I guess it is Wikipedia issues. I've been using AWB during this window so the AWB slowness seemed to be natural to me, was not aware this was an ongoing problem. The Persondata-o-matic seems to suffer greatly, more so than AWB. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still won't work, had it work for a brief time, keeps crashing. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give it a try soon, might be an issue with the new Mediawiki version or something. Dcoetzee 02:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't doubt that is because of a Mediawiki update. Every time they update, a gadget or script I use breaks. FYI... they did another update yesterday. Oh joy. Bgwhite (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fun... still not working here. Anyone been able to get it to run since update? I've had limited time to use it because it crashes out. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think its broken. Anyone have it working? I really want to clear the backlog, but it is so slow with my AWB and makes my eyes go crazy. This tool really helped the process. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:12, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I wanted to respond to your feedback on the article my class did on Callous and unemotional traits. I am aware of the Wikipedia education projects initiative, and used several of the materials available from those pages to come up with my class assignment. While I recognize that the product of our work is slightly different than some of the ideas suggested in the literature, I felt that this was a good opportunity to create a page on a topic that was surprisingly ignored on wikipedia, and to teach my students about communicating scientific information. In terms of the single user name, I had the students create their own wiki-style pages in groups and then fact-check the work of other groups to teach them the value of peer reviewing someone's interpretation of an article. I kept this separate from posting to wikipedia, as it would become difficult (for grading purposes) to monitor the actions of each student separately, and to allow them to anonymously review each others work. As the class is now finished, I don't believe any of them will be making further edits to the article. I tried to be careful to omit anything that appeared to be a copyright violation or plagiarism (only a few questionable phrasings), but if anything needs to be removed or edited, I can be contacted, or other authors can certainly revise as necessary. If I create a similar assignment in a future course, I will be sure to have students create their own accounts in order to better facilitate the editing and revision process, as well as potentially utilize the resources available from wikipedia.
As for the class itself, it was was a seminar course discussing neurodevelopmental disorders taught at Georgetown University. The material covered typical cognitive neurodevelopment and an array of well-known neurodevelopmental disorders including autism, callous and unemotional traits, schizophrenia, and ADHD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sperrycogpsych (talk • contribs) 04:27, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Derek, I pasted in Jacqueline and my work into the Habitat Conservation Plan article but am unable to figure out how to create a reference list. We have our references cited within the body of the article but there are duplicate references that I haven't addressed still. What is the next step in getting a list of our references and assigning the same reference number to the same references?
Also, there are links to some Wiki articles (such as Candidate Conservation Agreements) that when I [[ ]] them, I get an error even though they do exist. How do I fix this?
Yes, sorry, I meant to tell you that I figured the multiple references out. How do we merge the articles? Great! We'd appreciate you looking at our article to make sure there isn't anything blatantly wrong with it. Thanks!Hmocabee (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derek, I was wondering if you could take a look at ours and if ok, you could help us move our article over the existing one. Thanks!Hmocabee (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When I select "Follow/Unfollow user" a popup appears that says I am not logged into toolserver but I am pretty sure I am logged in. I can select "Followed users" and do not have to log in to view that page. Jojalozzo 02:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Works fine today. Jojalozzo 01:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am in Aaron Frank's Environmental Law class and my partner and I are still working through our topic. I had a couple quick questions...
1)If we have multiple sentences that use the same source, how do we do the referencing for this again? I know you had mentioned it in our class but when I tried the tag, it came out a little funny.
2)Would you also be able to give my sandbox a quick perusal to see how our article is shaping up so far?
I'm not sure if I properly moved the content out of my sandbox. Can you check to make sure? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwatmore (talk • contribs) 06:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick! My partner and I attempted to move our page from the sandbox to the live space yesterday, but when we tried to search it on google, it doesn't appear. Will you check to see if we moved it correctly? It is the Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy page.
Hi Caitlin, you did great and moved the article successful, you just need to wait for Google to index new pages. It will help if there are some links to the page from other pages - feel free to add links anywhere relevant, I'll look for some too. Dcoetzee 10:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick, appreciate all of your time in supporting Aaron's Law Class at USF. I received your message on review of the Lux v. Haggin case. I actually jumped the gun a little bit and set my suggestions to the team via their talk page while the article was still in their sandbox. I did not edit the article only sent them my suggestion. I took a second look after it was moved to the main page and did not see anything needing change, but will take another look to see if there have been any changes or additions - Thanks again Bkkperkins (talk) 00:09, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're invited: San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2![edit]
San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2! You are invited!
The San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2 will be held on Saturday, June 16, 2012 at the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco. Wikipedians of all experience levels are welcome to join us! This event will be specifically geared around encouraging women to learn how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. Workshops on copy-editing, article creation, and sourcing will be hosted. Bring a friend! Come one, come all!
Hi Dcoetzee. My name is Haitham, I work with WMF on developing small Wikimedia projects. I am interested in localizing wikipediaadventure (which I understand that you are working on its development) into other languages to provide new users with an easy and attractive tool for learning how to contribute to Wikipedia. I wonder whether we can setup such a tool for other languages, or extend it to include more tutorials? Best wishes. Haithams (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Haithams, I really appreciate your interest. I am very interested in creating versions of it for other projects, but first it needs to be extended to include all the introductory tutorials in the original design, and to do some assessment. This will take some time. Is there a good time to follow up with you? Thanks! Dcoetzee 07:34, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Glad to hear that this is still in the works. I was wondering about this the other day. Pine✉ 09:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are invited to the second Great American Wikinic taking place in Golden Gate Park, in San Francisco, on Saturday, June 23, 2012. We're still looking for input on planning activities, and thematic overtones. List your add yourself to the attendees list, and edit the picnic as you like. —Max Klein {chat} 18:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Persondata-o-matic will not work anymore, but if you could get it to work again I'd gladly do 10,000+ of the Persondata backlog because it is several times more efficient then working with AWB. It never worked after the Wiki update and just times out when I try to connect it. I really liked the program for the brief time I had it work. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chris, this is due to the Mediawiki update breaking DotNetWikiBot. I'll get a new version out as soon as possible. Thanks for the reminder and sorry for the inconvenience! Dcoetzee 07:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I have lots of other work to do on the side, how could you possibly known when an update breaks it anyways. Just wanted to remind you before I finish the typos off. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, as noted on the talk page there, the main thing missing is references. In order to prove that we're not just making stuff up, it's important to cite outside references that talk about the topic and why it's important. Please find some and then let me know if you need help adding them to the article. Dcoetzee 00:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Making the Wikipedia Education Program Meeting better[edit]
hi dude just a quick question. should the quotation marks around songs be inside or outside the hyperlink?? this is really bugging me.also, how can i commit my real life identity in case someone steals my account?Happymonsoonday—Preceding undated comment added 00:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I looked through Wikipedia:Manual of Style but did not locate a rule on whether quotation marks should be part of the hyperlinked text or not, as I think this case is unusual. I think either is acceptable as long as we're consistent. For how to commit your real life identity, please follow the directions at Template:User_committed_identity and let me know if you need help. Another way to commit your identity is to do as I have done and publish your PGP public key (see User:Dcoetzee/PGP_public_key), which you can later use to securely authenticate a message from yourself. Dcoetzee 04:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
awesome im on itHappymonsoonday 19:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Derrick. I'd like to ask a favor but first I wanted to thank you for contributing so much to enwp. I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your dedication to our project and your focus on improving the operations here. I was certain that Wikipedia:Tool apprenticeship was going to succeed and you put a HUGE amount of effort in to it. There were a lot of people that felt it was a great idea, myself included. And since I'm here, I was wondering if you've ever thought of a fellowship? You are certainly qualified and I think you'd be a great help to the WMF.
Getting to the favor. I've recently asked Moonriddengirl for a bunch of deleted articles. Since you're listed at CAT:RESTORE, I was wondering if you could help because it's a huge bunch of articles (see discussion here). Anyhoo, thanks again for helping the community, its very much appreciated. All the best. 64.40.54.81 (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your kind words. The fellowships look interesting but I'm not sure if I'll have time to work on one any time soon - I'll keep it in mind. Your list isn't too long at this point, I'll do at least some of them and remove them from the page once complete. Keep in mind that some of these articles regard living people and you are solely responsible for ensuring that the restored article does not contain libel, which is often an issue for non-notable persons with limited references. Dcoetzee 18:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I really appreciate the help, Derrick.
"The fellowships look interesting but..." Yep, it's certainly a commitment. Thanks for keeping it in mind. You've been great to the community.
"Keep in mind that some of these articles regard living people..." Will do. If there are any BLP concerns, then the article can be skipped.
Thanks very much for all yor help. 64.40.54.100 (talk) 16:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Shining Star Award
There are certain people that make our community shine. These are kind and gracious souls that not only improve our encyclopedia, but they also help others with their generous support. Although their number is small, they shine so brightly that they make the whole project glow. Dcoetzee, you are certainly one of those shining stars and I am very grateful for the support you have given me. Thank you so very much for your help. 64.40.54.160 (talk) 22:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2! See you there
The San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2 is this Saturday at the Wikimedia Foundation! We look forward to hosting you! If you'd like to bring a family member or friend, please sign them up on the event page or Eventbrite! Also, don't forget to bring your laptop! And we also need your help! Check out the Etherpad to learn more! Please arrive as close 1 PM as you can. We'll see you Saturday!
I found a section of Diaphragm pump that seems to have been copied, almost word for word, from a manufacturer's web page. The detector returned the result (3 words, 16 characters). What does that count mean? I see many more than 3 words duplicated. Thanks.Wikfr (talk) 23:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still need reviews for the Wikipedia Education Program research project[edit]
Hey, Derrick! If you have some time to review the quality of some articles, we're using the results for a really important research project that will help shape the future of the US/Canada Education Program. For a few projects, we're on a pretty tight timeline and are really eager to have many more of these articles reviewed over the next week. However, we think it's most useful to come from experienced Wikipedia editors.
I have gone through each class to prioritize for various projects, and everyone on the Education team at the Wikimedia Foundation would be extremely grateful if you could participate by reviewing a few articles ('pre' and 'post' versions). If we can rally a lot of editors to review one or two articles each day, we will be able to make the most use of this research for our tight timeline. As many of our Ambassadors have requested it, we are really eager to find out which classes have been successful according to the Wikipedian standard.
Hi, I've been researching the intersection of Wikipedia and Authority Control, and have just recently made a Village Pump Proposal to create a bot to expand the usage of a template. I've identified you as someone in the sphere of interest to this project and would appreciate your input at the Village Pump. Thanks, Maximiliankleinoclc (talk) 18:44, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for attending the second SF WikiWomen's Edit-a-thon[edit]
Great work!
Dcoetzee, thanks so much for attending the edit-a-thon. You were rocking it - lending a hand to the newish editor's and taking photos (can't wait to see them!). Myself and San Francisco's own Lillie Hitchcock Coit thank you =) Sarah (talk) 21:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thank you, Sarah. :-) Unfortunately I didn't really dedicate enough time to taking photos so they all turned out fairly awful, might be able to choose one or two decent ones, but I hope to get better ones at the next such event. Dcoetzee 22:29, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SF Article Review Party! Fun times (and food) for all.[edit]
Hi, Derrick! As I told you last Saturday, the Education Program team is hosting an Article Review Party at the SF Wikimedia Foundation office on Sunday, June 24th (from 11ish–3ish). We'll provide food, drinks, music, and laughter. You just provide your brilliant mind and acute eye for reviewing articles. If you can spare an hour or two, please sign up and join us on this mirthful occasion. Hope to see you there! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like another semester of the botany class is back and posting new articles. I had an idea to deal with the privacy issue that came up last time. Since the botany articles generally don't get very widespread attention (alas), we could strip off the identifying information from the list of students, list me as contact, and I can relay feedback to the TA. Sound like a plan? I'd like to know more about the parameters of the assignment, which has been producing fairly decent material, but the TA didn't sound very...engaged, last time. Choess (talk) 18:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Choess, that sounds like a good idea, but I suggest you first talk to the instructor about it. I'm sure they would be happy to have a volunteer Wikipedian helping out their course. Make sure you explain it in terms of how it would benefit their students. Dcoetzee 22:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[5] :) Seriously, every day I get to volunteer, I have reason to be grateful for you. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate it a lot :-) I'm glad it's helpful and hope to do more to help in the future. It's tragic though, that an unwatched article can face such dramatic degradation with no one to intervene on the poor soul's behalf. Perhaps a tool could be created to help monitor such things... Dcoetzee 04:11, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AFT5 allows everyone to post feedback without proving that they are human. This gives a possibility of mass bot feedback cheats. Could you consider adding a CAPTCHA check, at least for IPs? Could you also think about blocking blank feedback comments? --Николай95 (talk) 06:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have not seen any updates to followed users for about a week. Is the server working ok? Jojalozzo 03:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably Toolserver replication lag. See [6] for current stats. Sorry about that, it'll hopefully be fixed soon! Dcoetzee 08:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how those stats would explain no updates since July 14. Are you able to make sense of it? Jojalozzo 16:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, to clarify, it says the current replication lag is 700,000 seconds, or about 8.1 days. July 24 minus 8 days is July 16, so about right. Dcoetzee 06:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks. I didn't see units marked on the charts - thought it might be milliseconds. If 700k seconds is normal, I think they should change it to hours. Jojalozzo 18:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not normal :-) Seconds to minutes is more typical. Dcoetzee 23:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's been this way for 11 days. I don't see any notice explaining it. I suppose it's a volunteer project that's only casually supported and I should be (and am) happy it exists at all. Jojalozzo 23:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This thread on the toolserver mailing list explains things I think. It looks like the problem is the WMF servers are busy and it will be a week or so more before we get results. Jojalozzo 01:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please check your Wikicommons account for the very serious message--and request--I left you regarding certain images from archaeowiki. Thank You and Goodnight from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
EduWiki Conference 5-6 September in Leicester, UK[edit]
I am writing to you as you have signed up to the Education Meetup at Wikimania 2012 and perhaps are interested in how Wikipedia links to education. Wikimedia UK is now running a education related event that may be of interest to you: the EduWiki Conference on 5-6 September in Leicester. This event will be looking at Wikipedia and related charitable projects in terms of educational practice, including good faith collaboration, open review, and global participation. It's a chance to talk about innovative work in your institution or online community, and shape the future of Wikimedia UK's work in this area!
The conference will be of interest to educators, scholarly societies members, contributors to Wikipedia and other open education projects, and students.
Thanks a ton for actually helping rewrite the article 2012 Guwahati molestation case rather than place maintenance tags. I am a relatively new editor and really appreciate your help. The article looks so much better now :) Noopur28 (talk) 08:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! It looks like an important topic. I think it could still be expanded with more information but I feel like so far it's shaping up. :-) Dcoetzee 08:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Adventure: Request for feedback on Community Fellowship proposal[edit]
Hi! I'm contacting you because you have participated or discussed The Wikipedia Adventure learning tutorial/game idea. I think you should know about a current Community Fellowship proposal to create the game with some Wikimedia Foundation support. Your feedback on the proposal would be very much appreciated. I should note that the feedback is for the proposal, not the proposer, and even if the Fellowship goes forward it might be undertaken by presently not-mentioned editors. Thanks again for your consideration.
I've mentioned your name over at AN/I. You'll see why when you read it! (No worries, you haven't done anything wrong. Well, not recently. Well, if you have, it probably wasn't in Wikipedia, so nobody knows about it yet ... heheheeee!)
A young user is having some challenges, and I just got a kind of a hunch that it could be vaguely possible that he might be helpful in working on The Wikipedia Adventure, as well as getting some more insights himself. Just a thought; ya never know, there's a possibility something good may come of it. Worth a try, maybe? Pesky (talk) 08:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A large number of duplicates were missed due to whitespace between numbers and units as well as misinterpreted characters in units, e.g.:
250 °c vs 250°c
−55 °c vs 55°c
(Text as it appears in duplicate detector.)
Perhaps ignore whitespace after numbers from copypaste links (primary reason for error), optionally fixing text encoding.
--JAC4 (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that this is still the behavior. Is it something that you are interested in changing, or do you plan on leaving it as-is? --JAC4 (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That article is using the character " " which is apparently causing problems with character encoding recognition. I should be able to fix it to use the right character encoding on Wikipedia articles at least. I don't see a good way to deal with spacing, because sometimes spaces are added, sometimes spaces are removed, and sometimes they are retained, and it's difficult to predict which tactics will generate the best recognition rates in general. Dcoetzee 20:03, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to add a user to my followed users list and a window popped up to say I wasn't logged in to the Followed Users tool. However, I was able to see my list of followed users by clicking on the link at the top of the page. I logged out of my toolserver account and when I logged back in it appears to be creating a new account for me. Is this normal? If I create a new account will I still keep my list of followed users? Jojalozzo 16:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question about wikipedia data STORAGE FORMAT[edit]
Hi, let me ask a question. Since I am a little busy and
I am not English langauge native, my ssentences could be poor.
And I would be glad if you answer my question immediately since I have to leave
a little later.
When I edited a page, I usually did line break after about 60 or so characters.
You could see how I edit by editing your talk page, this page. As you know,
by the tag < p > of the HTML langauge, the wiki did aggregate the line-broken
sentences into a full paragraph automatically.
I thought that diff is the main block of the storage mechanism of wiki, as
wiki does not have to save all the full page. Wiki needed to save only
diff of the pages. I think so.
Then by making line break as I am doing now, does my method make
the diff data of wiki SMALL? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Diff said that
Some editors find that adding manual line breaks improves the diff function.
In other words, is making many line breaks of a paragraph is more efficient
to reduce the database size of wiki? Thanks. (Gauge00 (talk) 17:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]
The database stores the full text of every revision, although the data may be compressed. Your line breaks have little to no effect on this, but are unconventional and cause your discussion to occupy more vertical space on large screens. For that reason I don't recommend it. To clarify how the diff function may be "improved" by multiple lines: if a change affects a line, that line is highlighted clearly in the diff. Multiple changes on a single long line may be harder to see and understand than changes on multiple lines in the diff view. This is more relevant to article content than discussions, since it is edited more often by more people. Dcoetzee 07:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Before I thought wiki stores only diff's between versions. As we can think that the most simple compression method is saving the diff sections For example, in order to save
{1000, 1003, 1005, 1021, 1240, 1241} we only needed to save {1000, 3+, 2+, 16+, 1240, 1+}, and
this is indentical to the basic of image compression like jpeg, or motion compression like mpeg.
In order to save motion pictures, mpeg used I frame, P frame, P frame, ..., I frame, P frame, ....,
so I was suprised to hear that wiki saves all the verion in full text format. Anyway thanks.
It would be great to have a page something like wikipedia:wikipage storage format that explains
in detail how the wikipedia saves its every pages of every version in detail and how the editing warrings (edit battle?) effects on the storage usage and how a single character addition effects on the storage usage, etc. If you had some authority on wiki and knew the stroge mechanism of wiki, how about to edit that page? Just a thought. Anyway thanks. (Gauge00 (talk) 07:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Responsed there, thanks for letting me know. Dcoetzee 00:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did post a comment yesterday, but to no avail as the whole thread was archived[7] without further comment or decision. --Túrelio (talk) 15:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, honestly, if they don't want it, no problem for me, as I will have less workload when deleting images on Commons. If you think it's helpful, I can "repost" my - probably unread - comment at the original discussion to the new discussion. --Túrelio (talk) 09:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I linked the archived discussion from the new one so it'll be read in context, which is better. I was also frustrated at the premature archival, but such is ANI. Dcoetzee 21:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've unblocked the bot. Sorry about this whole thing- hopefully it can all be resolved positively. J Milburn (talk) 14:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I've carefully documented the trial and discussion on its user page this time. Dcoetzee 15:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Higher resolution, of New York Public Library images[edit]
Hello, I was wondering how you were able to get files from the NYPL, that don't seem to be avalible to the general public. For instance this image. [8] at 2,737 × 1,390 pixels, while when I go to the site [9] it only gives a maximum resolution of 760 x 377 pixels. I've been hoping that I could also find 2,737 × 1,390, or larger versions of the reverse sides of the cards as well, but your bot only seems to upload the fronts. I wanted to know, if you know of any way I could download them from the NYPL site at this higher resolution also, so hopefully I can get both sides of the cards at equal resolution rather then the 760 x 377 version of reverse side. Thank You for any help. (Floppydog66 (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]
I have a software tool that does this. I didn't upload backs just because I didn't want to flood Commons with a bunch of images that seemed uninteresting, but can obtain any that you have a particular interest in, provided that their software has not changed too substantially. Dcoetzee 11:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great, I've been trying to do something like which you've been doing but with Internet Archive. And the fronts and reverses of those, not yet in this collection would be great, so far the collection has only those from the Library of Congress. [10] Without the reverse of the cards it's difficult to tell what the image is actually of, who took the picture, sometimes the person who took the negative is different then the person making the print, and it has more information about the cards. If you like I can give you the number identification of the items on NYPL site. I've been trying to get things like this into one place so people can view them easier, without having to go to lots of different websites to see much of what should actually be a set of these and other cards. Someday I hope that all the Keystone View Company, Underwood & Underwood, and other collections will be available like this one day, so a person can search the individual cards and read the info on the reverse and see the entire sets of things that some libraries might only have one or two of. (Floppydog66 (talk) 15:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Hello again, I made a list of the images that I'd like to use, and added it to my sandbox page User:Floppydog66/sandbox I hope those links will work. I'd like the 'Full resolution' version of each of them if possible in PNG. I hope that's not too much work, and if you don't get to all of them or don't have time, Thanks for what you can do!!! (Floppydog66 (talk) 10:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]
If it's ok I fixed/cleaned the square root into a shape (rather than two symbols), regrouped the shapes/text for (hopefully) easier editing in the future (dots are one group, everything else is the background), and rotated the triple-dots (the "...") vertical and 45 degrees rather than using additional characters, which may appear as a white box.
I didn't change anything else - your originality remains intact!
Are you still using this template you created or is it free for me to commandeer for my own nefarious purposes? VernoWhitney (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I'm aware of, nope. Dcoetzee 09:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful, thanks! Just let me know if you'd like it back and I can make a different template for my needs. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're invited! - Wiki Loves Monuments - San Francisco Events[edit]
You are receiving this message because you signed up on the SF Bay Area event listing, or have attended an event in the Bay Area. To remove yourself, please go here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BAGBot: Your bot request Commons fair use upload bot 2[edit]
Division algorithm was a redirect created when moving it to Euclidean division. Thus there are a lot of links to Division algorithm that are intended to be to Euclidean division and that become meaningless after your move. Please revert your move or repair all these links. I have repaired some of them, but I have not the time to do more. D.Lazard (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Dcoetzee 10:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All fixed now. I've also expanded Euclidean algorithm to indicate that the theorem is referred to as "the division algorithm", I added a hatnote to Division algorithm about it, and I added a couple additional division algorithms to (the new) Division algorithm. My intention is to generalize its topic area a little bit to talk about all sorts of algorithms for division, similar to multiplication algorithm. Although the term is unfortunately overloaded, I think it'll be more useful to describe actual division algorithms at division algorithm rather than the theorem. Dcoetzee 12:16, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
hi derrick, could you please create a wikimedia-ch mumble channel, and assign admin rights to myself, ideally so that i would be able to pass them on to somebody else as well? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 17:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I created the channel but can't give you rights until you're a registered user, and you have to be online for me to register you. Please let me know when you will be online. Dcoetzee 00:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're invited! Ada Lovelace Day San Francisco[edit]
You're invited! Ada Lovelace Day San Francisco[edit]
October 16 - Ada Lovelace Day Celebration - You are invited!
Come celebrate Ada Lovelace Day at the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco on October 16! This event, hosted by the Ada Initiative, the Mozilla Foundation, and the Wikimedia Foundation. It'll be a meet up style event, though you are welcome to bring a laptop and edit about women in STEM if you wish. Come mix, mingle and celebrate the legacy of the world's first computer programmer.
The event is October 16, 5:00 pm - 8:00 pm, everyone is welcome!
Hi Derrick, thanks for running the Mumble server at moonflare. I'm looking to make use of it for multiway conference calls for Wikimedia UK (where I'm one of the trustees) and also in future for Wikimedia Medicine (where I've volunteered for the initial Board to help get it started).
I'm happy to help administer the wikimedia-uk channel and at some point a channel for Wikimedia Medicine. Would it be advantageous for me to have any advanced permissions on the server? In particular do we need to grant users 'authenticated' status for them to make full use of the server? --RexxS (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rexx, no special permissions are required for users to enter any channel or use the server, unless the channel owner has restricted it. If you're administering the channel it would be helpful to give you permissions, but I can't do this until you yourself are a registered user. I can only register you when we're both present on the server (or some other admin is), so please let me know when you're available to do that. Dcoetzee 18:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick, I've been a registered user (authenticated on the server) for quite some time now - Username = RexxS as recommended. Let me know if you can't find me. --RexxS (talk) 00:34, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, right you are. You now have access to edit ACLs freely in #wikimedia-uk. Let me know if/when you want to create a channel for Wikimedia Medicine. Dcoetzee 03:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Derrick. I'll try to encourage the Wikimedia Medicine folks to get used to Mumble and I'll ask for the channel as soon as I have some take-up for it. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dcoetzee. I would like to inform you that I have granted you autopatrolled flag at Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato(talk) 02:05, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Dcoetzee 02:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, So I see you've been busy swapping Botticelli's Venus to the Google version. Your version may have higher resolution and brighter, but that version not natural. The real painting itself doesn't look like that in person. The color is rather subdued. So it's very misleading. i changed the one in my sandbox back. The real painting color is closer to this
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Botticelli_Venus.jpg
Wow, I'm surprised. GAP's version is sharper, but I don't understand why it's so noisy, dark, and yellow tinted. I couldn't even fix it in Photoshop. Dcoetzee 00:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour, mon cher ami! :D We have a copyright listing (I feel guilty; it is woefully backlogged. :() at WP:CP that needs enough fluency in French to determine how extensive the problem is. I am afraid it may be quite. Would you by any chance have time to take a look at the last listing of Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2012 August 31? It would permit us to finally put August behind us. If not, I'll look for somebody else with your combination of copyright-savvy and savoir-faire français. :)
(By the way, nice to see your name popping up at OTRS!) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 18:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Good to hear from you, hoping to make a little bit of a difference with OTRS backlogs. Keep in touch and don't overwork yourself. :-) Dcoetzee 15:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, and when has that ever happened? :D Ping me sometimes if you happen to see me around and we'll catch up. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 15:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Derrick. I was just dropping by to say that thanks for following up on this; since she confirms that they predate her, I've blanked the text. I am a bit worried that this may be symptomatic of a larger problem, since she does not seem really to understand the issue, but we'll see what happens at this point. :/ Maybe she didn't understand your question for some reason. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 16:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Derrick. I share your concerns, but am not really sure what to do about it. :/ I spot-checked, and the majority of this user's contributions seem to be translating from the French Wikipedia. My French isn't really good enough for me to trust spot-checking other articles. I know you're a busy man, so I don't know if you have time to look. :( --Moonriddengirl(talk) 14:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. This run of duplication detector appears to have detected some text that actually isn't on the wikipedia page at all. For example, in the first matched phrase, the words "tough" and "bug" are not present on the wikipedia page. Any idea what's happening? --Stfg (talk) 15:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) It's in the templates. :) Expand the "Disney's Animal Kingdom" template in the article and you'll see the text. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 16:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-officeconnect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I hope you will be joining us tomorrow afternoon at the Edit-a-thon at Tech Liminal, in Oakland. We'll be working on articles relating to women and democracy (and anything else that interests you). It's sponsored by the California League of Women Voters, Tech Liminal, and me.
If this is the first you are hearing of this event, my apologies for the last-minute notice! I announced it on the San Francisco email list and by a banner on your watchlist, but I neglected to look at the San Francisco invitation list until this evening. If you can't make it this time, I hope to see you at a similar event soon! -Pete (talk) 04:42, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just read this message and so was not able to attend, even though I was in Oakland at the time. :-( Dcoetzee 10:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick, I've added a section to the short division talk page covering how I was taught in 1966. I don't have any references - not even I keep text books for 40 odd years - and it contradicts the layout documented. Is it worth adding to the main page, or leaving as a curiosity for those brave souls who explore talk pages? Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, I'd keep it to the talk page for now, but maybe somebody will be able to dig up refs for it. It'll certainly be of historical interest if someone can. Thanks! Dcoetzee 13:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 21[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All fixed. Dcoetzee 13:52, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am new to creating wikipedia article. I created the UPTE-CWA 9119 article. This article describes a unique union at the University of California that has sought to radically implement member control as means to not only further democracy but also to function as more potent activists for our interests.
As you can tell it took me some time to get back to requesting the undeletion of this article. My apologies, it has taken some time for me to muster my priorities to overcome the "quick deletion".
I do sincerely hope that I can make an effort to meet the concerns of "importance and significance" that raised by DGaw.
Hi Jelger, I recreated the article at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/UPTE-CWA_9119. At Articles for Creation, you can take your time working on the article and adding reliable, independent third-party references to it until you believe it is ready for review. Read the box at the top of the page for more information, and good luck. Let me know if you need more help. Dcoetzee 02:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much DCoetzee. I appreciate the editing suggestions and will work on it. Cheers, Jelger — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkalmijn (talk • contribs) 00:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! You're getting this message because you are or have been a Wikipedia Ambassador. A new term is beginning for the United States and Canada Education Programs, and I wanted to give you an update on some important new information if you're interested in continuing your work this term as a Wikipedia Ambassador.
You may have heard a reference to a transition the education program is going through. This is the last term that the Wikimedia Foundation will directly run the U.S. and Canada programs; beginning in June, a proposed thematic organization is likely to take over organizing the program. You can read more about the proposal here.
Another major change in the program will take effect immediately. Beginning this term, a new MediaWiki education extension will replace all course pages and Ambassador lists. (See Wikipedia:Course pages and Help:Education Program extension for more details.) Included in the extension are online volunteer and campus volunteer user rights, which let you create and edit course pages and sign up as an ambassador for a particular course.
If you would like to continue serving as a Wikipedia Ambassador — even if you do not support a class this term — you must create an ambassador profile. If you're no longer interested in being a Wikipedia Ambassador, you don't need to do anything.
Please do these steps as soon as possible
First, you need the relevant user rights for Online and/or Campus Ambassadors. (If you are an admin, you can grant the rights yourself, for you as well as other ambassadors.) Just post your rights request here, and we'll get you set up as quickly as possible.
Once you've got the ambassador rights, please set up at a Campus and/or Online Ambassador profile. You can do so at:
Going forward, the lists of Ambassadors at Special:CampusAmbassadors and Special:OnlineAmbassadors will be the official roster of who is an active Ambassador. If you would like to be an Ambassador but not ready to serve this term, you can un-check the option in your profile to publicly list it (which will remove your profile from the list).
After that, you can sign on to support courses. The list of courses will be at Special:Courses. (By default, this lists "Current" courses, but you can change the Status filter to "Planned" to see courses for this term that haven't reached their listed start date yet.)
As this is the first term we have used the extension, we know there will be some bugs, and we know the feature set is not as rich as it could be. (A big wave of improvements is already in the pipeline. And if you know MediaWiki and could help with code review, we'd love to have your help!) Please reach out to me (Sage Ross) with any complaints, bug reports, and feature suggestions. The basic features of the extension are documented at Wikipedia:Course pages, and you can see a tutorial for setting up and using them here.
Communication and keeping up to date
In the past, the Education Program has had a pretty fragmented set of communication channels. We're trying to fix that. These are the recommended places to discuss and stay up-to-date on the education program:
The education noticeboard has become the main on-wiki location for discussion of the Education Program. You can post there about broad education program issues as well as issues with individual courses.
The Ambassadors Announce email list is a very low-traffic announcements list of important information all Ambassadors need to be aware of. We encourage all Ambassadors (and other interested Wikipedians) to subscribe to the list; follow the instructions on the link to add your email address.
If you use IRC regularly, or need to try to reach someone immediately, the #wikipedia-en-ambassadorsconnect IRC channel is the place to find me and fellow Ambassadors.
Ambassador training and resources
We now have an online training for Ambassadors, which is intended to be both an orientation about the Wikipedia Ambassador role for newcomers and the manual for how to do the role. (There are parallel trainings for students and for educators as well.)
Please go through the training if you feel like you need a refresher on how a typical class is supposed to go and where the Ambassadors fit in, or if you want to review and help improve it. If there's something you'd like to see added, or other suggestions you have for it, feel free to edit the training and/or leave feedback. A primer on setting up and using course pages is included in the educators' training.
The Resources page of the training is the main place for Ambassador-related resources. If there's something you think is important as a resource that's not on there, please add it.
Finally, whether or not you work with any classes this term, I encourage you to post entries to the Trophy Case whenever you see excellent work from students or if you have great examples from past semesters. And, as always, let students (and other editors!) know when they do things well; a little WikiLove goes a long way!
Hi Derrick. Inspired by your example, I'm offering part of my old equipment to a fellow Wikimedian. I have some practical questions, if you don't mind. Did you take specific precautions on packaging? What kind of delivery did you use? Thanks in advance. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jastrow, I used ordinary USPS, and ordinary leftover packing materials, such as plastic air bubbles and bubble wrap. It's important to ensure that any parts in the package are fully immobilized (nothing should move when you shake and rotate the package), and that they can't contact one another or the sides of the box (each part wrapped separately). Finally, if you're shipping internationally, do not ship the parts in original retail boxes or the box they were shipped to you in, and be careful not to buy a lot of insurance or overvalue the parts on the shipping forms - these may result in substantial customs fees. Thank you for your generosity. :-) Dcoetzee 15:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. It'll save me the trouble of hunting for my old Nikon box! Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I'm just wondering, is there any update on the NPG/WMF dispute? The article about it is two years out of date. Thanks, — Hex(❝?!❞) 01:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The link you have supplied above does not have any lyrics on it (there are a few others in similar disarray). However, I am not convinced that Metrolyrics is authorised to print the lyrics. Can you show me exactly where you have taken the authorisation? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I thought I had fixed that but I made an error. I'll go back through them and revert any where they don't have the lyrics. MetroLyrics is definitely authorised - see [11] and the press release from Gracenote. Dcoetzee 19:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am not really convinced. Firstly you are assuming, that ALL songs are licenced to Gracenote. What further concerns me, in spite of accepting Gracenote's public announcement, is that none of the Metrolyrics pages I saw actually acknowledged the owners of the lyrics - neither publisher nor creator. Assuming that some form of royalty payments are due back to the copyright holders, both Metrolyrics and Gracenote should be holding that information and publicly acknowledging it. The link errors I noted above back me up. I'd like to see some songs which I can confirm Gracenote have degree of control over at Metrolyrics, too. You may well be right, but as I said I am not convinced. Cheers.--Richhoncho (talk) 19:42, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MetroLyrics is not required to attribute anyone as long as they comply with the provider's licensing terms, because moral rights don't exist in the United States (they may still be providing royalties even if they don't credit the publisher/author). You are correct that apparently not all of their lyrics are licensed from Gracenote (contrary to what I assumed), but they still claim that all of their lyrics are legal and authorised in several locations - they don't accept user-contributed lyrics and they probably have contracts with several providers. Even on the pages with the Gracenote logo like [12], there is no credit to publishers or creators. They also have a number of pages stating "Our licensing agreement does not allow us to display these lyrics at this time" such as [13]. See also the Gracenote EULA on MetroLyrics. See also news stories like this Wired story, "MetroLyrics Becomes First Lyrics Site to ‘Go Legit’" which says "MetroLyrics has in fact lost some lyrics during the conversion to Gracenote’s system. But overall, the Gracenotepartnership will increase the number of lyrics on MetroLyrics from 400,000 or so to about double that." And I found a statement on Talk:MetroLyrics, apparently from a MetroLyrics representative, reading: "Please be advised that metrolyrics does compensate copyright holders for every copyrighted content featured on metrolyrics.com with no exception. Please contact MetroLeap Media Inc. for more information and clarification if needed at www.metroleap.com/contact.php or by telephone at +1 604 421-9871." I will directly contact them to verify this - I just checked and I already received a response from one of their representatives earlier this month, Owen Stretch, who I have contacted directly. Dcoetzee 20:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This page suggests they accept user-contributed "amendments" so that is contrary to "do not accept user-contributed lyrics. I am trying to justify why they have "Our licensing agreement does not allow us to display these lyrics at this time" There can be only one logical legal reason, one of the publishers has not signed up to GraceNote. I am presently unable to prove or disprove this one at present. As for the claims by Metrolyrics, I suspect them as much as I suspect anything said by Bernard Madoff, but I am a cynic by nature and require third party confirmation! Finally, I am not sure that moral rights are relevant here, there is a legal responsibility for any author to be acknowledged for their work. Hmm. As I said I am not convinced either of us is right at the moment. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The lyrics on that page are from CBS Interactive (if you click the "Lyrics Terms of Use" in lower right it shows that). They do have a Submit Corrections button for users, but besides the fact that most such small corrections are not copyrightable in themselves, I believe the corrections are probably submitted on to the licensor, who reviews them and is responsible for quality control of their databases. There is definitely not a legal responsibility for any author to be acknowledged for their work in the United States - for example, you can use any public domain work without crediting the author, or any work released under the Creative Commons Zero Waiver. Such attribution is only legally enforced if the license extended by the copyright holder requires it. It's difficult to verify MetroLyrics' claims through a third party, since they appear to contract with several different providers and I don't have a complete list of them right now - but I should be able to at least get an official statement from a MetroLyrics e-mail address, and I can try to get a list of providers who I can contact directly for independent confirmation. Dcoetzee 22:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I think I need to go away until I have proven to myself what is right, little point in worrying you at the moment. I would add this is not the first site that has claimed authorisation! In some ways its a redundant conversation, I have always thought that printing the lyrics is marketing rather than infringement, but that doesn't help WP - see here. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I don't blame you for being suspicious, almost every lyrics website out there is illegitimate and full of copyright violations. I was surprised to discover a legit one exists at all, and they seem to have only been around since 2008 or so. I'll keep on doing the research to confirm this to the maximum extent possible. Dcoetzee 23:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
One of the things I looked at and meant to mention was WPSongs and what it says about external links and copyright. Looks a real mess to me. Any comments? --Richhoncho (talk) 23:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That section's consistent with my understanding of the policy ("officially licensed lyrics that follow the copyright policy. Sites which provide officially licensed lyrics include MTV.com, CMT.com, and Yahoo Music."). We can link any site offering the lyrics as long as they have licensed them and are displaying them legally - according to MetroLyrics, "MetroLyrics is partnered with AOL Music, NME, MTV and Billboard.com" so MTV.com might even be getting their lyrics through them. Dcoetzee 23:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The MTV and CMT lyrics link through to Lyricsmode, the AOL link is dead. There is absolutely no right to link through to music score or tabs/score sheet as it is claimed (chords on the other hand, are not copyrightable). BTW I have seen Billboard link through to YouTube unauthorised videos too. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's true, I'll go ahead and boldly amend it (I don't think guitar chords are uncopyrightable in general, except when they're copied almost exactly from previous public domain works, which for at least some pop songs they really are). Somehow I'm not surprised that Billboard is so careless :-P Dcoetzee 00:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can assure you chords are not copyrightable generally - that's arrangement. Only words and melody are copyrightable. I may have lost track of music copyright law in the past 10 years (i.e. internet), but the basics haven't changed! Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
this edit Included a link to lyrics from a single song from this album, "My Last Breath". I assume this is because there exists a redirect article, My Last Breath, that links to the Fallen (Evanescence album) article and your bot treated the album as the individual song. Perhaps you can add a line to verify if the article it is posting to is, in fact, the correct article intended? ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 05:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. It does include a check to see if an article is about a song, but it wasn't quite precise enough - it got tricked by the presence of the text "singles]]" in that article (which turned out to be a link and not a category). I've refined it a bit and I'll go back and check for any other similar errors. Dcoetzee 12:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem! I love programming, so it's fun for me to try to find WHY programs do odd things. :) ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 17:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another note: Is there any specific reason why the bot (and template) link to the MOBILE version of the website? (m.metrolyrics.com vs. www.metrolyrics.com)? ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 17:16, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. Because the main site is ugly as hell and full of distracting irrelevant stuff. :-) Compare [14] and [15] and you'll see what I mean. This can be easily changed if desired at Template:MetroLyrics song. Dcoetzee 23:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I don't desire a change at all! I love how mobile versions are so "clean". :) Glad to see someone else being practical with their implementation, especially when using a bot to add the links site-wide. Thumbs up to you! ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 00:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't anticipate this particular reason for transfer so there's no corresponding delete tag. I'll let you know when I find time to extend it for that. (Also Commons fair use upload bot in its current form can't reupload deleted works, which is something I've been wanting to fix). Dcoetzee 20:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just use Commons:Template:PD-US-1923-abroad-delete or whatever and fix the tags after the files have been uploaded. I see that the images were replaced by other images of shopping malls in at least one article, so I'm not sure if all of the images are needed any more. However, some of the replacements are also up for deletion for violating FOP. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I did not receive an e-mail. Dcoetzee 18:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why it did not make it. Just sent it to your moonflare.com emailStark247 (talk) 22:13, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm not sure either. I received that. Dcoetzee 06:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick, I got your email and responded back. Stark247 (talk) 19:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You have added automatically the Bob Dylan songs, most of which are already linked to the Offical Bob Dylan site. Not sure I approve of two sources, or indeed one source (which I am still not sure about) on every song article. When there is an alternative official source, isn't it better not to add? Cheers.--Richhoncho (talk) 08:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience, official sites change their URL structure quite frequently and often become dead links which nobody updates, so it's useful to have a backup link just in case. It's also extremely difficult to detect existing links to official lyrics automatically (it can't distinguish them from links to illegitimate sites). However please feel free to revert these changes if you prefer to have only the official link - the bot will not edit the same page twice. Dcoetzee 19:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will do, some of them needed updating anyway. I thought this article might tickle your fancy. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, I didn't know the bot would be affected and should have let you know. The page was impossible to use for manual listings due to the transclusion limit, so some action was needed. Feel free to revert it until the bot can be modified to accommodate it. Dcoetzee 08:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, all of the relistings can just hang out on the 24th until I fix my bot. Once fixed I should be able to undo that one edit and then only legitimately needed relistings will show up. I think I just panicked a little at the sight of that one edit, thinking my bot had broken in some crazy way. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Dcoetzee - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the link being posted is for the mobile version of MetroLyrics. Is that supposed to be that way? I didn't check what differences may exist between mobile and desktop. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 05:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A few people have asked about this. The template does this intentionally because the desktop version is incredibly ugly. Compare [16] and [17]. :-) Dcoetzee 06:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've just seen what you're doing with LyricsBot - a great idea and a useful addition to the 'pedia. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the contribution surveyor output is regularly decoded incorrectly by people's text editors (examples). That happens to various editors, and for most of them it would be hard to verify whether their text editor got the right encoding; educating them in the instructions would thus probably be difficult. I have two different suggestions instead:
Include a BOM -- I'd expect that all semi-modern text editors should then recognize the file as UTF8
Add a hidden comment at the top of the result with some fancy characters to make the mangled encoding explicit, similar to what was added to MediaWiki:Gadget-popups.js
What do you think? Amalthea 19:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I'll take a look at this as soon as I can. I assume you're talking about the wikitext rendering rather than the HTML version. Dcoetzee 02:02, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. :) Another option: don't set the Content-Disposition header so that the result is displayed in the browser. Cheers, Amalthea 08:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Added BOM with echo json_decode('"\uFEFF"');. Give it a try now. :-) Dcoetzee 21:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! Thanks, and Cheers, Amalthea 23:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried clicking on several of your links, but none of them work - I just get a grey square with revolving ring - I've tried leaving it 10 minutes, but nothing ever happens.
I then tried going to Metro-links web-site and searching for them there, and they come up almost immediately. Comparing the URL arrived at by following your link, with the URL found searching Metro links site, they are not the same. To give just two examples:-
Think this needs to be investigated/overcome before adding more non-functioning links Arjayay (talk) 16:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The templates currently link to the mobile site because it has a cleaner interface. All the links you link above work fine for me. It is possible their mobile site was temporarily offline. Can you check again now? It is possible to switch to the main site if needed by simply editing the templates, but I would prefer to avoid this if possible. Dcoetzee 21:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried the above two "Your URL"s at 09.00, 13.00 + 17.30 UTC - didn't work on any of the times I tried, so it seems to be a permanent problem. - Arjayay (talk) 17:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is very peculiar. They still work for me (as well as for many other users I've contacted). Perhaps they are blocked in your region. What country do you live in? What kind of service do you use to connect to the Internet? Are you connecting through any kind of proxy? Could you take a screenshot of the page and put it up on imgur.com? Dcoetzee 21:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've isolated the problem - the mobile site does not display in IE for some reason. I've changed the template to use the primary site, at least until they fix this. It may take a few hours for cached versions of pages to clear and use the other site. The main site is much uglier, but this won't be an issue when we later migrate to an extension that allows selecting among multiple providers. Dcoetzee 03:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
This edit by your bot seems to be in error. Did it get confused by the file info page still existing here? I made the deletion request at commons as it seemed clear to me it was a copyvio but don't deal with images much so don't know how best to deal with this - I assume the page and it's talk page can simply be deleted. Dpmuk (talk) 17:20, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that was an error. I can fix that. Sorry! Regarding the local page, we usually just leave them sitting around, but I have to presume they're speedy-deletable. Dcoetzee 21:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed this now. Dcoetzee 03:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is is a place to discuss Willy On you-know-what. NOT a place for vandalism. Also, was Sammy On Skateboards an actual username or vandal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmartyPantsKid (talk • contribs) 00:22, 12 January 2013
Hi Dcoetzee, just FYI I reverted your bot at Peaches en Regalia, where it added a "lyrics" link although the article is about an instrumental. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It is a mystery to me why MetroLyrics even has an entry for this song. :-) Dcoetzee 06:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The bot has misplaced the location of the External links section here. It could be because the article didn't have a References section. You should check the placement rules to prevent a case like this. Diego (talk) 10:55, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, sorry about that. It looks like it gets confused when the last section on the page has a subsection. I'll investigate. Dcoetzee 11:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick, LyricsBot put the external links section below the stub tag in this edit to "The Last Time I Saw Richard"; the external links section should be above the stub tag. Graham87 14:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Should be fixed now. I now identify stub templates by looking for use of {{Asbox}} in the template. Dcoetzee 16:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Derrick. :) I'm getting a 404 on the Duplication Detector. Not sure if that's a temporary issues, since the CCI tool still works, but I just thought I'd mention it in case something has gone pear shaped that you might be able to fix. I know I rely pretty heavily on it. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 21:40, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be either temporary or on your end, works for me. See [22], [23]. :-) Dcoetzee 21:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Must have been temporary. :) Back for me, too. Sorry for hte false alarm! :D -Moonriddengirl(talk) 22:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First, you really need to archive this page. Also, Gloria Steinem was meant to be a source for how people think that the shape of the symbol may have originated from or been influenced by female anatomy, whether or not it actually was. I think it's reasonable for that purpose, though feel free to clarify the intentions if needed... AnonMoos (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how significant one person's speculations are, if they haven't been very influential. I still would opt not to include that information. Dcoetzee 00:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't now how influential Gloria Steinem has been personally, but her remarks are characteristic and typical of one whole school of thought (which doesn't have much scholarly respectability, but whose collective opinions are still notable for Wikipedia purposes). AnonMoos (talk) 20:41, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm sorry, this wasn't clear from the reference. If we could supply at least one additional reference to clarify that it's an opinion wider than her own, and clarify the language a bit, I think it's fine. Dcoetzee 20:47, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was surprised that my personal article was deleted in wikipedia.
A degrading comment was posted about me as shown below by Dcoetzee, probably a deletionist:
07:02, 3 March 2013 Dcoetzee (talk|contribs) deleted page Joey Lawsin(Non-notable individual, very unlikely to survive an AfD; vanity piece, all refs are self-published except one poem of little note)
But what are wiki's bases to classify one as notable?
Wikipedia defines notability as a test used to decide whether an article is verifiable and must contain significant attention or objective evidence in any form that the subject has received from independent sources ... Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity— ...
Keywords: verifiable, significant attention and independent sources.
Let us use these three keywords and determine if these 3 persons have the criteria to be considered notable. I will use Derrick Coetzee, Lee Harvey Oswald and myself as examples.
Can we consider Lee Harvey Oswald as a notable individual? He killed the president of the United State. Obviously this person is not worth qualified as a notable individual. However, based on the criteria ... he is ...since he gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large over a period of time. So here we can assume that notable means number (the number of people who knew Oswald by publication) and not about ones integrity or accomplishments.
Can we consider Derrick Coetzee a notable individual? If I will survey my students and the common people in the street and ask if they know dcoetzee, most likely 100% of them will answer that they don't know this person. Did he make a great contribution in science and technology? I never heard of him even in any journals. His postings in google are likely vanity pieces as well. Now again if notable means numbers, most probably he is known only within his classmates, friends, a handful of peers and families. So can we consider Dcoetzee notable? Well, maybe he is. He posted his own personal page in wikipedia. Did he grab significant attention from the public? I doubt!
Is Joey Lawsin a notable individual? Joey has been teaching for the past ten years both in high school, colleges, and universities. If numbers matter to be considered notable, then he is qualified. Why? If a classroom is made up of an average of 40 students and there are 5 sections, then it follows the number of students who knows him is 200. In 10 years, he would have 2000 individuals. Can we consider this number to be considered him notable? His published physics book has been used by students all over the Philippines If their are 1,600,000 students in the secondary level and one fourth of these seniors uses his books then can this number be enough to be considered notable? Is this considered as significant attention as well? Are my co -authors, panel of writers and publisher considered reliable independent sources?
So, in your own opinion who is notable: Lee Harvey Oswald, Derrick Coetzee, or Joey Lawsin?
Now, let us discuss about verifiable sources: published and self-published books!
I will use Oprah Winfrey, the dog whisperer Cesar Millan and myself again as examples. Oprah and Cesar have books all over the internet. However, both of them did not write any of these books. They have tons of money and hired copy editors and a book writers to produce their books. The price package of a single book from publication to promotion ranges from 30 to 40 thousands. Their books are all over known magazines and newspapers because this type of promotion comes with the package. But have you realized ... that if they have no money ... do you think their books will be published? Now, if i have the same amount of money, do you think my book will not get the same attentions that they both have? I have learned publishing my books the hard way ... it involves money ... i don't need to go back to this path again ... i have already learned the in and out of publishing ... so why not just self-publish ... publishing and self-publishing are just the same ... it's money that matters ...
A self-published book takes lots of time, effort and love to be made. The author would do lots of research and revisions to make his book convincing to the public. It takes lots of knowledge, expertise, experience and character to make one. Oprah and Milan might have the characters and experiences, but are they really expert on their own fields of interest?
Maybe you need to change the word notable to extraordinary ... notable individuals with huge sum of money can post their names and works in any major newspapers, journals and other networks. They can be in every publication because they have huge amount of money to be well-known. However, an extraordinary person with an extra ordinary abilities can only be verified by the works that he makes. He can be a great independent expert, a verifiable evidence and a significant source of information.
I see that you understand the requirements for a person to have an article on Wikipedia (that they can be verified in independent third party publications). These rules are not just for the integrity of the project, but also for the protection of the subjects, who otherwise would be open to libel and misrepresentation. If multiple such sources write about you in the future, you may consider creating an article then, but please do not include information that you know personally that cannot be verified via external sources. Dcoetzee 00:27, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is the publisher of my published book considered an independent third party? Are my co-authors in our published physics book considered as reliable sources?
Thanks again for coming to class yesterday. I have a question. When i go to the Env Law course page I don't see the edit buttons next to the different sections under the timeline. I remember you talking about not being on the "timeline version" of the page. How do I get there?
Hi. you changed Module:IPAddress. i have no problems with your edits, but i think the summaries point to some misunderstanding. the original code i wrote had something like:
so far so good. this is a stylistic preference. but according to the summary, it seems you think what you did made a difference ("Modify to return object instead of table (convention, works with unit test framework)",
however, your change did no such thing: the code after your change return exactly the same table it retured before, and if it can work with test framework now, it could before. your change did not make any real difference - it replaced half a dozen with six.
i do not have any objection to the change (i prefer my style, naturally, but if this is the convention, let it be). however, my impression was that you seem to think your edit actually changed something, while in reality it did not.
You are correct, I was mistaken. I thought it would fix a problem with the test framework, but the actual problem was something else. . Dcoetzee 03:35, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
on 2nd thought, i do have one small objection to the changes: the "isIp" function returned "4", "6" or "" before your change, and now it returns "1" or "". this makes it slightly less useful: for instance, the previous version could be used with {{#switch in the template to do one thing for ipV4 and another for ipV6, while the current version will require multiple calls to achieve the same functionality. the disadvantage of the change is clear, and i can't see any advantage. would you mind reverting it? thx. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 03:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That was unintentional, fixed. Dcoetzee 03:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for creating the tests (i added one more, for a:::b). peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 04:06, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, looks good! Your script is very robust, I couldn't find a single thing wrong with it. Dcoetzee 04:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I added back the link - the link works fine for me and does not result in a 404 error. The error may have been temporary. If you are still experiencing it, let me know. Dcoetzee 20:25, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, it's working now. Thank you! --Wosch21149 (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Derrick. Could you may be also restore this article in the hoax space? Whereas it was not the record long (only five years), it was rather extensive, and may be the most elaborate hoax we had. I already asked to write a Russian Wikinews article on it. Thanks in advance.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going down the list in order. I'll get there soon. Dcoetzee 07:49, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can't seem to access certain parts of our coursepage to edit it. For instance, the student article banner. I assume that you put that up, but where can I see the edits. And, if I wanted to edit it or remove it, how could I access that part of the page?
I'm not sure if that part is actually possible to edit or remove - it may be added to all course pages by the template. As long as it's not part of the extension, I should be able to fix it to allow this, so let me know if you'd like to change something and can't figure out how, and let me know exactly how you'd like it changed. Dcoetzee 06:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can you figure out what I am doing wrong with setting up citation tests? I tried one example, using the Special:ExpandTemplates result as a target, but it doesn't seem to want to accept that. Dragons flight (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When adding the lyrics to the Van Morrison song articles, LyricsBot somehow missed adding the MetroLyrics for "Brown Eyed Girl". I could do it (not being lazy about it), but thought it best to keep the lyric additions consistently added by LyricsBot. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. The reason it skipped the page is because its limited pattern matching wasn't able to identify with certainty that that was the correct song. I'll make a second pass later with more sophisticated pattern-matching to catch ones like this, but that will take time. Feel free to do it yourself - if you do, LyricsBot won't add a link to a page that already has one. Dcoetzee 13:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dcoetzee, I went ahead and added it. Agadant (talk) 19:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello D. I just saw your move of the Bucharest Film Festival article to a "list of hoaxes" page. I am wondering if you would consider doing the same with this article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuri Gadyukin. I had made this post Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#When someone asks about IMDb when the initial AFDs were filed. I wanted to be able to show editors just how far people were willing to go to create a hoax article. The fact that IMDb now has pages for films, at least one director, and a film festival that never existed show just how little fact checking that they do. If you do not want to this no problems I will still be able to direct people to the page you have restored. Thanks for your time and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:46, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's great. As I hit save I thought - odds are you had already done this - and voila you had. Many thanks!! MarnetteD | Talk 22:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So i tried to add some input verification logic to my script ( Module:Range ). under some circumstances (i.e., malformed input), the script throws an error.
i'd like very much to be able to test this also. i made a feeble attempt to edit Module:UnitTests, and enclose the call to frame:preprocess with "pcall", but i don't think it's good enough. what i think *will* be good enough is if instead of calling "preprocess" to obtain "actual", we'll get the module itself using
module = require(module_name), and then we'll invoke the actual methods using something like:
local success, result = pcall( module[method_name], frame_object )
local actual = success and result or 'Script error'
hopefully, this or something similar will allow script writers to also verify that unders some predefined conditions their script indeed creates the expected error.
I would argue that a script's template interface should never return a script error. Even in the case of malformed input, it should return an informative error message string. This can then be checked using the standard method. Of course it would be nice if instead of just printing "Script error" when a script fails it could actually tell you which test cases are producing script errors. I want to avoid using pcall directly on methods because using preprocess is both easier to use and a more "end to end" test that can also account for the intricacies of how arguments are passed (e.g. numbered params aren't whitespace stripped while named params are). Dcoetzee 07:22, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Even in the case of malformed input, it should return an informative error message string." well, it does, but this informative message string is packed in en error() message, which is exactly what error() is meant for. for instance, in Module:Range, if one of the inputs is malformed, the function return an error with the malformed input, rather than a generic message as would be the case if it was a programatic error. this is The Right Thing To Do ™, and i think it would be nice if the unit-test would support it. see Module talk:Range/tests. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of Lua calling Lua, this is certainly the right thing to do - but in the context of wikitext invoking Lua, things get more complicated, because simply using error() will always result in an uninformative "Script error" that doesn't tell the template designer what they did wrong. I've created a test script at Module:User:Dcoetzee/Sandbox (example usage at Module talk:User:Dcoetzee/Sandbox) that catches all errors (including built-in Lua errors) and transforms them into a red bold error message when used via #invoke. Lua code that imports the module can still call the internal function _hello and catch errors itself if it wishes. If you copy my catch_error function you should be able to do the same thing and use the existing UnitTest functions to test it. If you think this catch_error strategy is a good one generally, then it could be moved into a general library. Let me know your thoughts. Dcoetzee 03:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dcoetzee. I was wondering, did you make a conscious decision with Module:UnitTests to go for a default of /tests instead of the default of /testcases that we used in the past for our Template structure ? Because I don't think we should divert if there isn't a real reason to do so. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I did not - at the time I didn't know testcases subpages existed as I haven't done a lot of template work. There are some differences from testcases pages, in that unit tests may run arbitrary code, but the similarities are pretty clear. Dcoetzee 02:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A few things that might have flagged a false positive: the age of one or both pages; the similarity of the supposed copyvio-source to a current WP article, the "edit" links on the source page that link to a wikipedia.org URL.
(talk page stalker) Hi, Sj. Dupdet is not a bot, but a manual tool. It can't be used to scan a page and find matches elsewhere; it can only be used to compare previously identified pages. Its inclusion in the copyvio template does not in any way indicate that it was used to find the issue - its presence there helps investigate the issue. It's included automatically anytime somebody says one page is a copyvio of another. The humans who use it from that template are supposed to look for those few things that flag false positives, and it seems you did. :D --Moonriddengirl(talk) 10:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. :-) Dcoetzee 04:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Problem with creating an account on LiteratePrograms[edit]
I've been trying to create an account on your LiteralLiteratePrograms (I keep messing it up) wiki, with no luck. The system tells me I've been recognised as an open proxy and so I'm blocked from creating an account or editing anything. I've tried connecting from 2 different locations, but unfortunately both are serviced by the same ISP and so the same block applies. Would it be possible to have an account created for me to get around these technical restrictions? Thanks in advance. —Astatine211Talk 21:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, just e-mail me with your desired username and e-mail address. Dcoetzee 04:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey -
Sorry for the late notice, but since you have yourself tagged as living in the Bay Area, I thought you might appreciate notification that we’re having an event Saturday! It’ll be held at Hoyt Hall, an all-women's house of the Berkeley Student Cooperative from 3 to 6 pm tomorrow. The main event page is here.
Anyone is welcome to show up, but we’re expecting a significant number of people to come who have literally never edited Wikipedia before. If you’re an experienced Wikipedian who would be able to provide useful help to some of the newbies, your presence would be especially appreciated (and it might be a good idea for you to show up at 2 or 2:30 instead of three.
Thanks, Kevin Gorman (talk) 01:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I’m AWB’ing this message to all Wikipedians who have tagged themselves in the bay area. I’m sorry if the message isn’t of interest to you; feel free to delete it. I’ll be unlikely to send future messages in a similar way, but if really don’t want to receive future messages of this sort, please let me know. [reply]
An old edit by you [24] has been questioned in Talk:Goldbach's weak conjecture#Primality testing and [25]. I agree with the objection. You are probably right and I know which algorithm and software to use so any single number can probably be verifed with ease (I would only need ECPP at bound0.3). But this assumes heuristics about how quickly a solution with probable primes can be found. Even if the conjecture is true, we cannot rule out the possiblity that the only solution is a sum with three primes above 1000 digits. If these primes are infeasible to find then it doesn't matter how fast the primes could have been proved with ECPP. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you're saying. I don't quite remember the reasoning of an edit I made so many years ago, but if I understand you correctly, the issue is that although primality can be deterministically shown for numbers of this size relatively quickly, this doesn't provide a decomposition into primes in the first place, which is of course needed to verify Goldbach for them. Feel free to delete or amend this statement. Dcoetzee 00:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dcoetzee. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
And please do archive your talk page – it takes way too long to scroll through. —Astatine211Talk 19:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Responded now, sorry! And I will archive soon, just need a kitten. Dcoetzee 20:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If I had more free time, I would like to port it to Linux (using Mono) so I can use it in my main computer... Congrats! —Fitoschido [shouttrack] @ 20 February, 2012; 10:10
wikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
VernoWhitney (talk) 01:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:View_of_breastworks_on_Round_Top,_the_hill_which_formed_our_extreme_left_at_the_Battle_of_Gettysburg,_by_Gardner,_Alexander,_1821-1882.png){kind=link}
