User talk:Daniel Gadsby/Archives/2013/May

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Daniel Gadsby. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The Potato Hose, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi The Potato Hose! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 May 10

Listen, I realize you're frustrated, but I really am in good faith trying to understand your proposed approach. I've laid out my proposal, based on the discussions with you, in a more clear form. I do hope you will cease with the name calling however, it's not very civil. Please consider the compromise I proposed, which I don't think is illogical at all, and could be easily informed/backed up by many many sources, and I think it gets quite close to the result you wanted in any case. Best regards,--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:38, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I am frustrated because you very clearly aren't bothering to read what I write. If you were bothering to read what I write, you wouldn't be repeatedly asking me questions which I have already answered at length. If you want me to be less frustrated, try reading what I write. Second, there has been no name-calling, and accusations of such without basis can be construed as personal attacks, so I strongly suggest you revise your statement. The Potato Hose ↘ 18:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I did read what you wrote, and you weren't clear, anywhere, that you were proposing to delete the food culture cats if a city was "upgraded" to cuisine status, so I asked a question to clarify. That's it.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Au contraire, there have been several times when you have asked a question that I have already answered, to say nothing about 'just discovering' an article I had linked to in prior comments. Demonstrate that you're actually reading what I write and I might be interested in continuing the discussion. Until then, adios, and please don't bother me further. The Potato Hose ↘ 18:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you had linked to it, but I didn't follow every link...so I apologize for that. Anyway, come back when you feel ready. Best regards. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

1) I told you not to bother me. 2) Me being ready to discuss is entirely up to you; show me that you are actually paying attention to a single word I have written (telling you not to bother me, followed by you continuing to bother me, is not a good way to show you are paying attention). As a bonus, it would be great if you showed the slightest inkling towards compromise, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards, since you're still harping on about keeping 'Cuisine of X City' categories as though they were meaningful in all but the tiniest handful of cases. The Potato Hose ↘ 18:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thanks very much for withdrawing the nomination, and for your kind words, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

One good turn deserves another. The Potato Hose ↘ 16:53, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I feel badly about how I overreacted. Thanks again, — Cirt (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Old Mac Wizard game?

I somehow ended up in the refdesk archives (no clue how I did that) and tried to suggest an answer to your question before reverting it... probably not helpful, but there we are. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 03:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! But unfortunately no, it was neither of those. I am convinced that it was called Wizard, straight up. Which is basically impossible to Google, as I am sure you can imagine. The Potato Hose ↘ 03:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Tiny Wizard? (Do a keyword search). I just googled "mac wizard game" and went to images instead, but I really don't know. best of luck to you. It took me years to find an old Mac SE/Classic maze game and I found it on YouTube so I know how frustrating it is to get all nostalgic with old computers! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Haha, thanks for your continued efforts... but that too is not the game. The graphics were better, and it was entirely B&W (played on a Mac SE after all!). Alas. The Potato Hose ↘ 16:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I know it'd be in b&w, but even Dark Castle eventually became color—one never knows! Best of luck finding it :) – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 16:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elite Traveler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luxury (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 14:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop collapsing the discussion at Template talk:Project assessments. User:Jerem43 started the thread yesterday (UTC). It's inappropriate to prematurely close discussions on Wikipedia in this manner. While you may disagree with notions there, it's way too early to close this new discussion thread. The creator of the talk page hasn't even responded there yet. Thank you for your consideration. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

You banned me from your talkpage. I don't really see any good reason why you should be posting on mine. Provide a reason other than process wonkery why a discussion about cosmetic changes to a nonfunctional template has any point. — The Potato Hose 02:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:List of domesticated fungi and microorganisms

Your edit did not include closing brackets to the template you added. Rmhermen (talk) 18:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Herp derp. Sorry. — The Potato Hose 18:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Empty calorie may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
designing eating programs and recommending dietary modifications according to patients' needs.<ref>{{cite web\|url=http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos077.htm \|title={{dead link\|date=September 2012}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

RfA-related research

Hi! Just as a quick note, I'm not sure what sort of research has been done in the past in regard to affects of reduced number of admins, although I'm obviously going to have to run a literature review at some point in the near future. However, I think there is (justifiably) a lot of tiredness around the issue, as while many people agree that there is a problem, there's been a massive lack of agreement about the way forward. So those who have been involved in attempts to get reform working have tended to be stymied, which is disappointing given the amount of work they've done.

Anyway, I agree with you that data is useful, but it is very hard to gather. I've tried a number of methodologies to get some figures, and the latest seems to be working so far, but none were easy. One source you might want to try if you're looking for research is the wiki-research-l mailing list. - Bilby (talk) 04:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll have a look at that mailing list. — The Potato Hose 03:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Tell me about it

RFD? Thanks, I'll look at it. I agree. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 17:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

RFD? — The Potato Hose 03:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink

I've reverted your changes to Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink, in part per the discussion that is occurring on the project's talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink#Project page changes, in which User:Jerem43 clearly states in regard to the boxes on the page: "If you want more visibility of the box, re-size the box, not restore the transcluded information." Other changes I made were minor copy edits that clarify the purpose of the new buttons on the page. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I invite you to read WP:BRD. — The Potato Hose 03:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Reverse split

The decision of the closing admin at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of cuisines was: "The result was keep. No clear consensus on whether to move or not as of yet, I would recommend that discussion continue on the talk page."

I did move the page, but only as part of a split, in order to keep the list's edit history intact. (The outline was named "List of cuisines" before its scope was expanded to outline scope).

Per the AfD, the Outline of cuisines is supposed to stay. That's what Keep means. The closing admin was very explicit about the move not having consensus. Splitting off the list from it is another issue. So per the AfD, please restore the Outline of cuisines. Otherwise, we will have to go to ANI to seek a resolution and have yours (and my) conduct scrutinized.

You are the one who is ignoring the result of the AfD. Please reread the closing statement. The Transhumanist 04:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The closing admin was incorrect. Go read it again. Everyone agreed with Quiddity. I have no idea how or why the admin missed that, but so it goes. — The Potato Hose 04:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Quiddity's final decision was "merge and rename the majority of the contents currently at Outline of cuisines and Global cuisine into a single article at List of cuisines."

That means leave the non item-list content at their respective articles. The List of cuisines is a list of specific cuisines (that's the item type), not other topics about cuisines. That's what outlines are for.

Also, Quiddity didn't realize that the List of cuisine's edit history was at Outline of cuisines, and dates back years before the Global cuisine edit history. The Transhumanist 04:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong, and biased. See here. — The Potato Hose 04:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

You've misread the consensus. The votes you counted came before Quiddity's final remark was made. Those people didn't get the opportunity to consider Quiddity's statement. So that's why it is left to the closing admin to do so. I agree with the closer's decision. You're the one defying it. But I think we've both gotten completely off the point... The Transhumanist 05:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No. You will see that I was clear about who agreed to what and when. — The Potato Hose 05:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

proposal

My goal is to create an outline (about 30K long) that lists all topics related to cuisines, that are not themselves cuisines. I've looked around, and there are a lot of topics about cuisine. The List of cuisines is already huge, and will be even more so once Global cuisines is merged into it. Here's my proposed plan: that a draft be created at Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of cuisine, and when it is large enough and sufficiently differentiated from List of cuisines, that it be moved to article space at that time. I look forward to your reply. The Transhumanist 05:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No. There is nothing in this 'outline' that is not contained at the List of cuisines or in Cuisine, or cannot be contained there. This 'outline' is some weird bastard love-child of a WP:CFORK and utterly redundant duplication. — The Potato Hose 05:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

It is correct that at this time, there is nothing in the outline that is not included in the other 2 articles. But there are a lot more topics that can be listed about the subject, that do not fit within the scope of either the item list "List of cuisines" or the prose article "Global cuisine". But because this is not plainly evident (yet), I'll compile the list offline. When it has grown sufficiently in scope, and is not "some utterly redundant" "weird bastard love-child of a content fork", I'll post it as new outline content. At that time I'll drop you a note so we can discuss it's further development/fate. Though it may be awhile (it's a big project, and my hands are full). I'll be in touch. The Transhumanist 05:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

You need to read a little more carefully. There is nothing in the 'outline' which is not appropriate, or already linked in, List of cuisines or Cuisine. — The Potato Hose 05:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, here's a challenge for you: find me two or more items which belong in the 'outline' but in neither of List of cuisines or Cuisine. — The Potato Hose 06:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOOD

{{tb|Matticusmadness}} I suspect that you won't be watching the pages of every member of WikiProject Food so this is needed. Regards. MM (What's up pup?) - ^{(Chocolate Cakes ◕‿◕)} 19:39, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I am indeed a slightly happier potato! I'll weigh in on the discussions at WT:FOOD in a bit. — The Potato Hose 21:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Your RfA comments

I suggest you might wish to calm down a bit. I've been making the same comments about RfA for a long time before you arrived on the scene. I also initiated the biggest Rfa reform project ever way back in 2011. Just because you disagreed with some things I may have suggested recently in good faith is no reason to be paranoid that all my comments are addressed at you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you might wish to stop projecting your feelings onto me. I'd further suggest that since I am the only person saying we need to gather data at the moment, when you refer dismissively to people who want to gather data, well, it doesn't take an idiot to figure it out.

As for the 'biggest Rfa reform project ever'... how'd that work out for you? How is doing the same thing over and over and over and over and getting the same lack of result over and over and over and over working out for you?

You're hostile to my approach, I suspect, because you're worried that it may have some success where you have failed. This is a normal human trait.

Now, since it is completely obvious that nobody has actually done any in-depth number crunching (except for looking at how many people are going for Rfa), and that it's equally obvious that finding out such numbers can only support your contention that RfA needs fixing, I invite you to do one of two things: articulate an actual reason why Data Is Bad, or leave me alone. Capisce? — The Potato Hose 16:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the particular discussion that Kudpung is talking about, but I've read your comments elsewhere. Your comments are usually not wrong, but they're usually not very nice, either. I know you're trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be, the same as all of us. It takes a collaborative spirit to do that. Other editors are not your enemies; we just have different opinions. Assume good faith and be polite when pointing out the mistakes of others or stating a difference of opinion. Ibadibam (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice and civil are different things. I'm not going to be very nice when I am trying to find solutions and all I get is "NO UR RONG I KNOES ALL" instead of actual reasoned argument. — The Potato Hose 18:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Potato Hose, I noticed your comment complaining about wanting to watch WP:RFA to watch for new requests but being disturbed by all the drama on the talk page. There's actually a solution to this that lets you watch the project page without watching the talk page. If you go to User:The Potato Hose/common.css and create the page by pasting the following code, it will hide the talk page from your watchlist.

.mw-changeslist-ns5-Requests_for_adminship { display: none; }

Hope that helps; let me know if you have any questions. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

That is... a really, really cool trick. ns5=namespace 5=wikipedia talk? would ns1 be article talk, then? (I'm assuming articles = ns0). — The Potato Hose 20:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think so. You catch on pretty fast for a newbie :-) You can find out more at Wikipedia:Hide Pages in Watchlist. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

There really isn't much correlation between 'how long I have had a named account' and 'how long I have been using and occasionally editing Wikipedia' :) That needs to be a much more publicized trick though, would come in handy for watching articles that are relatively stable but which have ugly talkpages. — The Potato Hose 20:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not hostile to your approach, Potato, and there is nothing in any of my comments that could be in any way considered as such. I was genuinely trying to help, and I of all people appreciate any attempts to get RfA reformed. That said, where my attempts for reform got me, is actually where it got the dozens of other members of the reform project too, and other users have since taken the lead and I was impressed by their efforts. You might wish to see where it got them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Quote: I invite you to do one of two things: articulate an actual reason why Data Is Bad, or leave me alone. Capisce? — The Potato Hose 04:46, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I invite you to show (with diffs), and without misrepresenting my comments, where I have said that data is bad. I invite you also to show where I have done anything else than offer help and some leads. You obviously haven't bothered to follow the link above or review the previous work that gone into RfA reform by various other teams. Anyway, as you are determined to continue to be hostile, as requested, I will leave you alone to seek your own supporters for your efforts to reform RfA, and deny some of the help you might have fostered. I sincerely wish you the very best in your endeavours and do hope you succeed, because reform is badly needed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:27, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Your comments have repeatedly shot me down without explaining any good reason why. Every single point I have raised to you about the usefulness of data-driven solutions, you have shot down without explaining any good reason why. Clearly you don't have any reasons, otherwise you would have articulated them. You seem to think I have to earn your support. I tried to by offering solutions. But I'm 'hostile' apparently because I don't take kindly to someone telling me I'm wrong (and that I haven't looked at the history; I have, and have not been able to find the data I am looking for, data you could have pointed to me if it existed, or told me it didn't exist, but nooooo you were much happier saying "NO UR RONG GO LOOK") without offering a single reason why. By all means, take your ball and go home. 'Deny' me help, indeed. Who the hell are you? — The Potato Hose 05:43, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For taking the initiative on the Jonathan Yip troll. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:28, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh hey wow! Thanks! I don't think I did anything special though. Hmm I'm going to prey on your niceness and say hey! How do you feel about joining WikiProject Food & Drink? — The Potato Hose 03:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Graham W Phillips may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
* [https://twitter.com/GWP_MG Twitter account[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

NASA categories of evidence

Hi there.

I had NASA categories of evidence listed as Portal:Human Health and Performance in Space/NASA categories of evidence because it is but a reference to many instances in articles I write (a means to an end to avoid numerous footnotes) and not meant to be a full fledged article. I will be reverting it, if that is okay with you.

Jssteil (talk) 20:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for shutting down the nonsense on the Help Desk. I've just figured out that the IPis the same person who has been harrassing me the last few days using a few socks. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries. I'm guessing that Crouton person is yet another troll. — The Potato Hose 20:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I think I'll close down now - being "sucker of the day" for all the trolls isn't my idea of a productive session on WP. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I suspect this could also be a troll attack because the disruptive editor hasn't edited the article in question.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:20, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, troll no. 2 did me a favor. I believe I have ADHD and needed a reminder to go back to the Signpost. Clicking on "back" might have given me a dead end.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I suspect Listen000t-gam (talk · contribs) and 2 users blocked yesterday for trolling on the help desk (Bringterugapartetoilette (talk · contribs) and Ordeerligg (talk · contribs), are also related to the above, in case anyone feels inclined to make an SPI for this. At the very least, all are guilty of trolling the helpdesk in the last 30 hr period. He iro 20:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I haven't read those yet. I usually wait until there have been responses so I can read them, but this one question was out of place.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Please take a look at User talk:Drmies#Spekkomissie is back - under a new name and the resultant SPI. Drmies has been very helpful the last day or two when I came under very severe attack by the troll, I'm sure she can tell you the details if you'd like to know. (I'm off to bed now) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

SPI filed — The Potato Hose 21:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

That was a red link. I hope you don't mind if I corrected it.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 14:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

NASA categories of evidence

Hi there.

Jssteil (talk) 20:53, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry no, that's not okay. Avoiding footnotes isn't a good thing at all (see here). Plus you can't use Wikipedia as a reference for anything (even if you wrote it yourself). — The Potato Hose 07:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

for giving Gounc123 some good advice. For a potato, you're a good egg. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm an eggtato! (Thanks, it really wasn't anything special. I'm sure someone else would have said similar if I hadn't gotten around to it first.) — The Potato Hose 08:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)