User talk:Gavia immer/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

WP;-)

On 23-Sept, you added a {{rfd}} tag to WP;-). However, you never listed this redirect at WP:RFD. If you still wish to nominate this redirect for deletion, please complete your nomination. The instructions are listed at WP:RFD. If you don't list it or remove the tag within a reasonable time, I'll assume you don't wish to proceed and remove the tag. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 17:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

A comment on your vote

Hi Gavia immer - I made a comment on one of RFD votes here regarding the 'Redirect pages to South African farm attacks'. Would you please read my comment and consider my request. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you. Cheers, Jason Lionchow - Talk 20:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the note on Template:Uncyclopedia, missed the tab, fixed it now. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Unsigned

With reference to this all the lines are made by me only. So I have modified your edit to make sure that there is no confusion  Doctor Bruno  21:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

That's fine; I just saw it as two different edits, and I didn't connect your username with your sig. My apologies for breaking up your edit. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 18:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

BUITMS (BUITMS)

D'oh! That's what happens when you wiki for too long. Thanks for catching that! —Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

re: your comment on Template:TOC-right on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion

What other redirects are there?100110100 22:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I demand a answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!100110100 22:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Please be CIVIL; don't make demands. You can easily find any number of redirects in template space by clicking on Special:Whatlinkshere from a template page (you can also supply an argument, like Special:Whatlinkshere/Main_Page. I didn't give you a list because the list is huge (because there's nothing wrong with template redirects). I also didn't feel inclined to give you an answer because you weren't being very polite; if you want to talk further, I would suggest you restrain your urge to be pushy. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 14:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it. If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Yasuo Takei Eye of Palpatine Politics of Réunion Pamela Dean Fuji Heavy Industries Hiroyuki Takei Will Shetterly Kempul Lynn Abbey OGLE-TR-122b Detroit Turbos Ralph Macchio (comics) Elizabeth Kostova Auguste Laurent André Kuipers Olga Kosakiewicz Emma Bull Romanian Wikipedia Immunity (legal)

Cleanup National Kidney Foundation Singapore Reference Resource Page Perpetual war Buck-Tick Merge Wikia Implicit function theorem Millennium Stadium Add Sources Vissarion Click-to-donate site Millennium Falcon Wikify Astronomical object Existentialist feminism The Cockroach Expand Spanish East Indies Gall Force Positivism

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

What did you mean?

re: Tfd on W2c: Delete. I have yet to see a member of the project describe, anywhere, why we need or should want these sort of templates on enwiki. Gavia immer 17:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

-- Sorry, don't follow the question.
A) Are you referring to things like Template:Commonscat1A(edit talk links history) which with it's brothers populates: 1, & 2, it's complimentary templates on the sister projects, which populate similar categories, or the links allowing people to locate maps, find pictures for articles and the like?
  B) Or Template sharing using {{Interwikitmp-grp}}, which is for the under staffed other sister projects AND our productivity when we happen to go foreign,
  C) or 'W2c' which is primarily used in both category text such as is very convienient to only type out and proof one version of, and get that right so it can be pasted in categories here and on the commons?
  D) Or the overly complicated sisterlinks templates (see long list Interwiki utility templates which use w2c (See example in: Music) and are the current Meta interlinqual preferred templates for tagging categories... only hardly used as are so combersome and prone to breakage.
  Short answer, links are a good thing per WP:Btw, but making it easier to navigate to other Foundation sister projects just helps --unless you are really good at typing fast and can recall long url's-- most of us can't, and our customer/readers won't know it's there unless a link is given. 'A' and 'D' are two different approaches that will hopefully be supplanted some day by a system software change, that links via the interwiki's on a page and the user's browser 'lanugage preference' to the same article on their home space and same category on their home wikipedia, from the commons. The alternative possibility is Commonscat and Wikipediacat tags on the commons are used as a trigger in page processing like (Magic words, which are then used to modify the links into the vistor's language's links and pages.
  From each of those non-English language sister's, their will have to be some kind of tagging equivilent to Commonscat1A providing the same kind of Magic word in the page-cache-processing and the whole 'SYSTEM' will need an auxillary database that maps interwiki's by our category systems (I'm including the commons's too, since it's English, and categories there differ a lot in some cases) and by English language article interwiki's back to the coresponding pages in the viewers home language. Those three places and their interwiki's are the key 'COMMON' points, three legs of a stool as it were, between the whole Wikimedia Foundation scope of projects... excluding Media-wiki, which is another animal entirely... it just makes the software changes possible.
  So is it important for us here on en.wikipedia to get to the commons... yeah, much of the time... Is it good to get back and join the two catgory systems so that the system software can map and populate that database... yeah. Is it nice to have clear text on both sister's pages, especially such as would link to a gallery collection related to a category here or there? Yeah... some of us like pretty pictures. Check out Flowers for example, or the Atlas project on the commons.
  So is w2c important? The better question to me is why the heck would anyone in their right mind want to take away a tool which is doing a valuable job when they know {{I0}A) not having that tool will cost many man-hours later to others for it's lack.
That someone will have to implement this decision, and will in all probability find there is no easy fix... there is no abbreviation like {W:, B:, Q, ... S:, M, V:} which work on Mediawiki sites... go check. Wikispecies has the same issue... for the same reasons apparently, it's also hosted by Mediawiki Commons server.
  I forgot Template sharing... which is aimed at providing a minimal set of templates to sites populated mainly by specialists (biologists, lexicography specialists, librarians, etc.), not technically good with computerese, but who still have the same adminsistrative needs as are served here--and what techies they do attract, get drafted into sys-ops duties and don't have time for writing templates. {{interwikitmp-grp}} is a link system that will handle the execeptions (That name is 'busy' and does something different there), The unwanted (The sister's icon will be off, and no link displayed), the Name variant (remapped common name), and of course dead on matches. WP:TSP is also providing a common category scheme and so the links from the templates connect to ours, or to the categories, and back to their catgories. If something won't do the task, part of TSP is to write up and catalog what we already have--others are already screening templates, adding usage to W:DPP, and in general, it all plays together.
  Hope that covers it for your question... it's all important one way and another. Usually to other people, so if you're the selfish uncaring type, you probably don't see any value in such things. If not, perhaps you can pitch in and help. One little help-- would be to keep this template around -- it's hard to replace without using inline {{#if:{{SITENAME}}... }}, and far smarter to have that test in one shared template. No one's asking YOU to use it, or remember it's name. But try {{w}} here, and realize all the other sister's 'W' says [[W:{{{1}}}}]] or usually [[W:{{{1}}}}|{{{1}}}]] just like {{tl}} just says [[Template:{{{1}}}]] . W2c is more of the same Smart thing. Where would we be with out it? Care to list the NEXT 5,000? // FrankB 03:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

re: The short answer to "What did [I] mean" is that, prior to your talk page post, which was in fact quite informative, I hadn't seen a good explanation, anywhere, of what purpose these templates had; the only previous explanations I've seen tended to be of the form "we will be doing X", which isn't one. So, thank you for taking your time to write up a better explanation. Bear in mind, I may or may not support similar templates in the future - it seems to me that some of this is better suited to Commons or Meta, and doesn't need to be here - but I consider myself better educated by your comments, especially given that I hadn't previously understood the intent to replace some even worse templates with slightly simpler ones.

At the same time, I hope you understand that a clear, explicit statement of what problems you are trying to solve, and how your work proposes to solve them, will go a long way toward helping people see your point of view. It can sometimes be difficult to step away from your work and see it from other people's point of view, but in a cooperative project like Wikipedia, it's essential. In this case, I'd suggest posting a version of your talk message to me somewhere in the main page for your project, so that people can get a good grasp of what you're trying to do. Thanks again for the message (and for taking the time to read this one). Gavia immer 17:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  

You're quite welcome, and something along those lines is certainly needed soon--like two or three weeks ago! Also quite right about the 'problem statement', which mostly was by emails, and at first there were so many unknowns that it required a test effort with lots of links testing to see where there were naming collisions.Then I was away, then back but needed time to refamiliarize myself into the culture, and then the Tfd on iterwikitmp-grp hit. Looking at the ugly clumsy version of interwikitmp-grp is most informative. It's really come a long way in a few weeks. I've been going non-stop since a little before it survived, and before and during the start of that I was mentoring/advocating.
  

Then I've been working on a crippled computer -- three (four?) days ago I destabilized my windows, and was really handicapped as I had and have many browsers going at once, and hadn't been able to back out on enough to reboot (Still working on that! <g> Editing pages on seven sisters can be a little bit challanging! By some miracle of God's grace, I managed to 'Warm Start' my windows again, quite by accident last evening! I'd been running using the task manager sans a task bar, email would shut itself down whenever I sent anything out and repeatedly need restarted with password, etcetera, etc. (Fun Huh!) and then I accidently grabbed the 'startup' folder shortcut I keep in my start menu in case I want to add something or take it out instead of the one for the start menu itself --the task manager instead of opening the folder executed it... miraculously It seems) restarted windows, and so far as I can tell in the twelve hours since... I didn't loose anything! Whew!!!!!!!! <BSEG>
  

It so happens that I've every intent of getting the WP:TSP project over to Meta as soon as I can get out of a draft write up and outline what I propose in categories and procedures. Sister's each have their own culture as you must be aware from your comments about ours here. Some use a lot of templates, some don't know templates at all, and some 'Leadership' doesn't want to rock the boat (because they're chronically short handed) by even importing something as basic as Lts! <head shaking vigourously! + A wry grin and one sheesh!>
  

I'm working steadily with a couple of other guys and have an email resource group and cheering section, but while they're surveying and recatting templates and the cheering section is doing whatever they do, I'm the only one working on finalizing the system logic and interconnections as well as porting and integrating templates on far wiki's. I just finished writing a template to test multiple site names so I can bypass the multitude of redlinks in usage pages with a lot of see also's or comparisons (Lts/Doc, cl, ccl, cat, etc.) that are up and running (feedback from abroad!). The categories stuff was on hold all last fall as I was very away in real life, but lately the liked pages have been growing without my adding many, so that's good; and that really inspired the template linking effort--little did I know what I was biting off! So thanks for the kind words, I appreciate the note very much. Warm regards // FrankB 18:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Gays

Surely every article with this link means gay people in the plural? What else could "gays" mean? Proud dyke 17:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It could mean anything listed at Gays (disambiguation) - admittedly, most of the links there are related to "gay" in the sense of "homosexual", but not all are. In most cases, it's fine and even encouraged to redirect plural forms to the singular, but in this case, there has been some disputation (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006_October_8#Gays_.E2.86.92_Gays.2C_Illinois and the history of the redirect), so it's best if it stays targeted to the disambiguation link. Gavia immer 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

CamelCase redirects

Please don't tag the camel case (ie, ones with InternalCapitals) redirects for speedy deletion. They are some of the oldest pages on Wikipedia and are kept for historical reasons. I tried deleting one once and got (politely) chewed out by a more senior admin. Thanks, NawlinWiki 15:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I hear you. I was probably tagging too fast in any case (e.g., not looking), so I'll slow down now. Gavia immer 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Firearms

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF 17:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Xenon, manga

Hi, thanks for letting me know that you want to work on the article. You could have removed the prod template to work on the article there only. However, there was nothing significant in the article to create a userspace page for it, so I am pasting the content here only. Except for a vandalism, it contained "Xenon is the name of a manga comic book created by Kanzaki". Regards, --soum (0_o) 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that's all I needed to know. Gavia immer (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Drive for the Firearms Wikiproject

Hello Gavia immer. The Firearms Wikiproject is having an infobox drive. The purpose of this is to ensure that most (if not all) of the articles within our scope have the relevant infoboxes. The start date will be May 28^th. If you choose to participate, go to our project page and pick an article under the To-do list's Infobox section or look for firearm articles that need an infobox. Before you start editing an article, please cross it out on the list so that we don't have editor's work clashing. The drive will last for five days. If you are interested, please RSVP to LWF. Thank you, the Firearms Wikiproject. --Seed 2.0 09:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Redirects to Kven people

Hi and thanks for helping with the redirects to Kven people. I think you made a small mistake that I have asked to be corrected by the administrator that deleted the redirectes: User_talk:John_Reaves#RFD_Redirects_to_Kven_people. Sorry for all the trouble, and again thank you for the help. Labongo 10:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Template header deletion

My apologies - I overlooked the capital F / lowercase f difference. Bencherlite 13:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem, that's why it's a wiki. That particular nomination has been all over the map, unfortunately (I had to move it once before), and it is confusing (almost the same content, but not quite); I just want to make sure it gets closed properly. Thanks for contacting me though; now I know we're on the same page. -- Gavia immer (talk) 14:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

EndUN Userbox

Hi, you recently participated in the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DieWeisseRose/Userboxes/EndUN discussion. I have reluctantly submitted the closing statement by User:Tony Sidaway for deletion review. Please consider taking a look at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_1#User:DieWeisseRose.2FUserboxes.2FEndUN. Thanks. --DieWeisseRose 02:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Volume Three move?

Just curious why you moved Volume Three to Volume Three (album)? There was no collision with another article, so no disambiguation was necessary. According to your edit summary, it was a "confusingly generic title". I find myself confused by your confusion - it's simply the name of the issue in question. I'm not sure why that would be confusing. Please do not move the rest of the Volume magazine articles for the same reason. — Wwagner 23:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The "confusingly generic" point could be explained better, I suppose — there's only so much space in an edit summary. It isn't really a question of whether there is a collision with other names (if we take that tack, there are probably a huge number of collisions: books, albums, videos, etc. with "volume three" in the title). It's a question of whether we want generic concepts such as "Volume N" to point anywhere at all. Remember the principle of least astonishment: if a random Wikipedia user searches on "Volume Three", are they likely to expect being directed to information on one issue of an audio magazine? Most likely, they are not. Consequently, I would prefer moving such generic titles to something more informative (Volume Three (album) was my test case, to see if anyone objected to it; since you did, I'll be glad to discuss it with you and not move forward as of yet) and deleting the generic redirects since I feel they don't add much and can detract from navigation. Other possibilities include disambiguation (this would be much larger and more painful than you probably think it would be) or redirecting to an article on the generic concept of volumes — if we have one of these, it's well hidden, but see Chapter (books) for an example of what's wanted if we do this.

For the record, thanks for not just doing a knee-jerk revert of the move. I know that page moves are always sensitive, which is why I did a test case like this. Hopefully, we get good results from it, one way or the other. -- Gavia immer (talk) 14:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, well, at least we're all being reasonable here. :) The policy which I usually apply actually comes from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, in the naming section: Do not pre-emptively disambiguate! If there's no collision, there's no reason to disambiguate. If there's a cause for it later, then article(s) can be moved and whatnot. I did have to disambig Volume One and Volume Two, because there were collisions (with two other albums, for an interesting bit of synchronicity).

WRT to principle of least astonishment, if there was more than one article which should be named Volume Three, then I'd certainly be astonished if there were not some sort of {{otheruses}}-style tag at the top. If there are no other uses of the term, then I'd be astonished to be see that there was a redirect. In these cases, there needn't be any redirects; they just plain aren't necessary. Which brings to mind that I need to add some sort of otheruses blurb for the Volume Ones and Volume Twos. — Wwagner 00:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Umpteen

I'm wondering what other "central discussion" things you have on your watchlist? >Radiant< 15:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

"Umpteen" was a rhetorical exaggeration because I really couldn't remember exactly how many it was. You seem to understand that this is bad in and of itself, so if you have any suggestions for conveying it to the people duplicating this stuff in multiple places, I'd love to back you up. Amongst the items you haven't mentioned in the present debate, I have Wikipedia:Goings-on (which typically completely overlaps with other material, but not neatly; it's mostly but not entirely redundant to the Wikipedia:Community portal]]), Wikipedia:Announcements (which says in its header that it shouldn't contain community announcements, but nonetheless sometimes randomly does) and Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions, which has evolved into a sort of hodgepodge of external news and internal notices. I am actually in the process of looking for any other similar pages that may be getting used but not publicized; do you want me to send you a list if I find them? — Gavia immer (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes please. I am very much in the habit of getting rid of confusing redundant pages. >Radiant< 16:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Village pump (news). >Radiant< 16:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• And also also, check out the reworked WP:RFC page and the bot that populates the subpages from {{RFCbio}} and related templates. Best of both worlds :) >Radiant< 08:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah, thanks for doing the legwork to get this started. Plenty of times, it just takes someone being willing to sweep the floor rather than complain about the dust (so to speak) in order to make improvements like this. Side note: I haven't found any further material in the vein discussed above; anything else is sufficiently hidden that it is almost certainly defunct. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Typo fix

Thanks... I can't type to save my life and I forgot to check that.--Isotope23 ^talk 13:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I make the same mistake all the time, so I'm tragically familiar with the most likely typing error in such links. I'm just glad to have evidence that I'm not the only bad typist out there :) — Gavia immer (talk) 13:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Plopper

The image of Plopper as Harry Potter is a better representation, as this is the state he was in when Homer formally addressed him as "Harry Plopper". -- SilvaStorm

Homer renamed him to Harry Plopper hence the picture! Leave it be. -- SilvaStorm

Date box on RfD archive pages

He he. It seems that with the same intentions we have both found the same problem. I also could not find this template, so I just made it using the example at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log. However, it would be best if we were to collaborate on creating one, and then add it to {{Rfd starter}} as you said. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 16:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Eep :) I doubt that this just sprung fully formed from the head of Zeus, but if we can't find it, we can't find it. I'd like to make certain that we get the GFDL right if it's at all possible. More to the point, there's a bit of a funky problem with the transclusion of <noinclude> tags; I know from experience that I'm quite capable of screwing that up, so I was hoping to see the source of the original if it exists anywhere. I'll spend a little time today sandboxing it to see how well I can get it to work, and then we can see how to go from there. — Gavia immer (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I'm working on the same thing right now. --- RockMFR 17:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I see you've pretty much got it, even. Just proves that actually doing stuff is worth more than talking about it ... — Gavia immer (talk) 19:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh btw, I found the origins of this - check the history at Template:Afd log. --- RockMFR 16:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Have you found a solution to the problem? - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 17:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Good to know that we found the source. Frankly, I was at the point where it just bothered me that I couldn't find it, aside from the practical uses of finding it. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Idiot boy

It wasn't a personal attack. I was just redirecting it to mental retardation because that's what the term means, even though it's derogatory. Retard is also a redirect to mental retardation.--Avant Guard 17:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

MFD Results

A MFD you recently participated in, arguing to keep the content has been closed with a non-standard closure, requiring additional action to maintain the content. Please review my closing and participate with the required move action if you desire. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOBY

Fair enough. But please amend to Wikipedia:MOBY (not Moby). You'll also need to adjust the MfD tag at the top of the essay, or move the MfD, so the tag's no longer pointing to a redlink. Cheers, --Dweller 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Got it. (And working on the tag). — Gavia immer (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, dude. --Dweller 14:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. (And, for the record, I have no issue with that page apart from its original location). — Gavia immer (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If it's for the record, you'd probably better mention it at the MfD. Not sure the closing admin would spot it here. --Dweller 20:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

My edit

On User talk:Bobo192, Gavia immer said:
Your most recent edit is good; thanks for making it.

There are of course two sides to the debate. This is the first time people have been encouraged to exercise their wish to remove themselves from the list - but on the same side there are people who have clearly wished for this to be the case for a long time - people who have left, as equally as people who are exercising a similar wish to simply not care - and so forth. I had a friend describe it as a "urination contest", but really the page itself is just a list of words and numbers which is as easy to update as the software allows it to be.

Thank you for your compliments. Bobo. 21:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Your Username/Userboxes/Mobile

Thanks for correcting my mistake, I appreciate it. That userbox was one of my first "experiments". Altairisfar 18:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.