Jump to content

User talk:Hersfold/Archive 39 (March 2010)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


← Previous archive - Archive 39 (March 2010) - Next archive →

This page contains discussions dated during the month of March 2010 from User talk:Hersfold. Please direct all current discussions there. Thank you.


Rollback Rights

Asking for rollback rights, as of ow I need to keep 3 windows open- 1 to scan Recent changes, 2 to be able to get a warning template and three to get the page name for the template. Seems much easier with rollback, and no I will not abuse these rights. Thank You Mlpearc MESSAGE 20:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, now I have some studing to do. Again Thanx Mlpearc MESSAGE 03:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

User talk:Ashot Arzumanyan

Since his underlying IP is a proxy, and he seems to be trying to edit in good faith, would you object to me granting him an IP block exemption so that he can edit again? –MuZemike 19:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure, which is why I asked Alison. I'm talking about this with her on her talk page, if you want to join in. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Amount of indirection necessary for TI keys

Okay, so links to pages that contain the keys are bad. Can I link to a page that links to the keys on a different domain? Can I mention that the keys have been reposted without linking to it but providing enough information to easily Google the actual key? Can I link to the page that links to the keys but is within the same domain? Does it have to go through two domains to get to the keys?

Surely there's a way to make it easier for people to find the keys without violating an Office decision. Swap (talk) 21:01, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Attempts to circumvent the action the WMF office has taken will be met with the same response; reversion, suppression, and blocking. Mentioning that the keys have been reposted should be ok, however the article we have should not be part of a breadcrumb link trail to the keys - regardless of the length of the trail. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Well, "be bold", they say. Can I restore my edits without putting the domain name? I'll try to figure out another way to identify that person who reposted the keys; they did so kinda anonymously. Swap (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Be bold does not apply when there are legal issues involved. Please do not edit this article further. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:26, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Very well, can I ask a friend to do so for me, instructing them to be careful to not mention the domain name nor any information other than a vague indication that the keys are available again online, somewhere? Swap (talk) 21:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Your account has been blocked for block evasion. Good day. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Transwiki bot

Hi Hersfold, when you get a minute, the Transwiki Bot hasn't imported any words this year... Perhaps it is because I talked on its "talk page"? I just want to make sure I wasn't causing a bottleneck for the year and get a few in to do. Thank you Goldenrowley (talk) 17:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I need to make some updates to the bot and haven't had a chance to work on it yet this year. New messages aren't a huge problem, just a slight inconvenience when trying to run the bot. The issue you pointed out on the talk page is one thing I need to look into, though. Sorry for the delay; once it runs again you'll have more words than you'll know what to do with, we're getting a bit backlogged. :-/ Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

TI Keys Infobox

Hello, Hersfold! You posted on my talk page about an edit of mine you reverted, and I have brought the discussion into the article's talk page here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Texas_Instruments_signing_key_controversy#Office_action_infobox

If you care to, please chime in on this discussion! Thanks, Miserlou (talk) 02:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

Protection of Talk:Murder of James Bulger

Hi Hersfold. I notice that you'd semi protected Talk:Murder of James Bulger. At the moment, both article and talk page are semi protected, which I'm not sure is the best scenario. There's been (AFAICT) 3 uses of oversight (2 on the article, 1 on the talk page) so far. Although it's not ideal that both are protected, adhering to WP:BLP is more important. If the talk page stays protected then we need to provide unconfirmed users with somewhere they can discuss the article. I just wondered what your thoughts were for having both article and talk page protected – and thought I should contact you before unprotecting. matt (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

The talk page (as well as the article) were semi-protected to prevent further need to suppress edits; each of those usages of oversight you noticed were in response to the same information, a result of the recent events mentioned on the article. As much as I understand and agree with your concerns, I'd prefer the protection remain up for at least a week more to avoid the information being reposted again, for both BLP and legal reasons. It's possible we could set up an "unprotected talk page" like several admins have on their user talk pages, and either link or transclude it to the main talk page, but that's subject to the same problem, so we may as well just unprotect then. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Commons:User:HersfoldOTRSBot

Is the bot ever going to start up again? I miss it :( Stifle (talk) 14:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll send it off tonight or tomorrow night; there's an update I need to make, but it's not too critical. Thanks for the reminder. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

I do alot of work in my sand boxes, building and fine tunning wikitables, moving and adjusting military badges and so on. Sometimes I get something soo messed up It's easier to start over. I guess I have 2 questions in the situation I just decsribed, is it ok for me to "rollback" my oun edits in my user space ? the second question would be of the same nature but on main article area the only differance would be if I were to rollback a number of edits in a main article area, I would have to correct them quickly after the rollback. And not rollback good faith edits .Is this a ok way to view the tool ? Mlpearc MESSAGE 00:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

From a talk page stalker:
Yes, you can rollback your own edits, although a way to avoid that is to use the "preview" button (I use that almost every edit). You can also rollback your accidental rollbacks any time. Not reverting good faith edits is correct; you use the "undo" button for that. Hope this helps (and sorry for invading your talk page, Hersfold). Regards, Airplaneman talk 01:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Hersfold Thanks for the free rent, and thaks you User:Airplaneman for your answer Mlpearc MESSAGE 01:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Your OTRS Bot needs some help....

... recognizing redirections ;) See this edit it did. The talkpage of my bot redirects onto my talkpage.... I guess appending that chunk of notes after the redirect ain't a good thing to do - I'd opt for your bot to follow redirects. Just a suggestion though. --Guandalug (talk) 22:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a bug I'm aware of, but haven't had the chance to fix it yet. Fortunately that's not terribly common, so the majority of the messages get through. If it's proving to be a major problem for your bot, the bot does allow people to opt out of getting notices. Either way, I do hope to have this fixed fairly soon. Thanks for the note. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry. The bot usually doesn't work on commons except for one task that has nothing to do with image tagging. In fact, it wasn't supposed to tag those images either ( I was using my own account and the bot script for tagging those images, but some cronjob that run at a bad time switched the login session back to the bot account). Just an idea for a future bugfix. ;) --Guandalug (talk) 23:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

A Nobody

You may want to notice User:A Nobody/Farewell, without revealing someone else's health issues I think that the timing of the Arb case is at least, is poor. -- Banjeboi 23:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm aware of it, thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry!

Many, many, MANY apologies, of course. Should I have immediately reverted my edit and put a link to it in my statement along with phony remorse? I'm really new to the whole Arbcom thing, excuse me if I haven't quite gotten the hang of it yet. Trusilver 03:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Or you could simply stop digging your hole deeper. I know, Sandstein's conduct here hasn't been perfect either, hence my and Carcharoth's responses to him, and the other comments from Arbs before his second statement. That doesn't excuse you acting like a dick, though. Drop the attitude and move on. I, at least, and I believe several other arbs as well, would be willing to consider a request to grant the tools back in a few months, but not if you keep acting like this. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:47, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Notification

As you have commented on the issue previously (as evidenced at this page), this is to notify you that I've made a proposal here to formally community ban Mythdon and restrict the number of appeals he is entitled to. Ncmvocalist (talk) 18:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your rousing vote of support. Steve Smith (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

He he. I was going off the assumption of the net-four thing, so me voting at that point probably didn't make much difference. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nrswanson/Archive

I have written to Amorymeltzer about the Nrswanson case, but I see he is on holiday. Perhaps I can ask you about this? IMO he shouldn't have been allowed to assume a new (and to most users unknown) name as 4meter4, while his principal identity as the sockmaster/copyright violator Nrswanson remains blocked. How can I register my opinion on this, ideally without a lot of drama? (Note that I am not objecting to his unblocking as such.) --Kleinzach 00:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't particularly care one way or another; the accounts are clearly linked through that SPI, and Amory's reasoning for the decision is sound. If you do have a concern about it, then your best bet would probably be to talk with Amory when he gets back as the closing clerk. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Telephone (song)

R u online Hersfold? If so can you come to the above article and take a look at the multiple infobox images? I nominated one for deletion as it failed wP:NFCC#8 for me. --Legolas (talk2me) 07:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If you nominated it for deletion, then the discussion you started will figure out what to do. Please don't send messages like this to users, it's canvassing. On a side note, if you want to know if I'm online or not, look at my contributions; I hadn't edited for three hours when you left this note. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dalejenkins

What about the two listed suspected socks there? You didn't comment on those. –MuZemike 19:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI

I just sent the permissions for( File:Don 1.jpg )to Commons, Thanks Mlpearc MESSAGE 18:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry it was your bot that left me a message, carry on l8r Mlpearc MESSAGE 19:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Иван Богданов

Hi Hersfold, I've tentatively closed that SPI, but would feel slightly better if you could revisit and comment on the possible technical explanation provided by a Serbian Checkuser. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment there, and the extremely useful tip you left as well. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Quite welcome! Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ibby356 / Austraki

A discussion which involves you may be seen at User_talk:Kralizec!#Ibby356_.2F_Austraki. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:17, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

List of English words of French origin

I noticed this article needs to be transfered to Wikitionary. However, considering the large list of words, I don't think anyone can do it in one sitting. If I add some of these to Wikitionary, can I delete them from the page as I go? Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 15:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

What's needed is the entire history of that page needs to be imported; it's not just copy/pasting over and deleting the article here (actually, the article here could probably remain here). If you're an admin on Wiktionary, I can show you how to do this; otherwise, it's best if you leave it be for now. Thanks for the offer, though. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, how would the history be moved? It seems to me that article is best fit into wikitionary by modifying each page, not by moving the whole article. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 16:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
You would be right, however to use this content we have to establish an attribution path to keep to the terms of Wikipedia and Wiktionary's licenses. This attribution path is essentially the page history. This can be copied over using the import tool (Special:Import) by an administrator on Wiktionary. This tool is what my bot uses, but unfortunately the interface it has to use is extremely twitchy, and trying to import a page with a long history causes the bot to crash; even when this is done manually, it's likely to botch the job the first couple times. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:11, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Second Account Help

I would like to open my wife an account, it would be two separate accounts using common IP's. I've been searching around for the do's and don'ts. I don't want to miss anything. Can you point me to the important issues, so this is done the correct way ? Thank you. Just so you know I choose you to contact because I saw your name on a Check User list, and we know each other. Mlpearc MESSAGE 17:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Once you create the account, please send me an email with the name of your wife's account. I'll make sure it's in the Arbitration Committee's records should there be any problems in the future. This shouldn't be too much of a problem (as I'm sure you can guess, there are a good number of active users whose significant others also edit), the main thing is to just be aware that your edits will likely seem somewhat similar, and to avoid the appearance of meatpuppetry as a result. If one of you comments on a discussion, it would probably be best for the other to avoid that discussion unless they have something significantly different to bring up (or you have opposite viewpoints on the matter). Thanks for letting me know, and tell her welcome to the project from me. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
And received. Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hersfold/Archive_39_(March_2010)&oldid=1141793910"