Jump to content

User talk:Achowat/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16→Archive 18

Talkback

Hello, Achowat. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy/Coordinator selection.
Message added 16:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 16:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

MfD comment

Hi, Achowat. Regarding my comment at the recent MfD - I wanted to quickly clarify since the discussion has been closed. I meant: anti-vandalism efforts in one place, and reviewing efforts in another. So, centralized individually. Sorry for the confusion. NTox · talk 17:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, all is well. That makes, y'know, the most sence sense. Achowat (talk) 17:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

They Might Be Giants

I am trying to edit per this request in the pic from the TMBG Facebook Page, as the photographer released the photo under Creative Commons. I submitted the photo to Wiki using the Creative Commons path. (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150826690932395&set=a.380598937394.152324.10655752394&type=1&theater) Shoberpants (talk) 18:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any sort of real evidence that the photographer released it under Creative Commons? Achowat (talk) 18:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
The band posted it as Creative Commons per this link. I assume I need more evidence then? Shoberpants (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I actually can't check that link while I'm at work. I can check it immediately upon my return home, at which point I will gladly respond to your concerns. Achowat (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, as it's explained in the Facebook comments, we need an actual attribution, not just the TMBG Facebook Page saying there's CC attribution. Achowat (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Ribbons

Here is one of the ribbons you were looking for to eliminate the placeholders: File:Vandal Whacking Stick Ribbon.png. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 18:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

You are my hero. Achowat (talk) 02:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

What failed ideas do you want to keep on this page? It's blank! Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The very idea that someone tried to create a British-only MOS is worth noting. Achowat (talk) 11:36, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit Undo

Can you please offer an explanation as to why you deleted my entry regarding Kevin Francis Delaney? Jkacmarynski (talk) 17:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Be happy to! The general policy is that people included in lists of people who have met certain requirements (List of Eagle Scouts, List of Jewish-American veterans, List of people, etc) is if the person in question is notable enough for inclusion in the encyclopedia. WP:LISTPEOPLE is our Manual of Style's reference point in these circumstances. If there's any other way I can help you, just let me know. Achowat (talk) 01:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
In my view People are made notable by what they have achieved or planning to do. Receiving such an award would make the receiver notable to appear on the list even if they would not have their own stand alone article since they do not meet the general notability guidelines. The same policy at WP:LISTPEOPLE states;

The person's membership in the list's group is established by reliable sources

The source that had been provided to me appears to be a reliable source and we should include the entry on the list. -- ₫ӓ₩₳ Talk to Me. Email Me. 17:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I understand that you feel that way. However, both standards listed in WP:LISTPEOPLE must be met. The person must meet Wikipedia's notibility requirements and have they membership established by reliable sources. Just the one, unfortunately, won't do. Achowat (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

Ribbons

Hello, Achowat. You have new messages at NielsenGW's talk page.
Message added 17:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ribbon Reward

The Original Barnstar
For the creation of two outstanding new ribbons, this award is hereby granted to Achowat! Cheers! NielsenGW (talk) 17:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Back so soon?

Just couldn't stay away? :)

Theopolisme TALK 18:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I did what I wanted to do, I travelled, saw the world, built Portal:New Englnad. Now I'm back. Achowat (talk) 18:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Yep, building Redlinks does take a while. JK, Welcome! Theopolisme TALK 18:28, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Typos, my good boy. Portal:New England. Achowat (talk) 18:32, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
As I suspected. Theopolisme TALK 18:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I think this new Jayemd character is going to need help, and a deft hand...If he wants to enroll, I want him. Achowat (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I figured you'd say that. ;) /// Sure, feel free. Consider this your birthday present (whenever that is). Theopolisme TALK 18:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I think my WikiBirthday is coming up. I registered on 23 November 2011 but I can point to IP edit as my first contribution on 8 October 2010.
Very nice, very nice. xD /// I don't know when I should consider my WikiBirthday... I did some dynamic IP stuff back in '09-10, but registered in March 2011... Hrm. Theopolisme TALK 18:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Ping

Hi, you have new messages at my talk page! benzband (talk) 18:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

RB

Thanks for pointing that out. I've been here for years and an admin for quite a while and I never knew that;) Not that I would ever want to roll myself back... --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I use it from time to time, especially working with templates. Sort of an "Oh shit! That's way, way worse than it was before" kind of a thing. But no worries. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

Rewards

The Barnstar of Diligence
For the addition of five wonderful ribbons, I award you this Barnstar of Diligence. Well done! NielsenGW (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For continued effort in adding eight new ribbons to the listings, I award you this barnstar! NielsenGW (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

AND FINALLY:

The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
For going all out and adding twelve new ribbons to the Wiki, I am pleased to award you this ultimate designation. NielsenGW (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Keep up the good work! NielsenGW (talk) 12:00, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

List of current UFC fighters

Hey just a heads up, as of UFC on Fox 4 (the most recent one) the UFC is no longer representing English fighters with the Union Jack, they have switched to the English national flag. This never made much sense anyway as they only represented English fighters with the Union Jack and not British fighters in general, but as they have corrected it the English flag will be used going forward. Thaddeus Venture (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:MOSFLAG: "In general, if a flag is felt to be necessary, it should be that of the sovereign state not of a subnational entity, even if that entity is sometimes considered a 'nation' or 'country' in its own right". It's about consistency and verifiability, and shouldn't be ignored withut cause. What Fox 4 does is wholly irrelevant to our Manual of Style, as they have their own standards. Achowat (talk) 19:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
In this case wouldn't verifiability be in reference to what is actually verifiable from the source. The flags in this article are in reference to the flags these athletes perform under when they compete professionally, not necessarily an exact representation of nationality. All of this can be referenced to UFC broadcasts and is not done without cause, but rather to provide a single, consistent source for athlete representation within the UFC organization. I hope that clarifies this situation as I realize it is non normative, but it is verifiable and consistent. As you quote "In general" this is not a general instance, but a very specific set of circumstances that surround this specific case of formatting. Thaddeus Venture (talk) 22:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Also from mosflag sports section: "Where flags are used in a table, it should clearly indicate that they correspond to representative nationality, not legal nationality, if any confusion might arise." and "Subnational flags (e.g., England rather than UK) are traditionally used in some sports, and should not be changed to the national flag without consensus." both these actions have been followed for this article.Thaddeus Venture (talk) 23:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll resort to you, since I don't know, but UFC is not a sport where we're talking of "representative nationality",so I'm not sure that applies. No UFCer UFCs for the England National UFC Team, for instance. Achowat (talk) 00:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Actually, the UFC puts a great deal of weight on the representative nationality of its fighters. The upcoming season of the ultimate fighter will be entirely English fighters against Australian fighters, and a recent season was made entirely of Brazilian fighters. They have entire fight cards featuring Americans vs. Canadians and Americans vs. Brazilians. They also display fighters with their representative flag before every fight, so it could be said that each fighter is a national representative unto themselves. It's essentially a more ethnocentric version of what boxing, golf, and tennis all do. This is a very specific case I realize, but thank you for taking the time to go over it. Thaddeus Venture (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll revert to your expertise, since I have none of my own. Just as long as you've reviewed the MOS regarding sub-national flags, then all is well. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 03:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

The discussion at Talk:Coat of arms of the Holy See#Dispute might interest you. Esoglou (talk) 09:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Would you please intervene in this discussion and tell me whether I am wrong in distinguishing a coat of arms from an emblem. Esoglou (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


P:NEWENG

(Spot the new shortcut...!) You may find User:Bencherlite/New England DYKs useful in finding interesting DYK hooks for the portal. As for the complexity of the Maths portal coding... well, that's mathematicians for you! I used something much simpler at Portal:Law of England and Wales/Did you know, as you'll see - 10 subpages of 5 DYKs, selected using the random portal component used to generate the other sections of the portal. That, I think, would be enough to keep people happy (10 was also a magic number for a reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Maryland Roads, anyway). Hope this helps. BencherliteTalk 19:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, top-drawer on that shortcut! Also, that's what I get for chosing "Math" when it comes to "easiest ways to randomize something". Do you have any advice for which 38 articles would be best as DYKs? I imagine we'd want one with a free-use image per set-of-5, but are there any other pitfalls I should look to avoid? Achowat (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Not particularly - look for interesting ones (well, most of them will be interesting to someone, I suspect, so that's a low bar) and avoid too many similar ones in the same set e.g. five hurricanes. Images not essential in my personal view but if you can find one per set, fantastic. Watch for facts that may now be dated (e.g. "... that John Doe will be running for the Vermont state legislature at the upcoming 2006 election?") - copyedit as necessary, I suggest. Reviewing the rest of the portal now, you'll be pleased to hear... BencherliteTalk 19:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Quite, you're being wonderfully helpful. Achowat (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
No problem. Review finished (I think...). Not much to concern me, just details. If you want to move that DYK list into portal space or your userspace, feel free - it's for your benefit, not mine, after all. BencherliteTalk 20:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I went ahead and moved it, but it won't be necessary much longer, given that I'll be done with the 10 DYKs by the end of the hour. (Could always make more, though). Achowat (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

FPoC usually works (and in my view, ought always to work) on the basis that more than one support is required, as is required at FAC and FLC, although exceptionally Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Michigan Highways was promoted with just one support for some reason. The more reviewers that you can recruit, therefore, the better. You may note from the page history at FPoC that nominations tend to linger longer than nominations at FAC/FLC, so don't be surprised if your nomination is on the page for some time... Good luck. BencherliteTalk 21:15, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, you've been tremendously helpful. Any advise as to finding other reviewers, while staying on the good side of WP:CANVASS, would be a nice parting piece-of-advise . Again, 100 thanks for all your help. Achowat (talk) 21:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

England–United States football rivalry

Hey, Achowat, I saw that you edited this page. I know little about football/soccer, but I've never heard of any particularly interesting US/England rivalry in soccer (or any other sport, really); is this a real thing? I'm suspecting it's made up. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

No, it's not. We (US) played England in the 2010 World Cup, and ESPN made a huge deal about the 1950 World Cup when it happened. But we play each other infrequently and rarely does either team particularly care. In fact, I'm digging through AFD right now (because I thought this had already been deleted once before).
I fixed the page because, well, if we're going to have a page, it might as well look not-terrible. Achowat (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I thought not. I was gonna PROD it when I first saw it, but as I said, I don't know much about soccer, so I wanted to ask around first, and your name popped up on the watchlist. :) AfD's probably the right venue. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I would say it's "uncontroversial", but I can see the Article's creator de-prodding it, so AFD is probably the quicker option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achowat (talk • contribs)
It is done. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16→Archive 18
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Achowat/Archive_14&oldid=1144453585"