User talk:AmandaNP/Archives/2009/December

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AmandaNP. 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.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, AmandaNP/Archives/2009, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! - Ahunt (talk) 01:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Question

{{helpme}}
Where did you get wind of me?
What major groups on wiki are you part of?
This helpers group, how does it work/what does it do?
Please reply soon Ahunt.
Thanks, MWOAP (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

We answer questions about the use of wikipedia and how to do things. If you would like to ask Ahunt a question, the better place to ask it is on their talkpage, as Ahunt may not be monitoring this page. --Terrillja _talk 02:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It just so happens because I started this page that I am still watching it. I saw your external link fix to CFB Goose Bay and just thought I would welcome you to Wikipedia, since no one else had done it before. Most of us try to be be welcoming to new editors, mostly because we need the help here making the encyclopedia better! - Ahunt (talk) 14:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

User Committed Identity

{{helpme}}
I cannot under stand the page on how to do a User Committed Identity. I just need to know what to do and what to put where. Can anyone help me? MWOAP (talk) 15:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Pick a sentence that only you know the wording to
Find an online hasher (google Sha-256 generator)
Put your phrase into that and get the result
Put the resulting phrase (into a template) on your user page.

In short, that the process. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 17:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

You still have not received an answer by a Sysop so try to get more anti-vandalism edits and wait for one to reply on your request. Frozen4322 : Chat 19:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I will remove my last message, and do some more. Thanks, MWOAP (talk) 19:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I've declined your request at this time, without prejudice to future application. Sorry, and happy editing! Pedro : Chat 23:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Danger (talk) 01:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: ArbCom Mentorship

Hey, MWOAP, sorry for the long delay. I've taken a look at your edits, and to be entirely honest, you don't have anywhere near enough experience yet. I can see that your account was registered back in 2007, but you've only been regularly editing since this year, and not very heavily at that. Arbitration Clerks are ideally users who have a wide range of experiences on the project, particularly within dispute resolution, and are users who have demonstrated that they hold the community's trust to be a dependable user. Clerks are also often administrators, as the tools assist in the execution of our duties. If this is something you'd like to get involved in at some point in the future, keep in mind that positions on the clerk corps are offered by the clerk corps based on a list of potential candidates we and ArbCom maintain. My advice to you would be to remain active, with particular attention to the "back-lines" duties, clearing out backlogs and the like. After a year or so, consider admin coaching or an RFA to gauge your standing in the community. Thanks for your interest. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Mil Palabras con sus dientes

Just a friendly note on Mil Palabras con sus dientes. I declined the speedy deletion request because it doesn't meet the definition of patent nonsense. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. My slip up there. I will try to be more careful. I understand the reasoning. --MWOAP (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

14th Street Viaduct (Hoboken, New Jersey)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 14th Street Viaduct (Hoboken, New Jersey), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: 14th Street Viaduct (Hudson County, New Jersey). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I was moving a page. I thought I did it right. --MWOAP (talk) 21:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm clearing out the SCV listings for this day and came upon this particular article. Given your note here, it seems perhaps you may not fully grasp the attribution requirements for copying material from one Wikipedia article to another. While you noted the split at [1], attribution requires at minimum a direct link to the source article in the edit summary. (Something like "Material copied from [[article]]" would do.) This creates an even worse situation, as the deletion of the article means that the attribution history is lost. Without that, the article is a copyright violation. Wikipedia's contributors don't release their text into public domain, but only grant permission for reuse if the licensing conditions (including attribution) are met. In a case like this one, it is better to simply move the page, which doesn't require copying & pasting material at all, but is a mechanical function that any autoconfirmed user can do (except where there's already a page at the destination point or the article has been protected against it.)

I've eliminating the copyright problem by restoring the deleted article and merging it into the new location for the text, 14th Street (Hoboken). But if you've moved articles or split them without proper attribution before, please let me know or take steps to provide proper attribution. Otherwise, we can't legally display it. :) -

I'll be watching your talk page for a time if you have any questions about this. -Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, ok, I didn't realize I screwed up this bad. I forgot about this article after I made the move. I saw the page of copying within wiki a few days ago when dealing with other page moves & stuff. I have not made this mistake on any other articles. The State that you left the article in as of now is awesome, and again I am so sorry about my screw up there. Thanks for you help. --MWOAP (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review of Windows Product Activation

{{helpme}} I just listed myself properly to be the first reviewer. Though on the talk page link to the GA assessment, someone has already posted there in progress of a review. Do I override this or what? --MWOAP (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Windows Product Activation

Just canceled request, I will just remove my name and go for another article. --MWOAP (talk) 22:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

(Cleared TB) ---Dough 48 72 01:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review of CobraNet

MWOAP, thanks for your GA review of CobraNet. I have currently fixed all of the issues with the article that you pointed out, with the exception of the OR and NPOV issues (which I aim to tackle tomorrow evening). The only thing I disagree with you on is that the article has a long way to go to get to GA. I don't expect that the remainder of the issues you've listed will take very long to fix. I would urge you to place the GA review on hold for a few days while the article is being fixed. Hopefully, within a few days I can either cite or eliminate the OR and NPOV from the article. If there are any other remaining issues with the article that you haven't listed in your review, please let me know. Thanks! SnottyWong talk 03:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I have now fully addressed all of your comments on the GA review for this article. Please take a look at my comments on the GA review page, and review the changes in the article. Let me know if you have any further issues with this article. Thanks. SnottyWong talk 22:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Windows Product Activation GA Table Suggestion

On your GA review, you suggested using a table. Is this (User:Michaelkourlas/WPAT) the kind of thing you want?--Michael Kourlas^talk 01:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I think it could have a little more, i.e. preinstalled oem vendor info, grace period applies to, etc

TB

TB removed. Author: COMPFUNK2 --MWOAP (talk) 23:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Fedora Project Review

I believe I have corrected the deficiencies you noted in the Fedora Project. Thank you for your review! --W4otn (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Fedora Project GA review

Hi there. Wanted to raise a couple of things about the GA review you've just undertaken at the above article. First, when concluding a review, don't clear from the GA review page the points you have raised in the course of the review. It is useful for the page to document what was wrong with the article and what got fixed. Second, while every reviewer has to interpret the GA criteria, I would not have thought this article was even close to GA status. A few examples of issues:

Most of the (very few) references in the article are to internal company or project sources and may not meet either reliability criteria, or be considered independent of the subject.
The bulk of the article comprises embedded lists, which are not ideal for the nature of the article. See Wikipedia:Good article criteria and WP:EMBED.
Much of the list material reads like promotional text for the Fedora Project (for example "Printing to create a good printing experience on Fedora")
Almost nothing in the "Subprojects & Special interest groups" section is referenced, and there is no indication why any of the detailed information is in any way notable.

I would in fact suggest it most likely that the entire article should be merged as a section of Fedora (operating system) or Red Hat. I will raise this at the GAN talk page, which may lead to the article going to the reassessment process, seeking delisting. If you've any queries, let me know. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, Yea, I don't know why I missed that, I will note my agreement. --MWOAP (talk) 22:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

A Stoop on Orchard Street

Hi. You tagged A Stoop on Orchard Street as a G12 copyvio of [2]. WorldLingo is one of many sites that mirrors Wikipedia content but doesn't give Wikipedia credit. It is listed here. I have left a note on the deleting admin's page asking them to restore it. Tassedethe (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it was another site also that I found doing it, I will check into it later. --MWOAP (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries, if you find the other location then it can always be flagged again. Tassedethe (talk) 09:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Yaquub Sultanate

A redirect only has to be deleted when moving content to a new title if you are using the move function. You can't do this with parts of an artilcle - you have to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Splitting. Hut 8.5 15:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC) {{talkback|Wikipedia talk:Copyrights|tp=1}}

Metro North Corridor

(Jordan S. Wilson (talk) 01:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)) Sorry about that. I just need to find another link to the MetroLink extension pages.

No Problem --MWOAP (talk) 01:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

US 40 NJ talkback

{{talkback|Talk:U.S. Route 40 in New Jersey/GA1}} ---Dough 48 72 22:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
{{talkback|Talk:U.S. Route 40 in New Jersey/GA1}} ---Dough 48 72 03:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Shambala (song)

I am having an issue finding the referencing problem on Shambala (song). Can anyone else find it? (I have been searching for a while now.) --MWOAP (talk) 01:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

You forgot an ending ref tag. Mysdaao fixed it for you :) fetchcomms☛ 02:02, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

With this edit in the section "Other versions". Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 02:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Editor Review: done

I have done an editor review for you at Wikipedia:Editor review/AmandaNP/Archives/2009/December.

Perhaps you could consider doing a review of another editor? It takes a bit of time (reviews can take anywhere from about 15 minutes up to 2 hours, depending on how many contributions the editor has made, where they have contributed, etc).

The ones marked with a * are those editors who have not been reviewed yet — if you want to review one of these, make sure you remove the asterisks in the parts indicated!

If you have not done a review before, you might feel more comfortable giving a second review to an editor — this will show you an example of a review that has been done, and show you the kinds of things that can be commented on.

I hope that you find the review useful. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about it.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 01:07, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

TB from PhantomSteve removed

Email

I sent you an important email, posting here just in case. If you did not receive it, please give me the address so I can verify and resend, thanks. fetchcomms☛ 01:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you saw it before you left, but it was before you left the list on my talk page. fetchcomms☛ 01:36, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, AmandaNP/Archives/2009! May you be blessed with a full plate and a joyous spirit!
I hope that this Christmas season is one of celebration and rest for you and your family. fetchcomms☛ 18:51, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Back

OK, welcome back! About the images, I see all of them, maybe just a browser issue. Anyhow, I hope you got the oversight thing fixed, the ronin afd was userfied (the user understood I think) and the Video game protect, nothing more as far as I could tell. Everything else was OK too. fetchcomms☛ 02:33, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

I have replied noting that the admin has done everything ok. let me know if there are any questions you have. MWOAP (talk) 17:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Reverting to his preferred version before protecting and starting a talk page discussion was not "everything ok", regardless of the merits of his version. --Damiens.rf 18:57, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Please note that the admin could not avoid this because of new content between the stable and bad versions. He took a neutral stance. --MWOAP (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. The admin did not take a neutral instance. He reverted to a version he authored and have been revert-warring to keep.

I noticed from one of you userboxes that you would like to be one administrator. From this episode, you should learn that administrators should not protect or unprotect a page to further their own position in a content dispute. I have taken no offense from your well intend attitude and expect you to take this advice wholeheartedly. --Damiens.rf 19:07, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Re'd on ANI. --MWOAP (talk) 19:22, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

R46 (New York City Subway car) edits

You said that the part of the article that I removed was not copied from another source. I removed too much content. Here's a sample of the source paragraph...

The R-46s had to be inspected several times a week at the TA's expense, and the TA and New York City filed suit against Rockwell, Pullman Standard and four other subcontractors for $192 million. As of March 1980, 62 R-46s were out of service due to cracks and 112 were out of service for other reasons. While the inspections caught many cracks before they became unfixable problems, on September 27th, two cracks of a type not before seen were found on the trucks.36 As a result, the TA cut the R-46 usage rate in half, and they would run only during weekday rush hours. Until this time, they were run between 6am and 10pm every day. Shuffling the R-46s in and out of the yards was causing delays throughout all the IND-BMT lines. In an effort to reduce the mileage that the R-46s ran, 144 of them were moved to the Brighton Line, but complaints from Brighton Beach residents about excessive vibration forced the TA to move them to the A and CC lines.37 Ironically, R-46s were run at all times during an acute equipment shortage during December 1980 and January 1981, due to very cold weather. Even the JFK Express was affected -- there were times in early 1981 where R-10s were making up the service! All of the R-16s, the cars the R-46s were intended to replace, were put back into service while the R-46 problems were sorted out. The problems were, besides the cracked trucks, heaters and wiring that posed fire hazards, faulty lighting and door controls. Yet there was even a TA proposal to remove the cross seats from the R-46s and replace them with side facing seats, as found in the R-27s through R-42s. In late December of 1981, the TA won $72 million in damages from Rockwell International, but the City Department of Investigation indicted seven high-ranking transit officials in connection with the planning, purchase, inspection and acceptance of the R-46 subway cars. Improprieties such as favoritism to certain contactors and mismanagement were cited. On March 8th, 1982, Rockwell paid New York City $80 million for damages that resulted from the faulty trucks.

And the paragraph from the article here on wiki...I went ahead and italicized some of it.

To keep track of their structural issues, R46 trucks had to be inspected several times a week. As of March 1980, 62 R46s were out of service due to truck cracks, and 112 were out of service for other reasons. In September 1980, two cracks of a type not seen before were found on the trucks. As a result, the NYCTA minimized use of the R46 fleet.

In July 1979 Pullman Standard informed the TA that the hand brake assemblies for the R46 could be faulty and they should be removed. In late July 1979, inspectors reported that steel was wearing away at the spot where the car body was joined to the truck, and that this could be potentially unsafe. By the end of 1979, numerous other flaws in the R46 fleet were found, and the Transit Authority filed another US$80 million charge against Pullman Standard and a number of other subcontractors. This lawsuit invalidated an agreement made with Pullman by executive director John G. DeRoos for US$1.5 million in spare parts to remedy the defects. In late December 1981, the NYCTA won US$72 million in damages from Rockwell International, but the City Department of Investigation indicted seven high-ranking transit officials in connection with the planning, purchase, inspection and acceptance of the R46 subway cars. Improprieties such as favoritism to certain contactors and mismanagement were cited. On March 8, 1982, Rockwell paid New York City US$80 million in damages for the costs which resulted from the faulty trucks.

Many R46s were assigned to the Brighton Line, but criticism from residents along the line about excessive vibration forced the NYCTA to shift them to the A and CC services. Due to shortages caused by the R46 issues, most R16s, some of which were intended to be replaced by the R46, were put back into service while the R46 troubles were sorted out. Just as the R44 put the St. Louis Car Company out of the passenger car business, the R46 order put Pullman Standard out of business.

I'm just saying...I, at the very least, think they're real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.104.218 (talk) on 28-Dec-09 1704 EDT (-5)

So sorry about that, you can go ahead and change that back by pressing the undo button, please note my talkpage though so other people don't think you are just vanalising. Again, my mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. --MWOAP (talk) 22:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'm just glad I didn't get flamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.132.131 (talk) 23:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Who are you? You were not part of the original discussion. --MWOAP (talk) 00:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh. My I.P. address changes from time to time. Couldn't tell you why, but it does.

Either way, thanks for being reasonable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.132.131 (talk) 05:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

To our newest Rollbacker

I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding {{Rollback}} and {{User rollback}} to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering! ❄ upstate NYer ❄ 01:39, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Carlos Matsumoto

The creator of the article has blanked the page. That means you should stop reverting it and let it be deleted. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, missed that, will be more careful.--MWOAP (talk) 03:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding my reversion

That other user was making edit tests and I was only reverting it back to the way it was with the photo in the infobox. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Must of been a server lag when I hit it. When I looked at it, it was the test. Sorry --MWOAP (talk) 21:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

It's alright, things happen. There has indeed been server lag today, been happening with me too. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Bob Henry Baber

I added some references to Bob Henry Baber. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Henry Baber. - Eastmain (talk) 09:18, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

AFC

I saw you doing some AFC stuff. You can join us in #wikipedia-en-afc on IRC. Also, don't forget that when you accept a submission, don't remove the template quite yet. There are two links on it after it is moved which allow you to create a talk page with the banner, rate the article, and inform the author of the article. Thanks! fetchcomms☛ 21:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)