User talk:DatGuy/Archives/2016/November
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:DatGuy. 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. |
Halloween cheer!
Hello DatGuy:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– -- samtar talk or stalk 12:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- Right back at you! --Dat GuyTalkContribs 12:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
OTRS issues
I tried deleting ticket:2016111110021423 as spam but you are listed as the owner. I'm puzzled that you would be the owner of a new ticket, do you know why?--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Sphilbrick: Occasionally when I find quite a few spam emails (usually more than 3), I click on them, then bulk-action move them to junk and close them as no response needed. I believe it is easier than just clicking on "spam" for each one, especially with the spam filled info-he queue. Should I not do that? Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:36, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- I am apparently mistaken, though I don't know what happened. I was cleaning out the info-en queue, and I thought it was the last one in the main queue, and I didn't know why I couldn't close it. I now see it is in the junk queue, but I am reasonable sure I did not click on the junk queue, so I don't know how I arrived at it. Do you know if you did this today? I'm wondering if it was in info en, but was moved about the time I clicked on it. Don't worry if you do not recall, I'll chalk it up to gremlins, but I was writing because I thought it was in a different queue.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:49, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- It was in info-en (primary). I did it Today. Perhaps we did the OTRS version of edit-conflicting? Dat GuyTalkContribs 21:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- I am apparently mistaken, though I don't know what happened. I was cleaning out the info-en queue, and I thought it was the last one in the main queue, and I didn't know why I couldn't close it. I now see it is in the junk queue, but I am reasonable sure I did not click on the junk queue, so I don't know how I arrived at it. Do you know if you did this today? I'm wondering if it was in info en, but was moved about the time I clicked on it. Don't worry if you do not recall, I'll chalk it up to gremlins, but I was writing because I thought it was in a different queue.--S Philbrick(Talk) 21:49, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
208.54.32.218
I noticed a variable IP changing [[Wikipedia]] to [[English Wikipedia]]. I mentioned this to user talk:Oshwah#English Wikipedia who suggested asking. I asked here and the note you deleted on my talk page was the answer. Not sure what to make of it. The IP appears to have stopped. I have been seeing this over a few days at least. Different IP at least every day. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 10:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean? Man oh man, you'd think you were Angela Beasley with her curly-whirlys and glistening whatnots themselves. Get real. What, pray you Sir, specifically, are your terms?--172.56.0.200 (talk) 10:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
- First of all, please try to stay at one IP. The general attitude I received when reading your post on Jim's talk page, and then "think you are...." is bad. Also, regarding your changes, you need to seek consensus since they are controversial. Dat GuyTalkContribs 10:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
NZ E/q
Before deleting the Tsunami warnings did u read the talk on that? Silent Billy (talk) 13:52, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. Does it matter? It's not encyclopaedic. Dat GuyTalkContribs 13:53, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
"Does it matter?" Get the stuffed shirt out of your arse please. It's an ongoing emergency. The Ministry site is up and down. Silly to make folks go to another site which may not be available if the fucking warning sirens are going off where they are. Prat. Silent Billy (talk) 13:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Before starting to throw insults, take a minute. Realise that its still not encyclopaedic. My aunt recently left New Zealand. Do you think I don't care? I care for the Zealanders' safety. Just because the content shouldn't be inside an encyclopedia, it doesn't mean I'm a prat. Would that be put in a dictionary? No. Would that be put in Encyclopædia Britannica? No. Dat GuyTalkContribs 14:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I realise that it was not "encyclopaedic" content. But as the other user and I agreed, it should be there temporarily and taken down when redundant. Silent Billy (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps other people should also chime in to the discussion per BRD. @Linguist111: what are your thoughts? S.B., this might need to continue on the article's talk page. Dat GuyTalkContribs 14:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Which article is this? Linguist If you reply here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to your message 14:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Linguist111: [1]. Dat GuyTalkContribs 14:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I'm a bit tentative on including the full text of the warnings. I think it might be a vio of WP:IINFO or some similar policy. Also, with the text included, the article reads like a natural disaster warning. I agree it has questionable encyclopedic-ness. Maybe this info, if included, would be better presented with prose? Linguist 14:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Linguist111: [1]. Dat GuyTalkContribs 14:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- Which article is this? Linguist If you reply here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to your message 14:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 13 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the List of earthquakes in New Zealand page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review needs your help
Hi DatGuy/Archives/2016,
As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).
Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.
Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.
It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.
(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Zy87
I blocked the account for 24 hours, and left a note asking what they were doing. I wouldn't be opposed to a mass revert, that's clearly spamming. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
- If he does any single edit similar in style to the current ones, I'll mass revert and request a uw-botblock. I believe that the owner will manually request an unblock request, so be wary of it. Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for holding down the fort. I think that anon could do constructive edits. Unfortunately, s/he won't play by the rules. The anon won't get it. Denys making those edits even though they are all from Kerala, India, all have to do with a few limited articles, and all those editor have the same disposition, wording, and learning curve. Perhaps it's a rouge cabal and should be added to the list? Thanks again! Jim1138 (talk) 02:10, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, DatGuy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| Thank you for removing the vandalism to my talk page! Sro23 (talk) 22:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC) |
- @Sro23: You should get one of these back! I've considered making a sock spotting barnstar with photoshop, but if I do you'll definitely be the first one to receive it. Dat GuyTalkContribs 22:58, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter
- Breaking the back of the backlog
If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
- Second set of eyes
Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.
- Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote
With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .