Jump to content

User talk:EurekaLott/Archive02

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

Category:American theaters

NekoDaemon has been upgraded with a security patch on the soft redirect of {{categoryredirect}}. Please be advised that a reviewing administrator is now required in the use of the template for the bot to operate on any categories the template is used on. Approval usually can be done through WP:CFD. --AllyUnion (talk) 11:58, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Ohio cities

Some of the cities you pruned are important. What criteria are you using, besides size? Rkevins82 18:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for watching over Shaker Heights

Just a nod in your direction for helping to keep the Shaker Heights article on track. I grew up there... Stude62 01:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

So....

I gather your answer is no? If so, would you reconsider? --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 16:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long to get it started (I check my talk page way more frequently than my inbox). Check it out here! Fill in your aproval, sign it, answer the questions, and ad it WP:RfA. Good luck! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 03:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Greetings newly minted fellow cabal member! I do not want to jump the gun here (chickens before they hatch and whatnot), but it appears that you will become an admin/sysop within a matter of minutes. Congratulations and good luck! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia 03:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

May I add my congratulations. Sorry about the confusion over copyright; I took the text to mean that the artist had to be dead for at least 100 years for copyright to be OK. Why do we have the 100 year tag if it's not needed? -- Runcorn 13:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to add my congratulations. I hope you know that my neutral vote was nothing personal, but merely a voting criteria that I felt I had to follow. I'm happy that you were successful, and I'm sure you'll do a great job! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 19:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

List fo Star Trek Planets

Don't link back to single planet articles, I think all should be completely MERGED into one article, since most of the planet articles are stubs and consist of a single paragraph or sentence. This is why I started this list in the first place. Cyberia23 06:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You misread the category

The category you objected to renaming is for Minor league players, not for major league players as you seem to have read it. Could you consider withdrawing your objection? Thank you. Choalbaton 06:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I attempted to explain your position. Please check back and correct me if I put the wrong words in your mouth. ×Meegs 11:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello again. Could you weigh-in on the new proposal by User:Mike Selinker on the CfD? Thanks ×Meegs 20:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sarah Silverman

EurekaLott:

Jaffer here...you had deleted my adding a video clip of Sarah Silverman to the Sarah Silverman article. As promised to the community, I am no longer adding links and trying to work a deal. But someone added a commercial link to SarahSilvermanonline.com (which is a for profit site).

What gives? I have asked editors who took links down to restore..some have, some have not. Could you restore the link to evtv1's Sarah Silverman video? Just politely asking.

Thanks for consideration. Jaffer 00:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Wasteland rv

Hi, just wondered why you did a rv on the Wasteland for this entry:

There's probably a good reason that I am not aware of, but it seemed an interesting link. Best, Tyrenius 00:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I have no great interest one way or the other as to whether it should be a link. I just wondered if there was something dodgy about the site itself, as it looked OK. Your point is quite acceptable. Tyrenius 04:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Birmingham, Alabama categories

Thanks for your help sorting us out. --Dystopos 14:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

U.S. protected areas

The two nominations you pointed out have been moved to the general discussion. Vegaswikian 08:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

CFD about Media

EurekaLott, do you have an opinion on [the CFD]? Vegaswikian appears to concur but there are not other comments in the last few days.MPS 21:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

CFR on "Sports in the United States by city"

What do you think about my idea of adding College Station, Texas and Lansing, Michigan to the list of "Sports in [city]" categories that should include the state? Just wanted to see what you thought.  :) — Dale Arnett | Talk 05:22, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Categorization

Sorry for the delay in responding to your comment on my talk page User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Categorization. I note from Wikipedia:Categorization/Categories and subcategories that "When an article is put into a subcategory based on an attribute that is not the first thing most people would think of to categorise it, it should be left in the parent category as well". Prisons such as Lorain Correctional Institution, Cummins Unit, Buckingham Correctional Center, Buckingham Correctional Center, Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary, Arrendale State Prison, Alderson Federal Prison Camp, Ahtanum View Correction Center, and (to a lesser extent Alcatraz all seem to fit that criteria, although I can see your point on prisons whose name begins with the name of the state.
Suppose a user wants to browse through the list of prisons for one which they know vaguely is called something like "Lorraine". A search for "Lorraine prison" will not throw up Lorain Correctional Institution, due to the mis-spelling ... and if it is only categorised under Ohio, the user would have to browse through a long list of 20+ sub-categories-by-state to find it. Why not help them out by leaving it in Category:Prisons in the United States as well as in the state category?
Category:Prisons in the United States is in no immediate danger of growing unwieldy, so it makes sense to me to have them listed in both, so that a user browsing by category can have different ways of browsing. I hope we can agree on reinstating those listed above. BrownHairedGirl 02:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Transport Cats

Hi! Thanks for getting in touch. My thinking on this subject is that even without the Transport by City cat there are already at least three (and often more!) routes for getting to articles on transport in a particular city: by the search box, by the individual City cat/article and by the Transport by Country cat. The extra Transport by City cat was an un-needed route; it was only partially populated, contained other partial cat systems, and led to editors getting confused as to which cat to use for their articles - some using City, some using Country and others using both. In short, the cat was not enabling clarity and ease of use for either editors or readers. And I was bearing in mind that "Restraint should be used as categories become less effective the more there are on any given article." SilkTork 23:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks for keeping me in touch with your thinking. I see we are now in disagreement regarding the best way forward with the categorising of Transport by area. Differing opinions and approachs are part of life and especially of Wiki, so this is not a problem. The debates that arise from such disputes are healthy and can broaden knowledge. Your approach to categorising Transport may indeed have some benefits that outweigh the disadvantages that I see, and it would be interesting to talk further. I am therefore somewhat suprised and dismayed that you have already reverted my work without properly engaging in such debate - this type of behaviour can be seen by some as heavy-handed and lead to revert wars. You asked for my thoughts - I gave my thoughts. You ignored my comments and proceeded to do what you think is right, assuming that your thinking was somehow better than mine. A more appropriate response might have been to engage properly in debate. If through debate we couldn't agree then we could take the matter to others for further discussion. It might be worth considering such an approach in future - especially as it has been noted that you have a tendency not to always engage in appropriate discussion with users. I know your heart is in the right place and that you are doing the right thing, but my actions - as explained - were not vandalism and deserved at least some discussion. Categorising by city is a category created in Dec 2005 by a user who left the site under a cloud of controversy. It is not a category that appears to carry any authority. Anyway - I shall now do as you suggest and nominate the category for deletion. SilkTork 09:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your input on William Stephen Dare

I had a bit of a bad experience with one of the characters on the AfD page for the original article. As it happens, I was looking up Dare, and came across the entry just as it had been listed for Deletion. When I followed the thread, it seemed pretty obvious what had happened, as there were numerous antigay vandalisms on the page history.

In the course of the discussion, since several of the other wikipedians were unacquainted with his work, I realized how badly written the entry was, so I put in about 10 hours of research to gather the accurate information. One of the admins had simply made his mind up that he was dead right on a subject that he clearly isnt even familiar with. (I really wonder if any of the people who joined the discussion would be able to identify P.G. Wodehouse, or Edna Thurber either.

Since the original 'stephen dare' post was so innacurate that it really didnt qualify as an article about this writer, I followed wikipedia advice about being bold, and posted it under his correct name.

A simple google search can make the point fairly easily. I wonder if you can simply change the forum for discussion from 'delete' to 'review'? I would definitely appreciate the input as it is the first full article that I have written....all my prior posts were simply minor edits, add ons, and corrections.

Thank you, from your other posts, you seem to be a fairly level headed administrator. I was beginning to think that all the other wikipedians were a little on the extreme side.

Carsten Boswell.Carstenboswell 03:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC)carstenboswell

Piccadilly Radio DJ's category renaming

Hi, I've seen your comment on the renaming of this category. Just to let you know that the capitalisation of the word radio is there as it forms part of the name of the company (as in Piccadilly Radio Ltd.) (Pally01 19:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC))

User:Erebus555

I have given this user a block and posted my rationale on WP:AN/I. I invite you to join the discussion there. — Apr. 7, '06 [17:16] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Question for EurekaLott

Dear EurekaLott,

I would have liked to have sent you a personal message, but couldn't find an address.

Could you please explain why you removed my added external link to clips of Monty Python? I think it's a nice collection of links that I would like to share with as many people as possible.

Could you please email me your answer to comedyclips at aikens dot nl? This will make it easier for me to reply and respond. I would apreciate you removing this afterwards.

Thank you very much in advance, Jan-Willem Aikens

Actors by series cats

Hi I tried to get these deleted back in December but met with a vast majority of keeps: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_26#Actors_by_series_and_its_sub-categories. Regards Arniep 21:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, why don't you just remove the guest stars from the cats? Arniep 22:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're right I just didn't think cats were meant to be deleted and recreated. Why do you particularly think the cats are necessary when we list (and if we don't we can list) the main stars on the article for the film or TV series? Arniep 22:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Category:American football plays

Hi EurekaLott. FYI, I'm one of those discussion hogs, and Mike is not, so the remainder of the discussion is likely to be at User talk:Meegs#plays. Cheers. ×Meegs 15:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry =

I did not know I could not do that with the dates. Sorry. JJW20084

Nancy Zimpher

Hi there. You protected this about two weeks ago. Since WP:SEMI is for dealing with serious, current vandals, I figure it's been more than long enough to unprotect it now. Can I ask you to check your other recent protections and lift them as necessary, also to remember protections in general? CAT:SEMI is nearly 100 items, most of them seem to have been forgotten by the protecting admin. Thanks. -Splashtalk 22:22, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your comment in CfD

Hi, re: Your comment regarding categories being emptied here, blame Piotr! 'Tis not premature, but could have waited. The three were redundant covering identical articles... and created whist trying to strike a compromise name for the project (re:talk:1632 series (bottom, which matters not NOW as he's being forceful). Mea Culpa. I would have been nominating them myself (Note My Speedy's) had I time to worry to learn how these past weeks. FrankB 11:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wold Newton family members CFD

That was a difficult decision but I think the best one considering the arguments over pure vote counting. Lady Aleena asked "Would all of those who are against this category be willing to allow for a temporary stay of execution while I look into some of your suggestions?" — so I think some constructive conversation as to whether the List of Wold Newton Universe characters or the category is the better way of presenting the information would be more productive than a deletion review. Tim! 21:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe at Talk:List of Wold Newton Universe characters, although that would be the same people I guess? Tim! 07:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Re Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 9

(→:Category:Planning; :Category:Politics of Planning - fix headers - the "merging" breaks links to the page)

Arrg – good point... If only the Wikipedia software were able to amend the links automatically... Thanks, David Kernow 01:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

{{Cfru}}

Hello again EurekaLott,

(rv formatting changes. this template should match Template:Cfr)

Would you object if I formatted {{Cfr}} similarly, then restored {{Cfru}}?
Thanks, David Kernow 11:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I have no objections to anyone making improvements to the templates. They could probably use some work. However, I felt that the changes you made weren't particularly helpful. Centering text tends to reduce readability, which is important in a template that people are likely to scan instead of carefully read.

Thanks for your response. Curiously, I find centering particularly significant text aids my scanning, but I realise this is but one experience.

In any case, the center tag is deprecated, and its use should be avoided.

Apologies; I was under the impression that <center> was a standard HTML element. I take the "Deprecated in favor of <div> with centering defined using CSS" at the above link to mean use (the more long-winded) <div style=text-align:center> ... </div>; is that correct?

You also inserted an additional comment into the template, and I can't discern what purpose it could serve. - EurekaLott 02:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Looking again, I realise I didn't understand that the original comment only makes sense when the template has been subst:d somewhere. How about rewording the comment along the lines of "Please do not remove or change this CfD/CfR message until the survey and discussion at WP:CfD is closed", i.e. using something less vague than "the issue is settled"...?
Best wishes, David Kernow 03:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Something to that effect would probably be a good idea. - EurekaLott 03:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, have replaced opening comment on the main Cf templates with the above and will await (any) reaction. Thanks also for confirming the <div > syntax. Yours, David 03:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Categories of Oz on DRV

My apologies for the bulk-nature of this message, but as someone who had participated in the CFD for the "X Gang of Oz" categories recently I felt that you should be notified that they were up for review here. This is not a solicitation of a specific response there (all users who participated were notified), but if you feel you have some insight I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks! Syrthiss 15:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Categories by city

You removed "Category:Categories by city" from "Category:Manchester, New Hampshire", which was the correct thing to do, since I had placed it there incorrectly. Do you happen to know of a category in which city-categories should be placed? If there is not one, do you have any suggestion as to what it should be? Thanks and keep up the good work Paul 00:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Category:Buildings and structures in Georgia

In CfD, do you know if your suggestions to also rename Category:Places of worship in Georgia, Category:Churches in Georgia, Category:Monasteries in Georgia, Category:Cathedrals in Georgia, and Category:Football venues in Georgia can be done as a result of the vote above or do they need to be renominated? I'm closing the vote with a merge as nominated. Vegaswikian 05:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Similarities between Babylon 5 and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - Carolyn Sykes

I'm a pretty big fan of B5, and I never heard of Carolyn Sykes... Who is she? Is she only mentioned in the novels? (not sure this is the right place for this or if I should have asked on the article's talk page instead) Jean seb 23:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah! It's been a while since I've watched the pilot. Thanks for the info.--Jean seb 01:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

web directory

This was my edit: [1]. I worked hard on that edit. It seems you didn't even read it. The left-hand tab says project. You're so-called "clean up" was therefore wrong. It seems to have been automated, without any thought.--Chuck Marean 15:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It was links to web directories. Looking at a web directory shows what a web directory is. It would therefore be helpful to readers. The article is supposed to be explaining what a web directory is. By the way, an article directory is not a web directory. You obviously didn't click any of the links. I would like to remind you the left-hand tab doesn't say "finished".--Chuck Marean 17:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sam Boyd Stadium

Does this count as a music venue given that it hosts shows like Vegoose? Vegaswikian 23:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Oz categories

I see we were thinking along the same lines. Should these be protected after the merge? Vegaswikian 20:29, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Buildings and structures in the Republic of Ireland and Ireland

I had been trying to bring some order to Irish categorisation which has apparently been undisciplined and all over the place. Much of this is due to the way that cats (not only buildings and structures but many others) are often duplicated between Republic of Ireland and Ireland (as a whole), with the only difference being the addition of Northern Ireland cats in the Ireland one. This is very confusing for writers and worse for readers. I would be happier if the whole area was categorised Republic of Ireland only, as Northern Ireland has separate categorisation for everything and is more naturally accessed through typing Northern Ireland. How do we get an agreed approach to this, before anyone wastes any more time??? Ardfern 22:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:IntoTheFire.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:IntoTheFire.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

WhoMikeJones

No problem, glad to help. -- Vary | Talk 21:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Apologies!

My apologies for my (apparent) zorching of your comment in Talk:Dark City. My edit started this afternoon and was only completed this evening, and apparently, the WIkimedia software doesn't flag "edit conflicts" on talk pages. I assure you I had no intention of deleting your comment.

Atlant 22:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd appreciate a reconsideration here

re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_15#Fabartus_user_categories — at least on the admin cats. This is a bit of spiteful non-sense, imho. Best regards // FrankB 18:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Also here: Thanks for the time. // FrankB 23:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, I'm Frank by the way. Seems to be our day to meet— even if I had planned on RL tasks in yard and garden! These taggings were also over-zealous: If all goes well, most maps categories here on wikipedia will generally be empty, but be accessed from the parent category, and echo the commons category contents (i.e. show the images here available in the commons, but indicate zero pages here as this one does now. Did you notice the image carry over? They even combine. Some trick of the database.)
Perhaps we need a different procedure. Since you tagged them, what would you suggest going forward to indicate these permanent categories that may or may not have content pending copyright issues? This was one purpose of the template family that tagged it and the notation as well as the last category you voted to delete. If that wasn't good enough, this kind of decision is likely to keep messing up the interwiki effort, so advise me!
For example, the maps now shown in Category:Early Middle Ages (which is NOT a map category in the new scheme, I've just moved three), will be correctly categorized and populate this page... at least temporarily pending identifying duplicates and transfers to the commons. Hence our local pages will have no images, but that doesn't invalidate the utility of the category... but it disappeared anyway with your assist. (undone)
But RL needs time too, and I can't make mundane edits like that if I'm busy defending the top down system (we've been dealing with setting up over in the commons) above in the short week I took to catch up in the yard! (We've had monsoons for a 'spring' followed by brutal unseasonable heat here in New England—trust me, I'd much rather be Wikiing than digging in this heat and humidity! Today's been totally lost to talk pages. Doesn't help the ole productivity!
I'm closing noting that you're working at cross purposes to the interwiki categorization. I had correctly tagged Category: Historical maps of Europe, with category redirect, regardless of how you want it formulated. I can assure you the category will be emptied, in line with the top down design implemented over there, so what's your beef. That's precisely the proper designed use of the {{category redirect}}, or I can't read.
The consensus was the map category names were are are too ambiguous. I wasn't part of those talks, and I happen to agree. I became involved because I have a boatload of public domain maps to upload and properly categorize. The current categorization (especially here with the sophmoric overly short names) was enough to drive one to drink—which is contraindicated when you need a stimulate to slow down as those of us with ADD do <g>! Between you and Simpson, you've created the need for twenty-percent of my reverts as a wikipedian, both today. I don't do such lightly, but I will not let you disrespect my time either. So we need to talk this out. Best regards, looking forward to your words. // FrankB 01:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Apology

I apologise for losing my cool but the cricket project members are acting in good faith and trying to improve the category structure for the benefit of readers and contributors alike. Chicheley is not a member of the project and yet, simply because he saw some of our proposed deletions on the Cfd/Cfr page, he has chosen to unilaterally revert work that was done quite legitimately within our project by a noted member. My colleague has called that vandalism, which is perhaps a bit strong, but I would still call it unwarranted interference. Either way, it should not have been done without first consulting the member in question. To make matters worse, Chicheley then had the effrontery to accuse my colleague of breaching etiquette when he had done nothing of the sort. I'm afraid one of the things that puts me off WP is the presence of these sort of people who are not acting in a positive way and will attempt to hinder real progress. What can be done about their attitudes, I do not know. All the best. --GeorgeWilliams 16:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

After looking closer over category redirect

... I see it was and is applied different than that used on the commons. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I've created Template:Category_redirect2 to give the same 'warn-off' tagging notice with the commons link. Am about to start cleaning up the commonscatX templates which the BOT messed up on pretty badly when renaming the categories. Will probably have time to start relocating more maps this weekend since the forecast is rain, rain, and more rain. I'd like your input on this as well as the above {dbcatempty} issue. Thanks // FrankB 22:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Another question to the list

Elementary politeness suggests one ought to discuss such as this: reversion. I see you haven't bothered to address my questions above, either. Even a stump can figure out without feedback that one cannot change one's behaviours, or adjust one's thinking. So talk to me once in a while if you're going to keep undoing time I put toward something in good faith. // FrankB 22:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EurekaLott/Archive02&oldid=1080083737"