User talk:Funchords

Welcome!

Hello, Funchords, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Matilda ^talk 01:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helpme A

(resolved help request) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:NebuAd weird thing happening here with refs.

I'm not seeing a problem, a few minor formatting issues. What specifically did you think was weird? Star dust 8212 03:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's right -- just the numbering is throwing me. Perhaps the same ref is being used multiple times. Give it one more look and if you think it's right, I'll take your word for it.

The funny numbers seem to be in this area:

Nebuad.[9], and in some cases informed customers that the terms had been updated.[10]. At least two customer's noticed that when they used Google, non-google cookies for sites such as nebuad.adjuggler.com were being read and written, but when they contacted WOW's support department, they initially denied that the ISP was responsible for this activity.[10] One spent hours trying to disinfect his machine as he wrongly believed that it had been infected with spyware after noticing problems with Google loading slowly and the creation of these non-google cookies, eventually resorted to reinstalling his machine from scratch, only to discover the problem had not gone away.[10]

ISPs trialing or deploying, or preparing to deploy Nebuad include Bresnan Communications[11], WOW[10], Charter Communications, Embarq[12], Broadstripe [13], CenturyTel[3] and Metro Provider[14]. Funchords (talk) 03:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's supposed to be that way. When you refer to the same citation multiple times it will use the same link, it is a function of <ref name="foo"> If you want them to each be numbered separately just use <ref> instead, though personally I prefer the way it is now and it is perfectly acceptable. I've removed the help needed box, if you need more help or this didn't answer your question add it again and someone will come by to help you (I'm off to sleep so I won't be able to reply). Good luck! Star dust 8212 04:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helpme

{{helpme}} I could use an experienced look at my recent edits. See my concerns at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:NebuAd -- thanks Funchords (talk) 04:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont get what you are asking. ElectricalExperiment 13:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I'm not making it very easy, but someone else came along and helpfully formatted the help page and now I can link to the issue I'm asking about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:NebuAd/Archives/2013#How_to_discuss_possible_connections_between_Claria_and_NebuAd -- TIA Funchords (talk) 14:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For guidance on content of the NebuAd article, I would recommend raising the question with either WikiProject Computing or WikiProject Companies. Hope this helps. Gazimoff ^Write _Read 14:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about NebuAd

Hi Funchords. I tried to fix up Talk:NebuAd with our usual Talk page formatting. Did I understand you to say that you are Robert Topolski? Maybe you could be more specific about how you would rewrite the article to mention 'packet forgery.' Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 06:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ed! Yes, I am Robert Topolski who authored the pdf file someone added. (Vainly, that's what attracted my attention to the article.) I would change this para:

Privacy advocates also criticize the lack of disclosure that some ISPs provided prior to using NebuAd, an opt-out method that relies only on cookies, the lack of oversight over what any third-party company does with the contents of Internet communications, its conflicts with United States wiretap laws, and the company's refusal to name its partner ISPs.

to:

Privacy advocates also criticize the lack of disclosure that some ISPs provided prior to using NebuAd, an opt-out method that relies only on cookies, the lack of oversight over what any third-party company does with the contents of Internet communications, its conflicts with United States wiretap laws, the company's refusal to name its partner ISPs, and the use of injected code to load its tracking cookies.

Something like that could be OK if we had a citation to back up each claim. The 'conflicts' could be too strong; it seems doubtful that the company would agree. If they disagree, then the legal situation ought to be neutrally summarized. Also we should be sure there is no WP:WEASEL wording, and attribute every opinion which is not a proven fact to its holder. EdJohnston (talk) 14:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph should be introductory, and the issues it mentions should be covered and referenced below it. I'll take another look and ensure that it is true, perhaps I'll re-reference both in the intro and in the items. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funchords (talk • contribs)

The lead section may omit references that are provided later, but I don't know that we can do that elsewhere. If the Controversies section is getting too large, perhaps it should be broken into subsections. There may be an opportunity to use bulletted items. Having a very large Controversies section may indicate that a reorg is needed. Also there is a risk that our article will not sound neutral. Some people must see advantages in what NebuAd is doing; their views should be represented somewhere if they have been reliably published. EdJohnston (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out there were 2-3 things in there not substantiated by cites. I'm working on that now. You also gave me an idea of another positive.

I left a comment below your comment at NebuAd asking for substantiation of packet forgery, as it is worthy if well-supported. Oh, and here's a tip: Once you are logged in, all you have to do is type four tildes ~~~~ at the end of each of your posts on any talk page (article, your page, anyone's else page), and your WP signature, date, and time will be appended automatically. Eliminates the note, "preceding unsigned comment added by..."! Umm, do *not* do this if you edit the article itself - the article's history page logs this automatically for everyone to see. Regards, Unimaginative Username (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks! I'll go look at it. funchords (talk) 15:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do see that you've been given the Wiki Welcome, but since there's so much to absorb, permit me to drop a couple more pointers, and please forgive if you already know these :) (1) When you post at any article, article talk page, or user page (e. g., mine), you can check "Watch this page" down below the "Edit summary" box before you save your edit (or open the Edit link and check the box, then save). without editing). Then when you log in, click "My Watchlist" in the upper right to see any changes in the pages you're watching. E. g., you would know that I had replied at NebuAd Talk without my leaving a message here. (2) To indent replies, use a colon : or two :: or however many indents are needed to differentiate from the message above yours. (3) The link in the Welcome (at the top of this page) has a complete article, "How to Edit a Page", but you can get a lot of quickies, like the Indent thing, at WP:CHEAT -- the editor's "cheatsheet". If you're capable of packet sniffing, debugging, coding and scripting languages, etc., you'll find Wiki markup a breeze. Me, I'm much better at English :-) Oh, and if the "unsigned comment by funchords" thing bothers you, you can go back and edit each of those remarks, but add only three tildes ~~~, which will place your signature on the page without the timestamp, since the current timestamp is not when you made the original comment. Anyone who is interested can click the History link at the top of the page to verify when the original comment and later signature were each made. Regards, Unimaginative Username (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

{{helpme}} I created the article Front_Porch and I probably should have named it Front_Porch,_Inc or something, because we already have one named Front_porch ... I'm not -sure- if it's a problem or where to find the real fix, or if a disambiguation is the right thing here. For the experience, I'd like to perform the fix if someone will give me a push in the right direction. funchords (talk) 02:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps you should check out this template--omnipotence407 (talk) 02:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Front Porch

The article Front Porch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:54, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Funchords. 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)[reply]