User talk:Henrik/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Henrik. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
hi
Great to hear that you might have time to add your expertise to trying to solve the autoformatting mess. Vasa needs surgery. I'll do little bits over the next week. Not yet ready for nomination. When you do, don't say that I've had anything to do with it: that would be the kiss of death. Tony (talk) 23:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Take all the time you need, Tony. I think you'll do a good job and I really look forward to seeing the article at FAC. It'll be henrik's first self-nomination, so don't be too hard on him. :-)
- Peter Isotalo 18:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to echo that. :) User:Finetooth has gone over it and massaged the prose now, which I hope has improved matters quite a bit, so I'd be interested in what your impressions are now. It's always hard to write really well, especially in a non-native language, so copyediting is even more appreciated for us whose mother tongue isn't English. henrik•talk 21:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Your comment regarding my post on the discussion page of Mafhoney
Hello Henrik, thank you for your comment: 'Hello. From your comments, it seems you're having an real world dispute with User:Mafhoney - but please don't bring it here. The talk page of User:Mafhoney, or really any place on wikipedia, is not the place to put those comments. I'm sure there are more appropriate venues for communicating. Please note that continuing to post messages to other users against their will has gotten editors blocked before.' I am sorry to tell you this, but I have been followed by Mafhoney aka Mrs. Jill Adams from website to website and she has posted everywhere nothing but vicious lies. How would you react if someone claims that you threatened with physical harm, when you never did so? I have no intention at all to talk ever again directly to this psychopath Mrs. Adams who send me a lawsuit threat last year and one month later I caught her posting more character assassinations about my persona. When I asked another administrator for help and advise, this person told me to post a response on her discussion page, where she posted her list of lies, in each and every point she even numbered. She is playing all nice and friendly and innocent, but she knows how to harm and destroy, or at least is trying to in my case. The next time I will talk to this individual is through my lawyer and I will sue her for all the emotional distress she caused to my life (because that is what she claimed in her C&D that I caused her).
These people are still supporting criminals who take from innocent Marilyn Monroe fans who have no idea how vicious Mafhoney and other Marilyn Monroe fan club presidents can be.
Thank you for your time and please give me advise what to do, but what Jill Adams, Mafhoney did here on Wikipedia was slander and defamation and I caught her in doing it, as simple as that.
I will not continue to post anything further, but I had to take a stand to her lies. I can prove that she posted nothing but lies. Best, 76.170.67.99 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Bernard Chan
Did you check the rest of user:su.alexander's contribs? Guy (Help!) 22:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Seems to be a well-intentioned newbie, I'll keep an eye on him and see if I can help out. henrik•talk 22:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
in response to your comments. i'm not sure i follow; am i not citing sources? thanks. Su.alexander (talk) 22:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- The problem was that the Bernard Chan article you posted was copied directly from a website, which is almost certainly owned by the people behind that site. We can't use content copyrighted by other people here on Wikipedia, as that would violate their copyright and is illegal. Citing sources is fine and very much encouraged, but we can't copy whole sections wholesale from the sources. henrik•talk 22:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
207.4.68.179 should be blocked?
You left a "blocked" message at User talk:207.4.68.179 but the log does not show that the IP is in fact blocked. (I went there to add a vandalism warning.) Sbowers3 (talk) 00:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hm, must be a glitch, since I see the following in the block log.
- 14:09, 13 November 2007 Henrik (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "207.4.68.179 (Talk)" (anon. only) with an expiry time of 1 month ({{schoolblock}}) (Unblock)
- A one month block a month ago, so it just expired. henrik•talk 06:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- As you say, must have been a glitch. When I checked, the log was empty. I wonder if I clicked "log" instead of "block log". Ah well. Sbowers3 (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for supporting my RFA
|
<font=3> Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 62/0/0 yesterday!
I want to thank Snowolf and Dincher for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and since you are reading this, I haven't yet deleted your talk page by accident!). Please let me know if there is anything I can do to be of assistance, and keep an eye out for a little green fish with a mop on the road to an even better encyclopedia. Thanks again and take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|---|
Nudge
Thanks for the comment over on User:Kwsn's talk page. I'm trying really hard to maintain an AGF posture, but it's getting more difficult, as I see my comments do not stand alone. Hopefully, Kwsn has just been busy and has been doing some minor editing over the past weeks and simply hasn't gotten around to his "housekeeping" responsibilities. Anyway, appreciate having an admin provide a nudge. Unschool (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. He hasn't edited in a few days, and has a note on his user page that he is editing at lower levels than usual, so a bit of patience might be needed. I'm sure he's just away for a bit. Let me know if you'd like to get the article userified to work on it in the meantime. henrik•talk 19:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know what "userified" means, but from what you say it would allow me to access what I had before. Well, realisitically, I won't have the chance to do any research on it until the 20th, if not the 26th. So there's no rush. I appreciate the offer. Unschool (talk) 21:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, and I even mistyped it. Userfication means that I would put the content in your userspace, which would allow you to develop the article in peace from the newpage patrollers. But since you're in no hurry, I guess we can wait until Kwsn has a chance to comment. henrik•talk 21:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Peace, my man! Unschool (talk) 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Vasa canvassing
I've notified a whole bunch of editors that have made comments on the talkpage or have made minor contributions about the FAC. You can check the linkage list for those notified.
Peter Isotalo 14:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
EU semi protection
Maybe you want to support this [1]. Lear 21 (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note, I'll take a look. henrik•talk 17:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
~*Giggle*~
Thanks for making me laugh, dear! I hope you know how much your confidence means to me. Ariel♥Gold 19:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 44 support, 4 oppose, and 3 neutral. I will work hard to improve the encyclopedia with my new editing tools (and don't worry, I'll be careful). |
My latest Vasa changes
Hi Henrik. After meddling some more with Vasa yesterday, I thought it might be good for me to say again that I'm not wedded to any of my changes. I try to use my best judgment when I make them, but I offer them in the nature of suggestions rather than anything absolute. For example, I tinkered some more with the "mile" in the lead, but I will not be upset if you or Peter think this or any of my other changes are not improvements and change them again. On the whole, I think the FAC process is working well, and I'll be greatly surprised if Vasa doesn't make FA. Finetooth (talk) 17:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, wow! I just saw your note on the Vasa talk page about promotion to FA. Congratulations to you and Peter and everyone else involved. I loved this article the first time I saw it. Finetooth (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Bah! I was too slow and you edit-conflicted me here, trying to point you to that note :-) Don't worry, I think the vast majority of your changes have been improvements and I very much doubt we would have made FA without your help. I don't think you should underestimate your own contribution to it. Overall, I'm very happy - getting my first FA was a nice Christmas present :-) henrik•talk 18:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for a rational comment at ANI
Thanks for that comment. I agree wholeheartedly. I don't want to see a big fight, and frankly I think that fair use does need to be addressed. I don't interact enough with ANI and suchlike forums to know if there's a big split between content and admin editors, but I hope not. Anyway, I don't plan to post again, since I supported Ceoil and that was all I wanted to do, but I'd be happy to see you post more common sense to that thread. (Just saw your post to BC: another darn good point you make -- gracious replies to annoyed comments need to be the standard if you're going to run a bot like that.) Thanks again. Mike Christie (talk) 21:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Jonathan Aldridge
Henrik, You are making a mistake. Jonathan Aldridge should be on Wikipedia. He is a celebrity actor and his television show was recently picked up. I will provide you with a couple of links.
www.insidecentralfloridashow.com and
www.jonathanaldridge.com
I think he is also on IMDB. Most actors on IMDB are on wikipedia. Many people on wikipedia are not as accomplished as Mr. Aldridge. Did I mention he also played professional baseball and was the star of the "Hershey's Swoops" commercial. You missed this one pal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.204.101.77 (talk) 09:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello there. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and doesn't include articles for every person, only those deemed notable. For more information, please read our inclusion guidelines on biographies and the guidelines on what constitutes a reliable source (IMDB and the actor's homepage doesn't qualify, for example). Has Mr. Aldridge been the subject of multiple independent articles in reliable sources? If he has and you can point me to them, I'd be happy to help you write an article for him. henrik•talk 10:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Henrick, Independent articles from reliable sources for Mr. Aldridge that are currently online follow below: 1. http://www.cccu.org/chem/profileID.84/profile.asp 2. http://www.benihana.com/newpages/orlando_tv_shoot.asp 3. http://www.polkonline.com/stories/121103/loc_steakhouse.shtml 4. http://www.oursportscentral.com/services/releases/?id=3055671 5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_Legends 6. http://everythingandbutnothing.blogspot.com/2004/07/gulfport-high-grad-achieving-acting.html 7. http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/052699/spo_LS0368.001.shtml
There have been many articles printed on Mr. Aldridge in various newspapers across the USA and Canada. Mr. Aldridge has played and performed with many people less notable than he that are on Wikipedia. We hope this satisfies your request and we are able to move forward with an article for Mr. Aldridge. Thanks again for your time, Mr. Henrick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.220.31 (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Vasaöversättning
Jag håller på att översätta Vasa-artikeln till svenska just nu. Jag vet inte om du hade tänkt att göra det också, men jag tänkte att jag skulle påpeka det så att vi inte gör massa dubbelarbete. Säg till om du vill hjälpa till.
Peter Isotalo 09:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Jag hade inga egentliga aktiva planer på att översätta Vasa till svenska, utan skapade mig en användare på sv-wiki mest för att ha en. Men om du kan översätta sidreferenserna till de svenska upplagorna av böckerna kan jag tänka mig att översätta en eller ett par sektioner, peka i så fall på dom du inte börjat med så kan jag ta dom. (Det kanske kan vara bättre att ha den här konversationen på sv-wiki i så fall, jag är sv:Användare:Henrik2 där) henrik•talk 10:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Jag ska kolla upp Kvarning & Ohrelius Vasa: kungens skepp efter citat på svenska och vi kan nog ersätta Roberts med Oredssons GIIA-biografi från 2007. Jag vet inte exakt hur vi ska hantera omstöpningen av artikeln, eftersom det har varit väldigt mycket onödigt smågnabb om otroligt obetydliga detaljer samtidigt som artikeln är i rätt dåligt skick både faktamässigt och litterärt.
Jag återkommer på din svenska sida om hur vi kan dela upp översättningen.
Peter Isotalo 11:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ja, herregud vad mycket bråkande om smådetaljer det var på den svenska diskussionssidan. Jag har inte varit aktiv på sv-wiki, men det där såg ju inte så lovande ut. Får hoppas det är ett undantag, även om det är mycket gnabbande här på en-wiki också. Nu var det visst någon som återställde din förkortning av ornamentiken också. henrik•talk 11:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Shout out
Thanks again for all the assists on Benazir Bhutto, you made my user page, and my day! Edit Centric (talk) 03:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, though my own contribution was very minor. It was indeed interesting to see the article develop. henrik•talk 11:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Content fork
Yes that was the point, to get rid of the recentism on Waterboarding. (Hypnosadist) 17:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Did you have a chance to see my comment on Talk:Waterboarding? I do not think it is a bad idea, but it should be discussed (probably there) first. henrik•talk 17:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not till after i posted here, ill continue talking there so all can read it. (Hypnosadist) 17:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the help on Copyright Infringement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.1.190 (talk) 00:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
RE: Wikidude57
Oh wow, that is quite worrying. Thanks for alerting me to that. I'll talk to him; I think the main thing is that he's new to Wikipedia, though stuff like this is inexcusable. Cheers, Master of Puppets Care to share? 07:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
DELETION Sound Factory (band) PLEASE HELP!!!
- Sound Factory (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore|cache|AfD)
UNDELETE_REASON
Sacredsoul2 (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sound Factory (band). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sacredsoul2 (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I realy hope you can help me. I published an article about a relevant band, SOUND FACTORY an italian pop soul jazz band who collaborated with jazz legend Mike Stern, the guitarist, and it has been deleted and many times I have been accused to use illegally the content of other websites or images.
I contacted the band's publicist and he informed the band Sound Factory, who appreciated my effort to write an article and appreciated I wanted to use their well-written biography and official images. They granted me to use EVERYTHING from their website or related sites.
Here are the official proofs of what I am stating:
Can you help me to get back the page? I am new to Wikipedia and its editing so please help me, I did a lot of mistakes. Can the page be online again or unprotected so I can post again correctly with a link to permission or they way you want it? HELP PLEASE! I don't want to be blocked!
Sacredsoul2 (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion Sound Factory The Band
HELP!!! WHAT'S WRONG???
I posted this because this is an important band in Italy and member Julie P. co-wrote the song "Quelli che ben pensano" by Frankie_Hi-NRG_MC, it is in her biography, #3 in charts in 1997 and received as best song in 1997 the Music Italian Award (PIM). The album she produced, La Morte dei Miracoli in 1997 published by BMG sold til now like more than 400,000 copies. She is one of the old school hip hop producer and well respected and known musician/singer in the soul/jazz italian ambient and also collaborated with Mike Stern, the jazz guitarist.
Sacredsoul2 (talk) 11:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Her notability does not make the band notable. Biography's of band members within the article in no way help to explain how the band is notable? Give two reliable sources (that explain the bands notability) as references. MySpace pages and Sound Factory home page don't count as references. Sting_au Talk 12:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Ancient Celtic music
Citizendium has released its articles under the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 licence, which (I think) is compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. Could you please undelete the article Ancient Celtic music and its talk page? Joshua Issac (talk) 13:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Let me research it a bit before undeletion. I'm not entirely convinced the current GFDL and CC-by-sa 3 is compatible, or more precisely how to fullfil the -by-sa part. I know there is some work to make the GFDL more CC-compatible though, but I'm not exactly a licensing wizard. henrik•talk 13:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Is this helpful? Joshua Issac (talk) 01:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
SWEDEN ARTICLE: CITATIONS
Thanks, Henrik.
I agree with you about the desirability to provide published sources for data not available in the public consciousness, and I'm generally familiar with the Wikipedia style or know where to find advice.
What I added to the article comes from personal experience in the culture as I have been married to it for over 25 years. You are welcome to insert any published sources of which you are aware and certainly to correct or eliminate any misleading phraseology or inaccurate information.
David
[edit] Citations
Hello! Thanks for your contributions to Sweden, I hope you stick around. I have one request though: Could you include citations for the material you add? Wikipedia is now strongly encouraging that material be cited from reliable sources, and citing is so much easier when done right at the beginning when material is added. If you're not already familiar with the wikipedia citation styles, WP:CITE has some instructions. I'd be happy to answer any questions about it too. henrik•talk 23:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Vasa
Hey, it was my view that "17th century" is a proper noun and should be capitalised, but ok. I can see how 2 numbers next to each other might be confusing, but surely most people can cope with that, just like they can cope with 2 words next to each other? :) Let's give the readers some credit. What was the other one, oh the dates? Well, 1 Jan 1900 is the format I prefer, and besides, people can change it in their prefs so they see which ever way they want. It's only people who arent logged in who see it the way its written. Hopefully everyone will have an account. Since the article is about a european ship we should do it the european way? But ok too.
SpookyMulder (talk) 01:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Question about your traffic tool
First off, that is SO COOL! Thank you so much for developing it. There are so many ways that information can be put to use. I currently act as editor of the Wine Project's Newsletter and I would love to start incorporating a section on most wine articles with the most traffic. Unfortunately I am not very technical-savvy at all but I was wondering if is possible to request a bot that would track articles in the Wine category and sub cats and format it in a chart form. I know your tool is in beta so I didn't know if that bot would create problems or server issues, etc. Again, I'm not very knowledgeable about this sort of thing so if my questions are naive, I apologize. :p AgneCheese/Wine 03:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Reply to Agne27. I've done the same for Wiki-project Mathematics, see User:Salix alba/One day of mathematics page views. If you can produce a list of articles for your project, I could easily do the same for wine.
- One thing I've noticed is that hits seem to obey a weekly cycle. It might be nice to colour some of the columns to pick out the weekends. --Salix alba (talk) 10:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea, I'll implement it. henrik•talk 23:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ange27, if you have a list of articles, you could easily make a page which linked to the right stats page for each of them. Might be useful to create a {{statslink}} template for that. henrik•talk 23:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, okay. I'll think about narrowing it down to a list. Thank you guys for the ideas. :) AgneCheese/Wine 07:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Feel free to move this to userspace...
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| Awarded for your creation of the wonderful traffic stats tool. Keep up the brilliant work! VanTucky talk 03:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
- yay, thank you! henrik•talk 23:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Jonathan Aldridge
Henrick, Independent articles from reliable sources for Mr. Jonathan Aldridge that are currently online follow below: 1. http://www.cccu.org/chem/profileID.84/profile.asp 2. http://www.benihana.com/newpages/orlando_tv_shoot.asp 3. http://www.polkonline.com/stories/121103/loc_steakhouse.shtml 4. http://www.oursportscentral.com/services/releases/?id=3055671 5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_Legends 6. http://everythingandbutnothing.blogspot.com/2004/07/gulfport-high-grad-achieving-acting.html 7. http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/052699/spo_LS0368.001.shtml
There have been many articles printed on Mr. Aldridge in various newspapers across the USA and Canada. Mr. Aldridge has played and performed with many people less notable than he that are on Wikipedia. We hope this satisfies your request and we are able to move forward with an article for Mr. Aldridge. Thanks again for your time, Mr. Henrick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.220.31 (talk) 23:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Traffic Stats Tool
heya Henrik, the tool is awesome, thank you! Was curious if you were doing any filtering to remove search engines/web crawlers, etc...? I've done a bit of research on collecting filters if they might be of interest to you for the tool. Best place to respond is my talkpage as I'll be traveling over the next 2 weeks and may miss your response here. cheers, --guyzero | talk 06:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Henrik, thank you for developing the Traffic Stats Tool. I came across this tool during an AfD for the article Havidol which resulted in the decision to keep the article. This should be a useful tool for AfD's in general. guyzero's suggestion for filtering out search engines/web crawlers would be useful in that regard. Likewise, filtering out access by contributors to the article would give a truer sense of the popularity of an article. --Dan Dassow (talk) 13:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's a great tool, but it has to be modified so that people won't sit all say clicking on "their" article to pump up its hits. On top of each Stats result page there should be a tag stating that repeated clicks by one IP or by creawlers etc. won't raise the hits numbers. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but it isn't feasible to filter the data on IP due to the sheer amount of hits. At peak times, wikipedia gets 40 000 hits a second. If anyone wants to sit around clicking reload to bolster a silly counter, then let them. It's not likely to impact the wikipedia servers at all. Nor should the counter be used for anything more serious than satisfying your personal curiosity. henrik•talk 18:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've begun to see it being used at afd's to prove the articles notability. In no time, every afd debate will have this stat like it has ghtis. And then there will be some sort of standard about how many hits make someone notable. This counter will be all over the place, and there will be a problem of people abusing the counter (my prediction, of course). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 18:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, it in no way proves that an article is notable. It's a pretty silly tool to use in AFD discussions. But have some faith in the administrators who close the discussions, they can and will discount non-convincing arguments like a silly hit counter. henrik•talk 19:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've spent a nice amount of time around the afd's and lost all naivety regarding the competency of admins. But even assuming that the admins know what they are doing, what's stopping someone from basing his !vote on the hits recieved and thereby influencing another !vote. An admin won't go against a solid concensus even if it's based on a fallacious reasoning. For example, see [4] (closed by a non-admin), where the first !voter based his/her Keep on the amount of hits the article recieved. What's to say that the rest of the !voters weren't influenced by that reasoning? (that specific article should have been kept, but you get my point)
- No, it in no way proves that an article is notable. It's a pretty silly tool to use in AFD discussions. But have some faith in the administrators who close the discussions, they can and will discount non-convincing arguments like a silly hit counter. henrik•talk 19:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've begun to see it being used at afd's to prove the articles notability. In no time, every afd debate will have this stat like it has ghtis. And then there will be some sort of standard about how many hits make someone notable. This counter will be all over the place, and there will be a problem of people abusing the counter (my prediction, of course). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 18:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- But as I am writing this, I am thinking - why shouldn't the hit counter be a legit tool for afd's. If it gets a lot of hits, then it probably is notable? (Sorry if I'm making you crazy)--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that there were four hits for the article Jason Butler Harner (http://stats.grok.se/en/200712/Jason%20Butler%20Harner). The article did not exist until 00:48, January 29, 2008 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jason_Butler_Harner&action=history). Does your utility count the number of times a term is search or is this a bug? --Dan Dassow (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- It counts all accesses, even to non-existent pages. So if someone seems the "this article doesn't exist message", it'll count as one hit for that page. henrik•talk 22:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
confirmed meatpuppetry on Waterboarding
FYI, related to the current waterboarding situation. Lawrence Cohen 22:32, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Neutral Good on ANI
FYI. Lawrence Cohen 04:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Waterboarding RfArb
I'm not quite sure why I was added as a party to this case - I've made only one edit to the article, which consisted of adding a closing square bracket. I've been involved in discussions on the talk page, but no one's alleged disruption or tendentious editing on my part. WaltonOne 13:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't intend to imply any sort of misconduct on your behalf. You are definitely not one of the disruptive or tendentious editors that have been plaguing this article since November, and if I caused you to think that my impression was otherwise I apologize. I included your name because you, as you say, have been involved in the debate and might be interested in providing your view. But I think enough is enough, this article has basically been locked down for several months, multiple uninvolved admins and other users have failed to move the debate forward. Mediation could have been one thing to try, but it is unlikely to succeed unless everybody involved is interested in a good faith resolution. (Like yourself, I have exactly zero changes to the article, other than one or two housekeeping edits) henrik•talk 15:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- OK, fair enough. I agree with you that the debate as it stands is getting nowhere, but I doubt the ArbCom is likely to consider it. Despite the tendentious editing, sockpuppetry etc., it is fundamentally a content dispute, and sanctioning the more aggressive editors won't make the issue itself go away. I agree, though, that mediation probably wouldn't have worked either. WaltonOne 15:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Copy of deleted article requested
Greetings, I wonder if you could provide me with access to the text of the deleted article Don't Just Vote, Get Active? I have recently found coverage of the subject in reliable sources and would like to rewrite the article. Thanks in advance, Skomorokh incite 19:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Done. You'll find it here: User_talk:Skomorokh/Don't_Just_Vote,_Get_Active henrik•talk 19:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Skomorokh incite 04:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA
I figured as much. No worries...and this is definitely something the ArbCom should look at regarding application of policy & guidelines. I hope they do, though it might be quite a mess to sort through. (User:BQZip01) 131.44.121.252 (talk) 18:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have every faith in the ArbCom in this aspect, sorting through messes is what they do best. :) henrik•talk 18:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorting through this one is gonna be a doozie though... — BQZip01 — talk 04:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
View count
How does the View Count page work? Where do the statistics some from? Evercat (talk) 23:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- From data published by User:Midom - you can read the announcement here. henrik•talk 23:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Great job on the view counter! I was wondering, if I wanted to use the charts somewhere, are they licensed under the GFDL or something? This is more of a "what if" question, I don't intend to do so any time soon. Thanks. Puchiko (Talk-email) 18:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Um, that's not anything I've thought about. As far as I'm considered, I'm not even sure the charts meet the threshold of originality required for copyright protection. Feel free to use them any way you like. henrik•[[user --Knulclunk (talk) 02:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)talk:henrik|talk]] 19:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
What a fantastic tool. Interesting to test my assumptions about what articles are sought after; my assumptions so far are generally right, but the scale is radically different than I'd expect. Great addition to the ol' toolbox, thanks!! -Pete (talk) 10:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- A small bug, though, I think: does it not understand commas? When I put in Portland, Oregon it gives me results for Portland (a disambiguation page) instead. -Pete (talk) 10:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I was so pleased to discovered that you put this online the same day I queried about it on the WP pump! Just curious, it seems to be running a few days behind. Does it need to be manually updated? --Knulclunk (talk) 02:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey bro
The other day I edited a page that was incorrect. Why the hell would you fix something that is right. It was for the good of the nation. I am a higher adminstrator than you and if you do anymore terrible edits you will never administrate again Love Your son Timothy Sanderson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricore (talk • contribs) 15:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Prehistoric Sweden
user:Mrund is an expert but his way of writing doesn't hold up. He is probably too busy to bother writing with proper references himself. We had probably better write those topics ourselves with reliable source, and then afterwards ask him to check the material for errors or misunderstandings.
Fred-J 15:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. The current section is too long, and I think the previous one were better in terms of length and depth. Of course, the whole article is way too long. My attempts to shorten Sweden are slipping away as soon as I don't edit it for a week or two. I almost had my goal of making it less than 100K within grasp for a while, but it's depressing how long its gotten now again. I'm half tempted to revert it to [5] somewhere in the neighbourhood of this version. henrik•talk 17:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well do what you want; this is a wiki.........
- I adviced Martin to start writing on Prehistoric Sweden again, as a new article. So you might want to keep an eye on it... if he gets it up to standard, the redundant section on Sweden could be removed.
- Fred-J 11:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks like you got the talkpage message in while I was getting a block set up. I'll let you decide whose to leave on the account. Personally, I'm getting "abusive sockpuppet" vibes and have no interest in letting it continue, but your choice. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 08:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, I think you are entirely correct. I have reformatted my message accordingly. henrik•talk 08:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Seriously impressed
With your stats gizmo. How difficult would it be to say, select a category and then generate a list of articles with the most hits? That might be very useful to wikiprojects and stuff looking to train their fire on specific articles. --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Good idea, I'll consider some way of viewing statistics for multiple articles at once. henrik•talk 15:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- The stats thing has apparently stopped compiling (no stats for yesterday or today). Has it crashed? -- Bellwether BC 15:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah.. I need to rewrite the aggregator to be more memory efficient, since last nights crop of statistics made the server grind to a halt. It might take a few days. henrik•talk 15:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Henrik. I saw a link to your page visits counter. It is very interesting, and I've always wondered why such a thing didn't exist. But what it is the data source? Is the data publically available? Thanks, –Outriggr § 06:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- The data comes from here. henrik•talk 21:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks muchly. –Outriggr § 22:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, my Wikipedia time has been a bit limited the last few weeks. henrik•talk 22:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Great stats counter! I just found out about it, and used it to thank some of my co-editors for their work on the synesthesia page, which according to your counter gets about 2K views per day. Thanks! Edhubbard (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Request Unprotection
Hi Henrik, since the editor who was involved in all of the recent edit wars was blocked on this page[6], is it possible to downgrade the level of protection of that page to semi-protected? Thanks in advance Buzybeez (talk) 19:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, I don't think that is prudent right now. You can use Template:Editprotected requests to make updates to it for now. henrik•talk 15:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I am familiar with that feature. While the page is fully protected, is it possible to put that full protection boxed disclaimer. Also, just out of curiosity, when does this protection expire? Buzybeez (talk) 14:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Given the history of the article, I think leaving the protection for at least a few weeks might be in order as I think there is a strong likelihood that the dispute might resurface. However, if there are a number of good faithed, well written contributions using edit-protected requests that shows there are people actively contributing to it, I'd be happy to unprotect sooner. henrik•talk 21:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to ask when this page [7] would be unprotected? There seems to be no activity or discussion on the talk page, no active disputes or anything disruptive occuring. Buzybeez (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 3 | 14 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
RfA thank-spam
Do the work yourself
If your not happy with the work people do, do it yourself! i answered every question, just because people can't be bothered to read is not my problem. (Hypnosadist) 07:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- If you don't want to participate in the development of this FAQ, I have no problems with that. henrik•talk 07:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- You forget i did "participate" you arbitarilly decided that it was not good enough. (Hypnosadist) 07:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- I do not intend to let the FAQ get out of hand, and devolve into the same kind of mess the rest of the discussion has been. Thoughtful, calm, measured responses clearly and neutrally explaining the issues is what I'm looking for. I will happily continue to revert (and if necessary block) those who will not participate towards that. They can go edit other parts of the discussion. henrik•talk 08:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- WP:OWN also those edits are perfectly resonable, civil, accurate and don't stop me or anyone else added more info. (Hypnosadist) 08:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Talk:Waterboarding/FAQ is not an article. If my behavior or actions are unbecoming in your opinion, I suggest you bring it up at either WP:AN/I or the currently open arbcom case for outside input. I'd be happy to give you any assistance doing that, should it be needed. henrik•talk 08:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- I expect you to re-add the links i posted to the FAQ, just because you can block me does not give you the right to in order to win a content dispute. (Hypnosadist) 08:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for readding the full list of sources to the faq. (Hypnosadist) 09:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
The "What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar
|
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
| For the traffic stats tool, http://stats.grok.se. AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC) |
Can you say a few words about how it works? And can there be an option to enter multiple pages at once, for comparison? Personally, I want to compare the 50 or so articles on User:AnonEMouse/Contributions to see which (if any) are actually being viewed... --AnonEMouse (squeak) 16:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, Thank you very much! Being able to request the stats for multiple pages is next on my agenda, I'll try to implement that as soon as possible. henrik•talk 21:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Waterboarding FAQ
What, in particular, in my descriptions of waterboarding did you object to? Like the tango, there are very different dances by the same name. Distinguishing between them can be important, as can noticing that it is also a very broad term with no precise meaning -- a buzzword. htom (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
- Your addition didn't meet the calm, measured, deliberative standard I'm setting for that page. I have no objections to describing the variations provided they can be referenced. In general, the waterboarding page should cover what reliable sources call "waterboarding". In an ideal world, we'd have descriptions on which variations where actually used by every regime that engaged in waterboarding and their relative "popularity" (for lack of a better word). Do you know of any sources that could help? henrik•talk 18:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, I did't understand the goal. I thought it was to provide information for those reading the talk page, describing the confusions, the topics being discussed, and what was sought for the article, not the referenced data for the article (for which there are already pages.) Those are, as I said there, unsourced but reasonably accurate descriptions. That it's a politically loaded buzzword seems evident from the history of the article (original entry, citations needed, negative Bush administration reference, are the first three entries.) Sorry to have bothered you. htom (talk) 20:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- Abandoning the question of how waterboarding is done, and how the supposedly RS describe it (mostly they don't, it's a buzzword), so that the user might recognize it from the description of what is done to the victim, we retreat to wondering if it's fringe to consider waterboarding not to be torture even though we don't know how to describe what it is? Earlier I said there was an echo of "Buzzword Baaaaad" as a joke, but it seems to be becoming reality. htom (talk) 22:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- After re-reading the article and recent comments (especially this one), it seems that we don't really have any choice in the matter. I just don't think we can do a definition without falling into the original research trap. I do not doubt the accuracy of your descriptions, but unfortunately I don't see how we can use them. The best we can do is repeat the descriptions given and describe inconsistencies among the sources. I do not like this state either, a clear authoritative definition of what the procedure involves would have made our lives much easier. Do you have any suggestions for how the FAQ could capture this dilemma?
- (Side note: Your comment above that the FAQ should provide information to talk page readers rather than repeating the article also made me think that maybe those two questions were ill-considered)
- But please let me know if I am mistaken in this. henrik•talk 23:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry to have been so sarcastic; it's a very frustrating problem. Those playing "let's you and him fight" are not helping, even if (and sometimes especially when) they sometimes agree with me.
- I don't think that you (generic Wikipedia you) will find useful accurate RS documentation of what the US did that some in the Bush administration called "waterboarding" until -- maybe -- some of the court cases run to their conclusion and things become unclassified. Those who know are looking at much more than the slap on the pinky that Sandy Burglar got. Whether those deeds are covered by the descriptions I gave (and if so which of those descriptions) I don't know. For a while I had hopes that the Harvard folk that we seem to have driven away would get someone from their medical school involved about means of triggering the gag reflex (you have probably felt this when you sometimes have a bad head cold; you can breathe just fine but feel like gagging) but that seems not to be happening. Even then, it would be OR or SYN to claim that that was the KGB/CIA/... method (if indeed that is what it is.) My knowledge in writing the descriptions is entirely OR or SYN of some form; too many years listening to fellow vets in group and in VA lounges about what others did and its effects, and reading stray papers about their history. I had hopes that someone else would be able to find RS descriptions that paralleled or confirmed mine, as I was unable to do so. Medical databases, (auto)biographies and case histories of POWs would be the sources to search; I have none available.
- I
thinkknow that there are probably several very different procedures, putting the victim at very different kinds of risk. The press, politicians, and lawyers seem to have hopelessly mangled them (whether this was intentional or not, and knowingly or not, would be another article!) You're right, it is not for Wikipedia to sort the mess out, but it seems to me to be POV to perpetuate the confusion they've created in the usually RSes as a fact when we are aware of it. I would propose something like this, for the entirety of the article:
- I
- Waterboarding is a buzzword used to describe actions allowed by the Bush administration (and possibly others) that are alleged to constitute unspecified water torture.
- And then lock it down for a couple of years, say until 2010. Water torture would have to be expanded, with links to some of the descriptions of people being tortured using water, and links to other articles like water cure and dry drowning.
- I'm trying to get some of this into some form to give to the Arbitrators, but I'm having a hard time just keeping up with the reading there, while comparing it to other arb cases to try and figure out what I'm supposed to be saying. That's something else that needs doing, a "what to do when you're involved in a complicated arb case page". Thanks for listening to my venting. htom (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Cleaning up Sweden
Thank you for being bold and cleaning up Sweden, the article really needed it.
/ Mats Halldin (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Yeah, it was/still is a mess. My goal is still to get it below 100k, but I fear that'd require the extra large axe. henrik•talk 20:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Waterboarding FAQ 2
I think it is clear that this is a noteworthy theory and it's inclusion in the article has never really been disputed. I think the point of indentifying fringe theories is to debate their inclusion in an article. The real question here is how much weight should it be given considering the inbalance of the sources. --neonwhite user page talk 22:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- There is no question that the current discussion in the US is noteworthy for the article (I don't think anyone has suggested anything else), but this question tries to ask whether the arguments among experts and sourcing discovered are sufficient to move the phrase "waterboarding is torture" from a statement of fact into a statement of opinion. henrik•talk 23:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 5 | 28 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Your traffic program
Henrik, I've been having a lot of fun with your traffic stats program. I've come across a mystery with the traffic for I, Claudius. There's an inexplicable peak in traffic on January 24th 2008, which I guess is due to the date being Robert Graves' half-birthday, but the traffic report for Robert Graves doesn't seem to show the same level of heightened activity. Perhaps a general study of traffic on half-birthdays is in order, or not.-BillDeanCarter (talk) 04:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- That might be interesting, but I'll leave it up to anyone who feels like investigating these patterns. I'm sure there are many interesting things hidden in the traffic graphs ;-) henrik•talk 18:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Traffic stats for February
We are a couple of days into February -- where is your update for February on the traffic stats meter?!?! We demand action! ;-) Seriously, awesome tool... and if you could get February running, that would be splendid. -- Shelborne Concierge (talk) 13:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's still run semi-manually. I got some more optimizations I need to do before I can automate the process. February is on it's way, don't worry. henrik•talk 18:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
New articles visited tool
Congratulations on the new program, it's wonderful! I have, I'm afraid, a question arising out of my use of it. Would it be possible to compile a list of the fifty most visited military history articles? And, if so, any ideas how? We're planning an article improvement drive and it would be handy to know which articles are getting most attention.
Once again, thanks for the program. --ROGER DAVIES talk 17:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Or, somewhat more simply: would it be possible to generate a list of, say, the 1000 most visited articles for the data period? Thanks! Kirill 20:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm working on creating a complete ranking list of all articles for January, hopefully I'll be able to publish that in different formats so that people can use it to extract an article ranking for the wikiprojects. I'll let you guys know when I'm done. henrik•talk 18:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. Very helpful indeed. --ROGER DAVIES talk 08:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Donk?
A very good fellow has just done what I recommended would happen if we kept Donk, and added sources all over the place. I would ask that you change your vote before it gets deleted by error. Cheers.JJJ999 (talk) 02:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll take another look. henrik•talk 18:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Stats
Great tool. It would be good if the date didn't revert automatically to the first month after each use, once a later month had been selected. Tyrenius (talk) 10:08, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yep, that is annoying. I'll see what I can do. henrik•talk 18:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
What a wonderful tool. Thanks so much! Any chance the tool can also be made available for Wikipedias in other languages?--Mschiffler (talk) 16:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- The data exists, the only reason that it isn't done is performance. If I can just fix that, there's no reason not to enable all the other Wikipedias as well. henrik•talk 18:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Please add February 2008 to the listbox. I can get the data by changing the URL, but obviously interface support would be better. Also, I'd like to add another voice to the requests that the default date should not be December - either the last month chosen, or the current month would be preferable. Thanks for the tool. It's fun watching the fairly obscure articles I write get 10-15 hits per day, and then jumping to 800 hits when they reach DYK.-gadfium 18:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- On a note similiar to Mschiffler's, Could you also add the sister projects, especially wikinews once you get a chance. This tool looks very useful. Thanks, Bawolff (talk) 23:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Just like to add my voice to the chorus of praise regarding your new stats counter. I have wanted a Wikitool like this for ages but didn't think I'd ever see one, so I was knocked out when I discovered it. I do hope it turns out to be viable in the long-term, and I'm looking forward to seeing what improvements you can make! Thanks once again, Gatoclass (talk) 04:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Brilliant (but a little scary)! Many Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 02:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- I love your page view tool. Great work. It would be good if interfaces could be added for months other than Dec. 2007 and Jan. 2008Cbl62 (talk) 08:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Data export
I had asked a while back if it would be possible for you to export the data in text format. That would be helpful for us in the WP 1.0 article selection project. I'm just writing to see if that is still a possibility. Also, I was told that hits are counted separately for redirects and the main article - is that right? — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Vasa on the mainpage
I made a long range request for Vasa (ship) to be featured on the mainpage on either 24 April or 10 August some time ago. I added a blurb just now. Thought you might be interested in taking a look at it.
Peter Isotalo 20:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 6 | 4 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Page view counter
I enjoyed your page view counter. I noticed that it said it was experimental. Have you taken it down. It was useful and should be kept up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Why isn't your counter working while I am at the Chicago public library? It won't work on my laptop via wifi or on the DSL internet stations. It works from my home via dialup.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible to add February to the drop-down list? Thanks again for a great tool! -Pete (talk) 20:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Done. The update is being run right now, the stats for february should be available in a few hours. henrik•talk 13:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
- Great work with the patch. Oddly it seems to have corrected 99% of the hits, but there are a very small number of stray hits. Since it is computer logic and not human error there must be another very minor hiccup in the program. By the way, is it possible to make it a second drop down option for which project you want stats for or all projects?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, I believe the results are correct now. The reason for those few hits just before the article was created are probably just like they suggested at the help desk: You or someone else clicking the redlink. They are correct, it will count hits even for nonexistant articles. Yes. A dropdown to select the project is coming, probably tomorrow! henrik•talk 22:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Great, other suggestions would be to 1.) backdate for earlier months and 2.) then give the option of choosing full years with either monthly or weekly traffic. Keep up the good work.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the data isn't available for earlier months, so I guess the only way to see long term trends will be to wait. :-) I have been thinking about an aggregate top listing and ranking articles though. henrik•talk 22:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- So far the highest traffic I have seen is at Barack Obama. I think there are lists where sex related articles are ranked highly. I keep forgetting where to find the rankings, but I think they exist on a monthly basis.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Traffic stats question
Hi, that's a cool little tool, but I'm having trouble making it work! Doesn't seem to matter what I put into the "put the address here" box - I get zero results. The only way I can get results is to put the address into the address bar directly, making sure I'm looking at either 200712 or 200801. (So that the address reads something like: "http://stats.grok.se/en/200712/Bulgarian_language".) Is this a real problem, or something I'm doing wrong? I use Firefox and Windows XP. -- Martha (talk) 23:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hm, it works for me - using Firefox and XP. After putting some text in the box, which URL do you end up at? henrik•talk 04:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I like it a lot too and it works fine for me (IE7 on XP). Thanks for your work creating this. I'm finding it a great help in prioritising articles to work on first. One small suggestion: could you change it so the default month is the most recent available instead of 2007-12? I can't be the only one who's more interested in recent traffic (and December is a somewhat atypical month..) Qwfp (talk) 19:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Good thought. henrik•talk 13:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| I am really glad to award you the Special Barnstar, for having considerably enlightened my Wikipedia experience with your http://stats.grok.se traffic tool. Thank you so much! SyG (talk) 09:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC) |
- Thank you! henrik•talk 04:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation (full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. (full remedy).
Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year (full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision.
For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK (talk) 14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Break
Enjoy your well-earned wikibreak good sir! -Pete (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. I'm unfortunately very busy in real life for the next few weeks (upcoming deadlines at work which are starting to loom over my shoulder). I'll try to get back and fix the view counter as soon as possible. henrik•talk 04:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Most excellent! Curious, does your tool data that is exposed to the public? Is there any way for me to find such stats without your tool, even a more involved/clunkier method? -Pete (talk) 01:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
About AFC helper...
I have tried this in Firefox, and it works great. However, in Safari, it still works, but on every page, adds some random page source code, that I don't know why it's happening. Do you know why this happens? Soxred93 | talk count bot 05:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, no - I don't have Safari. In general, using Firefox is probably your best bet for now but if I get some free time I'll try to look into it and fix the Safari problem. henrik•talk 04:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
More waterboarding, possible BLP vio
[8] My warning to Randy, who is comparing a BLP, Henri Alleg, extremely negatively to known racists for his one-time known political affiliation. Lawrence § t/e 05:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hm.. the conversation seems to have mostly played itself out now, so unless there are any further followups I don't see the need for any action. I'd guess much of it comes from the different perceptions of communism in the US (especially in conservative circles) vs. Europe. henrik•talk 05:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it gets so much worse. This article should be under the waterboarding probation as directly related, and this casual disregard for BLP is appalling. Please warn him? He's always leaving these horrendous comments all over. Lawrence § t/e 05:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- WP:BLP is a weighty hammer, and should be use with quite a lot of care. Randy seems to think the biography portrays Henri Alleg too positively, which is not a blatantly unreasonable view to have. It requires some discussion, and he brings sources to the debate. You may disagree with what they say and what is inferred from them given that they were written in another era almost 50 years ago, but I think Randy was doing the right thing here by bringing his arguments to the talk page. I would encourage you to engage him in a conversation instead. I would very much hesitate to use the BLP policy to prevent editors from discussing articles in good faith (unless there is a very blatant violation). henrik•talk 06:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
WP:AFC Backlog Drive
|
WikiProject Articles for creation needs your help! |
| WikiProject Articles for creation has done a tremendous job in working at WP:AFC over the past 7½ months. Thank you all for your hard work and dedication! Together, we've made the submission process easier and more streamlined, developed tools to make the process go faster for reviewers, and cut the backlog down to a mere fraction of what it once was. Well done! As you all are aware, however, our work is not quite yet done. The project still has 10 archive pages left to complete, which include over half a month's worth of submissions, many of which have not been completely reviewed. We need your help to finish looking over these neglected submissions so that we can finally remove the backlog notice from the page, and put an end to the more than two year old backlog that has been a thorn in our side for ages! Participants will receive an AFC Barnstar, so hurry up and help out while there's still work to be done! Make sure to sign in on the WikiProject's talk page so we know who is involved in what promises to be our final effort to complete this goal. Thank you for all your help! |
You are receiving this letter because you are listed as a participant in the Articles for creation WikiProject at WP:WPAFC. To avoid receiving further notices, please remove your name from the list. Thanks!
Article traffic counter
Just dropping by to say how fantastic I think this tool is. Really is useful. I was just wondering what exactly is measures? Is it the number of unique IP addresses visiting an article? What if someone is logged in? J Milburn (talk) 11:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you! It measures raw page views, so its not unique per IP or user. henrik•talk 13:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Waterboarding RfM
A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted
|
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Trying this again
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Neutral Good (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Prostitution
A feel there's a clear case for including something on prostitution on the main page on Sweden. Sweden, in terms of government, is known for, shall we say strong, feelings on the issue. I realize people want to create a good impression of their country, but it is absurd to have a section on "Equality politics", to mention gender politics, and then ignore a large group of people who say the Swedish government and society mistreats them, largely on the basis of gender, nationality and poverty. I'm not saying they are right or wrong, but this is an image of Sweden often portrayed in foreign media. In retrospect I agree my piece should have been written with greater care. Please right back. 23:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have no objections to discussing Swedish prostitition and the governments policies in that area, but please remember that the main Swedish article is supposed to cover all aspects of Sweden: geography, economy, demography, culture and two thousand years of history. Having a lengthy paragraph on what for most people isn't a very major issue gives it far too much weight. If we tried to cover every topic in that level of detail, the article would be the size of a large book.
- Luckily there is a dedicated article for discussing prostitution in Sweden - I moved your content there. You might also be interested in Wikipedia:Summary style, the in-house style guide for how to cover large topics. 22:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 8 | 18 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 9 | 25 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)