User talk:Nihiltres/Archive-34

This is an archive of past discussions on Nihiltres' user talk page, as archived on June 1, 2010. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Confused

All I am trying to do is create a reference/footnote. I mimicked what I saw already done, but to no avail. On top of all of this, most of my message to you is not appearing here. I have given an example of what I am posting but it is not showing up.

better to do this via email John fubarsiteyahoo.com

This is what I initially have inserted under "other work" on the "Evil Dave Letterman" site. I have altered it according to the what I have interpreted the error messages to mean, but I am not getting it I guess. John :

He has also appeared on the Internet and cable television program Psycho Babble.

This is what is showing up after I click on save:

He has also appeared on the Internet and cable television program Psycho Babble.[2]

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a <references/> tag.

The error says it all. Create a new section in the article, at the bottom of the page, with the following code:

==References==
<references />

Your reference will then show up in the list generated in that section. You've had some problems in your comment here (which I've fixed) because you're trying to give examples of code by writing the code. To give examples, write the example within <pre> or <nowiki> tags like this: <nowiki><ref>example ref</ref></nowiki>.* (*Of course, I've had to do even more special stuff to "escape" the nowiki tags, so don't copy the source code of my example here.) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 22:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I am here for some years, but for a newby its sounds more like a you tried to teach a html in four lines. I think you must take a step back and start with the explanaition on code templates and the resulting wikipage. I go t bed now ! have some fun and good luck! It is good to see that somebody helps the new editors.--Stone (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Big Eye

I saw you made an article called The Big Eye. what was it about?^{Who are you?}[[Media:song.wave]] ~~~~

I didn't make The Big Eye but rather deleted it, under the proposed deletion process. I wasn't particularly involved in the process except to actually carry out the deletion once the allotted period was up. According to the deleted article, "The Big Eye" was a "multimedia art installation".

If you'd like to know more about who I am, please refer to my userpage. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 04:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion Warning

Stop reverting changes for no legitimate reason or you will be reported.

I haven't reverted changes "for no legitimate reason" to begin with, so clearly I have nothing to fear. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, and my relevant actions here are only removal of content that was essentially promotional. If you really want to "report" me (that particular scare tactic is amusing, sorry), then you probably ought to head over to the administrator's noticeboard incidents section. I have no fear of scrutiny. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 08:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I just blocked this editor for a week, but I think with his last comment, he probably should be indefinitely blocked. Do you want to reset the block length? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 09:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

No, that's not necessary at this point. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 16:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nihiltres

Thank you for your willingness to help me. I tried saving the page in my sandbox but it said Spam blacklist. I don't think I have any bad links in the page so I don't understand why it thinks it's spam. Abe~

It should indicate what triggered the blacklist, shouldn't it? Try removing all the external links from your text (i.e. the ones that go places other than Wikipedia) and attempting to save again, then add each external link back one-by-one. External links are almost always the culprit. Make sure you're not using any URL shortening services, as those are blacklisted because they provide a way around the blacklist otherwise. If there's a legitimate link that's blocked, let me know and I might be able to justify putting it on the whitelist. You might want to check the Meta blacklist as well. If you still can't find the problem, put the text up on Pastebin or some such and I'll take a look for what could be causing the problem. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 01:50, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

OK Thanks, I finally figured it out! It was a lyric site that was causing the problem. Here is the link to my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:216.222.179.246/Sandbox

I'll take a look at it in a bit. It looks like you accidentally posted it logged-out, so I've moved it to User:AbeRomo/Sandbox for you. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 03:02, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you! I'm usualy pretty internet savy but wikipedia just seems like a whole new world : ) I Just noticed that my first reference link isn't working. It's a link to the trademark lightswitch. I think they time out but here is a new link. http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4009:1kuqmd.2.5

Hey Nihiltres, Just wondering if you had a chance to look at this yet. is there anything that needs changing ? Thank you for your time. Abe~

Finally got around to checking it in detail. I'm busy outside of Wikipedia too. :/

The first thing that jumps out at me is that your username is the same name as one of the brothers. I'm assuming you are that person. This means that you have a conflict of interest with an article about the band. While it doesn't preclude you from being involved with it, it's something that deserves serious consideration.

The second thing that jumps out at me is that the references are inadequate. Some of the links are broken (I can't get useful information out of them, anyway), some are only trivial mentions of the band, and most of them aren't from sources that we'd consider particularly reliable at Wikipedia. I don't think that what you have so far proves notability enough that the article could survive a deletion debate.

I think you ought to wait on writing this article for a couple of decent news articles detailing the band; things beyond schedules or other really basic information. Reviews are also helpful. The more prominent, the better. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 05:58, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nihiltres, Thanks for taking the time to explain everything, I really appreciate it! I'll try to get some more legitimate/prominent links. Due to the conflict of interest issue, do you think I should try to find someone else to put this on Wikipedia ? Well thanks again, Sincerely, Abe Romo

It's not a huge problem if you edit the article, though it's not good form; best form would be were a fan to create it independently of you. Don't worry about it; the main concern is that it satisfies the neutral point of view policy, and I can help with that. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nihiltress, just wondering,..How many references do I need before it will be satisfactory/postable ?

There's no bright-line rule, but more of a general sense of what's enough—it's not clear, I'm sorry. The absolute quantity needed will also be variable with quality. Twenty poor sources would not necessarily mean an article would be kept, but five excellent ones could probably justify it, for example. Try for five good ones as a lower limit—that's my suggestion. More is always better. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 04:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

deletion of the english language article 'ZZ en de Maskers'

> only recorded one song. No sources to establish notability

This assumption is wrong. Please try to evaluate more on facts in future before taking some action.

I didn't write that rationale. That article, which was deleted by proposed deletion, was simply listed for deletion with that rationale, and no one objected to the deletion after seven days (perhaps only five if it was older; the period was changed to seven not too long ago), so I deleted it after the time was up. It's the standard process.

If you object to the deletion and want to improve the article, just ask and I'll be glad to restore it for you. Articles deleted by proposed deletion can be undeleted on request. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 21:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC) (iPod edit)

World's Largest Pumpkin Pie

I ask that you restore the article on the World's Largest Pumpkin Pie. This pie holds the Guiness World Record and if Guiness recognizes it as legit, so should Wikipedia. We have the Guiness certificates, official weights by the County Auditor, articles about it from Libby's, inclusion is magazines, newspapers, and even a math textbook on geometry.

The pie weighed 2020 pounds (what guiness uses) and was 12'4" across. It was baked in October 2005. If took 5 hours to bake and the aroma could be smelled half a mile away.

Indeed this is not a 'dubious' entry. The crew that baked the pie are also members of an international organization that promotes growing giant pumpkins (new world record set in Ohio fall of 2009 at 1725 pounds).

Please restore the original article.

Thank you

Sure, done. Please update the article with some of the references you've mentioned; read about reliable sources and footnoting for details. The more the better: although I can undelete right away an article deleted by proposed deletion, the article could always be deleted again through some other process such as speedy deletion or an Articles for Deletion (AfD) discussion. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 06:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Orange Recordings

24.18.225.182 (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Just checking in on Orange Recordings. If you search for it, you can see that there are many references to the record label. Not looking to advertise, just making sure that there is a page that all of the other links can flow to.

24.18.225.182 (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't have any problem with the creation of an article on Orange Recordings so long as it's not overly promotional—as was the article I deleted. Feel free to register an account (I see you're not logged in with that comment) and create the article, though I recommend that you understand the notability guideline and gather a few reliable sources documenting the subject to use as footnotes. Those will help ensure that the article is not deleted again. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 00:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Proofread An Article I wrote

Hi Nihiltres! It's Neptunekh2! Could please proofread an article I wrote about an young adult novel called More than Weird? I wrote the started a long time on wikipedia and it the grammar and selling needs to be checked. Could you please do that for me? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 19:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I've copyedited it a bit for you. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 00:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Personal "filter"

Hey Nihiltres, From my Yahoo! question; do you know if there's a way to make a personal "filter", that would only have the ability to add pages to my watchlist? The vandalism I'd like to watch for is small scale, and will probably bring up a lot of false positives. Also, do you know if there's an article where I can read up on how Filters work? Thanks! Cas315 (talk) 08:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

There's a general description at Wikipedia:Edit filter. No, you can't make a personal filter that adds pages to your watchlist. If there would be lots of false positives, you might try setting the filter on log-only, and collect the results through the filter log. For example, see <the filter log for filter 46/span>. Also, with careful construction of a filter, one can eliminate many false positives. Filter 46 has a list of exception-cases at the end, for example: while "poop" is primarily used for puerile vandalism, "poop deck" is a completely legitimate nautical term that's explicitly allowed via that exception list. Yes, there will be false negatives on a good filter—but that's what we have humans for. ;) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 16:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Happy birthday!

Just a happy Birthday message to you, Nihiltres, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

-- œ^™ 10:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Inline Citations

Hello sir,

I am very grateful to you for making me a note that I should give inline citations in my last article - Tony John. I am sure this would enhance the quality of my article. I have now placed the references as inline citations. Please have a look and then remove the footnote tag. Also, please make the post permanent. Wishing you a very happy belated birthday :) Gyandeep Kaushal (talk) 03:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "make the post permanent"—wiki articles are by nature permanent unless they're deleted. I've removed the tag I've added—the issue in question has been adequately addressed. Thanks for the well-wishing. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 04:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Adding categories to Quincy_Jones_III article

Hi Nihiltres! It's Neptunekh2! I was noticing on this called Quincy_Jones_III that there were no categories or references or external links. Could you please add some? Also I ask you this before but would you mind adding add the link from the Xenu forum: http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=24302 because it says in the article "She is married to fellow Sea Org member Gavin Potter (a Canadian citizen) and both work at the Freewinds (FSSO) liaison office in Los Angeles." And it needs a reference on the Alexandra Powers article. I don't how to do references because I have autism. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 06:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I've said before that I don't think that you should use that particular reference; it's not a reliable source and it's questionable in other senses as well (since xenu.net opposes Scientology, as laudable as that maybe). I refuse to give you markup to paste into the article on those grounds—since I'd then be responsible for the reference being added—but find a valid source and I'll gladly help you. :)

I won't add to the Quincy Jones III article right away; I'm not particularly interested in that. I'll keep it in mind, though.

Finally, don't let your autism get in the way of learning. See if you can figure out how to make a reference by experimenting in the Sandbox. There's no consequences for messing up there. For an admittedly long and detailed guide, see Wikipedia:Footnotes. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 13:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

only half

could you please erase oll info and post a link to the proper page when you delete pages from wiki

for example

you deleted "cassandra disease" when it would have been beeter to just leave the title in place and re-direct to the relivent page

wich is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_(metaphor)

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kakero (talk • contribs) 23:19, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I've added redirects from the page in question and an alternate capitalization. I didn't think that the article was particularly relevant to the metaphor when deleting, but I could be wrong, so I took your suggestion. I'll make sure to keep it in mind in future. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 13:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

deleted the page krishna kumar

you have deleted the page krishna kumar i had created and currently there is another page with the name krishna kumar i had put in enough ciatation and reference to the page i had created - even if the page is not there in wiki, can i get the information i had collected for it. --amg 05:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Would you like me to email you a copy of the deleted page? …or userfy it for you? {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 17:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The Seventh Coin

Hi Nihiltres! It's neptunekh2! Would you mind editing an article I wrote about an idenpendent film call The_Seventh_Coin? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 01:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look in a bit. Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 02:38, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Belmont Club deletion

Flood of comments complaining about the deletion of Belmont Club

Nihiltres the Jackass

Deleting the entry for The Belmont Club?

You are a pathetic jackass.

Deletion of Belmont Club entry

Sorry, bub, but you prove the essential failure of Wikipedia, lol.

You deleted The Belmont Club? It's one of the most influential 100 political blogs on the entire Internet, according to ABC News. What were you thinking?

99.239.34.105 (talk) 01:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)Wondering

Interesting. The entry for the Belmont Club looks very much like that for the Daily Kos. Consistency demands that you delete that entry also. Courage Nihiltres, you can do it. I know you can. Anything less would be, well . . .

Is Nihiltres a Nazi?

Is there only room for one viewpoint in Nihiltres world? Will only Nihiltres decide what can be known? Who gave Nihiltres this power? What would Buhdda think? Is Nihiltres mind so small that it can only hold one idea at a time? Is Nihiltres a Nazi?

CENSORSHIP by the CENSOR

How dare you take it upon yourself to delete "The Belmont Club" as not particularly newsworthy. I think the same thing could be said of your twaddle. 24.113.133.242 (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

What the hell were thinking

You think you can just delete posts like the Belmont club, and it just disappears from the internet? Typical stupid lefty.

Deleted the Belmont CLub? Wretcherd is more known than the deleter will ever be.

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

The Belmont Club is deleted by Nihitres the Nihilist. Prejudice unencumbered by wisdom, learning, or experience sits in judgment. If this system worked rationally the senior administrators would see that you are destroying the value of their product and remove you quickly. One day you may have the misfortune of stepping outside of the cossetted air of the university Common Room or even face life in the private sector. My expectation is that with your ignorant and presumptuous penchant to not just criticize but to damage the value of what others work on, I am here referring to the Wikipedia, you would not last three days.

You deleted an internet resource more influential than yourself

You deleted an internet resource more influential than yourself.

---

for whomever added text below, please spend enough time at wiki to discover how to post your own content, you edited my content and made an addition. For example I would never use the word "please" when addressing theis particular person.

---

Hey Nihiltres, look before you leap next time. Belmont Club is more popular and influential than most of the minutae that Wiki documents. Nice Orwellian move; I presume you are more equal than the rest of us unwashed.

Put it back please.

Belmont Club Deletion

Please provide a link to the review process for the proposed deletion and deletion of Belmont Club. I would like to review it before deciding whether to start a delrev. Currently, Belmont Club receives substantial page views and is considered a highly influential political blog. As noted above, there are a number of other political blogs with similarly detailed entries, and with similar reputations and influence, still in Wikipedia.

In addition, you indicate strong political views that are rather different from Fernandez' views, raising an appearance of impropriety.

— Charlie (Colorado) (talk) 02:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

One of the best b logs and you deleted the entry?

How ignorant  are you? The Belmont  Club is one of the best blogs that is intellectual and discusses foreign  policy?
How can a mere student  bring  it  upon them self to determine a blog with millions of hits and that  inspires discussion. I have written essays over 4000 words in a comments. I  have had my comments  become an entire post on other blogs. I am only  one among  hundreds.

Put the entire entry back. Otherwise I consider you  an abusive editor.

One of the best blogs and you deleted the entry?

How ignorant are you? The Belmont  Club is one of the best blogs that is intellectual and discusses foreign 
policy?

How can a mere student bring it upon them self to determine a blog with millions of hits and that inspires discussion. 

I have written essays over 4000 words in a comments. I have had my comments

become an entire post on other blogs. I am only  one among  hundreds.

Put the entire entry back. Otherwise I consider you an abusive editor.

Deletion of Belmont Club

Nihiltres,

Could you provide suggestions for changes in format that would make an entry about the interesting aspects of Belmont Club conformable to Wikipedia's guidelines. As has been mentioned, the deleted entry seems similar in format to other entries about popular blogs. However, guidance is always (well, almost always) appreciated.

Programmierer

You deleted the Belmont Blog????

Are you for real?

You are like a 2nd grader erasing a College Professor's PhD thesis.....

What balls you have....

I don't even know where to begin at the chutzpah you have....

Belmont Club had 100,000 posts of some of the best geo-political and social observations around, BAR NONE...

From world history, current events, politics, science and more the community of posts are well thought out, reasoned and spirited...

You sir are a disgrace!

I grew up in Pointe Claire.

I grew up in Pointe Claire. Lived on Eastview Ave near Hymus Blvd. Attended St Thomas High School. Enjoyed eating at Chenoy Boys and the Manoir. It saddens me that someone from my old neighborhood is so harsh in his edits. I'm curious as to what your personal criteria is when deleting entire wikis that a lot of us find informative and useful. Is there something in the entry that offends you personally because your targets are random and inconsistent? Why delete one wiki and overlook dozens (hundreds?) of similar wikis? You remove Belmont Club and leave Instapundit for example. What Orwellian litmus test does Instapundit pass that Wretchard failed? I'm not intending this as a personal attack. I really am curious.

Hi, I'd like to explain the deletion of the Belmont Club article, but I'm very tired, so I'll give a point-form summary of the relevant issues:

• The article was deleted through the proposed deletion ("PROD") process, which is very straightforward. Please understand the nature of this process:
  • Articles are only deleted under prod after being tagged for 7 days (168 hours) with no visible objections to deletion.
  • The rationale in the deletion summary is provided by the nominator, not the admin who comes to carry out the deletion at the end of the 7-day period. The administrator is only involved in the process to carry out the sensitive act of deletion itself, since not everyone can be trusted with administrative tools like deletion, page protection, or blocking.
• In this case, Scythian77 added the nomination—but please, do not simply go and harass them. If you really feel the need to comment on it to them, give them at least a minimum of civility.
• The article can be undeleted. Articles on Wikipedia aren't really deleted, they're simply marked "deleted" and are only visible to administrators. This helps make administrative tasks, just like everything else on the wiki, reversible if applied incorrectly.
• Articles deleted by proposed deletion can be undeleted on request—but I'm not going to undelete the article right away. I'm annoyed at the flood of hate I've gotten here, and being sick and tired (literally) I currently have a short temper. I'm going to let everyone, myself included, cool down for a while, instead.
• After this point, I'll simply revert the addition of abusive comments here. Feel free to make useful, civil comments—but I will revert with prejudice anything rude.

Cheers, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 05:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Further comments

Hi: I just found your page, over the Belmont Club mess. I want to offer you my moral support - it can't be easy being at the center of something like this. I should also mention that before I realized how much flak you were taking over this, I asked another admin to restore the article to my userspace, so I could take a look at it and see if I wanted to retroactively contest the prod. I don't know what will happen with that. Cheers, Ray^Talk 04:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I fully support your decision to delete the entry for the Belmont Club. Links to such subversive ideas have no place in the realm of Wikipedia's civilized discourse and non-biased objectivity. Next on the quick-delete list should be articles describing other fear-mongers such as: Michael Savage, Andrew Breitbart and the Wall Street Journal.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.67.252.134 (talk) 04:53, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

The comment above is either scarily Orwellian or gooey sarc goodness. I have reread it 5 times now and cannot decide which. - Scott.

It's nearly as silly as the comments calling me names. Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion are intended to support verifiability, not to promote an agenda or even Wikipedia's neutral point of view. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

@Nihiltres While I think most people coming here know little about the way Wikipedia works, you Nihiltres, are also shirking your responsibility for your role in this deletion. There are many articles which may not get an objection for a deletion within the 7-day window. If they were all deleted without the admin performing the action looking into the merits of the suggestion, Wikipedia would be in bad shape. I think its wrong to delete an article without checking into the merits of the deletion. I realize that your actions fall within the PROD rules, however, as you can see by the outpouring of vitriol from numerous commenters, they have not changed Wikipedia for the better. A more appropriate action would have been to post a notice on the page requesting changes, if there was objection to its content.

PROD is intended for uncontroversial deletions. The article had remained without references for nearly three years (a notice remains on the page from April 2007), and continues in that status. So the suggestion for deletion certainly seemed valid. That notice does, in fact, request changes to the article, and so does the PROD template itself, which says "If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

erased my comment (reason: misred PROD rules). Those who want the article undeleted, a more productive and civilized way, than harassing Nihiltres: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:REFUND

There are procedures for appealing a deletion. Making personal attacks is not one of them. Don't worry about it, Nihil, unless the oh-so-civil blog readers decide to make it personal in real life. Woogee (talk) 06:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Casual readers of Wikipedia who do not make regular content edits do not know these procedures. It does not excuse personal attacks, but it does make them understandable. Had the "deleted" page even mentioned the REFUND procedure, there would be fewer negative comments here. It should also be noted that the author of the blog did a disservice to Wikipedia and his own readers by not looking into the issue before posting about it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.56.203.8 (talk) 06:22, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the well-thought-out comment. There's probably something to that; I'll take a look into making these pages more visible (i.e. through editing system messages such as MediaWiki:Noarticletext). {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Carry on the good job you do

I was reading the troll messages and so wanted to tell you that you do a very good job. When ever your name is behind an edit I know that it is OK.--Stone (talk) 14:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Stone. I appreciate the support. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reconsidering

As one of the readers of Belmont Club, thanks for your help in reposting the entry on the Club. It is really a very interesting site and many of the past discussions, especially in the area of economics, are very informative. There are also some really great discussions on quantum mechanics, although, of course, it's forte is conservative leaning political observation.

It's been a long time ago that I was a student, but I remember that free time and sleep were very scarce, so thanks again.

Programmierer

I'm glad to help; thank you in return for being one of the reasonable people involved in this. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Just an FYI..

You got me. I was going to ask why this was on the {{cent}} template box, as it seemed pointless, then I happen to check the date. ^Avicenna_sis @ 16:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

April Fools! Hope it was fun :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 17:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Willard Kraft from Sabrina the Teenage Witch

Hi Nihiltres! Could do me a favour? I think a character called Willard Kraft from Sabrina the Teenage Witch should be listed under Fictional principals. Here's the links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_characters_in_Sabrina_the_Teenage_Witch_%28TV_series%29#Mr._Willard_Kraft_.281997.E2.80.932000.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fictional_principals Thanks!Neptunekh2 (talk) 05:42, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember whether it's appropriate to add categories for individual members to a list article, but I'll take a look. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 21:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Barack Obama

Hi Black Falcon! It's Neptunekh2! There's a couple of things I Need to talk to you about; first of all do you think it is suitable to place the Barrack Obama under the category People_of_Kenyan_descent? I mean, he is of Kenyan descent and he is a very powerful person. 2. Could you please add some infoboxs on my userpage User:Neptunekh2? I like one saying I'm Canadian, and that I'm of English descent, and I'm into LGBT issues and that I have Aspergers. Thanks! 04:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

As of this reply, the Barack Obama article is already in the more-specific category Category:American people of Kenyan descent, so the category you mention would be redundant. I'll take a look at sprucing up your userpage, though (and I assume you mean userboxes, not infoboxes). :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 21:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Elastic Path

Hi Nihiltres,

I was wondering how I can get more edits to the site I am trying to create. Do edits have to come from outside readers or from myself? I'm assuming they have to come from me since the article is not yet published so no one has acccess to it.

Thank you for your help!

-Emily

The article is—or was, now—in fact publicly available, on your userpage at User:Elasticpath. I've now moved it to Elastic Path, where it continues to be publicly available.

First of all, your username is more or less the name of the article—so it looks like you're involved with the organization. I suggest that you review Wikipedia's guideline on conflict of interest. Long story short: you'll want to be demonstrably strictly neutral, limit your use of external links, be transparent about your relation with the organization, et cetera. That being said, with a little trimming, the article will be decent enough, so I'll go ahead and move it to the article namespace.

If you'd like more edits, try asking around—try perhaps the miscellaneous Village Pump, for example. Or highlight it on your own website. I'll tweak it a little myself. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 22:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Montreal Meetup

• Hi, Nihiltres.

I created a page, here: Wikipedia:Meetup/Montréal 2. Given the RecentChangesCamp gathering happening the same weekend, I thought it was a good idea to have a meetup. What I would like is some help figuring out where to do it--help organizing it. Your input is appreciated, and please share this with others who might be of interest. Bastique ^{☎ call me!} 19:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 19:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

{{Infobox artwork‎}}

I did revert your changes as you removed the coordinates field. I'm assuming it was an oversight, but feel free to re-instate your changes while keeping that field. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops! I forgot that you had added that field after I made the initial dimensions changes, and didn't sync the sandbox before starting to test properly. My apologies for temporarily removing that field; I've re-added the update, without destroying the coordinates field this time. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 23:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Perfect, works for me. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

{{Infobox artwork}} dimensions work

Hi, and thanks for your work with the hairy conversion code in {{infobox artwork}}.

A while back, I overhauled this template to use an {{infobox}} instead of raw table code. That change was eventually undone because {{convert}} doesn't seem to like {{infobox}} very much. However, it leads to significant wins in the general state of the code. Can you have a look at sandbox and see if you can get your new dimensional code working properly with the {{infobox}} version? Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I just directly injected the new code into the sandbox {{infobox}} version, and I don't see any problems after previewing a few test cases. I've been thinking about moving the dimensional code to its own (meta)template, {{dimensions}}, which I may do after this (the annoying part will be chaining along the metric_unit and imperial_unit parameters so that they don't cause problems if they're defined but empty), but I don't see what the problem is with the current code and the infobox format. Perhaps there's a bug in the old code that's not present in the new code? The new code is, after all, a complete rewrite. Do you see any bugs in either that I don't? (Not that I've checked the old code; the main thing I remember about the old code was deciding that it made too many assumptions about what data was provided to it.) Just remember when updating to not remove any features, like the coordinates field, which my last update accidentally removed for a short while. ;) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 14:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Awesome - I can't see any bugs either. I'll sync the sandbox version once I've verified that it's up to date with the deployed code. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Gah, I've had to revert the {{infobox}} changes after noticing this change that undid a break in the dimensional code that shouldn't be there. It looks like it's isolated to the ft&in-to-metric special case, but reversion seems best for now pending a proper solution. The error appears to be manifesting at the level of the {{rnd}} template, which is called somewhere in the depths of {{convert}}. From what I can tell, the problem appears to be that {{rnd}} is erroneously being provided with empty parameters (that hypothesis explains the specific "Unexpected > operator" error I saw), and, like many template bugs, it likely arises at some point from assumptions about what data the template is provided with. :/

I'll take a look into the depths of {{convert}} at some point (I suspect it's a bug specific to the special case of dealing with both feet and inches), but for now we'll probably be better staying with the "manual" version. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 17:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sure thing. Yeah, {{convert}} is really quite immensely hairy when you look at it closely, and I've never dared to try to wrap my head around it; unfortunately there don't seem to be too many editors who have. Thanks anyway, and good luck! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Bruce Willis' Nationality and Heritage

Hi again! I need to talk to about some people's Nationality and Heritage. First of all should the Bruce Willis article say that he is German-born American actor because he was born in Germany and is of descent. And I'm also wondering if it's suitable to put him in the Category:Naturalized citizens of the United States since he did move here in 1957. Second, it says in the Mike Myers article that he is Canadian actor (of British parentage) but wouldn't it be to say that he English-Canadian? I mean, he does have 2 passport 2 both countries. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 02:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm probably not the best person to talk to, about this…

There's already a mention of his birthplace in the article in the infobox and in the "Early life" section. I suspect that that's sufficient. I'd ask on the talk page whether the categories would be appropriate. In either case, you want to avoid overstating the importance of his German heritage—don't put undue weight on it, he was only 2 years old when he left!

On the Mike Myers issue: I'm not familiar at all with our conventions on calling someone "English-Canadian" or "British-Canadian". I would raise the question, again, on the talk page. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 14:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Expertise Wikipedia requise

Bonjour, Je mets présentement sur pied un wiki corporatif basé sur mediawiki. En analysant certains templates j'ai vu que tu semblais posséder une certaine expertise dans le domaine. Serais-tu disponible pour de la consultation? Notre site est: http://cyclide.org/WikiDM/index.php?title=Main_Page. Tu peux me rejoindre à nelson.riouxcyclide.org. Merci —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelrioux (talk • contribs) 14:22, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Je vais vous envoyer un courriel. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 18:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

---

For anyone who's curious, a translation of the conversation so far:

Hello, I'm currently setting up a corporate wiki using MediaWiki. While analyzing some templates I noticed that you seem to have a certain expertise in the field. Would you be available for consultation? Our site is [URL above]. You can contact me at [email above]. Thanks [Nelrioux]

I'll send you an email. :) [Nihiltres]

---

Hi [Nihiltres]. I haven't received any e-mail from you so far. Will you have the chance to contact me soon? Thank you [Nelrioux]

I need to ask you for a few favors

Hi Nihiltres! Could you do me a few edits on wikipedia? First of all, would you mind putting the category Liane Cartman under the Category Category:Fictional_bisexuals? Second could you look at the summary of the book I wrote called More_than_weird? Is it too long to be under the stub category? Third, about Alexandra_Powers the xenu forum this has a phone number and I've called it and the people there have have confirmed Alexandra Powers is a member of Scientology along with Gavin Potter. Here's the phone number: 1800-683-6234. You can call it to use that forum as a reference or if not could you find a source on the web to support the statement:She is married to fellow Sea Org member Gavin Potter (a Canadian citizen) and both work at the Freewinds (FSSO) liaison office in Los Angeles. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 18:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)