User talk:Qxz/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Comparison of wiki farms

Hi. Thanks for adding the better coding for the table. Someone had added the "sortable" code earlier, but that caused the internal grid lines in the table to disappear. I had been trying other code to fix it, but with limited success. Your addition/substitution of

class="sortable wikitable"

fixed several problems. The grid lines are not as dark. They are now gray. That looks better. Also, the last column now has grid lines, too. The background of blank cells is now gray, instead of white. That looks better.

I used the code to fix the tables here:

• Comparison of raster graphics editors --Timeshifter 04:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the "wikitable" class is the standard for these sorts of tables across the project and gives, as you observed, grid lines and borders in a colour that matches the rest of the interface. What I imagine happened is that someone replaced class="wikitable" with class="sortable", not realizing that it is possible to use more than one class at once as I have done. (Another example is class="messagebox standard-talk" used on talk page templates, where the "messagebox" part gives it a border, centers it and makes it 80% of the width of the screen, while the "standard-talk" part gives it the orange-brown color) – Qxz 04:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Work in progress

Great essay! - David Gerard 16:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! (And someone noticed it at last, yay!) – Qxz 17:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It got blogged. I'm suddenly addicted to http://open.wikiblogplanet.com/ ... - David Gerard 17:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Protected edit requests on protected templates

Hi Qxz. The templates are tagged with the {{permprot}} tag on the talk pages, which is how they should be (I actually started making a few of the changes then realised it was unnecessary). I have used rollback to revert your edits; please don't take offence to this, but there were a lot of pages you made the same request to. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I can see the talk pages are all tagged with {{permprot}}; in most cases that's because I put it there. :) However, I was under the impression that protected templates were meant to be tagged with {{protected template}} as well. Two reasons for this; first, {{permprot}} is on the talk page, not the template page, and second and more importantly, {{protected template}} puts the templates into a category (Category:Protected templates), which I assume is necessary in order to keep track of which templates are protected, and {{permprot}} doesn't. (Even if it did, it would categorize the talk pages, so that would be no good). Apologies if I've misunderstood, but if so could you possibly clarify for me in which situations {{protected template}} does need to be used and when it doesn't? Thanks – Qxz 22:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It's actually the first time I've come across it, as I was under the impression that templates got tagged via {{permprot}} on their talk pages (that's how I always did it). Hmm. Perhaps asking at Wikipedia talk:Protection policy what the best thing to do would be a good idea? Neil (not Proto ►) 22:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I've asked for clarification on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy ... I'm not sure myself! Neil (not Proto ►) 22:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Luna Santin has very kindly handled the requests for me. Apologies for taking up your time – Qxz 04:36, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: {{editprotected}} requests

Heh, thanks. ^_^ Who says guys can't appreciate flowers, eh? Unless this is one more in a long series of "Luna is a girl's name :o" jokes! Much appreciated, and always glad to help out those who help out the community. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad suggestions

• Help your fellow editors. Respond to requests for comments ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
• Welcome new users, and don't bite them ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestions. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 23:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's the no-newbie-biting one – Qxz 23:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

RfC one 02:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I love the don't bite the new comers! Real96 03:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I like the RfC one!--Tbone55 ^{(T, C, UBX, Sign Here)} 19:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Pennsylvania

Would you mind making something for Wikiproject Pennsylvania to help promote it? The project isn't going so well, with only 22 members, and I was looking for something to grab people's interest and get them involved. Thanks, 1312020Wikicop 20:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 22:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this OK? – Qxz 04:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks alot! 1312020Wikicop 20:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Harder

Should we make Wikipedia harder from people who are vandalists or etc., like a special test? Trampton 04:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

How exactly would this work (without affecting the fundamental anyone-can-edit philosophy of the project)? – Qxz 18:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, aren't we being too too easy, I think some users are kinda sick of vandalists and reverting their mistakes. Trampton 11:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed; I would count myself among them. However, I disagree with any attempt to reduce vandalism that makes life difficult for people who are interested in making useful contributions. For example, the idea of preventing anyone from editing unless they create an account has been brought up many times before, but consensus is very much against such a move – and with good reason. Quite apart from going again the "anyone-can-edit" idea, most of our actual content is added by anonymous users who make only a few edits. Those of us who are more regular contributors and have made thousands of edits tend to focus less on adding new information and more on fixing what's already there – formatting and rewriting articles, reverting vandalism and discussing changes – Qxz 20:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Julian Amyes

This shouldn't be a redlink as I just done a basi stub based on infomration in the IMDB and BFI databases (both entries linked from stub) – ShakespeareFan00 12:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, if you're referring to User:Qxz/Redlinks, you can safely ignore the fact that it's linked from there. I don't update it every time someone creates a page, otherwise I'd be here all day; rather, I run a script every once in a while to remove them all at once. The purpose of the list is mainly to assist me in redirecting article requests to articles that already exist under a slightly different title, which helps to reduce the size of Wikipedia:Requested articles; it also serves as a list of recently created articles that I can check for style, without having to wade through Special:Newpages. Thanks – Qxz 20:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ads

It would be nice if you had an ad code, that would be vertical, as well as the current horizontal.

Kind of like, real ads.

--Tbone55 ^{(T, C, UBX, Sign Here)} 19:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. In fact, the ads are the standard "full banner" 468x60 size [1], probably the most common shape of web advertisement (or at least it was before the days of popups and Flash animations, neither of which I can do here). I'm reluctant to introduce a new shape mainly because it would mean re-doing all the ads, which would take a long time. Thanks – Qxz 19:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:

– Luna Santin (talk) 21:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad suggestion

Hey, how about a possible AIV banner. Something flashy that would get the message across that people should report only after a user violates a t3 or t4 (uw-3 or uw-4) warning, and not before they go against the warning. That might be effective (maybe we can put it on AIV, itself lol). Tell me if you like the suggestion. Nishkid64 04:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Idea; AIV - Report vandals! Then, the next slide "only after they vandalize after a t3/t4 warning!". Something like that. Nishkid64 04:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 04:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I've made it more of a generic "how to deal with vandalism" one, and it links to Wikipedia:Vandalism, but it does explain when to report users (and it uses the same colours as the message on WP:AIV) – Qxz 05:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Great work! That's a bit more helpful. =) Nishkid64 16:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice work! -- Fuzheado | Talk 09:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Sailing vessels and rigging AD

Even though wikiproject sailing vessels and rigging is active it only has three members. Please create an ad saying basically this "WikiProject Sailing and Rigging needs Members so Join and Sail around Wiki", Thank you Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 15:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 20:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 20:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 05:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank You thats great, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!!! Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 18:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad project

Hi Qxz, your banner advertisements idea is nice. Suggestions: 1) an ad for RC patrolling, 2) create a WikiProject around the ad project (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Internal Marketing), 3) use protection instead of .css extension hack -- hey wait a minute! 30,000 edits? Do you want to be an admin yet :) ? I looked at some of your contributions; you have a standing offer of nomination from me whenever you're ready. (I know some people will oppose over wikiage, but you've contributed so much already. I was promoted after 2 months of activity, so "under 6 months" is not impossible.) – Quarl ^(talk) 07:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestions. I'm considering (1); I've already added one about fixing vandalism in general. I'm not sure (2) would be such a good idea; people keep trying to put these things in project space and someone even suggested putting them above every article (which resulted in lots of people yelling at me, even though I hadn't suggested any such thing). I want to keep it clear that this is just a personal thing I'm doing on a personal user subpage, which other people can put on their userpage if they like. And I wouldn't call it "Internal Marketing" even if I did create one. Big problem with (3): I can't edit pages while they're protected. I don't think I would be very popular with the administrators if I had to make an {{editprotected}} request every time I wanted to edit my own subpages. So why have them protected at all? I feel I owe the 46 people who are using it a guarantee they won't log on one day and find their userpage messed up due to vandalism. Thanks – Qxz 07:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to User:Qxz/f.css

This is your only warning. The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User:Qxz/f.css, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Gracenotes^T § 18:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Meanie. – Qxz 18:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ads and image protection

I noticed you've got images being transcluded onto a large number of pages, making your Ads template a high visibility template really needing to have some protection (for obvious reasons). I've semi protected the css file and added cascading protection so as far as I can tell, all the advert images are fully protected. I hope this is acceptable and if you need admin assistance, just shout on me and I'll be happy to help. -- Nick ^t 22:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, please reverse this immediately. User CSS files are already only editable by the user to whom they belong and administrators. That's the whole reason I named the page with a "css" extension – it's just a normal template, not a CSS file, I named it like that so that it was protected. Nobody except administrators and myself can edit it regardless of protection status. More worrying is the cascading semiprotection; there is a bug in cascading protection which causes any transcluded pages to by FULLY protected; I can no longer edit the image pages – Qxz 22:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, since when has a template used by fewer than 50 users been "high-profile"? There are hundreds of more heavily-used userboxes that aren't protected at all. Not to mention the hundreds of far more visible article template – Qxz 22:59, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It's a blatant vandalism target. If you want to edit the images, all you need to do is untransclude the image from the css page. Personally, I find the potential these unprotected image have for being vandalised is too great. -- Nick ^t 23:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The particular circumstances are irrelevant here; the protection policy states that cascading semiprotection should not be used under any circumstances. If you wish, I happily de-transclude the template from the pages on which it is currently used and request that the images be deleted (except those uploaded by AzaToth); however, I refuse to be prevented from editing my own images when they are used on fewer pages than, to pick an example completely at random, Image:Sweden stub.png on {{Sweden-geo-stub}}, which has sat unprotected – on articles, at that – for years with no objections. Thanks – Qxz 23:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Boo!

Huh, not sure what to make of that. My impression was that cascading semi doesn't work (it applies admin protection to everything transcluded, unless the devs fixed that bit). Also, that bulletin board is the craziest thing I've seen on the wiki in some time. Very interesting. :p – Luna Santin (talk) 23:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. Applies admin protection to everything transcluded. Yet because it was only semi-protected itself, I could still edit it, and transclude something else. See? Instant protection. Glad you like the page. Took me all day – Qxz 23:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA animation

I feel now i am asking a really random question but can this animation be slowed down as i cannot read all the messages...?! Simply south 01:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your feedback. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 01:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Has been slowed down. You may need to bypass your cache in order for changes to take effect. Thanks – Qxz 01:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

SigContract

I agree. Its original purpose was not for people to use it in their signatures, but rather to resolve a wikiDispute (see here). -- Where 18:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Not that you would care, but...

I just happened to be looking at this page and noticed that it appears differently depending on whether I'm redirected or not. Just thought I'd tell you in case you didn't already know. Pretty cool stuff by the way... 67.86.86.217 04:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, odd. Could well be a problem my end; it's quite a complex page, so I may have screwed something up somewhere. Alternatively, your browser may have cached an older version. Bypassing the cache (CTRL+F5 in most browsers) may fix it. Anyway, glad you like it – Qxz 04:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that was it - now I only see the one "very important announcement" instead of three. 67.86.86.217 04:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, they were only tests; so I removed them. (Mind you, the remaining one is a test too. I'll remove it as soon as I have any real announcements to put there) – Qxz 04:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing links from Wikipedia:List of encyclopedia topics

Are we really supposed to be removing links from this list? I would think the value is much higher with them left in, because it not only shows you immediately how much coverage we have but also the value as a "List of encyclopedia topics" is greatly reduced otherwise. Maury 12:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, a couple of points. Firstly, if you are interested in the overall progress of the "List of encyclopedia topics" subproject, you can see at a glance how much has been done by looking at the table on the main Wikipedia:List of encyclopedia topics page. Secondly, and more importantly, despite its name this list is not (and was never intended to be) an actual, usable list of encyclopedia topics. It's a maintenance page, part of the missing articles WikiProject and intended only for work on the encyclopedia, not for reference purposes. The name is misleading, what it actually is is a list of encyclopedia topics that Wikipedia does not have yet. Even if we did not remove blue links, this would still be true. The list was created some time after Wikipedia was started, and its original version contained around 78,000 links none of which, at the time, had articles. But by that time there were already tens of thousands of articles in Wikipedia and many "encyclopedic topics" had already been created. In short, the list never served that purpose (and never could, practically). If you want a list of encyclopedia topics, then there's always Special:Allpages; in theory, if our policies are followed, everything on there should be an encyclopedia topic, though that's not always the case. Thanks – Qxz 12:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

One other thing, if you do want to see the original lists in their entirety and see what has turned blue, simply go to the page history and select the oldest version. It is easier for people who are looking to create missing articles (the intended target audience of the page) to see only what remains to be done and not what has been completed. Thanks – Qxz 12:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

This may also be helpful: if you are looking for a page that is intended to be a list of encyclopedia topics, there are several around. Obviously attempting to list all encyclopedia topics is infeasible (there would be millions), but there have been several attempts to pick out a smaller collection of a few hundred "important" topics; one example is Wikipedia:Vital articles. Thanks – Qxz 12:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Forum Header

Hi Qxz! I just wanted to say that I think your forum-like header it neat! RyGuy 12:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks – Qxz 12:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad Suggestion (by me again)

Hi, I just had an idea. After I saw the ad for WikiProject Pennsylvania, I though that it would be good if there was an ad for The Strategy Games WikiProject. I also thought I could surprise my buddy AndonicO with it, since he made bothe the Portal and WikiProject. I'll post an image that you can use on the side, like the Penna flag you used for the Pennsylvania WikiProject. RyGuy 18:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

'kay, here's a good image to use, it's also used on the UBX.

RyGuy 18:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 20:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Quote from AndonicO: "There's only one huge problem with it: it's missing a period after "Join the Strategy games WikiProject". :-) Oh, and "Games" is lower case (per WP:NAME) · AO ^Talk 12:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)". I hope you can fix it, though I didn't even notice that it was missing a period. RyGuy 12:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Corrected. You may need to bypass your browser cache for changes to take effect. Thanks – Qxz 00:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject ASUE

As we're trying to attract more participants, could you construct an ad to promote the WikiProject:A Series of Unfortunate Events? It would be great if you could include this image. Thanks in advance.--Orthologist 20:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 20:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 22:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot on behalf of the participants. Cheers, Orthologist 22:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up my userpage after that vandal hit it. Take Care. ParticleMan 03:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey, thanks for caring enough to revert vandalism on my user page. It is much appreciated. V-Man - ^T/_C 03:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Talkpage indexer

What are the instructions for your talkpage indexer? It looks like a great program, whatever it's using. Are you running a bot under your username? Also, is it approved for general use? I'd like to index my archives, too; does this indexer retroactively index archives? Thanks! This looks cool! — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 01:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It requires a number of templates to be transcluded wherever the index needs to go, and a data page set up to hold data for the index. I have written a script to update it, which I've run under my username purely for testing purposes. At the moment I'm trying to get approval to run a bot to do regular updates; I can't do anything at the moment, but I may be able to do so once the bot is approved. Indexing of archives is possible in the same way, if desired. Thanks – Qxz 01:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking forward to your getting approval. Will you let me know when the tool is up and running? Thanks! — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately I've decided to withdraw my request due to objections that I can't be bothered to address. Apologies for the inconvenience – Qxz 01:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

ad box request

Would it be possible for you to create an ad for WikiProject Radio? It is in serious need of more members. --PhantomS 09:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 23:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 02:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. It looks great. --PhantomS 03:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment from Lizhoffman

Hi, regarding your comment on the edit I made to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_foam . I respect your decision to remove my link and if that's the way it must be then there's nothing I can do about it but can I just ask you to have a closer look at http://www.myfoammattress.net/memory/ild.html . This is the most comprehensive report on memory foam firmness out there, it involved 30+ hours of research, interviewing and writing and is very useful for anyone who wants to understand how memory foam works. The link has been in Wikipedia for months now which to me it means that senior editors deemed it worthy and useful. I hope you will reconsider your decision to remove the link.

As for the other links I removed, they were all to merchants and I know Wikipedia doesn't like that. If I was wrong in removing them, then I'm sorry. They'd been piling up on that page for weeks now. I was hoping a senior editor would step in. The only link that seemed appropriate was the chemtox one.

Thank you for your time Liz – Lizhoffman 10:12, 21 March 2007

Hi, thank you for your contributions. It may well be that the link you added is in fact the best one and that all the others are spam links; however, the impression that your edits give is that of someone attempting to promote their own website by firstly inserting a link to it and secondly removing any other links that might draw away traffic. If this is not the case, then I apologize; however, it frequently is the case, and it is necessary for us to balance the need to provide useful external links with the need to prevent Wikipedia from turning into a marketing tool.

I recommend that if you add an external link to an article, and then find that many of the other links are unnecessary, you contact an administrator or more experienced user, or leave a message on the article's discussion page, suggesting that they be removed. This should remove any ambiguity about your intentions. Thanks – Qxz 10:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Qxz, I had tried contacting senior editors in the past and they never replied but maybe I didn't contact the right people. I wasn't aware of the correct procedure but I do know it now, thanks to you, so I will not make the same mistake twice. Given that you are the first to ever reply to me on Wikipedia I'll bring my concerns to you. Regarding the edit I made, is there some way that I can fix my mistake and reearn the spot that link had or is there nothing else to be done about it?

Thanks for the quick reply by the way! Lizhoffman 10:12, 21 March 2007

I've had a look at both the link you added and the other links that were there, and yours seems to bear the least resemblence to spam; as your explanation seems reasonable, I've restored it. Again, apologies for misinterpreting your intentions.

I'm surprised to hear that you had so much trouble getting hold of someone; people are encouraged to at least say something in response to messages they recieve, unless they are obviously rude or insulting. I'll happily assist you with any other problems you may have (though if I'm not online, you may have to wait a little longer for a reply). Thanks – Qxz 10:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't mind waiting for a reply if I know it's coming eventually! All the best. Lizhoffman 10:26, 21 March 2007

Troy

Alright, let's take this guy up through channels. What's the first move to get this guy blocked? --HubHikari 12:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Report them at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Which I did, some time ago :) It's just a case of continuing to revert them until an administrator gets around to dealing with it. Thanks – Qxz 12:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, one step ahead of me, I see. I'm also going to shoot a request up to page protection, see if I can get that working. --HubHikari 12:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

There is generally no need to protect a page when only one user is vandalising – once they are blocked, they can no longer cause trouble. Requests are likely to be declined unless there is a significant recent history of vandalism from multiple users. Just to let you know – Qxz 12:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Whoops. My bad; I've already submitted the request. Looks like they've got some backlog over there. Wouldn't mind helping; I've got nothing to do in class today anyway :) --HubHikari 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed there is something of a backlog – and presumably for the same reason there's a backlog at WP:AIV; no administrators around to deal with it. If you have nothing to do (though I have a feeling you should perhaps be paying attention!), stick with reverting vandalism, probably the best use of your time. Thanks for your help – Qxz 12:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

No, no, you misunderstand. Class is going to be focused today (presumably Friday, too) on completing a lab assigned on Monday, because the professor hasn't gone over how to do what he's asked in class. But I'm so smooth that I was able to get it converted and running without him talking about it to me.  :) But yes, I'll keep plugging away at the RC page. --HubHikari 12:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

RaftaSchool

You're faster than me with reverting this person - FYI, I've got them listed at AIV, just a matter of waiting until someone gets it done. Lcarscad 12:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help. AIV was a little slow to clear earlier this afternoon, but it looks like the user was dealt with fairly quickly. Thanks again – Qxz 18:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Template change to my archive

I had never done one of these before, so I'm not sure what was wrong with what I did. What you did looks fine, though, so I'm not gonna worry about it much. Thanks, I guess. --Orange Mike 17:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a case of adding {{talkarchive}} to a page when you want to use the template, rather than copying and pasting the code of the template from Template:Talkarchive. Otherwise, all sorts of strange things happen like your archives get categorized into Category:Protected templates when they aren't templates at all. Nothing to worry about. Thanks – Qxz 17:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad Formats

I was wondering if you could create ads in the sidebar format. I like how bars like them look on my userpage. Thanks!Canadianshoper 18:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. This has been brought up before; I'm reluctant to do ads of a different shape because it would require me to re-do the existing ads from scratch in order to have content, and to do two new ads each time there is a request (to satisfy users of both formats), which would take a long time. Having separate formats also has the disadvantage of added complexity. Thanks – Qxz 18:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Canadianshoper 18:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Adminship?

Qxz, you are a very dedicated vandal fighter and civil Wikipedian. Your experience with this community seems superb and for a long time I have admired it. Have you ever considered running for adminship? I'm tempted to consider nominating you one of these days but I rather have your approval first :). Keep up the excellent work.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have considered the possibility of adminship; as you will notice if you look through my talk archives, so have several other people. However, I am not interested. There are a number of reasons for this, but I'll stick with the most obvious for now; I have been here for less than two months (two months as of tomorrow, in fact). One has only to take a quick look at the standards generally applied at RfA to see that one would have to be mad to apply with anything less than three times this amount of experience. Thanks – Qxz 18:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Heh, I should have looked through the talk page archives first! Anyways, I appreciate your response. I think though you are definitely an indispensable member of this community. Thank you for all your hard work and service.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I think there is a line of wikipedians who would like to nominate him. I know I have personally offered to as well as many others. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

A line that is (a) over four months premature and (b) unwanted. And each of you will recieve the same answer. I'd put this at the top of my talk page, but that would seem rude – Qxz 18:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I apolagize if my response seemed rude. I think what I was trying to say nicley is that you did not feel that you were ready without outting words in your mouth. I understand how you feel, and you have expressed it to me before. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it wasn't rude at all; don't worry. It's just slightly irritating that people offer to nominate me without even checking the age of my account – it only takes a few clicks, after all – as if they had, they would surely see that an RfA would have absolutely no chance of passing. Thanks – Qxz 18:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Benidorm

Can you fix this page? Mmcknight4 20:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Fixed, I think – Qxz 20:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thank. I'm polishing my revert skills. Mmcknight4 20:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing links from navigation via CSS

Hello. Hope you don't mind me asking you a question. I read your excellent tip at the Village Pump Proposals page about hiding some of the links on the left. It works fine for some, but I can't get it to work for "Make a donation". Is this because it is an external link and should be treated differently in some way? Regards, Adrian M. H. 22:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

#n-sitesupport {display: none}

should work, though I haven't tested it. Thanks – Qxz 22:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your reply. Most helpful. I'll give that a go. Regards, Adrian M. H. 22:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad banners

I was wondering if you can make a banner for WikiProject:Armenia something simple, since theres alot of help needed on there and the articles etc, a simple banner maybe a ancient slogan etc anything. Artaxiad 01:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 01:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, regards. Artaxiad 01:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 00:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks alot! looks awesome. Artaxiad 00:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey You

Upon what grounds do you revert my edit to Archetype? I would like to see a refutation to my edit and not a simple revert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.10.96.197 (talk) 13:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Edit in question here. Another edit by same user three minutes before here – Qxz 22:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment from HoJii

Excuse me so much, i did a stupid thing leaving my computor on while i was away and i can see my little brother has been doing some vandalizing. I'm sorry about this. If there is any vandalizing again done by this user it's not me, just so you know. But i won't do the same mistakes in the future, this has actually happened before.HoJii – HoJii 15:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well. I suggest you exercise a little more care in future; persistent vandalism may well lead to your account being blocked even if you are also making good edits. Thanks for your understanding – Qxz 18:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment Contribs for this user are any thing but productive. HoJii (talk · contribs) Purgatory Fubar ^Converse or Snafu 19:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Please check out what i have written on my talk thing, HoJii – 20:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Responded at User talk:HoJii – Qxz 19:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ad Request

I'm part of Wikiproject Vancouver. Its not new, but I think that actvity had fallen lately. Could you please try creating an ad for it. Thanks! Canadianshoper 18:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your suggestion. I'll see what I can do – Qxz 18:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Canadianshoper 18:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

– Qxz 00:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Thats a great banner Great Job! Canadianshoper 01:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Special links

Where are all the "Special pages" links, like "My page", documented?

I don't have a clue where to find the syntax for those.

And I've been here over a year!

(sheepish grin)

The Transhumanist   22:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

There's a list of all special pages at Special:Specialpages; this includes Special:Watchlist, Special:Contributions and Special:Preferences but oddly not Special:Mypage and Special:Mytalk. These point to the userpage and user talk page, respectively, of the user viewing the page. These two special pages accept subpage paths too, so for example Special:Mypage/monobook.css points to the user's CSS (assuming they're using the default skin), and Special:Mytalk/Archive 1 points to a subpage of their talk page called "Archive 1". Note that, like all Special: pages, the link is always blue even if the page doesn't exist, and sadly #ifexist: doesn't work with them. Thanks – Qxz 19:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment from Z.E.R.O.

Your vandal fighting skills have surpassed by users Curps and Omicronpersei8. I consider nominating you for admin in a few months. zero » 00:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You are the second person to say that in four hours. Please, at least take the trouble to read the rest of my talk page before saying such a thing – if not the archives, where there are several such requests. Each one of them is going to get the same answer: No, I do not want to be an administrator. Comparing me to two users who left months ago also demonstrates little and if anything is insulting to them. Thanks – Qxz 19:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Your bot request

I think you withdrew that a bit hastily. We have a duty to cover all bases, but I'm sure provided the transclusion limits weren't hit it would ultimately have been approved. --kingboyk 13:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

If the bot approval process is going to become as pedantic as RfA, I'm not interested. Thanks – Qxz 19:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

similar account...

...is this you? zero » 00:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it's not me. And since it was created over a year ago and has fewer than 50 edits, I also fail to see how it is "similar" in anything but name. I also find this an assumption of bad faith on your part; by that logic, I could accuse you of being a sockpuppet of User:Zero R – Qxz 00:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, no; I have changed my username from Meteoroid to Z.E.R.O. at Wikipedia:Changing username and I have been using this username for only 10 days. I do not know if is acceptable to change usernames more than 3 times. zero » 00:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

You can change usernames as many times as you wish (at least, if a bureaucrat approves the change; I imagine they'd begin to get annoyed if you requested them too often). Thanks – Qxz 00:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

About spam

Yes. I have sent some wikipedia mails to some editors and technically they may be contrued to be spam. However, my purpose was to watch the development and emergence of online community, and I had made this clear in my mail. If you feel aggrieved then I express my apology. However, I still feel that we should participate in emerging online communities to learn more about the phenomenon at its nascent stage, and to apply the lessons to wikipedia if possible. Still I respect your right to feel aggrieved and I would request to treat the matter in this light. I also think that (though may have all the right to think differently) this issue has nothing to do with my position as an administrator here, and it was done in my personal capacity. In case, people feel otherwise, I shall send any one any mail only after asking the editor concerned as regards his/ her intention to receive any mail from me outside anything connected with wikipedia. Sometimes, people surely send mails not connected with wikipedia and it should not be construed as a misconduct on the part of any editor or administrator. However, at the second thought I think that you people are right in your judgment in commenting about my action. As wished by you, I am also posting this at the ANI. Regards. --Bhadani 02:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. In future, if you do wish to contact users regarding a project (external or internal), I would recommend using talk pages rather than email, and only contacting those users who have expressed interest in the subject (from your description, it sounds like you went through a page history and emailed everyone on it, which is generally a bad idea). Thanks again for your understanding – Qxz 03:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I thank you all for guiding me in the matter. This spirit shows the resilience of wikipedia community - I now understand better the level of collective maturity of the wikipedians, and any other wiki should draw inspiration from such level of maturity to deal with the matters. Regards. --Bhadani 16:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

For my future reference. --Bhadani 16:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Strategic management

You've made a recent contribution to the article on strategic management, and I've made a proposal to revert that article to a prior version that existed before vandalism in July 2006. Please see Talk: Strategic management#Once_a_great_article. Please add your comments to that talk page if you're concerned about this. Thank you. --SueHay 04:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Strategic management – Qxz 04:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Mass protection of stub templates

Hi Qxz

I notice that you've begun mass protecting a large number of stub templates. For your information, we have around 3,000 of these. Have you consulted WP:WSS at all before beginning this? Stub templates are virtually never vandalised so any such action should at least be debated with WP:WSS first. Simply protecting a large number of stub templates seems rather over the top to me. Cheers. Valentinian ^{T / C} 08:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, you're not the first person to mistake me for an administrator while doing this, but I assure you I am not one. :) You'll notice I'm not editing any templates, only talk pages. All I am doing is tagging the talk pages of indefinitely protected templates with {{permprot}} in cases where this has not already been done, so that users know the protection is indefinite, and can see what to do if they want to propose changes. I am not protecting or unprotecting anything (and I can't, even if you wanted me too). If you do have an issue with any of these templates being protected, I recommend you take it up with the administrator who did protect them; you should be able to find this in the protection log. Thanks – Qxz 08:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. That template is normally avoided on WP:WSS, so I don't see the point in it. Well, you've definitely revealed something interesting; that several templates are protected without any reason at all. {{Poland-bio-stub}}, or {{Austria-bio-stub}}. They aren't controversial at all. Valentinian ^{T / C} 09:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

If you feel the protection is inappropriate, by all means request they be unprotected; I'm not making a judgement as to whether or not the protection is appropriate (unless I find a very obvious case like a protected template that's not used at all, in which case I'll go to WP:RFPP). If they are unprotected, remove the {{permprot}} again to avoid confusing people, though I recommend you leave it in place otherwise – it is useful, and apart from anything else, Special:Whatlinkshere on that template is just about the only reliable way of getting a list of all protected templates, without having to trawl through the protection log, as administrators frequently neglect to add {{protected template}} to a template when protecting it. Thanks – Qxz 09:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'll like to hear the answer, but do you have any idea about how many stub templates this affects? Valentinian ^{T / C} 09:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Replied with list on User talk:Valentinian – Qxz 09:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the list. I'll ask WP:WSS to go through it. Btw, I got a good laugh from the "advertisement" on your page. Valentinian ^{T / C} 09:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to hear you like the ads; if you have a bit of time, there are over 30 of them (though not all humorous); click the "show another" button to go through them – Qxz 09:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Admin

Hi there! Are you an admin? R@y 10:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No. If you want an administrator, pick one from the list – Qxz 11:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry about that, I forgot how to remove the article. It seemed unnecessary to have two separate articles about the exact same thing. – R00723r0 03:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:R00723r0 – Qxz 03:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

I noticed your revert here within the minute, and had a look at your contributions... Re. RfA discussion above, I reckon another month, then you should start gearing up. Tyrenius 05:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You deserve this for your tireless work. Tyrenius 05:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar. As far as adminship is concerned, once again, I do not want to be an administrator. What is it about that that people find so difficult to understand? – Qxz 05:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I thought you were just concerned about the requirements not being fulfilled. There's a nice user box that says this person is not an administrator and does not want to be one. That would save the hassle... :) Tyrenius 05:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

This is true; however it seems a little rude; a while back I had a notice telling people not to give me any more barnstars (this was after I got seven in one day), and while I still don't want any, I ended up removing the notice because people thought it gave a bad impression. I also happen to think userboxes are stupid :) I am a little confused as to why so many people (must be at least seven, now) have suggested I should be shoved onto RfA in a month or so; they seem to be obvlivious to the fact that I have been here for only two months, and I would be overwhelmingly opposed on length of time actively editing alone (many people seem to consider six months an absolute minimum) – Qxz 05:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the barnstar - you seemed a bit denuded of them!

That's because I archived the others away. I could leave them at the top of the page, but then there wouldn't be room for anything else.

Put up a notice/notices. You can always do a custom one.

I did. I even made a new version of Image:Barn star free zone.png for the purpose. I've decided it's better just to not fuss and archive them away.

It will solve the problem. On RfA people take all factors into account.

Much as I'd like to believe you, I fear the many voters simply rely on the output of a couple of scripts, and either support without a real reason, or oppose for "insufficient edits in X space" or "doesn't demonstrate a need for the tools", or something similar. And that's the ones who bother to look at the candidate's history at all, rather than just voting the way everyone else has. It's fairly well-established that RfA is not functioning as it should; the last few dozen archives of WT:RFA show a consensus that this is the case.

This is all academic anyway; I have no intention of going anywhere near RfA, (I went there once, when I was bored, and posted Image:Qxz-ad16.gif, which I think sums up my thoughts on the matter).

The number of edits you've made starts to compensate for the time factor. Obviously the longer you wait the more you lessen risks, but if people have been suggesting it, including admins, that speaks volumes. If you're nom'd any time, this is a formal request that I'd like to be notified (so you won't be canvassing in that case). Tyrenius 05:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Since I would decline any such nomination, rest assured there's no need for you to know. Thanks – Qxz 06:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough! Tyrenius 08:09, 24 March 2007 (UTC)