User talk:Selket/Archive/2

WikiProject:Vital articles

Hello and sorry for the delay, university taking up a lot of time right now!

As for the WikiProject idea, it seems that a few people did make quite a few changes to the page already in regards to what articles are listed there, which happened rather more quickly than I expected. I wanted to wait until the page stabilized again and then perhaps propose the project again. However, its scope was to be a) deciding what articles are listed there (seems to be happenning in a cooperative way without the project anyway) and b) collaborating on certain articles (it was noted that several of these collaborations exist already), so I'm not sure how much more a new WikiProject might help. Any thoughts? I'll try to check my talk page more often. Dafoeberezin3494 06:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

IRC

No, sorry... I found it way too distracting and gave it up ages ago :o) Will you be discussing drugbox changes there then? I thought of asking more WP:PHARM members for input. Fvasconcellos 13:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

And, before I forget:

[Thank you very much; barnstar moved to userpage] --Selket ^Talk 21:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I'd just logged off when you sent me that message, by the way—and thanks for the compliment! Fvasconcellos 21:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportivo football club

Hello, you recently closed the afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportivo football club after someone speedily deleted the article - however, I was wondering if it was your attention to leave the article for the club's home ground Estadio Northchetti (which was joined to the nomination), and whether that needs a seperate afd or if someone will come round and get rid of it in due course. Robotforaday 11:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportivo football club

I had to revert your closing of the above AfD, as the portion of the AfD that dealt with Estadio Norchetti was ongiong and had not been settled (ie likely deleted by the closing admin, whoever that might be). I had previously speedied Derpotivo football club after finding it through edit history (the AfD tag had been removed by an anon). My comments on the AfD came later and were directed at the statium. Cheers and good luck with the editor review. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 13:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. To be hones I missed Estadio Norchetti. I guess I saw red and got too excited. Sorry. --Selket ^Talk 16:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Selketbot

Is Selket bot a 24/7 bot? Real96 00:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, except when my internet goes down or I accidentally close the terminal window. Why? --Selket ^Talk 00:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I had to put a shared IP on this IP. Real96 10:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Drugbox-mab

I just noticed. Excellent work! :) Fvasconcellos 17:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, when I finish migrating them I was going to post a note at Template talk:Drugbox. --Selket ^Talk 20:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for responding

Hello Selket,

Please remove your comments left on the dBFS talk page (and re post the help me tag), as it helps confuse the issue.

If you don't understand, go to dBFS talk page and read the entire events that took place from March 9.

BTW: This page (dBFS) has been sitting too long with these redundant links that only offer a convenient way to promote those sites and provide little value:

1. Rane pro audio reference definition of dBFS
2. Jim Price's "Understanding dB"

Isn't this clear enough?

If you are an administrator, take action. Remove those suspicious links. Thanks Evinatea 08:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have now reviewed the edit history of the DBFS article and I understand your frustration. Nonetheless, {{helpme}} on the article talk page is not the right place to raise this issue. If you believe you are being unfairly treated by an admin, the place to bring it up is WP:ANI. I cannot, however, find where Omegatron even mentioned being an administrator, much less claimed to be able to dictate content as a result. If you can back up this allegation you should; otherwise, remember to assume good faith. --Selket ^Talk 08:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Selket, Thank you. I don't make false accusations. go to his Talk page User_talk:Omegatron#dBFS. Do the right thing deleting those links.

He also added this: We don't delete things just because they aren't sourced. Do you have reason to believe that it is wrong? — Omegatron 05:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

By saying "We" he was implying in my view that he had knowledge that separates users from administrators and it can be construed as coming from a place of knowledge and possibly even of authority.

Thanks . Evinatea 08:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. By "we" I meant "Wikipedia editors". There is essentially no difference between admins and regular editors as far as content disputes, except that admins are trusted to have the experience and goodwill to do advanced things like delete articles without causing disruption. You accused me of vandalism and threatened to "raise this issue to the administrators", so I pointed out that I am one of the (hundreds of) administrators.

Selket, it just came up on my watchlist that Evinatea is involved in a pretty big dispute on Talk:Audio mastering that you might want to look at, which appears to involve his removal of external links to his competitors' websites. — Omegatron 13:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Omegatron, the only difference between you and Mike Sorensen in my view, is that you are an administrator using a pseudo identity that has not been yet associated with foul play. Keep it that way ;-)

There is nothing I would love more than to have Mr. Selket take a look at the facts. Also, don't I get some credit for busting a major spammer (Mike Sorensen) who was abusing Wikipedia for more than a year? Evinatea 14:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

While I think that this is an important discussion that I believe can proceed in a civil manner, might I suggest that this is not the proper forum for this discussion. I will look into the other articles, but my intent in doing so will mainly to evaluate my edits going forwards. This talk page is without a doubt the best place to bring things to my attention, and I would encourage you to do so. However, if you feel the need to go back and forth with each other, please either do it elsewhere or maintain an extra high level of civility given where this discussion is taking place. Thanks, Selket ^Talk 14:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Selket, I have no intention to keep a dialog with Omegatron. I stated all I had to say to him. I told him that he can do with his page dBFS whatever he likes. I left it at that.

I am more concerned at that con artist "Mike Sorensen" coming back with more accusations of spam against me in order to draw attention away from the main point: He got busted for putting external links that help articles, names and web sites in the #1 position at Google.com. Read the audio mastering talk page "Smells like another Evinate......" And your intervention is welcome. Evinatea 15:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

External links use rel="nofollow", meaning they have no effect on Google's search results. Attempting to get a better Google pagerank by spamming Wikipedia is futile. — Omegatron 16:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Omegatron, why a "nofollow" page then be followed by Google? Who gave you the scoop on Google anyway? Martin? shhh. Hey, in any case, "audio mastering" search at Google had our Wikipedia page coming in the results at number one. That by itself would have been a big boost. All you would do is just follow the link.

You want to cover for the spammer on that one too? If you want to help, help stop Sorensen who is now using "Biggy P" user name to erase key comments from the audio mastering talk page. Evinatea 16:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, something that it was brought up time after time by Sorensen, is beginning to make sense as to why it preoccupied him so much.

Example, he said: "Evinatea wrote : "...Mastering (Post-Production) is the art of optimizing sound frequencies in order to meet industry standards.." First of all this looks to me like another spam directly related to his previous spam about "Maximum Blah, Blah, Potential" which talks about optimizing and maximizing frequencies..."

He would always quote anything I wrote implying "spam" wording or whatever.

So, he obviously thinks that not only links can help the search engines but phrases too. Now, can this be possible? Evinatea 18:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Basigin

Hi Selket! Thanks for the kind words. Yeah, I stumbled on to your basigin page somehow when I was working on other stuff yesterday and got curious!! Might as well put the reading to good use ;-) take care Ciar 16:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Goofed-up Template Problem

I don't know how to fix the SharedIPEDU|University of Wisconsin Maddison template. The name is spelled wrong, and lacks a hyphen. It should be University of Wisconsin-Madison. --Orange Mike 18:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your question, sorry. Is this regarding one of SelketBot's edits? Please provide a link. -- Selket ^Talk 18:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the bot edit to User_talk:205.213.216.254 (and others). --Orange Mike 18:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

This has been fixed in the bot. There is no easy way to fix the old templates, but it should not make this mistake again. I have fixed User talk:205.213.216.254. If you find others, feel free to do the same. --Selket ^Talk 19:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

How Convenient

Dear Mr. Selket,

How convenient. Administrator Omegatron returns from hiatus to make sure the links were re-posted. No explanation to me or you, because "He is an administrator" (See his talk page)User_talk:Omegatron#dBFS.

He did put on his edit summary "Attributions" :"rv removal of references - please see WP:ATT"

That's not right, but at this point, I can't do more for that Wikipedia page.

Ironically, the user who supported him (John Cardinal) raised the issue as to why some editors were "too hot" for the links and whether there might be some hidden reason such as direct association with those web sites by one of the editors (Me).

Well, I am not the one who created and planted those links. It was Mr. Administrator Omegatron. That doesn't mean that he maybe personally involved on those 2 websites.

He created the page on July 7, 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DBFS&oldid=18333236). Have a good night. Evinatea 07:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Selket my friend, I leave it up to you. I talk to you later. It's always good chatting with you and thanks for the advise. Evinatea 11:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Evinatea, please do not misrepresent what I said. I did not accuse you of having an association with the external web sites. I didn't accuse anyone of it. I asked if there was a subtext to the dispute. You asked what I meant by that. I gave a couple examples, including one where someone has an association with one of the sites. It was an example, nothing more. John Cardinal 13:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

143.215.155.44

Hi there! I noticed that Selketbot didn't tag this IP when I posted a message on the talk page--this IP is registered as "Georgia Institute of Technology". I went ahead and tagged it. Hope this is helpful to you. --Xnuala 19:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. SelketBot is a computer and so is not always perfect. It looks for keywords like "College" and "University" in the name of the IP address owner. Putting Institute in leads to too many false positives. Leaving it out leads to a few false negatives like the one you found. Thanks for tagging it. -- Selket ^Talk 19:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it helpful to you to let you know when we find false negatives, or should we just go ahead and tag it?--Xnuala 20:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Answers

Your answers at WP:ER were right to the point and very clear. Thank you. They've prompted some more questions, which are waiting for you there! The Transhumanist   19:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate SharedIPEDU boxes

FYI - For 205.124.225.250 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), your bot left a duplicate {{SharedIPEDU}} box. [1] I suspect this is because the existing SharedIPEDU template was substituted. Not sure if there is a way for your bot to check for that and remove the substituted template and leave just the one? Regards. --Aude (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You are exactly right that it is because the old one saw subst'ed. People have mostly stopped subst'ing the {{SharedIP}} templates but there are still a few old ones around that get hit every now and then (once or twice a month out of ~5000 edits). It keeps a permanent record of all the pages it's edited, so the bot should never revisit that one. Thanks for cleaning it up. --Selket ^Talk 20:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

One more thing...

When I manually place these templates, I will almost always link the name of the school. With the bot, I don't really need to manually place them anymore.

But when I did, instead of:

{{SharedIPEDU|Utah Educational Network}}

I might link (if lazy) to our Wikipedia article:

{{SharedIPEDU|[[Utah Education Network]]}}

However, 90% of the time I will link to the school's webpage:

{{SharedIPEDU|[http://www.uen.org/ Utah Education Network]}}

If possible, I will make the link go to the school's "computer use policy" which is sometimes available on school websites and easy to find. Ideally, to deal with vandalism, it would be excellent if we had a list of contacts for abuse of those policies and could actually contact them if vandalism was really bad. Maybe your bot doesn't have to do any of these links, but when we leave subsequent warnings, we can add these links. That's a good first step. --Aude (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Is there a consensus somewhere that this should be done? If so I can look into implementing it. The first link could be done through the template. The second style of link could be done also, but I would need a list of schools and the URL to which you would like me to link. If you provide me such a list and can form a consensus at Template talk:SharedIP or Template talk:SharedIPEDU, I'd be happy to add it to the bot's functionality. -Selket ^Talk 20:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

One person can't possibly develop a list, but think people are interested in doing more to deal with school vandalism. I raised this on the enwiki mailing list and people seemed interested in a collective effort of compiling a list of contacts, etc. and perhaps reporting some of the problems. Of course, some schools may just say "block us" or maybe others have a way of actually finding the kids that do this. I can go ahead and raise this somewhere on wiki. --Aude (talk) 20:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The SharedIPEDU talk page looks infrequently visited. I left a message there anyway, and one at Wikipedia_talk:Counter-Vandalism_Unit#School_admin_contacts_and_web_links which is where any coordinated effort I think would happen. --Aude (talk) 20:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. You don't need to copy any replies to my talk page. I see your replies here. Thanks. --Aude (talk) 20:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, if I can get a list, implementing it on the bot is easy. I'll make a note on CVU's page also. -- Selket ^Talk 20:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your response to my help request. But I am really bothered by that. What it means is that Myriam has to be treated as a second class citizen of Wikipedia. She can't do the things that other editors regularly do, such as helping revert non-consensus changes, or take part in some dispute or other. She doesn't get reverts if I've also reverted. Because she is involved in the same pages, and also has similar opinions, she has to be treated second class. This just isn't right. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 01:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I know it may seem unfair, but remember that 3RR is not a right, it's an electric fence. I try to follow the 1 revert rule, myself. The idea behind the 3RR is to prevent edit wars and build consensus through discussion on the talk page. I'm sure that you and Myriam can each add your own perspective to the debate, so nothing is lost, and the two of you would each be making a more substantial impact. -- Selket ^Talk 01:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

My Game

Hi Selket, my game is meant to see if you can research this stuff or if you just happen to know them.Sam ov the blue sand 00:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!!!

WikiThanks

Thanks a lot!!! --Nirajrm ^{talk ||| sign plz!} 00:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! --Selket ^Talk 00:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Castelseprio

Well, if you think so. Thanks for your efforts anyway! Johnbod 02:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I just don't think there is anything more I can do. --Selket ^Talk 02:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you/they still looking for another mediator/ assistance? Or has the entire routine worn itself down into a merely messy personal feeling issue? A quick read indicated that activity has settled. At least they listened to the suggestion that you made... Jacketed 08:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

They have calmed down, but nobody has conceded anything. Johnbod is still unhappy with the article. -- Selket ^Talk 14:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Mohammad Badshah Qadri-ul-Chishti Yamani Raichuri

Please read my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Badshah Qadri-ul-Chishti Yamani Raichuri and see if you still believe that this article needs to be deleted. I have added the three electronic references to the article, although the last one is not very reliable. --Bejnar 04:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar for Kevatta Sutta- I appreciate it. --Clay Collier 07:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support in my recent RfA. The point about shifting consensus over time is well-made, although I think in the case of schools it would be at least as likely to backfire if someone were to attempt it. Trying to impose something that contentious would most likely lead to a lot of DRVs. Still, excellent question. Shimeru 15:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think support is more meaningful if it comes with tough questions. Congratulations. -- Selket ^Talk 17:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Image file needs to be edited?

I believe the upper red area labeled "Lateral Antebrachial Cutan. C5 - C6" should be labeled the "Dorsal Antebrachial Cutan. C5 - C6". If I am wrong... ignore this :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gray812.svg smt 17:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No, you are correct. Thank you for pointing out my mistake. I've corrected it. --Selket ^Talk 17:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

WHOIS vs RDNS

Hi Selket. Is there any chance SelketBot can give preference to Reverse DNS lookup queries over WHOIS or at least try to fill in the host= switch to SharedIPEDU when possible. I find that there's a lot of primary/secondary school networks that are listed under University RIRs. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  04:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Probably. Can you give an example of a school where this is the case please? -- Selket ^Talk 04:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

165.138.160.15 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log)

Indiana Higher Education Telecommunication System, Illinois Century Network, MOREnet, Washington K-20 Education, and WiscNet are also other networks off the top of my head where RDNS usually provides more accurate identification than the WHOIS. But it sometimes does require a human and a search engine to recognise a school's name from a hostname. I think the best bet is for the RDNS lookup result to be inserted into SharedIPEDU by the bot and then have admins update the tag by hand when there's a mismatch between the hostname and the school name. --  Netsnipe  ►  16:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

So what are your thoughts on RDNS tagging? --  Netsnipe  ►  17:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I will implement it when I get a chance to sit down a just do it. It may be a couple of days. Also, once it is working, to go back and fix old pages I will need new bot approval, which will take a few days more. Sorry for not being responsive -- real world work duties are pretty intense right now. --Selket ^Talk 20:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Your Question on my RFA

That is a very valid question that, to be honest, hadn't crossed my mind before. As I said on the question itself:

I had planned on remaining the chair, regardless of how this RfA turns out. I hadn't seen any potential conflicts of interest in being either chair or admin, so I honestly hadn't thought too heavily on this. I do understand that there are situations in which serving in one capacity would make serving in another a potential issue (serving on ArbCom/MedCom comes immediately to mind). However, as most chairs of the committee have been admins while chair, I don't see any reason why I could not do the same. However, if there is some potential issue that you see with this that I'm overlooking, please bring it to my attention.

Do you see a potential conflict of interest? I'm very curious, as this question now has me thinking about that quite a bit.

Regards ^demon^{[omg plz]} 08:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can imagine possible conflicts of interest but not any likely one. Your RfA is going to pass by a sizable margin so this is somewhat moot. I could see people going either way on your answer. That is, if you say you'd stay some people might be concerned about conflicts; if you say you're going to step down some people might be concerned about loosing a good chair. I wanted !voters to have as much information as possible.

I do think that there are many new editors who, right or wrong, view admins as moderators. Your admining may put you in the other group, but again this can be fixed with a little awareness on your part that you are doing two jobs. I'm sure you'll be able to balance the two roles. Good luck. -- Selket ^Talk 14:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I had never thought of it like that before, thanks for helping to put things in a new perspective. Honestly, I believe my work on the MedCom is of a far greater significance and benefit to the project than me receiving the sysop flag, so if push came to shove, I'd step down from being an admin before I stepped down from the committee. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 18:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Circular redirects

Replied: User talk:Dgies#Speedy deletion

re: Noscapine

Hi there Selket, While researching a page request for Anarcotine (I created a redirect page to noscapine) I noticed you have worked on Noscapine lately. There seems to be some promising research on noscapine as a chemo agent for various cancers that I thought belonged in the article. I have some knowledge in this area but see from your user page that you probably have much more than I do and I wondered if you would be willing to review some literature and add perhaps a paragraph on noscapine in cancer treatment. I see that it is mentioned in the opening paragraph, but the link doesn't work. The stuff I scanned from a g-search [[2]] made it look very promising, but again this is way out of my expertise with pharmas and oncology. Thanks --killing sparrows 06:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your confidence in me. Truth be told, my research has nothing to do with cancer and very little to do with pharmacology. I work on the wikipedia drug articles as a hobby. I've only taken a couple of pharmacology classes (a while ago), so I kind of know what to look for but am not in any way an expert on the subject. I will take a look at the article, but I'm not sure when I'll be able to devote a substantial chunk of time to it. I would encourage you to keep plugging away at it. Also instead of google, try pubmed. You usually can't get the full articles unless you are on a university computer, but the abstracts will show the findings of the paper. I find a higher signal to noise ration there than on google. --Selket ^Talk

Selketbot

Where's Selketbot? Real96 21:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Should be running. May have stopped about 24 hours ago. I'm not sure why. --Selket ^Talk 22:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I take it back -- 48 hours ago. I'm not sure what went wrong but it's running now. --Selket ^Talk 22:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Humphrey_Lyttelton.jpg deletion

If you have a better image of "Humph", please put it up; otherwise, please leave it. MaxHund 15:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

SVG Logos

Actually, Logos can be in SVG, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:AeroM%C3%A9xico_Logo.svg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GE_Logo.svg, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Yahoo_Logo.svg --62.57.162.108 16:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

There is a guideline against this. Examples of a few images that violate the guideline does not give you permission to consistantly violate it. --Selket ^Talk 16:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S., go read WP:LOGO. -- Selket ^Talk 16:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for support in my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the support, and am disappointed on being judged by what in most opinions seem to be the wrong things. Until next time, edit on! :) — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 03:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

1-San

I added a bit to the page. If you think this is enough great, if not I will try to find a few more references. Thanks, Colincbn 15:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am open to recall. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 20:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

SelketBot/152.3.46.147

Hi, SelketBot tagged this IP, but the user denies it is shared and the edit history appears to support this. Cheers, AntiVan 03:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

RDNS resolves to res-152-3-46-147.dorm.duke.edu which would explain why the user doesn't want to be tagged as Shared. --  Netsnipe  ►  13:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. This is a problem with university IP in that, from the whois, it is impossible to determine whether an IP belongs to a computer lab, to a library 802.11 DHCP pool, to a faculty office, or to a dorm. Dorms become even more complicated because some setups have five or six people on one IP in a suite style dorm. At most, a dorm IP is "not shared" for 9 months. Anyway from a design point of view no bot will ever be perfect. I decided it was better to have a few false positives because they can easily be corrected. There is an additional level of safety in that the bot keeps a log of the pages that it has tagged. It should not hit the same page twice. --Selket ^Talk 14:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Come on...

It was a picture of giraffe sex in the sexuality section —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rustbl (talk • contribs) 08:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

And if you had a history of positive contributions to zoological or sexuality articles, that argument would be persuasive. However, you have a history of the opposite -- sexually explicit jokes and other non-encyclopedic "humor" inserted into articles. --Selket ^Talk 08:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Why...

do you wikipedia lot make it as difficult as possible to place an article on this site, as well as do anything else. The entire setup for this site lacks organisation. After over $1,000,000 donation money i would have expected better. I feel disappointed and let down. So much so in fact, im moving to www.uncyclopedia.org! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rpb140990 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Attention

As I apologized to Edhubbard, so I apologize to you, I shall use talk pages before moving a major page. Thanks for the patience and civility. WLU 14:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No apology needed. Please continue to be bold. -- Selket ^Talk 14:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Michael Emin Salla

I added some references, how does it look? (:O) -Nima Baghaei (talk) 16:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Opera titles

Hello from the Opera Project.

I see on a talk page that you intend to re-title some operas. I wonder if you could hold of on this until you have read the guidance sections on our project page. We have done quite a lot of work systematizing the titles based on WP policy and existing publishing norms. It is complex but obviously we wish to maintain consitency and avoid re-inventing any wheels. Best - Kleinzach 02:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Fine, but look at, for example, Template:Janacek operas and Počátek Románu. They do not agree. -- Selket ^Talk 03:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes of course there will be anomalies (I have never seen the Počátek Románu page before). I suggest talking it over with GuillaumeTell who has done most of the work here. - Kleinzach 03:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Is Selketbot dead?

Is Selketbot dead? I had to add a SharedIP template to a page. Could you please consider putting Selketbot on schedule from 6:00 to 0:00 UTC each day? (for UK and US schools -- along with AUS schools as well). Thanks. Real96 23:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Just restarted it. --Selket ^Talk 16:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Selketbot

[Thank you so much, moved to user page] -- Selket ^Talk 00:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Microscope.jpg

Who is the author of this image?Geni 23:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Richard Wheeler (Zephyris). See history. -- Selket ^Talk 00:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

so why doesn't it ssay that on commons?Geni 00:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It says that it came from the en Wikipedia. I thought that was sufficient to direct people to the history. If you know a better way, please fix the commons page to look the way you want it to. --Selket ^Talk 05:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The En version will get deleted at some point and even if it did not that is not an acceptable way of giveing credit. as the uploader that is your responcibility.Geni 06:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

apologies for my tone I was somewhat tired.Geni 15:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:UCSDa1.gif

I have added a speedy delete tag to the image that I uploaded that you tagged as an orphaned fair use. If you can, you may delete it. Thanks for calling it to my attention so it could be processed in an expedited manned. Thanks! --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 04:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

3O

I wonder why you are telling me? Shouldn't you be telling the original poster? Frelke 05:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably. 3Os are generally signed semi-anonymously, so I replied to the linked page. I was of the impression that you were the poster since your userpage was getting trolled as well. I will look through the page history and post a similar message on the original poster's page. --Selket ^Talk 06:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image Deleted

File:Redheadedbella.jpg

This is my caption

My image Image:Zomgpicturesfinallllly_098.jpg was listed for deletion and deleted, and I had intended to put the picture up for the article "red hair" but I was having trouble. If you would so kindly tell me how to insert a picture into an article with a caption, I could re-upload it and get everything sorted out. Thank you, - MegaZega93

Like this:

[[Image:Redheadedbella.jpg|thumb|right|100px|This is my caption]]

--Selket ^Talk 22:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Minor "of the" issue

Hi,
Neat bot! However, I noticed in User talk:163.238.101.30 (in an older revision) that it tagged it:

{{SharedIPEDU|College of Staten Island of the}}

…I'm not sure where the "of the" came from. This is so minor it could be ignored, but I thought it would be better to inform you than ignore it.+mwtoews 01:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. The "of the" comes from the whois database. The OrgName field is limited 32 characters. I think what they were trying to say was "College of Staten Island of the City University of New York." When the network was set up, I don't know why the CUNY people didn't realize that. In fact there are a few other places in the entry that have typos. But yes, you are right to bring it to my attention. Thanks. --Selket ^Talk 04:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

Hey Selket, Thanks for looking out for me. You were exactly right about my template! Tommy0876 16:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason why I didn't report it.

I thought that site would require membership or something. TheBlazikenMaster 16:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It requires you to sign up. But that's it. --Selket ^Talk 16:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Notability of WYSO-FM

A tag has been placed on WYSO-FM, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Captain panda 00:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have replied with {{holdon}} and on the talk page of the article in question. Please see my comments there. --Selket ^Talk 00:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Your points made me decide to not suggest this artilce for speedy deletion. Sorry if I caused you any problems. Captain panda 00:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. I've been known to pull the trigger too fast myself from time to time. --Selket ^Talk 00:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Political parties

I noticed you raised the issue on a guideline for notability of political parties. I have raised the issue again, on Wikipedia talk:Notability. --Soman 08:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

SVG, PNG

You said: "Your user talk page is protected and this is the only way to get into contact with you. Please reply on my talk page not, via email.

I removed the {{SVG}} tag from Image:VMware.Logo.png to comply with WP:F and WP:LOGO. I was doing a lot of these and happened to paste the wrong edit summary on that particular image."

Yes, my talk page is protected due to a particularly abusive vandal. Sorry about that. As to removing the SVG tag, it's not clear to me why you did so. Certainly, we aren't required to use svg images for logos but they are clearly superior to PNG for this sort of thing. The SVG tag does not say there's anything particularly wrong with PNG images, just that SVG would be better. Am I missing something? --Yamla 16:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOGO states:

“ Overly high-resolution versions of logos should be avoided, however, as they are less likely to be fair use. Do not use SVG formats, as this can infringe on fair use. However, if vector artwork is available, they can be rasterized to a screen-resolution PNG format. ”

This is because they are fair use images. To comply with fair use requirements, at least in the U.S., I can't speak to the laws elsewhere, the reproduction of the copyrighted work must be as minimal as possible to achieve the goals of the fair use. For example, if the fair use being cited for a logo is company identification, then the logo should be in the minimum resolution necessary for the company to be identifiable. Now we can argue over whether a particular logo needs be 300px or 250px to be identifiable -- although I have no intention of doing so. However, an SVG is effectively infinite resolution and is clearly larger than necessary to permit identification. --Selket ^Talk 16:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, you have completely convinced me. I withdraw my objection. Thanks! --Yamla 16:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)