User talk:Daniel/Archive/69

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Daniel. No further edits should be made to this page. For a list of archives for this user, see User talk:Daniel/Archive.

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any comments to the current talk page.

← Archive 68 · Archive 69 · Archive 70 →

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 19 ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit dissapointed by the outcome of my request for mediation. There has already been a lot of discussion about the urbanisation figures in the population section of the indigenous australians page. The information there is false. Wikipedia is a laughing stock. It says urbanisation is decreasing and everyone knows it stands to reason it is increasing.

Why can't the editors in question accept the fact that rural towns are urban areas just like major cities?!?

And the figues there are for 2001. I think you will find the 2006 census contains comparable updated data. Just have a look for yourself would you? Are you happy this article contains out of date false information?

Can't you have a word to that hard arse editor orderinchaos?

Governorauthur (talk) 12:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments here are totally inappropriate. Furthermore, I will not interject myself into your dispute as it would compromise the neutrality with which I just rejected your RfM. Please use prior dispute resolution, as I indicated when I rejected the RfM. Daniel (talk) 04:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Daniel,

I want to be an administrator on Wikipedia some day, and I have been here for over 4 years. I was wondering if you can screen my account, and see if at this point in time, I can meet the bar for admin? If not, can you give me some advice? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbiteroftruth (talk • contribs)

WP:GRFA gives an overview of the basics. And please sign your posts. —Dark ^talk 09:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to everyone who participated in my RfA, regardless of their !vote. I have withdrawn the nomination as a failure at 19 supports, 45 opposes, and 9 neutral statements. As has been written and sung, you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need — and what I need is to go back to working on our shared project. Not everyone has to be an admin; there is a role for each of us. After reflection, I feel I don't have the temperament to secure community consensus as an admin at any point, and I will not be applying again in the future — and hey, that's all right, 'cause I stay true to the philosophy that adminship is no big deal: I tried, I failed, and now I'll return to doing what I've always done. I have an extremely strong belief in the consensus process, and the consensus was clear. I will be devoting my energies to volunteering at MedCab and working up a complete series of articles on the short stories of Ernest Hemingway, among lord knows what else. Thanks again to everyone who spared the time to weigh in on this one. It was made in better faith than it probably seemed. Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't mean to disrupt the encyclopedia when I make proposals — I'm just trying to get my point across in my own way. That said, not everyone is suited to be an administrator, and maybe I'm one of those people. Probably am. Anyway, I appreciate your participation, and I like your A-League work. Cheers, and see you 'round! Mr. IP 《Defender of Open Editing》 14:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. I hope to see you around. Daniel (talk) 04:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, I am getting a user not authorized on Vandal Proof, which I have never seen before. When I checked the page I saw that no new users are being accepted and wondered if the program is being shut down. What is the status of the program? Am I no longer on the list of users? Please respond here rather than my page; I will be watching it. Thanks. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 19:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like nearly everything on Wikipedia, VandalProof is operated by volunteers. This means that there will be periods where approving users will be reduced in frequency for a variety of reasons. Daniel (talk) 04:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a reminder, the Working Group's deadline to post a final report, occurs on August 7. A draft final report is now on EN, at Wikipedia:Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars/Draft report. Could you please review it, and either edit it, post comments at the talkpage, and/or post your endorsement at the bottom of the report? Thanks, Nishkid (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. Daniel (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I can't find the page for the All Knowing Force radio show on here any longer. I'm just wondering what happened. It's one of the biggest shows in this market and the host is on VH-1. -A devoted listener, Lori Blanchard —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lori14 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted as it was a proposed deletion. Daniel (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unless you're planning a run for one of the most thankless jobs on wikipedia, maybe you could swing by Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008 to take a look... would you maybe stick your hand up to be on a committee to help organise and run this one? see what ya reckon.... Privatemusings (talk) 03:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not, and commented :) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"I'll probably not be getting involved with this election at all except for supporting a handful of candidates :)" I'll make you see the light on how glorious the duty of an arbcom member really is ... And you don't have to beg Dmcdevit for access to the mailing list either That, and a bit of blackmailing eh... pleasant commentary will allow you to control the politics of Wikipedia forever :D dangles a piece of important paper with the Wikimedia logo in front of Daniel, like a carrot.

Sincerely,

Dark ^talk 07:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For and on behalf of the Australian Cabal

*stab* *stab* *punch* *kick* *stab*

For the secret leadership group of the Australian Cabal,

Daniel (talk) 07:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second the motion

For Narnia,

—Giggy 07:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel,

I have just sent an email to the MedCom mailing list. As I know you are the moderator of this mailing list, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look at the email, and forward it to the actual list. If that's alright. Thanks, Steve Public (talk) 08:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forwarded. Daniel (talk) 09:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, the request was to confirm if my authorization to use VandalProof was revoked. I have used it for quite some time and now it is not working. Please answer here on your page. Thanks. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 15:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From all appearances it has not. Are you using the most up-to-date version? Daniel (talk) 15:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, forgive me for not being an expert in Wikipedia rules. However I know the facts you have removed to be true as friends were involved in them. What would you suggest? Darren.reynolds (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They need to be referenced to well known, established, reliable sources. Then you need to get a consensus to readd the material, reword it so it's not a coatrack-like statement, and prove that its inclusion is encyclopedic. Daniel (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like i've brake the bot at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation =( 91.122.90.169 (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed =) 91.122.90.169 (talk) 16:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've noticed you dealt with a few BLP matters in the past. You may be interested that a matter involving the Joji Obara article has ended up at ANI, and a prod template has been slapped on the article. The discussion, is here. D.M.N. (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commented. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 14:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alastair Haines/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alastair Haines/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Coren ^(talk) 02:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, per whose request? The IP that blanked it wasn't even from the same country as the one that submitted it...Someguy1221 (talk) 08:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An associate of the subject, via private email. Daniel (talk) 09:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now, I bet you're thinking, 'No way! The guy's only come back!' but listen. Readthis and you'll know why I'm messaging you. I have had a two week enforced break, as you well know, to think about this, and Sticky is right. I do say OMG and ZOMG and various other stupid things. I also put pictures up. I'm sorry for not doing mainspace edits. I have an interest in The Streets right now, so I can edit more. I will continue to do non-mainspace stuff, but balance it a bit. I will also continue to AGF, but not so much so that I will look like an immature idiot. I mean, Hippocrates himself said that "A grim man will worry the patient, while a laughing man may be seen as an idiot." I hope this settles things. Goodbye.--Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 10:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reverts. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime :) Daniel (talk) 05:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The log summary for this delete by you reads "No source info, personality rights, BLP, OTRS #2008073110006024". On July 21 I uploaded the image from this site to another website furnishing it with the licence information which I had found on its page here, cc-by-sa-3.0. Now I must inquire whether this is incorrect information. I particularly notice that whereas the image was uploaded with the following information: "I created this work entirely by myself", you contradict this your explanation for deleting the image. Could you explain the reason for this? I have also requested information from User:Essent, the uploader, to clarify this issue. __meco (talk)

"I took it" is a very dubious amount of information to give; a date and a location should be bare minimum to ensure that it isn't copied from somewhere else, and also the lack of Metadata is suspicious. However, more importantly, the subject requests deletion of the image and suggests it wasn't taken with consent, and given this the licensing data is irrelevant; we will not keep poorly-shot images where a subject requests they be deleted and the image isn't widely disseminated. Daniel (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your answer. __meco (talk) 10:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! There are some problems on the article Austrians. There is somebody who edits from an anonymous ip-adress and always reverts my edits with the "explanation" that my opinion isn't reliable because I am a german (as if the nationality woluld play a role ...) --Feierabend (talk) 12:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't left a message on the talk page of the article asking them to discuss their reverts, which would be a good start in my opinion. Daniel (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I explaned my changes in the summary of history of the article. I would also explain him in his talk page, but he always edited from different ip's. However, I didn't notice any edit warring in the last few days, maybe he decided to stop that. --Feierabend (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully he has. Regards, Daniel (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I don't think we've met so hello, I'm Cyclonenim.

I've recently (very recently, today in fact) started mediating cases and I'm having trouble with my first one. I'd appreciate the help of a more experienced mediator to help in my first case because it already seems fairly daunting. I've done small disputes before unofficially but it's so much different when you're doing it as a sort of "official" third-opinion.

Hope all is well, happy editing! —Cyclonenim^T@lk? 22:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I actually used my brain a little, I'd have linked you to the case. Here it is. —Cyclonenim^T@lk? 22:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel, I believe it was you who added the other restrictions section to the BC2 Arb page. You cite there the editing restrictions page but it appears there is no corresponding entry for Beta at that page. My concern here is that (at least) two recent blocks have cited the ArbCom Beta 2 decision, but ArbCom declined Beta 3 because the community was dealing with it - but there is no citable place for the community decision. Maybe RyanP should have entered the ER when he closed the community discussion? I'll ask him too. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 10:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel, I have just filed a request for meditation on the Hemshin peoples entry. I think I am required to inform the involved parties as a requirement of the procedure. This I did through their talk pages as well as the talk page of the entry. The instructions (to my understanding) seem to suggest that there might be a specific procedure through which they should be informed formally. I could not find instructions on such a procedure. So I hope it is ok to inform them only through their talk pages.Omer182 (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel, I just wanted to say thank you for the graceful way that you handled the Jerry Finn article. I have some inside information and it is my understanding that he did in fact die today.

The way that some posters were so quick to report his death was ghoulish and quite harmful. The worst case was when one person tried to correct the information, and was blocked for vandalism. Unfortunately the "v" word is too often used as a method of intimidating other editors (it was used against me once as well). I really think that accusations of vandalism should be restricted to administrators except in obvious cases. Drawing a phallus on Mickey Mouse is vandalism; disagreement over an article's content is not.

Unfortunately, the person who blocked the well-intentioned user in Jerry Finn's article does appear to be an administrator. This administrator ("KOH") acted SO irresponsibly, that I believe he should be stripped of his administrative privileges immediately, if not banned from Wikipedia entirely. Not only did he abuse his authority, he did it in a way that was very hurtful to the innocent.

Anyway, I do appreciate the service that you provided here. Very much.24.6.7.233 (talk) 00:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to unprotect the Central Coast Mariners article? The Marinators section is full of NPOV and weasel words. Sam lightfoot (talk) 01:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the vandalism. The page will be automatically unprotected shortly. Daniel (talk) 03:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi im new to wiki edit can u please help the article i did will not be delted ? i dont know what wrong wite it.its the tredoku article and im not sure this is the right place to write about can u help me edit the tredoku page please thanks the web page is on now. you can also search amazon and see that the book is real and for sale —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mindome (talk • contribs) 13:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit form my page: "Hi, I had to delete Image:Mew_Gull_(new).jpg as it wasn't released into the public domain as you tagged it when you uploaded it last April. As you said, "Original file found on: www.carairo.com/ Breighton.htm" - that page notes that "Copyright of these images is with Carairo - you may however use them for non profit use providing you tell us first and put a link to our site from yours. Click on an image for a larger version". This naturally is not the same as releasing them into the public domain, and indeed that copyright release isn't sufficient for Wikimedia projects. Content on Wikimedia projects, excluding fair use content (which this doesn't include), must be released in a way which allows for commercial reproduction and even resale.

The point of this message was simply a courtesy to let you know that I had deleted one of your images, and also to ask whether there are any similar images that you know are in a similar situation. If there are, could you let me know either on my talk page or via email, so that they can be reconsidered?

Regards, Daniel (talk) 04:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)"

Hi Daniel, thanks for your note. The author of the image, Michael Rushforth has a similar image that was taken at another location that he is willing to insert in place of this image. I will go through the process of having his image clearly identified to replace the infobox image. This image copy was not exactly the same one as described as it was apparently taken at Reno, Nevada while his new image is from Brigthton, England. There was probably some confusion over the image sources. Thanks for your help. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. Daniel (talk) 14:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daniel

I've found a mistake in your list. It looks like the statistics about the first season (05-06) are (in some cases?) wrong. For example Michael Baird played 20 games, not only 10 or Royce Brownlie played 10 league matches (5 in the list). Perhaps the games as substitutes werent counted. There are also missing: Reece Tollenaere, David Williams (footballer) and Shin Tae-Yong. --Ureinwohner (talk) 21:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{sofixit}}. Please remember to include reliable sources when doing so :-) Daniel's so busy with uni work that he's not even interested in his beloved soccer. I wouldn't expect much from a Mariners supporter anyway... no wonder he sabotaged the Roar's page... —Dark ^talk 07:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]