User talk:Xeno: Difference between revisions

This user really enjoys dark and stormy nights.

Hi Xeno,

You commented on my 3R ban recently on my talk page. I haven't had a chance to put my thoughts together on this issue until today [1]. It's important for me to know if I was clearly in the wrong on this issue. Your personal opinion would be appreciated.

Thanks,

--scuro (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I replied at your talk. –xeno ^talk 06:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hoped to get this archived and marked as unresolved seeing that the circular discussion won't cease. Being that the involved parties have stated that they believe another go at mediation would be a waste of time, I am unsure of the next step. Though it seems the RFAR idea was acceptable to most except Scuro himself. As you've been looking over things there, would you mind doing the archiving when you feel the time is right? Thanks. Nja²⁴⁷ 07:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it doesn't appear to be going anywhere. I'm off to bed at the moment so if it's still open when I wake up, I'll see about closing it. –xeno ^talk 07:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sleep? You're not allowed to do that! Nja²⁴⁷ 08:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I remember you corrected that cut-and-paste move I did a little while ago by moving it over the original redirect. Do you think you could move Ninja Gaiden Σ 2 over the Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 redirect? I feel it should be there owing to Wikipedia's naming policy, as well as the fact that official material such as the website for the game, suggests the "sigma" is spelt out in full. SynergyBlades (talk) 17:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. –xeno ^talk 18:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please restore the article Victoria (soda)? I am trying to fix some redlinks in the coca-cola brands template. I will fix any advert info lean. --Jeremy (blah blah) 18:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done –xeno ^talk 18:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This template is different than the other Canada templates and is in the familiar format of other places. Now put it back and stop abusing your administrator powers! Green Squares (talk) 20:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templatespace is not an appropriate location for your single-use forks of existing templates with adequate customization options. I've provided for your version in template:User Canada - just add |alt=yes as an option. –xeno ^talk 21:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I do Template:I Seek To Help & Repair/example template name would that be acceptable? I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 00:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do? The page link you gave me is a THOUSAND feet long, could you tell me in a sentence what I should do?

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 00:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, the templates that are currently expired but still in use, could I just blank out their template pages & nominate it for speedy deletion?

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 00:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, shouldn't him not understanding be moved into the discussion section? I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 00:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, threaded discussions are easier to follow. –xeno ^talk 00:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When is a survey over? Is there a time limit?

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 01:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How can I locate my templates to do a universal edit?

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 01:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, DUH! Thanks, I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I should be fine now, Thanks, I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 02:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RM tag

Thanks for the explanation, sorry about removing the tag. Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 01:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no worries. –xeno ^talk 01:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. --Abce2|AccessDenied 02:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user is a participant of the WikiProject User Rehab

Feel free to put this anywhere on your user page. To edit this box for improvement click here

I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 06:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you do with a userbox after you have put it in the new userbox section? --Abce2|AccessDenied 02:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Find a home for it in the WP:UBX#Gallery. –xeno ^talk 02:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
If it's still open when you read this, would you mind having a look at the unblock request from Br4011 (talk · contribs)?
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 10:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No more active unblock requests. I'm always one for second chance but copyvio is a pain to clean up after, unrepentant violators don't get much sympathy from me. Perhaps a {{2nd chance}} offer, if another unblock request goes up? –xeno ^talk 15:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning. Yes, Daniel came by and declined. I already gave him a second chance by unblocking a couple of days ago, but since he went on as before I am not prepared to try that again, as much as I want to believe that he has learned his lesson now. Sometimes I wonder, with editors who'll just create another sock anyway, if it isn't always better to unblock, to better keep an eye on them. The sock that you know …. But my discussion with him today made me wonder how well he can contribute here anyway, his communication skills are a bit lacking. Anyway, I knew that you were pretty lenient with blocks, so I thought I'd come here for another opinion.
Thanks anyway, Amalthea 16:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for adding it into the list of fictional elements. it was on my "todo" list, but i got bogged down in the stupid arguements on the afd page. >__< ...whenever i end up spending more time on that stuff, than i do on actual creative work, i know i'm in trouble. lolLx 121 (talk) 12:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. =) Note if you want to expand on it, you could also transmogrify it over to List of Star Trek materials. –xeno ^talk 15:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

My name was on the checkpage from before I was an admin for the AWB checklist. I'm fine with my name being removed from the "Bots" on the checklist, as my bot, Thehelpfulbot is already on that checklist.

Regarding the archiving, thanks for telling me about that - I'll archive the threads manually!

Thanks,

The Helpful One 17:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, are you forgetting something, something funny and LAME; or am supposed to add it on. Or the more likely possiblities, # You are ignoring me (again!), # You still haven't got round to it, or # you completely forgot. Lets go with three shall we, (never one =B) but if your not caperable of doing it due to work (on the wiki not real life, as if you'd have a job in real life, haha; yeah thats a joke and half, especially as you said 'Screw work' your self) then should I do it and you change it later? Yo, spocie (your choice) 'The Ninjalemming'' 19:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not take a stab at it? Make sure to be neutral in your description of the edit war. –xeno ^talk 19:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do it tomorrow, after the exam I forgot to revise for, whch infact is a GCSE; v.important. Remember to check it after I have written it though, tumblela weedo (I have resorted to writing random things at the end of talk things do to writing insanity after the war of the article in question, the article which I will never view agin, can you ban just me from it) 'facial features of a slightly nasty splinter' club 'The Ninjalemming'' 20

03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

What is the rule, or is there one, regarding posting links on one's own user page - particularly, links to youtube stuff? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:UP –xeno ^talk 20:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JohnRamirez. I have opened a SPI. Geoff B (talk) 21:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was my first true edit (as in adding something brand new instead of merely expanding on something). How did I do? There are two updates later on that I did quite quickly. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 11:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks great, but you might want to add a {{cite web}} at the end of it. –xeno ^talk 15:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See the next edit. That was what took the longest time I think. :P --Thejadefalcon (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes - nice job all around then =) –xeno ^talk 15:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Yes! I just kept thinking that I probably messed something up. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you could've linked to Artificial intelligence rather than its redirect ;p –xeno ^talk 16:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smeg. Didn't even think of checking if AI had been redirected. I'll correct it now. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was half-joking. ;> At the moment it's a perfectly legitimate redirect. Now if AI had redirected to AI (disambiguation), then you'd have a problem =) –xeno ^talk 16:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you were only half-joking. :P I did correct a few disambiguations and dead links while I was previewing it all. I was slightly surprised to find that heavy weapons didn't get an article, even if it's only a games-related article. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an idea for your next edit... =) Once, I was surprised to not find cover system. –xeno ^talk 16:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, good grief, no! :P Creating articles seems like a step too far right now. Although... hmm... I could try and draft one and ask people's opinions on it. It'll be up within the decade, I assure you. :D --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or just do what I did, and tuck it into a section somewhere. =) –xeno ^talk 16:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, but I want more points on that Wikipedia addiction quiz. :P I have been considering an article lately... I'll ask about it when I've given it more thought as I'm not too sure if I can write the article or if it would be deleted out of possible bias. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

← Bias? Why? –xeno ^talk 16:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's about a published author/sculptor, but I've known her for about a year. Therefore, any personal information (e.g. marital status etc.) that isn't on her site or in interviews is going to be useless in the article. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 16:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I thought you meant bias as to making a heavy weapons article =) You can certainly write about this person if you maintain a neutral tone and don't include that information that can't be drawn from reliable sources. –xeno ^talk 20:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought it was clear that it wasn't about heavy weapons. That's the problem, though. I can't find all that much infomation on her outside of our e-mails. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing your comments on LHvU's reconfirmation RfA, I have a question for you. Could RfA actually have teeth to desysop involuntarily if the consensus is overwhelmingly Oppose? My logic:

1. Stewards desysop based on the desysopping policy of the local wiki: "If a user requests that another user's rights be removed, be sure that the action complies with the local wiki's policy on removal of rights. This will often involve sifting through a lengthy debate on a local request page to confirm the validity of the procedure." (from meta:Steward handbook#Removal of access)
2. No policy on desysopping per se exists on English Wikipedia, but there is WP:DESYSOP, which says "The community also has the power to remove administrator access from any contributor." This how-to guide effectively acts as a policy, or is the closest thing we have to a policy.
3. If 80%+ (generally considered consensus) of RfA respondents Oppose the admin retaining their bit, and a crat in good standing closes the RfA in agreement, the community's will can be considered against the admin retaining their bit.
4. A Steward can then desysop the admin, since it reflects the will of the community, and the community's will is a valid reason given in the closest equivalent to a policy on the matter.

I'm not saying RfA is a good way to do this. I'm just thinking it does have teeth, if certain overwhelming conditions are met. Perhaps my logic is wrong though. Your thoughts? -kotra (talk) 00:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. I believe that is for smaller wikis & other language wikipediae that don't have as developed an admin structure. AFAIK local en.wiki policy only allows stewards to use their own judgment in emergency circumstances. ArbCom can ask them to desysop, but that's about it.
2. I actually just tweaked the wording of that recently, see what it said before [2] ("in theory," - I felt that we do have the power, it's just a little difficult; i.e. congregating before ArbCom or the GodKing's talk page) It's definitely not a policy though =)
3. If that many people were opposing a voluntary reconfirm, then the admin would've been brought before ArbCom by then. If that happened, they could bring the RFA to ArbCom, but as I said at the RFA, ArbCom has neglected to enforce voluntary recalls in the past.
4. See point 1. It's my understanding that stewards are not permitted to use judgment here except insofar as judging whether an emergency has presented itself such that they should use their power as permitted by local policy. –xeno ^talk 01:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. My comments:

1. It's my understanding that stewards wouldn't be using their own judgment in this case, except to judge that the result is approved by the community (which wouldn't be much of a judgment, more a basic observation of the fact). Stewards don't question ArbCom's desysop requests because the community has approved ArbCom's ability to make such decisions on behalf of the community. This would merely be a more direct decision from the community, so I don't see they would have a problem with it, even despite the unconventional process. But I suppose there's no way of knowing without asking stewards what they would do.
2. I thought I recalled the wording being less definitive before, but didn't check. I wonder if it should be a policy, though. Lacking an official policy on desysopping seems to be a major gap to me.
3. Possibly you're right. At 7 days, though, it's a much quicker result than most ArbCom cases (except for initial motions, like Aitias's), so I can see how it might be more desirable in certain non-emergency-but-still-urgent situations. But I was more asking if it was possible to desysop with RfA, not better. I don't honestly know which is better; I can see benefits and drawbacks of each.

-kotra (talk) 17:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's possible, not without re-writing our local policy for stewards, expanding the remit of bureaucrats, or using a RecFA as the basis for an ArbCom motion to desysop. –xeno ^talk 17:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for discussing! -kotra (talk) 18:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how to personalize your signature? I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 01:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, just go to preferences and enter a new sig. If you use code, click "raw signature". –xeno ^talk 01:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have created my personalized signature, should I copy & paste it's formula to the raw signature box, use the template... what? I Seek To Help & Repair! (talk) 02:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, paste it into the signature box. You'll need to shorten it to 255 characters, per WP:SIG#Length. –xeno ^talk 14:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"remember, the enemy's gate is down..."

Just reading the books for the first time, made me think of you. I should be back editing once I re-enter the blissful, test-free summer. I haven't quite reached your namesake yet, is that your favorite one? Hope all is well. Washburnmav (talk) 03:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been so long since I read the books... I can't really remember... I think the original is still my favourite, but I'm also fond of Speaker. –xeno ^talk 14:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again!

While trolling around I came across List of Ben & Jerry's flavors, a redirect to Ben & Jerry's flavors. These articles were merged some time ago with a cut and paste merge. Would it be proper to do a history merge? If so could you do so? Thanks again, --Jeremy (blah blah) 06:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Same for List of fast casual restaurants

 Done... The latter only required the talk page to be moved. –xeno ^talk 14:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Jmho, but pages like this are pretty unnecessary... I think the redirect class is designed for when there was previously content there and it's now a redirect. Not to create it on every possible redirect in the project. YMMV! –xeno ^talk 14:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could collect the diffs of say my last 10 or 20 edits on the ADHD page, and then the reverts. It would conclusively show page ownership. I could then show that Abd kept me off the page before Doc James. But, do you think any of this would matter at all? I'm being railroaded by a band of POV editors and by a few other editors with an axe to grind. Yeah, as Nja stated, I'm playing the victim. I can't keep up to it all, you read that stuff and the way it is twisted and untrue, and that really isn't good for your soul. It's been two weeks of this sort of stress. I could counter pretty well every significant issue that they have raised and then show that page ownership was the root of this whole problem. It doesn't matter, now they are sifting through every edit I've ever made. Whatever I state, will be refuted, and they will generate 10 times the material that I could. So there you have it. My version. You ask me to defend myself at the arb. This case doesn't belong there. It hasn't hit any of the criteria necessary to file. One on one, with mediation this could be slowly worked out. I've offered that, but why would anyone bite? They know that they don't have to follow any dispute mechanism to go to arb, get it accepted, and have me sanctioned.--scuro (talk) 10:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does it show page ownership or does it show someone trying to push a POV without providing sources? I am trying to remain neutral here, scuro, but I am having trouble sympathizing with you when the only thing that you are being asked for is to back up your claims with reliable sources. When there's half a dozen editors (even Abd, who is known to defend underdog editors to a fault) who hold differing points-of-view telling you that you are being disruptive, there's some point where you must look inward and try and recognize in yourself what must be changed to move forward. Instead, you seem to continue not to hear them. Frankly, I don't blame them not wanting to bother with another lengthy mediation or dispute resolution mechanism. Endless rhetoric helps no one. Sources do. –xeno ^talk 13:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have been trying the ol' Resi 5 article, to no aveil also I see. As I said, I gave p on that (which is almost definatly a good thing) and only check the history once in a while to laugh at the huge amounts of reverts. I reckon if I put 'Adolphus' in the edit summary, he will come and see why; should I do it with a strange comment attached to it? And also the LAME thing will have to wait till I can be bothered, which will be in a few days. lastly, how many pages have you started and how do you find things to start? oh, and whats 'unencyclopedia'? 'The Ninjalemming'' 13:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the 26 pages I started were newly announced video games. I would obsessively watch http://xbox360fanboy.com to try and be the first. Now I can't be arsed. Uncyclopedia is a humourous/satirical/parody encyclopedia. –xeno ^talk 14:08, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xeno, 'can't be arsed' doesn't have a page (to nobody's surprise). --Thejadefalcon (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I decided to link anyway... =] I suppose I could've piped directly to wiktionary, but that would be too easy, wouldn't it? ;> –xeno ^talk 14:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Adolphus smells! That should get him running. I wonder what he says. Mind you, nobody else better edit thispage or the edit summary will disamepear 'The Ninjalemming'' 15:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Preferences -> Watchlist -> Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent –xeno ^talk 15:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xeno.

i`d to ask some help to you.

I just found an agressive and fraudulent article about a brazilian politician. i have reported that and fixed all inssues, but the local admin undo my changes and blocked the article. All my tries to reverse were "deny". But its clear that the article has fraudulent sources. What to do? some of my explanation

i would like to push this question to commons. is it possible?

thanks Malves12 (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry; though I hold an account at pt.wiki, I don't speak the language at all. Also, administrative rights do not traverse wikis (except for global admins, one of which I am not). "Commons" doesn't refer to a common area for dispute resolution across language wikis, it just means a common repository for PD images and other files. The only thing I can suggest is perhaps making a post to pt:Wikipedia:Votações, (pt.wiki's ANI) to get outside opinions. –xeno ^talk 14:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall a tool for checking pages where two editors both edited at close times to each other. Do you know of such? Thanks!  Frank  |  talk  14:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The contrib comparison tool (affectionately known as wikistalk.py?) –xeno ^talk 15:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I saw your name over at WP:ADOPT.

I need the advice of an experienced Wikipedian.

I'm currently coordinating development of Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which has grown to around 500 pages, and I am having trouble recruiting editors to help build and improve it. I need some mentorship here.

I also need advice on the guidelines I've been writing for the Outline of Knowledge at User:The Transhumanist/Outline of knowledge. Is it good enough? Did I miss anything important?

My latest effort to recruit help on the outlines is a proposal for a contest between all of the country WikiProjects on Wikipedia (about 200 of them). This will be a very big event, and I'm not sure I'm going about it in the best way.

So you see, I've taken on a lot, and I need as much advice as I can get.

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.

The Transhumanist    19:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably not the best person for this, so I'm glad to see you're asking others the same. I'll take a look later and see if I can lend any insight. –xeno ^talk 19:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The good Countess you so sarcastically refer to, which is far from my usual field (as many will tell you very happily), was a page I found perchance here [3], as a bio, it was the worst I had ever read and I commented on it, then realised my own advice is don't moan fix it. So as penance for my own big mouth - I researched for hours and fixed it. That is what proper editors do. So don't you even infer sarcasm at me. Giano (talk) 19:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My point was that you've already killed the horse, so you should get back to doing what you do best. There's still some sourcing and tone issues there. –xeno ^talk 19:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then take my advice and if you don't like it fix it! You people have proven yourself a huge joke - I suugest you don't compund it further! Tone issues - you clearly would not recognise a well written page by a wikipedia editor if it punched you in the face. You can't even tell what is by a Wikipedia editor. Giano (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I saw your edit [4] - amazing stuff! Wikipedia is lucky to have you. Giano (talk) 19:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - it seems you are too close to your own prose to recognize your glaring tone issues. I'll see what more I can do. Do you normally leave your leads entirely unreferenced? –xeno ^talk 19:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would reiterate my civility reminder to you as well Xeno. Prodego ^talk 20:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being perfectly civil. Giano likes straight talk, so I'm not beating around any bushes. –xeno ^talk 20:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are a pathetic little runt [5] You exemplify exactly what is wrong with the project, and why so many are bailing out. You are a person to be despised and ridiculed. You are obnoxious and stupid. You are ignorant and to the project a handicap. Yes, this is probably a personal attack, and I shall be banned, but do yoy know, having seen the results of the last few days, i'm really not that bothered. Giano (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]