User talk:Rick Block

If you're here to respond to a comment I posted on your talk page, feel free to reply on your talk page (so the question and answer are together). I ALWAYS watch talk pages I've posted comments to for a while. If you leave me a message, I'll respond here unless you ask me not to.

Archive2006 - Archive2005 - Archive2004

Caould you add featured lists to your script, or create a separate page? It would be nice to honour those editors as well. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's done in two steps, one that starts with the FAC logs to produce a table with a month's worth of the by-year lists like Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2006 and another to parse the by-year lists to produce the WP:WBFAN table. It looks like Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations is done mostly by hand at this point. The first step could start with the featured list logs, but unlike the second step it's not fully automated (the logs aren't quite regular enough to reliably determine who the nominator is). What I actually do is run a script that parses the logs into an intermediate form which I check by hand against the actual logs, and then run another script using this intermediate form to generate the table format. After updating the by-year list, the second step is done with yet another script that reads all the by-year lists and generates the WP:WBFAN table. The second step is actually the easier one since it's fully automated, but it relies on the existence of the by-year lists. I'd be happy to make the scripts I use to generate these lists available, but don't think I can take on generating by-year lists for featured lists. If you (or anyone else reading these words) would like to, please let me know and I'll make the scripts available. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Left comments on the template talk page. --MZMcBride 03:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rick, that's much better, thanks! I think I did something almost exactly like that earlier but I missed out the |'s on the end of the lines containing the formatting... oops. Thanks a lot for helping out, much appreciated. --YFB ¿ 19:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if you can help me again - for some reason there's a big gap between the intro text box and the three columns of contributions, which my table editing skills don't seem to be up to fixing. Would you mind having another look for me? Thanks =) --YFB ¿ 21:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking of some templates to aid in navigating categories and categorization of articles. It is Radiant's talk page so perhaps you could take a look? Respond there if you feel like it.

I'm guessing you've been pretty busy recently. You seem to have missed my recent posting on your talk page which you archived without responding!

I hope all is well. -- Samuel Wantman 08:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at Radiant's page. Things are fine, but I have been kind of busy. I recently spent a week in the UK on business, which has led to an extremely busy time at work. Sorry about archiving without responding - I simply missed that one. Rather than subst template:LargeCategoryTOC into cat:LP and change it to eliminate rare combinations, I think it might be better to create a version without the rare combinations (perhaps the default version should be the pruned one and the current version renamed LargeCategoryTOCFull or something). There still seem to be fair number of folks who absolutely hate the underlying template:Navigation bar. I'm not quite sure what to do with it at this point. Discussion on the talk page has pretty much stopped, but there's been no real consensus. I may list it at TfD to try to generate more discussion. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, one of your user scripts uses the addLoadEvent( func ) function (see [1]). This function will be removed from MediaWiki:Common.js soon. Please modify your scripts to use addOnloadHook( func ) instead. —Ruud 18:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There wasn't much more to it than I mentioned in the article. The full text will be available on-line on Tuesady here. This version of the problem seems even more counter intuitive, since the same exact scenario has different odds depending upon what Monty Hall knew before he opened a door. The most disconcerting part of it was that the odds go from 2/3 to 1/2 because there are times when he guesses and opens the door on the car. In the example in the paper, that did not happen. So this is a good case for how the odds for something that could have happened in the past but didn't can still have an effect on what will happen next. I'm sure there'll be lots of discussion about it on the talk page. -- Samuel Wantman 09:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The new US court template is wonderful. Thank you. Ratherhaveaheart 18:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I really don't have any way to check that automatically. I'll remove this user, and when I get time I'll look all the users manually. Ral315 (talk) 05:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting, however, that he just left the project last week. Usually, people like you notice them before they pile up too much. Ral315 (talk) 05:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if you've got it lying around, I'll bug you for it (no hurry; feel free to send it via my talk page or e-mail when you have time to dig it up). Thanks. Ral315 (talk) 05:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I, Persian Poet Gal, hereby award you this barnstar for all the kind and considerate help you have often offered to new users at the Help Desk :). ¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think Samuel's idea has merit; it worked fine for tagging cats as "self-reference" and such. I've created Wikipedia:Category structure for central discussion on the topic; please participate. Yours, (Radiant) 16:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like most metropolitan areas in the United States, the extent of the Denver Metropolitan Area is largely contextual and the subject of lively debate.

Most Colorado counties are extensive. The three suburban counties adjacent to the City and County of Denver are long and narrow, with high population densities at the end of county near Denver and very low population densities at the opposite end:

• Arapahoe County is 72 miles long and 4 to 12 miles wide.
• Jefferson County is 54 miles long and 4 to 18 miles wide. (The southwest corner of the county is a wilderness area.)
• Adams County is 72 miles long and 6 to 18 miles wide.

There are several overlapping, officially designated Denver metropolitan regions:

• Denver Metropolitan Core Counties – 4 counties with 2,013,234 population.
• Denver Regional Council of Governments – 9 counties with 2,600,697 population.
• Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area – 10 counties with 2,359,994 population.
• Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area – 12 counties with 2,869,377 population.
• Front Range Urban Corridor – 17 counties with 3,965,289 population.

There are many additional unofficial and quasi-official definitions of the Denver Metropolitan Area.

The Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article started life as a Denver Metropolitan Area article. While the label Denver Metropolitan Area is almost universally used in the metro area, the name of the article was changed to Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area to coincide with the United States Census Bureau designated Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau also designated a Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area. The definition of the Denver Region used by the Denver Regional Council of Governments is the most common used locally.

I recommend that the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article be retained (and possibly renamed to the more popular Denver Metropolitan Area) for general information about Metropolitan Denver. The portions of the article that deal with a specific regional entity such as the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area or the Denver Regional Council of Governments should be moved to those articles. --Buaidh 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I had no idea. I hope by making the list I didn't annoy you since some people enjoy performing some tasks themselves. I don't wanna take any work away from you if you enjoy doing it. If you wish for me to take over this process for any reason, I would be glad to use your scripts. Thanks. - Tutmosis 17:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the response. I'm definetely interested and I'm running Windows. - Tutmosis 18:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'll definetely check that out. - Tutmosis 18:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rick,
It's been a while. Can you do me a favor and please proofread this infobox template before I implement it. You can make comment about it and see an example of it here. Thanks. —MJCdetroit 02:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a user who has expressed interest in dealing with misuse of the reference desk, you may be interested in my comments at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Where we stand and my new strategy for dealing with the problem at User:SCZenz/Reference desk comments. It will take help from many people in order to make it clear which behaviors aren't appropriate. -- SCZenz 03:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I speak Albanian, and I'll translate Wikipedia talk:Searching#alban skenderaj for you by the end of the day. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Your translation is done. See here for the translation. Glad to have been of help - let me know if you need anything else. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I found you in the Wikipedia talk:Image use policy page and I just wanted some input on a photo I recently uploaded. You can find it here. I used the "work of a US gov't" fair-use tag but I think that might be incorrect. Could you let me know what you think? Thanks alot. Naufana : talk 00:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Q: Is there some reason you need a link to your contribs, or your current focus article?

A: I don't really care much either, and if you find it makes to code for the sig too large then I'd be happy to remove it. Really it's just a copycat thing: I've seen many people use 'contribs' links in their sigs, so I did the same.

Q: You're presumably trying to drum up interest in your current focus article with the other link.

A: I've just removed it.

Cheers, Yuser31415 06:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you complaining that I removed the same advertisement text that you removed (though I also removed the link to YouTube). Let's be clear. We get a spam link every three seconds. We are not even beginning to catch the ads that are going into articles posing as encyclopedic content. Perhaps if we were to deal with the problem instead of worrying about the feelings of spammers, we would make some headway. Danny 21:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was'nt thinking straight when i did that. P.S. my account name is now User:Animine. 12hernn 01:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]