Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I regret the way the community appears to be treating you. There was a fairly long time in which I misjudged you, and while there may be a few issues where we still probably don't see eye-to-eye (e.g. Userboxes), I am glad we took the time to talk on IRC and were able to work constructively on things. There are some things the community is struggling with, and the well may be partly poisoned -- however you decide I wish you well. Take care. --Improv 04:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
What are the known symptoms of this poison? Any chemical analysis of it avalible? -- Catchi? 08:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You're replacing the images on ViP subpages for particular vandals with the CVU image. Any reason? It just seemed odd when I noticed you doing it. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 16:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
? Hmm... No real reason. Was just bored -- Catchi? 16:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hey,
you have helped me before and I was wondering if you could help me out here. I wanted to start a page that would be an anti vandalism page. (Like the Counter-Vandalism Unit). I started a page that explained what it was and when the page would be operative. An admin deleted it and told me to put in on the village pump. I couldnt find a place in the village pump to place my page construction. Could you help me.
(if what i said is confusing, then tell me and I will try to make it easier, because I think i didnt explain this clearly enough)
Beware that even the best proposals are litteraly "treated like shit".
The semi-protection when I proposed it recieved no sympathy and I was scorned for it, it was later implimented once we had CNN coverage. I am telling you this to be prepared for "wierd comments".
You will be accused of being a "millitary dictator" for example. People will also use Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit as another example "why this is a bad idea". ANd people will use it as an excuse to oppose RfAs etc. Some will call it a cabal... Endless nonsense yes.
In addition it will continiously cause you stress. Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit only achived to stress me (aside form throtteling vandalism down but no one cares about that).
For example if you have an IRC channel with newly-imposed restrictions
People complain about the restrictions
Cause you hours of work to find a way to lift the restrictions and still make the channel "secure".
Asking people to register their nicks is unnaceptable for example.
Then once restrictions are gone the person complaining does not EVEN use the channel ONCE or EVEN join the channel.
This is how it will go. I am telling you this in advance so you know whats waiting you.
If you are willing to take all that do this: Try creating the page on User:Activision45/proposal (or any name you choose under your userspace).
I'll be able to "guide" you better once I see whay kind of a proposal this is :).
I've reverted the joke noticed and deleted the category. No harm done, but please don't play that game again.
Could you explain what happened on the other wikis? What parts were you trying to move to meta? I'm asking this as your mentor, so please take this as a semi-official query on behalf of the English Wikipedia. If people on other wikis are getting upset at you, they would expect us, as the people who know you best, to play a part in resolving any problems. --Tony Sidaway 11:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi, Ill summarise since this is getting complicated. Ill use bullets :)
I decide being a Wikipediholic I move all pages explaining Wikipediholicism symptoms to meta on all languages.
I go ahead and copy every page on every language to meta.
I blank pages to take the attention of local comunities, I did not outright blank pages but leave a link to meta. I did this after creating a copy in meta.
Some mistaken this for vandalism while others did not. Once I explained them this is not vandalism but a "standard" meta move (no harm is done with the move).
True Wikipediholic's prefer meta rite? :) Also after all meta is not english, many pages have multi lingual links (you know what I mean). If individual comunities for any reason do not want the move I have no way of forcing them after all I am one person and can only revert so far. And also I dont care about other language wikis. I did not revert a single comunity against the comunities will.
Fr wikipedian reverting me on polish wikipedia: http://pl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedioholik&action=history Id like to note unlike his claims I have discussed with the polish guys in #pl.wikipedia prior to the move. Since I know them from RC patroling efforts of mine and theirs. And again it isnt the local comunity deciding it is the Fr.wikipedia deciding for another comunity. -- Catchi? 12:04, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Same goes for japanese wikipedia: ja.wikipedia issue I again discussed this on IRC and notice the local comunity reverting the anon reverting me.
Without having any discussion Anthere threatened to block me if I "forced" this issue on fr.wikipedia in a self contradictory manner. That en.wikipedia policies did not applied to fr.wikipedia (yea I know it doesnt) and that if I "forced" the issue on fr.wikipedia I would be blocked. etc. etc. (while I was beeing reverted by the nl.wikipedia guy who also has a fr.wikipedia account. Judging from his contribs he is not very active on fr.wikipedia)
So yea... thats in sum what it is. -- Catchi? 11:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
My belief is that it is either Davenbelle or Karl Meier (who I know is active on nl wiki) or it is some other individual I never met stalking me interwiki. And for THAT I get block threats.
I also noticed the french campaigning against my move/me while preparing the evidence.
Okay, I can see why you might want to put such an article to meta; I can also see why your actions could be viewed by other people as disruptive or unwanted meddling. I'm not excusing their actions, but I don't think it's necessary to get into a war about this.
I think the solution would be for you to leave the different language versions on meta, but place a note (preferably in the local language) on the talk page for the local wiki version, explaining that there is a copy on meta but you'll leave it up to the local people to decide for themselves whether they want to redirect to that one.
On local languages, prepare a translation if you know the language or can find someone who does--for instance I can write good French and Spanish if you don't know those languages, or you could ask User:Rama, who is a native French speaker, to translate into French. User:Dbachmann is, I think a native German speaker, and User:Ausir is Polish. But I expect you'll have some speakers of foreign languages through your CVU contacts.
I want to counsel you to be very sensitive here. This isn't an area for speculation about people out to get you and it certainly isn't the time to get into arguments with people like User:Anthere, whose commitment to Wikipedia cannot be questioned. I know you have had to bite your tongue and do the right thing a lot, and I admire your fortitude greatly. Please, please tread carefully. An argument at Foundation level is one thing I could not rescue you from. Rather than risk that, I would step in and make a cross-wiki ban recommendation which I would expect you to observe, just so that you would not end up being hard-banned. I am not yet about to ban you, but I am very worried about your interaction with Anthere. Tread very carefully. And I advise you to swallow your pride and apologise to Anthere. --Tony Sidaway 13:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I will not "swalow my pride" and rather leave wikipedia, thats how my personality goes. Under no circumstances will I apologise for getting threatened. I am not questioning Anthere's contribution to wikipedia, her contribution does not give him the right to threaten me like this.
I do not fear if the argument hits the Foundation which will likely cause Anthere problems. I prefer it doesn't come to that however. If the Foundation prefers that board members threaten "good wikipedians" (aka people who rc patrol write articles) then I have no reason to be here. Also I really have nothing to loose. I am not even entrusted with admin privilages and am one step from leaving wikipedia. Furthermore, I will not observe any "cross-wiki ban" because some board member decides to play the The Almighty.
I believe justice does exist among wikipedians and Ia also believe board members are not entitled to threaten random "good wikipedians" with blocks without even talking to them. If no one else is willing I'll stand up for the "truth" or die (get blokced indefinately) while trying.
May I add that I find very peculiar that Cool Cat feels allowed to change these pages without consulting the local communities first, even re-reverting after he has been reverted in two occasions (es: and fr:), yet gets angry with his opponents for reverting him on other wikis than their own? I also find his remarks here and here to sound like he has very little feeling for community. "It should not bring a lot of stress - I did a lot of work on this, it should just be blanked - do what you want with the page, you're causing me unnecessary stress". As for Anthere threatening to block you: Doing an edit then reverting it does sound like trying to 'force' to me. Your mileage may vary, but just realize that in many non-English Wikipedias there is much resistance against (real or imagined) 'imperialism' from en:. Barging in and make changes because you like them when others don't is not going to increase your popularity.
Addition: The block threat was based on a message to me on the wikipedia-l list, see here and here. Anthere reacted here, apparently hearing of them for the first time and getting quite enraged. - Andre Engels 13:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I dont care about my popularity or wikipolitics. I never had any popularity in the first place. I got harrased constantly by individuals unlike anyone else.
I have been reverted by same people interwiki even when I discussed it with the comunities on IRC and they said it was a good idea. Local comunities who liked the meta idea were also reverted. See th and ja wikipeida. I do not care what goes on wikipedia-l. I blanked to take comunities attention. Posting on talk pages no one looks at will not get anyones attention.
I will revert war on against french wikipedians on japanese wikipedia. If the japanese comunity decided they dont do meta then I would backed down as I did on Nl note that i did so with great disapointment.
never the less I thank you for posting liks to the mailing list. I did not even know about it prior.
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for the tip, if i'm on IRC anytime soon, i'll head into that channel. I have a question for you, but i'll wait a bit. I need advice from outside Wikipedia on it first. Karmafist 12:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Ok :). If its a "private" issue you can always email. :) -- Catchi? 12:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Hello Cool Cat. I am so estatic to see you decided to stay with us, and I'm happy you seem to have calmed down. I hope that you continue to remain in the wikipedian community, and I know that many would hate to see your departure. Please drop by my talkpage and talk if there's anything bothering you. -ZeroTalk 21:41, 4 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I have not calmed down. I decided to stay with newer incidents and also the recent nonsense in the mailing list. I have no intention of sorting that out. Also I have aboard member threatening to block me (out of the blue since she did not bother talking to me). If I run now it would look as if I was beeing scared away. I intend to be more agressive now since people are dedicated in giving me a hard time, Ill have to shake them off for good. -- Catchi? 00:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes. I saw your conversation, although I haven't looked into it. Therefore, I do not know what each side of the party's standpoints are, although not engaging in discussion before the threat of a block seems very unbecoming of a board member. Just try to stay out of trouble, or I won't consider letting you have any of this. -ZeroTalk 00:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Doing a headon with a board member is like dancing on thin ice. I am already at severe disadvantage and expect serious hostility from the masses. I do not care about that however so long as justice is met. People annoy me for a hobby and I am begining to get used to it (ok thats a lie). -- Catchi? 00:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Just attempt to continue to edit in good faith. If anyone objects, the best they can accuse you of is doing what you thought was just for the encyclopedia. No need for the negativity. -ZeroTalk 01:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm? I am trying to defend CVU a few lines below. I dont think I can "assume good faith" so long as people campaign against CVU. -- Catchi? 02:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Why are you opposing the CVU logos? apears on almost every userpage, does that mean foundation supports every userpage? I dont quite understand. -- Catchi? 17:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
I oppose them for two main reasons. 1) They contravene the Foundation's visual identity guidelines. 2) They falsely imply the CVU is in some way Foundation-supported. I know that is explicitly denied lower down, but the size of the logos and their prominence at the top of the page (and the fact that the disclaimer is fairly low down the page and many will skim-read it) do make the suggestion hard to avoid. Sam Korn(smoddy) 20:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
You should know I have been dealing with senseless complaints from people such as kim_ complaining about the restrictions imposed on the IRC channel to restrict access to the bot (due to malicious people impostering people). After I lifted the restrictions completely ignoting concensus established among people in the channel he did NOT even join the chan
With such people I only get stressed and day by day spend more time dealing with "complaints", I have quit editing wikipedia mostly and left RC patroling completely so as to deal with constant complaints. What stuff complains about is how "CVU" looks. All cosmetics such as the logos copyrihts. People at CVU have been "under attack" of complaints about CVU cosmetics for ages now and are distracted from focusing on fighting vandalism in order to defend themselves/CVU.
Lets assume your claim is correct that CVU logo violatis wikipedias copyrights on wikipedia, regardless of the boards permision. It is not like wikipedia is going to sue wikipedia for copyrights. Can you please spend time pursuing copyright violations on wikipedia aside from the CVU logos. There are maybe thousands of images/pages that should be deleted because they are violating non wikipedia copyrights. CVU and its members are constantly under fire by people who oppose CVU. They have their reasons, some do it just to annoy me (I am not remotely suggesting you are trying to annoy me).
You may ask "Why is the CVU's logo so important?" and there isnt an easy answer to that. Many of the people discussing want to get rid of the image (perhaps primarily to satisfy "copyright paranoia" of people such as yourself but thats my POV). For me CVU logo is one of my rare creations. I also like the image with the wikimedia logo on it.
About your points:
Board was fine with the image. Can I have a link to these guidelines so I can discuss the matter better.
I'd like to inquire what part of the logo implies "foundation support" as I do not see how thats possible.
If it is wikipedia logo warranting foundation support, that would mean the foundation is supporting every place the wikimedia logo apears on.
If it is the text, well Image:Wikimedia.png apears on almost every userpage with the words "Wikimedia foundation" and has the wikimedia logo. It is possible to falsely imply foundation support from any image if you look hard enough.
Unlike other people you are civil while talking to me, least I can do is respond back in a civil tone. If for any reason above stuff was not civil please accept my apologies.
Foundation's visual identity guidelines are at [1]. My contention in particular is that the position contravenes the "Placement" section. Note that Anthere explicitly denies that there is Foundation permission given. I shall dig up the links to the Foundation-l archives and answer your other points when I'm not feeling so ill. Sam Korn(smoddy) 16:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm so the coments I got on my talk page giving me permision to use the image is a lie? [2] link is from image description. There was no such thing as "board aproval" back then but there were also no objections. Now, if the board complains about the image we will deal with it. You are not the board and please let the board deal with such issues. I encourge you to use your time more effectively. However if you really like we can discuss the image based on the "Wikimedia visual identity guidelines". Please however do not involve the mailing list and rest of wikipedia for this trivial matter that can be handled effectively without the ruckus. -- Catchi? 17:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The colored Wikimedia logo should always be used on a white or very light gray background (max. 15% black), never on a colored background.
The logo should not be turned around or distorted
The cvu logo qualifies to above entries as far as I care aside from maybe the "very light gray background (max. 15% black)" bit. There may be some argument there but at the moment no such argument exists. That is easy to fix by removing the black triangles behind the wikimedia logo and would make the image not so cool. Is there anything else subject to copyright discussion?. Note that "Wikimedia visual identity guidelines" is a gudeline not a policy. I do not think it is absolutely necesary to follow guidelines letter by letter. -- Catchi? 17:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
In reading this I thought of Trademark and [3]. The point is that the customer or user is best served when not mislead. I have no opinion as to what extent the logos and their uses mislead or not, but in my opinion that is the issue. WAS 4.250 20:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Just a heads up-- I'm questioning the concept of declaring war on vandals on the mailing list.
Thanks for the constructive criticism you left on my talk page; it's always edifying to learn about other people's concerns. --The Cunctator 00:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Excuse me so you are suggesting vandalism be welcome on wikipedia? Look I do not believe you are trying to destroy wikipedia. However what ever you have been doing is non-constrictive criticism that only achive to stress good users and delighted vandals. When was the last time you RC patroled? Or do you oppose RC patrols as well? -- Catchi? 01:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Declaring war on vandals makes us, by analogy, the Roman Empire. That doesn't seem like a good idea. I think there should be automatic mechanisms to encourage/force all editors to review RC. --The Cunctator 15:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
We are not the roman empier, "declaring war on vandals" hence cannot make make us the roman empier. The cosmetics (apperance) of terminology really should be the least of our worries.
Automatic mechanism such as? Not everyone wants to do RC patroling. Just like not everyone wants to vote on VfDs. The main problem with automation is vandals find ways around it. Not all vandals seek attention, some prefer to vandalise sneaky and brag about how long their vandalism stayed.
There are mechanisms encouraging RC patrol.
Thats exactly why I started the Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit to encourage people. I placed a cute/nice logo to seek peoples attention and a lot of people started RC patroling perhaps because of that.
There is also the RickK's anti-vandalism barnstar given to people who revert vandalism to encourage people RC patrol more.
The idea is to get people RC patroling without forcing them. Forcing people do things make us slavemasters :P. The point of the two thinsg I mentioned above is to "encourage". Also CVU is a place where we colaborate on how to deal with large scale vandalism more effectively. Anybody, assuming they are not vandals is welcome to join the colaborations. -- Catchi? 15:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Rather than clutter up your talk page, I've created User_talk:Cool_Cat/bots It might no be complete yet, but it's a start. If you wanted more detail on particular parts, let me know. --pgk(talk) 08:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
The bots files are indexed files, so I can directly access the data based on the "key" value. Python implements this quite easily and maintains a fair memory cache of recently accessed items, so it's a pretty quick to get to any item we know the key for. --pgk(talk) 07:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi, well removing local copies of files on commons is generaly a bit of a cumbersome process (wich is probably why it has such a gigantic backlog) on acount of the requirement of preserving the file history for GFDL compliance. However these images seem straight forward enough, public domain and uploaded by you both places, so sure I can help you get rid of the duplicates, I'll get to work on the ones you orphanded with the 3 edits you listed on my talk page. --Sherool(talk) 15:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
You havent deleted the spanish ones yet :) -- Catchi? 00:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
[4] Italian ranks are now in comons too. those were the last. and are no longer necesary :) -- Catchi? 00:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I did delete the Spanish ones actualy, but it turns out someone else had copied those to commons under the same name already for use on the Spanish Wiki. I tagged them as redundant with yours though, some admin on commons will have to sort that out. I'll get on the Italian ones tomorow. I'm planning to get some sleep now... just have to fix my monobook.js file first. --Sherool(talk) 00:56, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Congratulations, とある白い猫/Archive/2006/02! Your user page has been nominated for the Esperanza User Page Award! Five judges will look over your user page and award it 1-10 points in four categories:
Attractiveness: general layout, considering colour scheme and/or use of tables if applicable
Usefulness: links to subpages or editing aids, helpful information
Interesting-ness: quirky, unique, captivating, or funny content
General niceness: at the judges' discretion
But first, you must be chosen as a finalist. If your user page is chosen as one of the five finalists, you'll have the chance to win an award created just for having a great user page!
Latest comment: 18 years ago7 comments1 person in discussion
I want to achieve what I am doing there with 25 in one template. Ideas?
The images follow this pattern:
CC-Army-OF##.EXT
CC-Navy-OF##.EXT
CC-Airf-OF##.EXT
Where CC denotes country code and ## denotes nato code.
I'll let you take a look at it and then toss ideas. -- Catchi? 01:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat. I've been looking at the templates and they could definitely be condensed, but I guess the best way to restructure them depends on what you want to use them for. You could make a template like, {{insignia |country=BE|force=army|rank=1a}} which displays any given insignia based on the parameters passed to it, but at that point you might as well just use the 'image:' markup. Alternatively the template could just look for 'country' and 'force' as parameters and then, based on those two, conditionally display the list of insignia indicated. That would just involve copying the info from all the existing templates in and putting conditional logic around it. Another option would be to put the ranks in the parameter names like; {{insignia |BE-ar-1a=1|US-nv-9=1}} and then have the template logic display the insignia for which parameters have been set. It all depends on how you are looking to use the images I guess. Are they just going to be on a few comparison pages or would they be displayed on the pages of individual commanders and the like? --CBD☎✉ 22:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I am not happy with the templates as they are not generic enough. No argument there. When I created the templates an if/else structure did not existed.
One reason I am not sure how to handle the templates is that I do not have one solid patern. See luxembourg one for example or italian. How would I handle all that in one template.
The templates will be used just for comparasions AND are used on individual army pafes. For example see what links to the US, UK, Tr, GR etc ranks.
What I want to achive: Few/One generic template(s) that does what 26 templates are doing. I also dont want it to change the apperance (aside from perhaps condensing width a bit)
I put together a partial test at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox2. Feel free to play with it. Changing the country in the template call on the first line should change the insignia displayed. Somewhat glitchy, but a general concept for how one template could include the contents of the 26 and conditionally display info for the country or countries called. --CBD☎✉ 02:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm.... You are tossing all images into one template. What I want to achiheve is to use a template repetively. (Use one templae for all countries). Template should be passed countries name, name of the ranks, branch of military... etc... Is this doable? -- Catchi? 13:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
That can certainly be done, but the tricky part would then be the formatting. How to tell the template to arrange particular insignia vertically rather than horizontally. That's why my first draft copied all the images/formatting in and then just displayed the requested set. I guess the '1' and '2' settings in your lists above are meant to indicate which row each insignia should appear in. Since it seems like the insignias for a particular country/force are always displayed together I'd suggest moving everything out of the call except {{insignia|Code=Tr|Branch=Army|Type=OF}}... which officer ranks exist for that country and the names assigned to them can be kept in the template code itself rather than having to be written into the call each time - unless you want to be able to do things like just display officer ranks 9, 8, 5 and 3 of the Turkish Army. Then all that detail needs to be in the call to the template. I'll work on it for a while now. --CBD☎✉ 23:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I put together a very simple template at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox2 which just calls the existing templates based on parameters passed to it and a much more complicated template at User:CBDunkerson/Transition which uses a switch to set various parameters in a call to User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4 - which then builds the insignia layout based on the parameters passed. --CBD☎✉ 01:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Looks nice. Sorry I couldn't be more help working it out. --CBD☎✉ 22:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
No that was the easyone. And you did help me greatly. Now, can you find a way to simplify this one (and make it much more generic)?
I'll take a look. Also, a couple of things on the current template. For the little flags - UK needs 'the United Kingdom' to get the flag file name right, but then prints 'the United Kingdom' next to it instead of 'United Kingdom'. If I recall correctly there is a version of those flag templates which works off the country code (UK) which would leave 'Country' free to be just the text displayed. For {{Rank insignia OF/N}} (or OF/D) it might make sense to change it from |'''No {{{1}}}''' to just |{{{1}}} so it could be set to the UK's student officer text, "single white stripe", the US "Various", or whatever... one template with configurable text parameter. Could also add a second parameter for a label below it (like Officer Candidate). --CBD☎✉ 23:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I modified your template to handle both officers and enlisted at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox4. That calls various other pages in my userspace... mostly copies of your 'OF/1', 'OF/2', et cetera modified to accept 'OF' or 'OR' as part of the parameters passed in rather than hard-coding 'OF'. However, I also changed 'OF/N' (User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox2) to just display the text passed to it... which defaults to the No Equivalent contents of your 'OF/D'... since this can handle the effects of 'OF/0', 'OF/D', 'OF/N', and various unique text which is displayed I used it for all of those conditions and don't call the other templates. I also added an 'OF/3' at User:CBDunkerson/Transition to handle side by side display of multiple insignias the way they are shown in the enlisted tables. Currently only handles two (a & b), but a third can be added for the few cases which have 'c' insignias. --CBD☎✉ 01:20, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Hi Cool Cat, no problem at all! Just tell me what you need.
By the way, I was also about to write to you. I was appointed admin in Wikipedia Malay two days ago and wanted to introduce all these awards in Wikipedia Malay portal. I wonder whether it would be possible to use templates to actually define the award, eg. "Best Article for March 2006" and stuff like that so that the actual number of logos used can be kept down. I will try to learn up a vector program so that the images will turn out better than the last one. Regards. — PM Poon 08:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi Cool Cat, I have tried one sample before I proceed with the rest. I wonder whether you found the original image a little too dark; I almost missed the four flowers in DM-Army-OF9.gif. I have removed the white background and brightened the image.
The edge is jagged because the two sides are slant and this is a gif image. The only way to overcome this is to make both edge straight.
I didn't quite get what you mean by "Standardise images in one theme". Can you elaborate or give an illustration? — PM Poon 15:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi Cool Cat, I have removed the white backgrounds for the 14 images. How do you want me to upload it as I do not seem to be able to replace the original images in Wikimedia Commons. — PM Poon 23:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
You can overite the commons one. The changes wont take effect immidiately. After the upload try purging your chache (ctrl+f5 for internet explorer and firefox). -- Catchi? 23:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Hi Cool Cat, would you consider removing the following from your userpage?
'''[[Image:Richard Cheney 2005 official portrait.jpg|45px]]'''
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user supports '''circumcision''' of '''[[m:Dick|dicks]]''' on '''[[Wikipedia]]'''.
Oh I see... The userbox is neither political nor religious. It is simply a self expresion. I dont like people who act like dicks on wikipedia. I am merely quoting a wikipedia guideline. -- Catchi? 19:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I think the policy is fine (except for perhaps a name change), but the first impression I had of your userpage is that you think Dick Cheney acts like a dick. Perhaps not what you intended, but some people can become touchy over politics. I will leave this to your decision. Thanks, Gchriss 19:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
His name is "Dick", I did not give him his name :P. I enjoy mocking famous/powerful people from time to time. Makes me feel powerfull. :P -- Catchi? 20:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm a little confused at a few of your recent edits. You removed the vandal 'logos' (for lack of better word) from various Vandalism in progress pages, such as this edit to MARMOT's page. Your reasoning for this was "lets not glorify vandals", which I agree with. However, you then added a vandal 'logo' to {{NCV}} in this edit. It seems to me that what is vandal-glorifying on one page is certainly vandal-glorifying on hundreds of user pages. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 17:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, how are you doing? -- Catchi? 18:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Rather bored as well. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 19:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Yep, us cabalians ocassionally get bored of wielding terrible tyranny over our poor victims. ;) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Participant alert regarding Wikiproject on Advertisingedit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Wikiproject No Ads, created as a backlash against the Answers.com deal, has served an important function in providing a space for users to express their disagreement with the Foundation proposal. While the current controversies about userboxes raise questions about political and social advocacy on Wikipedia, there should be greater flexibility regarding advocacy about Wikipedia in the Wikipedia namespace. Reported and linked by Slashdot and other press sources as a unique and spontaneous occurence in Wikipedia history, it has apparently had some impact as, despite being scheduled to begin in January, not a peep has been heard about the trial and proposed sponsored link since the deal's controversial announcement months ago. Currently, however, there is an attempt to delete the project or move it off Wikipedia altogether. Since the Foundation has provided no additional information and has not attempted to answer the specific questions that participants in the project raised, it is unclear if the Answers.com deal has been abandoned or simply delayed. Until the situation becomes more clear, I believe the group should still have a place in the Wikipedia namespace. Sincerely, Tfine80 23:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I'm pleging my support for the "no-ads" campagin on the grounds that if such a thing is happening then you can be sure i will be against such advertising on the Wikimedia network. We can but wait for the enemies to surface. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
SOS! Help us out :P -- Catchi? 15:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...Let them drown! :) (turns away the steering wheel) -ZeroTalk 15:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Never, they are among the rank-and-file (ha!) It's on my to-do list and I'll get around to the related articles in the next few days. Stay tuned, and thanks for your patience. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi there. Don't worry: it's on my to-do list. I anticipate getting around to the relevant articles in the next few days. I hope that's OK. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
That's ok. I am only panicing that I'd end up doing all the work. :o -- Catchi? 15:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I am emmensly impressed. The expansion and new rank tables are very neat. Beware of original research, though. A few of the enlisted ranks have never been talked about in the show and should be considered fan conjecture. Other than that...very nice job! -Husnock 00:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Oh, please move those to the right place (conjectured ranks etc). I treated spike as cannon see this link for example as spikes site is rather nice. -- Catchi? 00:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I was sent an email asking for permission to use the ranksets on Kuro-RPG for Wikipedia use, and I hereby give permission for their use here.
Also, don't be afraid to check up on the website for updates. Sometimes I may be unhappy with the design of one of the templates, and I wish to "update" it. (Which also includes TOS and TMP ranksets, since they are due for an update)
Sincerely,
Kuro-chan.
Hi, actualy I was hoping to lure you here. And thank you for the image permission :) -- Catchi? 19:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Let us try an experiment. Until further notice, the voting system will be open, using the method described in the Guidelines. This will make us understand how reliable the current system is and whether the project has a real possibility to expand into hundrends of users or not.
All users are encounaged to display the {{BestUserPage}} banner on their User Page.
All members all encouraged to display the {{BUP}} banner in their User Page, and also notify that the project has started.
We will refer to the votes for this first session as "March 2006" in the archive.
Thank you, howver I feel the userbox wouldn't generate the attention you guys are seeking, so I used something else. Hope you like it. :) -- Catchi? 00:39, 13 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Excellent! I modified the template, thank you for your useful suggestion. Federico Pistono✆✍ 09:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Please do not blank a page and copy contents to another. Instead use the move button. We want to keep histories of articles. :) -- Catchi? 21:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
You will see, if you check the timestamps, that the article "Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland" , the full and correct name for the article was created before "Royal Anthropological Institute" , which is the colloquial name, and the more often searched, and was created solely for redirect purposes. No page blanking occured. Apology would be nice. MNewnham 22:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
A blanking did happen at FRAI. I am not suggesting you were mallicious, if I had the belief you were we wouldnt be talking. I am simply pointing you the "move" button. No reason to get hostile.
A move is basicaly what you were trying to do, right? Moving everything on FRAI to Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland was your intention, right? We use the move button for that opperation on wikipedia. The only difference with it and yourself is that by this way you preserve the page history (A.K.A. who wrote it).
A move was done by User:Drini[5] for you. You may thank him.
Thank you for your time. -- Catchi? 22:24, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it wasn't a move - it was a merge and redirect of the information in FRAI into an existing article at RAIoGBaI. Now if there is some magic way of doing it apart from cutting the info from the source , pasting it to the target , then changing the original to a redirect please let me know. I notice the Dhini has destroyed the edit history of article FRAI, so obviously I cant prove this. MNewnham 22:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I am just trying to explain mediawiki (the software that runs wikipedia) to you. Your confortious tone is irritating, please modify your attitude. -- Catchi? 23:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm serious - I created RAIoGBaI brand new - If you look on dead end pages right now, you can see a link for FRAI. That link has been there for months. All I did was scrape what was on it and put it in RAI after I created it, then added REDIRECT to FRAI. Merge wasn't possible because RAIoGBaI already existed. but heres what is wierd. The history that is on RAIoGBaI is now the history that was on FRAI. The history on FRAI is gone, otherwise it would be verifiable as a dead end page. I'm sorry I irritate you, but call it a cultural thingMNewnham 01:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. I'm very surprised at your removal of the tag. [6] In what way have I gone against policy? I have tagged the image as possibly unfree and listed it on the relevant page for discussion by the wider community. The tag directs attention to the discussion allowing more people to participate. The JPS 00:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hi. I do not find the above most sincere.
If you had any intention want to seek the attention of a wider community you would use the talk page of articles using the image.
I am tired of dealing with people paranoid about copyrights. Not only are we required to tag images now, we are also required to defend them frequently. You are the 3rd person/group I am discussing images' copyright status.
No one outside of wikipedia is paranoid about copyrights and I am staring to get annoyed.
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Thanks a lot for creating a temp replacement for Devil's Due (TNG episode)--it's now in place as the article. By the way, it would be helpful in such cases if you could make a note at WP:CP, since we sometimes miss them (though we try our best not to). Thanks. Chick Bowen 02:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well, I didnt nominate the article and thought it was already listed there. I merely saved uncopyrighted knowlege from delete. :) -- Catchi? 03:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear. It was listed there; I meant to make a note that you'd created a temp to make sure we don't delete it accidentally. Anyway, yes, you saved it, and thanks again. Chick Bowen 03:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
^_^' I wish copyrights were processed with same care all the time. :) -- Catchi? 03:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, it's my first day. No doubt I'll be a callous wheel warrior soon enough. :) Chick Bowen 03:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
For telling me about the suspission thing. I am not the infiltrating kinda person, or a vandal to say.
--Auburnfan4 00:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Auburnfan4Reply
I am not saying you are inflating. All I am saying is people need to be carefull so innitialy things may not go as flawless as it should. :) -- Catchi? 00:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
You may want to keep that account blocked. Any username with "admin" in it is misleading. -- Catchi? 00:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat - yes, I know. I will reblock it in a little bit - don't worry. I'm in contact with the person who uses the account at the moment. --HappyCamper 00:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm..that was a bit vague - let me elaborate a bit further :-) -- The user for some reason was not able to create a new account even after unblocking the IP address that was autoblocked, so as a temporary measure, I've unblocked the entire username. I've told the person who is using the account to leave a note on my talk page once everything is done, at which point I will permanently block the old account again. --HappyCamper 00:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
A:Sorry to bother you, I should have trusted your instincts. :) -- Catchi? 00:45, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh, not to worry - anytime. You can feel free to question anything I do. I'm really glad to know that others are paying attention. Makes me feel less alone around here at least! :-) --HappyCamper 00:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Such stuff is quite easy to manage on #wikipedia-en-vandalism :) -- Catchi? 00:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I know that new commers need to earn trust, so they might not do things, like you said. Thank you for your help. --Auburnfan4 00:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Auburnfan4Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
please try to use edit comments. you are editing pages i watch, and it's a pain to go and have to see each change. edit summaries help me spend less time going over my watchlist. aa v ^ 05:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Which page are we talking about? I generaly make edits that wont fit the edit summary or edits that are minor enough to not warrant edit summaries. I generaly use the talk page if I need to explain myself which generaly is unnecesary as I am not a problematic user. In truth I am lazy so if you tell me the spesific article I'll be more carefull on that one. -- Catchi? 00:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I am talking about all of them. I watch well over a thousand pages, manually. Regarding small changes, even when I change 'taht' to 'that' and submit the edit, I use the edit comment "typo." I once changed a whole slew of pages from "2th" to "2nd", and used the edit comment "2th -> 2nd", and left the edit "minor." It isn't hard to add edit comments, and it is generally viewed as responsible and important. aa v ^ 17:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well, I watch over all articles on wikipedia via my bot. I am generaly lazy and often forget edit summaries. It is something I am yet to get used to. :) -- Catchi? 17:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
I'd appreciate if you'd abide by the request at the top of that page: don't edit it while I'm doing so. I've reverted your edits.--nihon 23:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Why can't we co-exist. Why can I never edit with people. Anyways check the diff and make the corrections yourself then. Inoue-san has one and only one daughter. -- Catchi? 00:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't have any problem coexisting with you. The only problem I have is when people make edits to pages when I'm in the middle of doing a major edit. That's why I used the {{inuse}} tag. Why do you feel the need to go against my request not to edit the page while I'm working on it? That's hardly the sign of someone wanting to coexist. --nihon 00:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I am not going to argue or respond to that, just don't make a similar remark to anyone else as they would eat you alive on wikipedia. I am, to say the very least, displeased with your response. -- Catchi? 00:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't have anyone else besides you editing a page marked {{inuse}}. It's marked that way on purpose. If you don't like it when someone gets upset with you because you're ignoring the polite and reasonable requests of another editor, then it's your problem, not mine. At the very least, you should have posted asking if it was okay to make an edit since it was marked {{inuse}}. --nihon 20:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
The thing you are trying to do is not an easy task. I never dared to attemt to do it myself, however I am not happy the way you treat my obviously productive edits. I did not edit anything on the lists, I could have as obviously the OVA and Movie sections are yet to be written. I am trying very hardnot to give you a hard time, so please show the same courtesy.
The procedure is that you write articles on your userpage and copy to article space after. I have no reason to ask/require that as I have no intention of giving you a hard time. Last thing you want to do is give a fellow otaku a hard time.
You may want to take a look at List of Oh My Goddess episodes. I wrote most of that featured list and I want this one to be a featured list as well. I can apply a similar style once you are done. The hard part of course is gathering the data. -- Catchi? 20:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
There is a person or two who wants to move this page elsewhere or perhaps try to get it deleted if they fail this. Thought youd want to know and perhaps voice an opinion. -- Catchi? 00:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Hmm..I thought that discussion was already over. I'll check it out. Thanks. (^_^) --nihon 20:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Yea I thought so too... -- Catchi? 20:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Article is undergoing major edits by parties trying to delete it. They are removing lots of sections and even claiming Rice University is an unotable source. -- Catchi? 20:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
hey, care to contribute here? :) -- Catchi? 21:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I would love to but due to the AFD, i will have to decline. Besides, i don't know what i can give to the article. -Dynamo_aceTalk
AFD will most certainly fail. I am not sure what you can do but you may find information regarding the Kawaii cult. -- Catchi? 02:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Actualy there were two other images that were recently removed. Feel free to contribute to the article. :) -- Catchi? 21:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry the removsl of AFD notice was unintentional. -- Catchi? 02:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
No probs. For the record: I'm not for deletion of the page, although I don't agree with the loanword statement (I don't even know who Gwen wossnim is) and do not want to get into the middle of a revert war if I can help it. Shiroi Hane 02:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I am at least not suggesting it is a load word, I am merely suggesting it may (not will or is) turn out to be one as more and more people seem to be using it. That should be perfectly fine with NPOV right? -- Catchi? 04:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, it started as a young women movement, then spreaded practicaly everywhere else... Random "criticism" w/o citation can go (as you removed) :) -- Catchi? 12:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I know several (definitely) non-female, and (debatedly) non-young guys at work with things on the desks or stuck to their keitai which would be a laughingstock in other places. I think I mentioned the HelloKitty trucks in another post. There's just a pervasive "kawaii" attitude in Japan. Looking around my den at the various junk, er, cultural icons I've accumulated, I guess I'm a victim of the cuteness, like everyone else. :) I think I disagree with pretty much everybody on the talk page, if that's possible. The ones who want to kill the article don't want to acknowledge the cultural aspects of Kawaii, just because there is no officially named cultural aspect. The other side seems to want to throw the label around onto things which are Kawaii by association, like "Kawaii style".
Personally, I think the article can be refashioned with a leading sentence like "Kawaii is a term used in manga/anime circles, to encompass a broad area of Cuteness related to Japanese art and culture". Continue from that with a description of the Japanese adjective, and some varied examples of Kawaii (not just anime cels, but grown men with Anpanman cell phone straps, or my Tom & Jerry bankbook, etc). Maybe it's unfortunate that the anime subculture looked at "cute" anime, and decided to adorn the genre with Kawaii just because the word and the anime were both Japanese. As someone pointed out, there is no "Kawaii Manga" section at a Japanese bookstore. But, that's the term that you're stuck with. I also wonder about Kodomo, Seinen, and some other wikipedia entries which are standalone Japanese words that describe manga genres. This same battle may erupt there, as well. Neier 13:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Oh I am not disputing Kawaii is in every office of all ages and gender. It just started as a young girl movement according to few articles I read (historic background). Arent we all victims of cuteness... Kawaii in anime/manga (main industry by far) should be in article, all we have is three images from anime atm. Is there any anime/manga NOT kawaii? I do not believe so as it wouldn't sell. Tom and Jerry would be a fine example of Kawaii in other cultures.
Kawaii style is broad and goes without saying it is suggesting something like "fiction style". It is something goes without saying and taken for granted in Japan and perhaps by anime/manga fans outside japan as well but for a stranger it is most certaily a cultural insight. Antropology isn't easy to write about.
The talk page debate currently is how to shorten the article, frankly I have never seen any wikipedia editor who tries to delete the article, fails, and basicaly blanks the article by "removing pov" even if the pov is cited.
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for mentioning this to me when we chatted. I agree that we shouldn't mess with good articles like this--and there is a huge keep consensus. --Tony Sidaway 04:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I was going to tell that on IRC but got distracted, and you were gone when I returned. The current problem is people who tried to get the article deleted are now trying to do the same via manual delete (aka removing everything they see fit such as the fashion section). He says he is "prepared for the onslaught of neologist Japancrufters" which I find somewhat insultive (although am not loosing sleep over it). Hence, I think there is a problematic situation. -- Catchi? 05:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely. More and more nominators are failing to piece together the true purpose of an deletion discussion, and should only be executed when the person has an hold on the source material. -ZeroTalk 05:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Oh this isnt deletionism at its best grasshopper, I dealt with more extreme cases. :) -- Catchi? 05:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Ok, thanks for the heads up. I have been gone for awhile, but I have managed to write up the Anti VAndalism Proposal. User:Activision45/proposal
Tell me what I should add, take away. Or what I should do next. Im not to talented at wikipedia still. So if your willing to help me, I would very much appreciate it. If your too busy to help me, then tell me, I understand. :)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Your edit in this diff shows that you have breached the arbitration decision by restructuring a talk page (remedy 4, "Coolcat prohibited from restructuring"). I've asked the person reporting this to notify the breach on WP:AN/I where action may be taken, including a block. If you persist, you will certainly be blocked, possibly by me. If things get out of hand I will completely ban you from editing the article and its talk page.
Please reconsider your obstructive and hostile approach toward others in the discussion on this page. I am patient, but I won't suffer any nonsense. --Tony Sidaway 19:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Hmm... Mkay... The "hostile approach" is a product of their approach visible on: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kawaii. Their idea of article writing is unnaceptable. The even dispute legitness of sources such as this. So far they have only been dicks... I am prepared to work with people who are not prepared for the onslaught of neologist Japancrufters. -- Catchi? 16:03, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Cool Cat, when you delete a consensus poll reflecting a 7-0 supermajority just because you disagree with it, and the supermajority includes people who you invited to the debate, you are not showing good faith or demonstrating that Wikipedia principles come first. Yes, there has been a bit of give and take, some very different perspectives, and some frank words, but at every step including the AfD everyone has respected consensus. As a result, the article has gotten larger, having gained more content, more sources, a greater variety of images, and it is growing more polished. If you are editing in good faith and you fully understand what consensus means, then you should be happy about the improvements to the article. I'm sorry for our differences, I wish you a speedy recovery, and I hope it will become clear to you that positive things have come from this dispute even though we took a bumpy scenic route to get there. Cheers. The Crow 22:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
USER Heja Helweda IS VERY PROBLAMATIC AND ONLY PLACES POV AND FALSE INFOedit
She actually verifies things through bad sources and is selective and has managed to high jack several articles with POV and untrue information. She also tries to portray Kurdistan as a Country and is re-invesnting Kurdish history.
Here and her group disgard are relavant info in the discussion page and basically say it is a democratic vote each time to someone with scholarly information. There are editing wars and she has clearly showed she is very biased and a fabricater of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.139.250 (talk • contribs)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading Image:Turkish_Armed_Forces.gif. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.
If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 11:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
The image is the logo of Turkish Armed Forces. I have added the official website and image is visible :) -- Catchi? 15:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Merhaba Cool Cat, en:Zaza people sayfasini kontrol edebilir misin? Bazi kisiler kaynak gostermeden makaleyi keyiflerine gore degistiriyor. Senin koydugun uyariyi da silmisler. --Daraheni 20:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've attempted an comprimise in this matter, as Brian rears an valid point. I agree that the external links as an whole are very useful, but the removal of a few could be warrented. I'd like your thoughts on this. Hopefully, we can all come to an agreement on this matter, as this situation and the current remedy seems very sensible. -ZeroTalk 21:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
That sounds doable. And Brian seems to sit well with the idea, so I shall go and trim down the template somewhat. If you feel my judgement after doing so was in error, please feel free to revert and we can all return to the drawing board. Don't hesitate to pay an visit to my talkpage. -ZeroTalk 22:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure what idea you're saying I "sit well with". What I would like to see is: (1) list the official site and no more than one fan site on Oh My Goddess!, Oh My Goddess! (manga), Oh My Goddess! (OVA), and other high-level articles; (2) remove all official site and fan site listings from articles about individual characters or episodes (unless you have a link to a page specifically about that character or episode); (3) remove the template, since any links which would have to be changed often enough to require a template are most definitely not the sorts of links which belong in Wikipedia. As this is an issue which is not limited to the three of us, please continue to discuss this at Talk:Oh My Goddess! rather than copying the discussion to user pages. - Brian Kendig 22:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
What I'd like to see:
I hope you will also make comprimises as one fan site is not enough, how about 2,3 ?
Individual articles and characters used to appear on the official fansite. The official fan site is currently being redone and links are changing. I intend to do what you request by aprilmay (as season two should air by then and the website would be completed)
Template makes it easier for me to apply same links on similar pages. It is a static template, you can use templates like that. {{NPOV}} is a static template for example ;)
There is room for improvement, I am more than wiling to cooperate if you are willig to assist, but meanwhile please withdraw the deletion request. I do not need the stress of deletion, we can achieve what you seek (or maybe something better) through cooperation.
I have been mostly lonely on articles relating to Oh My Goddess! and would apriciate any help.
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thank you! -- Catchi? 17:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
No problem! I'm on a wikibreak of sorts ... ha!
I've also started to tweak the intros and content for the various articles, starting (for now) with the various admiral articles. I've also been adding real-world links and (what I think) are relevant See also links/sxns to each of them; I got into a bit of a pissing match regarding Fleet Admiral (Star Trek) and may yet revise it, but my work isn't done. :)
In any event, thanks for your hard work on giving these rank articles the treatments and structure they deserve. (As well, I hope your surgery was trouble free.) Hailing freqencies open whenever you need 'em, but closed for now. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Surgery went ok (I am not dead so thats good :P).
There is more room for improvement, I encourage you to stick around.
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
I need your assistance. I'm currently attemptig to revise Template:Oh My Goddess Extlnk similar to Template:Imdb name, in that we can swith out varible sspecific URL's for each character, but I cannot seem to achieve this. Perhaps you can help. -ZeroTalk 18:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
The template's respective talkpage also may fill you in, if you're confused as to what I'm trying to do. :) -ZeroTalk 19:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
➨ ❝REDVERS❞ awards this Barnstar to Cool Cat for being a cool cat when under fire. I see someone above gave you an "award". Here's another one, expressing what the majority think! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 18:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Domo arigato! :) -- Catchi? 19:17, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have an idea for a Wikicity called Fanficpedia (An alternative title could be Fandompedia)
The idea is this, why don't we have a wikipedia style enclopeida for fandom. It would contian articles on fanfic series, charathers, and general fandom terms and sites. For example, there could be article on my Morpan fanfic series, complete with seperate articles for its charathers. It will all be non-baised.
The reason behind such a project is that only the most popular and well known fandom articles are allowed on Wikipedia. To prevent having minor fandom based articles from poping up on Wikipedia only to have them being removed due to them being "vanity" pages (which happened before with Wookiepedia, and eventally lead to the creation of such a wikicity to give such articles its place)
So, what do you think, does such a project need to exist? If you have questions, let me know. If you like it and can think you can help create a statment to submit to wikicites, let me know as well. There is also a test area where you can show off some examples, so if you need me to show some examples off, i can create some. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Actualy such projects exist such as memory-alpha for star trek. However I really like to stick to cannon. :) -- Catchi? 14:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
OK, i understand you pefer cannon to alternative work, but how about a genreal fandom repostrioy for all those fandom users to submit unbaised enclopedia articles of their work, all in one place for refrence? Because only the best fandom related material gets on Wikipedia and i don't think anyone would like a repeat purge of "vainty like" artices because of it. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Oh they do that regardless (such as the nonsense I observed on Kawaii). I do not mind you starting such a wiki. I however perhaps wont be involved :P -- Catchi? 15:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
OK, but i might not be able to do a statment for wikicities propley, can you help out with that?
I really dont know, I want to help but I dont know how, try asking to User:Sannse. She is wikicities staff after all... :) -- Catchi? 21:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hi again, I finally got around to editing the winged logo. I went ahead and did it in the .gif format (no anti-aliasing, but a .png version is also available) and uploaded it over the old one on commons. I hope you like it, but if you don't, I'm open to suggestions, or feel free to revert it. — TheKMantalk 23:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I kinda like it. Can you make it more like Image:Goddess Relief Office.gif? Notice the cenral ring and how much smaller the bulls eye is. Also the color of the rings should be darker, to a more golden color... If posible can you adjust it like that? :)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Regarding the {{Wdefcon}} template and the suggestions from the recent TfD that it should be shrunk... I have posted my solution suggestion on it's talk page. Since you are technically the "owner" of the template, I'd be happy with your opinion on this matter. Thank you. Misza13(Talk) 20:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Merhaba, There is a dispute ongoing in the article Iranian peoples. Some Pan-Iranist users are changing the defintion of Iranian peoples (an unknown and not widely used term) from its linguistic meaning to linguistic, cultural and racial issues. According to their wrong defintion many people are labelled as Iranian, including parts of Turkish population. If you have time and are interested in the issue I ask you to join the discussion. Thank you very much.
DiyakoTalk+ 22:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
Sure I'll work on it however I am not sure what exactly the dispute is. -- Catchi? 22:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply,
Since long ago there was a dispute on this article, the first time I saw it shoked, never heard of such a strange definition, everytime I asked for sources they rejected, so that i became suspecious, and after a while realized that the article is original research!
I suggested merging or redirecting it with page Iranian languages or demographics of Iran. The term Iranian peoples by itself in 99,9999% or almost 100% is used for people who live inside Iran not those who live outside Iran.
The term Iranian peoples is not a widely used an accepted term, so that i once even nominated it for redirection or deletion.
The relation among speakers of Iranian languages in most cases is only a simple linguistic classification. they are more different than any other existing group which speak a language family.
Most of them are not decendant from ancient iranians, even persians by themselves are not pure Arian.
Also Aryan is not exactly as ancient Iranians. ancient Iranians were only parts of Aryan.
Speakers of iranian languages culturally are totally different from ancient Iranian peoples.
Speakers of iranian languages speak different languages and have different cultures.
Their only argument is some weak personal POVs and not supported by verifiable sources except some weak pro-Iranian references which even directly do not discuss the matter.
Hello Cool Cat, I just became aware that you are trying to follow the discussion. I would like to point out a few things. First, I quote one of the posts here:
The word Iranian people has been used in many academic sources. The article is well cited. Here is also another example of such usage : in brittanica: [8], in scientific literatures:[9], news: (ethnic Iranians) [10][11][12] United nation’s definition for Lor as ethnic Iranian: [13]
Other sources, which are scholarly papers hosted by a University of London institute, can be found at http://www.cais-soas.com/Essays.htm. These also include the classification (as common in scientific literature) of Kurds and Azeris as parts of Iranian peoples.
The whole discussion started due to a dispute at the Kurdish people talk page, on which a few editors tried to remove all notions of relations among Kurds and Iranians. As this contradicted evidence (part of which is presented above), they moved on to remove the Iranian peoples article from wikipedia because it had become important in the discussion and was constantly referred to. The term Iranian people can be traced back to Biblical times, and appears, among other things, as early as 2500 years ago in writings of the Achamenid era. That this is a well-established academic term, well defined (not only in terms of language: As Richard Frye puts it: Iranians are defined by their culture and religion, not just languages. [14]), is out of the question according to the above and many other sources.
I also have to point out that this has nothing to do with pan-Iranism, of which I personally am an outspoken opponent.
Thank you for your time. Shervink 16:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)shervinkReply
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
What do you intend for the completed template to be? If you want it to be static links to fansite home pages, then that's not appropriate, and I still feel the template should be removed. If you want it to be page-specific links from specific articles to individual pages on fan sites, then that's what Zero and I are discussing on Talk:Oh My Goddess! - please join in our discussion there. If you want it to be something else, please explain. - Brian Kendig 23:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
If you browsed the official website you will see that page names ae stuff like foo/skuld.foo. However I want to create the dynamic template once the official website character section is complete. I want to use a central dynamic template for that reason.
Since you are good with bots can you please subst the ==External Links== header to individual articles. the that way more links can be added while the standard (official site etc) also appear.
Same sites cover AMG material and currently its two links deep for any character. :)
I hope this makes some sense... -- Catchi? 23:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, you're covering some ground that Zero and I already discussed - let's take this to Talk:Oh My Goddess!. I'll post a comment there shortly to explain. - Brian Kendig 00:04, 27 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
For making improvements to the Oh!My Goddess! external links template when it was about to be for the chop, I award you The Surreal Barnstar for that extraordnary touch. Dynamo_ace 17:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
![[6]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:St1AdPic.jpg&curid=1595801&diff=39655521&oldid=39640394){kind=link}
