This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
i haven't undone contributions of others, it's the opposite : others (meaning : usually black metal's fans) have undone my contributions because they think wikipedia is about point of view, not about telling the truth. So do you ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sant Erwan (talk • contribs) 11:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Re-adding something someone removes is exactly undoing that other editor's edit. Your speculation of their position on the topic is irrelevant. Regardless of who is ultimately right, edit-warring will get your edit-privleges revoked. And violating our policies on use of quoted material will get your edit-privleges revoked even more promptly. Do not continue down this path. I am saying this as an administrative warning, not related to the value of the content on this topic. DMacks (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
"Tool" indeed!
The vandal thought he or she was being funny or insulting, but you made me laugh when I saw your response in the edit summary here. Etamni | ✉ | ✓ 20:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Belarusian-Taraškievica Wikipedia was moved from be-x-old.wikipedia.org to be-tarask.wikipedia.org. This caused some issues, but most of them were resolved. [2]
Language preferences might not be changed immediately when you adjust them. Language selection might work slower. Please report any problems. [3][4]
The Wikimedia mailing lists should have been upgraded on September 9. It didn't work as planned and will now happen later. [6]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from September 15. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from September 16. It will be on all Wikipedias from September 17 (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on September 15 at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
ContentTranslation will show more data on the Special:ContentTranslationStats page. For example, it will show translation trends and information about deleted translations. [7]
The first version of the translation suggestions feature will be deployed soon. [8]
is at it again. I have requested page protection, but thought the other two IPs inserting crap about killers/murderers [9] might need to be temp-blocked or something... ugh, the things people come up with. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
NeilN protected it. Unless the IPs spread their crap to other pages, I'm content to leave it as "they chose a target, it got protected, they gave up". I think the IPs are not part of a reasonably blockable range:( DMacks (talk) 07:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
About Standard Penetration Test as well as Boring (earth)
Dear
I've provided reliable academic papers. I urged User:Argyriou to join the discussion, but he never did.
The following link -Zatsuwa, Monosagu (2005). "Beware, soft ground and the standard penetration test" (in Japanese). Public Works Research Institute.- is without a doubt what I found and he repeatedly kept deleting my writing as well as the link and stole the link as his for his writing even though he does not understand what it says. This can be confirmed from SPT history.
If you examine the SPT talk page,and its history as well as ANI, I am positive you would understand that I have provided all the necessary and reliable source to validate my writings, and I never enforced my points to User:Argyriou or others; I have been very open to discussion. He is the one who kept deleting my writings and cussing without solid reasons.
One more thing about three-revert rule in Boring(earth). I know about three-revert rule, but i though I could revert more than three if it was reverted by more than one other user. I am no expert in Wikipedia, and I never intended an edit-war.
I reported User:Argyriou's act as vandalism because there was a huge discussion about this issue in SPT talk and ANI a while ago, and I specifically pointed out about the link issue as well as others, and I thought it was settled. I urged him to join the discussion but he never did. And a couple of days ago, he deleted my writings and stole my link source as his again. I looked at Wikipedia:Vandalism, and it seems his act fits the description of vandalism. This is why I reported. I honestly do not know if this reporting is an act of edit-war.
I am not taking a position on the content at this time. As an admin, I am merely stopping a content dispute, forcing you (plural) to talk about it, get additional editors' input, etc (see WP:DR). The WP:3RR rule is a bright line regarding each individual's behavior, not "per opponent". But I do notice you have a history of uploading media files whose license/source tags are incorrect and often are WP:COPYVIO. Do you have some affiliation with a company or product related to this topic? DMacks (talk) 07:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
If there is vandalism, there are places and ways to report it before you yourself become tainted. But your WP:AIV was rejected (and I similarly reject this as a simple/obvious case) given that it has already been to AIV. I have no idea what it means to "steal" a link...links are just sources, and anyone can point to them to claim they support some fact. Perhaps this is a mis-translation of some other language's expression? DMacks (talk) 07:25, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
It is true that anyone can use a link to support his writing as long as his writing follows the source material. He cannot read Japanese, and he does not understand PWRI article. Anyone who has read the article know he never read it. His writing is quite different from the PWRI article. Although you say it is only a matter of the link, but he deleted my PWRI summary and took its link as his. I don't see why you don't find it strange. Yoshi123Yoshi (talk) 08:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
You are the one who raised the issue with stealing a link, a concept that makes no sense. Nobody "owns" a link, we (editors) all just use links as references to support content we write ourselves. I'm glad his writing is different than the content on some other website...if it were the actual same content, it would be forbidden as WP:COPVIO. As I can now see, your edits are disputed by multiple other editors, therefore I was correct not to rely solely on your statements here, but instead to recommend you use venues that give multiple other editors a chance to discuss. You did not answer my quetion: what (if any) is your affiliation with the companies involved with this topic? DMacks (talk) 08:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Too many quotes: 2,6-Dichlorobenzonitrile
DMacks: When dealing with chemicals like 2,6-Dichlorobenzonitrile that can cause harm to people and environment, how does one decide "too many quotes"? If you read through the quotes in this entry, you'll find that they wind up contradicting each other -- that this chemical is safe but then is banned in the EU and (under Toxicity) according to the UN IPCS and US CDC can cause harm to the environment (which is the intended use: to effect the environment, starting with tree roots)... Respectfully --Aboudaqn (talk) 12:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
It's worthwhile mentioning the different and contradictory positions. But that doesn't have to be done by extended direct quotes. Instead, summarize the relevant material in your own words. DMacks (talk) 19:57, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
DMacks: Shortened longest quote: does that work for you, and do you agree the rest are short enough? (While I agree with you in general regarding quotes, when it comes to technical matters I find that nuance can often go missing when summarized.--Aboudaqn (talk) 20:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Yup. Was out for coffee, then took me a few minutes to remember which sock-drawer it was and tag it. It's a WP:LTA who edits rapidly when he gets in the mood. Doesn't make it any harder to clean up, just more noise in the watchlists:) DMacks (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Nora Fatehi
Don't you think, sentence is contradictory ? (Her next movie was ?) Shachiindra (talk) 06:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
We're talking about Nora Fatehi? The previous sentence talks about the movie that was her "debut". That means that movie was her first one. Some other movie would not be "previous" to it, but instead would come after it ("next"). Are you thinking "next" means "after now" rather than just "after something else"? The whole sentence is past tense, so "after now" meaning doesn't make sense. DMacks (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Help
Hi DMacks,
I want to bring this to your notice. This user Turehnde is removing content from many pages which include Karanvir Bohra, Surbhi Jyoti, Parth Samthaan and many more. When I reverted those edits the user is citing that content was removed from Karan Singh Grover without discussion. So the user is applying same rules over these pages according to him/her. Please take action on this.
Regards,
Digvijay411 (talk) 4:51 , 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Blocked as yet another Durr-e-shehwar sock based on many clues. DMacks (talk) 06:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your improvements to the dopamine article. Now all I have to do is find a good ref for all that stuff . . . Looie496 (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
@Looie496: You're welcome! The analysis of the structure as being "catechol", "phenethylamine", etc is too obvious to need refs, but the definitions of those terms could be taken from their target articles if someone complains. The general idea of formulating amine drugs as salts for solubility reasons is supported (and cited) in the hydrochloride article--the ref looks like a reliable secondary/tertiary source. That this drug is formulated this way (•HCl rather than •HBr or other combinations) does need its own ref--I know about chemistry but not this chemical in particular. DMacks (talk) 19:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Desmethyletizolam
In response to your edit summary, I did not add the content that you are concerned about. The uncited claim was in the article before I ever edited it. 71.175.72.159 (talk) 00:18, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Joe Hockey article protection?
Hi, would it be possible to reduce the protection level of Joe Hockey's article? He has recently retired from the Parliament, and several sum-ups of his career are coming out, and the article has been semi-protected (without a visible padlock) since last December. There have been no attempts at vandalism since then - could the protection level be changed to pending changes level or fully unprotected? Thanks. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 00:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I knocked it down to pending-changes, and will check back in a day or so to see how it is surviving. For the record, we can't see "attempts at vandalism" that semi-protection is preventing. The software completely disables editing for those who are prevented from editing, so we cannot tell what they would have tried to do:) DMacks (talk) 01:45, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that! I've seen some spurious edit requests on pages which have been vandalised in the past, so I took it as a good sign that there was none of that on Hockey's article. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Logged-out edits
Dmacks, if an editor edits logged out, the IP adress is revealed- if it was accidental and unintended, is there a means of deleting the IP address from the edit history (re. WP:OUTING I guess)? cheers, FortunaImperatrix Mundi 14:32, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, admins can hide the IP-address of individiual edits in a page's edit-history. My [Email this user] link is available if you'd like to use it (ping me here so I know to check that account). Or you can email OTRS and someone who monitors that queue will handle it (those agents are vetted for handling non-public info regarding some WP activities). DMacks (talk) 15:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, DMacks. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Apologies for the delay in getting back to you: naturally I forgot to watch this page! Cheers FortunaImperatrix Mundi 08:49, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Last week a few issues with UploadWizard were fixed. Before this was done, UploadWizard would stop you from uploading your files if something went wrong. [12][13][14][15]
More Wikipedias can now use information from any Wikidata item in any Wikipedia article. Previously they could only use the Wikidata item that matched the subject of the article. [16]
The VisualEditor welcome dialogue has been changed. The intention is to make it more helpful for new users. [17]
Problems
Wikimedia Labs' HTTPS certificate expired for most of Tuesday 15 September. To reach Wikimedia Labs and Tool Labs securely you had to ignore your browser's security error message. There was no risk to data security during this time. [18]
Last week the notification system was split into two parts. This was temporarily undone because of a bug and performance concerns. It will return to two parts this week. [19][20]
UploadWizard couldn't upload files larger than 5 MB when using chunked uploads. This has now been fixed. [21]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from September 22. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from September 23. It will be on all Wikipedias from September 24 (calendar).
The page move tool has been switched over to the new standard look for forms. [22]
You can now choose whether to extend a link or not when editing one in VisualEditor. This means it is easier to choose how much of what you type before and after the link is part of it. [23]
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on 22 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can register to the Wikimedia Developer Summit 2016 in San Francisco 4–6 January 2016. Gadget, template, bot, and tool developers are welcome as well. Call for participation and travel sponsorship requests are open until 2 October.
mother fuckers Bfan20 (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Copyvio of the content as a whole and license violation of the image. It's only "your own" page in that it is associated with your account; it is still within the Wikipedia site and governed by certain rules. I recommend you spend some time re-familiarizing yourself with our core policies, as many/most/all of your recent edits have been unacceptable. DMacks (talk) 06:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
No. You and others with interest in that article have demonstrated that you are incapable of creating an acceptable article there (or elsewhere), so you will need to use a sandbox/draft-space so that an administrator can make sure it's acceptable this time. Consider it as an alternative to having your edit-privleges revoked altogether. DMacks (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
FACE:B00C collateral victim
addresses with FACE:B00C in their range are used by internet.org app service and not "geologically localized" in that a person in south asia can get allocated an address for a time which will be later cycled to any person in EU or NA. blocking entire ranges is too much collateral damage. please look deeply into this. block the sock accounts, not ip ranges. speaking as a victim of ip rangeblock associated with someone I did not know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talk • contribs) 05:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
The socks are using many IPs directly and to create many sock accounts using many IPs. Whack-a-mole on the accounts is not an effective or efficient solution at this point. If a pool of IPs that is assigned to a certain service provider is being abused by a vandal who rapidly jumps within that pool, that's exactly the reason a rangeblock is a reasonable solution. And indeed this case is a vandal jumping among many IPs in the range you cite. Maybe internet.org should stop running such an abusable proxy system? I'm not on their administrative or technical staff. Collateral damage of non-vandal users is often easily worked-around (but [citation needed] that it's "too much" as you say). DMacks (talk) 06:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
problem is that everyone in the world who are using internet.org gets assigned IP in the face:b00c range and internet.org system cycles the ip on a global scale, not regionally. so, because of some vandals in the ip range, innocent users get blocked. and the vandals can get away by creating accounts in "not face:b00c" range and logging into the vandal accounts using internet.org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahfuzur rahman shourov (talk • contribs) 06:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
That is the nature of range-blocks, yes. And I along with several other admins and vandal-patrolling editors felt it was an acceptable trade-off given the circumstances. I have re-examined, and I stand by my position on that. There are multiple methods used here, which also might prevent the vandal getting sneaking back in the way you propose (I won't discuss these technical details further in public). DMacks (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
In UploadWizard, the dialog to see an image preview has been removed. You already see the images in the thumbnails when you upload them. [25]
UploadWizard dialogs look a bit different now. They have been updated to the new OOUI look. [26]
You can now edit music scores in VisualEditor. You can add new sheet music scores and get live updates when you edit one. [27]
When you send an e-mail to another editor using Special:EmailUser, that user will now get a notification on the wiki as well. [28]
You can now see 500 images when you upload images from Flickr with UploadWizard. Before this change the limit was 50. [29]
The Wikimedia mailing lists have been upgraded. [30]
MediaWiki developers spent a day looking at proposed code changes in Gerrit. The goal was to clean up the backlog and give feedback to volunteer developers. [31]
Problems
Some visitors had problems reaching the Wikimedia sites for an hour on September 24. [32][33]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from September 29. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from September 30. It will be on all Wikipedias from October 1 (calendar).
There will be a new beta feature that allows editors to use Flow on their user talkpage if they want to. Each wiki can decide if they want to enable it. [34]
The Content Translation tool can give translation suggestions. This feature will now be available in more languages: English, French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, Turkish, Japanese, Italian, and Catalan. [35]
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on 29 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
The Wikimedia Foundation developers want the community to decide who can use OAuth in the future. You can discuss it on Meta.
When you substituted a new diagram (set), you did not correspondingly amend the footnote, which refers to the old diagram. PraeceptorIP (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Oops, thanks. I put the key info in the caption, but didn't notice that there was description rather than just citation in the footnote. So I removed the (now-incorrect and seemingly redundant) description from the footnote. DMacks (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Read your updates on the case linked above. I'm thinking of designing an edit filter for this non-privileged users placing privileged templates. Any thoughts? Have you noticed any trends? Ping me upon reply. --JustBerry (talk) 05:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Comment: I brought up a discussion on IRC regarding potential cross-wiki abuse for this SPI case. However, the consensus from enCUs and steward appears to suggest that cross-wiki CheckUsers team are already collaborating on issues like this. However, prior to my persistent reporting, users did not seem encouraged to report the issue. Seems like a systemic issue that should be looked on the cross-wiki scale as well. --JustBerry (talk) 11:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
I commented there. I do not support "giant covalent bonding" (nor is that what you proposed at that talkpage). DMacks (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Tymoshenko
Hello. I am trying to protect the article from My very best wishes. My first edit was at 03:52, 28 August 2015, when I removed allegations that ECHR had recognized that Tymoshenko had been tortured in detention. I provided a reference to the actual judgement of the court, which explicitly rejects these claims. Lidaz then started an edit war to reinstate the false claim about the court's recognition. I asked Future Perfect at Sunrise for help. He rewrote part of the article which had been rewritten by Lidaz in terrible English. It turned out Lidaz was a sock and he was blocked indefinitely. Since IPs started reinstated the same edits, Dennis Brown semi protected the page. Sometimes after that another user, Gal777, started to reintroduce the same edits. He turned out to be a sock of Lidaz and was idefinitely blocked too. Now, Volunteer Marek changed " the Ukrainian Supreme Court closed the case and found that "no crime was committed"." into "the Ukrainian Supreme Court and European Court of Human Rights closed the case and found that "no crime was committed"", thus associating the ECHR to the judgement of the the Ukrainian Supreme Court, which is factually false. He seems to enjoy the support of My very best wishes who strangely contradicts his own previous edits. In any case, my action has been conservative. I tried to maintain the consensus reached with Future Perfect at Sunrise and Dennis Brown. Therefore, I do not understand why you accuse me of edit warring, while giving a free pass to MVBW and VM to introduce changes that are factually wrong. Ask Dennis Brown or FPS, they are well aware of the whole affair. Thank you. Againstdisinformation (talk) 04:41, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
You are the one who made the same edits several times, whereas multiple others who are not socks made rational edit-summaries disputing it. I am acting solely as admin here, not taking sides here, and WP:EW is very clear that it doesn't matter who is really "right" or which content eventually winds up in the article. By a brief look, I don't see a discussion with clear consensus on the talkpage. Feel free to discuss with the other editors involved, especially those who currently disagree with your edits to try to persuade them that you are right. Ask those with whom you claim you currently have consensus to weigh in as well. All of this goes on the article talkpage so nobody can claim some secret deal, bad-faith explanation, etc. DMacks (talk) 06:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
I think this page can now be unprotected given that the matter has been clarified and agreed on article talk page. My very best wishes (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
"it doesn't matter who is really "right"" I could not disagree more with you. Wikipedia's consensual approach and its positivist disregard for truth are very dangerous. There was consensus at Salem too. When the matter is inherently subjective and there is no objective way to determine what is true, I agree that consensus is the best method if and only if it is accompanied with systematic doubt. As things stand the most vocal, and therefore more biased, voices get their way. In the case at hand, things are easy. Just read the ECHR judgement yourself. If you find any decision by the court that "no crime was committed", I will apologize. Please, if you answer, address the substance, not the editor. Againstdisinformation (talk) 20:22, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
There's no deadline that I can see here, whereas WP:EW is a policy that quite clearly is about behavior. Following such a simple behavior policy is a great way to get your ideas heard and possibly implemented. In this case, it seems there are quite obvious disputes about what sources to use, what they actually say, and/or how to write about them. The ultimate form of the article is subject to consensus once it becomes clear that there are genuine mis-readings or that one source is clearly at odds with many others. Please dial down your urgency and strident actions so that your ideas themselves can be taken for what they are. DMacks (talk) 20:30, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I possibly was not clear enough. I thought the consensus has been already achieved in this section, unless Againstdisinformation objects to clarification made by Alex Bakharev (he should not based on his previous edit). Saying that, I do not mind it be protected for weeks. My very best wishes (talk) 23:00, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
My very best wishes, there is no consensus whatsoever and, for the time being, the page protection is a very good thing. Againstdisinformation (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Right there is a great reason there needs to be a public and centralized discussion, so that anyone else looking at it can see what led to the article being in the form it ultimately has. DMacks (talk) 20:37, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
The link editor in the visual editor now shows results below the search box. This improves the usability on desktop and mobile. [37]
The description at Special:ChangeEmail now clearly explains that the page can also be used to remove your email. [38]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from October 6. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from October 7. It will be on all Wikipedias from October 8 (calendar).
UploadWizard will remind users to add a category. [39]
UploadWizard's category selectors will be easier to use. [40]
A new Cite error will be shown if a named reference is defined more than once in the same article. [41]
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on 6 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
A Cheese burger.Please reply me to talk you. DennisJohn12 (talk) 03:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
You8 just deleted my page :(((
Hi my name is Gabriele Corcos, you just deleted my page (twice).
I am setting up a bio page and will absolutely release my content from copyright, just wanted to let you know that this is me, in first person and all copyright in question is mine (no share holders).
Please let me know if I am doing anything wrong, I really need this page to go up.
Thanks
Gabriele Corcos — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetuscangun (talk • contribs) 16:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
As the copyvio alert on your talkpage says, "If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure." But see also WP:COI to learn whether you should be writing about yourself, and WP:BIO regarding whether you merit an article at all (regardless of who writes it). As a new editor, maybe our "Your First Article" guide would be a good first read to learn about wikipedia. DMacks (talk) 19:08, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Review request
Hello ,
The page Karanvir Bohra is currently vandalised by many anonymous users. Could you please protect the article from getting vandalised by adding protection for few days.
Yours Sincerely,
Digvijay411 (talk·contribs) 13:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Cycle revert
Why does it need a link associated with it? - Denimadept (talk) 04:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for stopping the Talk:Karanvir Bohra/GA1 from continuing. I have noticed some funny coincidences in this case from then onwards. Chronology is as follows:
Bohra was nominated by User:Derevation on 5th Oct
Bohra's review was started by User:Digvijay411 on 7th Oct
Immediately in 2 mins Qubool Hai was nominated by Digvijay411 on 7th Oct
About 5 hours later Qubool Hai's review was started by Derevation on 7th Oct
QH eventually passed while you halted Bohra.
I happened to notice this because Derevation had on 5th also nominated another film article Singh Is Bliing which didn't even have plot section in it then. And then he also jumped in the Talk:Shreya Ghoshal/GA1 which was not needed at all. Just bringing to your notice because you have administered Bohra's page and might know the history of these editors. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Network connectivity poor for next few hours, will try to look later today if it recovers... DMacks (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
My BFOH diagnotic tree says it's ephemeral sunspots attenuated by unusual cloud formations caused by unsanctioned HARRP testing by MiB. Ravensfire (talk) 21:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Ahah, thanks! I had diagnosed it as far as a case of fractal radiation jamming the backbone, but couldn't figure out where they were coming from. DMacks (talk) 07:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks @Ravensfire: for taking up the issue there. Will wait and watch. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Qubool Hai was indeed a terrible review job in its own right (I commented at that article's GA-review page). And Digvijay411 does appear to have either trading softball reviews or acting poorly towards other editors who are active in this genre. I'll give it a day or so to see if it gets any bites at the Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations.
Dharmadhyaksha, did you mean to alter someone else's sig at [42]? DMacks (talk) 07:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Oops no! Ctrl+C Ctrl+V mistake. And don't know who the text got dragged. Fixed it. Sorry for that. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Rename
How do i rename a page?Jdogmad (talk) 04:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
I think you have been sufficiently active on Wikipedia that you can do this one yourself. Help:How to move a page is the tutorial: essentially you click a button on the existing page to start the "move" process, then enter the new name you want, then click ok. If it doesn't work, or you make a typo and need to undo it or move it yet again, or want to remove the short-lived mis-capitalized remnant after moving, might need admin assistance (I and others can clean up after the actual move/rename process). DMacks (talk) 05:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:27, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
The database size lists have been updated. These control special page update frequency and which wikis use global abuse filters. [43]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from October 13. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from October 14. It will be on all Wikipedias from October 15 (calendar).
You will be able to upload images to Wikimedia Commons using the visual editor. When the image is uploaded it will be added to the article you're editing. [44]
Pages that show citation error messages will automatically be placed in a hidden category. [45]
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 13 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Hi, DMacks. User:Liz suggested that you might be able to help me. I have a colleague who has been working on the William Lofland Dudley article. Neither of us has an academic background in chemistry or the physical sciences. Would you be willing to review the article content as relates to the subject's academic career and work in chemistry, and perhaps do a little sniffing around for additional content to round out the related sections of the article? I have three graduate degrees (one in economics, two in law), but I am clearly off the reservation when I start discussing academic chemistry and related research. Please let me know if you can help. No rush. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Move Protection
Hi DMacks,
Khowar language, is currently semi-protected please set the protection level to; Pending changes protected (level 1).
Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Þørnø $ (talk • contribs) 13:42, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corey–Link reaction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reduction. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Tech News is trying to make reading the newsletter easier. The icon means the item is in the newsletter every week, but with new dates. The icon means the item is mainly relevant for readers with technical knowledge. You can leave feedback on this change.
Timestamps in the protection log will now be in the user's timezone. Previously they would show Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). [46]
Problems
A problem with MediaWiki made some pages show no content on October 14. This has now been fixed. [47]
Some templates were misplaced in the Flow description bar. This could make it impossible to click on links. This will be fixed this week. [48]
The deployment of the new MediaWiki version was stopped on October 14. No new code was deployed for the rest of week. This meant planned changes did not happen. [49]
Changes this week
Changes that were planned to happen last week will happen this week. [50]
Wikispecies, Meta and MediaWiki.org will be able to use Wikidata for sitelinks. [51][52][53][54]
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 20 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Why did you rollback my edits to Kent Hovind’s wiki? I don't think it's a fair statement to say that the entire scientific community discredit all of Kent Hovind's claims. Would you agree?
I'm not sure what "fair" means to you in this context. But the statement seems to be a reasonable summary of the overwhelming and well-cited opinion discussed elsewhere in the article. It's in accord with WP:FRINGE. There appears to be WP:CONSENSUS that this wording is proper, according to the history of the article's talkpage. Feel free to read those many previous discussions and then start a new discussion there if you have new points to raise. DMacks (talk) 23:28, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Sorry DMacks. I'm new here. Thanks for the explanation! Michaelcadcock (talk) 01:24, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
No worries, we were all new at everything once. Welcome aboard! DMacks (talk) 02:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! With these night owl nights you're always pulling, here's some hydration. This e-tea's remains have been e-compostedSwisterTwistertalk 07:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Only beginning a new discussion seeing as I am unable to post my thoughts on the existing thread.
Anyway...
Out of curiosity DMacks, what exactly are the "sources and proof" that have in your opinion counted Dr. Hovind' work as discredited? And to also be "fair", I believe you gave too much of a runaround and difficult answer (and you didn't even answer the direct question) to the user Mickaelcadcock for a simple question. Purely, I am curious as to what exactly you've edited to his page as well as the "discrediting proof", seeing as I've monitored his description by Wiki users who can write whatever they so choose regardless of validity for quite some time now and I'm displeased that all I see are lashing opinions spoken in a negative and bias way. TruthOverEgoAndFear (talk) 02:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your opinions. You are welcome to visit the talk-page of any article to start a discussion about that article--Talk:Kent Hovind appears to be fully editable by anyone. Make sure you include citations of reliable sources and understand verifiability policy and WP:FRINGE guidelines and have read previous discussions so you don't waste everyone's time re-hashing the same arguments that will almost certainly have the same outcome. Hopefully you're not here solely to slant some article towards (as your username suggests) the WP:TRUTH--an interesting essay that seems to relate to many editors' thoughts on that and other controversial articles and why "fair" or "valid" is probably not what most of them think that word means here (especially those who have strong feeling about the subject). You can see above and on the talkpage how the other user seems to have felt and acted in response to my and others' answers. Please actually read the article, I see for example several footnotes for "entirely rejected in the scientific community"--I assume you overlooked those details when you read the article? DMacks (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
DMacks, I will review what is readily available to me, however I note that you are once again making something simple (my question) very unclear and elongated (your answer). If you intend to debate the words "fair" and "valid" as being interpreted any other way besides "factual and without personal motive" then I have a hard time trusting in your credibility and or intellect. I mean absolutely no insult In any of this, but you don't need a college degree to interpret a word you learned in kindergarten. Sounding intelligent and being it are two different things. I shall respond to any reply when I review on my end. Once again I mean no harm, I would just respect a straight simple answer to a simple question.
Additionally, "entirely rejected in the scientific community" does not mean it isn't factual. Readily I admit I have not followed Dr. Hovind or his work for a great deal of time however what I have dug into shows validity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TruthOverEgoAndFear (talk • contribs) 03:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
You asked a paragraph, I answered as such. The short answer for you is: "nothing about that article's content is to be discussed here on my user talkpage". The longer answer included more details, including where to go instead, and the general nature of WP that you (still) seem to be missing. DMacks (talk) 03:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
DMacks
Incorrect on your statement of my "paragraph" question/answer. If you review my very first involvement, only one sentence was annotated with a question mark, making it the only (short and simple) question. The rest was response opinion/fact to your prior actions and I see you took it as generally superfluous regardless of valid point. I then ask this question (having now reread the entire article and reviewed some of the "sources" (and I say sources lightly seeing as links are broken or content is gone from their linked pages altogether)): If nothing about that article's content is to be discussed here on your user talkpage, why then do you believe you are a proper or adequate decider of the content of the page who is above reproach?
Also, I notice that despite my stance for a professional discussion (save one lapse on both our part) I realize I am being pressing. I am however asking your (implied underline) thoughts and sources, not for you to hide behind WP policy which I have not violated by asking you a direct question for source material on the content you personally edited, seeing as the links on my end are broken or missing.
I am not willing to discuss any article content issues (including access/functionality of cites) of that article anywhere except on that article's talk-page. DMacks (talk) 07:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from October 27. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from October 28. It will be on all Wikipedias from October 29 (calendar).
The first time you use the visual editor, pop-ups will explain why and when you should use the citation and link tools. [55]
You will be able to upload images to Wikimedia Commons from inside the wikitext editor by clicking "Upload" in the "Insert file" dialog. You will also be able to drag and drop them into an article when using the visual editor. [56][57]
When you edit a code block in visual editor, you will have the syntax highlighted. [58][59]
Index and Page namespaces on Wikisource will be defined as content namespaces in $wgContentNamespaces. [60]
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
If you are using the mobile version of Wikipedia, you can now see Wikidata descriptions under article titles in search results. [62]
Editing conflicts are now detected when you edit on a mobile device. Before, this did not work properly on mobile. [63]
Problems
On October 26 the Wikimedia sites went down for ten minutes. [64]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 3. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 4. It will be on all Wikipedias from November 5 (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 3 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join. You can also read the latest VisualEditor newsletter.
DMacks, I would like to contact you regarding the indefinite blocking of an account by you. My query relates to our decision on how to dispose of the matter with the individual in question. Therefore, How would I contact you in private to discuss? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SSCU (talk • contribs) 14:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I have my [email this user] link available. No guarantees I would be willing to act or continue to discuss "not on-wiki" though (lack of transparancy, etc.). DMacks (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I beg you nicely and politely not to delete my picture
The benzene structure of Spiropentadiene was 3D animation and also part of my midterm assignment was to add the 3D struture, please understand me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShinRyu Forgers (talk • contribs) 04:53, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I beg your pardon, I need your explanation, please. "Incorrect structure", please explain. "Annoying Animation", please explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShinRyu Forgers (talk • contribs) 06:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
You need some sort of actual scientific basis for deciding the 3D structure (WP:V is a policy on wikipedia). The most significantly wrong aspect was the detail of the molecular geometry, a really basic idea that should definitely have been covered in a standard organic chemistry course, and is usually covered even before than in a chemistry curriculum. It involves the relative directions of the bonds coming off each atom. At the level of organic chemistry, it is especially related to orbital hybridization of the carbon atoms to form the bonds, another usual concept in an organic chemistry course.
As I wrote on the image-deletion nomination, "Surely incorrect geometry of central C (not reasonable for 4-bonds, and not "spiro" per name)". The central carbon you created is approximately square–pyramidal, but a carbon with four bonds would be approximately tetrahedral. In a spiro compound, the two rings are twisted compared to each other, not both parallel and cupped down as you drew. And the carbons that have a double bond (each with a hydrogen attached) you made approximately trigonal–pyramidal, but they would be trigonal–planar.
Almost all wikipedia articles about organic structures have a diagram that you can rotate manually to see different shape ideas. Look for the link in the "Jmol-3D images" in the infobox. For spiropentadiene itself, the article even tells you the exact geometric parameter, and the various cited refs discuss the geometry in detail.
"Annoying animation" is exactly what it sounds like it means: the constant motion distracts the reader while trying to read the article itself. There is also an occasional glitch where a white square flashes in the upper-left corner. The animation itself appears to have several consecutive sets of the same sequence, making the file much larger (slower to download and start to display) than necessary. DMacks (talk) 10:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
You can now switch between the wikitext editor and the visual editor without saving. You will not lose the changes you have made. [68]
JSON dumps of the production search indexes are now available. They can be imported to Elasticsearch. [69]
Problems
Some translations for the Thanks and Echo extensions were missing. Translators have been asked to help and this should be solved soon. [70]
Changes this week
Thumbnails of 16-bit TIFF files will be displayed properly. Before, this didn't work. [71]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 10. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 11. It will be on all Wikipedias from November 12 (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 10 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Hi, can you have a look at Vedalam? I think you introduced the pending changes but it does not seem effective, or does it? I believe the previous type of protection was better. Or perhaps some other solution exists. Thanks, --WikiHannibal (talk) 15:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
The other protection had expired, so I was testing to see if there was any hope of a reduced level being sufficient. The answer seems like a clear "NO", so I reprotected to the higher level again for another month. Let me know if any other administrative action is needed. DMacks (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Recreation of deleted page
Helllo DMacks, in Aug 2013, you deleted page Salarpur under G12. This page was then created by some other editor. I just wanted keep you informed that I have recreated this page. Let me know if you have any observations. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 09:00, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. No objection to anyone creating a viable article on this topic. DMacks (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Jesus
Sorry to drop this here but WP:RFPP is backlogged and you recently commented at ANI. An IP is trolling at Talk:Jesus. Please block 31.219.124.176 or semiprotect the talk page. Johnuniq (talk) 10:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Looks like Bencherlite got it, and then semi-protected the talkpage when the troll started jumping to other IPs. DMacks (talk) 16:37, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Darr
Why are you deleting my information stupid get lost Mithilsoni200 (talk) 08:42, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Above user reblocked, so I guess he did "get lost". DMacks (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Jim Sterling page
Don't worry about reverting the page any longer. I shall be replacing the references with 3rd party refs. the IP is being a total dickbag about it, but I'll edit it to suit wiki standards.
I find it insane how Wikipedia seems to block primary sources, though. --Kizzycocoa (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your improvements to the dopamine article. Now all I have to do is find a good ref for all that stuff . . . Looie496 (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Comment: I brought up a discussion on IRC regarding potential cross-wiki abuse for this SPI case. However, the consensus from enCUs and steward appears to suggest that cross-wiki CheckUsers team are already collaborating on issues like this. However, prior to my persistent reporting, users did not seem encouraged to report the issue. Seems like a systemic issue that should be looked on the cross-wiki scale as well. --JustBerry (talk) 11:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
icon means the item is in the newsletter every week, but with new dates. The 
icon means the item is mainly relevant for readers with technical knowledge. You can leave feedback on this change.
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from October 27. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from October 28. It will be on all Wikipedias from October 29 (calendar).
