User talk:OccultZone/Archive 4

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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

A kitten for you!

This wiki-kitten is there to say "thank you" for your wiki-gnoming work. I have seen your copyedits on many an article that I am reviewing weekly for WikiProject Poland new article alerts - thank you for dealing with so many recent changes! Also, because it is my sincere belief that positive reinforcement is a key to running collective intelligence projects like our 'pedia. Cheers!

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Thanks for that. I will be patrolling those wikiprojects someday. Right now the football, albums, biography requires urgent attention. OccultZone (Talk) 10:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Is there any area on Wikipedia that does not require urgent attention? :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

None! You've been around since 2004.

Ever got bored? OccultZone (Talk) 11:10, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Piotrus: You may want to fix your typo. It is "if youu", should be "if you".[1] OccultZone (Talk) 17:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Ha, I guess I must have been a bit stressed to get this typo in. But, that sock is not permbanned, I'd rather avoid that page least I draw attention of the troll(s). For the last few years I have been quite happily mostly troll-free and I'd like to continue my wiki-life in such a fashion :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@Piotrus: I don't know whether it was a sock puppet or not, just WP:NOTHERE. OccultZone (Talk) 09:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. Through I have to admit I am positively surprised people realized that. Few years ago such NOTHERE accounts were numerous and hardly ever blocked. I'd like to think that something changed over the last few years, making our current wiki-world a much safer place. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Can't see anyone who will hurt or torture. I can affirm that. When I go through the archives of 2005-2007, I would still find some horrible posts. Don't why they weren't deleted. OccultZone (Talk) 09:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of pages

Resolved

I think some pages should just be blanked as courtesy as they await total deletion by Wikipedia administrators. I have seen the blanked as courtesy being used by various editors. A case in point if the page Murali Sekar-Learn ABAP. It is a copyvio and it is an advertisement at the same time. What do you think about it? Aha... (talk) 08:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@Kwisha: I've notified JamesBWatson about this issue. Other admin will get online, but later. OccultZone (Talk) 09:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Ashu Gaba

Resolved

Thanks, another admin has deleted and salted now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

speedied as author request Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanked. OccultZone (Talk) 19:02, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Incidents of necrophilia

On 4 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Incidents of necrophilia, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that an American serial killer said that he killed women before having sex with them because "I like peace and quiet"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Your new articles will now be autopatrolled. Please see WP:AUTOPAT for any additional information you may require, or let me know. Thanks, and happy article creating. Go Phightins! 23:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@Go Phightins!: Thanks, and finally. I had just created my 70th article. It looks like there is need of many more ambassador related articles. I hope you are having great time with your adminship, an accomplishment that you have recently achieved. OccultZone (Talk) 23:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nominations

Please be more careful when nominating articles for speedy deletion.

This was not nonsense.
Diseases and epidemics of the 19th century was tagged by you as vandalism, which it patently wasn't. I don't understand why an admin deleted it as vandalism either.
Pawan wadeyar wasn't advertising. I've restored it.
Manohar warti wasn't advertising. As it was a clear A7 candidate, I've not restored it.
BIOFIN wasn't advertising. I've restored it.

I thought I had discussed this with you before, but can't immediately find it in the history of your talk page. Have you considered archiving your talk page instead of simply removing posts? What you are doing is not against policy, but it is not the best solution in a collaborative environment like we have. You can archive manually or use one of the archive bots that do tihis for you. Fram (talk) 08:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Fram: I used that bot before, but they won't work at times, I had decided to make archive one day, whenever I may create a userpage.

I had tagged "Diseases and epidemics of the 19th century" as HOAX, you can read the summaries there is heavy amount of fringe. I never tagged it as vandalism, maybe someone else added that tag.

"Pawan wadeyar" is what I would agree with, I should've used the Afd instead, and expect a speedy delete, but it is a unsourced BLP, so there is option for another PROD.

Manohar warti was not advertising? Maybe the editor changed the article after reverting the PROD template, I might be confusing with another, but that may have happened.

BIOFIN - I agree. OccultZone (Talk) 08:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The previous discussion took place on your talk page. It was User talk:Fram#Why Tag.3F, about a fictional building. OccultZone (Talk) 09:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You did tag it as Vandalism though [2], both the tag at the page and your edit summary refer to vandalism, not as a hoax. Doesn't really matter either way, it isn't a hoax, it may be a thoroughly wrong article and it probably warrants deletion for some reason, but that doesn't make it a hoax. When a new editor creates an article (posts his homework, by the looks of it) and gets accused of vandalism and hoax creation, chances are that he will never return, instead of perhaps becoming a useful editor. Fram (talk) 09:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Pawan wadeyar will not get a speedy delete, and will probably not be deleted at all (once it gets a source). Check Govindaya Namaha and 2nd South Indian International Movie Awards.

Manohar warti: this was the full text when you tagged it for advertising: "Manohar Singh Warti( Mannu ) was born Devlekh on 26 April 1989 in Pithoragarh, Uttarakhand. His father, Himmat Singh Warti, led India's Animal century in forest departments, and grew up with His mother, Belmati Devi , at the Warti Bhawan Devlekh; a large family estate in Devlekh. Manohar had a happy childhood.[6] His father was often away, directing Forest activities ," (yes, it ends with a comma...) Fram (talk) 09:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Figured, Hoax and vandalism are same thing, it reads "Pages that include blatant and obvious misinformation or hoaxes. (G3)" I don't know what to do especially when you have restored the page? You informed the involved admin?

If no one will add source, I will source Pawan wadeyar. Everything else has been dealt. OccultZone (Talk) 09:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks. Its good you informed the involved admin. Hopefully resolved. OccultZone (Talk) 09:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Fram: Please share your opinion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BIOFIN, I will list that Afd to deletion sorting, but later. OccultZone (Talk) 09:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diseases and epidemics of the 19th century. OccultZone (Talk) 09:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, vandalism was not quite the best reason for deleting diseases and epidemics of the 19th century. But since the title and content were both inappropriate, I deleted it. I invoke WP:SNOW - what was the point of using any other deletion route? Similar, but less strong arguments can be used to support my deletion of three other of the articles. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely RHaworth, I assumed that article to be based on fringe theories so I selected vandalism. There was no other reason. OccultZone (Talk) 10:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

How was the title inappropriate? And how is an article based on fringe theories "vandalism" or "hoax"? This is some piece of schoolwork by someone young, I would guess, not some fringe advocate, never mind a vandal. Fram (talk) 10:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Need reviews

Resolved

List of constituencies of Telangana Legislative Assembly--Vin09 (talk) 10:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Done OccultZone (Talk) 10:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Lists of newspapers on a state page

Resolved

Pls see this section, I don't whether it is correct or not. Listing all newspaper on an important page. Please provide suggestions on Andhra Pradesh#Newspapers and journals.--Vin09 (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Vin09: Should be moved to List of newspapers in India, consider adding them to a Andhra Pradesh section. OccultZone (Talk) 14:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

American football

Please don't change the disambiguation "American football" to footballer". Players that play in the NFL are known as American football players. Thanks.--Yankees10 16:37, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Yankees10: It was hours ago. I had that page on my watchlist, I had questioned the involved administrator, and they have described it well. I think I had indirectly addressed the page move on it's noticeboard so the admin caught attention. I am discussing about the other page moves currently, but nothing to do with these football ones. OccultZone (Talk) 16:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Just making sure you didn't change anymore, thats all.--Yankees10 17:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Review

Economy of Vijayawada--Vin09 (talk) 17:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Creative.

Done OccultZone (Talk) 17:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

IRC

Would you be willing to step into IRC to discuss something later this evening (any time after 9:30 PM ET)? Go Phightins! 21:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Go Phightins!: I am online now. OccultZone (Talk) 23:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Would you enter the IRC channel #wikipedia-coffeehouse? Go Phightins! 01:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm there when you're ready. Go Phightins! 01:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

There. OccultZone (Talk) 01:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Are you Imzadi? Go Phightins! 01:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

OccultZone, found. 01:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thanks for your help in amicably resolving that dispute. Your openness to compromise was pivotal in the conflict's resolution. *Go Phightins!* 02:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. OccultZone (Talk) 02:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

BLP Parameters

Someone has to check Category:Biography articles without living parameter and add Category:Living people to those who are alive. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Nice finding, I think I can do that. OccultZone (Talk) 17:37, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

deletion

Resolved

Thanks, deleted and salted Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:45, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Personal attack?

While I know many here are very biased against Asians, I did not know they also post warnings! What do you have to say about zillions like that dude who does nothing but revert others edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parikhjigish (talk • contribs) 00:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Parikhjigish: If they are biased, you are encouraged to inform them about the essential things that they don't know about the subject. Whenever you submit your knowledge especially to main article space, kindly add a reliable source to your information. I have no hard feelings for you, but it is usually a formality to warn users against the personal attacks. I probably don't want to see you getting blocked for that. OccultZone (Talk) 00:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I clearly asked the question. I had SAID " I am willing to put Sankrit texts for verification. Will you be able to read and translate?" Guess you ought to know that very likely most so called 'senior editors' will not be able to read and verify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parikhjigish (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Parikhjigish: Surely they wouldn't be, but don't you think that usually everyone is unaware about some languages? OccultZone (Talk) 00:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Review

Kondapalli railway station.--Vin09 (talk) 18:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Vin09: Link? OccultZone (Talk) 18:36, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Kondapalli railway station--Vin09 (talk) 18:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. OccultZone (Talk) 18:41, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Kondapalli railway station

I ran across the article Kondapalli railway station and noticed that you had marked the article as reviewed. I read over the article and was quite surprised to find numerous errors that had not been tagged or corrected. Rather than mark the article back to unreviewed and tag it appropriately, I went ahead and made the needed corrections. Please be more careful when marking articles as reviewed if you do not take the proper time time to either tag them appropriately or perhaps make the corrections yourself. Thank you. Carriearchdale (talk) 01:08, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Carriearchdale: I don't have to be. Subject exceeds an estimated amount of 50,000 in terms of search results. Makes it notable enough. Article seemed more than a test draft so it is fair to mark it as review. When you click on review, you further inform a person that the page is not a vandal, promotional, attack page, or anything that comes under the WP:PROD. If you want to make your own changes you can do them yourself, but it has to do nothing with the review. [3] You have only non-capitalized 3-4 words which is hardly an improvement when it comes to 'numerous errors', errors are usually those that break the page or they are open invitation to other errors(such as wrong templates). OccultZone (Talk) 01:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Wow, can you say denial? Next time I won't do you the courtesy of kindly notifying you before I re-mark articles that you don't have time for as unreviewed! Have a great evening! ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 01:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

"You have only non-capitalized 3-4 words which is hardly an improvement when it comes to 'numerous errors'," WRONG Carriearchdale (talk) 01:22, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Carriearchdale: Ok, what were the errors? It can be known through the watchlist if someone has unreviewed the article. Some people use an automated template for notifying the reviewer, but most of the time they notify when they have turned PROD into other PROD. I hope you are aware of it. OccultZone (Talk) 01:26, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

sorry

Resolved

i believe i overrode your changes on the Silent Contest page. are you able to redo those....???Happy monsoon day 02:33, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Happy monsoon day: I think you had them, but I've categorized your article and linked from other articles, Have fun! OccultZone (Talk) 02:41, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Place of birth

Let's see how long it will take until "my police" removes the place of birth from the infobox because it doesn't appear in the article ;) (the article will grow eventually) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Sorry for the late reply, birth place is not that important especially for a lead or the articles that have 2-5 lines. A separate "biography" section should be formed for that. But birth year is pretty important, some people have even added the birth year in the page title. It cannot be rejected either, but requires discussion. Bit strange. OccultZone (Talk) 17:24, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

AWB usage

Looking through your contrib history, I was wondering about your AWB usage- it seems a bit on the side of using it to get a higher edit count. I'm not accusing you of anything- it's not like I'm an expert on AWB ;)- but I was just wondering. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 14:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Lixxx235: It can be.. There are a number of editors,[4], [5], [6] who have made most of their edits with AWB, because it is a good tool for resolving errors, adding non-controversial maintenance tags, etc. OccultZone (Talk) 14:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

wrong sortkey and you readded persondata after it was removed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I believe inflating edit count using AWB is against AWB policy. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 14:51, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Recall that AWB is not bug's free and you are responsible for your edits. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Lixxx235: I don't know what is your point here. Suppose if there is a specific problem or issue with 15,000 pages and you want to solve them with AWB, you are allowed. If you want to complete them on a single day still no one will object you. For example, there are more than 16,000 pages containing the "underlinked" tag, it usually takes about 20 seconds to solve each of it. Maybe AWB will be the best option for solving such issues. OccultZone (Talk) 15:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

This isn't criticism, I was just wondering. Maybe it'd be a good idea to use a bot account to avoid the impression of inflating edit account? Just a thought. Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 15:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It is and hopefully I shall get one someday. OccultZone (Talk) 16:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

For constant tagging is better to use bot account than normal accounts. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:35, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Magioladitis: From where I can start? :-) OccultZone (Talk) 16:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that you stick to manual edits for a while. Our need at the moment is on editor's checking their edits. This is the reason I leave you instructions. We have many tagging bots at the moment. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes I was wondering a bit. But I do understand that. OccultZone (Talk) 17:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Again here persondata is not needed. The infobox in the page was empty and wrong. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Because we have already discussed about the bots and their situation. I wanted to know that if a bot is allowed to make cosmetic change on talk pages? I may have seen GoingBatty with the bot doing so, but I don't see any objection. There are an estimated of 200,000(I've counted half) of the articles that have inappropriate tag. I agree that if a bot has made about 5000 edits(all cosmetic), it can be easier to oppose such bot. Maybe because of such reason I thought that what if a bot makes 10 cosmetic changes, and the owner makes 10 effective changes after following those cosmetic changes? Or whoever is willing to take responsibility. If you are not sure, you can let me know, I can propose a model. OccultZone (Talk) 17:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Goingbatty's bot adds WPBS around project banners. Josve05a's, when approved, will rearrange pages per WP:TPL. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

If Goingbatty do that, I can simply tell goingbatty him. Although it might be matter of time whether he wants to do or not. I am not that curious about Joseve05a' bot though, but I hope there is nothing harmful in his bot anymore. OccultZone (Talk) 17:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

When most people talk about cosmetic changes, they are really referring to insignificant or inconsequential edits that have no noticeable effect on the rendered page, which is not only against AWB's rule of use but will probably not get approved as a bot task. GoingBatty (talk) 17:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes I know. Exclusively, the main purpose is to create or pave some way for constructive edits. But what is with rearranging TPL? It is assumed by many as cosmetic change. OccultZone (Talk) 17:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Maybe it would be helpful if "cosmetic change" was accurately defined somewhere. GoingBatty (talk) 17:36, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

rev 10241 fixed the family problem stated above. You should report these things. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The article coolie

Hi how are you.... I have tried over and over again to have the article coolie edited and nothing has happened. The article is completely false and it has a racist agenda. Coolie should be classed as Indentured Laborer and Indentured laborers are not slaves. Also the entymology is completely wrong. Coolie means unskilled Asian laborer or hireling. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coolie

I have provided very credible sources stating that indentured laborer are not slaves and they have been disregarded and that is just wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richey90211 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Richey90211: Sadly what you are doing is considered as "Edit warring". You cannot enforce your content after removing much of the content which they had written for years.

Coolies are not slaves in the today's world. That was in 19th-20th century (before WW2) when colonizers had enslaved coolies, they would try to profit from them as much as it was possible. Many of them died due to the lack of food. Have you read the related stories?

If you have some information and reliable source for the information you are welcome to attribute, but you don't have to remove content without consensus. Consensus on talk page is clearly against those edits that you had made. You've been told on WP:ANEW. I also think that once you learn how to edit these articles, you should edit some other articles, your account looks like a WP:SPA. OccultZone (Talk) 00:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Boba milk tea with passion fruit for you

Thank you for your service to the community! Cabbyca (talk) 07:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

You are very welcome! OccultZone (Talk) 07:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Please use direct language when communicating with other users

Regarding this message you just left on another user's talk page. Please don't say "[This edit] has been reverted" when it was you who did it. Say "I reverted [this edit]", or similar. Using indirect language is bureaucratic and has an unpleasantly authoritarian tone that frequently upsets people who are on the receiving end of it.

This is not a formal request, merely advice from experience on how to help maintain a congenial editing environment. Thank you. — Scott • talk 14:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Appeal statement

Hi there, much of my appeal statement on [[7]]'s talk page was a previous one, i improved my statement , please comment positively there, it 's very important for me. Rim sim (talk) 20:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

@Rim sim: You learned that after 2-3 months of topic ban? You could have done before. Whenever you make any requests against the discretionary sanction, you have to talk about yourself than others. I can only see you talking about the other user. You are indirectly saying that Callanecc committed a mistake by believing on other user and now he should regret.

I have also checked your contribution history, you might be active a lot, but you haven't made even 500 contributions since the TBAN, you've to prove that you are capable of making edits without any further blocks. OccultZone (Talk) 00:09, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your edit

Thanks four your edit on the page I recently created,Olawoye Theo Ladapo.occultzone, I guess we will best of friends here.cheers!(Wikicology (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2014 (UTC))

You are very welcome and I had edited your page a little more. Remember, that you should use as many sources as you can, on a page. You can post here anytime, happy editing. OccultZone (Talk) 23:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Extended content

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Crawling Sky may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.