User talk:Gatoclass/Archive 6

Archive of October-December 2008

Inuse page

Hi Gatoclass, I just noticed the tag right now as I was saving my last edit before your note. I'm afraid I was looking at the yellow template above it more than anything else. My apologies, Jamie^☆S93 02:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

You're back?

That's great, now I can focus on contents development. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Second Attempt to Delete Donna Eden

You made a comment the first time someone attempted to delete Donna Eden. Someone is trying again to delete it. If you want to comment again, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donna Eden 2. --Mbilitatu (talk) 16:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK Next round

I notice that you're loading the next DYK round scheduled to be flipped in an hour. I could flip it if you weren't planning on being online. I don't think it's bad if we flip it a bit (up to half hour) early because we are getting way behind. Royalbroil 03:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I can do it. Please buzz me when you're done. I'm verifying some hooks from the following day. Royalbroil 03:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed that you flipped the round. I'll take care of the credits. I should have been posting the verified hooks on your talk page. Royalbroil 04:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Sure, sorry about the confusion; you added the inuse tag almost at the same time, it seems. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

References

Please don't change dates to those which don't appear in the references. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 09:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Next update

You are welcome to finish it. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:23, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I can do it then. See you tomorrow... --BorgQueen (talk) 13:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

USS McCawley (APA-4)

Thank you for catching that! Too bad there is not a better way to classify the difference on WP.--Funandtrvl (talk) 17:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

{{border-notinline}}

I stared at it for a while, and yes, I think it does, at least on my LCD screen. The painting by Blake does not have clear edges (sort of blurred), and the border provides a frame for it. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I am not going to argue over a mere stylistic choice; you are welcome to remove it. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Next update

I have to go out now, so someone else will have to take care of it. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Next update

As the Borg Queen said in the show, "our thoughts are one." You can finish the update, if you want. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:53, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, see you tomorrow. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

DR 6 nebula

Any chance of using Image:GalacticGhoul.gif instead of Image:DR6nebula.jpg on the Main Page at Template:Did you know/Next update? -- Suntag ☼ 16:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Centenary of Western Australia

Thanks for the notice but I had hardly anything to do with the article except as the nominator. I moved your notice to User talk:SatuSuro which I presume is what you intended. Moondyne 09:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Its not a problem. BTW, let me say thanks for your hard work at the DYK-admin-front. Your contributions there are amazing. Moondyne 09:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK update

Thanks. I'll put in the next few hooks. I see that the 'make hook' template was left out this time. I have added it to the next update page anyway. I don't know if it was left out for a reason, but... I doubt there'll be any probelems ;) Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 13:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for placing an inuse template on the page. It's a great idea; I'll do that every time I'm busy on the page adding hooks. Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 14:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

T. M. Nair

Thank you very much for the DYK :-). I find that you are one of the regular DYK admins. So, I wish to bring a small incident to your notice. I submitted one of my creations T. M. Nair for a DYK. I've created it and expanded it to 10KB within 5 days and submitted it for a DYK. Well, well, the hook I added contained a fact about T. M. Nair's sister, Taravath Ammalu Ammal. I added it because I felt it would indeed come as a surprise to people that she had written a book on Hindu saints as her brother, Dr. Nair was the founder of the Justice Party which later evolved into the Dravidar Kazhagam whose members are staunchly atheist. I agree that the article is not about Taravath Ammalu Ammal. But one particular user has rejected my nomination asking me to create an article on Taravath Ammalu Ammal and nominateit, instead. This is particularly perplexing as the user has not given any specific reason whatsoever or any alternate suggestions about the hook nor has he engaged in any sort of discussion on the issue. I don't have enough material on Taravath Ammalu Ammal to write an article which would measure >5KB. As far as the main criteria are concerned, the article does satisfy the minimum size requirements and is adequately referenced.

I provide the URL of the DYK nom here:-Template talk:Did you know#Articles created#expanded on October_26 fopr your reference. The same user has also stalled another DYK of mine for the same reason. I've replied to him/her and am awaiting his/her's. Thanks-Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 04:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much :-) -Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 08:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Petrus Johannes Waardenburg

Dear Gatoclass, can you look at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_October_25. Have a nice day! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 09:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The issue has been resolved. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 09:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOSNUM

I just checked again, and the guideline states: "single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine are commonly rendered in numerals, or may be rendered in words if they are expressed in one or two words (16 or sixteen, 84 or eighty-four, 200 or two hundred, but 3.75, 544, 21 million)." So, in the next update, except "30 million" in the third hook, the numbers greater than nine can be either numerals or words. You are welcome to revert my change except the smokers hook. (Actually as I recall the rule used to be that the numbers greater than nine should be in numerals, but the guideline obviously has been changed since.) --BorgQueen (talk) 12:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

No, wait, sorry: even "30 million" are two words, so it can be in words, too. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Having said that, since we are trying to tighten hooks, using numerals will save some space on DYK; although when hooks are already short enough there won't be much point. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any gap on my screen with normal(medium)-sized fonts. I see several empty lines only when I set the font size to small... Ok I am getting headache.

By the way, are you going to archive your talk page anytime soon? It takes a bit longer than usual to load it. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Shuffle

Because of the presence of the image. Some hooks that occupy only two lines become three-liners when the lead image "pushes" them, so to speak. But some hooks don't get affected by the image presence because they are short enough. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Much better but I always archive all posts that do not need any further discussion... But then it is upto you. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh my goodness

Are you serious? LOL --BorgQueen (talk) 13:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

10th Mississippi Infantry

I should have gotten nom credit for 10th Mississippi Infantry.--Gen. Bedford ^{his Forest} 14:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

inuse

I thought you were not around. It is all yours now. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Note

I've noticed what seems to be like a minor error in this edit - [1]. I was in the middle of an edit on the immigration issue, so I'll undo your edit since the Uzbeki link (and possibly my own change) removal seems like an honest error.
Cheers, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 10:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

"right" in DYK next update

Sorry about putting the "right" parameter back in the DYK image after you took it out. We got into an edit conflict and I accidentally pasted my version (which still had "right" in it) over yours. My bad! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Next update

Could you fill the next update? I have to go out soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I would normally agree but look at the backlog we have to deal with now... Even the current batch was pretty late and no one else was doing anything much so I had to take care of it.

Having said that, you are welcome to rest if you must, I will try to do it. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:56, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I will try.... --BorgQueen (talk) 15:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Credits

Hey there, nice to see you updating DYK again. Will you be doing the credits, or shall I? – RyanCross (talk) 07:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Go right ahead with the article talk page credits. – RyanCross (talk) 07:14, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I noticed. Thanks. I'll be running off soon, but I'll try to get the next update filled by then. Thank you for your help, Gatoclass. :) – RyanCross (talk) 07:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Template for DYK

Hi, I just wanted to let you know, RyanCross started a thread at WT:DYK#Template:DYKquestions to ask for comments on a template I made, {{DYKquestions}}, for notifying nominators when their DYK hooks need some issues clarified or anything like that. If you have a moment to check it out and see if there is anything lacking, I would appreciate your comments! Thanks, —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 18:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK credits

Oops, I started doing DYK credits at the same time you did for the users; sorry about that. I went ahead and did all the talk pages, sorry in advance if we got into any edit conflicts. I'll also purge the Next Update page (unless you've done it already by the time I get there). —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Sure, be my guest. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, I'm not surprised you are tired. Oh and are you ok with me chopping out the dead and dying orphan hooks in the "expired" list? When I go to look for hooks in the pile I seem to have to search through a lot of "dead and dying" before you find one that is issue free. cheers Victuallers (talk) 14:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Praise

Thanks so much for the DYK (In Praise of Shadows), cheers Julia Rossi (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK double check

Credit for Albert Boime was given to User:Bruce1ee for a revised hook to the article, which is fine, but I think I may have been missed on credit for this article. Can you double check? Alansohn (talk) 03:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Ok, I think I can take care of it. Take a good rest. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

inuse

Hmm, I suppose you didn't notice the inuse template? --BorgQueen (talk) 11:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, it is not something you normally do, so I just wondered.

Btw, I am not sure if a hook in a higher spot necessarily gets more highlight; according to the statistics it seems that the position of a hook has almost nothing to do with the number of click it gets. (except the lead position with a pic, of course) Actually I've seen the last hook getting even more clicks than the lead hook with a pic.

Anyway, since you think that way, I am not flattered that you put my Opium (perfume) hook as the last hook a few months back. Thanks a lot. :-D --BorgQueen (talk) 11:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Awww, you made me blush. In any case, I was joking above, of course; I always appreciate your work.

And the reason I raised the gun issue is that I was under the impression it is particularly sensitive, especially in the U.S. where there have been controversies surrounding it with their shooting spree cases and the 2nd Amendments (which is also the difference between gun and other weapon systems). Main Page is a far more conservative place than the rest of Wikipedia, as you must have known, so I was just asking question if it would likely draw complaints if we feature the image. But now obviously it seems we have nothing to worry about, but I was just trying to be careful. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

thanks

for the welcome back and for your work in creating and mantaining DYKs! Tiamut^talk 11:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

yes it is, but it's always good to come back. even if just to make one edit. who knew that writing an encyclopedia together could be so much fun? Tiamut^talk 11:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK Backlog

We're close to eliminating the DYK suggestion backlog. -- Suntag ☼ 19:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your gracious apology. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know about Nausicaa's DYK - I don't try for DYK often, so I'm glad I can see it on the front page. :) --Malkinann (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for the sandwich. Cirt (talk) 07:52, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK hook duplication

Hi Gatoclass, I'm not sure how this has come about, but the hook for Wonderland Greyhound Park you selected for the next update is already in queue 4. --Bruce1ee^talk 15:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused now. I put it back on the list after I checked the current hooks, next update and archives to see where it went. I got no notification that it was ever on DYK and still don't know if it is cause I can't find it anywhere. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Somehow I didn't realize that this was your talk page lol. I'll ask the user who said it was already used. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see, these "queues" must be new. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

1970 Tonghai earthquake hook

Hey, I feel a bit stupid for having been the one to tick this hook, but the 1970 Tonghai earthquake hook (at the top of Queue 3) is a bit inaccurate now that I look at it...it says the earthquake monitoring network was established "following" the 1970 earthquake, although it was actually established 25 years later and the source given in the article doesn't even present any causal relationship between the two (the so source basically says, "A network was installed in Yunnan. BTW Yunnan has some bad earthquakes. There was one in 1970 and one in 1976.") The hook could be changed to "installed 25 years after the 1970 Tonghai earthquake," (although that still seems to imply some causal relationship that isn't supported in the sources given), or kicked back to T:TDYK for discussion.

Sorry about green-lighting that hook erroneously, —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, Victuallers changed it. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 20:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK Update

DYK Next Update will be using Queue 1. There's nothing over there right now, but there is a batch at Queue 2. Would you mind if I shift it over to Queue 1 while I compile the subsequent ones? - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 04:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Udo Schütz

Thanks for the notification, but articles names got a little mixed up, as I've written Udo Schütz, not Tata Corus acquisition. -- Matthead  Discuß   11:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

50% of DYK topics U.S. related

Hi - why have you added back the note "NOTE: Since on average about 50% of hooks on the suggestions page are U.S. related, it is usually appropriate to have roughly half the hooks in any given update on U.S. topics. Thanks." with the note "we need this note, please stop removing it"? I have searched for discussion as to why this was added and cannot find any. What purpose does it serve? Yes, we should take the topics roughly in proportion to how often they are suggested, but why highlight this case? Warofdreams talk 12:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK - Symphony in C (Bizet)

Wow, thanks for the info, Gatoclass. DYK is not something I've ever taken any interest in, but I will from now on. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Hi - please see my query at User_talk:Cirt#DYK, and the reply at User_talk:Testing_times#DYK where User:Cirt suggested I ask you whether I should give myself a talk page notification for my nomination of User:Giano II's Arabian Hall of the Winter Palace. Or perhaps I was missed off for some reason? -- Testing times (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem - thank you! -- Testing times (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Starry Night

You've deleted the image page of Image:VanGogh-starry night ballance1.jpg on November 9. Would you please revert the deletion, because this image is a featured picture? See also Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Starry Night. – Ilse@ 13:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

New DYK system

Hello Gatoclass. As you may have noticed, I have been a bit inactive with next updates for DYKs, mostly because I'm very confused on the new system now that we have the DYK adminbot to help out. Could you give me an overview on what I'm supposed to do now that our process has changed? I'd really like to get back to setting up DYK updates. Thanks, – RyanCross (talk) 05:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I'll give it a go sometime soon. – RyanCross (talk) 01:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Next queue

I am pretty sure it is the queue 4, if you are still wondering. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Note for DYKs

Hi - thanks for your response on this. I now understand why the text is there, although I do still feel a little uneasy about it. Would you object to rephrasing it to something along the lines of "The subjects of the hooks in any given update should roughly match the mixture of those on the suggestions page - for example, it is usually appropriate to have roughly half the hooks in any given update on U.S. topics."? Warofdreams talk 14:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any specific objection to changing it? If not, I will change it to make the reasoning more explicit, as I have proposed above. Warofdreams talk 23:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It's good to get to the specific objection you have. When I have some more time, I will take this to wider discussion for some other opinions. Warofdreams talk 00:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK candidate first British Helipcopter?

I just found this out and added it to Cyril Pullin which I havew spent time today significantly expanding from a stub Thruxton (talk) 11:55, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Bot

Is the bot not working? I notice that it doesn't appear to have done the credits and cleared the page for the latest update. Is it back to manual editing again? Gatoclass (talk) 13:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

The bot seems to be functioning erratically. It has done the credits for the latest but haven't cleared the page, and hasn't done the credits for the one before. Unfortunately its creator seems to be going through some tough time as well. Are you willing to volunteer to do the credits for the previous update? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

See his talk page. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

John Milton

I wanted to point this out. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for feedback

I thought you might be interested in reading an essay I just wrote on the use of info boxes. I'd appriciate hearing your opinion. The essay is at Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes.Nrswanson (talk) 19:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reading it. :-) I actually agree with you on the visual appeal. I wouldn't consider myself anti-infobox per say. My advice to editors would be to use an info box if you can, but if you can't use it well then don't. I'm considering adding a section of good info boxes at the bottom to illustrate how to properly execute one.Nrswanson (talk) 02:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarism and DYK

Re this edit: it's not every day I get to see someone taking a harder line on plagiarism than I do! It's nice to know there are other plagiarism nazis around, and I agree with and support your decision. Cheers, —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I would be wholeheartedly in favor of banning DYK contributors who knowingly submit plagiarized material. (The only place where it gets hazy is in cases like this one, where the editor simply didn't understand what constituted plagiarism...which is a bit hapless for an editor with nearly 20,000 edits, but not necessarily bad faith—hopefully he will be more careful after the discussion I had with him.) I have received a small amount of criticism for being harsh on plagiarized nominations, but any time someone proposes something to combat plagiarism at DYK I will support it. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Bot-friendly format

Hi, Gatoclass, so nice to see you are back. May I remind you that if the same editor has written/nominated multiple articles you need to add different amounts of spaces after the username for the additional articles, as it is stated in User:Ameliorate!'s instruction? I don't mind fixing the format for every queue but I may overlook sometimes. Thanks for your hard work, again. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Er, actually, you can read it right here in the "credits" section, as soon as you click the edit button... --BorgQueen (talk) 09:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Milton

I updated some sections on John Milton's religion. However, I need to know which section specifically that you think needs expanding. I know that this upcoming week, people will be filling in the other details later (especially during the Milton FA push). Right now, I have a time management problem because the individual I was hoping to perform a lot of the clean up and minor expansion work is sick. Bad timing. I have to hold off on the larger set until tomorrow. Rush rush rush. You know how it is. I'll look back here so if you reply I'll catch it. Ottava Rima (talk) 07:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I filled in part of the missing summaries for John Milton's politics, so there shouldn't be any blank sections. I will add in small summaries for the epics on the religion page now . Ottava Rima (talk) 07:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I filled in the religion blanks. I will have to go through them closer while I work on Paradise Regained and Samson Agonistes tomorrow morning. Ottava Rima (talk) 08:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I relinked the John Milton's early life page because the text is unique, and text would have to be moved over from the main page because of WP:WEIGHT issues. This would happen, but remember that whole 20% of the text shouldn't be used already controversy? I'm trying to avoid that now, so I am waiting until after the DYK to move over and clean up the main page so no one can complain. Ottava Rima (talk) 08:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Gato, do we really need to fight? Because there is no actual reason to say that the page isn't standard practice, nor doesn't qualify. There is no duplicate text. There is no controversy that can be said. It is new information and follows the standards of other biographies. I have created many such pages. Unless you have an actual point for disqualification, it doesn't actually matter what you say in regards to it. There are DYK guidelines for a reason. I gave you enough latitude in your request above that is not part of the DYK guidelines. This is being ridiculous. Do I really need to take this to AN because people feel the need to arbitrarily make up new policies and hassle content contributors? Ottava Rima (talk) 08:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

As I stated before, if you honestly think that the early life page is not qualified, then I will take it up with AN. Remember, all admin are operatives on DYK, not just those that stick around momentarily. I am sure that many of them will be upset by the fact that you would deny the page, containing new, fully cited information, and matching what many other biographies do, because of what? Samuel Johnson has an early life, Charles Darwin has an early life, and many, many other pages have early life pages. Why would you think that John Milton would not have such a page? Especially when there are entire conferences devoted to the exclusive discussion of his early life! There isn't a notability concern. There isn't a sourcing concern. There is no concern that meets any of the requirements. So come up with a legitimate reason. Ottava Rima (talk) 08:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ottava, this is really going too far. Gatoclass has been more polite and helpful with you than any other editor at DYK, and now you are threatening him with AN just because he raised a concern about one of your articles? This is the third time you have reacted disrespectfully against an editor who was just doing his/her job at DYK, and this is the third time you have tried to tell DYK editors that they don't know the DYK rules as well as you do.

DYK is not AfD. People aren't there to argue with each other and try to prove to someone that their hook is good. People are there to work together to find out what concerns there are with those articles, and then address those concerns so that their article can be featured. Instead of trying to prove Gatoclass wrong, you should be trying to improve your article so that Gatoclass's concerns go away.

People at DYK, and Gatoclass particularly, are bending over backwards to accommodate your numerous nominations that you introduced with barely 24 to go before the day they're supposed to air, and to devote 24 hours worth of DYK space to your efforts. The least you could do was be respectful and courteous with those editors who are trying to help you. Sure, you don't have to be courteous with me if you don't want, because I stopped being courteous with you (and I still stand by everything I said), but Gatoclass has been extremely poised and patient in dealing with these nominations and does not in the least deserve your attacks and threats. Frankly, your attacks are disruptive to the DYK process. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 09:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Politizer, I don't think you understand what AN is - its a place in which you talk about admin issues, i.e. what goes on the main page or not is appropriately discussed at AN. Admin are the ones who approve of DYK. The forum for discussing inclusion on DYK is AN. And my "attacks" disrupt the process? You mean a process that I have been a strong part of? Politizer, you were never courteous with me, nor are you an admin so your opinion of what belongs on the main page or not is pointless. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Now the opinions of non-admins don't matter? Wow, have you seriously been on Wikipedia for 6 years? You clearly still haven't figured out what an admin is. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Politizer, do you really not know that only Admin can approve items to be placed on the main page? Ottava Rima (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't mean non-admins opinions aren't taken into account during the discussions. Go take a look at T:TDYK and see how many of the verification/rejection marks were placed there by non-admins. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 16:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Simply put, the article is clearly on an independently notable topic, the article is sourced, and the article has more than 1.5k worth of text. If anything, the argument should be to move text over. The information is all new. Thus, it meets every single DYK guideline. Admin not approving such pages is something that admin outside of DYK is highly concerned about. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You made it clear that you wont promote it. Hence why AN is the best option, seeing as how this meets all the guidelines. I have just expanded the page to 15k, wasting valuable time on some other pages, just to show that there is a lot of information that this page will contain and that it is perfectly appropriate for Wikipedia. I really don't think other admin will agree that a page that is now 15k, with new information, and fully cited, is not qualified to be on DYK. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

And your timing is a little off. The first hook should display in about 7 hours. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Bending over backwards? It is a simple check list. There is no "bending" over backwards. You look at a hook. You see if the information is cited. You see if it has over 1,500 characters. You see if it is expanded or not. If it meets those, you approve of it. If DYK is really becoming some strange system that no longer does these three simple things, as you seem to make it out to be, then it really needs to come to the attention of other admin immediately. I defended you last time over the plagarism issues when people thought that DYK should be dismantled. However, this alteration of the system to impose standards that are just not there to begin with is surely something that will bring out all the people who hate how DYK has become a clique. DYK is a simple yes or no and a move. Its not to be friends with someone. Its not to be pals. Its not to express how much work you put in on it. Did you forget this? Because your entries seem to suggest that. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• Ottava, please stop this. You have demonstrated numerous times that you don't understand the DYK process, and your continued comments are insulting to everyone who works at DYK. There are, believe it or not, many editors who put a lot of work into DYK and are proud of what they do. DYK editors don't just check an article yes or no and move on; they often work with the nominator to take a non-passing article and improve it so that it can pass, rather than just throwing it away immediately. If you continue to attack DYK and threaten two of the people who keep it afloat (Gatoclass and Suntag), I will have no choice but to threaten you as well: if you don't stop these attacks immediately, I will start an open discussion at WT:DYK suggesting that a community ban be enacted with the condition that you never participate at DYK again. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• "You have demonstrated numerous times that you don't understand the DYK process" Odd, because those 50+ DYK seem to suggest otherwise. I also remember getting people to support Gatoclass as an administrator so we could have more admin over at DYK to promote articles. I remember involving myself three times in DYK matters at ANI and helping to ensure that DYK stayed as a process. But yeah, I guess that means I know nothing about the process. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• You're right, it is odd that someone with so many DYKs can still be so ignorant of the process. I guess it goes to show that, contrary to what you seem to think, time on Wikipedia and number of contributions doesn't necessarily translate into knowing what you're doing...and lack of time on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily translate into not knowing what you're doing. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• Or, perhaps, you are wrong. It sure seems that its true. Also, topic bans can only go into effect by a large consensus of Admin, and they are performed at AN or ANI. Putting forth such a proposal at DYK would only bring about more attacks on DYK as a process. If you've been around as long as I have, you would have known the history of DYK and the problems like this. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• AN/I isn't needed for a ban like that; it's very easy for DYK people to just say "Don't review hooks that this guy posts, he's just going to slap you in the face and try to take you to AN." —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• I'm not sure where you lost what I was saying, but what you are saying is a complete misunderstanding. I would go to AN in order to get more admin opinions so that one of those would put forth the page as acceptable for the main page as a new article. Any admin can review DYK, not just ones that watch DYK pages. It would be simply to get a wider audience to see how they feel about if the requirements are met and then have them put forth it as acceptable, seeing as how there is no requirement that the page fails to meet and any objections would be deemed as cliquish. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Primal therapy article

Gatoclass,

I read your message to me regarding the primal therapy article.

I'm glad to hear you're working on a rewrite for that article. I think it could use it. But there's no great rush about it. Take your time.Twerges (talk) 10:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I do have substantial knowledge of primal therapy and its history. I've read almost all of Janov's books, even the ones that are long out of print; and I've read most of the literature surrounding the topic. If there's any way I can help, then do let me know.Twerges (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

AN

No problem, Gatoclass. I will be in class for a couple hours but other than that I'm keeping my eyes open. I have been following you guys' conversation (my apologies for turning your talk page into a battleground) to try to make sure i don't miss it when an AN gets opened—I admit I've been stalking your and Ottava's contribs on and off. Anyway, have a good evening, and hopefully this will be over soon. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 17:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Flyable Heart

I'd like to again thank you for taking the time to check and review the hook. It's understandable that you don't have much time to take a good look at it since there's just so many hooks and perhaps not enough people to help reviewing them, so I don't blame you ;). Maybe I should find some time to help reviewing hooks too, just so to relief you guys. Again, thank you. -- クラウド６６８ 17:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Note

We go back quite a bit so I think I owe you an apology for being short with you. Although I can justify my actions in many ways, there is no excuse for me to put you through any strain. I'm sorry. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

And I think I need to clarify something - I wasn't taking you to AN. I was going to ask AN for their opinion to see if someone there would be willing to promote it, seeing as how promotion is open to all admin. It was because you made the comment that you didn't want to promote the articles. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Bot

Yes, I did set it to 8 hours. I wonder what made you feel confused, because it has been only about 7 hours since the last update. Isn't it a bit too early to worry..? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I just checked this, and I see the bot updated precisely after 8 hours and 5 minutes. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Fixed now. It was a sort of display thing, and did not affect the actual update. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Note

No, that's totally fine, I just noticed your edit and I don't mind. I actually realized after posting it that I probably shouldn't have. In any case, the rest of the DYK reviewers are all smart people and will be able to see what's going on without my needing to remind them. Thanks for keeping me honest, and my apologies again for repeatedly dragging you into all this; I'll try to keep myself under control from now on. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 03:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Did you know/Queue/2

Did you add Kathryn Stott for more variety? --BorgQueen (talk) 05:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see. That's sweet. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, again, Gatoclass. If I understand the new system aright, it should be live at least some of the time during the UK day, which is perfect. And by the way, extremely belated congratulations on your well-deserved promotion! Espresso Addict (talk) 06:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply

It doesn't say that and I am not absolutely certain, but as I recall the bot behaved sort of erratically when it was not lined up like that. Sigh.. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK reply

Hi Gatoclass. I posted a reply to your request at Granada Bridge (Ormond Beach). -- Suntag ☼ 19:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Recall

I stand by this comment 100%. I and others voted you as an administrator to stand by DYK rules. You have adopted practices that are NOT accepted by the community, and your comment to Rlevse, saying that you will vote against him for saying that the community must approve of things first is 100% against the whole reason why you were made an admin. Put yourself up for recall if you think you honestly deserve to be an admin. That is completely inappropriate. The community does not agree with you nor with Art's interpretations. Its time for you to realize that. You cannot threaten your way into getting people to change their minds. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom candidacy

Hi Gatoclass. I've been looking at the comments left by those who have opposed my ArbCom candidacy, and I couldn't help noticing that you said you were opposing "regretfully". I've since prepared a statement that I hope will allay people's concerns. That statement can be seen here. The "Decisiveness and block actions" and "Leniency and hardline stances" sections may addresses your concerns about whether I would be capable of applying the harshest sanctions. I hope you will be able to have a look. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

ANI

Gatoclass, I just wanted to let you know, someone (not Ottava Rima) started a thread at ANI about your vote against Rlevse; the thread is here. There's probably not even a need for you to respond, as the thread seems pretty frivolous...but I just figured I should give you the link in case you want to respond anyway. Best, —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 06:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

An apology needed

You claimed that I was wasting everyone's time. Applying the standards that blockquotes, quotes, and duplicated information should not count, your numbers are way off. This means that your claims that I am doing something improper are based on extremely bad evidence. This is also self serving bad evidence. I suggest you apologize and strike immediately. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Biting my tongue

I'm dying here trying to keep quiet. Must... get it... off my chest... Mustn't... nominate... for 5x-expansion in last 5 days... the page... Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Haus^Talk 17:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Heteropoda maxima

Thank you for your help with the references, I'm glad to see it's verified! How do I see when it'll be on the front page?--DarkAvenger (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Awesome, thanks! --DarkAvenger (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Updated DYK template

Hi, I'd just like to let you know what the template {{DYKsug}} was just updated with a new feature: now, for all DYK nominations that include only one article, it auto-generates the credit templates ({{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}}), which the person moving the hook to Next may simply cut and past from T:TDYK directly into next. This only happens with single-article nominations; if the nomination has more than one article, there will be a message in the template saying "Credits must be done manually by the person moving this nomination to Next" or something like that. It will probably be a few days before you start seeing the auto-generated credit templates, since the template was only just updated and only the new nominations will reflect it; the first several times you see auto-generated credit templates, you may want to double-check the nom as you are promoting it, just to make sure the credits are correct.

There have been some other minor changes—mainly, now if a DYK nominator lists himself as both "creator/expander" and "nominator," the "nominator" field ends up blank (so that what gets displayed is "Created by User, self nom" rather than "Created by User, nominated by User." Also, the fields, |collaborator=, |collaborator2=, and |collaborator3= have been replaced with the more intuitive |creator2=, |creator3=, and |creator4=.

Please let me know if you experience any problems with the new template. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I just wasn't sure what to do about them...I assumed that in some cases (although certainly not all) there would be different editors for different articles (as in this nom) and there might not be any easy way for the template to handle that...since right now a nominator can basically only use the template to say "these people worked on the articles in the nomination," and not "this guy worked on this article, that guy worked on that article, etc." That is moot, of course, for noms where the same person created/expanded all the articles, and those are probably more common...I dunno. If you think it would be useful to put that stuff back in, so the template generates credit templates for all articles, I don't think it would be very hard...I mainly just left it out for now since I wasn't sure if the template could handle it, and there are so few multi-article noms that I figured it wouldn't be a huge deal right now to have DYK people do those by hand until things get figured out. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 05:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that should be doable. It'll just make it generate the templates anytime someone specifies multiple articles, and as far as I know there's no way for the template to "know" that the nom is more complicated (unless I did something like disabling the credits anytime the nominator entered something in |comment=, but there's no guarantee that comments entered there are actually complicated details about who edited the articles, so that's not a good idea).... which means that for multi-article noms, the DYK reviewers will just have to take the auto-generated credits with a grain of salt, and double-check to make sure they're right. 90% of the time it should be fine, if most multi-noms have the same people working on each article.

I have some work I need to get to off-wiki before I turn in for the night, so I'll see what I can do about this tomorrow morning. Best, —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 05:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Do you think the following points could be a DYK proposal ?

• "Did you know that the 1948 Arab-Israeli War was preceeded by 6 months of Civil War during which the Jewish and Arab communities of Palestine fought each other ferocely while the country was still under British rule, resulting to several thousands deaths and the exodus of about 400,000 Arab Palestinians ?" (ref. 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine)

I think nobody knows that :-) Ceedjee (talk) 14:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey Ceedjee, I noticed your comment at Gatoclass's talk page, and I just wanted to say, it looks like a good fact for DYK (although it's a little long; you could trim it down to be a bit punchier), but as far as I can tell the article attached to it isn't new or expanded (DYK articles have to have either been created in the past several days, or expanded fivefold in the past several days). Were you planning on starting a new article on a related topic? —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 14:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I think Ceedjee was joking. The Palestinian Civil War is already quite well documented on Wikipedia :) Gatoclass (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Oups...

Sorry, I was not joking.

I sincerely didn't know that DYK was only for recently expanded articles !

Thx in anyway !

Ceedjee (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

9-article DYK hook

Apparently you were the one that had a series of articles on Egyptian temples for an 8-article hook. My previous DYK hook was 5-articles:

• Did You Know that Royal Page Davidson, son of Northwestern Military Academy founder Harlan Page Davidson, invented the first U.S. military car and fully armored car as well as a lightly armored car?

And the one previous was a 4-article hook:

• Did You Know that the Fremont Canning Company, owned by Frank Daniel Gerber and Daniel Frank Gerber and known for its Gerber Baby logo, pioneered the commercial baby food industry in the U.S.?

Apparently Ottava Rima has given it an approval, so probably in the next few days it should go up if all goes well. Someday I am sure this record will be broken also - we will see how long it lasts. How long was your record of an 8-article hook?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Pennsylvania class steamship

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pennsylvania class steamship, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for SS Pennsylvania (1872)

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Pennsylvania (1872), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for SS Ohio (1872)

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Ohio (1872), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for SS Indiana (1873)

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Indiana (1873), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for SS Illinois

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Illinois, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for USS Supply (1873) (95/2 DYKs)

On 23 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article USS Supply (1873), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Update cycle

Per User:YellowMonkey's concern that we have a backlog, I've shortened the cycle to 5 hours. Please let me know if you have objections. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK Poll close

I meant to do that but got busy. :) I think maybe you should post a summary of the results, instead of just closing it. Just a thought. Best. ++Lar: t/c 05:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

(Refactored from User_talk:Lar per my policy) I'm not really au fait with poll closures, so I don't know what the convention is for summarizing the results. I thought no more needed to be said.

If you want to give a more detailed summary, you are welcome to do so, but I would be wary of getting too specific over the unwritten rules poll. The options were hastily and incorrectly proposed and most people had voted before I had time to protest the choices. I therefore think that the only conclusion that can be reliably drawn from that particular poll is the one I made, which is that a majority of users voted to keep the unwritten rules.

I intend to eventually open a new poll regarding the unwritten rules in order to get some more useful results, but I think I will leave it for a week or two as I think it's still too close to the last one and people are a bit sick of polls right now. Gatoclass (talk) 05:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Let me take another look. I'm not trying to make more work for myself, just feared I'd left a loose end. I thought some of the items with wide margins were also worthy of remark, but I guess I need to review more carefully. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 05:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"USA"

Some people seem to resent this linking. What do you think? --BorgQueen (talk) 09:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

If Arizona is ok without "USA", then Derby is ok without "England" and Perth doesn't need "Australia"...? Or the difference is that Arizona is a state and the latter two are cities? --BorgQueen (talk) 09:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Ahem... please see Arizona (disambiguation). --BorgQueen (talk) 09:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

See here and here. The former admitted his U.S. bias... --BorgQueen (talk) 09:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Xmas thing

Well, that's fine with me, although it will inevitably generate some backlog we'll have to deal with later. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I need some more detail. So would you like to switch the next update to one of those Xmas special batches, and change the cycle to 8 hours? --BorgQueen (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

No, you don't have to replace it manually. I can do it by altering templates. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:12, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. Doing it manually takes just too much work. The next update is queue 3 and I will change the cycle to 8 hours as soon as the update is done by the bot. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Such a disaster won't happen unless someone tampers with the templates without knowing what they are doing. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I think we'll be fine as long as everyone knows what is going on. I've left a note on the Discussions page. Thanks for your help BQ :) Gatoclass (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Updated

See? Worked like magic. :-D --BorgQueen (talk) 13:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

When you would like to change the cycle and I am offline, just alter User:DYKadminBot/time. It is currently set on 28800 (3600x8). 6 hour cycle is 21600 (3600x6). --BorgQueen (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy holidays

Thanks for making 2008 an interesting and enlightening year for me; at some point, our paths have crossed and I've found your comments amusing, helpful or thought-provoking—I'll let you guess which!

Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season, and happiness, health and hopefulness in 2009. I trust you'll enjoy this little token, a favourite performance of Baby, it's Cold Outside, for your holiday amusement.
Best, Risker (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Best Wishes

File:Mars celebrations.jpg

Best wishes and a great new year Victuallers (talk) 16:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Queue/5

Do you think German Socialist Labour Party in Poland – Left is ok to be promoted? (after Xmas) It has been approved and moved by someone and currently in the queue 5, but I am being cautious since it relies on a single source. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:41, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wheels

I have replied at my talk page. CIreland (talk) 06:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:DYKsuggestion format

Hi Politizer, just wondering about the output of your DYKsuggestion template.

I notice for example that for the Zhao Zongru hook, the template is outputting the following:

| creator           = Nlu
| creator2          = 
| creator3          = 
| creator4          = 
| expander          = 
| expander2         = 
| expander3         = 
| nominator         = 
| comment           = 
| image             = 
| credits           = 
*{{DYKmake|Zhao Zongru|Nlu}}

I can't really see the point in all this. Once DYKsuggestion has outputted the credit string, ie *{{DYKmake|Zhao Zongru|Nlu}}, why do we need all the rest? It seems redundant and it takes up a lot of space. Also, we are experiencing increasing problems with loading times for the page, so the less text the better.

One other thing, I've noticed your code outputs this whole DYKsuggestion thing in brackets {{}}. Is there a reason for that? I can't see why they are needed. Gatoclass (talk) 11:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you that now that we have the credit templates created, there's not a whole lot of reason to output the rest. I know Suntag, for example, likes having all of that output because he says it makes it easier to see who's who, and easier to modify things if you need to (ie, if the nominator forgot to credit someone, or if you want to add an image or something); I agree with that to a point, but if the size is beginning to create page load problems then we should at least find a happy medium, I guess.

My dream has been to get the DYKsug template working in such a way that it calls {{DYKsuggestion}} but only with the parameters that the person actually filled in...so the output for Nlu's nom above would be more like

| creator           = Nlu
| credits           = 
*{{DYKmake|Zhao Zongru|Nlu}}

I've been having a bitch of a time getting that to work; it looks like it should be a simple matter of putting in some #if: expressions, but I haven't had any luck yet; I asked Ameliorate! to look into it a while back but I think he was away at the time, so I might try nudging him/her again or getting in touch with Lifebaka, who has also helped out with the template.

As for why the code outputs DYKsuggestion in brackets...well, it gets a little confusing even for me, because I didn't create the template top-down like I should have, but put things together piece by piece, making changes when a problem came up, etc., so right now it's thrown together a bit randomly. But basically, subst'ing the {{DYKsuggestion}} template made the output really ugly...what you see on the page looks beautiful, but what you see in the edit window is horrible (see here for an example). So part of the reason the DYKsuggestion stuff is generated in templates is because that template is always transcluded, rather than subst'ed when it's first called. On the other hand, DYKsug (the template on the outside that calls it) is always subst'ed...the main reason for this is because if a template is transcluded, the section edit link it creates on the right-hand side of the page would cause you to be editing the template itself, rather than the section on T:TDYK...so we needed the outside template to be subst'ed to create a working section edit link (as well as a few little things—the credits templates, and a timestamp that stays the same as it was when you first made the nom) as well as an inside template that would never be subst'ed because the code it would produce is horrible.

Anyway, I agree with you that something needs to be done...especially if the template is starting to affect load times. Personally I think the best thing for now is to get {{DYKsug}} to only output the fields that the nominator actually filled in; if you think that's a good idea, I can start asking around for some help (unfortunately, I will be traveling and visiting friends for the next two weeks or so, starting today, so I might not have a good chance to devote a couple hours to template work). If you don't think that's good enough, we can go back to the drawing board and see what else can be done.

As a super-temporary fix, I can go into T:TDYK now and delete some of the extra unused text manually, just to get the loadtimes back to normal for a couple days. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 13:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't have a huge problem with that; I just made the template for fun, as kind of an experiment (it was a bit of a BEANS sort of thing...I was imagining that people might mess up the section headings and so my originally reason for the template was to ward that off...in actuality, it might have been a solution for a nonexistent problem) and if people think it's more trouble than it's worth, I won't be offended if we try scrapping it. Personally, the only thing about it that I think is really nice is the auto-generating of the credit templates; other than that, I don't know how necessary it all is (although some people have told me they think it's nice). My only concern about scrapping it would be confusing nominators all over again, but hey, confusing nominators for a couple days is probably better than having problems forever. I should probably at least take one last stab at fixing the template before we do anything drastic, but if I can't solve the problems, then maybe we could do a survey at WT:DYK (i'm reluctant to call anything a "poll" after the last one...and anyway, this would preferably be less of a "proposal" and more of just a request for feedback) to ask people what they like and don't like about the template, whether or not they think it's worthwhile, and how they would feel about not using it anymore, etc. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 13:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: the expander fields, yeah, I've been thinking the same thing lately; we'll check the history anyway, and people can always use the |comment= field to clarify that the article was an expansion beginning on X date. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 14:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I'm not sure how we would dump the fields (other than by what I've been trying to do, making {{DYKsug}} only call the fields that are actually filled in)...I'm keeping my fingers crossed and hoping that once I bring in someone who's more experienced than I am at template development then what I've been having trouble with will turn out to be easy.

Also, this is a side thing, but I just noticed this morning that some of the cred templates are not being produced properly...specifically, there was one nom that had a |creator= and |expander= (when the second should have been |creator2=...another argument in favor of your idea of scrapping the "expander" field altogether) and didn't make credit for the expander...and another with two creators and a nominator (where the nominator was one of the creators) and it made nom credit, instead of creator credit, for the second guy. I'll have to fiddle around with those at some point.

So anyway, it looks to me like our three big tasks are 1) figuring out how to deal with the extra fields (either by making them not get created by DYKsug, or some other way); 2) removing the expander fields; and 3) fixing the credits. 1 and 3 are things that won't affect how people use the template, so they can be done pretty much behind the scenes; 2 will be a bit more of a major change for people using the template (although for me, ironically, it's the easiest one to do) so we might have a little extra work showing people how to use the new template (stuff like changing the edit notice). —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 14:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I think I can do that. We might end up not even needing {{DYKsuggestion}} anymore...I don't want to jump the gun or anything, but I think DYKsug can handle outputting the hook, the credits, the image, and an optional comment. It already does the credits and image, and the others should be easy to move into it. I'll try to start working on it within the next couple days. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 14:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: DYK bot

I am sorry, but I can only run the bot; I do not have the expertise to repair it. —harej // be happy 17:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK credits?

I thought a bot did that? Cirt (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Eeek that sucks, is anything else about the bot malfunctioning, or just that part? Cirt (talk) 15:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a post to WP:BOTREQ could snag someone knowledgeable about bots? Cirt (talk) 15:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, but I thought I'd let it run for a few cycles to see if we can identify a pattern, because we might be able to fix it ourselves. According to Dravecky at DYK talk, he's noticed that the bot seems to work if there are no nom credits, so that's our first clue I guess. Gatoclass (talk) 15:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah okay. Glad to know people are on it. :) Cirt (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I've commented here. And I am not comfortable that the credits section has hidden section headings like <!--Creators/Expanders -->. It might be worth a try to get rid of these notices to see if the bot behaves better. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The naughty bot is no match to our Collective. Resistance is futile :-D --BorgQueen (talk) 10:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2009!!

Happy New Year Gatoclass/Archive 6!!!! I wish for you and your family to have a wonderful 2009!!! Have fun partying and may you make many edits!!!

-Ravichandar_{My coffee shop}

12:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)