Please remember to use {{subst:vfd2}} when nominating as it outlines in the instructions. Without the subst parameter, it is can be difficult to access the voting page since the edit link goes to the {{vfd2}} template. DoubleBlue (Talk) 6 July 2005 18:43 (UTC)
Well, techically the three-revert rule is, as the title implies, broken at three reverts. However, admins can block for the fourth and after. Thanks for gentle reminder though, that Admins shouldn't be notified until the 4th. -- BMIComp (talk) 7 July 2005 22:34 (UTC)
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Thank you. -- BMIComp (talk) 7 July 2005 21:10 (UTC)
Hi,
As I stated before, I recently started WikiProject Chicago to try and improve some of the Chicago articles. Please feel free to join, as membership is, ummm low. As for specific articles, I am keeping a running list on the projects homepage. Personally, my number-one priority is to bring Chicago up to featured article status, so that is where my work is going to be directed in the near future, but the sub articles (ie. I think Parks of Chicago is on the list) need some work too and there is a whole list of Chicago stubs.
If you are interested in working with me on this project, please join and contribute as you see fit.
--Gpyoung 9 July 2005 05:38 (UTC)
P.S. Cudos on the picture, I was looking for a good one on Google, but honestly yours was the only one that I really liked enough to put on my page-lol.
Yeah, I don't like the picture on the top either, anything that you can do to replace it with something better would be great. I was actually thinking of moving your picture up to the top, but if you think you can get a better one that would work with me. One of the smalled articles that I am working on now is the Adler Planetarium, as I think a Chicago landmark and tourist attraction deserves to be more then just a stub, and I am unable to find a good picture of it with the new editions. I know that the Adler is a little far from "Downtown" so I would understand if you couldnt get it, but if you could it would be much appreciated. Also, a good picture of the Millenium Park and Grant Park would probably help the Parks of Chicago article that another member of the project has been asking for. Beyond that, I cant think of any that are really needed as of now, but any good pictures would be a good adition to the main Chicago page.
Are you going to work on a specific part of the Chicago article now? One of the advantages of the WikiProject in my mind is that we can divide up the work so people can really focus on one aspect of the city and organize the improvment work that is going on.
Thanks for putting the [[test]] messages on vandals' userpages when you revert them. A lot of RC patrollers don't, but it makes it so much easier to keep track of what the vandals are up to. Joyous (talk) July 9, 2005 16:24 (UTC)
No problem, thanks for noticing. =). I actually added a little bit of scripting to my monobook.js so i don't have to type it out each time, makes it a little easier. -- BMIComp (talk) 9 July 2005 16:27 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I have created a member tag for the Chicago WikiProject to put on your user page to try and attract new members like you suggested. Feel free to edit it, I pretty much the same wording as the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} tag. The tag for it is {{ChicagoWikiProject-Member}
--Gpyoung 9 July 2005 17:33 (UTC)
Yes. See Homosexuality's talk page. See Homosexuality in animals, ie the sheep study. See Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. If you need more please ask. 67.41.236.21100:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sheep:
Homosexuality in male sheep (found in 6–10% of rams) is associated with variations in cerebral mass distribution and chemical activity. A study reported in endocrinology concluded that biological factors are in play; this study replicated similar findings in humans. It shows that approximately 10% of males are homosexual and that the brains of homosexual males are different.
Kinsey Reports:
Paul Gebhard, Kinsey's successor as director of the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, spent years "cleaning" the Kinsey data of its purported contaminants, removing, for example, all material derived from prison populations in the basic sample. In 1979, Gebhard (with Alan B. Johnson) published The Kinsey Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1938-1963 Interviews Conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Their conclusion, to Gebhard's surprise he claimed, was that none of Kinsey's original estimates were significantly affected by this bias.
Professor Martin Duberman writes:
Instead of Kinsey's 37 percent, Gebhard and Johnson came up with 36.4 percent; the 10 percent figure (with prison inmates excluded) came to 9.9 percent for white, college-educated males and 12.7 percent for those with less education. And as for the call for a "random sample," a team of independent statisticians studying Kinsey's procedures had concluded as far back as 1953 that the unique problems inherent in sex research precluded the possibility of obtaining a true random sample, and that Kinsey's interviewing technique had been "extraordinarily skillful." They characterized Kinsey's work overall as "a monumental endeavor." [2] Globeism01:54, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ive noticed that you have been sending people invitations on their talk pages for the project, good idea. I actually did the same thing yesterday with different people (mostly from Chicago and talk:Chicago) and I think its our best chance at recruiting new members. One of the new members you recruited, Kelly Martin, suggested that we make an invitation template, and since your invite was a tad more elegant then the one I used, I went ahead and turned it into one. It can be found at Template:ChicagoWikiProject-Invite. Feel free to change it as you see fit.
Another question-where did you find the people you sent the invite to? I did not have much luck on Chicago and talk:Chicago, I only got one person and couldnt figure out where else to look-Advise.
Thanks,
--Gpyoungtalk15:41, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the pictures that you took of Chicago. Those are great, I think we can put most of them into Chicago once its reworked. Good work!
--Gpyoungtalk05:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you post on my talk page a 3RR warning in reference to the Cold Fusion page? I have only reverted that page twice today, at 16:18, 11 July 2005 and 17:41, 11 July 2005. This is two edits short of breaking that rule, which is not violated by three reverts on a page in a single day. I also find it odd that you left this message on my talk page yet declined to do so for Brian0918, who also reverted that same page twice today (at 15:49, 11 July 2005 and 16:18, 11 July 2005). If your intentions were to avoid a revert war, I would have expected you to send such warnings symmetrically. I find your actions 'impolite and unproductive', to quote from the message you left for me. --Noren21:14, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'd say you reverted three times; adding an extra edit in between your revert still makes it a revert. I wasn't reporting you or anything, just wanted to let you know that continued reverts could result in bannination. I noticed brian had made reverts also, but I saw this comment and from it I inferred that he was not going to revert it again. -- BMIComp (talk)21:41, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am just wondering, because your comment in Wikipedia:Translation_into_English#Recently_Completed_Translations suggests you may have been confused: the request for translation in this case wasn't for the article itself, it was for "the little stubs on the Spanish wikipedia about the Argentinian presidents". Did you do those (in which case, just amend your comment to say so) or not (in which case, could you please restore the request?).
Worth doing because: I do not want the list translated, but my goal is to have decent traslations of the little stubs on the Spanish wikipedia about the Argentinian presidents. Most of the corresponding ES articles to the earlier Argentinian presidents are short and simple stub translations but I think the little blurbs being made into in English would be a great help.
Hi,
Yeah-I have been working on re-organizing everything in the sandbox and I think Im gonna post it stright to Chicago after Im done, even though its still missing information, particularlly in the People and Culture section.
One of the complaints I read about the origional article was that it had too many skyline images, mediocre ones at that, so I was trying to work in some more different pictures. For example, the one from millenium park was the only good picture I could find that showed actual people, so I thought it would be appropriate for the people section. Unless you feel that any of the pictures arnt your best work, I think they fit in nicly in the article.
Thanks,
--Gpyoungtalk23:05, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.-Feel free to add to the Sandbox if you want, as I said, it needs a lot of work.
its at User:Gpyoung/ChicagoSandbox.
Are you going to work of writing something for the Great Chicago Fire? If you are then ill leave that section for you (it needs a lot of work).
--Gpyoungtalk02:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks-I saw you additions to the fire section-its a good outline that covers the important info b/c the page is already 38kb. One of the issue brought up in the peer review was the Chicago template at the bottom of the page. I have tried editing it to make it much smaller as before it was just a category outline. Tell me what you think. Also, we need a section still on Utilities-the infrustructure sectoin is too small (w/ only health and medicine) and i think we had Utilities planned for it. Do you know if there is already a Utilities article of are we going to have to wrok from scratch.
Thanks for saving my talk page, I cant believe I got vandalized, lol kinda flattering, I must be doing something right.
--Gpyoungtalk03:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I warned you before I reverted, so that's why I didn't notice your revert. Anyway, I reread what you replaced the entry with, and it looks like you meant to post that to your livejournal instead, so I removed the warning from your user page. Thanks for clarifying, and sorry for the misunderstanding.
... has been redirected, since that seems a good solution. But it's still on VFD as well. Note, by the way - please use {{subst:vfd2}} when creating a nomination page. Radiant_>|< 08:48, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
I have noticed that on plenty of biographical pages, the subject is slandered. In posting the available information on Mr. Outis I have done no more than others have in posting available speculative information on such other dangerous anti-Semites as Adolf Hitler and his ilk. I consider it necessary to give even rumors about such dangerous characters so the people can be well informed that in our society, fascism is still very much alive.
If you could send me the two component pictures, I can spend some time tomorrow evening (when I'll be stuck at my hotel with nothing else to do anyway) working on getting them to play nice with one another. Kelly Martin 19:53, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, somebody else mentioned this today too, thanks for reminding me.... I need to change the AutoVFD script I'm using. I didn't realize that's why the edit link doesn't work. Once again, thanks for the heads up.-- BMIComp (talk)22:47, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Both you and I have tagged Kovatch for speedy deletion, but the page history shows nothing. I've retagged it, but do you know what's happening? — Pekinensis01:18, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You had me confused for a minute there too. It was actually deleted twice already. The creator keeps recreating it. I'll try to deal with it right now. Thanks.
19:31, 20 July 2005 Denni deleted "Kovatch" ( No meaningful content or history, text completely meaningless or unsalvageably incoherent)
Thanks for the recommendation about signatures; I was worried however that the vandal 222.153.153.88 (who I am trying to clean up after right now) would retaliate by making bad edits to my own page. What to do in this situation? (Unsigned comment by Badagnani)
Well, I recommend not worrying about it; if they vandalize your page it will be quickly reverted, by you or another user. I commonly deal with vandalism, and have only had my page vandalized twice. Also, you forgot to sign your edit on my user page. ;) -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)08:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks--yes, I've been looking through it but it's a bit confusing and I wanted to make sure I reported it the right way. In any case, 222.153.153.88 seems to have stopped doing what s/he was doing. Won't forget this time... Badagnani08:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, umm.... Thanks for the welcome message. Now, if only I hadn't been here for almost a month, and made 400+ edits. :) I've also done everything on that list, except for posting a picture. Not that I don't appreciate the message as a nice gesture, but I don't know if it was really appropriate. No worries though, and no harm done. --Icelight 16:04, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
Heh, I saw that you've been RC patrolling for a while. Your talk page was a little lonely though. =P Not to mention it doesn't hurt to say welcome. So, welcome! Have fun wikipediaing. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)16:06, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I've been vaguely watching some of the juggling articles because the anon 80.177.206.19, who I think is probably Charlie Dancey, has done some really good work with them - which is why I was surprised to see that flagged as a copyvio. OpenToppedBus - My Talk 16:34, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
Hi,
I actually was on "vacation". I forgot to post anything saying that, sorry-lol. I also thought that I would have internet access where I was.
--Gpyoungtalk00:20, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Well, welcome back. Hope you had a good vacation. I've been working on a few articles, although, they are still pretty raw. Feel free to add anything to them as you see fit. P.S. Are you on #Wikipedia IRC?-- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)00:22, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, to be honest I have never been on the #Wikipedia nor do I really understand what is it (but I assume its a board of some sort). Please excuse my nievity on this subject and, if you can send me some information on how I can join.
Sorry. #Wikipedia is an IRC (chat) channel for discussing Wikipedia and the like. It's on the freenode network (irc.freenode.net). The channel/roomame is #Wikipedia. If you'd like to get join it and need help, let me know. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)00:33, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, I managed to get onto #Wikipedia, my s/n is Gpyoung. I have tried messaging you, but have gotten no responce, might be dong it wrong but who knows.
Thanks for the advice,
--Gpyoungtalk01:39, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I didn't really mean to revert the 2nd time, just to put something in the edit summary. I was assuming good faith of course, though someone really concerned about little people would be unlikely to equate them with "midgets". Anyway, that anon has been adding spurious info elsewhere as well.--Pharos03:24, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'm going through your edits and setting up a (mock) RfC =). This outta be fun. See progress at User:Bmicomp/RfC. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 03:31, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you referring to the current version or the version before I removed the attack. I'm going to save myself a post and assume you meant the latter (although this is most likely not the case).
In it, it singled out a specific user and their voting policies in an article in the Wikipedia namespace. While this may not be the more extreme form of attack (using profanity and the like) I'd say it comes close to being just as bad. Specifically condeming the actions of a user (consistently voting in a certain way without justification), and then associating such actions with Grumpiness and eccentricity is an attack. There are recourses for disagreements with a user, but this was not such an effort. It was an attempt to make a point.
"In the past, many contributors have found their Wikistress levels rising, particularly when an issue important to them has been handled in a way they consider unfair. The contributor may point out inconsistencies, perhaps citing other cases that have been handled differently. And the contributor may postulate: "What if everyone did that?" - a common rhetorical technique. These devices may not persuade for the reasons cited above.
In this situation, it may be tempting to illustrate the point using either parody or some form of breaching experiment. For example, the contributor may apply the decision to other issues in a way that mirrors the policy the contributor objects to. These activities are generally disruptive: i.e., they require the vast majority of nonpartisan editors to clean up after the "proof". Many consider such "point-proving" acts to be vandalism."
This isn't the same exact situation as cited, but it is still an obvious disruption. The article has to be removed and debated... etc.
I still do not see this as a personal attack, at least as the term is defined on Wikipedia in WP:NPA, for instance. In the edit you cited, Boothy is listed as voting contrary to the majority of users, often the sole dissenting vote. This is true, a simple statement of fact, and no comments about Boothy himself are made; rather, in a subsequent revision, making a WP:POINT is listed as one of the reasons, and Boothy's listing is moved there—and Boothy himself admitted that he was voting that way to make a point. I do fully agree that it was not a nice thing to do and was a bad idea, but I don't see commenting on a user's voting patterns to be a personal attack. The example you cited would be a disruption, but I think the edit you cited is quite different. A single edit can be reverted; it's not as if someone followed Boothy voting oppose to everything that he voted to support. And the article was not deleted. Again, I am not condoning the inclusion, I just don't think it's that useful to cite vaguely related rules when asking someone to change their behavior, and especially not if it's an isolated incident. A polite comment explaining why the item was removed is more effective I think than assigning malicious motivations like personal attacks and purposeful disruptions. And it's more likely to make sense to the person to whom you're directing the comment. Furthermore, in some cases, removal of the comment with an appropriate summary (e.g. "Removed mention of specific editor--this really doesn't belong here") might be enough for an otherwise good contributor. And finally, I wasn't really referring to any revisions per se; I was referring to your comment and the included diff. Thanks for your efforts in keeping Wikipedia a civil place; we both have the same goal in mind even if we may disagree on details in acheiving it. — Knowledge Seekerদ01:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly enough, while I was thinking yesterday I contemplated leaving a note updating you on my opinion on this matter. In hindsight I had realized that this was not a personal attack. I think I was just a bit gung ho in defending an editor who gets a lot of hostility (deserved or not) from other users. Anyway, I appreciate your response, even if it is a little belated. =) -- BMIComp(talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)02:34, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You know, now that I reread my response, it sounds a bit hostile too, which I assure you was not my intention. Anyway, I'm glad we agree that Wikipedia should be a friendly environment. In fact, I think I'm quite like you in that I tend to come to the defense of those I feel are being criticized unfairly—which is why we were having a discussion on what one user said about another! Anyway, congratulations on your recent election, and I'll see you around the Wiki! — Knowledge Seekerদ05:07, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to let you know that your "How's my driving?" RFC signature is by far the funniest I've seen here. The mental image it conjures of a half-asleep Wikipedian swerving through sentences and careening off punctuation marks while other editors honk and flash their lights is endlessly amusing. :) —HorsePunchKid→龜 08:22, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks =). Funny enough there was a night a didn't sleep at all, i just wikipedia'd all through the morning and rest of the day instead. At one point I ran into that same exact situation you described. Hehe. Wikipediaing under the incluence of sleep drunkeness is not recommended, do not try it at home. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)08:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I find your organized crime article fascinating, but would it be possible for you to find and add info about organized crime after the 1920s? I have heard that organized crime was a major political force in teh 1950s at least. Thanks, fellow Chicago WikiProjecter Dralwik23:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for the reminder. I have been discussing with User:Huaiwei over several talk pages, and the issue is currently in arbitration. If you're interested in the topic feel free to join the discussion at talk:list of companies in mainland China. :-D — Instantnood 07:28, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
Great you're there already.. :-) — Instantnood 07:29, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
You left a comment on my talk page saying "Your test worked, and has been removed.", however I have no idea what this could be about. Please let me know what I did wrong. Qutezuce 01:05, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. BTW, what's with the rush of vandalism on IE? Eh, I'll list it on VIP, no big deal. --DropDeadGorgias(talk) 21:19, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
Hi,
I have finally ended the picture vote (#3 won of course) and have nominated Chicago as a Featured Article. Just wanted to let you know.
--Gpyoungtalk18:11, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that, looks like it's getting support (except for the some of the images, suprisingly enough). Also, just to let you know, I'm going to be out of town until August 4th, but I'll be checking in periodically. I hope everything goes well. -- BMIComp(talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)19:52, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting my RFA, I really appreciate it! If you ever need administrator assistance with your own anti-vandalism efforts, don't hesitate to let me know. --Canderson7 16:55, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
"One man's spam is another man's delicious luncheon meat."
Thank you for contacting me.
I add external links from time to time on topics directly related to domains that I own so that those interested in developing them can contact me. In one sense this is commercial in that they can buy/lease the domain from me. In another sense, it is topic-related, since I may develop any or all of the domains into information resources on a specific topic. For Goshen.in, for instance, I have begun doing just this. For domains I am waiting to develop, I just leave them parked on Sedo.
I thought it would be a service to your readers to make them aware that these sites exist and they may do things with them if they contact me.
If these purposes fall outside of the rules for external links, please email me at [email protected] and I will stop posting external links. As far as I could tell, however, from Wikipedia's policies pages, nothing prevents adding a few commercial links, so long as they are on-topic.
Please distinguish for me the difference between the Microsoft Wikipedia page and the company's link, which is about a commercial subject, and making topical links such as a link to mousepad.in on the Wikipedia page about mousepads?
Do I simply have to follow the format of the Microsoft page, listing who the owner is, inception date of the commercial enterprise, etc., in order for it to be acceptable?
I also would note that HP, Xerox, and a host of other companies are listed on Wikipedia, with links to their commercial sites. Does this mean it is ok for smaller companies to put links to their sites with explanations of what they offer, or does Wikipedia have different rules for large corporations versus smaller ones or for sole traders.
Note: this is in response to the e-mail I sent you (reguarding the previous comment): Hi. Selling of products via wikipedia is very widely seen as not acceptable. Please see What should not be linked to...
There is a subtle difference, but there is a distinct one. The link to Microsoft's site was most likely not added by an employee of Microsoft. Also, the link you added was added, by your own admission, in order to promote a product. If the Microsoft webpage linked to a part of the Mircosoft site which was only linked to in order to further sales of a product, like a page on their site that only sold Windows XP CDs, then this may be a questionable link. I would recommend rereading the external links guideline. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. Thanks. -- BMIComp(talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)22:49, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of the entire Microsoft website is to sell product. Anyone in business will tell you that. You also have numerous pages and links on Wikipedia on various bits of commercial software like Excel:
There is no subtle difference. Can you immediately buy software on Microsoft.com?
The answer is yes. And links to microsoft.com are littered all over Wikipedia.
I have put maybe 5 or 6 external links to topic-related pages. How is this any worse? I am detecting a serious logical inconsistency in Wikipedia's policy on external links and commercial purposes. It seems the larger the company, the more lenient Wikipedia is. And conversely, the smaller the commercial enterprise, the more strict and exclusive Wikipedia is. 203.184.36.23723:13, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The sole intent of you placing your links on wikipedia is to sell a product. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and such links are not encyclopedic. The link on the Microsoft Excel page is to a page about Mircosoft excel. The intent of the link is to further inform the reader about Microsoft Excel, not to sell it to them. They might be able to buy it from somewhere on Microsoft's site, but this is obviously not the intent of the link. There are plenty of places on the internet where you can advertise the website, or you may want to contact the city directly and see if they are interesting in buying the domain. However, Wikipedia is not the appropriate venue. Thank you. -- BMIComp(talk, HOWS MY DRIVING)23:23, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a hierarchy of moderators on Wikipedia? I think the policy is wrong, and as applied is biased in favor of commercial sites of large companies and against individuals. I would appreciate it if you would bring this conversation up to someone higher up at Wikipedia. If you don't want to, I would be happy to if you let me know whom to contact.
Perhaps the solution is to have at the very bottom of an article a place for commercial links, and that would include ones like Microsoft's--or mine?
I could, following your logic, make a webpage about mousepads in India with the incidental ability to buy the domain from me on that page. This is exactly what Microsoft does on the Excel page external link you mentioned. They provide the ability to buy the product on that external link.
Why not simply allow commercial links in an appropriate area, at the bottom? External links would have been ok for that, but maybe there needs to be something else specifically provided for so that people don't get all agitated.
And by the way, there is nothing inherent in the nature of an encyclopedia that prevents commercial entries being there in a discreet form. In fact, until the Internet and Wikipedia came along, most people did have to pay something to own a set, and some had ads at the back where you could mail-order books, etc.
I think it would be worth polling your readers on the front page for a month to see whether the users themselves would like to see a free commercial links section possible on articles.
There is not a heirarchy of "moderators". Everyone is considered an editor. If you are serious about discussing your above proposal, I would suggest bringing it up at the village pump. However, I can assure you that it will not be looked upon favorably. The following is from the what Wikipedia is not article's section on advertising:
Advertising. Articles about companies and products are fine if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Further all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Wikipedia does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs.
