User talk:David Fuchs/Archive 42
Trek film seriesDavid, The purpose of the section you removed in Star Trek (film series) was to give brief plot synopses of about 2 sentences to all the films,and give minimal info about the interrelationship of the film plots to other films and the various TV series. That at least was not redundant to anything else in the article. The rest of the article was devoted to production detail and information, but said nothing about the plots. Perhaps 1) some format other than a table, or would be appropriate. However, the table was not redundant to the rest of the article as your edit-summary suggested or stated. Regards,--WickerGuy (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Herrerasaurus side.jpg Thanks for uploading File:Herrerasaurus side.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC) Proposed pollRe the caps and title case, I asked Aleandr and he says I should ask you about this. I am considering launching a new information poll at WT:TITLE, to get a better idea of where people stand on the changes that Born2cycle has proposed. I have drafted a poll in my user subpage at User:Dicklyon/Recognizability poll. I'd like to post this to WT:TITLE soon, if you think it won't be disruptive to the ongoing process. It might even solicit some opinions that people can cite in evidence. Does that seem like an OK idea? Dicklyon (talk) 16:22, 5 February 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 06 February 2012
MSU InterviewDear David,
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at [email protected]. I will be more than happy to speak with you. Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you. Sincerely, Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 02:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC) FACTwo weeks later, the nom is finally within the rules, so here I go again... hope you don't mind if I'm taking a cue from your style of FAC introductions (and your guide - unintentionally, but once I had stumbled upon the very same joke, there was no way I wouldn't link to it!). Also, any comments/suggestions you can add there are welcome :) Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 01:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC) If you have more to say, I'm willing to hear it. igordebraga ≠ 04:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 13 February 2012
Wong Kim Ark FACHi. I realize you're very busy, but I was wondering if you might be able/willing to take some time and participate in the FAC for United States v. Wong Kim Ark. The current FAC (2nd one for this article) has been going on for a very long time — largely because of lengthy exchanges with two skeptical reviewers who, however, seem to have left the discussion for now. I believe the FAC would benefit greatly from new input; and regardless of whether the article gets promoted this time or needs to go for a third FAC sometime in the future, I do believe the comments I've received so far have resulted in the article being significantly improved over where it was a few weeks ago. Thanks for whatever you can do here. — Richwales 19:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 20 February 2012
Inserting of picture for sequelHey David. I have a question, that is, regrettably, once more about the DotA article. Right here I have an image comparison between DotA and Dota 2 and I was wondering, while concerning sequels, do you feel it is appropriate to include an image screenshot comparison between the first and the second, if we were to want to include such an edit on the DotA page? DarthBotto talk•cont 02:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 27 February 2012
WikiProject Film January–February newsletterGRAPPLE X 00:35, 4 March 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 05 March 2012
You're invited to DC Meetup #28!
Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude You're invited: Smithsonian Institution Women in Science Edit-a-Thon!
Sarah (talk) 22:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC) FYI It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— — Cirt (talk) 02:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 12 March 2012
Friendly notification regarding this week's SignpostHello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you are set to be mentioned in this week's Arbitration Report (link). The report aims to inform readers of The Signpost about the proceedings of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the draft article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them on the talkpage (transcluded in the Comments section directly below the main body of text), where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section). Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot (talk) 00:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC) "Locus of dispute"David, did you see my query at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Proposed_decision#Appeal already: "Locus of the dispute" finding? It's odd to me that the MOS is included in the locus, when no evidence or workshop discussion was presented to support the idea that there was disruption at MOS beyond the sock behavior. I think it's a holdover from the confusion with TITLE. Can you review and let me know if this can fixed by copyedit as AGK suggested? I'd hate to see the PMA/JCS socking causing sactions at MOS if there's no reason to do so. Of course, if you see a reason to do so, I'd like to see that stated some place. Dicklyon (talk) 21:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the reply. I don't understand what you mean by "The case was precipitated by the TITLE dispute, but it definitely has its roots in related MoS discussions." (nothing in the TITLE problem was related to style issues, as far as I know). But at least I know you considered it. Dicklyon (talk) 05:32, 20 March 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 19 March 2012
ArbCom typoThe final wording at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation has a non-trivial typo in it. "Collegiate" is not the same word as "collegial". The former ('of or having to do with a college or university') has no applicable meaning here, while the latter ('of or having to do with interaction between colleagues') is clearly what was intended, and is the very basis of WP:CIVIL interaction. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ Contrib. 05:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 26 March 2012
Mojang-related mergersHey, David. I was wondering if you are able to close the merge discussion for Jens Bergensten? The thing is, it has been opened for more than two months now and the general consensus is that the page should be kept, but expanded and cleaned up some. Just, this discussion should have been closed a long time ago and it never was. Also, somebody nominated Notch (game designer) for being merged into Mojang, despite that this individual is widely considered the most popular person in the industry today and has won numerous awards, including a BAFTA. Are you able to share your own personal input on the subject? DarthBotto talk•cont 22:08, 01 April 2012 (UTC) Harassment of editors and Arbcom transparencyOn my talk page at User_talk:Russavia#Comment_from_AGK, there is a discussion between myself and your fellow Arb User:AGK, concerning an issue which came to the attention of Arbcom. As the various links and diffs show, many editors saw the recent RFC/U against User:Fae as harassment, at best, and as homophobic harassment, at worst. AGK firstly stated that he "voted" to ban Delicious Carbuncle, then has "corrected" himself to state that he merely was in favour of the Committee reviewing the case; either way there was opposition on the Committee to either banning Delicious Carbuncle or even reviewing the harassment that Fae was being subjected to. As an Arb, the community elected you to represent the community for the community. The Committee time and time again pushes on editors who come before it that transparency is essential in our editing; in fact, transparency is one of the key tenets of this project, however the Arbcom often does not act in the same transparent way that it (and the community) expects of the community itself. AGK states on my talk page that one can only expect a transparent hearing if a request for arbitration is filed, and states that most Arbcom business is conducted this way. This notion is somewhat correct, but it is also very wrong. As the committee time and time makes a point of stating that community transparency is essential, the community also expects the same of the Committee -- at all times. The Committee also makes many decisions "behind closed doors", and when pushed to explain decisions cites various "get out of jail free cards" to avoid being transparent to the community-at-large. This includes decisions such as banning editors for things done offwiki which can't clearly be attributed to that editor, or unbanning editors with a history of socking, etc, etc. In aid of this, and in the interests of transparency to the Community at large, I am asking that you answer the following questions:
These are very simple questions which one is able to answer if they are truly for transparency both on the Committee and in the community in general, and I would expect that many in the community would be wanting transparent answers to these questions. The last thing, it is of course Fae's choice if he wishes to request a case for Arbitration, but these questions are not being asked to have an end-run around the Arbitration process, but are being asked in the interests of transparency on a specific example that the Committee was aware of and refused to act upon. I would expect Fae and other editors (especially LGBT editors) would be wanting transparent answers here now, before deciding if they wish to act. Russavia ლ(ಠ益ಠლ) 07:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC) Star Trek movesI have reverted all your changes to Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: Insurrection. Unlike Generations, these two films were marketed with the colon, and so moving them would be improper; secondly, cut-and-paste moves are prohibited due to Wikipedia's content licensing policies; see WP:MOVE for instructions on how to properly do one in the future. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 02 April 2012
0x10cHey David, sorry if my last question was lame. I have another Mojang-related inquiry, however. You see, Mojang just announced their new game called 0x10c. I created a redirect called 0x10c, but I do not know how to have a title with the prolific "c". Are you able to move the page, or at least tell me how I may achieve this? DarthBotto talk•cont 00:04, 04 April 2012 (UTC) Dispute resolution survey
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2012 The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter Project At a Glance
Content
Project Navigation To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 19:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC) Signpost questionHi David! I write for the Signpost and I'm working on a series analyzing the work of the Arbitration Committee (a recent story here). Would you be free to answer some questions regarding your work on the Committee, and specifically the ins and outs of the committee mailing list? I see you're a member of the incoming mail team for the committee, and I'm interested in some organizational details. For example:
If you would be willing, please ping my talk page. I'd be glad to post questions here or via email, whichever you prefer. Best regards! The Signpost: 09 April 2012
Main page appearance: Turok: Dinosaur HunterThis is a note to let the main editors of Turok: Dinosaur Hunter know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 13, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 13, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC) Hello!It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Could I get a reaction of interest or disinterest to my e-mail? Either option is fine. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC) Wow, a Barnstar!(In tears) I ... don't even know what to say. I would like to thank my family for supporting me all the time and ... OK, enough whining :). I really didn't expect to receive a barnstar for simple cleanup work. Thanks a ton, David. Carry on the good work. Electroguv (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 16 April 2012
FFD comment requestYou were the image reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/No Rest for the Wicked (Supernatural)/archive2 which was promoted to FA on 20 October 2010. This included a review of the infobox image File:Norest.JPG. You were also the image reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pilot (Supernatural)/archive1 which was promoted to FA on 27 July 2010. This included a review of the infobox image File:Pilotinfobox.JPG. I am in a debate at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 April 15#File:Pilot .28The Cosby Show.29 monopoly lesson.png, which is a debate over the infobox image for a television episode. The reviewer believes that the image currently violates WP:NFCC. I was hoping you might weigh in on this debate.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC) Wikimedia DC Meetup & Dinner
UFC ArticlesThere is a huge discussion ongoing over the UFC Event articles, a lot of people feel that a few people are making sweeping changes without appropiate consensus being reached or in some cases a lack of knowledge about the subject in general. Something needs to be done otherwise this is just going to drag on. Fraggy1 [talk] 21:38, 24April 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 23 April 2012
Private evidenceCan you confirm that my private evidence for the R&I review, noted by you as received by the Arbcom mailing list on March 26, was factored into the proposed decision? It is unclear from this discussion whether it was even seen by the other arbitrators. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 21:45, 24 April 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 30 April 2012
You're invited: Smithsonian Institution Archives Edit-a-thon!
The Signpost: 07 May 2012
The Signpost: 14 May 2012
File:SG1-04x06-window of opportunity.png listed for deletionA file that you uploaded or altered, File:SG1-04x06-window of opportunity.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC) File:SG1-10x06 wizard of oz spoof.png listed for deletionA file that you uploaded or altered, File:SG1-10x06 wizard of oz spoof.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC) Wiki Checker on User PageThe wikichecker link on your userpage is not functional. I'd fix it myself, but I thought it'd be best to let you know and decide how to proceed. Cheers, C(u)w(t)C(c) 03:50, 18 May 2012 (UTC). Help on CMIHi for the zillionth time, David :). I was very fickle during the last several months, moving from one project to another, but currently, I'm hard at work to improve The Curse of Monkey Island, and I WILL GET IT DONE. With your help, of course:). Could you mail me a couple of newspaper reviews for the game? It would make my life much easier. Thanks in advance, Electroguv (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Do you want some more work? List of Halo multiplayer mapsI recall that you did some really good work on the Halo series. A newly created Halo maps article has just been AFD'ed. I voted to keep but refactor (and broaden) to cover the release and reception of the DLC map packs. Take a look. - hahnchen 17:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC) The Signpost: 21 May 2012
The Signpost: 28 May 2012
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
