User talk:Pathoschild/Archives/2006-03

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki


Requests for admin actions

I just want to correct my errors

Please, I took into consideration all advices and I try to correct my errors. Now all text and photos are mine! And I have changed the stle of article. What else? The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jabez (talk • contribs) 09:55, February 28, 2006.

I'll look into it and see if it can be used on Wikipedia. Please do not remove the tag in the meantime. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 10:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
The article doesn't seem to be a copyright violation any longer, so I restored your last edit. Thank you for your contributions. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 10:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Great comfort!

If it possibly seems funny, but you message brought me a great comfort! Thank you. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jabez (talk • contribs) 10:16, February 28, 2006.

You're very welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 10:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

You mean Point of View?

What is POV? You mean Point of View? If it is so what you advice to be changed? I don't want to be blocked again. ----Dmitriy A. Pitirimov

Don't worry, you have no fear of being blocked. Blocks are only used against editors who vandalise or who continually ignore policy despite being notified and warned.
One of Wikipedia's most important principles in the neutral point of view, which is a goal we strive for on every article. The article you've contributed speaks very positively of it's subject, and may be excluding other possible points of view. Are there certain factors about that country affecting tourism that aren't mentioned? If so, they should be mentioned. It's not absolutely necessary for you to do it yourself; another editor will eventually edit the article. For example, the article on Uzbekistan states the following:
However, credible non-government human right watchdogs, such as IHF, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, as well as United States Department of State and Council of the European Union define Uzbekistan as "an authoritarian state with limited civil rights" and express profound concern about "wide-scale violation of virtually all basic human rights". According to the reports, the most widespread violations are torture, arbitrary arrests, and various restrictions of freedoms: of religion, of speech and press, of free association and assembly. The reports maintain that the violations are most often committed against members of religious organizations, independent journalists, human right activists, and political activists, including members of the banned opposition parties. In 2005, Uzbekistan was included into Freedom House's "The Worst of the Worst: The World's Most Repressive Societies" list.
// Pathoschild (admin / talk) 11:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Help please

Hi Pathoschild..

I wanna steal your userpage, cause I loved it so much, but that's not the point right now. I hope you can help me because you helped me before on a similar problem. I'm being blocked for the second time for doing nothing. I'm so frustrated, angry and crazy. I'm sad, hurt and mand. It's pushing me to the edge and I dunno what to do. Who's ass to kiss... ahh so tired of listening and following orders when it backfires on me like that. It's my fucked up life only this time it's digital too! I checked my contributions just to see if someone stole my username to do whatever they did but nothing but my good old contributions. I wish I can take this chance to walk away but I can't. Help me please or tell me at least who's ass do I gotta kiss to contribute. --Unbreakable_MJ 02:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

If I can send messages now does it mean I'm not blocked? Well anyhow who gives a fuck. Sorry to bother you. Note: I always expect replies in my talk page instead of here. --Unbreakable_MJ 02:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey Unbreakable MJ. Don't worry, you weren't blocked because of anything you did. You were hit by the autoblocker because someone has abused their editing priviledges from your IP address. Whenever this happens, just leave me a message by wiki or email and I'll unblock you. Alternately, you can place {{unblock}} on your page with a note that you were autoblocked, and another administrator will unblock you. I've overridden the autoblock; thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 02:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
To answer one of your questions, autoblocked users are often able to edit any page in the talk namespace. Users blocked by an administrator can only edit their own talk page. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 02:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I appreciate your help and kindness. Have a great day. --Unbreakable_MJ 03:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm sure you've got my email & you're the one who unblocked me just now (for the second time today), so thank you again.

I decided to log out and there was a new message so I was on the user talk page and this user have been doing many many bad edits & causing problems. Many users asking him/her to stop yet s/he doesn't listen.

I'm sure s/he'll do it again and I might get blocked for the 4th time... so my question is: what can I do about this? --Unbreakable_MJ 10:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

You can try contacting the administrator of your network about that user's abuse, directing them to Special:Contributions/ for evidence and information. There is a feature request to disable the autoblocking of established accounts; when or if this is implemented, you shouldn't have any problem with the autoblocker. Until then, there isn't much you can do. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 10:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm the one being harassed

I do so hope that the action you took to unblock MJ isn't going to expose me to the harrasser again. He has been vandalizing my user page and reverting ALL my edits -- even on subjects far removed from the Shi'a articles that originally roused his ire. Zora 11:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I simply overrode the autoblock, which had no effect on the original IP block. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Edit History merge

Hi Pathoschild. I want to merge two similar articles: Abdeen Palace and Abdin Palace. Both articles have an edit history. If i redirect one to another (after making some changes) , only one history will appear. Is there a way to merge both edit histories?--Wedian 15:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's possible. If you've added the merge templates, it'll get done eventually. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 15:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

not blocked anymore

hi - i sent you an email which you can disregard - obviously you've now unblocked the IP i edit from... thanks! Petesmiles 02:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


Could you block User:Tt1 considering he is the same person. And User:Nixer. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 03:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Request moved to Wikipedia:Requests for investigation. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 04:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you 25px εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 09:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 15:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the awesome block of this serious problem user. I blocked two of his known sockpuppets and will keep my eyes for others. What was the template you used for his talk page? I would like to keep it handy. -Husnock 17:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Nixer is actually not the same person. We ran checkuser and found Nixer to be in Russia and Roitr/Tt1 to be in Israel. Also, Roitr and Nixer have had edit wars with eachother. -Husnock 17:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Husnock, I'm not entirely sure which template you're referring to. I didn't deal with the request myself, as I was occupied at the time. My only related edit was moving the request to Requests for investigation. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 17:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Identifying anon

Hi there, I read the things you listed that you do and don't do, but I'm not sure if you do this, so I thought I'd ask. Can you check if this anon: has a registered user account? If not, please let me know...either way, thanks. bcatt 00:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

No, only users with Checkuser access can do so. See m:Checkuser for more information. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Responses to admin actions

Proxy Report

Hello Arundhati bakshi. Following your request, we've scanned and concluded that it was most likely not open. Note that this scan doesn't preclude the possibility that the IP address is a zombie computer or network; if you have reason to believe this is so, please list it at Vandalism in progress noting your suspicions. Thanks for your contributions to the WikiProject on open proxies. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 23:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention in this matter. I got a help request from someone using and he/she claimed that it was the IP address for everyine in their network, so didn';t know it the claim was legitamate or not. Thanks for helping me. (Arundhati Bakshi (talkcontribs)) 01:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

on the Skull and Bones article

Re your comments on my talk page, thanks. Though as I said above it is more than simply an article contention, so why is that point being ignored? I was registering a heads-up/complaint about systemic cherrypicking administrator abuse against myself and others (based on the selective topics he "intervenes" in, as well as his "unWikipedian" martinet attitude and subjective political biases of his intervention); it was more than a particular article issue, it was a Wikipedia personnel issue. You saying the issue around Will Beback's administration will be kept in mind, that's something positive on this dual issue though, though it can represent slippage. As you recommend, I will contact you once more if something like this happens, though I won't bother you otherwise. Peace. (And you have the best organization for your talk page that I have ever seen here, nice). --ReSearcher 16:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. What you describe is a user dispute, or a disagreement between two (or more) good-faith editors. These are unfortunately fairly frequent, and Wikipedia has developed a dispute resolution process to deal with such issues. The process describes various methods to deal with the dispute in a cascading order: civility, discussion, informal mediation, third-parties, survey, formal mediation, and in extreme cases arbitration. Your dispute seems to be in the discussion phase. Please see the process for more information. Thanks. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 16:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


Can you please explain what you are doing with SNI ? [1] This is an important entry, did you read the talk page ? Please FIRST restore the deletion, and THEN discuss with me what your opinion is. There is no violation of copyrights or whatever. This is very exasperating to me. Some Benon started this, without consulting first. Colignatus 14:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

On the talk page, you stated that "This page is based upon a translation of a review article, published by a peer reviewed Dutch Economic Weekly[...]". Because the Dutch Economic Weekly owns the copyright for the article, any translation made of that article is also copyright by the Dutch Economic Weekly. Even if you wrote the article, the copyright is most likely transferred to the DEW upon submittal. If you would like to contest my decision, please list the article at deletion review with your arguments. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 15:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I did so, on the deletion review with a reference to the argument on my talk page, but now there is another message to delete the page since it would contain only a link to wikinfo (which it doesn't). What now ??? Colignatus
If the process at deletion review is favourable, the original article can be restored. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause, but we do our best to protect the Foundation from possible legal problems. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 05:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocked from Editing

I would like to know why have been blocked from editing on Wikipedia? Byrdin2006 22:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Byrdin2006. You contacted me about being blocked, but didn't include the IP address mentioned on the edit denied page. To prevent vandals from circumventing blocks with new accounts, Wikipedia sometimes autoblocks usernames operating from IP addresses that have recently been blocked. However, it seems that you have edited other pages and are no longer blocked. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Last night, I could edit some pages, but not others. I am on a different computer at the moment and it is working fine. Byrdin2006 20:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
That means you are or were probably autoblocked; I've overridden the autoblock. If you're still blocked, please tell me the IP address specified in the edit permission denied text. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

IP talk pages

Category:IP talk pages for speedy deletion claims it is under CSD U2. I do not see any CSD U2. Please explain what it is and how the bot will empty the category. -- RHaworth 07:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

OK. I see it now and I agree with deletion of the criterion - deleting these pages does seem a waste of time. -- RHaworth 07:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I take it you found the discussion on the talk page, then. The category hasn't been updated, thanks for pointing that out. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 07:43, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


This should not have been placed at the admins noticeboard. Please explain your reasoning. Sam Spade 07:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello. You were the subject of a Vandalism in progress report last week. In investigating the report, I judged that I didn't know enough about the situation to make a fair judgement on whether or not intervention was necessary, and to what degree if so. I moved the alert to the Administrators' noticeboard, where you are invited to discuss the report with both involved and outside parties. I think that this is more fair to all parties involved, as everyone has a chance to present their arguments openly, and any response is open and known. This openness and discussion is not possible on Vandalism in progress. If you would like to comment on the alert itself (as opposed to my decision to move it), please do so at WP:AN#VIP_alert:_Sam_Spade. Feel free to contact me further if you have questions or comments. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Have you seen WP:AN#VIP_alert:_Sam_Spade recently? Have you looked @ the history of the article in question? It seems you took action where none was warranted based on a lack of information. I request that you look into such matters with a greater degree of rigour prior to placing them on the already cluttered WP:AN, a move which might appear provocative considering the matter has since cooled down considerably, and is now in mediation. Sam Spade 08:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I was not aware of the mediation case; I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. There being no discussion at this point, I'll remove it from the noticeboard. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm sorry if I came across as hostile, but I caught alot of flak over this from the users in question (which you saw) and it left a bad taste in my mouth. I merge obscure pages all the time, and if I waited to see if anyone wanted to discuss them (which 99X of 100 they don't) I'd forget to merge them entirely. Obviously I wouldn't merge a popular, active page w/o discussion, but something like: Kadochnikov's Systema being merged to systema... that still seems like an easy judgement call (altho I do of course respect the current consensus). Sam Spade 08:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

With a severe backlog, it's difficult to investigate every report as fully as the users deserve. Thank you for your patience. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:20, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. How do I respond without being hostile? First, the "mediation" (unofficial) is Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-25 Systema and should have been linked-to above. It was started after the VIP. The "history" mentioned will reveal Spade's discussionless "judgement call" mergers. The conversation in VIP had several history links demonstrating this. I'd say that this has concluded ([2]) but if Spade's cabal tries to act in any "official" capacity I'll have to re-request official help. -- Sy / (talk) 09:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I have no issue with people making merges without discussion (happens all the time), but I do take issue when people claim to have discussed it when they have obviously not. --KimvdLinde 10:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Jiminy christmas, havn't you seen Talk:Systema#merge? Sam Spade 11:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I have.--KimvdLinde 11:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Please don't use my discussion page for a discussion I'm not a part of. Thank you. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 12:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

False open proxy report

WashingtonWillie posted a false claim on the open proxy page that I am posting from an open proxy. It is not. WashingtonWillie is the person who keeps vandalizing the Railfan page with patent nonsense, also using several other names, and I have been removing the nonsense. You might want to check the talk page for railfan. Thanks The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 12:45, March 7, 2006.

We're aware of the potential for abuse; rest assured that we won't block any IP address as open or zombie until we investigate fully. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 13:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Template for misplaced report to VIP

I think I saw you use a template to notify people who had wrongly reported to VIP rather than AIV (You can't get much more obvious than your great big box thing, but it's still happening- hopefully the moves will help!). I was just wondering what the template was called so I can use it.

PS. I've also noticed that the help page needs updating, but might as well wait till after the page moves and give it a proper refresh then. Petros471 10:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

The template, created by lightdarkness, is {{AIV not VIP}}. I'll update the help page when we finish the renamings; thanks for pointing it out. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 12:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Whopper. I noticed you added an entry to Vandalism in Progress. That page is only for very specific cases, as described by the page's guidelines. Your alert would be better placed on Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), where it will usually be processed within minutes. Many alerts that are incorrectly placed on Vandalism in Progress are never dealt with, simply because they become old before an administrator gets to them. Thanks for your efforts. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 16:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I dont take vandals lightly. I hit them wher it hurts. A warning of getting blocked Whopper 22:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

No personal info infringement

Over at my talk page, has tried to guess my name (here). Without either confirming or denying that this is correct, I want to point out that this was an infringement of the 'No Personal Information' rule. I would like for this to be deleted permanently, if possible. Bucketsofg 16:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

The relevant revisions were deleted per your request. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 18:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Possible personal information

Hello Bucketsofg. Please note that I've removed the possible personal information from this page's history per your request. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 18:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


thanks for the quick deletion. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bucketsofg (talk • contribs) 18:08, March 11, 2006.

You're welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 18:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Requests and responses to editor actions

Template substitution

Hello Jedi6. When you use template tags on talk pages, it'd be much appreciated if you could substitute according to the guidelines at Wikipedia:Template substitution. Just add subst: to the tag; for example, {{subst:bv}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thanks. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 23:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me about that, I never knew! I'll start using it immediatly. Jedi6 23:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome, and thank you. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Help with Code

Hello there. I am trying to design a userbox (Yay! Another one!) for the Cleanup Taskforce. I've already got something fairly close made at User:Averykrouse/Cleanup but I can't figure out what the proper code is to link back to the desk on a userpage. What I need is for the "here" link to have the equivalent of User:EXAMPLE/Desk with example automatically being substituted for the username on the page in which it's used.

You seem to know wikicode, can you help me? Thanks in advance! --Avery W. Krouse 06:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

What you're looking for is the magic word {{PAGENAME}}, which on this page renders as Pathoschild/Archives/2006-03. I've editted the template appropriately; note that the instance on your user page works. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 07:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Cleanup Taskforce thanks you as well! (Or at least, I say it does. Oh well.) --Avery W. Krouse 07:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 07:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


Don't worry- there's nothing of controversy or ill-feelings in the following message, despite the ominous title. I'd like to thank you in your work in what has become Wikipedia:Userbox policy poll. I support the policy, but I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes to pass. In addition to thanking you, I had a couple of questions. Based on this policy proposal, which of the userboxes on my user page would have to be subst'ed or moved to userspace? (My guess is potentially the last 3 on my "Personal" section, though a couple may be borderline.) In the meantime, would it be detrimental at all for me to just subst: all these anyway? I use subst: all the time when doing vandal warnings, but I don't know the technical specs enough to know if this would screw up categorization (e.g.- for my Babel boxes). Anyway, thanks for all of your time, and keep up the good work! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 00:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. {{user uw}} and {{User mad}} would need be substituted, and probably {{User tuba-2}} as well. {{user Vandal Fighter}} is borderline, and could go either way. Substitution won't affect the categorisation in any way, although there's no need to substitute your other boxes if you don't want to. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 04:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Your userpage

I'd love to know what's going on in your mind right now, or maybe not... (originally refering to this version, but could apply to newer ones as well) Petros471 15:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Just toying with my sanity. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 15:57, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Can't wait to see the end result :) Petros471 16:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


There's no need to worry about the userboxes on my userpage anymore. I've built myself a batch of custom-modified boxes which won't be affected by template deletions. Best wishes. :) Metamagician3000 09:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Great. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 13:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Project schism

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Pathos, Guess I'm slow, I'm just getting winds of User:Pathoschild/Projects/Schism and it's work being done with WP:VIP. I have not read all of it yet. Buttttttt, I've got one question, is noe of the goals to do away with WP:AIV? I hope not, that page seems to be working very well. Thanks, xaosflux Talk/CVU 04:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Nope, quite the opposite. The changes are part of a major overhaul to streamline the process and eliminate overlap with AIV. ;) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 04:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Moving on to phase three?

Hey Pathos, I guess you're in bed now, but is there any particular reason for not moving onto phase 3? Or did you just need a break!? Petros471 09:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

To summarise our discussion on IRC, I think we need to update, expand, and streamline WP:CUV before we can move on to phase three. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 19:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

— and —

Hey, sorry about the mixup on {{unsigned}}, I had not seen WP:VP(T)'s entry on that... I should know, using IE at work, where my siggy doesn't even work right ><. Thanks Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 17:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Most users don't know that MediaWiki parses literal characters properly. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 17:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Would like you opinion on this please

Re: User talk: anon and deletions

rv - the warnings were removed by Pathoschild as very very old

you assertions that User:Pathoschild deleted those entries because they are very very old is mistaken for two reason:

1) they were repeatedly deleted by the anon himself 15 February 2006

2) they are not "very very old"--the last entry was 14 feb, 2006 and the deletions occured 8 days later on feb 22, 2006.

We have a repeated vandal which you are shielding. Deleting vandalism notices is considered vandalism. Travb 23:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

This diff shows that you are incorrect - Pathoschild removed the warnings. As this is an AOL IP, even a month-old warning is 100% irrelevant to whoever's computer has flitted through the IP at this point. I also don't appreciate the charge of vandalism; try to assume some good faith. (ESkog)(Talk) 23:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I am not calling you a vandal, just explaining policy in case you are not familar with it. My mistake, you are correct, I am sorry Pathoschild did delete those warnings this time. I have followed this particular aol vandal for two months, and was just in the process of writing up a vandalism in progress because this user deleted all the messages on three AOL anon talk pages.
I will talk to User:Pathoschild about his edits, and if I can archive those warnings. I find if ironic that User:Pathoschild did what the vandal attempted to do not 7 days before 15 February 2006
--delete all of the warning entries.Travb 23:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: User talk: anon and deletions
Can I archive those warning messages? Could I restore some of the warnings from at least Jan 2006? Can you site policy in your response please.
Looking forward to your response.Travb 23:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your straightforwardness. AOL rapidly rotates IP addresses assigned to its users, so that a message addressed to one user is often recieved by a different user. AOL users are typically assigned a new talk page at intervals of less than fifteen minutes. The result of this problem is that legitimate users may check their talk page and be confused or aggravated by a large number of warnings that they had nothing to do with. This is the subject of many complaints emailed to the Foundation, and has a noticeably negative effect on the opinions of legitimate users operating from AOL. To mitigate this, I regularly clear warnings older than a few days from AOL talk pages.
I recognize that the reasoning for this may not be apparent to many users. However, please consult before reverting established users and administrators, as they usually have valid reasons for their actions. I'll add an explanation to the page we linked to in our edit summaries to help prevent any future confusion. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 23:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your time. Appreciate your hard work.Travb 00:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Just to butt in on this: whilst I'm well aware that AOL IPs to usually rapidly change, I recently saw a case were an AOL IP had kept the same one for much longer (as evidenced by article contributions and comments made to editors). Maybe this was an ADSL customer, I don't know. All I'm saying is don't automatically delete old comments off the talk page, possibly create a simple one sub-page archive for them and/or consider leaving them on for more than a few days. Petros471 17:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I have never known an AOL user to maintain a constant address. Perhaps the page was mislabelled as within the AOL ranges? If not, we'll need to find out why certain AOL users aren't reassigned IP addresses. Confusion and aggravation over old warnings on AOL talk pages is so common we have a specific form email response explaining the issue. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 18:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying (your talk page must have dropped off the bottom of my watchlist). The AOL IP I was referring to was (talkcontribs). Looking at Contributions/ you can see edits to the same article over the course of a day (13th) and a return to that article on the 15th. This indicates the same person has use of that IP with a certain level of consistency. However it is still clearly a shared IP as indicated by "06:26, 14 March 2006 Jimfbleak unblocked (contribs) (me)" in the block log. It is correctly tagged as AOL. Petros471 09:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

tl and cl templates

PLEASE stop substing these templates! They were deliberately listed at Wikipedia:Template substitution as "Do not substitute" because substitution causes lots of problems with them in a number of situations - particularly with the stuib-sorting wikiproject, which uses them all the time. I don't know why, but someone must have moved them from "Do not substitute" to "Substitute" without checking the original debate relating to them. It's getting annoying having to keep roll back your bot's work! Grutness...wha? 05:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I've paused the bot, and will later resume without the tl templates. Note that the matter was rediscussed at length at "{{tl}}". Note that my bot is deliberately editing talk pages only. It will have no effect on project pages, such as the WikiProject page. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 05:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

please stop pathosbot from changing {{tl}}, {{cl}} and their variants! they arent meant to be substed and are causing a lot of ehadaches for the stub sorters! BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 00:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Check your email

I got news for you! --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Wait you dont have an email. I want to keep this thing private. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
buh? o.O // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


Wow Pathoschild, I never knew you were a Wikipedia Admin. I don't know if you still remember me.. its been a while since we talked. -Tcwd | Talk 22:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's been a while. Hi. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject on open proxies

Hey there, I'm interested in helping. What needs doing? · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 21:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

At the moment, the most pressing issue is recent expansion; we're now on four wikis with a fifth expected soon. This causes problems in keeping them synchronised, and makes it harder to block proxies on every participating project. We're trying to partially resolve that problem by centralising most of the WikiProject on the Meta-Wiki, but we're encountering other growing pains there.
There are a few ways you can help. If you have some basic knowledge about open and zombie proxies, you can get access to the WikiProject scanner and verify proxies. if you have an account on the English Wikisource, Wikinews, Wiktionary, or MetaWiki, you can help with the understaffed projects there. If you have some experience with design (or creativity), you might help us fix the table on the MetaWiki: although its contents are wider than the page in most monitor resolutions, the table does not extend beyond the page and the contents overlap.
If none of that interests you, remember that new tasks will come up as we go along. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 21:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Some Help

Hi there, I would like to run a bot, but before I send in a request, I would like to know more about them, how they work, etc. Please can you help me? Thanks for your time. P.S. You might want to consider archiving your talk page. Dessydes 01:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Most bots are written in python and use the existing pywikipedia framework to interface with wikis. You can find out a lot about how they work by studying those two subjects and looking through the list of bots. If you have any particular questions, feel free to ask. :) // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 02:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


Moved from User:Pathoschild/Projects/Style guide


I just noticed you were recommending using sentance style titles. I really think Headline is appropriate here as the titles corespond to actual works. I believe books are always written in headline style generaly. Of mice and men looks really strange to me.--BirgitteSB 20:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I added an exception for original capitalisation. The 'sentence form' guideline is particularly aimed at titles like "Presidential radio address of November 2003 (George W. Bush)", which should not be "Presidential Radio Address...". // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 19:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


I feel we should be giving this some priority, since so much in WS hangs on sensible implementation of rules like these. I shall be very happy to take part. It seems to me what we are looking for are simple rules an editor should apply when working on a text, eg, if the text has numbered references and notes, then he/she should know how to do them in WS. Page numbering might be required for reference to the printed page amd also as an anchor for indexing in non-fiction titles. Its akin to a style guide used by publishers which is not only about grammar and spelling but also the presentation of MS and 'house style'.

Otherwise we are going to get all kinds of variations on the use of templates for headers and the like, and worse, editors concocting DIY new ones. Is there anything you would particularly like me to get on with? Kind regards. Apwoolrich 15:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

If you have some idea how to implement page numbering and from which source, feel free. I see there's already a template to do so, but it's far more complex than it needs to be. A new {{page}} template containing <span id="page#">page#</span> should work fine for this. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 19:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Page numbering - I have retrieved the following from the Scriptorium Archive for January 2006. What is needed is a method like the present ref/note system of coding a text and its index to be able to jump back and forth between the index entry and the relevant page. This should be simple where a document has not been split into chapters but it gets complicated where each chapter is a different document. Or will your system of naming sections with the Title/ Chap 1/ etc make this possible? Kind regards Apwoolrich 08:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Page numbering template

I just added a page numbering template {{Page|x}}. With the following example:


resulting in User talk:Pathoschild/Archives/2006-03.

It's short, sweet, and easy to put into a document. It also adds an effective anchor in-page named Page_#, so one can link to a given page number by saying [[#Page_5]] (for example). To wit: try this link. -- ChristianEdwardGruber 05:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Heh heh... the above example won't really usefully work on this page, because this note is already at the bottom of the page. If the page number reference were earlier, it would help. Right now I've only got one document using it, the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá. An example would be like this: Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá#Page_13.
I'm hoping to have a nice page-number-index, sort of like an alternate TOC, since page numbers are sort of orthogonal to topic, if you're looking up references by page number. Unfortunately, the whole lack of a good solid for loop rather prevents it. The foreach stuff and the loop2 templates and such are nice, but are limited to 150 pages, and so there's no easy way to specify a {{Page Index|1|245}} template. It's more work than it's worth to setup such a page-number-table by hand, just to save someone from using ctrl-f on the browser to find "p. 176". Sigh... I'll keep digging, maybe there's a way. -- ChristianEdwardGruber 05:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
If this could be worked on it would be a really useful addition to WS, IMHO, since it would make possible the inclusion of proper indexes to non-fiction texts. Project Gutenberg seems to ignore index pages, but they would be easy enough to scan and add in on WS. Apwoolrich 08:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

This could be a help to WS! Especially if we are scanning in encyclopedias, dictionaries, etc., or any work that has an index. This allows us to actually make those indices meaningful. And best yet, these templates aren't conspicuous, so you can still read the work and not be distracted by the page templates.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 17:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I thought too. The problem is with arbitrary ranges in loop structures in the MediaWiki software. First-class support in media wiki for the quivalent to the old-school:
 for (pageno=$start, pageno < $end, increment($pageno)) { [[#Page_{{$pageno}}|{{$pageno}}]] ) 
or something like that would be sweet. It would allow for very very simple indexes to be expressed simply, but more complex ones could be built for documents that had ranges of different kinds of pages (i-iv,1-245,A.1-B.5 for example).
As it stands currently, I think that static, pre-fab large indexes will be necessary to get this effect. -- ChristianEdwardGruber 19:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
You could always file a bug report if you want it that feature to be added to the software. That would give you the feature you wanted. I'm afraid I don't know much about scripting, so I couldn't even begin to comment on whether it's feasible or not, but Brion or another developer would know.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I urge that Brion is approached. If it can be done it would be well worth it. There are a number of biographical texts I wish to get on Wikisource that would be greatly enhanced by such a feature. Apwoolrich 19:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
w:User:AzaToth has a really nice codebase under consultation at MetaWiki. It doesn't have loop structures, but it does have properly formulated conditionals and comparators. This is half of the situation, but it's a mediawiki software patch. I think the above loop structures would need to be implemented in the php files, or it would drag out performance. I added the wikipedia Template:Foreach (and related), and created Template:Page index as an example. The problem with that approach is that it lists pages up to 1000, but any given document may not have that many pages. Proper comparators and conditionals would very much help, since each call to Template:Page_link could made conditional in a wrapper template. Ultimately, first-tier support for loop flow-control stuff would be much better, and probably be less of a drag on the server. -- ChristianEdwardGruber 21:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Author Page sub-sections

On the Author page section you state: "In the case of very prolific and authors who wrote works of various types, sub-sections—using <h3> markers—should be used to simplify locating a particular work." Some simplification or clarifying link would be useful for those, like me, who have no idea what a <h3> marker is, does or how to use it. AllanHainey 14:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I've rewritten that line to advocate the use of wikimarkup instead. It now reads, "In the case of very prolific and authors who wrote works of various types, sub-sections—using third-level headings—should be used to simplify locating a particular work." Is this better? // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 21:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Grand. AllanHainey 13:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Heading point number 2

I've got a question with point number 2 under the "Heading" section. Could an example be given when/how a third-level header would be used to separate stanzas? I can't picture what is being described here. We've got a template {{stanzabreak}} that adds stanzas to the text.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 22:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Changed accordingly. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 05:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Wow, I'm tired...I think I proposed a change which wasn't exactly appropriate for the topic under discussion. I read the "i.e. to separate stanzas" and went right to how poetry is separated. However, what's being talked about is something more general than just poetry; it needs to apply to any (or most) situation.
I think the problem is that I still don't understand what is being described here. Why would we separate something which has no "discrete sections or headings in the original text"? It seems like just a blank line should do the trick. After all, if it's not in the text, then we should probably not be adding it anyway. Or, would this be for us to provide a sort of "meta-division" where we explain the what is about to follow (like in the Zodiac Killer letters)?—Zhaladshar (Talk) 05:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Quite honestly, I don't even remember what the situation being described is. If there's a more general application, I think it could be clarified later. -.-; // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 13:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Moved from s:User:Pathoschild/Projects/Deletion policy

Support I think this proposal much better reflects the realities of Wikisource than the current Wikisource:Deletion policy. --BirgitteSB 18:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Moved from s:User:Pathoschild/Projects/Blocking policy


All thus looks fine to me. Its good to have it so clearly codified. Apwoolrich 19:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Very well-written. If it is based on a parallel text (perhaps at Wikipedia) then we should keep a link to it. Dovi 11:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)