Jump to content

User talk:Alison

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sswonk (talk | contribs) at 04:09, 22 November 2011 (you know what, never mind, I'll email it). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
2004 Entire year  
2005 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2006 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan • Jun Jul • Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Entire year  
2013 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2014 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep • Dec  
2015 Entire year  
2016 Entire year  
2017 Entire year  
2018 Entire year  
2019 Entire year  
2020 Entire year  
2021 Entire year  
2022 Entire year  
2023 Entire year  
2024 Entire year  
Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

User:hfordsa - Oct 21, 2011

many thanks

Thanks for fixing my page Alison. Muchos kudos :) User:Charles evesson - June 26, 2011.

important question

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T or M/Sign mine 02:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want me to tell you them, that's fine. I'll just go and ask someone else then. Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) T or M/Sign mine 17:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please do. I'm really busy & not really here these days - Alison ❤ 05:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ding! (twice a few days ago)

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SlimVirgin, Poetlister

Discussion here: [1] Mindbunny (talk) 16:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BUSYYYYY

Sorry everyone - I'm way too busy in RL right now to have much time on-line, least of all for WP stuff. Any messages posted here, unless related to Oversight, will likely go ignored. Really sorry but I'm just too busy with bill-paying kinda work - Alison ❤ 23:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious IP sock

look at this.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's just a certain imageboard. I protected your user talk. --Bsadowski1 05:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) LOL - /b/tards. Just ignore - Alison ❤ 05:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:ABrownG

Thanks. I was thinking I should do that now but you beat me to it. I've blocked him until he agrees to start discussing some of the problems. Hopefully he'll see sense and can be a constructive editor. I don't need to be consulted about any unblock, maybe I should put that on his talk page. Dougweller (talk) 08:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Terri Schiavo case

Hi Alison, I'm confused as to why you made this reversion. Thanks! NYyankees51 (talk) 19:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those edits were made by a banned editor who is obsessed with the Schiavo case. The IP, an open proxy, is now blocked - Alison ❤ 19:57, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Rowell

Hello!

Just to let you know I Rev/Del'd those revisions to Peter Rowell again. Not wanting to start a wheel war or anything but when I checked back on Google it became clear that the editor had just copied and pasted from various newspapers. So I Rev/Del'd them as a copyright violation, feel free to undo them if you disagree. To be honest, kinda feel sorry for Peter Rowell, doesn't sound like he's had a very good 2011 so far :(. Hope you're well :)--5 albert square (talk) 22:34, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Yeah, I'm good with that. If they're copyvios, then they need to go. And yeah - BLPs suck :/ - Alison ❤ 22:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well Courcelles has protected it now anyway. I wasn't going to at the moment as only one editor was adding the unreferenced stuff but I reckon it's probably for the best, I just checked his name on Twitter and he's getting called all sorts on there :/--5 albert square (talk) 23:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AN discussion

You may be interested in this AN discussion. Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:41, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing a protected page

Banned user ItsLassieTime

Loose ends = Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everything Tastes Better with Bacon = can this be closed? Can the article page Everything Tastes Better with Bacon be semi-protected for at least one month, as it has been disrupted by 2 different socks of the banned user? — Cirt (talk) 08:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re User:TheKohser userpage

"...why not?" Well, perhaps because it is protected and you are supposed to get consensus for potentially controversial edits? Since this is an ArbCom block, any changes should really need to go through them. I have reverted to the status quo, as at the point when I protected this page from the compulsive edit warring that was occuring. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help me and remove the "speedy deletion tag" from article?

Hey! How are you, Alison? I need your help, can you please remove the "speedy deletion tag" from the Polyneon (artist) article? Thank you! Jamesallen2 (talk) 09:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there. I've replied on your talk page and have moved your article to somewhere you can rescue your work/improve on it - Alison ❤ 09:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you Alison for responding! But if you don't mind, can you personally tell me how can I make the article better for approval, so it will never be "speedy deleted"? To me the article is properly sourced, referenced, and etc. Jamesallen2 (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can I get back to you in the morning? It's 3am here and I need to sleep :) Your article will be fine in your userspace for a good while - don't worry! - Alison ❤ 10:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks! Jamesallen2 (talk) 10:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Morning Alison! Please let me know if this article is ready to be put live on Wikipedia! I have added some more references and etc! Thank you! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jamesallen2/Polyneon_(artist)

Non-Free rationale for File:Juggler.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Juggler.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Socks!

This kitten needs a home...

Thank you for being here for me ever since I've been here on Wikipedia. You've taught me a lot and I've grown.

- Dwayne was here! ♫ 03:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hey..

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Tvoz/talk 04:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

my page is missing

~new msg~

hi, basically a random person decided to tag my page (most likely out of the goodness of this person's heart) after all this time when nobody else did. so i just need my resource page that was on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rm2dance -- it doesn't seem to be on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Rm2dance and i don't know if it's supposed to? basically i just need my page, i guess you can just post it back on my page and then i can move it out of wikipedia. thanks~


~original msg -- (just forget everything -- too much trouble)~

my page is missing out of nowhere and there's nothing in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Rm2dance and i can't check the history of my page? is that how it's supposed to be?

hmm.. so my page is missing randomly just today with no problems after all this time. then a random person decides to tag it because the person felt like it? is there like mediation or something for something like this?

but basically if it's too complicated or too much trouble, just nevermind, im just wondering if they have mediation

also, was there any way to protect my page? just wondering

hmm.. it says "If all else fails, try another wiki" so i'll just do that -- where is my resource page? the history for it that is. so the page took years to build up so im glad a random person decided to tag it... it's fine. i'll just put it on wikia for the time being. wikia doesn't have any problems and wikipedia also... but it depends on the random people.. well.... rm2dance (talk)

Iolym

Thanks for this, I just wondered; is possible to know what his/her other accounts are/were? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 12:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alison (talk · contribs), thanks for your involvement at Hamsa. Could you summon your prowess to penetrate the identity of Rakim the Goat (talk · contribs)? Thanks.—Biosketch (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SPI help?

Mr. 71.56.23.123 blocked

What'd he do this time? His last few edits looked basically okay. - Denimadept (talk) 15:59, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alison. I'm also involved with the user(s) at 71.56.23.123, and while I agree that the argument we had on the IP talk page was abusive and the edits to Virtual Console were unconstructive, I'd like to know what your reasoning was for the 1-year block following the user's last three edits. Would you shed some light on the history, in case I missed something important? :) Thanks! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As it turns out, the IP user in question is back and continuing the language argument under a different IP address. I'm tired of arguing with him. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 21:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E-Mail

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--Michaeldsuarez (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E-Mail

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Zac Δ talk 20:34, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Benson (cartoonist)

Hello,

Any chance you might consider renewing the semi-protection on this article? It has been the subject of nasty defamatory vandalism both historically and recently. Your previous protection expired in June. During the AFD the community pretty much promised the article subject that we would keep it semi-protected in future, and it does look like the article is still an attractive target for vandals...

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 03:29, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Gate Bridge pic

We're really trying to keep a lid on new pictures in this article, as there are a lot of such pictures. The link to Commons near the end of the article suffices for most. Do we need this picture in the article? Is she notable? Is she notable relative to the Bridge? - Denimadept (talk) 05:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • She's not notable herself, no. However, there are no bridge pictures in the article from the opening day, or anything earlier than the 21st century, from what I can see. It also illustrates the older steel pedestrian railing as it was then. Given that it's opening day, I'd consider the image historically significant, encyclopedic and highly relevant to the article. It's not exactly the average holiday-snap-from-Sausalito - Alison ❤ 05:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The very next picture in the article is an OGG of opening day. :-> - Denimadept (talk) 05:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, a movie! xD (which, coincidentally, doesn't want to play for me) - Alison ❤ 05:49, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose the movie might depend on your browser. OGG support works okay for me in FireFox, for instance, but I don't know if it might cause trouble elsewhere. Note that I didn't simply remove your image. I wanted to discuss it with you before I took it anywhere. - Denimadept (talk) 05:51, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's not working in Safari 5.1, but I kicked over to Firefox 6.0 and it is :) Silly Apple! Still, now that we've discussed it, I guess it's over to you for the next step, whatever that may be. Talk page RfC? I think I've stated a reasonable case for its inclusion here - Alison ❤ 06:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've brought it up. It's your posting, so I figured you might want to be aware of the issue, in case someone ELSE removes it. It's too borderline for me to just yank, IMHO.
There's an image I've been looking for, of the 1987 (50th anniversary) Pedestrian Day with the bridge deflecting under all the people, which I have not found in a while. I know it's in a particular book by Henry Petroski, and I asked him, but he doesn't know where he got it. I hope to find it in a reference in the book, but I've got to find the book first. :-/ - Denimadept (talk) 06:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

← Thanks, yep :) I'm here in the South Bay, as it happens, and I may know some people with personal pics of the event - similar to this one - I'll put the word out and see what comes up ;) - Alison ❤ 06:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lambon and Tar baby

Hello. Just an explanation to your question about why the reference to Rep. Lambon's usage of "tar baby" was reduced to a footnote on the tar baby entry. Over the last few years several politicians (e.g., Mitt Romney, John Kerry, etc.) have used the phrase, each time sparking a minor flurry of press notices. Were we to itemize every instance the page would eventually grow to incorporate a lengthy list not central to "tar baby" itself. To avoid this, we simply note that various politicians have employed the phrase to public censure, and include the citation so that the reader may track down each individual case should she wish. This could change, of course, should a future case prove remarkably notable (e.g., a candidate using it in a presidential debate, an instance in which a given usage created a media firestorm, a figure having to resign, etc.) Cheers. ThtrWrtr (talk) 17:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IRC!

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that we have created an IRC channel for women and Wikipedia: called #wikimedia-gendergap. I hope you'll join us. (And if you need any IRC help, just let me know!) See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 22:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for userfication of deleted article

Nevermind, all is well :) --Jdechambeau (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

article visibility

Stephen Richards (author) has recently been deleted, but I would like to view the article and possibly improve it. I believe that it is a viable article. He is the founder of Mirage Publishing and I would like all the edit history returned and the article made into a redirect to "Mirage Publishing" for now. I can then consider the article off-line. I have asked the deleting administrator, but he does not seem to understand my request. I am asking here having looked at the list of administrators who make articles visible and made a fairly random choice. Snowman (talk) 09:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok -  Erledigt - Alison ❤ 10:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ruslan Salei

Hi, Ali❤: I contacted Shootmaster 44 and explained what happened. He's cool. I have no dog in this fight, if that idiom is appropriate, i.e. meaning I have no interest or agenda or obsessions about ice hockey or conspiracy theories about airplane crashes. I never heard of any of these unfortunate young people before today. I was just trying to keep track of what was going on, but there's too much editing by new and unregistered users. I think some degree of page protection may be needed. Yours, [email protected] (talk) 19:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Email sent

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:38, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ding!

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Actually, I sent it a few days ago, just checking on it you, but no big deal. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check me, please

Hey Alison, at John Hearne (lawyer), I made an edit, and the system randomly decided to log me out in the middle of adding a category. After logging back in and making a null edit to claim the real edit, I redacted my IP address. Am I now supposed to request official oversight? Or is it ok for me just to do that? (Was it improper to do with my own edit?) LadyofShalott 02:12, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're likely to get a much faster result by emailing the oversighters or pinging one on IRC. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, it seems that one already saw it and nuked your IP. :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
yeah, me ;) I'm on my cell here! - Alison ❤ 02:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both! So is the difference that with just the admin revdel, other admins could still see it, but with oversight, no one can see it? (Forgive me if this is a dumb question; this is an area of WP workings I'm done little with.) LadyofShalott 02:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Alison, thank you for the reply. Part of the nature of this sort of thing is that it's hard/impossible to glance at past examples around the wiki and see which course of action has been taken, so thanks again for the feedback. Brammers (talk/c) 08:22, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For going above and beyond the call of duty with your use of checkuser, suppression, and administrator tools. Because your work is often behind the scene, everyone does not know how helpful that you are to the community. FloNight♥♥♥♥ 21:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello,sorry to disturb with a question as this is not something wich has to see with the wiki.en. And very sorry about my english too. I'm sysop on a little wiki and faced with an user who ist cutting article's text to put them on another page just to avoid other noticing his dids and to write them as he wants, destroying like that he page history. I was wondering wich would be done on a big wiki, knowing he is not at his first wrongdoing. --Kadwalan (talk) 16:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment on Talk:David Reimer

As a person who edits a lot of biographies, I'm curious as to how you feel Reimer is treated in his article as a whole. Would there be a difference if he were still alive? Thanks. Theinactivist (talk • contribs) 22:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Suppression of some of your comments

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at FleetCommand's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at Causa sui's talk page.
Message added 21:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

causa sui (talk) 21:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking a look at this please?

An editor has archived a section in the Harriet Harman talk page, see this diff. My view is that, if it clearly contravenes WP policy on BLP's it should be deleted, otherwise it should be restored. What do you think? Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Related discussion is on the article talkpage Talk:Harriet_Harman#Archiving this page. - No one has requested the discussion be deleted. Off2riorob (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've commented there now - Alison ❤ 02:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Alison. I am not involved in the actual argument and do not intend to be. I went to the page to help with a much simpler RfC but noticed that a large section of the talk page had been removed in the middle of what seemed to be a heated argument. Initially the reason given was that the argument had become stale but this was then changed to BLP issues. You know my views on genuine BLP issues but in this case it looked as though an editor was trying to improperly stop discussion on the talk page. If the talk breaches WP policy on BLP then it should be deleted, otherwise it should stand. I do not think there is any halfway house where material should be archived, but not deleted. I am not going to take any action myself but I will ask the person who removed it to restore it. This is just for your information, I am not asking you to take any further action or interest.
On a different subject, there is an editor who claims that medical details of Caster Semenya have been published in certain journals. I am still waiting for proof of this but, if it is confirmed, we may have to think carefully about whether any changes to the page are justified. Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

apostrophes

See your Irish talk page

Jcwf (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

If you have a moment, can you request that ToonIsALoon not to revert to his favored version of The Godfather Part III whilst this discussion and this discussion are both ongoing? I am really trying to get previously uninvolved editors to contribute to the discussion so that consensus can be reached. So far, it has been the same user and I reverting each other and talking past one another on the talk page. Someone has to intervene. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 02:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This has gone on long enough that my good faith has gone out the window. But, I take your point, and I am trying to settle this amicably. That is why I came to you rather than simply reverting for the umpteenth time. My hope is that something positive will come out of the discussion at the Film Project. Thanks for your help and good advice. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 03:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
I've just been going through most of your edits, and I'm impressed with your general demeanour as an expressed Wikipedian editor. You always seem to take advice well, and not get troubled. Well done! Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 22:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Please advise

re:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harriet_Harman#Archiving_this_page.

Alison, thank you so much for entering the discussion on how to move forward, however I need to make something extremely clear to you, the reason that the debate over PIE inclusion is that the user Off2riorob has practised blocking attempts at reaching consensus for eighteen months. We have four editors who wish to include neutrally and two that do not, they keep trying to throw the debate into the long grass even going to lengths such as deleted talk history out of sequence and renaming neutral-sounding sections, please consider helping us through this? I have all the sources necessary and am happy to make it neutral as possible and I have to ask are wiki BLP entries cv's or factual living biographies? I do not want to cause any harm but Harman's continued impact and presence over attempts to water down child sex legislation is extrememly pertinent. Twobells (talk) 17:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Hi Alison. Perhaps you're interested in this survey as well? (please revert it if you don't want this message on your user talk) Regards, Trijnstel (talk) 14:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey, Alison! I saw that you were an administrator here, so I was just wondering if you might be able to answer a question I had. The thing is, I'm an admin on a different wiki, and another admin on the same wiki posted a question to the rest of the admins asking if there was a URL that can be used to show any user their current number of edits on the wiki. On our wiki, there's a page called Special:Editcount that conveys that information (I don't think Wikipedia has a page like this though), so another admin advised him to use this URL: http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/Username. That URL would achieve the desired result, but one would have to constantly put the username of the specific user at the end of the URL when posting it on that user's talk page, so my goal was to come up with a way to avoid that; almost to create something you could post on any user's talk page without changing any part of it and still get the desired result. I came up with this: {{fullurl:Special:Editcount/{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}, this way, one could just post the coding on the talk page of the desired user and the returned URL would automatically direct the user to their respective edit count. This worked successfully for every other user whose talk page I tested the coding on (without saving the page, of course); the only problem is that the user he wanted to do this for has an "*" both at the beginning and the end of their username (the second asterisk isn't a problem, just the first), meaning that instead of being returned as:


http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/*User*


it gets returned as:


{{fullurl:Special:Editcount/

  • User*}}


and doesn't take anyone anywhere, because it's just the raw coding. So I was just wondering if you knew of any way to circumvent this problem (aside from just telling him to post "http://_________.com/Special:Editcount/*User*" on the user's talk page, which isn't the end of the world, but is, of course, what I was trying to get around in the first place), maybe by putting some other form of coding that I'm not aware of somewhere in the existing coding or something. Any light you may be able to shed on this problem would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

69.204.38.3 (talk) 22:53, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)
Just wondering, instead of >{{BASEPAGENAME}}, have you tried {{BASEPAGENAMEE}}? It's usually a more URL friendly formatting. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:08, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, already tried that, but it still didn't work... :/
69.204.38.3 (talk) 23:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at a complete loss on this one. I was hoping there would be something on mw:Help:Magic words oder mw:Manual:Magic words, but no :( I'll keep looking ... - Alison ❤ 23:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't test on this wiki, as the special page isn't available ... but you could try {{fullurl:Special:Editcount/{{anchorencode:{{BASEPAGENAMEE}}}}}}, and see if that formatting resolves the problem. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:59, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually able to find a solution that fixed the problem; just had to add {{urlencode:}} to the coding. Thank you both for your help and time.
69.204.38.3 (talk) 03:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please join a discussion

Please join a discussion ("Wikipedia and its relationship to the outside world") about medical ELs and related issues. You may want to follow the links provided to learn more if you are so inclined. Thank you in advance. Presto54 (talk) 07:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Developments in the Caster Semenya article

Alison, I notice you have not commented on recent statements in this article about the release of personal information in publicly available reliable sources. I do not think anyone is suggesting a tabloid style release of personal information but it looks to me as though release of this information is not prohibited by WP policy on BLPs.

I think it would be useful to discuss how the concerns of some editors about what might be though of as censorship of information could be addressed in a way that does not unduly invade Caster's privacy. Better to have a civil discussion now with editors who are supportive of maintaining privacy that to have an edit war later. Martin Hogbin (talk) 21:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, Martin, I need to step away from it, and Wikipedia in general right now. I can see the direction in which things are already going & I'll just end up getting pointlessly annoyed. And I've still not seen any reliable sources yet to support statements such as this; it's just crass. And when I see words like "censorship" being bandied around, I just roll my eyes. It's become a general epithet to be used when people don't get to write whatever they please, regardless of consequence - Alison ❤ 17:27, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with you about the statement you quote, it is completely unjustified. I do not think anyone is suggesting we write anything like that.
The point is that BLP policy says, 'We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation'. We now have very reliable sources that have published information about Caster so it would not be a violation of policy to include quite a lot of detail. In this case, I agree that we should try to protect Caster's privacy as far as possible and I believe that the other editors who have commented also agree with this principle.
I think we would be able to take a firmer line with editors who want to sensationalise the article if we can have a civil discussion on how we might explain some of the rather cryptic points made about the media furore without revealing too much detail about the subject herself. We all agree that she was treated disgracefully by all concerned but there is nothing we can do about that, except maybe show a little more clearly where the blame lies. Martin Hogbin (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection?

Hey, Allie, you seem to have accidentally fully protected your talk page. I've turned it down to semi, but feel free to revert me if you meant to do that for some reason. Courcelles 02:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! Sorry about that - I was on my cell!! :) - Alison ❤ 02:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Hamilton-Fairley‎

Ali, when you get a chance can you take a look at the most recent edits (you'll know them when you see them in the article's edit history) of the Hamilton-Fairley article, and tell me if I am mistaken regarding referring to an individual of major importance in the above article (but not the subject) as a "Conservative M.P." in the lede.

I do not get why two other editors, whom you know well, oppose this so vehemently, citing allegations which they refuse to insert in the MP's article themselves. I left a quite restrained query on the latter editor's talkpage citing encyclopaedic standards, to which he never responded, and which he either archived or deleted instantly. I left a second message on his talk page, indicating what I thought his real reason is, which I suspect is accurate as he simply had nothing to state.

After this I rv the article back to my last version. He then informed me I was in violation of WP:1RR and to rv my edit or he would report me. I am not sure if the Hamilton-Fairley article is even under the 1RR remit, but better safe than sorry. I know if/when I restore my editing after the 24 hour period is up, one of these two editors in question will simply rv it again, and so on, ad nauseum. Hence this message (sorry it's so convoluted). Any assistance or advice will be appreciated. [email protected] (talk) 15:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ali: the matter has apparently resolved itself. Thanks anyway for listening. [email protected] (talk) 03:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Middlesex (novel)#Intersex grammar

Hi Alison. As a frequent editor of Intersex and commenter at Talk:Intersex, would you be able to help at Talk:Middlesex (novel)#Intersex grammar? Thank you, Cunard (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interview for the 2011 Wikipedia Fundraiser

Hello Alison, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser here at the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign we're seeking out and interviewing active Wikipedians like yourself, in order to produce a broader and more representative range of "personal appeals" to run come November. If you'd like to participate in this project, please email me at amuszalskiwikimedia.org. Interviews are typically conducted by phone or Skype and take between 30-90 minutes. (Note: This invitation is open to any interested Wikipedian — If you're reading this, and would like to be interviewed as well, please contact me.) Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 20:40, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Alison! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Survey women on Wikipedia

A while ago (on 1 October to be exact) I gave you a link to a survey about women on Wikipedia. Here are the results of it. Regards, Trijnstel (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Email concerning privacy

Can you please check the Email I've sent you. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

same old, same old

A time ago you blocked a Grawp sock that was active on Hamsa..AFAIK that was my only (tiny!) interaction with him....for which I have been rewarded the last few days with promises - pr email- of being exterminated/killed, etc. etc.I have now switched off my email. There is a discussion here, which I wonder if you would like to look into? Some claim you must be an autoconfirmed user to send email to others...but the accounts which have emailed us have made no edits at all. Is this a bug? Is there someway to raise the threshold for sending email to other users? And why, oh why, should anyone have a legitimate need to send 50+ emails in 2 minutes to the same user? [2] The system looks like an open invitation for abuse, or am I missing something? I don´t know if any of this interests you at all, but any suggestions would be appreciated, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - it kinda looks like it may be a bug. I've emailed it to one of the internal CU/tech mailing lists for advice as it doesn't seem right at all. If it's any consolation (and it's not :/) you were amongst dozens of people to get them. Yours appear to have been from Jarlie/Grawp but the ones that Roland Rance was getting were likely from the Runtshit vandal. I see you've already switched off your email setting, but hold tight and we'll see what the more geeky folks have to say about it. - Alison ❤ 23:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC) (largely retired, BTW)[reply]
Ok, thanks a lot, I thought Roland had gotten emails from the same accounts as me: User:Prammac, User:Squadroncapitol, User:Nickovie. Oh, and I´m not loosing my sleep over this, it is just a tad inconvenient to have my email disabled. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging socks of (you-know-who)

I'm personally a supporter of tagging socks like Sparqs (talk · contribs) but others prefer to not do so and WP:DENY him instead. Jasper Deng (talk) 23:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cool either way. Just that I've been asked to look into it (see message above) otherwise I'd not have been arsed, y'know? It's not so much a case of WP:DENY as not really having the inclination to perform the mouse-clicks required. There's zero value-add to tagging them, really - Alison ❤ 23:11, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's the thing. But others might feel that he is using the sock categories' page counts for amusement, which is what I thought about when others deleted socks' userpages (w/ tags) with "WP:DENY" in the deletion summary.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Thenub314 (talk) 06:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

L Bacon

Louis Bacon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi Alison. As the previous protector of this article and I think you are aware of the legal case in London as regards wikipedia, with that in mind, would you consider some more ongoing semi protection as your previous has expired, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 23:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&oldid=461883551"