Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:26, 27 August 2008

Ideally, please post new messages at the bottom. If you can't find something you recently posted, I might have moved it down there or it could have been archived if you posted it over 7 days ago. Cheers :)

Click here to start a new talk topic

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Regarding slakr: Why did my page get deleted? Please see Misplaced Pages:Why was my page deleted? first. I have no idea what you're talking about. What's vandalism? If you received a warning from me and you're not logged in, you might have gotten an old warning I sent to someone who shares your IP address. On the other hand, if you've made recent edits and received a recent warning message from me and you genuinely believe that it's not vandalism, don't fret-- simply drop me a message below, because I could have simply made a silly mistake. :) Regarding SineBot: Why does SineBot keep signing stuff I've already signed? All comments should have a signature that includes both a link to your user page (slakr) and a datestamp (05:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)) (per signatures - internal links). This is most easily generated by placing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your contributions, which makes something like "slakr 05:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)". If you have an interwiki-linked user page, consider either creating a user page on enwiki that redirects to your preferred home wiki or simply opting out of automatic signing. If you're still having problems after trying that, post a message below. Be sure to include diffs to make sure I can reference the problem. I don't want my comments signed by SineBot. How do I get it to ignore me or my talk page? Please use one of the opt-out methods listed on its user page. SineBot forgot to sign something it should have signed. Usually this happens because the bot isn't sure if it really should sign something, so it defaults to not signing it (e.g., in cases of complex edits). It does this to avoid being annoying. Other times, a comment might be made when the bot is down for maintenance, so the bot simply never sees it. SineBot signed something that it genuinely should not have signed. Please let me know-- especially if you think it's not a one-time thing. Be sure to include diffs to make sure I can reference the problem. Is SineBot's source code available? Not currently. I'm signing with four tildes (~~~~) but it's still saying I didn't! You likely enabled raw signatures. Open your preferences, click the "User profile" tab, make sure that "Treat the above as wiki markup" is NOT checked, and click Save; it should be fixed. If you have an interwiki-linked user page, consider either creating a user page on enwiki that redirects to your preferred home wiki or simply opting out of automatic signing.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Changing the Protection on the Feng Shui

Hello,

Can you please tell me why you have lifted the protection on the Feng Shui page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sedonafengshui (talk • contribs) 19:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC) --Sedonafengshui (talk) 20:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

It was originally protected due to an edit war, which has since seemed to have died down. Per our protection policy, the protection was removed. --slakr 20:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

The only reason the edit war stopped was because of the protection. If you read the discussion board you will see that there is no consensus on this page. Removing the protection without consensus will only lead to more problems. I would request that you review the discussion page and put this page back under protection until consensus is reached. Thank you. --216.19.43.241 (talk) 05:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)--Sedonafengshui (talk) 05:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to request that, but they'll probably tell you the same thing I have. --slakr 15:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Invisible Ink and Scantegrity II

Why did you remove the reference to Scantegrity II from Invisible_ink? AndersJohnson (talk) 02:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

It's original research (link was a primary source), spam (it fails verifiability through secondary/scholarly sources), and quite possibly a conflict of interest. Same goes for Scantegrity II, which was deleted per criteria for speedy deletion - G11 - blatant advertising. --slakr 04:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that the primary source was in fact reliable, being published in a peer-reviewed journal by highly reputable authors, and that the article was not interpretive. Another editor added a link to the missing article in End-to-end_auditable_voting_systems, so I felt there was a need. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndersJohnson (talk • contribs) 05:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

It appears to be a press release made to look like a journal article. If it isn't, however, simply cite the reference to the article in the journal. --slakr 05:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This thing is an academic project, and I don't see why pointing to copies of articles on the author's website counts as an advert. It even says "This paper will appear in the proceedings of USENIX/ACCURATE EVT 2008." As abstracts are meant to be advertisements for the paper I can see how you could have thought it was an advertisement, but how hard is it to google "Scantegrity USENIX"? Toshardin (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this work meets the self-published sources exclusion, see David Chaum, Ron Rivest, and Punchscan. It is obvious that these authors are experts in the field of Computer Science, not to mention it was never in violation to begin with. I still wish to know why posting a copy of a published work on your website counts as spam/self-sourcing/etc.. Could you undelete/give the text to the Scantegrity articles? I have the feeling five minutes of finding the original source links and changing the feel for some of the language would satisfy your objections.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toshardin (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

1. It was written like an advertisement (see also WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV).
2. You appear to have a conflict of interest.
3. One paper does not satisfy our notability criteria to have its own article. --slakr 14:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Re the advert, I guess you're talking about the article (which I haven't seen because it was deleted). Fair enough. I have found numerous references through a quick google search (IEEE, USENIX, RangeVoting.org, MSNBC, MIT Technology Review, NPR, etc). What is the minimum number of references required? I think the language can be changed, we can add these references, and you will be satisfied. I do not understand the COI (i've read the whole COI page twice now). Could you elaborate on why you believe I have a COI? I don't think we should remove reliable sources illustrating the practical use of a technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toshardin (talk • contribs) 14:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Re COI, I'm not aware of any plans to commercialize the system, I would not stand to gain from its adoption, and I have no personal relationship with the authors. Re advertising, I still don't see it (let alone blatant), but I guess that's subjective; I tried to pattern the article after Punchscan and ThreeBallot. I'll concede that notability is a possible concern for now, as the paper is less than a month old. AndersJohnson (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I propose that while we're waiting to establish the notability of Scantegrity II as a separate topic, we restore the original reference to it in Invisible_ink, complete with the original journal citation. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndersJohnson (talk • contribs) 21:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Which already happened, I just noticed. Doh! AndersJohnson (talk) 21:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Slakr, can you help me by pointing out a couple of biased statements in the deleted article? Thanks! AndersJohnson (talk) 17:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You know how a brochure reads? That's basically the tone of the whole article. One of the best examples is, "Because Scantegrity II differs from a traditional optical scan voting system only in the type of ink used and in the addition of optional steps, it retains the familiar integrity properties." In fact, that sentence, alone, basically sums up why it likely fails WP:N: it's best placed in a section of the main article— if it's to be included at all. --slakr 19:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I agree that this statement does not belong. Can you give me any actionable advice on how to neutralize the overall tone? I'm having some difficulty distinguishing the tone from that of Punchscan, for example. Thanks! AndersJohnson (talk) 23:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

Hi Slakr. Thank you for unblocking me. Why did the Block log shows that I was unblocked at 03:03:56 when I wasn't? --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 16:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The second block was an autoblock on your IP address, so while your normal block was removed, the autoblock (essentially, a second block automatically added by mediawiki) on your IP address was still in effect. --slakr 19:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and a Little Help

Just wanted to thank you for upping the protection level on RD Reynolds again but I seem to be having a problem of my own. Someone editing from http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/41.245.171.32 went and put a sock puppet thing on both my and http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:COOLRUNNER87 talk pages. It's one of the vandals from that page trying to get revenge or whatever, it's really stupid. I removed it from both of our pages but wasn't sure if that was ok or not. It's obvious that neither one of us are sock puppets of the guy who keeps doing the vandalism since we always revert it. Just thought I'd run this by you since you dealt with the first page. It really is pretty stupid all around. DX927 (talk) 19:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

That's ok. It's pretty obvious it was done in bad faith by the user, and no SSP case was opened. :P --slakr 19:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

User requesting unblock who is affected by your rangeblock

See User_talk:Florin92. He may have been hit by a rangeblock that you placed. You may want to comment on his User talk. I did not want to give him any advice without consulting you first. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

(un)Blocking of Opera Mini servers

Hi!

I work for Opera Software as system administrator for Opera Mini.

I understand you have blocked users from Opera Mini server IPs from editing Misplaced Pages due to abuse.

To address this issue, I've now had our IP ranges added to the XFF project (we were already forwarding the x-forwarded-for header).

The Opera Mini Demo application specifically mentioned in your block will have a unique IP in it's x-forwarded-for header, and can be permanently blacklisted. It's not intended for regular use, only as a test-drive of the product.

I have verified that the addresses are listed in http://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/trusted-xff.txt.

But still, I get blocked from some of our IPs, but not others. Are only parts or the ranges blocked, or are not all Misplaced Pages servers using the same configuration?

Please contact me (kronberg (at) opera.com) to resolve this as soon as possible, or direct me to someone who can help. Since these servers are not normal web proxies, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to go through the normal process for unblocking an open proxy.

Regards,

//Mats Operamk (talk) 18:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I'll drop you an email in a second, but I figured I'd reply here just in case. Since it looks like you've placed the demo on 195.189.142.176, and Ryulong has already blocked that one; and, on top of that, all of the XFF stuff is in place now, I've now unblocked 195.189.142.0/23 and 91.203.96.0/22. Those were the two ranges that I think I was originally able to proxy through using the demo. Anyway, thanks a million for your help, and keep up the great work. :) Cheers. =) --slakr 22:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Aleenf1

Hey slakr, can you please lock Aleenf1's profile because IP users vandalized his profile to avoid ruining.

I found the page history of his profile which they were a vandalism pages:
Old revision by 66.93.43.66
Old revision by 62.158.70.254
Old revision by Cptnrodent
Old revision by 76.185.91.79
Old revision by 212.23.162.37
Old revision by 154.20.148.225 (1)
Old revision by 154.20.148.225 (2)
Old revision by 154.20.148.225 (3)
Old revision by 64.231.1.124 (1)
Old revision by 64.231.1.124 (2)
Old revision by 71.107.129.219
Old revision by Paraside —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.96.110.167 (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to be excessive enough to warrant automatic semi protection for the time being, though the user is free to request it him/herself as per our protection policy. --slakr 02:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it declined to semi-protect Aleenf1's profile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.96.110.167 (talk) 07:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Keenyah Hill

Hi Slakr, Can you please lock the page of Keenyah Hill (America's Next Top Model, Cycle 4 third placer) for full-protection to recreate the article again. Which it was deleted back in November 2006. --ApprenticeFan (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot mis-sign

Just thought I'd let you know that Sinebot signed a message on an AFD vote I made, which had a date and a link to my userpage. Here is my signature:

— {{SUBST:User|Byeitical}}

Diff: — ] (] · ]) 17:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)