User talk:Tim Pierce/Archive/2009

YOU WILL NOT SILENCE THE TRUTH.

"Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Suicide intervention, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tim Pierce (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)"

My comments were perfectly constructive, you intellectual pygmy. SUICIDE INTERVENTION IS A VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.131.217 (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Date tags on list of oil spills

Hi. I'm the one who inserted the invisible tags on List_of_oil_spills the other day. The reason behind the edit is, with the page in its current form (i.e. after your revert), you can't get the table to sort according to date correctly. Workaround for this is:

1. Insert date tags
2. Modify each date to follow Wikipedia's built-in date standard

I wanted to go for no.2, but the month name will be shortened to 3 letters (e.g. 16 Apr 2007 for April 16th). I think it's more readable in its current form, so that's why I opted for no.1. So what do you think? By the way, I referred to help:Sorting while doing that.

(But really, I personally prefer no. 2 as it makes the markup more readable and saves bandwidth. Then again, I'm a bandwidth conservation fetish ;) )

Syock (talk) 23:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:NYRepresentatives

Please see notice of proposed technical fix at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_April_6#Template:NYRepresentatives.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

photocatbot - template

Hello. Your bot is changing most reqphoto's I've been adding. Do you know where and when the change was decided upon? The new template would be slightly longer to type in, and thus less convenient.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! There has been discussion at Template talk:Reqphotoin in support of deleting {{reqphotoin}} in favor of {{reqphoto}}, and the original author of the {{reqphotoin}} template posted to my talk page to agree that {{reqphotoin}} should be deprecated.

I'm sorry that typing {{reqphoto|in=...}} is less convenient. The advantage of {{reqphoto}} is that it permits categorizing an article under not just its location but also its subject matter (e.g. {{reqphoto|cats}}). The bot adds these category tags wherever it can, to make sure they get seen by more editors. Thanks for your interest! Tim Pierce (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Please make the change, it would mean a lot less typing for others, like myself, adding subjects as well as location to photo requests so that more people monitoring specific topic can see it and get it addressed (which is the point). Traveler100 (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Re:your comment at the date linking poll

Saw your comment here. I just wanted to let you know that there is a way to make dates work in sortable tables. See {{dts}}. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I had seen the {{dts}} sorting before but sort of thought it seemed awfully kludgey. Now in retrospect it's probably no worse than anything else I'd come up with. Tim Pierce (talk) 20:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Templates and the holding cell

I have reverted your last additions to the template holding cell. The TfDs you linked to were not closed. You may want to mark the related templates as WP:CSD#T3 instead.--Rockfang (talk) 03:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Am I supposed to do something to call for closing the discussion? It's been eleven days since I listed these templates for deletion -- well more than the five days described at Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Deletion_discussion -- and there have been no objections to deleting them. This is the part of the deletion process that I don't understand: whether it's now my responsibility to move the process forward, or if I just have to wait. Tim Pierce (talk) 04:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

An admin will close the discussion. If the admin closes the discussion as delete, then they will most likely delete the templates as well. Since it appears the templates are not currently used in articles, you could mark the templates with Template:Db-t3. That might get them deleted faster. At long as they aren't used in any articles.--Rockfang (talk) 04:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

PhotoCatBot code modification request

I just went through Category:Articles which may no longer need images, checking a few US places, and was surprised to see that the bot is currently assuming that many cities don't need photos because they have maps with certain names: see Biggs, California for an example. Could you perhaps modify it so that files including "Incorporated and Unincorporated areas" are treated as maps? Many US states have maps like the Biggs map for all their municipalities, and virtually all maps of this sort are "COUNTYNAME County STATENAME Incorporated and Unincorporated areas COMMUNITYNAME Highlighted". Nyttend (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a mistake. At another editor's suggestion, I modified the bot to ignore any SVG images, as those are usually used for maps or diagrams rather than illustrations. It's not perfect, but it will ignore the Biggs map in this case. Unfortunately, you may come across more locations the bot tagged before I fixed this. :-( Tim Pierce (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, just yesterday I removed the bot's opinion from Talk:Alburgh (town), Vermont, which has a map but no pictures, but today it's back. Could you perhaps tell it not to restore the tag for at least a certain period of time after it's been removed? Nyttend (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

It's already waiting at least six months before revisiting an article. I know that code is working, too, because I've stopped and restarted the bot several times and watched it skip articles it just edited. I'll double-check to see if it's slipping up on that for some reason -- please let me know if you see it happen again. Tim Pierce (talk) 00:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks (Aquascaping)

Thank you very much for your help with the "of" parameter in the photo request tag at Talk:Aquascaping. That page is a sort of pet project of mine, and I appreciate the assistance. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad it helped! {{reqphoto}} has become sort of a pet project of mine. :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 00:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

stop the photobot

could you please stop the photobot and respond to questions at its Talk page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doncram (talk • contribs) 16:30, April 20, 2009

Done. Tim Pierce (talk) 21:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I came here to ask you to modify the bot for NRHP-related pages :-) Nice pictures! Are they all NRHP? Nyttend (talk) 01:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! No, they're not quite all NRHP, but almost all of them were for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Massachusetts. It just happens that most of those articles are NRHP sites. :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 02:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Warren's Gore caption change, by the way; I copied from another infobox (I remembered that there was a town of a certain name, and typed it in, not remembering where in the state it was) and, as you see, failed to change all the data :-) Nyttend (talk) 02:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It happens all the time :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 02:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pausing, and thanks for discussing over at wt:NRHP. I've probably been over-critical, and I don't want to hold you up unduly. I'll say this over at wt:NRHP, too, given an opportunity. doncram (talk) 04:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries, but thanks for saying so. Besides, it gave me an opportunity to uncover and fix the bug that caused the bot sometimes to revisit an article that it shouldn't. Tim Pierce (talk) 04:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

how to

I though this page was needed :- Wikipedia:Requesting an image or media file. Would appricate your input. Traveler100 (talk) 17:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: TinEye

Ah, I didn't realise one existed over at Commons — Splarka wrote this one for me (it wasn't ported). As for the downsizing, perhaps it was simply an agreement with TinEye to avoid unneeded bandwidth use by reducing dimensions pre-comparison. My JS knowledge is basic at best, so maybe consolidating the scripts should be left up to you and he (if he is up for it, of course). :) — neuro^(talk) 13:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The thumbing reduces the bandwidth needs both for wikimedia and for Tineye. I asked Tineye by email and they said that a size greater than 300px wouldn't be adding more information (they get enough information with 300px). Platonides (talk) 20:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

That's just what I needed to know -- thank you very much! Tim Pierce (talk) 23:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Denmead Entry

Thank you for the advice to stimulate discussion with other editors concerning my edit of the Denmead article.

Christopher

Aconcernedresident (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Warsaw Pact Invasion of Czechoslovakia

I apologise for reverting the bot so abruptly, I was under the impression that the bot already added that tag and it was removed previously, but I had it mixed up with the Prague Spring article (which does have the "of" parameter). I believe that was is specifically being requested is a picture of the invasion itself (of which there is only one picture). Thanks. The Dominator^Talk_Edits 22:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

No apology necessary, I just wanted to make sure that any outstanding image requests are clearly documented so that other editors know what you're looking for. :-) Thanks! Tim Pierce (talk) 04:07, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your photo!

Thanks for uploading the wonderful photo of the candlelight vigil for George Tiller. It's so rare to see photos of that sort on Wikipedia. I wish I could have been there. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 03:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, and I'm glad I was able to get a picture that was good enough to contribute. I wish I had gotten a better picture of the vigil itself, but you do what you can. :-) See also http://www.flickr.com/photos/qwrrty/3586974701/. Tim Pierce (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

S1L3NC3

Just to say - your speedy deletion of the S1L3NC3 page - it would make sense if you did not know who he was - being American - you probably haven't a clue who Derren Brown or even Paul Daniels are. It is similar to your Phenomenon series. As with the Arctic Monkeys - you seem to be abrupt to delete things if YOU haven't heard of them. Now the Arctic Monkeys are one of the biggest bands in the UK. Show something doesn't it. Just my 2 cents. Deadferrets —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deadferrets (talk • contribs) 08:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's guidelines are pretty clear about what makes an entertainer sufficiently notable for an encyclopedia article. The articles on Derren Brown and Paul Daniels make their notability clear. Your article on S1L3NC3 didn't. If you post a new article that meets the notability guidelines for entertainers, that would be fine. Tim Pierce (talk) 14:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy deletion tag: Second Glance (film)

Hello Twp, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I removed the speedy deletion tag from Second Glance (film)- because: No such criterion: the reason given is not a valid criterion for speedy deletion. Use WP:PROD or WP:AFD instead. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions, please let me know. decltype (talk) 10:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Hudson Street School

Thanks for noting this — there's no county border issue involved, since all MA municipalities are in only one county. I'm going to move the school to the Middlesex County list. Nyttend (talk) 21:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Foundation

Hello Twp, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Foundation has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary '(contest prod - the BBC source and many others found by Google News searches demonstrate notability)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Ernesto Lomasti rough translation

Hi twp, it may be bad english but it's not a translation from an existing text :D Xpai (talk) 11:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry! I knew it might not be a translation from an existing text, but {{rough translation}} was the closest template I could find to what I thought needed to be done. :-) Thanks for your work! Tim Pierce (talk) 13:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Ridge A

On September 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ridge A, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 05:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

can you stop interfering with my wikipedia page?

I am trying to stop inaccurate information from being posted on my page and you are interfering. Please kindly stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phantomtruth (talk • contribs) 13:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Nicole Couch page is in an unacceptable condition. Comments like "she inevitably began skipping all her classes so she could stalk Paul Gilbert" and "currently is the process of constructing the website www.phantomblue.net, cleaning her house and waxing her bikini line" are plainly vandalism. Honestly, considering the comments you have added to the page, I am extremely doubtful that you are Nicole Couch. Even if you are, you should not be editing an article about yourself. It would help a lot if you would post to Talk:Nicole Couch to describe what your concerns are. Tim Pierce (talk) 13:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, other than sending you a copy of my driver's liscense and SS card, guess I can not prove that I am Nicole Couch and why would I not want to edit my own page and why should I not be able to do so. I do not think the editing I have done is vandalism, it is the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phantomtruth (talk • contribs) 14:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Editing articles about yourself or about a group that you're involved with is strongly discouraged because it contributes to a conflict of interest -- the goal of Wikipedia is to provide verifiable information, as accurate as possible, whether positive or negative, from a neutral point of view. When people edit articles about themselves they are often tempted to add self-promotional content, or remove information they find embarrassing, or something else that conflicts with Wikipedia's mission. Please do post your concerns at Talk:Nicole Couch so we can find a way to resolve them. Tim Pierce (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

While I fully respect the work you do for wikipedia and understand why you would discourage users from editing their own wikipedia page - I highly doubt you will ever find any editing done on my part that is self-promotional - my purpose in editing is to achieve the exact opposite - all information on the Nicole Couch wikipedia article is 100% accurate and I would like to keep it that way. Honestly, I have checked the other articles you address with editing and my page is so irrelevant - could you please this one time, let it go. Kind Regards, Nicole Couch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phantomtruth (talk • contribs) 14:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The information you have added to the Nicole Couch article may be accurate, but at the very least it is not verifiable, which is an absolute requirement for any biography of a living person. I'm sympathetic to your concerns, but you must bring them to the Talk:Nicole Couch page so that they can be discussed with other editors for consensus. Tim Pierce (talk) 18:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Chinese origin of playing cards

You're right Tim, the article should be focused on the article writen by Mr. Wilkinson and not the origin of playing cards. There's already an entry on the Chinese origin of playing cards on the Playing cards article, so merging both would most probably be considered a redundancy. You, see, I for one never tag articles, instead I go look for reliable sources myself and fix that which I presently consider inacurate or badly writen. Could you help me re-edit that article Tim ? C'mon, I know you could do that ! Krenakarore (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I tried. I searched for any critical response or study of the Wilkinson essay and could not find much. That is why I tagged the article as one that needs work, in the hope that someone who is a better scholar of the history of games may be able to help. Tim Pierce (talk) 18:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

NeXTSTEP

Are you aware that you just moved the talk page but not the actual article? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:31, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Bleah. I used the "move" tab at the top of the page and expected it to move both the article and talk page. The article cannot be renamed over a redirect without administrator help - I will submit a request. Thanks for alerting me. Tim Pierce (talk) 20:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Glance Magazine

Just a friendly note on Glance Magazine. I declined the speedy because it's not fundamentally an advert (although the mission statement section could certainly go). However, notability is not at all established, so feel free to prod or take to AfD. Cheers! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion/Redirection of Article "NuVinci Continuously Variable Planetary Transmission"

I disagree with your deletion/redirection of the above-referenced page. This technology is unique and growing quickly in both the number of available applications and its market acceptance. It has won five major international design awards. The article is well-referenced and contains a dozen secondary sources that attest to its relevance. It is factual and contains both positive and negative information about the technology. It is much more neutral and factual than the article "Rohloff Speedhub", which has been flagged as advertising but not removed. I believe the article can be improved, but it certainly does not deserve to be deleted and turned into a two sentence redirect inside the Continuously Variable Transmission article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samstone1972 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The article as written is, unfortunately, little more than a thinly disguised press release from NuVinci, and I have not found much in the way of reliable independent sources to back it up. Most of the references to the NuVinci transmission I have found on the net are advertisements, blog posts, and other NuVinci press releases. The article can be improved, but only by editing it down to its bare bones. I will see what I can do with it. Tim Pierce (talk) 14:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samstone1972 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Allen House

The Allen House is located on the south campus of Umass Lowell. It's in the middle of the campus, but it can be seen from the river. In a way, you just helped to explain why the building was in the middle of a concrete jungle, so thanks a lot. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)