User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 9

From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection

Jump to: navigation, search

<older newer>

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page.
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Contents

You're nominated

I hope that's OK... we started to talk about it on IRC but then got distracted. You really should have this tool. --SB_Johnny | PA! 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Game Maker book

Hey Mike the artical is legitimate, it just isn't very big, will add to it in weekend, but no time now, busy times 'round x-mas. Also to reply can you send to my talk, so that it shows up without me having to add this page to my watchlist.Beaver 05:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Template removed – Mike.lifeguard | talk 05:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Links only page

Hi Mike,

Just to let you know that I have finished deleting the "links only pages" associated with Exam 70-536, the "candidates for speedy deletions" page will be more quiet in the upcoming days :-) Regards --Jacques 21:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It's good to get those cleared out though.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 23:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

copyvio notice?

Mike,

User talk:Claurel mentioned to me that he'd received a copyvio notice with your signature for a page he'd recently created. Just so you know, we're in the process of migrating a Celestia documentation Web page originally written by Harald Schmidt into the Celestia Wikibook. This is being done with Harald's permission. He's no longer involved with Celestia and the page is woefully out of date. ...Selden 22:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine. Thanks for letting me know.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 23:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Other evident flaws?

Hi Mike
I have finished my first series of interventions on Microsoft_Certified_Technology_Specialist/Exam_70-536 (deleted link only pages, shorten paragraph header, added short introduction, etc.) Two questions from here:

  • Could you take a look at the module to see if there are any other apparent flaws?
  • Tell me if a future renaming of the pages would invalidate outside links pointing to them?

Thanks in advance --Jacques 05:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Short reply now; ask again later if you want more detail.
When you move a page (be sure to use the move tab), a redirect is automatically created at the old location, which points to the new location. If the old location (ie where it is now) has redirects pointing to it, those need to be updated so they point to the new location. Otherwise, you will have a redirect pointing to a redirect pointing to a redirect (and the MediaWiki software won't do both redirects - you'll get stuck). Sequences like that get caught periodically at Special:Doubleredirects, but it's better to avoid them in the first place.
In essence you need to check "what links here" after moving, and fix the double redirects if any exist. For the most part, moving pages is safe (despite the warning that moving pages can be disruptive or whatever it says). Always move the talk page along with the module (there's a checkbox to bring it along automatically, no need to do a separate move)
That turned out to not be very short :P  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 05:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Answer to second question is very clear, thanks. I unsderstand you're very busy and don't have time for the first one. No problem. --Jacques 13:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Moving a book to Strategy Wiki

You suggested I move my book to strategywiki. How do I go about doing so? Connor.rosen 05:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

StrategyWiki seems to have Special:Import enabled. You'll want to find an administrator at that wiki, and ask them to import the pages. They may have a page where such requests are listed. Once that's done, please come back to Wikibooks, and add {{delete|transwikied to StrategyWiki}} so we can delete it once the content has been moved. Thanks!  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 06:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Intuitive template?

The down arrows on the featured books template don't seem to be intuitive to me. In fact, when I first came across this template in Featured Books I didnt notice them and wondered where the detailed write ups had gone. Consider a new user who has no idea that there might be write ups accessed by the down arrows, they will click on the headings and get the library catalogue. Having got one result they might not then suspect that the down arrows also have a different function. RobinH 10:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

He probably considers the template intuitive now, because I changed the behavior so that anywhere within the titlebox (besides the links) can be clicked now to expand/collapse the boxes, and when rolled over the titlebox changes color and shows a tooltip that says "show contents" or "hide contents". --darklama 16:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I also removed the links, which made the behaviour slightly non-intuitive; the links are no inside the template body, and link to Subject: pages instead.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 04:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

 ??

This doesn't seem to be on Books but looks interesting from a Commons perspective. Might be useful here too to someone? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 11:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I posted a note about this extension already at WB:TECH. Thanks for the heads-up herby! --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

CompactTOCs (en.wp)

W:Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 27#CompactTOCs merge and rename closed in favor of the merge. Thanks for volunteering to help; I honestly haven't run AWB in almost a year, so it would probably be best if someone more currently versed in its behavior fired it up. My immediate take its that replacing CompactTOC2 (the original one) would be the first step, so that CompactTOC8 can take its place, then all the others can be changed to refer to (the new) CompactTOC2. I suppose an admin will need to be involved in that transition, since the original will need to be deleted and TOC8 moved over it. I imagine that the closing admin would do that when asked. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 05:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi, the image which I was warned would be deleted should be deleted because I made a mistake with it and didn't realize it.

Done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 12:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

copyright heads up

Hey Mike, User:‎James Fogal posted a lot of stuff (which I just marked) which is direct copyvios, I'd warn him about it but to be honest I'm not sure what template to use, do you know which one is typically used to warn people against this? Hope you're doing well. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 05:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I usually do {{subst:nothanks|Page|~~~~}} for the first, and if there's a bunch more, you can use {{subst:User:Mike.lifeguard/Copyvio|type|sig=~~~~}} where type = text, image or nothing (to select the language most appropriate; the page shows you the output in each case). I may move that to the template namespace, but you're welcome to use it regardless. Thanks for catching those.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 12:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Import blues

Just an observation: I find import tends to work a lot better between 4 and 6 AM EST, probably due to low server loads that time of day. --SB_Johnny | PA! 13:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? I'm waking up that early to import! :P I don't think it would matter for w:Inflation anyways; it's massive. I did figure out that it works (a bit) better if you import the top revision, then try the rest. Not sure why though... I wonder what the problem is, and whether if can be fixed easily.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 13:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Huh?

Why have you added a "welcome to wikibooks" thing to me? Thanks but uhm.. I've been here since at least 2006 (cant remember when I started) so it seems a bit late? Just giving you feedback. Hmm. Cheers! Nesnad (talk) 17:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. You were doing good work, but had a redlinked talk page, so I assumed you were new. My bad!  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


Thanks

Thanks for your continued surveillance of SE Wikibooks. The last couple incidents of vandalism were cleaned up almost instantly. --Ezra Katz (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, well we monitor simple.books in IRC, and stewards are generally available.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 01:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Response

Just responded to your question on my talk page in case you did not have a watch on it. -- Jacques (talk) (email) 16:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I do, but thanks for the heads-up. It's Done  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 16:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you mean:

Wikibookians? Heh, that's a funny word. Wikibookians. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha

Right then. About my edits, maybe the User:Jimbo_Wales comment was not great, but everything else was.

oh and Wikibookians heh

oh and I request you answer on my talk page --67.142.130.38 (talk) 01:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Geology Bookshelf, deletion

05:30, 13 November 2007 Mike.lifeguard (Talk | contribs) deleted "Geology bookshelf" ‎(content was: '{query}BOOK LIST:== 1. The Geology of Indonesia ==')

I don't understand why you deleted this. The wikibook The Geology of Indonesia is pretty good but it is hard to access without a geology bookshelf. --98.199.206.122 (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Well a bookshelf with one book on it really doesn't help anyone do anything. The Geology of Indonesia should be listed at Wikibooks:Natural sciences bookshelf#Earth sciences, which I have done.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 15:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for my late reply

First, my comments were directed to the nice box you put on the page that said 'contributors' instead of 'Wikibookians' (which, is still, as funny as last night). I think you really worked hard to make a nice centered box, complete with a nice little stop sign, which, as you seem to be of great importance, is also at the top of this page.

My IP has changed, so I apologize that you can't see said stop sign.

  • I think you tried really hard.

As usual, I still say the User:Jimbo_Wales comment was mis-guided, but as you are indeed so important perhaps you could delete that page anyway. it didn't/doesn't really help anyone. Or be bold (or italic) and just merge it to whatever it's supposed to be merged to.

Yeah.

Oh, and wikibookians. Heh. --67.142.130.31 (talk) 01:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mike, You know that awkward feeling you get when you make a joke in a crowded room, and nobody laughs but you? Man, that's awkward, and even a little pathetic. I don;t know what brought that up, and I'm sorry to interrupt. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 01:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

POLT

Hello Mike,

I am a GA of Dr. Bonk's POLT Wikibook website, http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Practice_of_Learning_Theories. Several times, I uploaded a bookcover image that Dr. Bonk personally created for this website. But it seems like you deleted the image whenever I uploaded. Is there something wrong with the information that I provided for uploading the image? What can I do for solving this problem? The image is created by Dr. BOnk and he wants to use it in his Wikibook. Please let me know what I am supposed to do. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jsnaree (talk • contribs) 19:17, December 13, 2007.

When you first uploaded it, you claimed it was your own work. If that's not the case then you can claim fair use, though we prefer that the image be freely licensed. Please provide a source (ie URL) for the image so we can verify who own the copyright and use {{information}} to provide the requested information regarding the image. Thanks.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 19:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Template ? Wikibooks cannot accept copyrighted content

"but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted works borrowed from either websites or printed material, or works which use an unacceptable license."

"but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted works borrowed from either websites or printed material, or works which use an unacceptable license without proper authorization."

I know it is generic and intended to be minimal, but can you consider in adding just 3 words more and provide a link to how to proceed in getting authorization from the righholders. This can lead not only to a better understanding but in automatically increase the chance on promoting Wikibooks (if the user does fell that the content is important enough to seek authorization). I would be bold and add it my self but I don't think you are using a template. --Panic (talk) 02:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Your wording would not be correct, but I will change it to make this clear.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
The template in question is {{Nothanks}}. I believe the wording is clear, correct, and the next sentence links to an explanatory page. I'm not going to change it, but if you like, you can suggest precise changes on the talk page (as the template is widely used, and is expected not to suddenly change).  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Done Template_talk:Nothanks. If you have time, I will ask you to examine the wording and if I changed the intention of the text. --Panic (talk) 02:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser

Your Checkuser flag is now active, you're already listed on meta:CheckUser, would you please subscribe to checkuser-l, email checkuser-l-owner@wikipedia.org so that the listadmins know you're allowed on the mailing list (the list may contain confidential information), and also contact an op for access to #wikimedia-checkuser. Thank you, --M/ 09:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on your selection. Please do not hesitate to call on any of your fellow Checkusers for advice or help if we can be of assistance in any way. The community is very helpful and the mailing list is a great resource. I am on the hook to try to put together a FAQ so if you have any questions that ought to be in it please ask them there so I can harvest them :) ++Lar: t/c 13:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mike, I'm not even a member of the #wikimedia-checkuser page myself (didnt know it existed), so I'll find somebody to contact and put in both our names for it. Congrats! --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 14:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to all three of you!  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 16:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia content

When using Wikipedia content a simple acknowledge from the source suffices (that was the way we did things before we could import the history logs), the history log is of course a boon, but from Wikipedia it is not really a necessity to conform with our (mutual) GFDL license. This has to do on how rights over contributions are attributed and can be claimed on Wikipedia. --Panic (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand you.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I was attempting to explain that your assertion here User_talk:AKCaveman may not be exact. --Panic (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It was incorrect, though not in the way you assert. The history is available from wapedia, I just didn't see it at first. The import from enwiki failed; a link to the history has been placed on the associated talk page, which satisfies the GFDL. Is there something else?  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
What I was attempting to say is that the history log is not a requirement to the use of content from Wikipedia, a simple acknowledge from where the content came from (Wikipedia) does suffice. That was the way we imported material from there before we could import the history logs. --Panic (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
No; a copy-and-paste transwiki would have been sufficient - the entire history is needed, which is why having Special:Import enabled was such a big deal. Unfortunately it doesn't always work; when it doesn't we still have to bring across the edit history manually. See meta for details.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I'll reformulate this since I don't think you are understanding what I'm stating. If attribution is given to Wikipedia, the requirement to use traswiki is secondary (not a legal requirement to conform to the GFDL we use), but of course if possible it should be performed since it preserves more information. I also referred that prior to the possibility of transwiki the first option was the only one available. Personally and regarding Wikibooks it is my opinion that doing the transwiki without giving acknowledgment to Wikipedia on specific books should not be done especially since the history information is highly volatile and hard to port to other mediums. --Panic (talk) 18:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Clock recovery

Howdy, the author has done some large updates to w:Clock recovery. Could you reimport it over to Transwiki:Clock recovery? Someday I need to start pruning the wikipedia article, but would like to capture this as one page before doing so. Thank you. Mrand (talk) 22:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Transwiki updated  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 22:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Commons:Graphic Lab School

Hello, the Commons:Commons:Graphic_Lab_School/Images_to_improve made the work asked, you are welcome to pick it up ;) 140.122.97.6 (talk) 12:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I've passed that along.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 14:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Moving book to Strategy Wiki?

For some reason, I'm not able to secure an account on StrategyWiki, which is required to import a page. Is it possible to post/add/import content without an account? Connor.rosen (talk) 23:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I assume you're welcome to contribute there without an account, though I'm not sure why you wouldn't be able to register one. You might ask an administrator at strategywiki about that. They do have import enabled, so you can ask an admin there to move the content over in full compliance with the GFDL. Hope this helps.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hum

A drop down reason for qr-em deletions? Just a thought - cheers --Herby talk thyme 08:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we had one for a while; I think it got lost in the shuffle. Seems like people are leaving the (hideous) default reason, which is just a quote of the old content. I'll put something together. Good thinking.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 17:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

thnx

Thanks for leaving me that message,it really helped me.--1bookfan (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

POLT book cover

Hello Mike,

I am a GA of Dr. Bonk's POLT Wikibook website, http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Practice_of_Learning_Theories. As I explained before, Dr. Bonk personally hired a graphic artist for the POLT bookcover for this Wikibook, so he owns the book cover image. I think I already provided enough information of the license for this several times when I uploaded the image file. Please let me know if I did something wrong. And is there any way to post it on his Wikibook, except proving free license for it? Please let me know if you want to contact Dr. Bonk in person for this issue. In fact, he wants to let you know his phone number and email address. I think it would not be a good idea to provide his contact information here.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.56.193.69 (talk • contribs) 19:07, December 21, 2007.

As I said, it was initially claimed that the uploader was the artist. If that were the case, then we wouldn't accept a fair use claim on the image - it would have to be used under a free license. Since that's not the case, a fair use claim is fine (though we'd still prefer a free license instead). I'll restore the image in a few minutes if not already done. If you'd like to provide contact information privately, you can email me.  – Mike.lifeguard | talk 20:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Thanks all, it's very appreciated. You're taking so much time to show me how to use the thing that I though that some general clean-up work would be appropriate. I'll return to my .NET things for the next few days though. -- Jacques (talk) (email) 23:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive_9"
Personal tools