Archive

Old versions archived at:

• User talk:John Fader/archive1

User:John fader

He's been permanently blocked. RickK 23:54, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Are you the only admin who actually does anything about vandalism? I see lots of people on WP:RFA saying they will, but not one heck of a lot of action thereafter. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:58, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed one of his bits of vandalism and traced him back to the source. If this happens again, you can always report it on WP:AN/I. RickK 05:18, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

False accusations of vandalism by REX

Why does REX feel he can yell 'vandalism" when faced with an edit which he doesn't happen personally to agree with, but has been made with good intent and a large amount of justification? This seems to me to be contrary to the spirit of cooperation and respect for others' views which Wikipedia expects. See England 25/3/05 --Aroberts 14:24, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

REX, I've reminded Aroberts of the 3RR, and you might like to be careful there yourself. It's a somewhat untested issue whether an edit that's at variance with clear consensus (as Aroberts' edits appear to be) constitutes "simple vandalism". If Aroberts restores the edit again, I'd hope you'd leave reverting to someone else, just to be safe. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 15:08, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi John, thank you for your advice. I was aware of the 3RR, but it is nice to know that I am being supported. REX 20:21, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert of vandalism on my Talk page. Guettarda 18:10, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Firefox

Hey, John, how does tabbing work? Or, how do I make it work? Another question: I'm really stymied with Firefox's Bookmarks. I have to scan through a long list of bookmarks to find the ones I want, instead of just using my most frequently-visited one. I have a lot of favorites.  ;) You can reply on my email address, giantsrick13@yahoo.com, if you want to reply. Thanks. RickK 09:52, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

DYK split

I like the idea. But with the servers being so slow at the moment, I prefer to wait a bit longer. I'll do it tomorrow. Besides it gives others the time to weigh in. Be patient a little bit more :) - Mgm|^(talk) 21:48, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Sure, there's no hurry at all. Making a nontrivial structural change when one can't properly check (or trust) what links here would be madness. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 21:51, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Speyside

That was quick! I figured that if it was a blank redirect it was "fair game". Never heard of Speyside in Scotland until now. I have no problem with moving the page, but I would think a disambiguation page would be more appropriate, rather than a straight redirect (it would make rather strange reading to place the text For the town in Tobago see: Speyside, Trinidad and Tobago on a page called Strathspey, Scotland, not so? Anyway, I'll move the page. Guettarda 23:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Frankly, the Scottish article should really be Speyside,as that's the name by which it's most commonly known (I'm not proposing to change that, however, as I guess it has the name it does for symmetry with other Scottish regional articles). Speyside (heck, who calls it Strathspey) is one of the major regions for production of scotch whisky (and they get called "speysides" or "speyside malts" (can't say I care for the stuff). Anyway, I guess a disambig seems like a fair solution. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:27, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I read the articles that linked to Speyside as I fixed the redirects. I wouldn't have a problem with the Scottish town having first dibs on the name, I was just going by the fact that it was a redirect. I also wondered why it wasn't at Strathspey (rather than Strathspey, Scotland) - never heard of the dance either. Anyway, I did that. Now I have to find out what a "speyside malt" tastes like (getting good Scotch in the middle of Oklahoma is likely to be a challenge). Guettarda 23:40, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Strathspey isn't a town, it's a moderate (for the UK) sized valley; "strath" is Scots Gaelic for "valley of". I'd forgotten about the dance. A speyside malt tastes like a fairly conventional quality whisky. If you want something more unusual, try a Laphroaig (from Islay) which tastes eerily like smoke and mouthwash (expensive mouthwash). -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:59, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bay rum

I just reverted your edit; see Talk:Bay rum. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 13:14, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Ideally it would have a better stub category, but I don't think there's a "personal care" or "toiletries" stub ;) -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 13:19, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism help

The Porcellian Club has been attacked again. I suspect it is by a Harvard IP. The article was deleted twice by a Harvard IP on hierarchypedia. Don't seem to be able to roll the article back here. --Hierarchypedia 17:08, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wikifun

You can use Wikipedia:Wikifun/Round 7 which has the correct links. I'm trying to sort it out. Grue 14:16, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Well, the main page seems to work too, at least if you purge the cache for it. Also, when you answer a question, provide wikilinks to articles that helped you to find the answers. So far both of your answers are incorrect, but you may try again. Grue 14:36, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Survival

Yah, have glanced over Wikibooksness on your advice. So the best method is to pour info in Wikibooks and then skim for 'Pedia? Okay. You're right - the best thing about Wiki is you can inform now, organise later. I've left a note at the 'book site; right now I have work to do (waah). Your offer of help is gratefully heard, understood, and acknowledged.

That's my suggestion, but just my opinion. Wikibooks is a bit easier as there's less of a strict house editorial style, so you can braindump there more easily. I've seen too many contributors get disheartened when they braindump on the encyclopedia and find their contribution gets nominated for deletion because it doesn't match the style and content expected of an encyclopedia article. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 13:16, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Queen of Prussia & the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

It is certainly safe to say that "Princess Victoria, Queen of Prussia" refers to Princess Victoria, Princess Royal, as there was no other Princess Victoria who became Queen of Prussia. The Saxe-Coburg and Gotha case is a little more complicated; however, Alfred did die in 1900, and was the first Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to be born into the British Royal Family—so it would be he whom Edward VII commemorated. -- Emsworth 23:40, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

I have & I will. We'll get the vandal. Rlquall 11:38, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

hi

Renato

I agree that 'vanity' is used very peculiarly (and sometimes hurtfully) on Wikipedia. I've tried to think of a snappy alternative, but have so far failed. Your idea would involve judging whether or not we have genuine vanity, Wikipedia-vanity, or new-user mistake, and that's often not easy. The wording of the template isn't actually that bad:

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article [[{{{1}}}]] may not be well-known enough to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. By starting an account or logging in, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects.

it's just the template's name (and the way articles are referred to in discussions, especially VfDs) that's the problem. My apologies to Renato if I caused him offence. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:30, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Accidental deletion at Current events

Hmmm... I dunno how I did that .... Weird ... Anyway, I have restored the missing item. Thank you for pointing that out to me. Happy editing. -- PFHLai 22:05, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)

Cleanin' up

Thanks for your responses to my questions at the Help Desk. Most helpful, especially because you've given me additional confidence to just try stuff out; if it doesn't work "correctly" I can always revert myself with a big "whoops" in the edit summary. I'm not ususally such a stickler for procedure; must've had too much coffee that day or something. . . . Soundguy99 15:22, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)