User talk:Cirt

AFD/T • T-7 • AFDO • AIV • RFUB • UAA • RFPP • PER • CSD • AB • FAR • FAC urgents • TFAR • Google Search Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update RfA candidate S O N S % Status Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Voorts 128 10 3 93 Open 21:06, 8 November 2024 3 days, 6 hours no report

Other neat portal ideas for longer term

• Longer term ideas to think about from other portals:

1. Events section, like: "On this day" e.g., Biography, Religion, United States; "Selected anniversaries" e.g., War; "Calendar" at Holidays. Interesting idea of "Month selected anniversaries", at Oregon.
2. Model intro with some rotating images, after Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro.
3. Revamp DYK sections w/ free-use images, model after Portal:Criminal justice and Portal:Oregon.
4. Portal palettes at User:RichardF/Palettes/Portals. Comparable color schemes can be developed from the various hue lists at User:RichardF/Palettes. Also see Portal:Box-header.
5. If there are a lot of categories, then categories section to 2 columns, like in Portal:Indiana.

   Also take some time to check out style/formatting at Portal:Indiana Cirt (talk)

Note to self

Citation model

The Simpsons (season 3)

Body text in-cite

<ref name="REFNAME">[[#LASTNAME|LASTNAME]], p. PAGENUMBER</ref>

References section

(reference template from WP:CIT)

*<cite id=LASTNAME>REFERENCE</cite>

Dispatch

Cirt, Awadewit suggested that you might be interested in writing a Signpost Dispatch article on Featured portals (the only area of featured content we haven't covered). Sample previous articles are at {{FCDW}}. We've covered:

• Featured content overview
• Peer review
• Did you know
• Featured lists
• Good articles
• Featured sounds
• Featured topics
• Images
• TFA
• And Featured articles many times: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-21/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-10-13/Dispatches

None of them start out looking like that: if an editor initially just chunks in some text, many others chip in to tweak it up to Signpost standards. For example, someone wrote this, which Karanacs, Royalbroil and I turned into this, so if you just chunk in some text as a start, others can help finish it off. Another example, I put in this outline, and Karanacs brought it up to this. Other editors have written almost complete and clean Dispatches without much need for other editing. If you're interested, please weigh in and coordinate at WT:FCDW In case you're interested, you could just begin sandboxing something at WP:FCDW/Portals and pop over to WT:FCDW to leave a note when you're ready for others to help out. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Will mull this over and most likely draft something up. Cirt (talk) 11:54, 18 November 2108 (UTC)

Razzies progress

• 15th Golden Raspberry Awards through 29th Golden Raspberry Awards = reformatting process done.
  • Note: Going to have to go back and model these after the modifications made subsequently to 29th Golden Raspberry Awards.
• 29th Golden Raspberry Awards - so far only one expanded with sourcing research. (WP:FL)
• Razzie Award for Worst New Star = reformatting process done, next to use Talk:Razzie Award for Worst Picture as model to reformat other pages in Category:Golden Raspberry Awards by category (with subsection breaks by decade)

Cirt (talk)

Looking for insight

Was the block of this ip a mistake? I'm not seeing a point, so I figure I must be missing something. If I didn't ask, I'd just miss a learning opportunity. Thanks. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 23:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

My mistake, unblocked. Thank you for pointing that out. Cirt (talk) 23:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Cirt, now I'm wondering what I'm missing about that ip. I spotted it when looking through recent changes, and it seems to me that this IP has *only* contributed spam. I can't ARV them for vandalism because the "appears to be a vandalism-only account" option is greyed out. I figure there must be some reason for this, though I can't imagine what. So, can you please tell me how I should handle this? Are we not to report vandalism (or whatever) if the option to do so for a given user is grayed out? Is there some other procedure in this case? Thanks! Hananekosan (talk) 12:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

You can't report IPs for VOA because they are not technically "accounts" and they generally cannot be blocked indefinitely. This is a Twinkle limitation, but you could report manually as VOA if you really wanted to, but it isn't really appropriate. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 13:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Got it, thanks to you both! Hananekosan (talk) 13:48, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Bill Dawes

Hello!

Would you mind restoring this article to my userspace, please? This actor easily passes WP:ENTERTAINER but the article lacked proper sourcing. It would make it much easier for me to tweak the existing info and source it properly rather than to re-write from scratch.

Thanks! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done, see User:Big Bird/Bill Dawes. Cirt (talk) 18:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

BeyondRelations

User is requesting unblock, a chance to change username and promising to edit in a non-promotional area of interest. Any comments? Daniel Case (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

"Diego Lucio Rapoport"

I have not been around since this article been marked for deletion and I have just started to develop and improve the article. What is this timing of yours to delete, now! --Webmaster6 (talk) 19:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Ian Halperin

Don't revert my changes without reason. WillOakland (talk) 03:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Removing a valid source from the article for no reason is vandalism. Cirt (talk) 03:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty article

Hi Cirt, I have been trying to add to the Shilpa Shetty article that she had a rhinoplasty early in her career. This is my source http://www.metro.co.uk/fame/article.html?in_article_id=41925&in_page_id=7. As an individual who made her start in modelling and is world famous due at least in part to her looks I believe this is pertinent information and is of interest to the reader. In addition as the article states she is not attempting to conceal this fact. There is a user intent on keeping this information off the page for what appear to be personal reasons. Please can you look into this. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.199.17 (talk) 02:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD on Andrew J Newman

Hi, I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew J Newman on the 3 September. Did you notice that User:NuclearWarfare had relisted it that same day diff? I was wondering if this was intentional or if you closed this AfD by mistake. Thanks in advance, Bonewah (talk) 12:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Let's see if the article could be improved, and perhaps AfD could be revisited at a later point in time. Cirt (talk) 16:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witch (etymology)

I don't understand why you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witch (etymology) as keep. The keep arguments were not grounded in policy; at best this should have been 'no consensus'. Powers ^T 14:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Can I also register my surprise at your closing of this debate - as far as I can see none of those saying "keep" explained how this was (a) more than a dictionary definition, (b) how it could be more without duplicating what is already at Witch and Wicca, and (c) why the section about the word and term "wicca" is at all relevant to the etymology of the word "witch". Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I happened to see this discussion. The article Witch (etymology) is surprisingly good for what it is and it has a ton of references, mostly having to do with the etymology. The only section that might appear to stress the parameters of the title is Witch (etymology)#Modern "Wicca". Even that is not an open-and-shut case, so the 'dictionary definition' argument doesn't seem very powerful here. I gather that LtPowers and Thryduulf aren't complaining about Cirt's count of the votes, but they are asserting that the voters did not understand policy. I'm not persuaded by that argument. Consider WP:DRV if you still think this closure was eccentric. EdJohnston (talk) 16:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

EdJohnston (talk · contribs) got it pretty much right with this above comment. Cirt (talk) 16:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Witch (etymology)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Witch (etymology). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Thryduulf (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the notice. Cirt (talk) 22:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Can I have rollback please?

Thanks --eric (mailbox) 05:55, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not too familiar with your contributions, and you seem a bit inactive and don't have a need for the tool. Perhaps instead you could request at WP:PERM? Cirt (talk) 05:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Help with an obvious sock

I see that you are actively administrating right now. 88.91.14.52 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is being very active today, and taking up a bunch of my time. WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-11233/Archive shows the detailed history, and the socking is extremely obvious: how many anonymous Norwegians are there that only edit articles about Jay Sean, a British rapper? I filed WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-11233 again, but that always runs slowly. A one-week block would help immensely. —Kww(talk) 15:37, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 15:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Potential Superpowers

Hi, we already discussed asking for protection and decided not too because the correct dispute resolution channels are being taken and the disruption has tailed off (admittedly since blocking the two offending IPs) can I suggest removing the block and the re-instating it if disruption flares up again? I'm not a huge fan of blocking, and especially if it's done in response to issues that are being/have been dealt with. Cheers, RaseaC (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC).

Let's see what discussion on the talk page brings in the next 24 hours. Cirt (talk) 18:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

True, how long are the IPs blocked for? Because the PP is for 24 hours, and if their block is the same all the PP is going to do is disrupt innocent IPs. RaseaC (talk) 18:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The IPs could change, and continue the disruption on the article. Cirt (talk) 18:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Landmark

George D. Chryssides' book Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements, ISBN 0-8108-4095-2, pp. 290-291, has an entry on "Self religions", although it acknowledges in that entry that "para-religions" and "therapy cults" are other terms that have been used to describe such entities, as well as the much broader "human potential movement". Maybe the first thing to do would be to make sure we have an article for at least one of these titles and include a link to that in whatever article exists. That article, whatever its name, would probably include a lot of the material relevant to a lot of these groups. By the way, others mentioned in that article include PSI World, PSI Mind Development, School of Economic Science, Lifespring, Insight, Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness, Actualizations, Exegesis, Self-Transformation, Samuri, Lifestream Seminars, the Living Game, isa, i am, and Life Training. John Carter (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's at least a start at Self religion. John Carter (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for San Jose Mercury News West Magazine

On September 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article San Jose Mercury News West Magazine, 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.

Staxringold _talk^contribs 23:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Forum shopping

Many thanks for your comments about this. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy Labor Day!

Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A Nobody^{My talk} 03:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:Leveque#September_2009

What do you think? Enigma^msg 15:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like he's threatening to use sockpuppets to evade his block. Enigma^msg 21:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Revisional Cosmetic Surgery close

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revisional Cosmetic Surgery as redirect, but then you deleted the article. Which close did you intend? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Cirt (talk) 15:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

crmmetrix

I have created a new account palomaben (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for crmmetrix (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who you blocked after counseling him regarding conflict of interest. Fred Talk 18:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I assume this individual (if it is an individual and not multiple people behind one account) will refrain from editing on their conflict of interest? Cirt (talk) 18:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully he's been innoculated, but there can always be a relapse, or clever unproductive behavior. Fred Talk 19:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I watch all unblocked and created accounts closely. See the top of my talk page. Fred Talk 19:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

List of Khatri Surnames

Hi Cirt, just curious, why did you delete the List of Khatri Surnames page? This was only requested by 1 or 2 people, but the page actually contains useful information not found on other pages. I am a Khatri by background, and those people who requested to have it moved are not of Khatri origin, so they make requests like this from time to time. Please let me know when you will be re-activating this page. Thanks.

--KhatriNYC (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Cirt, but the concensus was made by people who are not of Khatri origin even. So what right do they have to request to remove it if no harm is being done by keeping it there?

--KhatriNYC (talk) 14:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Ojocitzen

Am I missing something here? Why is this a username violation? (The bot reckoned it was similar to Goatse, which I can't see myself. I had to look up Goatse itself to find out why that might be considered a violation). —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 13:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Unblocked. Cirt (talk) 13:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Not to be too easy on vandals...

...but IMO the block on 166.205.5.19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) was over the top. If you look at the timestamp for my test1 warning, it was after the ip's last edit to Irony. Essentially, they didn't edit after my warning. ;) Syrthiss (talk) 13:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I did not block it. Cirt (talk) 13:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Lol oops, mea culpa. I saw the block notice and assumed...which I guess I know what that makes me. Syrthiss (talk) 13:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Unclear removal

So why was AIMMS removed (Sep 5, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/AIMMS, was AIMMS)? This is a software package used by many in the mathematical optimization field. Would appreciate if you just keep it in as it is referred to internally (like GAMS, CPLEX, AMPL, MPL etc.), see General_Algebraic_Modeling_System, CPLEX, AMPL_(programming_language), etc. or are you planning to delete all those as well. Information was/is very general and not commercially oriented. People in our field should be able to find all products in this field and find website representing the product as well (this is where an encyclopedia is for in my eyes). Seems odd to me that people seemingly unfamiliar with the field can just delete this info. Please place it back. Wikiquestions (talk) 22:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Re. Portal:Indonesia at WP:FPR

Hi there Cirt. Thanks for the note regarding the above portal. I've just moved back to uni and at the minute I'm stuck with a 3G mobile internet pen. Unfortunately the bandwidth and speed is shocking so it's a struggle to load things. As portal maintenance requires loading a large amount of pages I can't really work on the portal just now. My broadband gets installed on Monday and I'm going to make it my priority to work on the portal. It's entirely up to you - no problem if you want to demote it (it's in a very bad way at the minute) - if you do, I'll work on it and renominate it when I'm done - no big deal either way in my opinion. On a personal note, I hope you're well both here and in real life. Take care, Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Nickbatz block

Hello! I reviewed the unblock request made by User:Nickbatz, whom you indef blocked earlier this evening. I can agree that the editor deserved to be temporarily blocked for not paying heed to concerns raised about his ignoring the no original research requirements. However, I believe his action was an honest error by a very new editor who didn't read our rules and policies; I don't see this as deliberate vandalism and I felt an indef block was harsh. I approved the unblock request, with the request that the editor read up on Wikipedia policies regarding WP:RS. Thank you and be well. Pastor Theo (talk) 03:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)