Archives

1: August–October 2008 2: November 2008 3: December 2008 4: January–February 2009 5: March–April 2009 6: May–July 2009 7: August–October 2009

Click here to leave me a message saying I'm great, or here to leave me a message saying I'm terrible.
Click here to leave me any other kind of message.
Please sign your message by typing ~~~~ after it.

Contents 1 Rjanag Arbitration 2 中式英語 3 Correct discussion link 4 Auto purge 5 Template:Zh 6 Unreferenced material and deletion 7 Zhbot 8 apostrophe-stuff 9 RFC/U and Admin discussion concerning you 10 Edit Warring 11 Running 12 DYK Queue 3 13 DYK for battlecruiser article??? 14 DYK 15 Not One Less 16 Bug? 17 Thank you! 18 不能使用图片 cannot use the image 19 Talkback 20 User:Juliancolton/Project 21 ZhBot and the lang template 22 Not One Less 23 Eva Peron article 24 Account 25 Birthday 26 Re:Academic Community Hall 27 Chinese news 28 Template:Quote 29 re: b-day 30 External editing 31 Note 32 Minority language place names in China 33 Thank you 34 Disruptive behaviors by User:Monkh Naran and others 35 User:Alefbe 36 Re: Mandarian 37 One-child policy 38 Rudolf Yanson 39 User talk:GraYoshi2x#Lamest edit warring 40 Hardest language 41 Chinese: {{{1}}} 42 Thank you 43 Uyghur language 44 为什麽我的留言被删除? 45 User talk:俠刀行 46 IPA 47 Archive search box 48 StarCraft articles and archive urls 49 Thank you 50 Cite video 51 Why? 52 You are so great

[edit] Rjanag Arbitration

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Rjanag and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requesting Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, --Epeefleche (talk) 21:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rjanag. It seems that you have been helpfully reflecting on the appropriateness of some of your behaviour and been willing to apologise. I would suggest that you consider apologising to others to whom you have been un-civil, and specifically undertaking that you will not use your powers as an Admin either:

1. To delete articles expect in strict conformity to the WP Deletion policies (so no 5-minute deletions, no vote-stacking, and no "delete and salt" when the AfD decision was "delete")
2. To harrass or threaten editors with whom you are in disagreement.

Best wishes NBeale (talk) 08:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I owe you no apology, your participation regarding your article has been entirely inappropriate and you have repeatedly refused to actually learn the rules that you repeatedly cite incorrectly. 5-minute deletions are not a violation of any rule when they follow the criteria for speedy deletion; no "vote-stacking" ever happened and you need to stop making offensive accusations like that with no evidence; "delete and salt" is appropriate for repeatedly and disruptively re-created articles (see WP:SALT) and I had already received requests from two editors in good standing to do so. Editors who care about nothing other than promoting themselves are useless to this project and should not be welcome here. Perhaps you yourself need to do some "reflecting on the appropriateness of your behaviour" before you leave condescending messages and continue forum-shopping. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

When my daughter was doing her PhD at Cambridge she was President of the BA Society at Trinity which looked after the welfare of grad students and I have some insight into how tough life can be for people in your position. I can see that it may be tempting to take out your aggression in Wikipedia. But it really isn't a good idea. There is a difference between learning a language rapidly and speaking it idiomatically. If you can't apologise when you make mistakes when you misuse your priveleges then it would be better for everyone if you were temporarily unable to make such mistakes. You know perfectly well that: (a) your initial 5-minute deletion was expliclitly against policy - if not why did you reverse it? (b) the AfD decision was "delete" not "delete and salt" - did any editor voted thus in the AfD? (c) These delete decisions are pure Wikipolitics - can you find a single example of someone who has written a N book being deleted? (d) That by contacting the people who voted in the previous AfD in the way you did but not notifying the creator of the new article or allowing any time for the article to be improved you were able to manipulate the AfD debate to get the snow close you predicted (e) that you do harrass and threaten and seek to undermine editors with whom you are in disagreement and (f) the idea that my 3,000+ edits have been about "promoting myself" is absurd.

So please reflect and see if you can find it in yourself to be civil, apologise and give these undertakings. NBeale (talk) 06:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

For the millionth time, if you think the deletion was incorrect then take it to Deletion review, and if you think your little page shouldn't be salted then take it to Requests for unprotection. I did nothing wrong in deleting and salting it (as numerous people have told you in all the forums that you forum shopped) and am not interested in listening to you anymore. (And by the wya, if you actually looked, when I contacted people who voted in old AfDs I also contacted the people who had voted keep. The reason I didn't notify the creator was because it was clearly a one-off account that was never going to edit again and was probably a sockpuppet or meatpuppet.) If you care about your article, you know the places to go; if you're just here to whine to me, I'm going to delete any further messages you post. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 07:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

And by the way, if you really think speedily deleting that article was an abuse of admin tools, you'd better be prepared to desysop a lot more admins than just me. Kevin, Floquenbeam, and Black Kite (who have been registered wikipedians for 4, 1, and 3 years, respectively) all spoke up at that AfD to say explicitly that the article should have been speedily deleted. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 07:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 中式英語

我看了文章後，开始乱掉了。"I want a soup(×)" 以及 "There are a lot of shoe(×)."这些句子都是错误的。那正确的说法是什麽？English:I confused after reading this article.I want a soup and There are a lot of shoe are both wrong.So what's the correct sentense?--俠刀行 (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

• (Sorry, I am currently on my friend's computer and she doesn't have Chinese installed, so only English for now!)
• "There are a lot of shoe (x)" should be "There are a lot of shoes".
• "I want a soup" is more difficult. Technically, soup is a mass noun and should be "I want some soup". (Just like Chinese, you have to say wo yao yidian shui(我要一点汤) or yi bei shui(一杯水), never yi ge shui(x)一个水(×).) But, the truth is different. In conversation, "a soup" can mean a cup/bowl of soup. For example, in a restaurant you can say "I want a sandwich and a soup" (which literally means, "I want a sandwich and a cup/bowl of soup". So really, "I want a soup" should not be marked incorrect. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:45, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Correct discussion link

The discussion I meant to link to just now (and failed to) is here: Template talk:Citation/core#We should never render invalid HTML --JN466 21:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, could you please undo all those changes to {{cite journal}}, etc.? The earlier discussion established a consensus that generating Harvard IDs by default broke too many pages. Certainly a change like this should not be installed without further discussion and consensus. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 21:58, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, changed. Intuitively, though, it seems to me that it makes more sense to set harv as the default and override it on the pages where it would be broken, rather than vice versa. Do you know if there is data on how many pages have broken HTML vs. how many pages don't? (If you prefer, we could discuss this at the template talk page instead.) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it looks like you adddressed that proposal with your comments on 23:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I only caught a glimpse of this (and then saw this [1] and the other reverts) but I've been working on {{cite IETF}} and harv anchors would not really be desirable when using that template as it has its own anchor generation and linking system/support for shortened footnotes. The documents it is intended for won't always work well for harv footnotes since there aren't always authors or editors, which the harv system really requires. It does support |ref=harv though in addition to its own system. --Tothwolf (talk) 22:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Auto purge

Ok I have a question. Here is a list of articles that use template:Chinese. I updated the template font size, but it is not changing the page contents until the next purge. Can your bot do auto purge? Such as running...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cha_siu_baau

with

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cha_siu_baau&action=purge.

and just go down the list. I suppose it can be done outside wiki. But I don't know if your bot can do something like this. If not, is no problem. Just let me know. Benjwong (talk) 06:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

It would need special approval from WP:BRFA. But purging happens by itself after a few days (pages purge themselves when there's server downtime) so it's probably easier to just wait. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 12:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I did not think it auto purges in just a few days. Benjwong (talk) 06:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Zh

Hi there. I just noticed that the note about Chinese characters at the top of Kowloon Walled City, the article I'm working on, are having weird formatting issues. Just looking at recent edits to related templates, it seems like this edit of yours might be the cause. If that is indeed the case, could you please fix that as soon as possible? Thanks. —tktktk 08:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. This appears to have fixed it. Let me know if you see any other problems, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Unreferenced material and deletion

I am unsure what to make of this, and would like to know how you think about this. On East Asian age reckoning there are many "unsourced statements", however a particular user seems keen on eliminating all unsourced statements, turning a page of about 5,000 bytes into one of 1,000, to the point where there is minimal information left. The page has transformed from this to this. This said user argues here that such material is not permitted at all without sources per WP:BURDEN, full stop. I am under the belief that it was acceptable to temporarily allow an unreferenced statement provided that it can be referenced eventually, and that it doesn't violate BLP; am I mistaken? Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Zhbot

Can you make the edit summary a bit shorter please?--Tznkai (talk) 02:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

That is possible. May I ask why you want it shortened? rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Makes my watchlist look funny. (I have Zhuangzi and Yuan Shikai on it) It's not a big deal in any case.--Tznkai (talk) 02:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like the bot just finished its run (it was created to do one task and, 11,000 edits later, it has done it), so there should be no need anymore. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

All good then.--Tznkai (talk) 04:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, my entire watchlist is full of those Zhbot summaries... I've got a lot of Chinese-related articles on it... ;P I guess it won't be such a big deal later on. :D -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

It's kind of pretty, in a way ;) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 12:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] apostrophe-stuff

Actually, glottal stops can occur at the end of words as well; so we're looking for

IF <(not apostrophe)+'> OR <'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ

(that's to avoid replacing italics and bold-markings. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Or wait, that's probably junk as well... hmmm....maybe

IF <(not apostrophe)+'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ

Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RFC/U and Admin discussion concerning you

Hello, Rjanag. As you know, a number of arbitrators suggested at the Rjanag RfA that an RfC be brought with regard to your conduct discussed at that RfA. Please be aware that in accordance with the arbitrators' suggestion a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia by your name in this list.

The RfC can be found here.

If a second user certifies the dispute within 48 hours, it will be moved from the "Candidate pages" section to the "Approved pages" section.

Once it has been certified and opened, editors (including those who certified the RfC) can offer comments, either by:

(a) posting their own view; and/or

(b) endorsing one or more views of others.

I invite you to respond in the Response section. You may endorse as many views as you wish. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties, inside parties, or the subject of the RfC.

Information on the RfC process can be found at:

1. RfC Conduct
2. RfC Guide
3. RfC Guide 2
4. RfC Rules

--Epeefleche (talk) 08:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

• It has been certified and opened now.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Warring

Actually I was agreeing with you, rather than the other way around. I was planning to start a talk page thread if he did it again. As for the rollback/Twinkle thing, sorry, I didn't know. I just assumed it would be the best/easiest way to say I was assuming good faith. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

(sighs) I'm used to things looming over me. Thanks for the help at keeping an eye on the talk page though. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:36, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Running

Hi Rjanag. I hope all is well with you. I haven't had occasion to work with you much of late, although I always think to ask your opinion on linguistic and language related subjects (as I recall that's an area of interest and expertise for you?). Anyway, I just wanted to come by and offer some support and encouragement. Wikipedia definitely has its frustrations, but I hope everything is going well for you and that you enjoy yourself on and off-line. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, CoM...it's always a pleasure getting your nudges about interesting AfDs and such. And I still try to remember your advice about going for a run ;) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, feel free to nudge me about running any time. It's getting so I can barely get out of my seat! Be good. ;) ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:08, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK Queue 3

Hello, Since your online right now was hoping you could move Queue 4 to Queue 3, since its been recently moved to the front page. If its a lag of the bot then nevermind. Thanks in advance Calmer Waters 15:45, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

That's strange, the bot should have cleared Queue 3 when it promoted those hooks to the front page. I'm not sure what happened there (to be honest, both of the editors who wrote the bot are semi-retired now so there's no one around who knows how it actually works). I have cleared the queue manually.

As for moving them... actually, sets of hooks don't move through the queues, but rather the bot moves through the queues (so it's a bit misleadingly named). Once a set is promoted to, say, Queue 4, it sits there and waits until the bot has cycled through to that queue...so once hooks are promoted to a queue they don't need to be moved. Just for clarification. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that. Just saw that it said the next update is scheduled for Queue three. Must admit I'm not aware of the workings that take place from the prep areas to the Queue. The behind the scenes of the adminstation workings. Maybe one day. Just kind of follow from the watchlist and such. Thanks again for doing that and taking the time to explain it to me. Cheers Calmer Waters 16:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, good catch. The bot has a counter (User:DYKadminBot/count) that tells it which queue it's supposed to be on...normally it updates this counter itself after each update (ie, after promoting queue 3 it should increment its counter to 4, so next time it'll do queue 4) and seems to have missed that too. I fixed it for now...will have to keep an eye on it in a few hours to see if it messes up again. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for battlecruiser article???

Hi. Uhmm... What's [this]? I didn't to any work on the HMS Indomitable (1907) article at all. 88.90.88.107 (talk) 03:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It looks like someone made an error and listed you in the DYK credits: see here. That editor might know why he did that. But it's not a huge deal either way, I wouldn't worry about it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanx. I'll go over there. No biggie, true, but I think the standards for getting cred. should probably be a little higher than suggesting an alt hook. :) 88.90.88.107 (talk) 04:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I agree, it's not usual to give credit for that, and especially not nominator credit (which is only for the person who first brought that article to the suggestions page, and only if that person is different than the article writer). Leaving a friendly note for Jolly Janner wouldn't hurt. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Just left a little note over at JJ's talk. Thanks again. 88.90.88.107 (talk) 04:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

You thought this was more fun than this? Haha. Grsz¹¹ 04:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I didn't notice that one (someone else promoted that hook, so I didn't see the ALTs). That would have been a good one too...I guess it's too late to change it now, though. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey I didn't even realize who you were! Belated congrats on earning the mop. Grsz¹¹ 05:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 06:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Not One Less

Just wanted to say thanks. A lesser editor would have reverted my whole change instead of moving it forward. You're one of the good ones. Thanks. Hope you can get that article featured. -- Horkana (talk) 05:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

And thank you for your comments! Even though I don't agree about the table, I do appreciate the amount of thought you've put into the article, rather than just doing drive-by machine-like comments. That's always refreshing to see ;) . Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 06:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bug?

I was looking at one of the bot's edit on the Martin Lee article. When it converted zh-tspj without saying first=t, this is going to cause issues. Now Martin Lee has simplified chars first. It becomes difficult maybe even impossible to go back. That goes for any other article that used {{zh-tspj}}. Benjwong (talk) 08:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can remember, this was intentional. The traditional/simplified ordering seemed to already be a mess across the project (i.e., a lot of articles were already using the wrong template), so we didn't want to try to program the bot to make any decisions about ordering since it's often subjective and needs a human to make the decision. Most of the templates that should have traditional first, I replaced myself (using AWB) several weeks ago, adding |first=t manually; the bot only did replacements on templates that were already simplified-first. (Note that the name of a template doesn't necessarily tell you the order of its constituents: templates like {{zh-tspj}} and {{zh-ts}} actually had simplified characters first [2][3].) I figured people watching the articles can fix the ordering manually if needed. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I am wondering if the order should have been reversed now. The number of articles that uses traditional first..... pretty much covers 1000 years is many more than the post 1949 articles. Benjwong (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok I got AWB. I think it is possible to flip it so that traditional comes first. And anyone else can fill in the simplified chars. Something like first=s. What do you think? Benjwong (talk) 04:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think any project-wide changes should be made without a discussion (for example, at WP:CHINESE). It's fine for you to start manually adding |first=s to templates that you think should explicitly be simplified first (such as PRC-related articles) but I won't alter the defaults without a wider community consensus. You'd probably be better off starting a discussion instead of making any changes with AWB yet, because you would have to do something like 15,000 edits (even with AWB, that takes a very long time), whereas if a community consensus is reached then I can have ZhBot add the |first=s automatically to templates that don't have it, or to templates that are in certain articles (for example, if the community came up with a list of categories for which all the member articles should be simp-first or trad-first, the bot could use those). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Was there an agreement that first=t? And I am not attacking you. I am just trying to figure out how that decision was implemented. I know your original goal was to consolidate like 10 templates in 1. Benjwong (talk) 05:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

No, but like I said above, many of the existing templates already defaulted to simplified-first. Also, like I said above, I didn't change the display of any templates (except the minimal number of bot errors that people like you have found and corrected); before the bot ran I manually did the templates that needed traditional first, doing several thousand edits with AWB. (You can tell if you see my contributions summary, there is a giant spike in September.)

Side note: about consolidating 10 templates...actually, it was more like 70+ ;) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Hi! Thanks for the WikiBirthday message! Wow... three years and counting... I am so proud to be part of Wikipedia. Thanks again. κaτaʟaveno^T_C 14:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 不能使用图片 cannot use the image

我不能使用这张图用在中文维基，为什麽会这样？要如何才能在中文版使用呢？ --俠刀行 (talk) 14:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

"non-commons"的图片只能在“当地”维基使用。 想要使用在中文维基，可以在中文维基再次上载，或者可以把这张搬到Commons. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

All these complaints and puffery give me a creepy feeling. Try reading this recent NYT-article ... Seems distantly related (at least in my mind) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 19:40, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's something.... The problem of racism is also starting to [finally] get some attention in China, have you heard the recent uproar about Lou Jing? rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 19:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Interesting/sad. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 19:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:Juliancolton/Project

The project now has a more defined idea of what we plan to do. Basically, we're calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. Please help by posting your new ideas! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC) (Cross-posting)

[edit] ZhBot and the lang template

ZhBot is currently replacing {{lang-zh}} with {{zh}} and the edit summary says to check the userpage. However, the userpage mentions only merging all "zh-" style templates into zh. Where was it decided to start using zh|c= across the board instead of lang-zh? Kolindigo (talk) 04:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hm...now that I check, it does look like we didn't specifically discuss lang-zh (or lang-gb, for that matter). But in this case the change is 1) harmless, as far as I can tell, and 2) useful, for the following reasons:

1. {{zh}} is simply better than {{lang-zh}}, it has all the functionality of the latter and much more.
2. {{zh}} is shorter to type out.
3. Probably most importantly, having all Chinese stuff in the same template makes it easier to implement systematic changes in the future. For example, hypothetically, if we decided someday that all Chinese text should be enclosed in some extra html template, it will be much easier to do that if it all uses the same zh template, rather than a whole slew of templates.

And, while it seems like a lot of edits, this template actually seems to have been used much less than the other series of templates (zh-stp, zh-cpcy, etc.) that ZhBot replaced before—there were less than 2000 of these, compared to 15,000 or more of the others. And the text that shows up to the reader is still exactly the same. My plan, now that these replacements are done, is to redirect {{lang-zh}} to {{zh}} (more specifically, to replace its contents with {{zh | c={{{1}}} }} so that it still works if people use it. I also intend to make the same replacements for {{lang-gb}}. But if you think this is serious, I can file a second request for bot approval before doing this task. Personally, the only benefit I see in keeping the current templates is consistency with the others in Category:Multilingual support templates, but that benefit is outweighed by the others (I think), and besides that category is not exhaustive anyway, so I see no harm in having just one more language that has slightly different format. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 06:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I see your point. :) I was just wondering if a lang template had been deprecated. Kolindigo (talk) 13:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Not One Less

Congratulations on FA for a fine article. Hope there is more to come! (You are an original writer. I appreciate that. I don't mean that you make up facts, but that you put together subject matter in a wonderfully clear way. ) Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 23:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Woohoo! Thanks for the notice—and, more importantly, for taking the time to give the article a look when no one else was doing so! Your input, as always, is invaluable... behind every FA is a workhorse who cleans up the silly mistakes that the original writer made! rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Eva Peron article

Regarding the Eva Peron article, we do not need accents over the "o" in the words "Peronism" and "Peronato." Please stop inserting accents over the "o" in image titles because that disables the images. Thank you. Andrew Olivo Parodi (talk) 02:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Your edits are just as bad. I have been working on fixing the broken images and links, and twice now you h ave come in and done a wholesale revert. I realize that the image links and derived words should not have accents, and I am working on fixing them--unfortunately, a mess was created when an IP user removed all accents from the article for no reason, but in a way that couldn't be easily reverted. I did not add these extra accents intentionally, it happened while I was trying to repair the earlier damage using find & replace--which would not have been necessary if no one had screwed up the accents in the first place. Long story short, some things should have accents and your removals of all the accents are incorrect. Now I'm going to have to sit down and go through all of then one-by-one to fix what you and the previous IP editor have messed up. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not interested in arguing. I'll just say thank you for cleaning up some aspects of the article, such as the citations sections. Andrew Olivo Parodi (talk) 20:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Account

[edit] Birthday

Many thanks for your birthday wishes. Davshul (talk) 21:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Academic Community Hall

My apology regarding your bot adding the simplified title to the article. --WikiCantona (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese news

First, I'd like to thank you for your work on July 2009 Ürümqi riots. It seems I'm late to the party (good job on the GA) but that article looks positively superb for such a contested topic. It is for this reason that I would like to request your help on User:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal (yes, when mainspaced, it will reside at 2009 Chongqing corrupting scandal instead of its current stated target). I've listed sources at User talk:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal, but I'm having trouble with both the formatting of the article and the decision of what information should be included. Your help would be greatly appreciated, if you have the time to spare. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I haven't been following the case much, although I've definitely noticed it a lot lately. These days I'm pretty busy so I'm not sure how much hardcore writing I'll be able to do, but I'll be happy to watch the page and offer input...if I find some free time I might do some writing too, but I don't want to make a solid commitment yet as I'm not sure if I would be able to go through with it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. I'm in no rush either. Also, check your email if you haven't already. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 02:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Quote

Hi Rjanag. My query here is regarding Template:Quote. I just noticed this issue then, but previously when using Template:Quote, if you left a line between two paragraphs it, naturally, would recognise that line and leave a space separating the paragraphs. However, for some reason it is not doing this now and the text, even if split into paragraphs, merges into the one block. As you were the most recent to edit the template, I thought it would be logical to ask you if you knew how to fix this? It may not have been your edit, but I didn't notice this until now and you were the most recent to edit the template. Thanks, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 07:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that! Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

(editconflicted) Short answer: my recent edit is the one that has caused the problem, and I can't figure out a way to fix it yet, so I've reverted.

Long answer: Thanks for pointing this out. I removed those tags to fix a formatting error in this AfD close, where the {{quote}} template caused the archiving to be messed up. Basically, the archiving works by applying a <div style="background: [some color]"> tag to the beginning of the discussion, and a </div> tag to the end... but the quote template also has a tag, so when the browser sees it it thinks that's the end of the background-color thing and ends the archiving. I have also noticed this problem with embedded div tags on other pages; it's kind of annoying, so I'll leave a note at WP:VP/T to see if anything can be done about it. Anyway, in this case I thought the div tags in the template were doing nothing so I removed them to fix the AfD page, but didn't realize that would create other problems. For now I've just converted the quote template in the AfD to a <blockquote></blockquote>, which will work as a quick fix for most cases, but the better solution will be to figure out how to prevent div tags from interfering with one another, so I will look into that. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That does seem like a pain in the butt. Hopefully a solution can be discovered in which the templates cannot interfere with each other. Anyway, thanks for (temporarily) fixing this. ;-) Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] re: b-day

Thx, and happy Friday 13th to you too. - Altenmann >t 16:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] External editing

Thanks for the heads-up on editing the source in an external editor. Is there some way to do this, however, as it's pretty difficult to find your way through pages and pages of mark-up without a search function? BarryNorton (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

If the page is long, I just use the search in my browser to find the specific comment I want to reply to after I click the "edit" button. If the markup is intimidating, the Wikipedia tutorial explains most of it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Note

[4] - Ottava Rima (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice (it looks like now we're both having the experience of people digging up ancient, and questionably relevant, diffs in current disputes...). I may not respond immediately because I'm not sure yet exactly what to say, but long story short I don't agree with Voceditenore's and Moreschi's wording of this 'principle' or their interpretation of the civility policy, so once I've sorted out my thoughts I will try to leave a comment. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Ping. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 17:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Minority language place names in China

I wanted to consult you on the romanization of minority (i.e. Tibetan, Uyghur, Mongolian) place names in China. Is there a system in place sanctioned by the PRC government on how to correctly name these places? The most obvious examples are Urumqi, Hohhot, and Lhasa, but I also refer to county names which are not romanized according to pinyin. Colipon+(Talk) 15:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure, it seems to vary from place to place and it seems to be more just habit than policy. For example, Kumul in Xinjiang is generally called Kumul by Uyghurs but Hami by Chinese, and most "official" stuff uses Hami (this is one of the relatively few instances where a place has a totally different name for Chinese, rather than just a transliteration); on the other hand, in places you point out like Lhasa and Hohhot, romanizations seem to use the native name more often rather than the Chinese transliteration. Some are less clear (for example, Turpan/Turfan/Tulufan, which someone started an edit war about a few months ago). But long story short, as far as I know there's no unified policy on how to romanize (or, at least, no unified policy that is really followed). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I guess my question really is, how does Wikipedia decide on how to romanize and name things like this. Colipon+(Talk) 16:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hm... that one also might just have to be case-by-case. I think each place's romanization is influenced by a bundle of factors including native word, most common name in English-language materials, and existing standards on WP:

"Native" name/spelling	Pinyin of Chinese name	Other romanizations
Ürümchi (Ürümqi)	Wulumuqi	Urumqi
Qaramay (K̡aramay)	Kelamayi	Karamay
Aqsu (Ak̡su)	Akesu	Aksu
Qumul (K̡umul)	Hami	Kumul
Xoten (Hotən)	Hetian	Hotan
Qeshqer (K̡əxk̡ər)	Kashi	Kashgar
Turpan	Tulufan	Turfan
Altay	Aletai	Altai?

The above table covers only the Uyghur names from the template (and only the ones I'm familiar with). From that sample, though, it becaomes pretty clear that most of the current names (which the exception of Hami) follow more or less the native name, albeit with variations on the romanization. A bit of background on Uyghur romanizations... the one written on the left is the Uyghur Latin Yéziqi that is more or less official among Uyghurs and is closely based on IPA (note the use of Q for uvular stops, X for velar fricatives, etc.), and the one on the right is an alternate (and I think somewhat older) alphabet which is more pinyin-based (note that Q and H are like they are in pinyin). Most of the names in this template seem to follow the pinyin-based romanization more closely (with some changes made to use letters that appear on a normal keyboard--ie, using K instead of K̡, a instead of ə, etc). I don't know if this is a good reflection or not of which spellings are actually more common in the outside world. There are a couple exceptions—for instance, Kashgar, which doesn't use either of the Uyghur romanizations, since it's a more well-known name (compare to how, until relatively recently, people still commonly referred to Guangdong as "Canton"...or to the use of romanizations like "Mao Tse-Tung" even though WG is more or less defunct by now).

It may be helpful to do a larger survey of the Xinjiang placenames on WP... what I've looked at so far is a bit limited, and some may be skewed because of my own influence (for example, "Turpan" breaks the pattern because I moved it away from "Turfan", and "Aksu" and some others almost ended up at "Akesu" and I had to fight with a Chinese nationalist to prevent that from happening). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I've always had trouble deciding what to name these ethnic minority places and deciding which one is more "proper". I will consult you if I come across anything that I cannot figure out. Funny that only Mongolian, Tibetan, and Uyghur names are not Romanized according to pinyin, yet Zhuang and Korean names are. Colipon+(Talk) 21:04, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you very much for your birthday greeting.

[edit] Disruptive behaviors by User:Monkh Naran and others

Hi, Rjanag, if you're active, could you look into this blatant violation of WP:Talk, WP:SOAPBOX and WP:NPA by new editors named Monkh Naran (talk · contribs) and Pertook15 (talk · contribs) as well as GenuineMongol (talk · contribs)'s gross incivility. I deleted some rant[5] that have nothing to do with the ongoing disputes on a map and content regarding 13th century Korean and Mongol relation. However, Monkh Naran (talk · contribs) reverted to include such offensive attacks including mocking ethnicity, and false labeling of "vandalism" with threats. I've been attacked by the users like this[6][7][8]. I warned them and tried to calm down[9], but well...I got this treatment.User_talk:Caspian_blue#Materials_from_User_talk:Gantuya_eng. Would you look into the situation? Thanks.--Caspian blue 17:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I also found out an odd thing. The user appeared to support to delete the article of Mongolia during Tang rule several month ago [10] when all Mongolian editors appeared to voice out the same view at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mongolia during Tang rule, and his other occasions are also similar. I think there must be off-forum or the account is an alternative one to avoid scrutiny or SPA. They disrupt Wikipedia by resorting to personal attacks and soapboxing.--Caspian blue 17:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:Alefbe

Hi, Rjanag. This user is constantly removing the sourced information from the articles Samad Behrangi and Turko-Persian tradition without any discussion. If you check the talk pages of these articles in which i contributed the most, you'll see that there is no comment from this user. However, he/she's blindly removing information and also stalking. Regards, E104421 (talk) 22:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Please ask another uninvolved administrator to look at this. I do not deal with Alefbe anymore and, frankly, I am never pleased when people come to me asking me to block their enemy just because I warned that person months ago. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

He/she's not my enemy but a blind reverter. I came to your page just because i thought you know his/her distruptive behaviour. Anyways, i'll take your comment into account. Best, E104421 (talk) 01:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

If he's blindly reverting then use the edit warring noticeboard. In the past people have come here before thinking "oh, Rjanag has scolded Alefbe before, so Rjanag will be the perfect way for me to exact my revenge!" and I refuse to act on requests like that. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Heh, my request is not like that. I'm against blocking people, since they're somehow coming back. For this reason, i'm in favor of forcing them to discuss their problems with the articles. If they do so, i have enough answers for them, but how to force them, that's the problem. That's the logic behind writing to you. Regards E104421 (talk) 01:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

A message to Alefbe or to the article's talk page would be a good thing to try before seeking administrative intervention. According to your contributions history, you haven't made an attempt to contact him other than with edit summaries. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. It's better to contact directly rahter than the edit summaries. I'll do that next time. Thanx. E104421 (talk) 02:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Mandarian

Nope nothing is automated with the Wiki Cleaner edits. Just my mistake. Thanks for catching it. Wiki Cleaner just gives a fast list of what needs to be disammed. It's more of an assistance tool than an editing tool. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 22:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] One-child policy

Hi Rjanag,

I do a fair amount of writing/editing on WP but I don't know of any page that has such a constant stream of vandals as the One-Child Policy page. Virtually all of the vandals are unregistered users, and judging by the childishness of the entries, the vast majority are juveniles.

Would it be possible to restrict editing of that article to Registered Users? Of course many of us monitor those entries now, but it's a PITA to have to deal with those edits. If it is possible to place a restriction on editing, and you know how to request or create such a restriction, then I encourage you to do so.

Thanks a lot.

--Mack2 (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protecting it at least temporarily is definitely a good idea, given the level of vandalism; I could apply a several-months protection to it myself. Semi-protecting indefinitely, though, is a slightly bigger deal and it would probably be good to get more input before doing it—in some instances I wouldn't mind protecting indefinitely, but in this case it's a controversial article and is not even very good anyway (and I think it has some bias that would make some editors bitter anyway, although that's still not an excuse for the mostly sophomoric vandalism that takes place there). The best option might be to list it at Requests for page protection (requesting either indefinite semi-protection, or something like 3- or 6-month semi-protection) just so that a couple more eyes will see the request and be able to raise objections if there are problems. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind the above; it looks like we were getting hit especially bad today, so I just went ahead and protected the page for 3 months. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:33, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Maybe when the schoolboys are less bored with school, they'll lay off.--Mack2 (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rudolf Yanson

What do you think? I have a feeling you're going to go with delete. But I wonder if including an author/scholar of specialized work in this field doesn't make the encyclopedia just a little bit better? I actually like that it's very short and stubby without and fluff. I don't see how it can be merged to a broader topic. And it seems like a good way to have his books be included in some fashion in our comprehensive resource. Have I lost it completely? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I agree with you that there is use in having articles like these (especially for if his work is cited in other articles, so there can be a bluelink in sentences like "According to Rudolf Yanson...."), but unfortunately I don't think usefulness can trump the notability criteria. The notability criteria themselves are not very good, I've come to think, but I don't think it would be right to try to tear them down from the inside by ignoring them in AfDs... I get frustrated, for example, at how WP:ATHLETE is so lax and WP:PROF, comparatively, much stricter, but making that argument during AfDs would be too much like crusading. So I think we have to go according to the current criteria until they are changed by some other means. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:GraYoshi2x#Lamest edit warring

Hello, Rjanag, I hope my message to you is not ignored this time. :-) (my feeling was a little hurt). However, I can really not come up with any suitable admin for the matter because you know both GraYoshi2 and Badagnani, and your are an active member of WP:CHINA with experiences in editing food/Chinese culture-related articles. This tendentious edit warring between them has been going on for about 7 months. Regardless of the formed consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China/Archive/May_2009#Naming_convention_for_Chinese_foods_and_usages_of_Wikitionary, GraYoshi2x has been reverting to exclude the Wiktionary links even though he is the only one against the consensus. I think this long-term revert campaign is indeed spooky and disruptive.[11] (most of them are mere reverts of Badagnani's edit). I have agreed and disagreed with each of the both, but to me, GraYoshi2x wants to pick a fight, so Badagnani who has many block records to be blocked for a longer time. Would you take appropriate action; block or warning anything to stop this silliness. Thanks.--Caspian blue 22:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the intervention to the two users. The edit warring was stopped since then, so I hope this matter is resolved.Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hardest language

I'm bringing another problem to your attention since your specialty is in linguistic study. User named Laws dr (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • summary) has been inserting WP:Original research to Hardest language over and over and even distorted contents from used books (he claimed he merely re-added somebody's edit). This was pointed out at here on Oct.31, but he recently added his personal opinion referenced with a chatting forum, insisting that his edit is justified. He sporadically edits Wikipedia, but as soon as his added content was deleted today, he appears. I think Law dr is a single purpose account, or alternative account with another account. Would you warn him for his repeated disruption and violations of WP:NOR and WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:RS and if possible look into the account? Thanks.--Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

This user's disruptive behaviors are going nowhere; please check his/her contribution.--Caspian blue 18:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese: {{{1}}}

Hi there, thanks for the helpful info on my discussion page. I didn't know the zh-cp was deprecated. I'll make use of the new Chinese: s....

--Visik (talk) 05:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

[edit] Uyghur language

Hello. I am a native Russian speaker and linguist. What we have originally in the article is transliteration with mere elements of transcription (e.g. no vowel reduction is indicated). There is the pronouncing norm of standard Russian in Russia which roughly corresponds to Moscow speech. In this norm there are rules for vowel reduction which are in no way respected in the article. Voiced consanants always become devoiced (with few situational exceptions) at word ending. --Zumrasha (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Uyghur is different than Russian, and I am a Uyghur speaker. As for the article, the current consensus is to transcribe the underlying representations (the same as what is written in the word's spelling) rather than the pronunciation details which vary from one dialect to another. If you believe this should be changed, please start a discussion at the article's talk page.

I am traveling right now and might not be able to respond until Monday. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I really hope that when you have more time you will see that I am not at all trying to argue about the Uyghur language. I am interested in and like the language and even try to learn it a little but far be it from me to try to change anything written in the article concerning the Uyghur language before I have any solid data to support the correction. In other words I completely respect the work of all those more knowledgeable people who contibute to the article. If I find any new and proven data on the Uyghur language I will surely contribute but as of now it seems that the article is the most comprehensive one on the subject on the Internet.

The only thing I do not feel comfortable about is the way RUSSIAN words are transcribed in the table. In the said table each foreign word is given along with its native transcription and then follows the Uyghur variant of the loanword with its Uyghur transcription. I only tried to change the RUSSIAN part, i.e. the RUSSIAN transcription for the Russian words, not the Uyghur transcription of the words. And you, as far as I understand it now, think that I'm correcting the Uyghur pronunciation. Not in the least!

Because of this misunderstanding it looks like you are trying to convince me that my Russian transcription for the Russian words is wrong. Now I am not a stubborn man and I do not wish to engage in any kind of "undoing" tug-of-war. But I happen to know standard Russian as my native tongue and I have a linguistic background, so I guess I must know a little about how Russian words are transcribed in the Russian language.

I simply ask you to find some time and take a closer look at the issue. I hope this misunderstanding will soon be cleared. I am really looking forward to having a more fruitful discussion about the Uyghur language proper with you. --Zumrasha (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I see. You are correct; I was misreading your edits earlier. Sorry about this misunderstanding. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 为什麽我的留言被删除?

我不懂。我只是发牢骚一下，他就马上删除了。你可以告诉我原因吗？被删除的内容：[12]--俠刀行 (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

因为不知道上下文是什么样的，我也不太理解。不过，看来他是觉得你的留信没有constructive、要回复的内容，所以他干脆删除了。对我来说 这样有一点不礼貌，可是他有这个权利，你最好不理这件事，这不算大事，而且他就一个用户---不理他应该很容易！

此外，他给你的那个警告也没有道理，你不用着急。 rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• 那请麻烦你帮我问他，可不可以教我英语？他似乎不理解我的意思。--俠刀行 (talk) 15:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • 说实话，维基百科不是学英语的一个好地方。大部分的维基用户只写文章，不叫语言。。。他们可以帮你写文章可是不要提供英语课。我有一点同意 给你留过信的那个User:Plutonium27: 如果你的主要目的是学英语，也许你最好找其他的网站（如http://simple.wikipedia.org）。我也是很愿意帮你做 和百科有关的事，可是不会当英语老师；RadioFan好像也是这个意思。 rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
• 明白了。我也觉得维基有很多用词都非常艰深，不适合用在会话上，也许要学英语应该去其他网站。你有比较好的英语学习网站吗？最好有提升会话能力的。--俠刀行 (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • 嗯，维基有很多jargon啦！再说，叫语言不是维基的目的，创造百科才是，所以许多用户不愿交语言。
  • 说道教英语的网站。。。对我来说，网上学习不是个好办法，尤其是如果你要学会话英语的话。最好跟人直接交流。我知道在中国可能没有很多机会上有效的课程等等，可是如果你在大城市的话， 外国人很多。。。你如果叫外国朋友就可以很快地提高英语水平。 rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:俠刀行

[edit] IPA

If you can't win the argument, the next best thing is to be able to "hang up the phone", yes? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

This argument has happened over and over again and your "side" has already lost it many times; see the very top of Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet. And as I said, it's not an appropriate argument for the reference desk anyway, as that's not a place for deciding policy. If the lazy users who complain about IPA really want to make a change, they are welcome to start the argument elsewhere. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

What I object to is having to learn a new language in order to read the English wikipedia. There's nothing wrong with the IPA stuff as such. It's the snobbery connected with its use that I object to. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Many could say that the 'snobbery' connected with the use of US dictionary pronunciation guides is just as objectionable. Given that no pronunciation standard is universal among the English-speaking population, why should we use one that you happen to like? Why not use the one that is, from an objective standpoint, the one that reflects the sounds of language the most accurately and is the most widely used in the world (and that's not snobbery, those are facts). IPA is not a "new language" and claiming that people need to learn a new language is an exaggeration; it uses almost all the same letters that are in our alphabet and can be learned in a day, just like the pronunciation guides that you are supporting (remember that when you were in school you had to learn them, too, at some point). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Archive search box

Here is an archive search box for your talk page. You can modify it and place it according to your preferences.

-- Wavelength (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] StarCraft articles and archive urls

Hello. I saw your post here and I was wondering if there is a list of StarCraft articles that need archive urls added? I wouldn't mind doing some manually.--Rockfang (talk) 06:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Any Starcraft article with links to transcripts from sclegacy.com... it looks like StarCraft, Characters of StarCraft, Species of StarCraft, Sarah Kerrigan, and Jim Raynor all have it. Probably over 100 links to correct, I think doing it by hand would be quite tedious. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 07:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

It may be tedious, but I'll still help. :) Rockfang (talk) 07:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, wait a second.... before you start, I think there's an easier way to do this!

It looks like most of the links are actually from the same webpage: http://www.sclegacy.com/encyclopedia/starcraft_story.php (archive), just different anchors on that page. So rather than having to look up every link, the majority of them could be fixed by simply concatenating http://web.archive.org/web/20040810213217/ to the front and not worrying about looking them up specifically. I could do this pretty easily on AWB, I think, once I sit down and work out the search terms.

There are a few links that are different; some seem to be at http://www.sclegacy.com/content/starcraft-encyclopedia-4/starcraft-story-17/ instead of the link above. But think I think those ones can be fixed in the same way (just with a different archiveurl stuck on the front). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I'll hold off doing them manually by hand. Please let me know if your idea ends up working. Thank you.--Rockfang (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the kind birthday wish J04n(talk page) 15:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cite video

Are you aware <date> is for some reason a deprecated field? Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC).

Yes, but at least one template was using it, and I assume many more are (given that "date2" is an extremely unintuitive name for the field). All templates with |date= and not |date2= were broken; the easier fix by far seemed to be to add date to the template, rather than making text changes to however many articles have the template transcluded. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I dug around, and it is yet another thing that arises from the date mess. I put my proposals on Template talk:Cite video seems like people have been meaning to get around to this for some time. I have a list of articles using date2 and I will probably start by replacing that with date. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 00:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC).

[edit] Why?

I don't quite understand what you are referring to. Which user is this? Why is there no further discussion on #linguistics? ...some questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alinovic (talk • contribs) 12:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

What??? Where did this come from? I don't know what you're responding to. Context, please. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] You are so great

Thanks very much for fixing {{mountain index row}} !! —hike395 (talk) 16:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)