This is an archive of past discussions about User:SMcCandlish. 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.

→

October 2008

Thought you'd enjoy this (Jean Balukas footage)

Resolved

– Just an FYI.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNAtK-Qhlqg --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

That was great. I wish he'd let her run out! — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 05:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

[[Template:Rp}}

Resolved

– Just a chat.

hi, smc. Do you have a Wikilink for the construction of the {{RP|:xx}} pagination-citation? I would like to read that page. Whenever I tried to find something around here, it seems as if I get lost in lots of extraneous crosslinking. Thanks. Hag2 (talk)

Hey. I noticed your message and since SM doesn't seem to be around and the template was created by SM in light of my whinging; here's a few links you might be looking for: The template page itself has detailed instructions on use; it has been much used at Glossary of cue sports terms so see there for it in action, and it was created after this discussion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Fuh. I'll take a look. Smc used the pagination on the Rudolf Wanderone article too. (Which, incidentally, Smc has posted at the review page. Hag2 (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the template's own page is its best documentation. I think the peer review is essentially over, thanks to your (Hag2)'s work, though I want to pore over it again in light of others' comments there. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 20:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Snooker players nicknames

Resolved

– Moved to other user's talk page.

Could I suggest that you check your facts before dismissing edits as vandalism. As you're clearly not that up to speed on this subject area may I suggest you read Clive Everton's History of Snooker. It's a couple of years old now but will give you the details on how those names arose. Clearly I'm not the only one aware of them, as you pointed out on the pages history, several other people have added exactly the same. I'll give you a day to brush up your knowledge and revert after that. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.32.32 (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but they look like vandalism edits. I'm reverting nothing. Our verifiability policy requires that information in articles be cited to reliable sources. Per the policy on biographies of living people, any information which may be construed as potentially controversial (such as insulting-sounding nicknames) must be deleted on sight if it has no reference citations. So, you are not in a position to suggest that anyone check their facts when you provide no evidence that what you are positing is actually factual. I will change the vandalism tags to different warnings, but I don't believe for a minute that 81.153.32.32, 81.153.39.14, 86.145.194.156, 217.44.5.8 are different users, as "you all" are making precisely the same edits, character for character, over and over again. My guess is you are one person using several different computers at a university and perhaps one at home. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 19:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Project banners in archives

Resolved

– Question answered.

Hi,

Out of interest, what's the reason for including {{WikiProject Cue sports}} in talk page archives? (and you may be interested in {{talkarchivenav}} instead of the {{talkarchive}} / {{atn}} combination when doing future archival.) Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The project uses this banner to identify all pages under the scope of the project. It is of considerable metadata interest (to me, perhaps to other project members) which articles within our scope generate enough discussion to even have archives. For similar reasons we also tag /Comments pages (which of our articles have significant enough editorial interest to generate such pages?) and other subpages. Also, should something radical change, like a new way of archiving talk pages, or whatever, this will make them easier to find. Thanks for the pointer to {{talkarchivenav}}; that does look good! — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia CD question

Resolved

– Just a chat.

I think this note might have been intended for BozMo not BOZ? Anyway the answer is to post on the talk page at Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia CD Selection. PS Hello there BOZ, never come across you here before, welcome (belatedly). --BozMo talk 15:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

It was intended for BOZ, who left a post above about D&D articles and the CDs/DVDs. Maybe you would have been a better person to ask, ultimately, but BOZ was convenient. :-) And I think that Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations was what I was looking for. Or are we talking past each other? I may be misinterpreting what you mean by "this" in "I think this note..." — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:07, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Use of rollback

Resolved

– Mea culpa.

Please don't rollback ([1]) non-vandalism edits like this one: [2]. It's not what the rollback tool is for.

Was the edit somewhat promotional in nature? Yep. Do I agree with removing it? Yep. Was it so obviously done in bad faith that it could be rolled back without comment? Nope. The article section in question includes – through your own edits ([3]) – the names of a number of manufacturers and information about some of their products; the anon added slightly more detail in the same vein, and doesn't deserve to get slapped for it.

If you wish to undo a non-vandalism edit in the future, please use either the undo tool or manually revert and leave a descriptive edit summary. Thanks. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that was just a mistake on my part. I meant to hit "Undo" but hit "Rollback" by mistake. With all the scripts and widgets I have installed, some of the rollback options are "fire and forget", offering no opportunity to add any kind of comment. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'm still using the vanilla interface. :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Moved your essay

Resolved

– Just an FYI.

Incidentally, I moved your essay on the application of the Manual of Style to your userspace (from SMcCandlish/WP:MOS-Irony to User:SMcCandlish/WP:MOS-Irony); you must have inadvertently dropped the User: prefix when you created it. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; I must be smokin' too much crack. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD Discussion

Resolved

– Just an FYI.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fresh Mex restaurants: yeah I was agreeing with you, agreeing with me. Haha. Most of that categorization stuff is beyond me, so I'll let you handle whatever needs improvement. :) Intothewoods29 (talk) 07:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Keen. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 07:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Serial vandal template/ubox question

Resolved

– Year-old request.

Hi, I have been experimenting a bit in my sandbox with an idea inspired by some recent RC patrolling and based on some of your contribs to the userboxes I thought you might be able to help. As an example, this user User_talk:216.162.91.110 has been repeatedly blocked/warned. Normally I would just paste {{repeatvandal}} at the top before blocking, however, it is really tedious to scroll through months/years of section breaks and warnings, especially in cases like this IP where they have basically never contributed anything positive. I was hoping to replace the whole litany of warnings with a template using some dynamic parameters, and while doing a little browsing I noticed you had authored the userbox VN that lets you specify the number of vandalisms. In my sandbox User:Kaisershatner/sandbox I was playing with this, but I thought you might be able to point me in the right direction coding-wise. What I would like ideally is to have a box modeled after {{blocked}} that says:

"This IP has been blocked X times for vandalism and has been warned over Y times. Previous warnings and blocks have been archived HERE." ({{subst:serialvandal|X|Y|[[archivepage]]}} )

This way, I can clip the 200kb of warnings off without removing the useful information that a particular IP has a long history of abuse. Think you can set me straight or point me at the "learn to code templates/userboxes page"? Best, Kaisershatner (talk) 00:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Woops, sorry I never responded to this. I did not notice it until now, during an achiving run. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 17:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Ten-ball edits

Resolved

– Mediation seems to have worked.

Hi, I see you edited a couple of my edits about the ten-ball championship. No worries, I was just trying to clean up what I thought were non-encyclopedic edits by User:Florentino floro. He has since gone back and re-edited the Ten-ball, Wu Chia-ching, Darren Appleton, and Niels Feijen articles. I am not interested in getting in an edit war with him over this (see [4] if you're bored), as billiards is not really my area of expertise, but I thought you might be willing to take another look at those articles to see if they need to get cleaned up. Thanks, axschme (talk) 17:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will. The information is definitely valid (when tagged with current sport) for the article on the sport, but I have to agree with you that it constitutes blatant trivia in some of the other contexts. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 22:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Update: I've cleaned up the player articles, but Ten-ball still needs work. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi

With all due respect, I fully respect your comment, and on the talk page - [5] - I desire that, if you have time, please read my evidence. Basically, I and User:Cma or Mr. Dominique Gerald Cimafranca, both from the Philippines and both alumni and student, respectively, of Ateneo de Manila University-Ateneo Law School (1974 and 1982) and Ateneo de Davao (student, present), respectively, had had personal angers, hatred, and differences which spilled here in Wikipedia with Max. There were long battles between us 3 for blocking:

User:Diligent Terrier/Florentino floro and Maxschmelling
The very long Rfc Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro and then, Max challenged my userpage, and I created this to refute Max:
User:Florentino floro/Learned Treatise:Legal-Academic Values of Compleat User Page
Max's contributions are daily and nothing more than stalking of my edits[6]. I and you, with all due respect, never ever found any editor of millions here, that, had had only one agenda: stalking another editor, co-Filipino, co-Atenean.
User:Cma barely handful of edits had nothing more but edits of my daily edits[7]

In law, there is no other best evidence of stalking than this. Stalking is a crime and punished under all foreign laws and by Wikipedia by blocking[8]

IN FINE, I respect your opinion on this, and I desire that you edit and amend, Ten-ball: the Philiipines, my country will never forget this event, and please visit our country. Cheers.

User:Florentino floro) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Florentino floro (talk) 08:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

It would be good for you to either reconcile with this user, or not deal with him at all (which could mean avoiding editing certain articles). As for ten-ball, I actually have a total overhaul of that article planned, with both sets of rules (WPA and traditional BCA) fully sourced. It is an important article, as ten-ball may well be the future of professional pool. I assure you that it will be handled as best as I can handle articles here, and the event in question will either remain a major part of that article or become its own article. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 04:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Anything more general than WP:ICONS?

Resolved

– Apparently just a note. Wasn't quite sure what to do with this one.

I don't know, I'm bad with table and image stuff. If you know anyone who likes to keep up with the pages in the Image cat, I would love for someone to add the category to stuff to keep up with at WP:Update. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 05:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

AAU reminder notice

Resolved

– Projectspam.

A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =)
	Hey there SMcCandlish! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers!

Notice delivery by xenobot 14:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

Resolved

– Just a note.

I edited a barnstar and cut follow ups, an image and wikilinks here from last month. In advance, no problem if for some reason you need all that and revert. Things calmed down here. Thanks for being a safe haven. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

List naming conventions

Resolved

– Discussion moved to nascent guideline's talk page.

Hi, SMcCandlish. I don't know if you remember, but just over 2 weeks ago you commented at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#Naming conventions for lists regarding the complete mess and inconsistencies over the naming of lists. A couple of other people commented along the lines of "Yeah, it is a mess", though despite me leaving notes at WP:Lists, WP:FLC etc it didn't get the attention I was hoping for. I know that we cannot say a consensus has been reached, but the proposal was made, noone opposed it; do you think it's time to be bold and actually create WP:Naming conventions (lists) (shortcut: WP:NNL) using the points we discussed? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd call it WP:NCLIST; "NN" means "non-notable" in WP parlance. I'd proceed with caution here; we need to work in material from multiple sources, including WP:NCLL and WP:SAL, actually observe what's happening in practice and try to normalize it (i.e. make it more consistent) based on what the most common naming pattern(s) is/are (see WP:POLICY – guidelines are supposed to describe actual WP best practices, not try to make them up or prescribe someones' pet preference), account for specialized lists like glossaries (see WP:MOSGLOSS for an in-progress draft relating to them), and so forth. I have no objections to creating the page; it should have {{Draft proposal}} on it, though (if not {{Brainstorming}}). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 04:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, NNL must have been a typo, I'm sure I meant NCL, but NCLIST is just as good. I'll have a go at starting something this weekend, all being well, taking into what was discussed a couple of weeks ago, and what you pointed out here. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)