User talk:BD2412/Archive 2

Status: Active. bd2412 T Email inbound Just sent you an email. EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC) RfB thankspam! Just wanted to drop you a line to thank you for your support of my RfB, which just closed with unanimous support. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC) I have every confidence in you for the job. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Kindness quote Hi BD2412, I was just cruising for quotes for our church's weekly "Thought for the week" and I used the MacDuff one you posted, and linked it with Proverbs 15:1. But I noticed that the Littleton one right before it - also posted by you - seems a bit odd. Can you check to see if you made a typo? It currently says, "And if you ask what is the temper which is most fitted to be victorious over sin on earth, I answer that in it the warp of a sunny gentleness must be woven across the woof of a strong character." The words "warp" and "woof" both seem strange - can you check these against the original source? Thanks, Walkerma 18:47, 20 June 2009 (UTC) For this use of these terms see Weaving, once a homecraft familiar to all, but now mostly relegated to factories. ~ Ningauble 20:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC) Thanks, yes it's old fashioned language, but "warp and woof" is a correct expression. Cheers! BD2412 T 22:36, 20 June 2009 (UTC) Aeschylus I was just paroling the recent changes for vandalism, and noticed you'd added quotes from Bartlett's to the Aeschylus article. I must have made a mistake then, as I had just recently moved Aeschylus out of the category requiring completion at the Bartlett's project page. I had referred to my (personal) copy of Bartlett's and added the particular quotes that were missing, and I guess I (incorrectly) assumed the different editions were just reprintings with, for the most part, the same quotes — So I thought I had appropriately completed the importing from Aeschylus. It appears there were more which I neglected to add before I moved the entry to "complete," I apologize. Next time I'll make sure to check the exact source! Peace and Passion ("I'm listening....") 07:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC) The Bartlett's edition that we are using for this project is the 1910 edition (which, of course, happens to be in the public domain), linked on that project page. I'll import all the quotes to Wikiquote project space in the next few days, so we won't have to jump to external sources to find them. Cheers! BD2412 T 08:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC) Thank you Thanks for the endorsement of my block. :) Cirt (talk) 18:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC) Blocks can be tough, and controversial (probably more so here then on Wikipedia, where they are far more common). Hopefully my review precludes such controversy! BD2412 T 18:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC) Yes, I hope so. On another note, are you on OTRS? Cirt (talk) 19:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC) Nope. Should I be? By the way, User:TheVidiot sent me a rather lengthy email protesting his block. For transparency's sake, I'm inclined to repost it to his talk page. Since he addresses your actions, you may wish to respond to his points. BD2412 T 19:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC) If it is okay with you, I will just respectfully defer to your admin review. :) Cirt (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I tend to believe that improper conduct can be redeemed. I would have started with a shorter block (maybe 48 yours), and would have given a warning for the first evasion, since it was not an attempt to edit the article which led to the block. I would recommend you reconsider the indefinite block after the week has run. BD2412 T 18:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC) Perhaps, after a week, it could be proposed to him to lift the block, to be replaced by a topic ban? Cirt (talk) 18:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I think that would be an entirely reasonable resolution. BD2412 T 18:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC) ┌─────────────────────────────────────┘ Whoa, had you noticed this comment??? [1]. In his recent unblock requests, his excuse is he claims he was unaware of his violating by usage of sockpuppet, but this comment acknowledging he is aware of this is from December 2008! Cirt (talk) 18:30, 17 October 2009 (UTC) Additionally, after further review of his posts using the sock, I must point out that his posts with the sock about the account TheVidiot referred to it in the third person. [2] [3] - showing he willfully intended for this to be interpreted as a different individual. Cirt (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I was unaware of the earlier comment - still, some people don't consider an IP edit to be a sockpuppet, since it's not an actual account. Those comments certainly do strengthen the case for a longer block. BD2412 T 18:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC) In my own defense: 1. Yes Cirt, I would have liked an explanation from you about why I was blocked. Having another admin say, “I endorse this block” does not provide any information about why YOU blocked me in the first place. 2. About sockpuppets, my previous comment acknowledges that I know what they are; my “excuse” was that I didn’t realize that use of a sockpuppet would result in a lifetime ban with no warning. 2a. Yes, I did refer to myself in the third person. I think it was pretty clear who I was, without explicitly saying, “Look, it’s me! I’m posting anonymously!” I was trying to get an answer to my question, not trying to make a big deal about dodging the block. 2b. And yes, I think there is a big difference between posting anonymously, and having a second account which you use for sockpuppetry. 2c. And in fact, when looking at the sockpuppet guidelines, it says that the puppet account should be blocked indefinitely, NOT the original account. 3. After asking for an explanation so many times, it would have been nice to know that a revocation of the block was at least being considered. The only time I heard about it was after I had already tried to ask anonymously, and it was only in the context of, “We were going to unblock him, but then he kept asking to be unblocked….” The Vidiot 23:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC) You're welcome. BD2412 T 23:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Review As you were kind enough to take on the review of another block, could you look at this one [4] - and perhaps comment in that same subsection at the user talk page on it? Cirt (talk) 18:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC) I'd rather avoid creating the appearance that you and I have an arrangement to that effect. There is no requirement for blocks to be reviewed at all, but any admin can review any other admin's block. BD2412 T 18:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC) Well, I did post about it to WQ:AN, with a request for other admins to review. I suppose if you disagreed you would feel free to say so. :) Cirt (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC) True. BD2412 T 18:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC) Fictional characters update Hey, regarding Wikiquote_talk:Fictional_characters#Notability_exception, I just wanted to stop by and say that I agree with the changes you made there [5]. There hasn't been any comment at that page in about a month - you think we can mark that issue as resolved? :) Cheers, Cirt (talk) 04:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Absolutely! BD2412 T 15:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Okay, I posted an update to Wikiquote_talk:Fictional_characters#Notability_exception. I will post a similar query to Ningauble (talk · contributions) and UDScott (talk · contributions). Cirt (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Request 4 Advice ( & assistance ? ) Hello, BD2412. Please allow me to introduce myself : I'm CononOfSamos, & I formerly edited under the Username Archimedes. I am trying at the moment to find the best solution to a page naming issue involving Thomas Fuller ( I've been adding material to the page for Thomas Fuller, the English physician and aphorist, 1654-1734 ). The Wikiquote page was titled Thomas_Fuller_(physician), but the corresponding page on Wikipedia is titled Thomas_Fuller_(writer). There are also a number of other Thomas Fullers, including Thomas Fuller (1608-1661), an English clergyman and historian, who also has a page on Wikiquote ( the situation is even more complicted on Wikipedia - I have saved some notes on my Talk page, please read them if you can spare the time ). I made note of this situation in a brief note on the Talk page of InvisibleSun ; another editor (Kalki) then moved the Wikiquote page for Thomas Fuller (1654-1734) from Thomas_Fuller_(physician) to Thomas_Fuller_(writer), which is certainly an improvement, in that it results in a consistent naming scheme between Wikiquote and Wikipedia. However. I am of the opinion that a better way to improve the situation would have been to move the Wikipedia page for Thomas Fuller (1654-1734) to Thomas_Fuller_(physician). Not only is this a better designation for Thomas Fuller (1654-1734) than the present designation : the earlier Thomas Fuller was a more prolific writer than the later T.F. : and in addition, the edits that I have been making, and also additional edits planned for the future, involve direct links to the Fuller page from the page for Poor Richard's Almanack : the links I've already made point to Thomas_Fuller_(physician) , so if the present move stands, they should be updated to direct links for efficiency, if I've correctly understood how these links work. I am fairly sure that I am not able to make the Wikipedia change that I think should be made here ( from Thomas_Fuller_(writer)to Thomas_Fuller_(physician) ; I've made additional edits to the Wikiquote page since Kalki moved it, so I'm not sure whether it would be safe now to revert his change, and in any case, I've never yet done one of these moves, so I'm unfamiliar with the correct procedure to begin with ( though I feel I should learn the right way to make such an edit ). I'm bugging you about this crap because a) I believe that you are an editor who is able to make the change I've mentioned on Wikipedia, and b) I believe that you are experienced in making this type of change and could therefore, at the very least, warn me if there are things here that I've either misunderstood or failed to properly consider. Please let me know, on my talk page, whether I've understood this situation properly. Thank you, CononOfSamos (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC) List of people by name Will you be doing periodic runs to pick up new articles not in List of people by name or must it be done manually?--Ole.Holm 22:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC) It should not be too difficult to do this manually from time to time, once the big initial runs are finished. BD2412 T 04:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC) VFDs Just to let you know I am only trying to get only the bad pages deleted not good pages on VFDs. I came here to try to clean up the website not ruin it.(StarWarsFanBoy 02:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)) A better way to clean up the website would be to source unsourced quotes; and if you find a page with no quotes that can be sourced through a diligent search, to nominate for deletion. BD2412 T 02:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC) I am sorry but I rather let the admins nominate the articles for deletion because you admins know which pages are unwanted and are wanted. Besides I can't tell which quote is notable or memorable on many pages like Air Force One and George Washington.(StarWarsFanBoy 05:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)) Hamid Bin Ahmad Al-Rifaie Why did you delete the article ... We have repaired the article .. I have to add the sources .. I have also attached files for books PDF format ... I'm astonished by this act???? Is it deleted for deletion only??FALCON-MAN 09:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC) The article was deleted in accordance with the vote of the community, excluding anon IP addresses with no established record of participation in Wikiquote. BD2412 T 00:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC) The article was nominated for deletion for certain reasons listed there .... Defects have been repaired and the addition of sources for the article ... As well as the addition of books and files attached to PDF format ..... Question: What is the benefit of the vote if the article had been repaired!!! Voting was on the defects, and defects repaired?? So the vote has no value to him??? In other words: the vote was for some reason ... The reason ended ... So vote for him no value FALCON-MAN 08:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC) If other members of the community felt that the citations added indicated that the subject was quotably notable, they would have changed their votes. BD2412 T 00:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC) These votes were before modification and repair of the article ... they did not come back again ... I hope to help bring the article, it is good and useful .. , Which it is identical to the specifications of wiki FALCON-MAN 09:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC) I replied to the same question posted elsewhere. The vote was for two reasons. Your participation in the dialogue only addressed one of them. Participants do come back and review current developments. No one changed their vote. The dialogue was finished and there was a clear consensus. BD2412 acted properly in closing the vote and deleting the article in accordance with the consensus. ~ Ningauble 15:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC) These votes were before modification and repair of the article ... they did not come back again ... I hope to help bring the article, it is good and useful .. , Which it is identical to the specifications of wiki FALCON-MAN 16:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC) Would this be an opportunity to use WQ:DRV? It seems it never has been used.--Ole.Holm 19:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC) It could be the time, while I'm not sure if the conclusion of us at the community may vary and if this gentleman is satisfied. --Aphaia 01:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC) May as well. BD2412 T 05:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC) the vote was for some reason ... The reason ended ... So vote for him no value FALCON-MAN 14:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC) There were later votes by the same participants in the same project space; those participants had to have seen that discussion continued, but they did not change their votes. The issue is resolved. BD2412 T 02:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC) Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers Have you considered templatizing a section header for articles that use quotes from this work? Just a thought. ~ Ningauble 17:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC) Actually, I was just thinking about it today. However, my ultimate goal is to find better sources for each of those quotes, so eventually the sections would disappear, to be replaced by reference to the original works. Of course, that may take a while. A long while. BD2412 T 19:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC) Hello I need some help on this Wiki, and woud appriciate it if you would help. The main question I have is [When you edit a page it says do not steal something from a internet site, but then how do you add wikiquotes that were created by someone other than you?] --Nascar1996 02:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC) How do you add wikiquotes? Or just a collection of quotes? To add quotes by a particular person, start by looking for things they have said that have actually been quoted in books and articles. Also, see if there's a public domain collection of quotes (pre-1923); that we can use freely. BD2412 T 03:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC) Okay. --Nascar1996 02:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC) Help Hello! Please help me, this new user, at Wikiquote. Thanks,--Sainsf 16:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks for mopping up Thanks for mopping up the films by producer categories. I really ought to try out the AWB for myself one of these days... ~ Ningauble 13:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC) No problem, my friend. BD2412 T 01:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC) For what reason ... ... have you nominated my article on Lord Voldemort for deletion? As one of the most well-known characters in modern literature, I rather think he deserves a page. --86.174.21.44 01:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC) We have three kinds of entries here: quotes by people, quotes from works, and quotes about things. Voldemort is a fictional character, so none of the quotes are actually by him. They are instead by J. K. Rowling. Voldemort is not the work; the Harry Potter books are. Voldemort is not a thing about which quotable quotes are being made by numerous authors. BD2412 T 12:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC) [Splitting] Hi, I've been working my way through the list of TV shows to cleanup, and I want to split this page because it is very long (442kb). I also wanted to thin the quotes down a bit, as it's in danger of breaching copyright, to only a few per episode (which would also bring the size down. I just wanted to check this with an admin, as there doesn't seem to be a "propose for splitting' page, unlike wikipedia. Another very long one is this one, which I also propose splitting. I've previously split the One Tree Hill page, so this will be no trouble. Soph 23:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC) Pages that long give me serious pause regarding potential copyright concerns. Also, is there really that much that is profoundly quotable emanating from any of these shows? BD2412 T 01:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC) Template:People by name Please see my comments on the talk page of that template.--Longfellow 08:46, 27 October 2010 (UTC) Michael Laitman Ah, thank you - this person sounded moderately familiar, but I was in a hurry and couldn't exactly remember this prior VFD. Thanks! ~ UDScott 13:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Curious Curious how you came by to find my posting, at User talk:Tiptoety, and then showed up there? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Kalki copied it on his own talk page (also his prerogative, I guess), which I've been watching. Cheers! BD2412 T 19:56, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Perhaps it might be useful for you to take some time to back away from so closely and heavily monitoring the situation that you feel the need to pop up and appear not just at Village Pump discussions, or Kalki's talk page, but also other users's talk pages. Cheers! -- Cirt (talk) 20:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC) I'm just trying to introduce a dose of proportionality to the situation. If Tiptoety doesn't care for my commentary, I suppose he can delete it from his talk page. BD2412 T 20:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Yes, but must you do so across multiple pages? It seems a little bit creepy that you popped up like that, is all. Cheers! -- Cirt (talk) 20:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Ah, it's a wiki (makes creepy wiki noises). To be honest, I've had my fill of the whole situation. Keeping up with all these posts is tiring! Also, I have a huge quote-importation project in the works to fill my time. ;-) BD2412 T 20:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC) You've had your "fill of the whole situation", and yet showed up to post over at User talk:Tiptoety? Seems a bit contradictory. -- Cirt (talk) 20:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Well now I have! BD2412 T 20:11, 5 November 2010 (UTC) (Though I'll add that the issue you raise at User talk:Tiptoety is a general purpose question for which we should have a community standard, and not a Kalki-specific problem). BD2412 T 20:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC) It is both. -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2010 (UTC) It can't be both, the latter subsumes the former. BD2412 T 20:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Yes it can, the former goes to a specific inappropriate behavior pattern. -- Cirt (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC) My point is that if the behavior is inappropriate, it must be universally so. That is, it can't be inappropriate if done by user "X", but fine if done by user "Y". There needs to be a policy saying what is acceptable and what is not, irrespective of the identity of the person doing them. BD2412 T 02:14, 6 November 2010 (UTC) Agreed. But it should also be dealt with individually. -- Cirt (talk) 02:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC) Highlighting misattributed sections Hi BD. Do you really prefer placing {{misattributed begin}} tags below the section heading rather than above? I think it looks better to highlight to the entire section, including header. ~ Ningauble 16:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC) I have no strong preference, so long as we are consistent. I suppose it does provide a neater presentation to include the header in the highlighting. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC) Wikiquote interlanguage communication Hi, I'm Nemo from the Italian language Wikiquote and I'm writing you (via a bot) because you're an administrator of Wikiquote in this language; please excuse me if you've received this message more than once. The simple thing that I want you to know is that Wikiquote has an official mailing list, Wikiquote-l, which can be used to communicate and discuss matters which interest all Wikiquotes. This mailing list was last "advertised" about three or four years ago, before many of us joined Wikiquote, and is currently almost not participated at all by Wikiquote users and very low-traffic. I ask you to subscribe, to participate in discussions and to write about your Wikiquote. I love Wikiquote, as you probably do, and I think that we should be proud of what we do here, share our experiences and good practices to make Wikiquote better and raise awareness of it. I remind you that Meta-Wiki is the best place for Wikimedia projects coordination, and it contains several pages about Wikiquote, and specifically this talk page which can be used to discuss about Wikiquote if you don't like mailing lists. I hope that this message has been useful for you. Cheers, Nemo (write me) 10:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC) The Content Creativity Barnstar The Content Creativity Barnstar For your outstanding work on Freedom of the press. -- Cirt (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Excellent work on Freedom of the press. Great job! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Thanks! I think this is the first barnstar I've ever gotten on this project. However, I should in all honesty point out that many of these articles are dictated by the content of public domain collections that I am importing (Bartlett's, Hoyt's, the DOBW, and the DLQ). Cheers! BD2412 T 16:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Yes, but still, a very important topic and extremely worthwhile and appreciated contribution! -- Cirt (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Hoyt's Question for you - I realize you've been adding quotes to a lot of pages under a section for the Hoyt's Cyclopedia, but if the original source is known (and in many cases is cited), why wouldn't you source them to that - especially for theme pages? I ask because I was adding a couple to Authors, and realized that one I was about to add from Alexander Pope, sourced to his original work, was actually already listed in the Hoyt's section, with the original source also cited there. I moved it up to the main section instead. In looking at many other entries in the Hoyt's section, I saw similar situations, with quotes available with the original work cited. Shouldn't all these also be moved up and out of the Hoyt's section? Or is this your plan all along, to get them to a theme page and then to go back later and sort them out? It seems to me that the original source if known should be the preferred reference. It would also make it easier to determine if a quote someone wanted to add was already there on the page. Just wondering. Thanks. ~ UDScott 03:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC) Yes, the plan is to get all the quotes copied in first and sort them out later. Hoyt's doesn't provide publication dates, so their citations are incomplete by our standards (although Hoyt's as a work does so). My first concern is that there not be any public domain quotation books out there containing materials we lack. Our utility will be established by our having everything, so no one ever needs to look elsewhere for a quote. If something in Hoyt's can be more fully cited, please do feel free to provide the citation to the original work and move it up to regular sourced content. BD2412 T 05:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC) Wikiquote talk:Deletion review I posted a process question here - your thoughts? ~ UDScott 16:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC) Style issues I notice you have been changing "Ch. xx" designations in interlinear citations to "Chapter xx" form, and other similar adjustments. I actually prefer the abbreviated forms on this, and this is what I have usually used. It might be an issue for discussion at the Village Pump. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 00:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC) Quotation books generally use a collection of abbreviations to save space, which is not a concern for us. My aim in the current set of edits is to catch the ones coming in from the Hoyt's import. Non-Hoyt's quotes getting caught up in that are incidental, but I'll try to keep it to the Hoyt's quotes for now. Cheers! BD2412 T 00:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC) Category:Occupations -> Category:People by occupation? Your recent creation of the Shoemaking article prompts me to ask something that has been in the back of my mind for a long time: What would you think about renaming Category:Occupations to Category:People by occupation (or something similar)? I have been routinely removing Theme articles from People categories, and vice versa, in order to keep the "Fundamental" categories distinct. It would be a Good Thing™ to have lots of theme articles about occupations, but we don't have a separate category for them and the obvious name is taken. If you think this is a good idea, would you be interested, as a proficient AWB user, in helping to move 88 subcategories to a renamed category? ~ Ningauble 16:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC) I would estimate that, at peak efficiency, I can recategorize the entire group in under four minutes. I'd be glad to do so. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC) Done. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC) Awesome, Thanks! (I should really download and learn to use the AWB, but now I have one less reason to do so.  ; ) ) ~ Ningauble 17:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC) Hoax article I am about to leave, at least briefly, and just thought I would point out that Elmoe and Gabby's Deathday Fun should be deleted as a hoax article by a repeat vandal who should probably be given a long term block. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 00:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Apologies I will abide by your will to not further discuss separate matters on your Wikiquote:Request for bureaucrat/BD2412 nomination page — I was responding to offer what I considered an important perspective on some of the comments on matters Cirt had made. While I am posting this I will note that tomorrow's QOTD page Wikiquote:Quote of the day/May 28, 2011 needs updating by an admin with material at Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/May 28, 2011. I was not able to update the page earlier in the week, as Cirt had taken measures to restrict my editing in deplorable ways. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 20:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC) I haven't updated a QOTD page before - do I just move the talk page to the article title? BD2412 T 20:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't catch this reply earlier — I would just copy the layout of material I've posted at the talk page into the project page — I'm not sure that a page move would be a good idea. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 21:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Done, but why is an admin needed to do this? The target page does not appear to be protected. BD2412 T 21:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC) It is cascading protection from Wikiquote:Quote of the day/Protect. (It is supposed to protect pages in a current window of dates, but the formulae do not quite work at month end.) ~ Ningauble 22:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC) As Ningable notes, these QOTD pages usually become temporarily protected about 2 days ahead of time. In the past this was a convenient feature to automatically protect pages, when I had to make decisions and edits a few days in advance because of expectations of being off the internet for a few days, but now it is an inconvenience, when I happen to have missed the rolling protection of the pages — which at times can be quite erratic. This could be altered to only protect the page of the current day and previous day at the Wikiquote:Quote of the day/Protect page, so as to remove the BOTTOM two lines of each section here. I usually have been able to get things done sevaral days ahead, but I believe this would make things much less of a burden on me and others, as I have occassionaly been unable to edit the pages in time for the rollover, and others have had to do it. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 22:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Or, they might just be semiprotected, until such time as we have trouble with sleeper vandals. ~ Ningauble 22:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. I think semi-protection might be a good way to go. BD2412 T 22:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Ok, I have lowered the protection level to allow "auto-confirmed" users to edit. Keep your fingers crossed. I also fixed the date calculations so it does not think the day after the end of a month is the first of the same month. ~ Ningauble 15:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC) N Ack! Cascading does not work with semiprotection (bugzilla:8796). I restored full protection. ~ Ningauble 15:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC) I guess we'll have to figure out something else. Full protection for the time being, in any case. BD2412 T 16:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Congrats, you are now a b'crat Welcome aboard, BD2412. I'd invite you to have a tour on Wikiquote:Bots, WQ:CHU and WQ:USURP. I don't mention to WQ:RFA since there would be nothing new for you at this moment but WQ:ADMIN may also be nice to read. I'll be appreciate you to review my recent comments on WQ:USURP in particular. Renaming accounts looks now the center of bureaucrat life, even if it's much calmer than other request pages. Use the tools you've get wisely and thoughtfully as same as you've been doing with the older one. Cheers, --Aphaia 20:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC) Thank you. I am humbled by the trust of my peers, and I promise to do my best to avoid screwing anything up. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC) Congrats. Thenub314 01:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Congratulations! ~ UDScott 01:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks for volunteering to pitch in on the account maintenance chores. ~ Ningauble 17:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Thank you, to everyone! BD2412 T 17:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC) SUL usurp Hello BD2412, could you please take care of Wikiquote:Changing username/Usurpation#Non (SUL usurp) → Galadriel, thanks in advance. Axpde 12:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC) Greetings! Our policy requires a three-week period for the usurpation target to respond to the usurpation request. As you notified User:Galadriel of this request on June 13, 2011, I will be pleased to effect the change on July 4, 2011. Cheers! BD2412 T 13:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC) Ah, haven't noticed you have a three-weeks-period - usually it's only two weeks. Regards Axpde 19:59, 28 June 2011 (UTC) No problem. Cheers! BD2412 T 23:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC) Asking about the VfD closure... ...of Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Open Season 2 (video game). Who is it? I did a CU check on "Cars 2:I'm back!" (dusting off my CU flag for the first time in friggin' forever), but the IP didn't match the Open Season author. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC) (that said, I don't actually have an issue with the deletion; the article never would have survived, and the author's ownership issues were definitely a problem. I just don't think it's correct to draw a line between the IP editor and the recent vandalism spree, though I could do a CU on the IP author if you feel there's a connection.) The connection seemed apparent to me from the pattern of editing. The same vandal (under a different name, but using the same tactics) had previously created a large number of pages, some of which were (to my recollection, though I can go back and look) similar in content to the Open Season page. It struck me as an unlikely coincidence that the vandal would choose this one recently created page at random among all of his vandalism decisions; it seemed like a return to the scene of the crime. BD2412 T 12:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC) On reviewing some of this vandal's earlier page creations, the resemblance is not what I recall. I have deleted other pages created by the same vandal under different names in the past, so I may have been thinking of one of those, but it struck me as a very clear connection when I saw that he had vandalised this particular page. I have no objection to restoring the page for the duration of the VfD, but I think you are correct that the article would never have survived. BD2412 T 12:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC) The article in question is a familiar pattern of childishness. I would not put too much stock in coincidences, for I think there are several individuals who have exhibited this pattern. The reason may have been weak, but speedy closure was probably a good thing. I have occasionally been strongly tempted to apply the following logic to such cases: Someone who is knowledgeable enough to spell, type, and use wikimarkup must necessarily be intelligent enough to know that such contributions are disruptive so, therefore, such contributions are prima fascia cases of deliberate vandalism, and should be treated as such. I have generally resisted that temptation, and tried to apply the principle that what can plausibly be attributed to folly ought not be attributed to malice. I fear that when such plausibility is too thin I may have been negligently lax. ~ Ningauble 14:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Hiya Thanks for the welcome. I appreciate it! --~Another Zombie 15:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC) It was my pleasure - thank you for your contributions! BD2412 T 15:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC) name change Can you please carry out my name change on WQ:CHU please?   † CR90  04:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC) Usurp request Please confirm My request. Three weeks were spent.Pesare amol 07:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC) QOTD layout for 24 September 2011 I was late selecting a quote and a layout for today's date, and the layout at Wikiquote talk:Quote of the day/September 24, 2011 will have to be moved to the Wikiquote:Quote of the day/September 24, 2011 by an admin. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 00:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Suspicious edits by User:GunLobbyist, User:BornInTheUSA, and User:TexasTown For some reason, I get an error message when I try to post on the Admin noticeboard. In any case, User:GunLobbyist, User:BornInTheUSA, and User:TexasTown all seem to be the same person, going through subject pages alphabetically and posting "quotes" from Wickedictionary, which is sort of a joke version of Wiktionary (although one version has been published in print). Here are a few diffs: [6], [7], [8]. I am inclined to revert all of these additions, but would value a second look. Cheers! BD2412 T 23:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC) I think the Wikimedia servers had a brief problem that has now passed. I'll take a look shortly, but you might want to try to repost to WQ:AN as well. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2011 (UTC) Email Hi, can you deal with my email? Thanks, Goodvac 21:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC) Done. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC) Thank you. Much appreciated! Goodvac 21:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC) Question Would you mind commenting on the discussion I am currently having with a new user regarding a page with inadequate sources? It is here. Thanks. ~ UDScott 00:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC) Gentlemen, you are doing a terrific due diligence. Thank you for keeping the standards very high and for the great contribution that wikimedia is to the humanity. However, a new source been found by another user - 'a printed book: "Funniest Thing You Never Said 2" [Paperback] Rosemarie Jarski (Author) Section Philosophy - Page 512. Please please give it another consideration. You know have two well known people Jarski and Geary quoting Vishnepolsky. His quotes are funny and witty. Best regards. Zvezda1111 21:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC) Incidentally, this new source may or may not be to your high standards. I will understand and agree with whatever decision you all will make. I just want to make sure you have all information available. If you need me to elaborate on why I think this person is notable and quotable, i would love to expand. Zvezda1111 22:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC) MediaWiki:Blocklogentry Hello. There is a problem with this system message, because the parameter $3 is missing (that's the block options). Could you please fix that (for example by adding $3 at the end of the message) ? You can see an example here. Thanks -- Quentinv57 15:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC) I have updated this to include parameter $3, using the same text as at Wikipedia. ~ Ningauble 15:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Gentlemen, it has been wonderful having this conversation with you. Cheers! BD2412 T 18:25, 29 October 2011 (UTC) Well, I watchlist all of the administrators' talk pages. When I saw this it just struck me as a SOFIXIT situation. ~ Ningauble 16:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC) I know, I do the same - I just found it amusing to log in and see the issue raised and disposed of. :-) Cheers again! BD2412 T 16:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC) White Cat → とある白い猫 Hi, I'd like my account "White Cat" be renamed to "とある白い猫". Thanks. -- Cat chi? 00:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC) Please post your request at Wikiquote:Changing username, and please also post a comment on your Wikipedia account at w:User talk:とある白い猫 confirming that these are the same account, and provide a link from that comment to this request. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC) Treachery & Treason Just a quick comment - I saw that you had made Treachery into a redirect for Treason. I'm not sure that I completely agree with this. I do realize that some laws equate the two in some countries, but I'm not sure I would think of them as strictly synonyms. Yes, treason can be a form of treachery, but there are plenty of acts that would be defined as treacherous that do not rise to the level of treason (meaning that they do not involve betrayal of one's nation, but rather betrayal more on an individual or smaller group level). Instead, I would rather have a page on either treachery or maybe betrayal that contains a See also section pointing to Treason. Your thoughts? ~ UDScott 20:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC) I would not be opposed to a separate page on Treachery, but at the moment one does not exist. Of course, one can colloquially be described as committing "treason" against their family or other institutions without it rising to the legal sense of the term, although this is a less common use of the term. BD2412 T 21:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC) There are lots of redirects that could eventually become separate articles. I think it's a good thing as long as the redirect is not misleading. I have even been inspired by them to create new articles from time to time (e.g. [9], [10]). ~ Ningauble 17:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC) Of course, you are both right - just struck me as funny when I first saw it. I made a quick search for quotes on the topic of treachery or betrayal, but came up empty; perhaps I'll make a more thorough search when I have the chance. ~ UDScott 18:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC) Keep up the good work! Every time I stop in the Hoyle's project I am amazed to see how much you've done. I will try to lend a hand as time permits. Thenub314 23:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC) Thanks! The project is about 2/3 of the way done, but it has been a grind getting there mostly by myself. For the most part, the red links - the Hoyt's entries with no corresponding Wikiquote article - are easy to do, requiring only formatting, a brief introduction, and a page move. Cheers! BD2412 T 23:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC) Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Template:@ Would you mind transcluding this debate onto the main VFD page ? I can't because the page is protected. Thanks. --A Divine 19:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC) Done. Cheers! BD2412 T 22:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC) I need help I saw that you had been a pushing force in the deletion of the page Victor R. Ramirez. It seems as though he is now self-promoting on his user page. Is this against the rules on wikiquote? Deezy D 18:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC) A person who otherwise participates in the community is permitted to have a user page, and we are generally not concerned with what goes there so long as it is not vulgar or defamatory, and does not infringe intellectual property rights. Mr. Ramirez is allowed to have what he wishes on his user page. Of course, another member of the community might challenge his right to have a user page at all if he doesn't contribute to the general work of the community (for which the opportunities are abundant). Occasionally we do delete user pages from editors who have not contributed in other areas. I suppose that you are asking because you are interested in having Deezy D moved to user space? If you so desire, I will be glad to accommodate. Cheers! BD2412 T 19:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC) Thank you for your help on the subject. I Would like to have Deezy D moved to my user page if that is possible. Is there a way i can find more quotes for my articles I created?(Pimp C Bun B Eazy E Ludacris) O get it where it is visible to others who might have more information on the subject? Thanks for the help! Deezy D 14:26, 13 December 2011 I think the best way to find quotable quotes from song lyrics is to read reviews of the songs and albums, which can sometimes be found in Google Books (which also carries scans from magazines) and on Google News. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC) FYI – Sadly, the utility of Google News is greatly diminished. It has been re-purposed for current news only: They recently started purging anything older than 30 days from the index, and they are no longer updating the "news archive". I think it is a real shame but, since many more people are interested in "new" news than in research, one can understand why they would decide to go where the money is. ~ Ningauble 14:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Thank you for the advice I will look into it!! Deezy D 14:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Help ( Proteccion ) Mr.BD2412 exist a user on Wikimedia Commons is making edits to my profile, there is some way that he can not do that? The problem is that is making inappropriate accusations. --BEARMAN 14:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC) I am not BD2412 but i belive you can semi-protect your page. Mr3in1gr 14:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Can you please show me how to do that ?--BEARMAN 15:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Jean-Luc Picard page = improved Jean-Luc Picard I have worked hard and put in a lot of effort and research to greatly improve the page Jean-Luc Picard. I would greatly appreciate it if you could reconsider your position at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Jean-Luc Picard. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 16:54, 16 December 2011 (UTC) As you were the nominator and you changed to "weak keep", can you please strikeout your original nom statement? Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 19:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC) User rename requested Here's the application to rename my account login. The page being less crowded than some other high-traffic wiki, may be nobody has noticed the new request so far. Having you as the bureaucrat for most of the last few renames, I have stepped out to reach you to request committing the change. Would you be so kind to change my username, please? -Debloper 04:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)