User talk:Korath

I loathe fragmented discussions.

Please place comments relating to specific articles on their talk pages.

If I post on your talk page, I will see any replies posted there.

Unless you request otherwise, I will reply here to comments made here.

If you're here to ask how I get specific edit counts at WP:RFA, see here.

Archives may be found in this page's history: [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Korath&oldid=9411673) [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Korath&oldid=11382247) [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Korath&oldid=12142426)

Preserved Deleted pages in the user space

Here's the articles that were deleted and preserved in the user space. I'm not sure what to do with them (I don't know if you just VFD them or what) so I'll list them here and you can do (or not do) with them what you will. If you reply, I'd appreciate at least a note on my talk page.

Kevin Rector 05:06, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/First Photograph

I just got a high-res version, and the image is public domain. Please support the high-res version. --brian0918 ™ 17:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Schoolwatch

I notice you put the blatant POV-abuse (e.g. "Make sure your vote is counted!") back into this, and tagged it with a {{merge}}, even though Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch contains the more recent information (namely, schools for which the discussion is no longer active are not listed), and therefore no merge is needed. Chris talk back (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chriscf&action=edit&section=new), not here 22:27, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:Dr Zen/keepschools

The discussion on this template on a user subpage has been moved from WP:TFD to WP:VFD as user:Netoholic closed the discussion in its former location with the comment that TfD is only for entries in the Template: namespace. I have taken the liberty of moving your vote from its former location to the present discussion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dr Zen/keepschools. You may of course change your vote or stikethrough it all together in the normal way. To avoid any allegations of vote stacking I am contacting everybody who voted at TfD and Netoholic who closed the discussion, but not anybody who had not already expressed an opinion. Please feel free to disucss this on my talk page. Thryduulf 14:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Also, please give your opinion on the jurisdiction issue, at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Proposal. Radiant _* 15:36, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

For the VfD tag on User:Radman1/keepschools, I would have put a TfD tag on it, but it's been decided that the proper place for this template is at VfD. --Carnildo 18:20, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- If you look at User:Dr Zen/keepschools' deleted history, you'll see that was what was done first. —Korath (Talk) 18:26, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi Korath. I nominated you for an admin. Just go to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Korath and indicate your acceptance and answer a few questions. -- Darwinek 10:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

So should I delete your nomination from WP:RFA? -- Darwinek 11:26, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Please. —Korath (Talk) 11:37, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to think that sooner or later you might reconsider, even if not at this time... Grutness|^hello? Missing image
Grutness.jpg

13:39, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your confidence in me, but it's misplaced. People with tempers like mine shouldn't have access to block buttons. —Korath (Talk) 14:02, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know; we have our differences, but I think we should have more reluctant admins. Reconsider? — Xiong 熊 talk 09:54, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)

Maybe we need more reluctant admins, but we definitely do not need more tin-pot dictators, which is what I'd turn into. —Korath (Talk) 14:10, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism?

On VFD/Oral sex (no pictures) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Oral_sex_%28no_pictures%29#.5B.5BOral_sex_.28no_pictures.29.5D.5D) you called an obviously good faith edit that I made, which you disagreed with, vandalism. I'm sure you're aware that it is not reasonable to call something vandalism just because you disagree with it. ... I understand that there could have been a misunderstanding, so I thought I'd bring your error to your attention here. If you decide to reply on the VFD page, feel free to delete my comment here, though I'd prefer not to have a long discussion there on the matter since it is off topic. --Gmaxwell 14:50, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

KateWinsletTitanic2.jpg

Image:KateWinsletTitanic2.jpg - the grey bars are not a part of the movie. If you can edit that out, that'd be awesome. Kevin Rector (talk) 18:50, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Done. There'll be caching issues for a bit, as usual when uploading over an old image. —Korath (Talk) 19:06, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Monobook.css

I made the little change... it doesn't seem to be working. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:30, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. It's working here, both on Opera and IE (I don't have Firefox installed). The servers send out a header to make your browser reluctant to reload the sitewide Monobook.css more than once every 31 days; if you force a reload of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Monobook.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css&smaxage=2678400, things work properly. —Korath (Talk) 09:31, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Template competition

Thanks for your comments about my Developed Solution templates. I've tweaked them slightly, and hope it looks better now - can you check, as I'm still on this rubbish laptop! violet/riga (t) 21:32, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Tin-pot dictators

Good; very good. You and I may disagree on many things, but you show an admirable sense of your own limits -- more, perhaps, than I can say for myself.

I invite you to join a caucus on the ongoing Charter Convention; please send me email. (Click my sig.) — Xiong 熊 talk 03:41, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)

Youri Messen Jaschin (vfd)

Thanks for the prompt! I -think- I have followed the instructions. At least it appears on the vfd page now. I started the process yesterday, and my brain was too tired to follow the instructions past the first step :-) Please let me know if I've not done it correctly Eilthireach 20:45, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for rv'ing the most boring vandalism ever to hit my userpage. Frankly, if I was going to waste my time whacking someone's page, I'd be a lot more creative than just changing a couple of dates. What are vandals coming to these days? Joyous 03:18, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

US 94

Not a problem. --SPUI (talk) 17:49, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stub sorting duplication

Thanks for the offer, but I'm most of the way through it now. My main frustration is not so mucht he task as I seem to have a poor connection to the net tonight, and the link has gone down a couple of times. page caching's been slow too, which doesn't help. But (famous last words) I think I'm within ten minutes of completing it now. Grutness|^hello? Missing image
Grutness.jpg

11:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Automated VFDing

I've slightly added to Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion#Automated_VFDing and thought you might be interested and able to help me with my problem. I'd appreciate any assistance (there, not here; I only comment here to alert you to the fact that I continued the discussion there: it's been a while since the last previous post). Thanks! —msh210 14:20, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Template:Corp-stub

Hi, I executed the article move you requested through the Template:db tag. However, in the future, use the Template:move tag for Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cheers, --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:31, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Would be happy to, though I really don't see the point of letting page-move vandalism hang around at WP:RM for a week. —Korath (Talk) 21:50, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the board on Sandbox/Chess

Thanks for the board!!! :-)

Thanks for getting the photo template

I thought the Abu Ghraib template was a pretty nifty hack in leiu of a more formal solution. Unfortunately, almost no one understands what it is or how it works. I thank you for being one of those people. These image debates make me come back less and less frequently. It seems that a majority thinks we're a free speech forum first, and an encyclopedia second. Cool Hand Luke 09:54, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyrighted text on Abu Ghraib

Hi, I've noticed you have reinsterted the inclusion template into Abu Ghraib (no pictures). When this template is installed mediawiki dynamically inserts the text of the Abu Ghraib article without preserving attribution, in fact it actually provides misleading attribution. This unfortunately is in violation of the GFDL which wikipedia is licensed under, as we are required to maintain attribution. I tried getting the template to also provide a link to the correct history, but I couldn't find a way to get it to work. Even if you believe the inclusion of the history on another page is sufficent (which I disagree with, especially because of the misleading history attached to the no pictures version) then we must also consider what happens if a downstream fork of wikipedia fails to provide access to the orignal article? We really don't want to create additional copyright pitfalls for other people. You seem to know some about the inclusion template, ... is there something we can do to fix this problem?--Gmaxwell 17:15, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You can link to the history either by cut and pasting from the link on the original page, like so (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse&action=history), or by using the slightly more third-party-friendly incantation {{SERVER}}{{localurl:Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse|action=history}}, like so (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse&action=history).

I don't think it's necessary in this case, as the article clearly links to the main one, and doesn't misrepresent itself as a different version (except, obviously, for the omission of the photographs). Third party reusers almost invariably link back to Wikipedia to fulfill the author attribution requirement instead of providing a list, and we in fact encourage them to do so. —Korath (Talk) 17:33, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Regarding my RfA

Hello Korath. I was promoted to admin today, and I would like to thank you for the time you took to comment on my RfA page. I hope not to disappoint. Cheers. Phils 20:05, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedians statistics

How do you get the breakup of statistic on wikipedians edits as you do on VFA? =Nichalp (talk • contribs)= 07:37, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

See my archives (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Korath&oldid=12142426#Contribs_count). —Korath (Talk) 11:17, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Googlebombing?

You mentioned in the history of the VfD page for my StickHorsie article, there was some Googlebombing. Errrr... what's Googlebombing? Any idea who did it? *puzzled look* DarkSkywise 14:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Also, why did you disable the link at the bottom of the StickHorsie page? If there's another way I should have done that, I wasn't aware of it... this is the way I always do it at Wiki-Dutch where they taught me this was the correct procedure. DarkSkywise 14:25, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Okay, so I found Google bombing on Wiki :-)) but I still don't get what that has to do with the Horsie page or the link that's on it... it's just a single ordinary MSN Groups page... can you please elaborate? DarkSkywise 16:01, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Beefstew

To quote,

So how about BEEFSTEW of 5 gets an article, substubs are deleted, less than 5 gets merged if it isn't growing? Kappa 05:30, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Not in its current form. As mentioned on the BEEFSTEW page, only criteria H, J, and sometimes G would be accepted to show notability for any other subject. I've had pet fish about which I could write articles that meet criteria A-E. —Korath (Talk) 06:05, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

In the spirit of getting some consensus on high schools - what would you like changed in BEEFSTEW in order to make it a guideline acceptable to you? R adiant _* 07:33, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

As with any other subject, I would never support the inclusion of a specific school if an encyclopedic, verifiable, non-stub article couldn't be written about it. More specifically:

By "encyclopedic", I exclude trivialities, such as:

curriculum
lists of clubs and sports teams
the name of the assistant librarian

...and statistics that are better suited to an almanac or directory, like:

number of students
student:teacher ratios
class size
percentage of students receiving free or reduced-price lunches

By "verifiable", I obviously refer to Wikipedia:Verifiability, but with particular emphasis on the point "the author has a conflict of interest" - that is, information should be verifiable from a source other than the student who wrote the initial substub and the school's own web site, just as information about my pet fish should be verifiable from a source other than me and my web site. I notice a link to from Verifiable to Wikipedia:Reliable sources; while I haven't read the page before or in detail, much of it is applicable.

By "non-stub", I mean that there should be enough actual information that a good four or five paragraphs of actual prose without resorting to lists or other non-content.

By "couldn't be written", I'm pointing at that annoying notability issue. Unless the school is obviously notable, as in, you couldn't change move the article to a page title referring to a different school in a different state without someone so much as noticing, I'm unlikely to be convinced that the article could be written without someone actually doing so.

By "about it", I refer to statements that are not specifically about that school, such as:

Alumni, especially ones not notable enough to have an individual article at Wikipedia (so Rich Dangel doesn't qualify)
"There are a wide variety of books in its library."
"Like most high schools, it enrolls 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th graders from the town."
"Charter schools in Delaware were authorized by Delaware Code, Title 14, Chapter five, enacted in 1995."
"Many students and parents have expressed deep safety concerns as [the school] has been plagued with gun violence, sexual harassment and street gangs."

Any numerical approach like BEEFSTEW is doomed to failure, except as a tool for saying, "This article is so terrible and its subject so trivial that even an extreme inclusionist should be embarassed to vote keep for it." Witness the creativity in finding three facts for point D, such as those listed above, all of which were pulled from school articles currently or recently on VFD.

Further reading: Geogre's user page, if you haven't stumbled on it yet, starting somewhere around the Notability Nota Bene section. —Korath (Talk) 04:48, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Xiong

Hi there! Because the RFC about Xiong seemed to deal mainly on his disagreements with Netoholic, I thought it best to start a new RFC to see if people have comments on Xiong's behavior that do not relate to Netoholic. Please give your thoughts and/or opinion on that at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Xiong. R adiant _* 08:27, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Archbishop Williams High School VfD

I noticed all schools on VfD were eventually posted there and on Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch, so if I saw a new school and didn't post it to both, I would just be leaving more work for someone else, so I felt responsible to do it myself when I had the chance. Is there a reason why I shouldn't? My talk. Samaritan 16:55, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Schools

Please give your opinion there. Thanks. R adiant _* 08:44, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Move of Portal:Cricket

Korath, why did you move this page? You say "per vfd", but the VfD discussion for the page under portal namespace kept things there until a Portal: namespace was built. Your move mucked things up. Unless there is a really good reason (new) since the page was placed at Portal:Cricket, I shall move it back. Your move was unjustified and inflammatory. --Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 11:39, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Bellvue West High School vfd 2

Hi, I do appreciate that you feel that this article should have remained as a merge and redirect, but there was no consensus to do that. Rossami was simply being bold and he said so. Well sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. It might have worked if more editors had discussed a revert as a possibility during the discussion. Only two did. The discussion was somewhat rancorous and the result was heavily polarized.

You said GRider "refused to accept consensus, and reverted the closing redirect against several editors", but that isn't correct at all. What happened seems to have been a fairly evenly balanced revert war, in which GRider, SimonP, Radman1 and BaronLarf wanted the article kept and you, Jayjg, Carnildo and Neutrality wanted it as a redirect (in practice only SimonP, Jayjg and GRider engaged in warring--reverting more than once). So there was clearly no consensus for this redirect. Which is why I chose to protect on the article, not the redirect. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Your IP-blocking javascript

Many thanks for User:Korath/blockip.js - I've copied it to my user javascript and find it very useful. However, in certain cases, such as very high-speed vandals whose talk pages do not yet exist when I go to block them, I wish that the "block" and "blocklog" tabs were present when editing a userpage as well as when viewing one. Would that be very difficult to implement? Would you be so kind as to look into it? Thanks! User:Rdsmith4/Sig 00:47, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

VfD Closing process

Good afternoon, Korath. There's recently been some discussion about ways to simplify the VfD closing process. I know I have some pride-of-authorship issues and may not be as perfectly impartial as I'd like. Would you mind taking a few minutes to review the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Deletion process#Simplification and share your thoughts? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 20:44, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/User_talk:Korath"