User talk:AzaToth/Archives/2013/July


Deletion of P. Narahari

The article which you deleted was strongly notable (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-18/bhopal/36414703_1_facebook-and-twitter-gwalior-followers, http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/MadhyaPradesh/Got-a-complaint-Poke-Gwalior-collector-on-Facebook/Article1-945195.aspx and http://www.tehelka.com/gwaliors-game-changer/). I was to rewrite that article due to copyright violation, but I was banned till 5th July, so I wasn't available to rewrite it. Please restore it. Shobhit Gosain (talk) 07:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I think you got the wrong admin here. The article was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parikipandla Narahari (2nd nomination) by User:Secret. →AzaToth 11:23, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle, ANEW and time

Hey, Aza, why is Twinkle using some sort of local time for reports to ANEW? It should be using UTC, and I thought it did before.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Currently, it's doing "moment(v.timestamp).format('lll')" which I assume can bee too simple. Didn't take time to construct a better format than 'lll'. Also I assume I should have used .utc() instead of .format(). Docs can be fond at http://momentjs.com/docs →AzaToth 12:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
You're not expecting me to change it, are you? :-) Will you have time to do so? Should I ask someone else?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
What format do you propose? →AzaToth 14:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't know how other admins feel about the entire format, but the date/time should be UTC. I actually switched my preferences to UTC because of the weird way Wikipedia reports some things in UTC even if you set your preferences to use local time. At the moment, I have my preferences set to "no preferences" and default UTC. That displays the date and time in revision history as "15:02, 13 July 2013". That would be acceptable to me and should be acceptable to others as it is the default, but the thing I care most about is using UTC (and not AM or PM, of course).--Bbb23 (talk) 15:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Kiefer's question

Let it be. It is not a question I would ask but none of us have special rights on Wikipedia (and it is always helpful to see how a candidate responds to an odd question). --regentspark (comment) 14:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

While it's true that it could be interesting to see how Huon would respond to the question, in my opinion it's still inappropriate due to Kiefer's current involvement in a ArbCom case. I don't want any answer Huon makes on the question result negatively on the RFA as whole as well. →AzaToth 14:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry. Huon looks perfectly capable of answering the question without getting into trouble. I agree that the question itself is less than perfect, particularly in the assumptions that it makes about IRC and about Huon, but I wouldn't call it inappropriate. In fact, questions like this actually help show how a candidate deals with oddball stuff so their existence is actually quite useful. All in my opinion of course :) --regentspark (comment) 14:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Well; The question in it self might be fine as a oddball question, but I must still stand with my argument that it's inappropriate for Kiefer to put the question. But I'll refrain from removing it for now. Lets see how this folds out. →AzaToth 14:35, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey AzaToth...

See here. Both welcome links are welcoming the first user, 204.112.191.83. Also, on the next diff, both links welcome 109.242.11.105. Why is this happening? Thanks! smile -- (T) Numbermaniac (C) 08:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)