User talk:Enochlau/Archive 2006e

This page contains archived material written on my talk page during 2006.

Susan L. Graham

Enoch, I was pretty sure that being a professor of anything anywhere is not per se an assertion of notability. Am I not right? - the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 15:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 15:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

See my user page for my re-reply - the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 02:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hong Kong Island

I guess the tie between Hong Kong and British spellings is still quite strong. — Instantnood 22:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Resolution

Thanks. :-) — Instantnood 15:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (88/3/1), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you require assistance, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an administrator. Once again thank you and with kind regards Gryffindor 18:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

10,000 B.C.

I wish you wouldn't use a rollback to revert CSD requests. The request may not have been good, but it was in good faith, and deserves a reply. 02:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC) —This unsigned comment was added by Arthur Rubin (talk • contribs) .

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 05:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

australian mathematics competition

Hello. I'm writing up this article wondered if you could help me (seem to have a high probability of being mathematically oriented). Do you know what the markscheme for 2003-04 was? I know what it was changed to in 2002, and it was changed to the current version in 2005, but I can't remember if they tweaked it in 2003-04. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:21, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Potential edit war on the articles about the United Nations

Enochlau, I would like seek your help in solving an edit dispute related to several articles about the United Nations, such as United Nations Security Council, International Court of Justice, United Nations Economic and Social Council etc. Each of those articles contains the name of the organization / department / agency in all the six official languages of the United Nations. (The six official languages of the United Nations are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, Spanish.) But User:Raul654 is recently, unilaterally, very actively, deleting the official names except the name in English. I asked him to seek a consensus in Talk:United_Nations_Commission_on_Human_Rights#Alternate_names first before he delete any information from the articles. However, it seems that he is still deleting the information from the articles. I am afraid that would invoke an edit war. I hope that you can help us to stop his deletion, and encourage all Wikipedians to discuss, ask for other people's opnion, and seek a consesus, before they delete information from the article. Thank you. - Alan 04:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-> Discussion moved to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Potential_edit_war_on_the_articles_about_the_United_Nations

(Replied on talk page. enochlau (talk) 05:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks Enoch

So... how's the admin'ing going? Sick of it already? :P Do we know when the next wikimeet is on? - Ta bu shi da yu 12:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Cite.php

"Template substitution misrenders inside <ref> tag."

Hi, how come you removed the above line from the Current issues section of Meta:City/Cite.php? Snottygobble 23:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 04:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks. Snottygobble 04:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Hi Enoch, I need your help. Someone has posted an external to the Superbrands article. Although the link - a blog, is titled Superbrands India - News, Views & Reviews, it has nothing to do with the organisation mentioned in the Wikipedia entry. To some people, the blog may be wrongly viewed as having some sort of association with the Superbrands organisation, which it does not. The person who added the link is not a registered user and there is only an IP address as to their identity. Can I just remove the link? Or do I need to discuss it somewhere first? Your advice, as always, is welcome. -- S Masters 02:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 04:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

As always, thanks for your help and advice. -- S Masters 07:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FPC Nomination- Sydney Opera House

Hello, I'd just like to let you know that I nominated your image of the Sydney Opera House as a featured picture candidate. I hope you don't mind as I found the image quite lovely. :) Andromeda321 01:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw it didn't make the cut and I'm kind of disappointed as I still think it was a good picture! Either way, thank you very much for sharing it. Andromeda321 20:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Dewey Decimal System

I can see from the talk pages that there was some effort to get rid of WP:DSS, which is a clear copyvio, and that you were involved in it to some extent. However, the main page and all its subpages still remain. Now, there is a curious "copyright notice" on the the main page (Wikipedia:Dewey Decimal System) which proclaims that pre-1923 of the Dewey Decimal System are public domain, and a link to the current copyright holder which proclaims that a licence is required. However, the page itself says it is based on the 2003 system, not a pre-1923 system. There is a legal precedent cited about recipes in a cookbook, which, my law degree tells me, sounds like it is being cited out of desperation rather than clear legal argument. Further, it seems odd to me that the page talks about pre-1923 being copyright-free when it admits to actually using the 2003 system. I am tempted to try to get this deleted as a copyvio but I want to find out why the last effort to do so failed - I can find no trace of why it failed on the talk pages, just some messages agreeing that it should be deleted! Can you remember what happened that meant this got kept? TheGrappler 17:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 00:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I've tracked it down now - an admin removed the speedy tag deciding it wasn't a speedy. In the case of copyvios there are two choices - speedy delete on copyvio grounds (if it is a blatant copyvio of content that is normally charged for - actually, that's exactly what this is, so I'm surprised it didn't get speedied!) or taking it WP:copyright problems. Since it didn't get speedied, I'll take the latter route. We could use the 1923 version, but somebody would have to go away and look the 1923 version up - it probably isn't documented on the web, unfortunately, so they'd also have to reproduce the full documentation of it here. The big problem with that would be that the only reason for implementing Dewey on Wikipedia is that people are more used to Dewey than Wikipedia's category system. Using an old Dewey might just confuse people even more! (And Dewey is confusing enough as it is, e.g. putting "sport" under "art"... it's only familiarity with it that makes it usable, and many people are familiar with it, but possibly not the 1923 version!)Also, there would be no way of classifying things like space flight and World War II... so actually it would probably be unworkable anyway. Meh. Off to the copyvio page it goes... TheGrappler 00:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, since the 1923 version can't cope with the Internet (it has since been sorted under "0", which originally was kept for "miscellaneous") the 1923 system wouldn't have been able to index its own web page :-) TheGrappler 00:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 01:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Most of the languages are fairly inactive unfortunately (though I have been doing quite a lot of translation from Norwegian wiki, and am drafting an article about German punctuation). It seems the creator of the Dewey classification of Wikipedia was one of the very earliest members of the project - his "Welcome!" message came from Larry Sanger himself! And it also seems he hasn't been on Wikipedia for 3 years which explains why his Dewey system linked to articles rather than the rather newer categories. That page and its subpages have been essentially neglected for years, by the looks of it. I guess once categories were implemented, trying to classify Wikipedia like that lost a lot of point.

P.S. You seem to be quite a keen photographer! I've made a suggestion that I think would be a Very Good Thing at Wikipedia talk:Requested pictures#Subcategorizing Category:Wikipedia requested photographs - I am quite suspicious that the vast majority of non-urgent photo requests aren't listed on WP:RP at all (and many articles that could do with a photo aren't marked as such), those that are often become "lost", people are unlikely to check WP:RP on the off-chance of seeing something in their area come up etc etc - I think that subcategories of picture requests (especially local ones e.g. Category:Requested pictures in Sydney) may be the way to go, especially if they can be linked with WikiProjects and regional categories of Wikipedians. Any thoughts? Some feedback on that page would be nice, since its talk page seems to be a bit of a ghost town - I can see that somebody else suggested the idea in the past but it looks like the idea died of old age rather than anyone actually disagreeing with it! TheGrappler 01:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on talk page. enochlau (talk) 02:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I replied on that talk page - it would still be possible to use the template if we adapted it to use a parameter, which would be cool. And thanks a lot for the village pump suggestion - good idea :) TheGrappler 02:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Section titlez

Thanks for taking necessary response and stopped the vandal. :-) — Instantnood 08:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania volunteer meeting?

Hi enochlau,

If you're interested in Wikimania, come to the volunteer meeting tomorrow night: m:Wikimania_2006/Planning#Volunteer_meeting

Cheers, +sj + 20:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 01:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Time warp baseball

Hi, you recently speedily deleted Time warp baseball as a non notable club. The author was asking about it on IRC, and I was considering undeleting it. He didn't add any assertions of notability to the article, which made it look pretty nn. Apparently it's the most popular online league for Out of the Park Baseball, which is apparently the best selling 2d baseball simulator. In my opinion, that information makes it atleast notable to not be speedily deleted. What's your opinion? If I undeleted it, I would add that information to the article, and make some other changes, to make it nicer. --Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 17:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 00:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Hmm, I didn't think about reliable sources. If it's as notable as those claims show, though, it shouldn't be excessively hard to find them. My proposed changes include removing the unencyclopedic stuff, for the record. I'll look into it some more. --Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 01:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ori Hofmekler

Howdy! I was about to speedy delete Ori Hofmekler when I noticed that you had previously removed a {{db-bio}} tag. It's clearly a WP:CSD A1 situation, your thoughts? I'd like to hear from you first to avoid potential wheeling. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:45, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 01:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Hamish Ross

Why did you delete Hamish Ross. That was a really nasty thing to do :(--84.67.148.195 23:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exoskeletor

Sorry about before. i though why not to make a biography of me and some usefull freeware programs that i have make. My question is,, how a person can know that it worth to be here?

See WP:BIO. As a general rule, don't write about yourself. If you're notable enough to be in Wikipedia, someone else will write it. enochlau (talk) 04:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About my programs? can i write informations about them like how to use them etc? there are free programs and if a reference to me is a problem i can remove it

See Wikipedia:Notability (software). Again, as a general rule, don't write about your own stuff. enochlau (talk) 04:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Album stubs

Please flesh out the stubs that you are writing, because they are falling into the WP:CSD category of "no content". If you do not wish to see them deleted, please at least write one full sentence in the article. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 04:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I was going to fill them in later. I will include a brief sentence until I can finish them up. --Buzzard Joe 04:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of "Stepfather"

Hello Enochlau, sorry to bother you. I noticed you deleted my article about the album "Stepfather" by People Under The Stairs, based on the band being non-notable. I checked the criteria of band notability, and they meet at least one criteria, which is having undergone an international tour (to Europe and Japan, multiple times). This can be verified on their website, and likely other places (which I would be happy to lookup). I do understand if you havn't heard of them in Australia, but they are known in California. I also understand if I simply had written a poor article. It was my first. Thank you. Chiller1800

You need to make that clear in the body of the article that the album is from a notable band. In particular, linking to People Under The Stairs would have been a good idea. I now see that the deletion was a mistake, so feel free to recreate it with that in mind. Also, note WP:MOS - formatting articles properly makes them less likely to be treated as garbage. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 07:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Overkill album "!!!F*ck You!!!" notes...

Whats with the notes on the Overkill album page for the ep "!!!Fuck You!!!"? I understand the name probably sets off the 'vandalism' flags, but it is a real album, released by Megaforce/Atlantic Records in 1987.

What kind of verification do I need? Websites that catalog the album? I am holding it in my hand, I can scan pics of the back text in, ect.

I'm semi new editing here, so I am just adding album pages that don't exist so far. Thanks! Skeletor2112 11:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 11:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

-cough- Team 37...very Notable.

Team 37 is certainly a very notable group. They deserve recognition, and there is no reason not to be mentioned on wikipedia.

Backtothefuture

I saw you deleted the Backtothefuture article. No I'm not an admin, but I would think that "afd" isn't really a good reason to delete articles. Also, backtothefuture is a user of Newgrounds. The article seemed to be neutral. Just dropping you a comment. Robot569 20:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Editor's Barnstar

Is this your first barnstar?

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For tirelessly removing unencyclopedic matter from wikipedia, I award you the editor's barnstar. ßlηguγΣη

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 10:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

gala galaction unverified info

Hi Enoch,

You put an "unverified" tag on the Gala Galaction article. can you tell me what specific claims you were refering to? Thank you, Eugen Ivan 23:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 03:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Liberal Stooge

Hi, I am the so called "Liberal Stooge". It was a joke that went too far and I will not vandalise the FSHS page in the future. -Liberal Stooge 23:47 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Good to see that you've woken up to your senses. I hope that you can contribute constructively in the future. enochlau (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heya

this is not the same Enoch (aka Steve) who did SOFT1901 at USyd in 2004 is it? AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 05:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did SOFT1901 at Usyd in 2004, but my name is not Steve. You might be confusing me with someone else. enochlau (talk) 06:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

huh, coincidence then. apologies. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 10:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instantnood and Alanmak

I recently had to block both Instantnood and Alan for edit warring again, and both are at each other's throats. If you'd like to take the effort to mediate their disputes, whether through the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal or just a casual discussion, I would really appreciate it. If not, I guess I'll file a mediation request and brace myself. Ashibaka tock 22:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

It's actually a large-scale revert war over many articles, mainly stylistic (whether Macau should be called "Macau, China", whether Cantonese should be called "Cantonese Chinese", and so forth). The main issue is that they have long ceased to communicate with each other; in fact, they frequently use reverting edit summaries as a talk page. Ashibaka tock 03:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Informal mediation

Thanks so much Enoch. I welcome whatever way to help reach an eventual resolution, as long as it's fair, open and public, justice is ensured and guaranteed, with all parties involved participating, and are willing to justify their claims and points of view with solid evidence. — Instantnood 12:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your effort and patience. — Instantnood 12:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "informal mediation"

First of all, thank you for your offering the informal mediation. I appreaciate your effort in promoting peace between Wikipedians. However, I doubt if the idea is going to work.

First, the idea of this "informal mediation" was brought up by someone who imposed several sucessive blocks on me. He did nothing to help alleviating the situation but merely enjoying the authority that he had to block other user. In simply words, he didn't do sh*t. Now, he suddenly brought up some "new" idea, which is essentially the same thing as the official mediation process, but with the administrator replaced by an administrator who pretends that he is not an administrator. What was the motive behind? Why did he have to ask someone else to do it, instead of doing it by himself? When he tried to "solve a problem", the 48-hour block was the first thing that he used. I don't think that he is actually capable of solving a problem. This idea was brought up by him. So, I might have to think about it.

Moreover, Instantnood has a very strange political views in his mind, as we can see from his edits. Some of those "political ideals" are not actually reflecting the fact. But he insisted to push those kind of political views to plenty of articles, and he already had massive edit wars with several users, such as SmuckyCat and Huaiwei, before. Do you know how difficult it was to find at least three Wikipedians to edit-war with someone simultaneously? Although it is difficult, it happens on Instantnood. This is actually the problem with Instantnood's personality. As far as I know, it is almost impossible to change the political views that have already been well developed in one's mind. If he continues to push his political ideas that are not reflecting the truth, a mediation is not going to work for him.

Remember that I have left a message on his user discuss page and tried to solve the dispute with him on our own? Remember how he responsed to that? I don't think that he has any willingness to negotiate. As I said before, there will be no more concession or compromise with him. If he insists to revert my edits massively, edit war continues. I hope that, by now, he knows that I am not afraid of edit wars and blocks.

I appreciate your effort, but I want to see Instantnood's sincerity. Otherwise, it would be a waste of your effort.

- Alan 08:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on user page. enochlau (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]