User talk:Selket/Archive/1

Timeline of inventions

Hi,

On Timeline of inventions, the two deleted were factually inaccurate -

• Artificial teeth was explicitly at odds with the article on the subject, which cited an earlier case. However, that article doesn't give a source for the invention - the patent mentions "...in a more easy and effectual manner than any hitherto discovered...", wording which clearly indicates that artificial teeth were in use, and the patent was for a better form.

I would like to apologise Latley a friend of mine has been using my computer to vandalise pages on wikipedia(some ppeople are immature). I have confronted him about it and I think that he won't do it again. I will also do my part to guard my computer from him.

• Scramjet I left out simply because of the ambiguity of when it was invented - you could probably argue for half-a-dozen dates over forty years - but I was fairly confident that one wasn't it. (In all honesty, I also meant to go back and research it, but the rest of that week grew rather busy and I forgot).

In both cases, I felt it better to have no mention than verifiably incorrect information; Scramjet as is now looks fine, but Artificial teeth still looks wrong. Shimgray 11:33, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Diuretics

Hi Selket, I agree. Perhaps an initial basic writeup would be good just to get things going, and perhaps people can fill it in with more detail afterwards. I'm a bit too busy to do it myself at the moment unfortunately. -Techelf 12:03, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[[Media:Insert non-formatted text here]][[Link title]]==Images== I wanted to thank you for the images you are providing for anatomy. However, might I persuade you to upload the images to commons.wikimedia.org instead of to en.wiki, to make the images easier to share with editors using the other languages? --Arcadian 19:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selkat has an obvious vendetta against Larry Darby. He against posted non-neutral, poorly written, non-factual information in violation with a settlement reached between Darby and general counsel for Wikipedia. The only reason Selkat would have to rebuild the article would be to continue to post information that is designed to disparage the subject. I have restored the page to reflect that which was agreed. Selkat: you are advised to stop your unethical practices.

I did not rebuild the page. I was very unhappy when I saw the state that it had been returned to. I have no idea who User:71.207.240.17 is. To be honest, I do think the page needs some rework, but if I make any changes they will say they are made by User:Selket

Larry Darby

Per an OTRS ticket I have reduced the article to a stub. I know you have put quite a bit of work into this article, so I felt I should inform you. I would like to rebuild the article, and since you probably know more than me about the subject your help would be greatly appreciated.--§hanel 06:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you say OTRS do you mean an Office Action? I would be happy to rebuild the page. It was in pretty bad shape when I found it, but I did try to start rewriting for NPOV and would be happy to continue after things calm down a bit. --Selket 06:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

n

Sorry for not being more clear. OTRS refers to the foundation's Email response team, who use OTRS to assist in responding to queries, complaints, etc. Office Actions can sometimes arrive from complaints on OTRS, but I wouldn't have the power to do such a thing anyway. :) Thanks for your help and understanding; I really appreciate it. --§hanel 06:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

maps

Hello, usually for those it is a mix of photoshop and paint, with this map overlaid with this. Cheers, --Astrokey44 23:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can more links be removed at Bayesian inference?

Hello Selket. Thanks for the recent link removal. The 'external links' section is rather long; are there any other links we could perhaps do without? I see that www.abelard.org is a bit garish-looking and has a lot of advertising. Somewhere I saw a rule that external links should be mentioned in the text. If such a rule were followed, most of the remaining links would go away (unless new text were written to integrate them). EdJohnston 15:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Darby

I am very sorry, but you may not use internal links or internal diffs as your references per WP:RS and WP:V. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 23:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is currrently a discussion on ANI about banning Darby. You may wish to comment. JoshuaZ 03:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Despite our differences over the Wikipedia citations, I feel you are to be commended for your efforts to make a controversial article well-referenced and accurate. Editing these types of articles opens one up to fire from both sides and your NPOV concerns in the face of that is admirable. Frise 06:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controller Area Network (CAN)

I saw that you removed multiple external links from the Controller Area Network (CAN) article. I also noted that there is an external link to kvaser.com with information on CAN

Question: Could you please evaluate the following link that leads to a very comprehensive CAN tutorial? http://www.softing.com/home/en/industrial-automation/products/can/more-can-bus/communication/broadcast.php?navanchor=3010076

Since I am affiliated with the company Softing I should not add this link. Instead, I would like to ask you as a neutral editor to evaluate this link and to add this link to the external link section of the Controller Area Network article if you think the link provides valuable information.

Thanks68.236.126.218 18:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot proposal

You didn't need to withdraw that. It could have been useful. Gimmetrow 04:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Astroturf

Cheers, it was getting a bit above my level now anyway - WP policy/guidelines don't give 100% clear guidance. COI would indicate one thing while this would indicate something different. As far as I am concerned COI should hold, otherwise what is the point in any of us doing anything on this project if money is just going to talk, but I will let others with more experience in this area comment. SFC9394 17:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but you notice that if there is a non-trivial problem with an article, the factual error page says that the enterprise representatives should contact OTRS, not start editing the article. Also, this user has changed a lot more than a few factual errors and is a SPA, which should raise suspicions. --Selket ^Talk 17:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In which case the text "and change whatever you like." should probably be removed from that page - it tends to suggest that editing scope is far wider than factual changes. Additionally I arrived at multiple readings when things such as User:Schwartz PR are factored in. I appreciate this was sanctioned and declared, but it didn't sit too well (moot point anyway since they never seem to have used the account beyond the initial buzz). SFC9394 18:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I'm running into is the learning curve. There are so many cross referencing policies that I'm unclear where to look for specific information, or which keywords to use when trying to search for it. I've learned more on the policies from you guys telling me and the links you provide than I was able to locate on my own.

I didn't even know about the "factual error" page until I found this conversation. Ben 16:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User "Coz" has changed your edits to the FieldTurf article back to the original. Perhaps you and SFC can persude him to halt his edits and discuss them openly on the talk page. Thanks. Ben 21:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot requests

Sorry to ask you directly, but you seem to be the goto person on this and I didn't know where else to turn. What is the policy on resubmitting bot requests for approval? Should a new userid be created or is it ok to reuse one that was withdrawn? --Selket ^Talk 00:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :-) If you want to request a new task for your bot, you can use the same bot account, just create a new request subpage. For example, if you want to request another task for your bot, you can call the subpage Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/SelketBot 2. —Mets501 (talk) 01:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STV

Move is done. Fire when ready. :) Chris cheese whine 02:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vestibule (Architecture) GA failed

I failed the article as a GAC, please see the talk page for information. Please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. --Nehrams2020 22:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, just keep expanding the article and try again later. --Nehrams2020 19:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pepper Hamilton

When you can turn up the source that something was irrefutably copied from and it's under copyright, have no hesitation about removing it, even if it substantially reduces the articel. 68.39.174.238 12:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of IBM

Thanks for following up. After some frenzied hostile exchanges, the matter seems to have settled down. (I was concerned that it might erupt into something nasty, but I think we defused the problem. No further animosity has appeared. Unfortunately, I don't think we won over the main participants – who seem to remain steadfastly anti-Wikipedian.) I will update the mediation page accordingly. Trevor Hanson 04:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC cloak request

I am Selket on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/selket. Thanks. --Selket ^Talk 18:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

I noticed you are active in developing AWB so I figured I'd ask you. What would you think of adding the foot note corrections we discussed a week or so ago to the "apply general fixes" list of things to fix? I can do the c# coding, but I wanted someone else's opinion first. --Selket ^Talk 20:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great! Do you have the AWB source? You can just edit it and email me the new code, and I'll test it and commit it for you. —METS501 (talk) 21:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dumb question

How do I e-mail you? Can't see e-mail this user box Johnbod 18:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Garion96's RFA

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship which closed successfully last night. Feel free to let me know if I can help you with something or if I have made a mistake. I would also like to encourage you to vote often (just in case you don't) on other candidates since we need more admins. Happy editing, Garion96 (talk) 23:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selketbot adding duplicate templates

I like selketbot and think it will save quite a bit of effort. But I just wanted to point out that Selketbot has added a duplicate template to the talk page of 199.185.84.234 (talk · contribs). Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re : Camille Anderson

The abovementioned article does not qualify for CSD G4 - It is meant for articles in which its last AfD debate resulted in a delete, which in this case was a keep. - Mailer Diablo 17:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, see my note there. There was a link to a different article's delete page that resulted in a delete. I got confused. --Selket ^Talk 17:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SelketBot

I just noticed SelketBot tagging talk pages today; it's doing a very nice and useful job. Thanks for writing it. -SpuriousQ (talk) 23:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images of the inner ear

Hi, Selket, Your images in the stapes, malleus and incus articles is really excellent. However, the item in the image referring to the labyrinth needs disambiguating as it links to the classical Labyrinth rather than the labyrinth (inner ear) where it should link. Good work however. Dieter Simon 02:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Rights Management and Security Engineering

This is referring to User talk:88.154.11.246

Hello Selket. I got your comments about the links removed from Digital Rights Management and from Security Engineering. First of all, I apologize if my contribution was in violation of the Wikipedia policy. However, please be assured that this was neither spam nor advertising, as you can see yourself in the content of the links. The links were not to promotional pages but ONLY to essays and texts that are highly relevant to the topic without even the slightest of promotion or marketing. The mailing list link was a referral to a mailing list that is completely professional and used only to discuss the topic.

Well I'm sorry if I offended you. I don't think I said it was spam until after the link was reposted. I did say it might be spam however. Spam on wikipedia has a somewhat more expansive definition than some places (See WP:SPAM and WP:EL). It does not need to be commercial; if it is posted to promote a website, even a non-profit one, that is enough. Generally, it is not considered acceptable to link to a web site with which you are affiliated. Blogs are also frowned upon as a general policy. A link to Keira Knightley's blog from Keira Knightley would probably be OK. In general, if you start posting links to one site on a number of articles, you are going to raise suspicions.

I am not the sole arbitrator (or any arbitrator) of what links are and are not OK. Post them to the talk pages of the articles and see what other people think. --Selket ^Talk 09:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS!

When I saw this, I totally cried. It is beautiful. Can it be named the Selket/Realbot? Real96 06:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I don't think I can change the name because of permissions, etc. Also, I will be adding other functions to the bot account in the future and don't want to have to maintain more than one account. I have added a note on SelketBot's user page thanking you, and I'm very sorry that I didn't do so sooner. --Selket ^Talk 14:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I also design the userpage, because it looks so -- blah! :-) Your award will be here today ... or tomorrow.Real96 16:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kool new bot!

My compliments on the new bot, I posted a user warning template to the talk page of 150.243.202.78 (talk · contribs) and your bot added the sharedip template in less than a minute! I'm impressed I am! Good work! —Elipongo ^(Talk|contribs) 06:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awarding Barnstar

[Thank you much, moved to user page] Selket ^Talk 22:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Custom Made Award

Selketbot -- helping to minimalize vandalism from School and Shared IP addresses. I, Real96 hereby give my stamp of approval for Selketbot, a bot which helps minimalize collateral damage as well as save time for many Wikipedia users. Many Wikipedian users and administrators such as LunaSantin and Ryulong attend college and are Wikienthusiasts. Vandalism, from another user on the college servers, (which leads to a block), slows down the connection for the people who edit at the particular colleges/schools. In some cases, some established users can't log-in, because another person on our server vandalized Wikipedia. With Selketbot, me and other users on recent changes patrol don't have to worry about the shared IP's modus operandi and administrators can determine the correct duration of blockage that the IP needs to have. Another plus of Selketbot is that the bot places the location of the School IP so that Wikipedia administrators can contact the proper authorities in order to lessen the amount of vandalism. Thanks to people like Selket, we Wikipedians can all edit in collective harmony and not worry about suspected IP addresses. Respectfully signed, Real96 17:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: You can put this award on the bot page. :-) Real96 17:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the user page! Thanks! Real96 18:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just a quick thanks for all your edits to drug articles. Keep up the good work! Best, Fvasconcellos 22:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. About time someone noticed! :) Fvasconcellos 18:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schedule

Can you please post a daily schedule of Selketbot's activities. I have noticed that there are a high level of edits from universities during the weekends and during school hours in America. Real96 19:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't keep summary statistics, but I could post the log files. I haven't done that yet because they are quite large. You could parse them to get the information you want. Would that be helpful to you? --Selket ^Talk 16:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Real96 06:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See: User:SelketBot/Log. --Selket ^Talk 22:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. it seems to have gone down for some reason, I just restarted it. --Selket ^Talk 22:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

De Minimis

I am reverting your, doubtless good faith, deletion of the external link. This link was included in the page after consensus was reached as to how to achieve its inclusion. It was originally included as an example of a mnemonic being used by some Anglo law lecturers to enliven a dull class in the way classically trained pedants do Albatross2147 04:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very well then. Far be it from me to buck the consensus. I'm glad I inspired the discussion. --Selket ^Talk 06:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Load Block

For some reason, my page kept timing out. It finally worked. Thanx! Dale 14:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)^Talk[reply]

No problem, glad to have been of service. --Selket ^Talk 22:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selketbot

How can I make it tag my county ips? ffm ^yes? 23:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You tell me what they are and I will update the IPs that SelketBot looks for. Note that it only marks a page when someone posts to it. What are your county's IPs? --Selket ^Talk 23:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here is the record I have so far (prob somthing like 158.59.19*.* or 158.59.1*.*):

158.59.198.155
158.59.199.153
158.59.199.15
158.59.199.125
158.59.198.124

I am not sure exactly. It is fairly large, with 200,000 people. Can I look it up somewhere? ffm ^yes? 23:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to look it up, I will add Arlington County Government to my list of IP owners who's IPs should be tagged. I'm probably not going to get to it another 24 hours or so though. --Selket ^Talk 00:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This will be very useful. ffm ^yes? 00:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, should be working now. --Selket ^Talk 05:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automated message to bot owners

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 04:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sophocles

Thanks for the GA review. I've dropped some of the unsourced statement and added the sourcing on others, and have made the notes section a little less ugly than before. Take a look when you get the chance. Mocko13 21:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Selket ^Talk 22:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Laurel Nakadate edits

This is my first time using wikipedia - I'm just learning, so I don't really know what I did wrong, but feel free to fix it. I'm the Associate Director at Laurel Nakadate's art gallery, Danziger Projects.

Best,

Kimberly

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by KWDP (talk • contribs) 21:35, 23 February 2007. -- Whereizben - Chat with me 01:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

100 Years test

In an AFD, you mentioned something called the 100 Years test. Could you please give the link for the page? Thank you, Black Falcon 04:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's on WP:BIO, it is not an official policy, which is why I marked my comment comment. --Selket ^Talk 04:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It is actually more positive than I had expected (I thought it would read: will anyone still be writing about the individual in 100 years). However, despite that, I'm doubtful about its use as a criterion of notability give that whether "In 100 years time will anyone without a direct connection to the individual find the article useful" is quite a subjective judgment (as an unofficial, personal test it seems OK). I prefer the objective "does the person have things written about him and/or a major documented impact as of now" (slightly shortened version of WP:BIO ). Cheers, Black Falcon 07:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree that now matters more than in 100 years, but there must be some lower limit to momentary fame. It is likely that the person in question will not have any more media attention in a month's time. --Selket ^Talk 07:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

converts to Shi'a Islam

Yes I nominated for deletion but now I fixed it so that it goes directly to the discussiom

Can you please vote the link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_February_25#Category:Converts_to_Shi.27a_Islam

The previous unsigned comment was placed by Java7837

Selketbot

Hi, I noticed the bot didn't correctly check for the template already being substituted onto a talk page. Is that something it's coded to do or does it just check for {{? Great bot by the way. - Taxman ^Talk 22:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. The template should not be substituted. See: Template_talk:SharedIP#Prefered_method_of_usage. The bot does check if the template is transcluded, but cannot check if it has been substituted because the template can change. Every now and then someone substitutes the template and the bot makes this mistake. I'll go ahead and delete the duplicate. --Selket ^Talk 23:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could run checks based on old revisions of the template, no? I wouldn't think it changes that much. It's not a big deal of course unless there are a lot of them substituted. Do you have a way to check that or would it be easier to check old versions of the template? - Taxman ^Talk 23:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot keeps a local cache of IPs so it will never hit the same page again. It happened several times the first two days I ran the bot. This is the first time, to my knowledge, that it has happened since, so I'm inclined not to worry about it unless it becomes more of a problem. If it does it again, please let me know and I'll look into adding some old versions of the template to the step where it checks before adding the template. --Selket ^Talk 23:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Great bot, but I did notice that it added a sharedip template to User talk:64.45.86.199 just after I had added one, and I wanted to know if a) it could check that and b) why it didn't use subst with its own template addition. I just recently started doing that to help prevent any problems if the template is removed, at the advice of Elipongo. Thanks! Whereizben 16:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, it checks if the template has been transcluded, but not if it has been substituted. You are not supposed to subst this template per Template_talk:SharedIP#Prefered_method_of_usage. I am going to have it start to pay attention to substituted templates also, but I will need to request a further approval first, and I will not have time to make those changes for a couple of days. --Selket ^Talk 18:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate it! Have a great day. -- Whereizben - Chat with me 18:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP 82.111.197.26

Can the bot check out User:82.111.197.26 I did a who is and got Akeley Wood Senior School but not sure how to add the school box. Gnangarra 15:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot should check the IP as soon as you put a note on the IP users's talk page. --Selket ^Talk 15:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

has been fix thanks Gnangarra 15:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Star

Thanks for the star. The reason, I was so fast, was that I encountered an edit conflict trying to answer your question on WP:CSD, you caused the edit conflict since you already knew the answer. So the only thing I could do at least was to delete the category. :) Garion96 (talk) 22:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good times --Selket ^Talk 22:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

removing old merge tags

Hi, I noticed you are removing merge tags placed nearly a year ago. I sincerly doubt the usefulness, for example this removal. The merge tag indicates that there is a problem with the article and give a solution to it. Noone has likely acted on (or discusse) it due to a lack of visibilty. I believe it would be a better idea to place a {{mergeinto}} tag on the merge target or notify a relevant WikiProject instead of "painting the rotten wood". Cheers, —Ruud 23:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the merge was not proposed properly as there was no corresponding {{mergefrom}} on Tiger. Proposing merges is only useful if someone is interested in performing the merge. There have been many articles where the consensus clearly favored a merge and I performed it. In cases like this, where the merge is not proposed on both articles and there is no discussion whatsoever, it is hard for me to justify unilaterally merging the articles. Meanwhile, the tag is doing nothing. If it hasn't helped in the last 11 months why should it mater now? I think, in this case, I could have re-proposed the merge properly and initiated a discussion. I have done this on some of the other articles. I seem to be the only one interested in clearing this backlog and there are a lot of articles to get through. Sometimes I don't make the best decision on what to do with the request, but any other party (you for instance) is free to re-propose the merge on both pages and initiate discussion him or herself. --Selket ^Talk 23:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe the removal of the merge tag accomplished anything either. In fact the reader/editor passing by would now no longer know there exists another more complete article on this subject. This particular article is on a list of articles I was planning to merge/delete/redirect this week (and if I won't the changes are now bigger someone else will do it eventually.) —Ruud 00:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not arguing that you shouldn't merge the articles. I was saying if you want to do the merge, propose it with a new link on each page and a discussion rather than just reverting me. Look at the pages now. That is what I was trying encourage you to do rather than reverting. --Selket ^Talk 00:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name Tag

It probably should be deleted. I thought it was worthy at the time, but I've reconsidered. I should take a look at the notability guidelines again!N734LQ 00:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly encourage you to make the same contribution to wikt:Name tag at [en.wiktionary.org en.wiktionary.org], which is a dictionary. --Selket ^Talk 00:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I don't have an account, so I probably won't. N734LQ 00:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:205.202.*.*

The range 205.202.*.*, registered to "State of Nebraska / Office of the CIO" is used by Nebraska's public school system; thus I believe it would be more appropriate for your bot to tag them as {{SharedIPEDU}} instead of {{SharedIP}}. Regards, Tuxide 02:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll add this in the next day or so. --Selket ^Talk 02:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tensor tympani

The middle ear map is impressive and a great addition, but can you do something about Tensor tympani, where, at 1024x768, the template conflicts with the gallery on the page? Thanks. Chick Bowen 03:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliment; I'll look into the overlap issue. What browser are you using? --Selket ^Talk 20:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 2.0. Thanks. I remember there was some kind of spacer template that was written for these circumstances, but unfortunately I can't remember what it was. Chick Bowen 22:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. It turns out that it was not a problem with the map and happened at very low resolution with just the infobox. If you find another please add the Clear template with {{subst:Clear}} be fore the "additional images" header. Thanks. --Selket ^Talk 05:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhode Island Route 11

Thanks for withdrawing your nomination. I'm slightly disappointed by my comrades' inability to assume good faith; this clearly was not a WP:POINT nomination. The two historical designations should have been merged quite some time ago (not 10 months after they were tagged). Thanks again for keeping your cool. -- NORTH ^talk 04:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I didn't for a second think that it was everyone coming after me, although there were a lot of voices at once. I appreciated your civil disagreement with my nomination. Thank you. -Selket ^Talk 20:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bolivar's War

Please do remove the merge request. I am interested in significantly expanding that area, but between WikiProject Central America and everything else in life, I am out of time at the moment. SRICE_{13 (TALK | EDITS)} 04:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ArticleConcern

I'm sorry to have taken so long to answer you, but I just saw your 21 January 2007 question at Wikipedia talk:Template messages#New template proposal, and replied there. You may still find the information useful, even if (as I hope) you have long since resolved the Proprioception issue by other means. -- Ben 00:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, to be honest, I stopped worrying about it and forgot about it. Now that you bring it up again, I do still think it would be a good idea to have the template I was proposing. I was looking for something more like:

This could be used to tag the article, not necessarily a user's talk page. But thanks anyway. --Selket ^Talk 00:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Determining whether a template is transcluded

Sorry to send such a technical question out to the help request. Even if you can't answer this question, maybe you can tell me the proper forum in which to ask this question. I am trying to determine, using parser functions, whether a template has been transcluded or subst'ed. Is there a way to do this? The idea is to give a warning to the editor who substs a template that shouldn't be, much like Template:NowCommons gives a warning that it should be called from Template:Ncd. Thanks. --Selket ^Talk 18:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried WP:VPT or WP:IRC? You can also repost this tag if you want to try your luck again. :) Xiner (talk, email) 19:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better?

sorry, I orphaned that stub on Samuel Krauss. Added more sources. -- Kendrick7^talk 01:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that is better, it is no longer under consideration for speedy deletion. It has now been nominated for deletion under the standard procedure. You should comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Krauss. After five days of discussion an administrator will look over the comments and determine whether there is a consensus to delete it. I just voted keep. --Selket ^Talk 04:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]