This is an archive of past discussions with User:Shubinator. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Unable to resist bacon's temptations, rogue editors have kicked off the Bacon Challenge 2010 before the New Year even starts! This is a fun and collegial event and all are welcome. There are many non-pork articles for editors who enjoy some sizzle, but object to or don't like messing with pig products. This year's event also includes a Bacon WikiCup 2010 for those who may want to keep score and enjoy engaging in friendly competition. Given the critical importance of this subject matter, I know you will want to participate, so remember to sign up today and get started A.S.A.P. ALL ARE WELCOME!!! The more the merrier. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Eldurloki,
I just looked at the JWBF code here, and I don't think .matches() is the method you want; .find() would be more appropriate. I try to stay away from regex if I can; I used
if(article.getText().toLowerCase().indexOf("#redirect")!=-1){// if the article is a redirect
where article is a SimpleArticle. I don't think regex helps here since "#redirect" has to be one string; if there's a space between the "#" and the "redirect", the redirect breaks and it turns into a numbered list. Hope this helps, Shubinator (talk) 05:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
The DYK talk page bot added a line of irrelevant info (about a video game) to Talk:Florence Jaffray Harriman. I can delete the information, but in case it's symptomatic of a broader glitch I thought I'd bring it to your attention and leave it as is for a day or so.Wikijsmak (talk) 13:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey Shubs, JamieS93 and I have both talked about nominating you for RfA, and she said you were interested but would be away after December 27. So I guess we wouldn't be able start anything until after then (I meant to contact you earlier so we could finish before the 27th, but you know how things get this time of year....), but I just wanted to check and see if you would still like to start an RfA sometime after you get back. If you're up for it, I could start the RfA page now so you could answer questions 1-3 at your leisure, and Jamie and I can prepare our nom statements; then we could transclude and start it once you get back. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs15:41, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
For the early transclusion of your RfA by Coffee i apologise. I refreshed a tab to check for your answer to Q5 before saving my vote in another tab and saw the votes were undone and your RfA un-transcluded. I look forward to it coming "live" again. :Ddelirious ☯ ~ happy christmas~19:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
As a courtesy, this just to say I've removed your message from my page as I had nothing to do with the creation of the Roch page and little more with its editing apart from tweaks. But thanks for letting me know. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 17:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Indeed it must. You're quite welcome and we might see about that in a few months (when I'm feeling masochistic again!) and in the meantime, I'll just come and bug you if I need something! I have WP:ERRORS watchlisted so I'm sure I'll see you around,,,,,,! HJMitchellYou rang? 02:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Heya! Try not to use {{uw-ublock}} on editors unless it really is just their username that is problematic. For example, User talk:GenovaDiagnostics isn't just a username issue; it's a conflict of interest issue, as shown by looking at their contributions. Just changing the name of the account won't suffice. {{uw-spamublock}} is more appropriate, and is less likely to confuse the user. (And congrats on your adminship! --jpgordon::==( o )01:18, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
on becoming an admin. the diff you presented was the diff i had in mind. thanks for that, i guess. i was dissapointed how you went awol once gatoclass stuck his nose into the picture, despite the fact that you approved it initially. There was something else, that i just remembered. Here was another incident in which gatoclass yanked an already approved Judaism-related article from the queue. Your coming to his defense was in poor judgement, imo. in any case, you don't have to deal with it now. a vast majority of editors apparently have confidence in your judgment, so i may be wrong. i hope there are no hard-feelings, but i guess i would understand if there was. i guess i can't be surprised if i soon find myself blocked by you :) Good luck, --brewcrewer(yada, yada)06:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! You're right, I sort of intentionally stayed out of the Palestinian Land Law discussion for a while because it became very heated and I didn't have an alternate hook to propose. I actually did run some research on my own for an hour trying to find reliable neutral sources for a few of the proposed hooks. That was the first DYK IP discussion I followed closely (though I should've remembered Lydda Death March), and since then I've reviewed articles from either side more thoroughly (like here). At its core, DYK is a consensus-driven process. We try to satisfy everyone's concerns before featuring an article. Of course, an article can be promoted over someone's objections, but there must be consensus to do so. For the two you mentioned, multiple editors (more than Gatoclass and myself) thought the hook or article wasn't neutral. At DYK, no consensus defaults to delete.
