en User talk:Zad68 Archive 2014 Oct

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Zad68. 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.

The Signpost: 01 October 2014

From the editor: The Signpost needs your help

Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism

News and notes: Wikipedia article published in peer-reviewed journal; Wikipedia in education

WikiProject report: Animals, farms, forests, USDA? It must be WikiProject Agriculture

Traffic report: Shanah Tovah

Featured content: Brothers at War

Happy Adminship Zad68

Wishing Zad68/Archive 2014 Oct a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Vatsan34 (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2014

In the media: Opposition research firm blocked; Australian bushfires

Featured content: From a wordless novel to a coat of arms via New York City

Traffic report: Panic and denial

Technology report: HHVM is the greatest thing since sliced bread

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

Op-ed: Ships—sexist or sexy?

In the media: College player falsely linked to sports scandal by Wikipedia; the Nobel Prizes

Arbitration report: One case closed and two opened

Featured content: Bells ring out at the Temple of the Dragon at Peace

Technology report: Attempting to parse wikitext

Traffic report: Now introducing ... mobile data

WikiProject report: Signpost reaches the Midwest

How do I do this (mass undo)?

Hi Zad68--You have helped me in the past and I am sure you know the answer to this: Let's say an editor makes a whole bunch of changes in a row and you want to undo them. I just go one by one and do it, but I have seen others undo back to a certain version. That would be a lot easier. Any help? No hurry. Thanks. Desoto10 (talk) 22:15, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey Desoto sorry I forgot to answer... You can go through the History tab, select a particular version and hit the Restore button at top. More later... Zad68 22:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

article title

Thanks for commenting on the new discussion thread. One thing about the consensus, the title 'Ebola virus disease cases in the United States,' did not have consensus. What happened was this, the title was Ebola virus cases in the United States. That had discussion attached to how we'd name it, etc. Floydian came along, and in one fell swoop, he moved the titles of all the new articles. He added disease to match the Spain article as his edit summary said. I then moved the page to 2014 Ebola virus outbreak in the United States. Epicgenius then came along and moved it to its current title. There's no more consensus for 'disease' than there is for 'outbreak.' Additionally, it appears the RM discussion nominator did not research the article title. SW3 5DL (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

SW3 5DL thanks for the comments... I'm fine with a restore of Ebola virus cases in the United States as the last consensus title, and don't really see a huge difference between that and "disease cases" anyway. If you'd allow that I'd be happy to make that move. Zad68 19:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I'd say yes in a shot but won't there be a riot over you now being an 'involved admin?" SW3 5DL (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Also, now I think of it, another editor has suggested Ebola cases in the United States. And another has suggested another close one. Perhaps in the same thread, suggest that. Let's see. Fingers crossed. SW3 5DL (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern, what I'll do is drop a note at ANI announcing what I'm going to do, if anybody has a concern say so, otherwise I'll get it done in X hours. Appreciated! Zad68 20:10, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Also, make a note on the article talk page. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 20:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

I do have concerns about you doing it as an involved admin. If you meant you would leave a note on ANI explaining the situation including the current move and previous issues (and requesting another admin to assess a revert per WP:TITLECHANGES), then that's of course fine if you think it needs immediate action. I honestly don't mean to prolong this title mess, but you really are involved here.

If you want to propose the same after the move closes in a couple days, if the outcome is "disease" and there's a reasonably clear alternative, I wouldn't oppose it at that time. But I do oppose you moving a page that you've been heavily involved with the move process on, including the discussion of the previous reverted admin move, and that's been at the same title for over a week without requiring ANI action yet. Xqxf (talk) 21:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

All good points. We can ask admin Philg88 to move it as he's the one I asked to protect the move function. That's what's been saving the page from more random moves by every editor who happens by. This way, we're going to one admin, totally uninvolved, who will always be there. And then when he moves it, he can lock the move function again. SW3 5DL (talk) 21:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry folks I got really busy with stuff IRL, but it looks like the article title issue (or at least the one we're talking about here) is resolved now. Zad68 04:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

Featured content: Admiral on deck: a modern Ada Lovelace

Op-ed: Hong Kong's Umbrella Revolution—a wiki-protest

In the media: The story of Wikipedia; Wikipedia reanimated and republished; New UK government social media rules; death of Italian Wikipedia administrator

Traffic report: Death, War, Pestilence... Movies and TV

WikiProject report: De-orphanning articles—a huge task but with a huge team of volunteers to help

Precious again

arbitration
Thank you, "level-headed editor with experience working on high-profile and controversial topics", for quality articles on medical topics, such as Low back pain and Circumcision (the "most stressful but also the most educational thing"), for pictured Rules of content (wood and jellybeans), for believing in BRD, for "closer inspection" of your own view, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 647th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you again Gerda Arendt, seriously this particular wiki-award has special, unique feel. Appreciated. Zad68 14:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Red link

Thanks! Darn newbies, always trying to take it away...Yobol (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

LOL... I still think you keep it red only for the perverse pleasure of keeping MastCell off-balance with his revert button when he sees a redlink edit medical articles.... Zad68 14:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, yet again. Grrr. Shhh, MastCell might hear you, and spoil the fun. Besides, I think it's funny how some people respond differently (like jumping to the assumption I'm a sock of somebody) just because my name is red... Yobol (talk) 18:11, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Yobol you REALLY need to request a rename of your account to "wiki Truth Improover152". Zad68 18:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hah! Don't tempt me. Seriously, I have half a mind to do it. NeUtRaLiTyF1ghter4TruthOnWIKIPEDIA2015 seems be available as well...Yobol (talk) 18:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

It's obvious you're a corporate sockpuppet. I mean, your username is "lobby" spelled sideways (as a particularly ~~paranoid schizophrenic~~ perceptive user once pointed out). How much more obvious can you get? MastCell ^Talk 20:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, sweet, sweet memories of conflicts past. MastCell, it has not gone unnoticed that your username is an anagram of "cat smell". I don't know what it means just yet, but I'm sure it's super devious. Yobol (talk) 00:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

And yours is a VERY suspicious anagram of "Yo lob", which is a CLEARLY a reference to a Spanish tennis player, no? Or should I say, "¿No?" And when you wrote NeUtRaLiTyF1ghter4TruthOnWIKIPEDIA2015 I thought for a second you linked to Josh's (jps) User page. Zad68 04:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)