User talk:Ale jrb/Archives/May 2011
Latest comment: 13 years ago by EdwardsBot in topic The Signpost: 30 May 2011
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ale jrb. 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: 2 May 2011
- News and notes: Picture of the Year voting begins; Internet culture covered in Sweden and consulted in Russia; brief news
- WikiProject report: The Physics of a WikiProject: WikiProject Physics
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Two new cases open – including Tree shaping case
- Technology report: Call for RTL developers, varied sign-up pages and news in brief
The Signpost: 9 May 2011
- In the news: Billionaire trying to sue Wikipedians; "Critical Point of View" book published; World Bank contest; brief news
- WikiProject report: Game Night at WikiProject Board and Table Games
- Features and admins: Featured articles bounce back
- Arbitration report: AEsh case comes to a close - what does the decision tell us?
Script template messages
An admin recently posted a speedy deletion "contested" template on my talk page using one of your scripts. A couple of points: first, the correct terminology is "declined" for speedy deletion nominations. "Contested" is usually used for PRODs. Second, and more importantly, I find the tone of the message rather patronising (You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages), especially when directed at a long-time user. Perhaps you should revise the text of the script's messages and advise its users not to template the regulars. – ukexpat (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hello there! :D User:Logan is not an administrator, and as such cannot decline speedy deletions. However, as it is possible for any user to remove a speedy deletion tag from a page, they are in effect contesting it, thus the language in the message. With regards to your second point, users are given the choice when notifying a user whether to use a carefully designed newbie message, or not - the language you object to is only in the newbie message and probably should not have been applied - I suggest you take that up with Logan.
- On a slightly different issue, I will politely point out a few things. In the future, when bringing accusations up, I suggest you do a little bit of research - otherwise you come across as unprepared, and your concerns run the risk of looking silly. Secondly, I would advise that your trying to lecture an admin with a significant amount of experience in CSD about the CSD process - while at the same time accusing him of being patronising to experienced users - is something you may want to be slightly more cautious about. After all, if they were slightly less good-humoured than I, it might be seen as blatantly hypocritical rather than pleasantly ironic.
- Perhaps you should revise your concerns, and direct them to the appropriate person. Have a nice day. Ale_Jrbtalk 14:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hey - I was the one who contested the speedy (I guess it's a compliment that Ukexpat thought I was a sysop?). In no way was that article promotional/G11-eligible, and the message at the end was completely warranted in this case, as, before tagging pages, one must make sure that the criterion fits with the article in question.
- Also, Ale jrb, I never noticed that "newbie" checkbox because it isn't inside the box (screenshot). Any chance of fixing that? I definitely wouldn't have used the newbie message if I knew that such an option existed, especially with Ukexpat's experience. However, I hope that it does link to the criteria even without the "newbie" message because I feel that it's important to revisit them every once in a while.
- Hope this explains it! Let me know if you have any further questions. Logan Talk Contributions 19:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 May 2011
- WikiProject report: Back to Life: Reviving WikiProjects
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Motions - hyphens and dashes dispute
- Technology report: Berlin Hackathon; April Engineering Report; brief news
The Signpost: 23 May 2011
- News and notes: GLAM workshop; legal policies; brief news
- In the news: Death of the expert?; superinjunctions saga continues; World Heritage status petitioned and debated; brief news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Formula One
- Featured content: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Injunction – preliminary protection levels for BLP articles when removing PC
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 30 May 2011
- News and notes: ArbCom referendum goes live; US National Archives residency; financial planning; brief news
- In the news: Collaboration with academia; world heritage; xkcd; eG8 summit; ISP subpoena; brief news
- WikiProject report: The Royal Railway
- Featured content: Whipping fantasies, American–British naval rivalry, and a medieval mix of purity and eroticism
- Arbitration report: Update – injunction from last week has expired
- Technology report: Wikimedia down for an hour; What is: Wikipedia Offline?