User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 24



usurption of Beano
first of all, thank you for allowing me to usurp this username. I do have a question for you: Why does my username have (usurped) after the name? Is it possible that i can get it removed so I can just be user:Beano? I'm active on the english wikipedia and have plans to expand to all sister projects. Thanks!  ~Beano~  (talk) (contribs)  23:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: After taking a closer look, it looks like only user_talk:beano had (usurped) after it. I discovered that there was a redirect on my talkpage. I went ahead and removed it so I can use the talkpage properly. If this is a problem, please let me know.  ~Beano~  (talk) (contribs)  23:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, that's perfect. I was supposed to do that, but forgot. Thanks. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 00:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Criteria / Levels
Mike, hi. I did what I could with the discussion of criteria and levels in the Muggles' Guide, moving it over to the Help page, but there is not a thing I can do about Coverage — all of our discussion there is MG-specific.

For some reason I still feel very twitchy about writing anything for WB-wide perusal. I keep expecting Panic to leap out of the shadows... I'd appreciate it greatly if you could take a look over what I've done on the Help page and verify the quality. Chazz (talk) 09:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The only thing I'd question is the idea that the "leader" for a book needs to approve of an edit before it can be flagged. We do try to be as open as possible - this is a wiki. I'd say perhaps that that can simply be replaced by stating that agreement among editors of the the book or the community at large that the page is accurate would be plenty. Maybe ask around for some other ideas - that's just my take. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 17:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd argue about primary and lead editors; from experience, any committee is normally driven by one strong personality who drags things the way he wants them to go... or is so obnoxious that everyone fights him out of principle. However, I have rewritten to fit the principles of a wiki, if not the facts. Better? Chazz (talk) 01:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sounds better to me. Thanks for your input. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 02:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Mike, like it or not, it seems you are now effectively the go-to guy for the new reviewing tool... and because of that you will be fielding the questions. Here's one for you already: Every page in the Muggles' Guide is flagged in the changes summary (for me) with a red "!", presumably to indicate that it is unreviewed. Except for pages that I create. It seems that if I create a page, it is automatically reviewed to level 1 across the board, possibly because I am an editor. Pages I edit are not accorded the same autoreview. Is this to be expected? Chazz (talk) 07:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * reset
 * Yes, that's normal. It's expected you're not going to create bad pages. You can always manually bump the review level as needed. I think after you edit a page that's already been flagged, you should be shown the diff from the last flagged version up to your version and given the opportunity to flag the new one. It's not automatically done because you don't necessarily know what changes happened in between without looking (ie you can't automatically assume that your version is good - there might be hidden vandalism in some part of the page you didn't edit, for example). &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 17:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Which explains why, so long as I am the only editor on a page, it stays reviewed. Hmm... Interesting. Chazz (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Ownership
Doesn't sound like wide latitude at all!! - Is this your personal interpretation or is it backed up by some directive to which you can refer me? Rotational (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a Commons user talk page, you know. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 18:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Engineerng Acoustics/supercharging 2 stroke engines picture
Hi Mike,

I uploaded a picture for my page that is for a class project. the link for the picture says you deleted/moved it? this is the picture link: http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Tune_pipe_cross_sections.JPG

what do I have to get that picture back on my page? Has it been moved to wiki commons? if so, how do i find it there?

thanks Albert
 * Yes, I did delete that image as there was no information on how it is licensed, or the source of the image. According to our media policy, license and source information must be provided, preferably using the templates provided. I can certainly help you do that if you find it difficult. I've restored that image so you can provide this information for it. Thanks &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 16:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, help with this would be much appreciated as I intend on adding more pictures, and therefore would like to know how to add the license info. I drew that picture myself in MS Paint and intend to draw all pictures myself. What do we do in this case?

Albert
 * I would suggest multi-licensing under the GFDL and all version of CC-by-sa. You'll want to use the following template code on the image description page, filling in the appropriate information.


 * &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 20:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

egg rice
its ginger and garlic paste. we indian's dont use seperate ginger and garlic paste's. it is 70gm garlic to 100gm ginger which is mixed in a mixer with water and salt and the taste would be very different if u did as its written in there it would taste very different.
 * Oh, I'm sorry. It's just that that didn't seem like the original intent. I stand corrected. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 01:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Stable Versions
Mike, I can't figure out what this log is, or how we configure stable versions of a page like you've done. Am I missing something? --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * On the protect tab, look for "This page has an updated stable version; page stability settings can be configured." - configured is a link where you can adjust those settings. But the UI is pretty bad - doesn't really describe what's what. The first option is what to show to anon users. They see the stable version by default, but you can change that - some pages you want changes to go live right away. The second thing is a bit more complicated - about what to show if there is a stable version. The first option is to show the latest quality version (even if there are sighted versions newer than that) - if one doesn't exist, then the sighted version. The second option is just the latest flagged version, no matter what level it's flagged to. I'm not really clear where that'd be useful to change though. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, I use the protect tab so infrequently that I would have never seen this option. Thanks Mike! --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 15:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Commons:User:Lmbuga
(poor english) I will look for a user who translates to English these words

Español:

(Sigo sin poder expresar en inglés ideas complejas por falta de capacidad) Deseo hacer considerar, especialmente a User:Mike.lifeguard, que los bloqueos pueden tener finalidades muy diferentes. Puedo aceptar que se me pida que abandone mis atribuciones como administrador por haber cometido un error, pero no admito ser parte de un parcial y personal listado de actuaciones de los administradores: es injusto. Es injusto porque yo había bloqueado a una ip por 2 horas, y lo hice no como castigo (sería absurdo hacerlo por 2 horas para castigar), sinó porque consideré conveniente (dado que no es la primera vez que veo actuaciones ideológicas de ese tipo y probablemente en esa página) que quedase constancia a otros administradores de esa acción, acción que erroneamente consideré ideológica. De hecho, permití que durante esas dos horas se crease un usuario desde esa ip.

Incluírme en un listado en el que consten simplemente actitudes punitivas de administradores es algo que considero insultante. Insultante no solamente por el proceder que he tenido siempre, también por el proceder que he tenido en este caso y, además, en su resolución.

Es habitual que dialogue con ips, pero esto es entrar a justificar mi proceder y mi historial como administrador en Commons, cosa a la que no estoy dispuesto bajo ningún concepto, puesto que no estoy dispuesto a defenderme dado que no pretendo perpetuarme en ningún cargo: Cuando sobre, sobro y ya está.

Expreso simplemente que las palabras de User:Mike.lifeguard son, para mí, insultantes. En caso de que desee expresarlas y crea que me excedo en los bloqueos, considero que debe proponer que yo deje de ser administrador. En caso de que no ose hacerlo, tanto por no creer que eso sea lo que suceda, como por cualquier otro motivo, considero que debe de estudiar más pormenorizadamente los casos antes de expresarse, considero que no debe equiparar mi actuación con las peores actuaciones que ha visto. '''El error que User:Mike.lifeguard está cometiendo es muy semejante al que yo he cometido: Mike, no generalice: actuaciones semejantes pueden ser muy diferentes.--Lmbuga (talk) 00:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ on Commons. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 03:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

You are not guilty. I would like that you excused my words. Thanks --Lmbuga (talk) 18:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Careful...
To misrepresent implies the intention to lead others in error, dishonestly and tempering with the truth. If you have any problem with any of my actions please do address it first privately and provide validation for your assessment. In the case at hand I will push for clarification of the problem (colon convention) and at that time I will point out previous discussions that validates and clarifies my position on the subject... --Panic (talk) 00:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The word "misrepresent" does not have that connotation, nor was it intended to. Colons are not to be used as a delimiter between Bookname:Chapter for example. They're valid as part of a title, so Bookname:Chapter is invalid but Bookname: Subtitle/Chapter is valid. Thanks for your attention to detail. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 04:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

MINC toolbox pages
Hi Mike, thanks for the note about the empty pages. I certainly do plan to fill them all in (there are now three of us working on this book) but as I am sure you are aware it does take time. :( Is there a simple way (beyond commenting) that you can hide a page before it is ready for prime time? .Still, nice to know that at least someone has read (some of) it! Andrew janke (talk) 03:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No, there's not. You can start pages in your userspace (User:Andrew janke/Whatever) and then move it into place when ready, but there's not any huge benefit to doing so. Just remove & that'll be fine. Thanks for the note!  &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 04:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

SUL account status

 * Hello Mike. After being renamed by you here I've merged my accounts but when I consult SUL UTIL it keeps saying that the user name in en.wikibooks is unattached! Why? Georgez (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, renaming accounts does that. You simply re-merge it. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 02:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, it's merged now. Thanks! Georgez (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Frank mcdonald on En-Wiki
The user who requested to usurp the username above (I assume) just popped up on the AC toolserver requesting an account on En-Wiki. Since the above user account is nearly two years old with no edits - We created the account he requested as User:Frank McDonald. Thought you might like to know so the usurp request can be put to rest. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 17:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * God that's an impressive number of redlinks in a single message :) Paxse (talk) 17:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, figured out ACC after the usurp req. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the work at Commons. I really appreciate your help. --Manop (talk) 05:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

LoTR Citation Templates
Hi,

Are you planning on creating all of these on WB? I've just been cleaning up one of the articles to remove the dependency as I assumed we wouldn't want the templates here on WB... don't know why I assumed that, but anyway, if you are going to create them all, I'll stop cleaning them up! Thanks. <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 17:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh. I'd prefer to have them as vanilla s, but it's easier to just import the template :) Clean up as you see fit ( is your friend) &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 17:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, well, there's so much clean-up to do I'll probably leave it until "later". Cheers. <font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 17:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

mbz1

 * "truly atrocious disruption"

Hi Mike, While you're right that Mbz1 shouldn't have uploaded the images, I can't fault his motivation for acting. I agree that the way he chose to act was wrong, and that it was disruptive, but in no way was it atrociously disruptive. There is a middle ground to be found here, and a bit more good will on everyone's part would help. Thanks, BenAveling (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a Commons talk page, you know <tt>:)</tt>
 * However, I do think his behaviour is truly atrocious & he admits he is purposefully disrupting Commons to make a point - that's not OK. I very seldom say things I don't mean. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 23:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Re location: I just clicked on your signature - I didn't check where it landed. Re degree of disruption: the disruption caused was minor, a couple of extra deletion debates.  Remember that we are talking about cartoons that encourage people to go out and kill people.  That is atrocious.  Given the context, there is a real chance that these cartoons may cause someone to kill someone.  Our hosting these cartoons may cost a life somewhere.  Freedom of speech is like that.  It may also save lives, if it is used as part of a sensible discussion.  A blanket ban would be wrong.  Keeping all of them with no requirement that they be presented as part of a rational discussion would also, IMHO, be wrong.  But I'm getting off topic.  Mbz1 did the wrong thing for good reasons.  Throwing a hissy fit because other wikipedians don't seem to care about the possibility of encouraging murder is bad behaviour, but hardly atrocious.  Attacking him without engaging with the point he is trying to make is not constructive behaviour.  Regards, BenAveling (talk) 00:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with everything you've said here. As I've stated my stance clearly on multiple occasions, I'm not going to do so again here. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 02:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalbot Added to Blacklist
Hi Mike,

http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Instructional_Technology%2FInstructional_Design%2FRapid_Prototyping&diff=1371486&oldid=1371483

Added IP 87.106.94.63 to BL per yesterday's chat.

<font color="#E66C2C">Unusual? Quite <font color="#306754">TalkQu 16:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch! &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 02:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

HELP
Excuze me, butin wikbooks is there a fifth grade science textbook which is from harcout which the school John I Smith Elem.(Florida) uses. IT MUST BE FREE AND ONLINE. Thanks 4 the help

--Blacky98 (talk) 02:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No there is not. All our textbooks were written by volunteers. That one is published by Harcourt Press - you might be able to find it on their website. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 04:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Transwiki:Bearded Dragon
I found this up for speey deletion and deleted it before seeing your note on the history. Still, I couldn't find it mentioned on either WB:RFI or WB:TW (these should probably be merged), nor their log/archives. Any idea who asked for this to be moved in? This page is nearly a year old without anyone doing anything with it. It might be best, after all, to delete and re-import if anyone asks for it. --Swift (talk) 14:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive_14 - not whether it needs deleting or not. I guess they haven't used it yet. But the transwiki namespace is largely junk that we don't need. We should perhaps think about a larger cleanup. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 20:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Improper conduct the Commons
You blocked me on the Commons based on Kuiper's complaint. You were part of the argument between us and backed Kuiper. You didn't ask for my response, and you didn't ask another administrator to handle the complaint. This is an improper conduct, even if what you did were just. Drork (talk) 07:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't. I happened to find that complaint after I blocked you (see the timestamps). Your continuing incivility was pointed out to me by Multichill. You've had multiple warnings for the same issues over the past week, so I'm not sure why you think the block would be unjustified. Please try to calm down, and work cooperatively when the block expires. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 15:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Kuiper conduct is not what you would expect from a dedicated contributor to the Commons. If you choose to back him - that's fine, but you also chose to use your administrator's privileges against me, while you could have asked another administrator to handle the issue. Drork (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to tell you another thing - you have a lot of privileges on various projects. Actually, I don't think I've seen someone with so many privileges on several Wikimedia projects - including Meta and Commons which are global projects - and I'm part of these projects for a long time. The way you participated in the discussion about those caricatures, asking those who call for deletion to explain their opinion or to elaborate their arguments, while supporting those who call for keeping the caricatures, repeating the claim as if deleting the caricature were censorship etc. was quite unfair considering the privileges you hold. You have a lot of power, and you overused it. I don't think you did it on purpose, but it is still wrong. Drork (talk) 06:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure I didn't use my "powers" at all - if I did, please point out the log entries. We had several discussions in a fair and open forum. Complaining about the outcome is probably not worthwhile. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 14:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for multiple move "Bot"
Hi Mike, I have been around Wikipedia and Wikibooks for some time and thought I knew I was trying to improve the Wikibook Blender 3D: Noob to Pro by moving the whole book to Blender 3D: Beginner to Professional, unfortunately most, if not all, the links were lost!-does your Bot do this automatically? kind regards Read-write-services (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It uses relative links. So long as the whole book gets moved, it won't be a problem. However, I don't think that is an improvement on the current title, so I would hesitate to recommend that you move the book. As well, if it is going to get moved, you should get a sysop to do it. &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike.lifeguard</b> &#124; talk 01:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)