RexxS
This is RexxS's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66Auto-archiving period: 28 days |
Cookie
MCEllis has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Thanks for staying up trying to fix the error I was getting with Module:Wikidata. I'm sure someone will figure it out tomorrow.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Scuba skills
Hi RexxS, I am considering polishing up Scuba skills and submitting for GA. Aside from the obvious need for more citations, which should be tedious but not difficult, are there any other major deficiencies that are immediately apparent to you? Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello sir,
I've just received a note informing me that this article that I created 2 hours ago will be presented for deletion because there is some policy in the en Wiki regarding living people. I understand that. Just Mary Marquet who was a leading figure in French theatre and cinema from the 30s' up to the 70s' died 36 years ago. Her dates are indicated in the first line of the page. How is it possible to apost a model regarding living people who died a third of a century ago? 15 pages link to this article; We live in a bizarre world don't we? Now, I'm also fully aware that I'm not used to the en Wiki practice. Yours, LouisAlain (talk) 12:28, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker). As the subject shuffled off this mortal coil some time ago, a BLP Proposed Deletion is indeed not applicable, so I have removed it. However, the article does appear to be unsourced, so it would be a good idea to add some citations - see WP:RS and WP:CITE for help with that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Boing! I've added a quick reference to her obituary on file at the Institut national de l'audiovisuel and indicated that further material is available from the article on the French Wikipedia. She has 53 film credits at IMDb, but I wonder how long it will be before somebody comes along and AfD's it because she's "not notable". --RexxS (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- And now Kudpung has done a great job on translating the French version! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw the note he left at User talk:LouisAlain #Proposed deletion of Mary Marquet. I get reminded what I really enjoy about Wikipedia when a bunch of us can work together and it ends up with something good like that. --RexxS (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- And it's even better when other people do all the hard work ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw the note he left at User talk:LouisAlain #Proposed deletion of Mary Marquet. I get reminded what I really enjoy about Wikipedia when a bunch of us can work together and it ends up with something good like that. --RexxS (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- And now Kudpung has done a great job on translating the French version! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Boing! I've added a quick reference to her obituary on file at the Institut national de l'audiovisuel and indicated that further material is available from the article on the French Wikipedia. She has 53 film credits at IMDb, but I wonder how long it will be before somebody comes along and AfD's it because she's "not notable". --RexxS (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Children
"...by demanding contrition or guarantees of future conduct..."
This is something that has bothered me for some time, quite apart from the infantilizing aspect - despite having sympathy with the intent of the Standard Offer.
Firstly we shouldn't mind if they are contrite or not. It is their edits that matter.
Guarantees of future behaviour are hostages to fortune, that many will baulk at giving.
It seems though that we do need some dialogue with some sanctioned users, other than just "I'll unblock you, but be aware if you go back to what you were doing before you will probably be blocked again."
Or maybe not?
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC).
- It's all down to behaviour modification, and that seems to be something that folks in general have very little grasp of, and the Arbs in particular are not blessed with any greater insight. Most people probably remember what measures they encountered at school and extrapolate them (whether successful at the time or not) into adult behaviour. That's a recipe for treating adults as if they were children and it's no wonder that folks like Giano, Eric, Andy, etc. have had very poor experiences at the hands of admins. It's another reason I refuse to associate myself with the group. There are a lot of editors who would benefit from changing their ways - myself included, but that's not to say that they are doing anything wrong; they just allow others to put that gloss onto their actions, and if you throw enough mud, some will stick. If I could find a way of painless behaviour modification, I'd change Giano to suffer fools, Eric to stop calling a spade a fucking shovel, Andy to stop calling a 'non-automated metal-wood hand-operated digging implement' a spade, and myself to find trolls funny rather than annoying.
- The teaching emotion (as Edward Albee calls it in Zoo Story) is the juxtaposition of carrot and stick. Anyone who is sanctioned and nothing else is rather unlikely to change their behaviour going forward; the recidivism rate is huge, particularly given the inability of the denizens of The Great Dismal Swamp to forgive, forget, or let things go. What is needed is some kindness to be shown:
"I'll unblock you, and if you find yourself back where you were before, please talk to me [or Rexx, or 'Shonen, or Floq, or Rich ...] before you do anything precipitate. We're on your side and we want to help if we can."
- All the very best, Rich, I'll catch up with you at a meetup soon. --RexxS (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
passionate dedication | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 90 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
- Normally I don't repeat what I said then (when we tried to have PumpkinSky set free from an unjustified block, the Great · Dismal · Swamp - no redirect needed), but it fits so well here (I just corrected my typo, - I was still in the beginning of learning accessibility ;) + added emphasis): Thank you for looking in detail at the aspects of complicated tables, improving their accessibility and clarity, and for wise words concerning the spirit within the project! - When I read the above, I laughed loud, twice, - in good spirit ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
User's stats
Hi RexxS,
Can you tell me if the English Wiki possesses this kind of page that is of use on the French Wiki?
Thanks in advance for your answer, LouisAlain (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Louis, we don't have an exact analogue that I'm aware of, but the page at Wikipedia:Statistics has links to a lot of statistical pages, including some similar to the French Wikiscan. Have a look at:
- Those may give you some of the information you're looking for. If not, let me know - my talk page watchers may know of more resources for you. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 13:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- Most pages like this on en-wiki died along with Toolserver and thus no longer work (including Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of recent edits, linked above). Those that either still work, or are planned to be revived at some time, are listed at Wikipedia:Database reports. I imagine that a full-scale "breakdown of users by everything they've done" along the lines of Wikiscan's userstats report would be extremely unpopular—even simple lists like WP:WBE and WP:WBFAN generate significant opposition. You can generate creepy-looking stalk-and-compare activity reports on individual users or groups of users using this tool. ‑ Iridescent 13:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks to both of you. It goes to show things are different in the country I come from ... and conversely of course LouisAlain (talk) 18:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)