User talk:Cenarium

Protected templates

Hello... FYI, I've taken the liberty of adding three templates to your list of protected templates. They are {{cite doi}}, {{cite doi}}, and {{cite doi}}, all of which are used by Citation_bot for auto-generating references. (I've also added them to Hersfold's list.) Hope this is OK, and thanks for taking the initiative to institute such a useful service. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat_spy 17:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

swine flu barnstar notice removal

Hello,

This is extremely no big deal so I am not going to argue much about it, but I don't really understand why you removed the tiny notice that a special barnstar was available for swine flu articles. How else is an editor to know such a star intended for only a couple articles exists?

It had been there a while & no one else objected, which doesn't mean it was OK, but I see no reason why it was wrong either. However, please do inform me if there is one as I am always willing to learn.

Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 00:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Well, this is not really the purpose of a talk page. I think there are some ways to share and advertise barnstars at WP:BARN. Many talk page headers are already quite bloated by templates, and we should generally only keep the essential. Barnstars are nice, but they stay behind the scene, they are not directly related to improve articles. There are barnstars pertaining to certain groups of articles, but they aren't advertised in main talk space; it's the first time I see this, and I don't think it's fitting for the above reasons. But no big deal, yes. Cheers, Cenarium (talk) 01:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar for help with wind

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for helping out with some of the nitpicky tasks I've missed during my months of editing and improving the wind article. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ;) It's a pleasure to edit an article of this quality on such a major subject. I'll add follow-up comments to the FAC in a short time. Cenarium (talk) 02:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How are the recent edits stacking up against your comments from a day or two ago? I've heard they've previously been aggressive in delisting FACs which descend into inactivity. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look, I should comment within 24 hours. Cenarium (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded to your latest responses. Station model and wind scales are now within one section titled "Meteorological use." Let me know if this is too broad of a header for the section. I've added a couple lines about the khamsin wind's influence on historical events, and did add a line concerning the Nor'west arch's influence on art in New Zealand, within the "near mountains" section. I'm asking for additional feedback on the FAC page, to see what others think might still be missing. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did an excellent job, and I'm satisfied enough with the present article. Moving to support. Cenarium (talk) 14:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 185

I disabled this for now - we have an IRC bot watching the abuse filter, and since non-admins do crossnamespace moves all the time, it is constantly going off (anything that sets of a page move filter is considered high priority). Also, given that non-admins do do this all the time, why would we want to tag that? Seems like something better handled by existing tools to me. All of the information for detecting a cross namespace move is in the IRC RC feed, you don't need the extra power (which uses server time) of the abuse filter. Prodego ^talk 07:07, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no easy on-wiki way to detect page moves into mainspace, which is a problem, because it bypasses the NewPages monitoring. We frequently had requests for a feature to detect that, which can be done through the abuse filter and the log or tag system. A couple of hours is not sufficient to determine if the filter impacts performance or if this is done all the time. We should have in a couple of months a usergroup intermediary between autoconfirmed and sysop that we'll be able to use to extend the group of exempted users, but as of now it's not possible. Although we could use a time since registration/number of edits to limit this. If there were a more server-friendly way to detect cross-namespace moves, embedded in the software, we would have no need for that. But as of now, there are no efficient existing tools for this. IRC is not relevant here, just fix it so that it doesn't trigger on this filter. Cenarium (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is trivial for a bot to detect cross namespace moves, without using any server time. Such a bot would simply check all page moves in the IRC RC feed (which is run by the wmf and part of the site), and look for any that are crossnamespace. There really isn't any need for the abuse filter. Prodego ^talk 16:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a better way to detect that, then fine, but I'm still unsure on how a bot could present this information. It's better fit for a log. The best would be to be able to filter the move log, but internal filtering of logs has never been easy, so it's where tags could come into play. Tags embedded in the software, which doesn't take out server time or rely on the abuse filter, would be much better for that purpose, and I plan to request that kind of things if it's not already developed. Cenarium (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subpaging archivebot code

Fairly sure MiszaBot won't work if it's not on the page in question. I could be mistaken, though. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I vaguely remember some comments implying this doesn't work too. Cenarium (talk) 14:18, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...?

I'm a bit confused, and I'm sure you have a reason for it, but why did you remove FlyingToaster's Autoreviewer rights? Is it just because she's inactive? The Savage Norwegian 00:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we had come to the conclusion at AN that inactive users shouldn't be given the rights, to allow an easier management of the usergroup (it's a new userright that has been given out based on a whitelist, a little in a hurry, see WP:AN). More than 50 users had it removed due to inactivity. Cenarium (talk) 02:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Performance

{{Wikipedia:Abuse filter/Performance/Header}} should be added on the next update. Dragons flight (talk) 20:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are an admin, request for edit on Jackson

Although the death shouldn't be overly emphasized in the lead of the article on Michael Jackson, it should have at least one sentence talking about it, like other articles on the deceased do. Hello32020 (talk) 00:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was reverted in this edit, propose to revert it on the talk page. If you get enough support, an admin will revert or add something similar on his death in the lead. Cenarium (talk) 00:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection on Michael Jackson

I don't see a clear reason why this page should not be semi-protected instead of full protection. As new information is released by the mainstream media and other reliable sources we are preventing a 'normal' user from adding relevant materials. Am I wrong on this ? I'm not really familiar with the policies, but I'm more than happy to learn more. Thanks! e0steven(☎Talk|✍Contrib) 00:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I gave my reasons on the talk and in the log. Check my reversions in the history. Three vandalism in seven minutes, it was reverted by me relatively quickly because I refreshed the page history ready to rollback. But that's way too much vandalism with this extreme traffic. Cenarium (talk) 00:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should read the comments at WP ANI Corpx (talk) 00:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep I headed over there and read the comments, I didn't realize that would be another avenue to head down as I'm not an Admin and I'm not stirring any pots, I was just curious as someone who doesn't really know all the in's and out's of Wikipedia Policy. Thanks for the link. e0steven(☎Talk|✍Contrib) 01:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two things: 24.94.40.184 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) should be blocked for posting negative BLP/vandalism on the talk page; and the dashes in the lead should be spaced (birth and death range). Dabomb87 (talk) 01:08, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This loks like an isolated edit from this IP, blocking probably uneeded. For the edit request, please request on the talk page, tere are plenty of admins available. Cenarium (talk) 01:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Linked on Google News

Hello Cenarium
you wrote that your {{On google news}} got superseded by Template:Linked on Google News, do you think it is enough if the template is changed once per hour (snapshot)? The editors on Google News change their front page references pretty often/fast. I am just asking to make sure the template will be updated often enough to reflect things properly. --- Kind regards, Melancholie (talk) 01:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]