User talk:Deprifry/Archive3

Archive1
Archive2

"Oh thank you love, thank you very much, look I'm sorry I forgot to mention you on my Academy award winning speech, but there were so many people to thank love all of whom were much frankly more important than you, so if your calling to complain please leave a message after the beep:"[1]

<hi fives>

Very good work on the WoW... <will beat you next time!> <grin> - Amgine | ^talk 23:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, same to you. I think this fella now has a pretty thick layer of blocks ;) --Deprifry|+T+ 23:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

un-delay delay

OK on the date thing. But when I look at my talk page (http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User_talk:216.237.179.238) and click on the edit link for the "Welcome" section, I get an edit page with an edit box that I can't actually edit anything in. If I click the edit link for the entire talk page it omits that section from the edit text. The legend at the top of the edit page says why: "This page has been locked to prevent editing; there are a number of reasons why this may be so, please see Project:Protected page." I figured since you were the one who put the Welcome section into my talk page that you'd set a lock bit somewhere. 216.237.179.238 20:52, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok. That happens because I used a template to send you the welcome, and that template is protected. If you want to edit your page just hit the big "edit this page" (instead of the smaller "edit" in the text) button at the top of the page. --Deprifry|+T+ 21:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

thanks

thanks for fixing my accidental post to user:Ajdlinux's user page instead of his talk page. i must just be tired by now! :) -- IlyaHaykinson 09:25, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem :) --Deprifry|+T+ 09:31, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Hey Dep, thanks for the welcome to WikiNews. I have a wikipedia account, although I'm not sure if I want to bring it over here, or I want to edit pages with an account at all. Although I must say, the biggest concern I have with WikiNews is that people not trained in journalism are attempting to write journalism articles...there is a proper way to do it and a proper style to follow, which many people really don't know. Thus, just about every page here could use lots of edits. Thanks again. --147.124.49.89 19:23, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think we're all amateurs here, many of us didn't have any journalism experience at all before joining Wikinews. But I think everyone is more or less capable of writing articles, maybe not at New Yorker-level, but still solid. Plus we have our Style Guide to help us with that. And I guess thats what Citizen journalism is about, being able to write news without having to go through three years of college. --Deprifry|+T+ 20:06, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

It's ok.

—MESSEDROCKER (talk) 13:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

==Thanks for the Reverts== --elliot_k 15:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. --Deprifry|+T+ 15:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Rfda on Amgine

Hi Deprify,

MrM deleted my Rfda on Amgine although the previous Rfda on Amgine has been withdrawn. I have a health situation that allows me online rarely; I trust you will replace the Rfda I just put on; as I do not have the energy for an edit war with those 2. Paulrevere2005 02:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the DR maintainance!

Thank you very much for taking care of WN:DR while I wasn't! —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 22:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. --Deprifry|+T+ 12:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Redirects

Hello, I will try to fix redirects if I can when I rename articles, but you are not in a position to give users orders. Like all wikis, if you see a problem, fix it! --MateoP 15:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, in future I will simply pull the articles into development and request a rename. The policies should not stacked in order to discourage participation. --MateoP 15:27, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

please don't revert Wikinews:Administrators

please don't revert Wikinews:Administrators. the reason I edited out your comment was because it was unrelated to the topic of the discussion: the request for adminship of user Nyarlathotep. thanks, i put it on the comment section but i guess you did not see it. glad we cleared this up. --MateoP 22:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You accused me of something on a community discussion page. I have the right to defend myself there so that others, who see your accusation, can see my rebuttal. --Deprifry|+T+ 22:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

It's irrelevant to the discussion. I said that in addition to replying about the user Nyarlathotep's request for adminship. YOu simply stated something off-topic. That's what user talk pages are for. The discussion in question wasn't about you in any way. --MateoP 22:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. But you were the one who started going off-topic when you named me and thus giving me every right to respond. --Deprifry|+T+ 22:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect, I was responding to someone else, so that person should be directed for going off-topic, if that is what you believe. I related my comment into what I was talking about with the adminship, you did not. Your post was in no way related to the adminship question. Your response was unnecessary, you didn't need to defend yourself as your status was/is not in jeopardy. It would be like debating over irrelevant issues on a wikipedia talk page. If someone says something irrelevant, just ignore it, or tell them on their talk page not to. Don't drag the discussion further off topic. Thanks. clarified. --MateoP 00:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Woa. You spread lies about me on a page that is visited by the entire community and you expect me to respond on your talk page where perhaps 1/10 of the people visiting WN:A see it? Is that what you are saying? You have got to be kidding, man. --Deprifry|+T+ 00:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

yeah i noticed

It should be fixed now (limited to 30) however it shouldn't put that much. I remember reading somewhere it was limited so that wouldn't happen. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I tried it about a month ago to see what would happen, and I'm pretty sure that didn't happen. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

YOU HAVE DELETED AN IMPORTANT ARTICLE

I DEMAND AN EXPLANATION Chileno 01:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

out of bounds

deleting an article is ok. but you act unilaterally without discussing things. this supposed news is no more than 20 minutes old. you're acting like you've solved the JFK murder instantly, with no community involvement. exercise patience and group discussion. --MateoP 01:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but have you actually read the thing? Chileno posted quotes from various high ranking Chilean personalities, including the president, who reportetely said "I was eating nachos, just like Allende was before the coup, when I saw the news." The guy was obviously, obviously playing a prank on us. And btw, I'm still waiting for the response of our discussion above. --Deprifry|+T+ 01:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

And the Speedy Deletion guideline says reasons for deletion includes "Obvious hoaxes, spoofs, April Fools-type pranks or other works of fiction that damage the credibility of Wikinews". --Deprifry|+T+ 01:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I know it is probably a hoax. After all I contributed to the article immediately after it was written and have been watching TVN and Chilevision looking for any type of conformation, but there is none. And I pointed out the fact that the presidential candidates had already commented on the death 10 minutes before you brought it up. So yeah, I "read the thing". But I also realize that it's a wikimedia-wide policy to assume good intent. That means you have to wait longer than 20 minutes to start deleting articles and banning users.

It was pretty clear from the start, with all the quotes, that the guy was out to spread misinformation. And he only continued on the talk page, as you have seen, so assuming good faith went indeed away pretty fast. --Deprifry|+T+ 01:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You made no attempt to talk about it with the community. If you had read the article heading, it said that it was being discussed in IRC, which it was, and we were discussing about what should be done with the article. You acted unilaterally as though you own wikinews. You don't. That speedy deletion guideline you cite says that articles can be moved temporarily to user space. I volunteer mine. --MateoP 01:48, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe I did use the discussion page. There you said it was a hoax, I said it was a hoax and it was obvious from the body of the article that It could have been nothing else than that. So I deleted it to protect the integrity of Wikinews. At your request, you can find it now here. --Deprifry|+T+ 11:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

By the way, what response is necessary to "our discussion above"? You think it's perfectly all right to drag discussions completely off topic. Sorry, wikinews isn't a chat room. I'm not going to repeat the obvious fact over and over because you don't get it. --MateoP 01:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

What I find sad is that you reserve the right for yourself to make false statements about other users but then don't allow those who you addressed to respond. --Deprifry|+T+ 01:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Listen, when you make requests on a talk page to do some rare task that a person has never done before, I assume it's a demand and I'm obligated to do so. You didn't clarify that. I don't know if you speak any other languages, but "Redirect fixs" is a command in most languages (in english it can be depending on context and voice inflection). As I see it, you don't request or ask anyone to do anything on wikis. That's the point of wikis. Users contribute what they want. Remember it's everyone's kernel of knowledge combined. The most you do is make a person aware of something that needs to be done. But you don't ask that they do it. For all purposes you should assume that every edit I (or anyone else) makes is going to be my last. --MateoP 02:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

A rare task? You are actually obliged, not by me, but by both MediaWiki:Movepagetext and MediaWiki:Pagemovedtext (those are the messages you get during the move process) to fix the redirects. The former say under the big headline "Read this" :"be sure to check for and fix double or broken redirects by checking the "What links here" page for your newly renamed article. You are responsible for making sure that links continue to point where they are supposed to go.". I just assumed you somehow didn't noticed that so I left a friendly request on your talk page to make you aware. And it certainly wasn't a demand. A demand requires the imperative mood which in turn requires a verb. There wasn't any in the headline you mentioned so there is no way this could be seen as a command. "Fix the redirects", that would have been a command. And I did clarify it here. --Deprifry|+T+ 11:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Movepagetext is a page, just like any other, written by a user who doesn't have authority to make up policy on their own. The fact that it's a protected page and can't be edited doesn't mean anyone is obliged. No one is obliged to do anything other than what they want to do. That's a wikimedia wide fact. If you have a problem with it, change the policy. I'll continue to change titles, when written in eurocentric terms, without changing the redirects, which I neither know how to do nor want to waste my time doing. If you want to fix them, do so. If not, don't. That's why it's a wiki. --MateoP 19:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

As much as I hate to get involved in a fistacuffs when you're in the 9th round, I'd suggest that you both read my comments on the Pincohet article. I'll save my Chileanisms and sarcasm for later... -- NeoAmsterdam 19:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually pages in the MediaWiki namespace aren't really written by users here, they are provided by the software, in this case User:MediaWiki default. They describe technical necessities, things that need to be done to keep the site running smoothly. And they exist Wikimedia wide. And if you didn't know how to fix the redirects why didn't you say so? I would have been, and still am, willing to show you how to do it. And in other news, our mutual friend from yesterday found a new target: Former Paraguayan president Alfredo Stroessner dies at 93 --Deprifry|+T+ 20:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

ARE YOU ACCUSING ME OF BEING A SOCKPUPPET TO BLOCK ME. I GAVE YOU A SOURCE AND YOU IGNORE ME. Paraguayo 20:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

New Article

Hi, do you mind if I copy your new article box, to my userpage? cheers Brian New Zealand 01:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

No, not at all. :) --Deprifry|+T+ 01:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

WTF?

WHo are you to say that the Stroessner article is wrong? You're not even Paraguayan or Brazilian. Paraguayo 20:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

If you are willing to provide a credible source for the article I'd more than happy to publish it. And ou don't happen to be related to User:Chileno, are you? --Deprifry|+T+ 20:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea who chileno is. I'm paraguayan, not chilean. Are you accusing me of being a sockpuppet now? Here's a source on the news: www.diarionoticias.com.py

I'm sorry, but I get a timeout on this, the server is probably overloaded because all the world wants to see this incredible news. --Deprifry|+T+ 20:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

OH SURE. I can see the headline perfectly: STROESSNER MUERTO EN BRASILIA. You're lying so you can block me. Just like you're accusing me of being Chileno. Nice tactic. Paraguayo 20:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Screenshot: http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/7127/15xj1.jpg.

According to Julián Ortega this may have been a hoax by "noticias", like an April Fool's prank. I will apologize if this is true. Paraguayo 22:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

copyvios

If I want to write up an article which was previously submitted as a total copyvio, like say 22 Journalists Are Faced With Jail should I first delete the article and the rewrite, to purge the copyvio from the history. Or do we care about copyvios in the history? Nyarlathotep 15:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

The best way is probably to start rewriting the story at 22 Journalists Are Faced With Jail in Turkey/Temp, then delete the original article and then move 22 Journalists Are Faced With Jail in Turkey/Temp to 22 Journalists Are Faced With Jail in Turkey. Copyvios in the history are generally bad because they are still accessible. --Deprifry|+T+ 17:35, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, sadly, I just discovered that I don't have an appartment to move into when I move back to Lyon, France, so I suspect this weekend will be spent entirely combing appartment ads, and I probably won't fix that particular sotry, but its good tgo know the procedure.  :( Nyarlathotep 18:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that; I kinda know this sort of trouble :). --Deprifry|+T+ 19:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

re:"Royals Highlight Forgotten Island"

Thanks for your quick action. I was thinking to proceed as you did with "22 Journalists Are Faced With Jail in Turkey" article. You have done it all before I moved an inch. Super. :-) Tomos 22:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Deprifry|+T+ 22:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey!

Hey Deprifry! I'm back. Isn't it incredible how all of these South American dictators are dying all of a sudden? First Pinochet, then Stroessner, who's next? Videla? Oh, and it was hilarious hoy my article got you and MateoP into this big stupid fight. Best regards, -chileno 23:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

What's going on?

Why do you insist that I lie? It is quite probable that the news isn't in the major news sites because, after all, Bermúdez is a pretty obscure statesmen when one compares him to other Latin American dictators. Please try and be nicer. Thanks Peruano 17:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

So obscure that Peruvian newspapers like El comercio, La Republica and Gestion won't report his death? --Deprifry|+T+ 18:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, sure. The Bermúdez régime is one of the most obscure in history. Peruano 18:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)