User talk:Mike Storm: Difference between revisions

Hi Mike, welcome to Wikipedia! I converted your graph of Alexa traffic to PNG format. Jpeg tends to be unsuitable for line drawings, especially those with only a few colors; the conversion actually resulted in a 99.6% smaller file! Check out the policy page section on format, as well as this tutorial for some tips on converting to PNG in the future. Nice graph, by the way. Happy editing! -- Wapcaplet 21:00, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

---

Mike, due to your recent edit to Wikipedia:Are You a Wikipediholic Test, my score just went up by 5 points. You're making it harder for me to claim I can stop at any time! -- llywrch 02:22, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Day

Hi there - The statement under the heading ==Wikipedia Day 2004== at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Day is a measure of our progress to Wikipedia Day 2004 (January 15, 2004). It is not supposed to measure where we are currently. There will be another update added to that page for Wikipedia Day 2005. --mav 00:33, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry about that. Mike Storm

Linking to a user contributions page

Try Special:Contributions/Mike Storm (or Special:Contributions/Ardonik for that matter.) --Ardonik 20:35, Jul 21, 2004 (UTC)

SubStub

Hi Mike. I hope you take the substub related snickering on the village pump easy. We're just having fun, and no harm is intended. Personally, I don't see the need for a substub, but then I don't mind having one either. Thanks for your contributions -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:13, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Mike, I'm not sure what this edit was and I'm not sure if my edit fixed it. Can you check to see nothing was lost as I can't tell what you were trying to add. I expect it's the edit conflict bug again. Angela. 23:46, Jul 21, 2004 (UTC)

Go to Special:Preferences. In the first section (user data) is a nickname field (Your nickname (for signatures):). Enter something like

Mike]] [[User talk:Mike Storm|Storm

which will make "Mike" link to your user page and "Storm" to your talk page. Angela. 00:09, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Substubs

See my answer on My talk page. Also, i just noticed that you like chess and computer programming stuff. And just so you know, I like chess and I do a little bit of programming (key word little, I never really had the patience to learn more than the basics, but I really want to) Ilyanep (Talk) 15:26, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Once again, my answer is on my talk. Ilyanep (Talk) 18:18, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Mike, I've been thinking about the substub idea. I think it is a nice alternative for the anti-deletionists, but I also think that the people using that template need to be aware that there a large number of people who will disagree with it and simply delete such pages. However, there are many pages that come very close to be CSDs but just hang around unimproved forever so it could be useful for those. However, I'm not sure if this just duplicates what the Special:Shortpages list already tells you. Angela. 18:59, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Alphabets / Writing System categorization

(also assuming that you are identical with 67.175.91.111, see [1])

You recently added Category:Alphabetic writing systems to Ge'ez language, Devanagari, Baybayin and others.

To the best of my knowledge they don't belong into Category:Alphabetic writing systems, but into Category:Abugida writing system (see also Abugida), with the possible exception of Ge'ez language, which may be a syllabary.

I called for help at Category_talk:Writing_systems and other places, to cleanup the writing system category tree, but got no answers so far.

Please comment on that talk page on how to proceed.

Pjacobi 22:01, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

User contributions

As always, response is on My User talk page Ilyanep (Talk) 16:48, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oh, and in case you haven't seen it yet, I've just archived my Talk Page. The response is on My Talk Archive 2 However, please respond on my talk page :) Ilyanep (Talk) 18:32, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

RE: edits stats code

<?php
/**
* User Edit Stats
*
* @version $Id$
* @version $Revision 1.0$
* @since 2004-04-29
* @author Just another PHP saint
* @copyright Public domain
* @todo -cFeatures -oMe -d2004-05-05 Implement additional stats and counts, and performance. (Right now, bit busy).
**/
set_time_limit(0); //ignore time limit

$username = 'Rrjanbiah';
$fix_value = 56; //manually calculated fix value

$hideminor = '0'; //all edits
$url = 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&limit=50000&offset=0&hideminor='.$hideminor.'&target='.urlencode(trim($username));
$arr_file = file($url);
$line_count = count($arr_file);
$no_all_edits = $line_count - $fix_value;

$hideminor = '1'; //major edits
$url = 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&limit=50000&offset=0&hideminor='.$hideminor.'&target='.urlencode(trim($username));
$arr_file = file($url);
$line_count = count($arr_file);
$no_major_edits = $line_count - $fix_value;

$no_minor_edits = $no_all_edits - $no_major_edits;

echo 'Major Edits = '.$no_major_edits."\n";
echo 'Minor Edits = '.$no_minor_edits."\n";
echo 'All Edits = '.$no_all_edits;
?>


Here is my initial code. I'd thought of adding more stats, but couldn't get time and also lost the interest as no one seems to be interested:-( Anyway, I'll try to implement extended stats. Note, this works without querying DB (the script is totally remote invoking). --Rrjanbiah 05:51, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't oppose it, and I have even added a few substub tags myself, but I don't support the idea enough to put my name on that list. Sorry. Angela. 13:26, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)

"Too Big"

I reverted the following edit by you:

19:49, 2004 Jul 20 (hist) List of people by name: A (top) [rollback]

It

1. blanked a page that has a well established role in the workings of the List of people by name tree
2. was applied to a page
   1. whose markup has 104 characters and
   2. whose rendered text is 251 characters.

Beyond that,

• there has never in the past been a suggestion that 32K is an "absolute max", and
• your concern with it sounds like either
  • a misunderstanding on your part or
  • a personal commitment to doing operations on large pages that no one has seriously considered before.

I hope you'll include me in consulting with your WP colleagues about whatever it is you think you're accomplishing.
--Jerzy(t) 05:01, 2004 Jul 27 (UTC)

I apologize. I've posted a reply on your talk page. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike Storm (Talk)]] 22:02, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, that's reassuring, and [grin] it should calm me down. [smile] --Jerzy(t) 22:00, 2004 Jul 28 (UTC)

CSS problem

I've been creating a new custom user CSS which I call "Neptune". The background code is:

/* Main body */
#content {
    margin: 2.8em 0 0 12.2em;
    padding: 0em 1em 1.5em 1em;
    background: #0099ff;
    border: 1px solid #00ffff;
    border-right: none;
    line-height: 1.5em;
    position: relative;
    z-index: 2;
}

This is supposed to make the background blue. The weird part is, on the main (or article) namespace, the background is white. On every other namespace (Wikipedia, Template, User, etc.) the background is blue (which is correct). All the other CSS code works correctly in all namespaces. How do I fix this? The entire code can be found here. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike Storm (Talk)]] 21:31, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I guess it's just the specifity of the selector, background: #0099ff !important; or a more specific selector should work. -- Gabriel Wicke 00:39, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Mike. I moved this from the village pump in case you hadn't seen it yet. Angela. 02:24, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

Substub

That discussion was taking a turn for the worse, and I decided it would be better to just let it die. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:41, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"[Your] plans for Wikipedia"

"Join the Cleanup Department, but I'm not sure if you have to be a sysop before you can do that."

There's no sysop requirement to do much of anything around here, short of the actual dirty work of blocking vandals and deleting pages. There's a lot of other cleanup work that needs to be done, like wikifying unformatted new pages. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:36, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The Carpetbaggers

You added a POV message, but apparently didn't start the discussion on the Talk page. The article (which is mine) does try to put the book into cultural context, and perhaps puts too much emphasis on that. I'm not at all averse to tuning it. However, I am interested in knowing what specific problems you see. Are you old enough to remember what a "blockbuster" it was at the time? Not quite in the same category as "Tropic of Cancer," but more shocking than "Peyton Place," I think, although I should try to find references to it at the time that would support that statement. Suggest you start the discussion in Talk:The Carpetbaggers rather than replying directly to me, even though I suspect we'll be the only two discussing it... [[User:Dpbsmith|dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:43, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I posted my reason on Talk:The Carpetbaggers. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 20:49, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Arbitration

Congratulations. As a result of your behaviour you have been reported to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Dunc_Harris|☺ 21:48, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Duncharris, you are the one at fault here. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 02:24, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Don't be mean. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:21, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Telling people they disgust you is far meaner than saying "I'm having a problem with this user and I think he's at fault". -- Cyrius|✎ 14:01, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

First, calm down. (see Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot) doing exercise always calms me down when I'm pissed off. Be aware of Wikiqette.

Right, I don't really give a toss what you think of me. Let's sort this out sensibly. I admit that I may have escalated this confrontation unnecessarily, but *you* are not going to intimidate me. I'm big enough to look after myself.

We need to establish a consensus of talk:substub. The best way to do this is to have an organised debate. That way, rambling flame wars do not start up, and the whole discussion is much more clearer. That was what I was trying to establish. Would you care to propose a structure for such a debate?

And if you want to become a sysop consider this; Wikipedia is a meritocracy, experienced users have more weight than newbies; users with a reputation for sensibility carry more weight than flamers. I suggest you serve time as a new page catcher special:newpages, catching all the nonsense that comes in from anon IPs, and you want to get into WP:WIWO or the cleanup squad and vote on WP:VFD to gain a better impression of Wikipedia:Maintenance. If you do that, you may earn the respect of others, and if you get enough you may become a sysop. Emperor of Wikipedia is probably out of your depth though. Dunc_Harris|☺ 17:20, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm not mad, but I am ticked off at you. Nor do I wish to intimidate you, and please do not put words in my mouth.

Are you accusing me of starting rambling flame wars? Because that is not what I do. There is already an organized structure in place - the voting sections.

You are correct about one thing - sensible posts do carry more weight than flames. However, you are mistaken - newbie users can edit pages with just as much authority as experienced ones. Furthermore, I am not a newbie - I have done all the things that you have listed. I know how to gain good impressions from people, and I know what is required to become a sysop: respect. So far, you have gained zero respect from me. And I take great offense to you saying that I want to become "emperor of Wikipedia".

So far, I believe that I have acted in a much more courteous, respectful, and Wikipedian manner than you have, and I do not appreciate you talking down to me, like I am some idiotic newbie, when all proof shows otherwise. Get off your high horse. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 18:01, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A person so easily offended by advice does not inspire respect. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:57, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Advice from a person who has humiliated me without cause on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration and who has wasted several hours of my time forcing me to write a defense of myself on that page is not very valuable to me. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 19:00, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Grow a tougher skin. Your continuing ability to misunderstand people's intentions is what started this mess. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:07, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I did not start this mess, it was Duncharris' misunderstanding of how talk pages work and the fact that he ignored my helpful (3 of them!) explanations of how they work. Also, I though that you had removed yourself from "this mess". If you have to comment about something, then comment about substubs - that is the only subject on which I will take you seriously. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 19:14, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

That you think your abrasive comments are helpful seems to be part of the problem as well. Telling someone you aren't going to take them seriously is no way to get them to agree with you. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:22, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

My comments are not abrasive, and you won't agree with me no matter what I say, which is just one reason that I won't take you seriously. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike∞Storm]] 19:28, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Done

I had no idea 1911 was protected. It's unprotected now. Not sure if I did it or what, but have fun! jengod 04:53, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)