User talk:Osiris/March 2013

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 16

Rollback

Hey, I'am sorry, but can you give me rollback so I can patrol. I has been on a long break so I would like to be able to patrol :-) I asked to get them removed ([1]). --Simeondahl (talk) 21:06, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I did that in Osiris' absence. Hope you don't mind. -Barras talk 22:59, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki work

Since you're one of the people who worked on User:Auntof6/Adding simple interwikis on enwiki, please see my question on the talk page and respond there. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks a bunch! you sure had helped me improve. This really made my day. Thanks a bunch!!!!!!!!!!!! - TDKR Chicago 101.

No problem, mate. The praise really belongs to you. Face-smile.svg Osiris (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Scientific Research Institute of System Development

Hello Osiris,

I'm sorry, but the second time I've written a new article, without borrowing from the English Wikipedia. Why was it removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolument (talkcontribs) 16:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Absolument. The article was deleted under WP:QD#A3: it was not in Simple English and it was copied from the English Wikipedia without simplification. Take the first sentence as an example: "research and development institution in the field of complex applications, on the basis of fundamental and applied mathematics in combination with the methods of practical computing"... Normally I would try to translate/simplify, and I did do this with Russian Academy of Sciences. However, Scientific Research Institute of System Development was too complex and it hadn't been simplified much from the original.
I'll restore the page and simplify it for you. But you need to read over Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia. If you haven't borrowed it from the English Wikipedia, then you've borrowed it from a site that is a mirror or fork of the English Wikipedia. The content was a derivitive of en:Scientific Research Institute of System Development. Osiris (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I understand. Thank you for correcting my errors. Unfortunately, I'm not a native English speaker and that's why I find it a bit difficult to assess the degree of complexity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolument (talkcontribs) 04:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
That's perfectly understandable. It's not a natural way of writing, so pretty much everybody finds it awkward at first. I'm happy to help if you need any, anytime. Osiris (talk) 06:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Ariel University is in Israel

it is not the Palestinien Authority. it is Israel Authority area. פארוק (talk) 10:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I live in Israel and i know that is in Israel. it is not yet in other regim. פארוק (talk) 20:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
If you so want to say that is not Israel I do not Atoch with you, but please bring the discussion back to here. by the way, your map is not accurate at 100 percent!! becouse half of the area is still in Israel. פארוק (talk) 05:39, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
No it isn't. Ariel is in Area C of the West Bank. It's not under Israeli law. It's under the Oslo Accords scheme. It hasn't been annexed by Israel, so it's not in Israel. Surely, if you live in Israel, you know all of this? Osiris (talk) 06:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
until there is no Palestinein Country this is still under Israeli government, and Please don't quote me. Thank you. פארוק (talk) 08:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
No, that's original research. That's a conclusion that you have arrived at by yourself. I've cited maps and reliable sources showing that the settlement is in the Palestinian territories (a territory that is recognised universally as not being "in Israel"). Nobody – not even Israel – considers this area part of Israel. I've cited a reliable source stating that Ariel is not under the Israeli government, not under Israeli law. It's factually inaccurate to say otherwise. Osiris (talk) 00:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
It's true that the recognition of the United Nations, but did not get there an Arab country and therefore it is still an area controlled by Israel and Israeli residents in place. פארוק (talk) 09:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
"still an area controlled by Israel and Israeli residents in place." - Israeli settlements in the West Bank are considered illegal under international law. I don't see how that leads to the conclusion that Ariel is Israel territory. Area C may be governed by Israel, but they are still considered a part of the Palestinian territories. Chenzw  Talk  09:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, this is No Man's Land - not Jewish, and not Arabic. but steal israelis are living there. פארוק (talk) 09:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
No it isn't. This is just more original research. Unless you can provide a reliable source saying that it's located in anything but the West Bank, or that it's been excised from the West Bank and made a part of Israel, then I'm not going to continue this conversation. Osiris (talk) 10:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: A week later...

You have new messages Hello. You have a new message at Chenzw's talk page.

Acre Port

I put the name "israel" beside because there is a another sea port with a same name in the United States. פארוק (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide a link? Neither "Acre Port" nor "Port Acre" get any hits on Google. The closest thing I could find is en:Port Acres, Port Arthur, Texas. But it's spelled differently, so it's not an issue. Osiris (talk) 09:55, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

PaRappa the Rapper

You have new messages Hello. You have a new message at Ezekiel53746's talk page.

Also at Talk:PaRappa the Rapper. Ezekiel! Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'. 02:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

You have new messages Hello. You have a new message at Ezekiel53746's talk page.

Ezekiel! Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'. 02:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Retirement

Thanks. You've been one of my best influences throughout my editing. I think it would take a long time to reach my 2,000 article, but once I get there I might be gone of a while. The retirement deal would be more like a break. Thanks. - TDKR Chicago 101.

In mater of fact, I don't think I want to retire. I think I was just feeling droopy about something, that's all. I will remain active as a member until...well...you know. - TDKR Chicago 101.

Oh! Well, that's a relief to hear! I get that way sometimes too... bad days that make me want to switch to something new. I usually just take a break and then I'm back a bit later. If you ever need any help or anything, I'm usually around. You can email me too if you like. Osiris (talk) 02:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks!!!!!!!! You've been a great help and a great friend. - TDKR Chicago 101.

Help

Hey Osiris, I was wondering if you can help me make the Jimmy Durante article easier to understand. Also can you see if the Hal Holbrook article is doing okay because I feel that I'm the only contributor and I fell that the article can be deleted (I've recreated many article that were deleted because of this reason). Oh! and I was wondering if you can join to me to fix outdated articles. Thanks for all my nagging! - TDKR Chicago 101.

Hey! I had a look at both of those articles -- I did a bit of simplifying, but they were pretty simple already. They should be fine now. Did you have any particular articles in mind you want to see updated? There are a lot of outdated articles... ;) Osiris (talk) 12:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch! Well yesterday I already updated Harrison Ford and Steven Spielberg, so I don't known any probably the 2012 in movies could use another update, but other than that I'm just looking up people and waiting to come a cross to updated articles, so just do that. THANKS AGAIN!!- TDKR Chicago 101.

Should I Create These Categories?

Hi again. I was wondering would a Category:Democratic actors and Category:Republican actors be a good category and would fit the Wikipedia guidelines. I previously created the age categories, but they were deleted, so would these categories be appropriate? Please write back so that I can or can't create these categories. Thanks again. - TDKR Chicago 101. March 24, 2013.

If they're registered as a member of the party, then I guess it's relevant information. You could probably start by creating Category:Democrats (United States) and Category:Republicans (United States) for people in general, and add them to one of those. But mixing career and political affiliation might seem a bit strange to some people. Osiris (talk) 02:16, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Also, please be sure there's a reference for the people being members of the parties before you put them in those categories. This is one of those categories, like religion and sexual preference, that can be controversial. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Article wizard

Good work on getting the article wizard going. Is there anything else that needs to be done?--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Your timing's great actually. Everything is pretty much finished, but could probably use a second pair of eyes to verify that everything works okay. The instructions for creating an article straight away are finished (you can test it at WP:WIZGO). I'm a bit stuck, though, on the instructions for creating a userspace draft. I don't know what to tell the users to do when they've finished their draft... Once that's figured out, it's ready to go. I also need to make up some demonstration screenshots to replace the enwiki versions, I'll do that today some time. Osiris (talk) 01:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Movies by language

Remember that change you made to template {{Infobox movie}}, to only add pages to a language category if the category exists? I added that template to three Urdu-language movies, then created Category:Urdu language movies, but the pages didn't show up in the category. (I added the category manually so it wouldn't get deleted.) I did a dummy edit on one of them, but still no luck. What am I missing that kept this from working? --Auntof6 (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

We never actually made that change, I don't think any action came out of that discussion. Currently the infobox requires the language's article to exist. It depends on the value you specify in the parameter |language=
  • If you give the value |language=Urdu, then because the page Urdu language exists, it'll sort the pages to Category:Urdu language movies (regardless of whether the category exists).
  • However, in the infoboxes you added, the value was [[Urdu]]. So, because the page [[Urdu language]] doesn't exist, it won't put the pages in the category.
A strange system, yes, but I suppose that it addresses typos and such. Osiris (talk) 13:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Actully, if [[Urdu]] was set as the language, [[Urdu]] or [[Urdu]] language would need to exist. The linking of the variable's value causes the parser function to also try and find the brackets used, but note the brackets are inside the second term, not appended at the end. --Creol(talk) 14:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
We didn't? I saw some changes you made around the time of that discussion, so I assumed they were related. Actually, Urdu language does exist, but it's a redirect. I supposed I could move Urdu to that title over the redirect. That would even make it consistent with other language articles. I'll think about that, but I'm probably just as happy not to have the automatic categorization anyway. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Urdu language does exist exists, [[Urdu]] language (or [[Urdu]]) does not. The linking breaks the template. --Creol(talk) 14:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I'll have to check and see, and I'll get back to you. It's okay about the article. For the template's sake, it only matters whether the title exists (doesn't matter if it's a redirect). Osiris (talk) 13:56, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Thanks, Creol, that explains it! I'll go back and unlink the language in the one with the infobox. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I could have explained that a bit clearer. Osiris (talk) 03:52, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Scientific names of organisms

Hi, may I ask you this, as I'm quite puzzled? I'm spending a bit of time here as a break from the drama at the English wikipedia, where I tend to work on scientific and common names of organisms. There is currently quite a large battle going on there (not the battle that drove me out, that was unrelated) between people who want each species to have exactly one "common" name, and those of us who want coverage of the species that don't, and good disambiguation pages for the names that could apply to several species. I haven't been able to get an impression of what the accepted approach here is. There are some pages with the scientific name of an organism, such as Nakalipithecus nakayamai, but overall it looks as if these may be deprecated, so that raspberry is written as if there is only one species of raspberry. Do you think there'd be an unfavourable response if I started adding a genus page that includes a list of species in the genus, and a page for each of those species, for some plants that don't have huge economic importance? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I doubt there'd be much of any kind of response. But you could ask on the community forum if you want to be safe. You can use scientific names as titles as much as you want. There are no naming conventions here (although we sometimes have a rule about following the English Wikipedia's conventions if it suits us). But if there's a simpler way of doing things, then you should go with that. This brief conversation (that led nowhere) might be relevant to the idea you're talking about with a separate article for each genus. I'd either ask on the forum or just be bold and see whether any response comes up. Osiris (talk) 14:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, that's very helpful, and encouraging. I'll try to resist the urge to copy all the simpler pages over here, while trying to give a bit more feel for biodiversity. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 17:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Query

I wanted to know if there is any timelimit for DYK noms. Any article could be nominated? Thanks TheStrikeΣagle 12:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

No, there is no time limit. There are a few basic rules about when an article can be nominated -- they are at Template talk:Did you know#Rules. Osiris (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
I have seen the rules but was wondering if there was no limit.Thanks for the clarification. Cheers TheStrikeΣagle 12:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Ancient Australia

Greetings. I have begun work on rewriting the Ancient Australia article, which was, quite frankly, appalling. I know you have an interest in this topic, so I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on what I am doing. I have been working on the first few paragraphs, covering the latest discoveries and what DNA is telling us about early history. Thanks, --Peterdownunder (talk) 11:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure! I'll take a look at it now. Osiris (talk) 03:34, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Your rewrite looks great. I don't know what was there before but I can get an idea from the "religion" section I did a bit of a copy-edit on those older sections if that's okay... Actually, I removed most of the stuff on ancient art and replaced it. Osiris (talk) 06:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Block settings

Change Purplebackpack89's block settings to not allow talk page editing because I saw him doing so many unblock requests. 50.42.37.114 (talk) 02:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)