User talk:Interiot

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Archives:


Hi, Interiot. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting of fixing up the categories. [1]

And I had no idea there was a category redirect template. --Ed Poor 14:56, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

I created it... one of the essential templates that needed to be modelled after Wikipedia's. Unfortunately, there's currently no bot that triggers off of it, to actually move things for people, so things have to be done by hand, but fortunately all the moves/merges currently have been small-scale.--Interiot 14:58, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Another favor, please. I moved Birth control to Contraception, but I messed up and moved it back. I think we need only one article. Please sort this out for me? --Ed Poor 13:22, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Contents

Note

Hello, since you commented on Template talk:Stub before, I thought I'd let you know that after I redesigned the wording to make it less lines - TK and I have set up a four template color designs that will be implemented throughout the entire site - so if you could vote for one of them there that'd be great.--Iduan 19:00, 26 August 2007 (EDT)

Automation

Do you know of anything that will run on CP to automatically lists articles one has created? Elsewhere I can use "dpl", but it doesn't seem to be installed here. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer. Human 20:12, 29 August 2008 (EDT)

No, sorry. The one script I wrote had to have direct access to the database, and I never could get that query to run quickly at all, the indexes seemed to be all wrong for this. I'm surprised DPL is able to do it so quickly. I suppose one could write a complicated script to do it with api.php, but it would take a while to actually run. --Interiot 20:17, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
Ah, thanks. I was hoping ;). And, yes, the dpl is very efficient, isn't it? I guess I can dig through my contribs, not too hard to search for "new" I guess. Human 23:03, 30 August 2008 (EDT)

Edit count tool

It appears that your edit counter tool is no longer working (probably the MediaWiki upgrade a short time ago). As a link to it is included in our welcome template it would be nice if you could update your script. Thank you. BrianCo 17:01, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I plan to update it when I get some time. My personal life is very very busy this month though, but I hope to get to it once everything settles down. --Interiot 11:36, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
I've put a "temporarily not working" note on the template. When you do get a chance to fix it, please let us know so that we can remove that note. And thanks very much for it. Philip J. Rayment 10:39, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Capitalisation of Earth

I seem to recall you changing "earth" to "Earth". Perhaps you'd like to add your comments to Conservapedia talk:Manual of Style#Earth or earth?. Philip J. Rayment 09:04, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

Categories of blocked and warned people?

You're going to have to take this subject up with Aschlafly, but I'm not going to sit here and watch pages being created for the sole purpose of branding a scarlet letter on those who were blocked and/or warned for various things. Karajou 14:06, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

I was just doing maintenance edits, they already existed.
If you're planning on keeping the categories deleted, it would be a good idea to remove references to them from their respective templates:
--Interiot 14:22, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
You're correct that you didn't create the pages. In fact one of the pages was created by a former administrator and two of the templates were created, with the categories, by other administrators. I apologise for this false accusation. Philip J. Rayment 05:18, 30 October 2008 (EDT)
No problem at all. Thanks for resolving the dangling links one way or the other. --Interiot 12:46, 30 October 2008 (EDT)

Warning of blocking

Don't pollute talk pages, and let's see more substance in your entries. Thanks.--Aschlafly 22:05, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Huh? What are you talking about? Philip J. Rayment 03:49, 12 November 2008 (EST)
I was involved in this exchange, and Aschlafly's subsequent revert. JohnZ was the one who ended up getting blocked, but it was still below my standards to be involved parody here (my intent was to present raw facts, but I was injudicious to use wording that could be interpreted as parody).
As far more substance, I can try, but I tend to do janitorial work that other people won't do, and I'm more interested in lexicography than in writing prose. --Interiot 12:10, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Without prejudice to the 'pollution' thing, I'd like to point out that Interiot does a huge amount of grunt work that I find very helpful. And he's the Wikipedian I trust most over here.

He's more like the secretary who does the xeroxing and stapling. Not everyone is a brilliant writer or talented researcher. --Ed Poor Talk 12:16, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Phantom cats

I wonder if you could help with this. Browsing through the list of categories, I found that Bill Clinton is in several categories that contain only that article. Examples include Category:American saxophonists and Category:Bill Clinton. But:

  1. the article itself doesn't list those categories
  2. I can't see them anywhere in the code for the article
  3. I can only seem to get to these cat pages from the Categories list.

Do you know how this could be happening?

Many thanks,--CPalmer 09:24, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Seems to be a caching issue. I made a null edit on Clinton, and it went away. --Interiot 09:40, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Thanks - it was happening on the Ann Coulter page too, and the null edit solved the problem.--CPalmer 09:58, 14 November 2008 (EST)

"no no, *chartered* is key"

?

Whilst I created the category, I am at a loss as to your remark, the fist since August, 2007 ! --₮K/Talk 16:26, 21 November 2008 (EST)

The Boy Scouts of America isn't currently run by the government, so I moved the category out of Category:Government Organizations. It's possible for the government to start an organization, without retaining control of it. --Interiot 16:32, 21 November 2008 (EST)
That doesn't alter the fact that the BSA is a U.S. Chartered Organization, right? That is a matter of historical fact. Does the cat imply somewhere that the government exerts control because of that charter? Or is that your subjective opinion? There has been an on-going discussion about categories, Interiot.....is there someone who tasked you with deciding categories without discussion? Or, I ask once again, is there some on-wiki discussion about this taking place? I am sure more editors than just me have ideas, input, already made, and would like to see some discussion. There is some previous on Az's user pages and my own. --₮K/Talk 17:30, 21 November 2008 (EST)
This is why discussions should be on the appropriate talk pages, so others can read what has been discussed. Discussions via AIM, e-mail, and even user talk pages makes it impossible or difficult to know what has been discussed.
Also, our Editing etiquette says that changes can be made without discussion if there's not expected to be any controversy with the edit. Interiot's edits are mostly house-keeping ones, most of which should be uncontroversial. Philip J. Rayment 20:15, 21 November 2008 (EST)
I didn't take BSA out of Category:U.S. Government Chartered Organizations, I agree it belongs there. I took that category out of Category:Government Organizations though because "government organization" usually implies "government-run organization". But I agree it can also mean "government-launched orgranization" too, so feel free if you think the other meaning is more natural.
I read through User:Aziraphale/categories and other discussions in your talk archive, though there's a lot of material, so I skimmed over some. Are there key discussions I should be sure to not miss?
I certainly would like more community involvement in categories. Maybe it's time to create Conservapedia:Categories. However, these are fairly minor changes that anyone can revert if they disagree with me. There's so much work to do that not everything can be discussed at Conservapedia:Categories, so I'm not sure if it would have helped in these cases. --Interiot 17:59, 21 November 2008 (EST)
As you are no doubt quite aware, Interiot, the real problem is how messed up searching becomes, and that not everyone can see or track the dozens of changes made, things can rapidly get out of hand. Reversing is one thing, knowing the change occurred before 1000 other changes have been made is another. That is why I used to lock them up, to prevent well-meaning editors from making small changes. Well-meaning editors X 100 of them X 2 "small" changes, unnoticed per day, adds up, right?--₮K/Talk 18:18, 21 November 2008 (EST)
Wikis work because the 100 well-meaning editors review each other's work. But we don't have 100 people reviewing category changes. So if I limit myself to, say, ~40 category edits a day (I did 81 today), would that ensure that each edit get enough review? --Interiot 19:45, 21 November 2008 (EST)
I don't know exactly what you are getting at regarding locking, TK. It would be most unusual that large numbers of category pages get edited, so I don't see much point in that. Most "category changes" are changes to categories on article pages, and it is simply not feasible and/or counter-productive to lock many of them. Philip J. Rayment 20:15, 21 November 2008 (EST)

If there is no discussion, and no way to contact, and the edits are taking CP categories away from what was intended, previously approved, towards, by way of example, Wikipedia conventions of categories, it wouldn't be a good thing. CP has always operated, as you know, differently. All this seems like just double the work, to revert anything you do, and then make the needed edits undoing those 81 moves you did today, Interiot. I note you said you looked at what was on my cat page, and Az's, but still went with your ideas as to how things should be, making literally hundreds and hundreds of cat moves, etc....that would take hours to undo, and conform with what we already decided. Since you are not interested in discussing, and will do what you want anyway, it seems (just stating a fact, not passing judgement) I will be better off to discuss with Ed Poor, and get his opinion, since he has a bot that can do what you are. I tried to email you a list, but your email isn't enabled. --₮K/Talk 20:04, 21 November 2008 (EST)

He didn't say that he wasn't interested in discussing. He said that there's no point in discussing every change. Discussing every change definitely would double (if not triple or quadruple) the work. What, to pick an arbitrary example, is wrong with this change?
If there's something in particular about the way he's doing things that you disagree with, then why don't you start Conservapedia:Categories and start a discussion there?
Philip J. Rayment 20:23, 21 November 2008 (EST)
I was not aware it was impossible to have a discussion with any user without you getting into it Philip. It is another form, I feel, of intimidation on your part, and any reply except acquiescence will garner me yet another threat of blockage, or a tongue lashing about respecting sysops. I will now bow out of all discussions on this topic. --₮K/Talk 20:20, 21 November 2008 (EST)
It's not impossible. I just happened to come across this one and felt the need to comment. I will not block for disagreement, so your claim that "any reply except acquiescence" will get you a block is wrong, assuming that your disagreement is civil. I invite you to continue to discuss this topic, but to do so in the appropriate places. And such discussion should be on the grounds of what's best, not on whether it's different to Wikipedia or previously decided, if that's not in the guidelines or style manual. Philip J. Rayment 20:31, 21 November 2008 (EST)


I confess I didn't wade through the entire discussion, but based on off-wiki conversations I gather TK would like to be informed prior to any massive restructuring of categories, lest "liberal ideas" somehow infect them. This is also a concern of mine.

On the other hand, I trust Interiot to be wise and gracious, so I don't see any big problem here.

TK, is there a page where we can discuss Conservapedia:Categorization concerns? --Ed Poor Talk 20:25, 21 November 2008 (EST)

  • Ed, since July of 2007, there has been User:TK/SandboxCat. Interiot said he looked it over, and Azriphale's page as well, but he never posted. --₮K/Talk 20:28, 21 November 2008 (EST)
    • My email is re-enabled, I had disabled it during the password-reset spam back in August.
    • I had missed User:TK/SandboxCat because it wasn't clear what I was being directed to read. It definitely wasn't my intention to try to do things the Wikipedia way, I wasn't aware of the previous discussions. Maybe someone can update Conservapedia:Categorization or similar with a summary of previous discussions, so that new users (such as myself) don't inadvertently make as many mistakes. --Interiot 20:53, 21 November 2008 (EST)
This may have already been discussed, but categories are upper case. Learn together 02:37, 22 November 2008 (EST)
Also, when categories are created, there should already be a plan for how they will be used and, usually, the next step is to populate them. We have a number of well meaning category creations that sit with no (or one) item in them because the direction of the original category was never taken. Learn together 02:40, 22 November 2008 (EST)

WikiGnome awards

Interiot, I would like to nominate you for the first-ever WikiGnome award. --Ed Poor Talk 16:03, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Thanks, though WesleyS has done way more wikignome work by clearing the Special:UncategorizedPages backlog. And some people are still waiting on me to update one of my edit counters to work here, so maybe I could get the second ever award after that's complete. --Interiot 16:32, 30 November 2008 (EST)
I concur with my friend, Ed Poor in this, and also agree with Interiot about WesleyS, and would include the good works of Azriphale as well! Now that Thanksgiving is behind us, and Christmas yet to arrive, and some of the more strident negative voices have been silenced, we can make a better effort of coordination, and use the talk page suggested by LearnTogether and Ed Poor above, to better align everyone's workings? I hate to see more unilateral action on categories continue, as it potentially makes lots of work for someone to undo. --₮K/Talk 18:42, 30 November 2008 (EST)
Is User:TK/SandboxCat active? --Interiot 16:09, 1 December 2008 (EST)
User:Aziraphale has not made an edit since he was blocked by Schlafly for 90/10. Why would we reward someone for being blocked? HenryS 19:04, 30 November 2008 (EST)
My sincere and friendly suggestion to an old friend (who has offered me good advice in the past), is you don't stir the pot here, Bohdan. A block or blocks, as in my own case, or your very own here and other places, does not negate past or future contributions. Except of course, at places run by vindictive liberals. --₮K/Talk 19:20, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I just now discovered that I created 1,100 Wikipedia articles. [2] Can we have a tool here that tells how many articles a contributor created? --Ed Poor Talk 19:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Somebody mentioned above that DPL is a common way to list the articles somebody created, but that extension isn't installed here. The extension looks incredibly useful, do you know if there's any chance it could be installed? --Interiot 16:09, 1 December 2008 (EST)
Retrieved from "http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Interiot"
Personal tools