Difference between revisions of "User talk:DavidB4"

Revision as of 19:29, August 24, 2016

Feel free to post any questions or comments here. If you don't hear back from me, try e-mailing me instead.
Archive(s): 1

Thanks

Thanks for creating the Ubuntu Christian Edition article. I believe I am going to install that on a computer. I also think I am going to install Xiphos on a computer.

In addition, I may try out CometBird. A quick suggestion: When you create articles like this, I would put in the software's greatest strengths and weaknesses. It seems to me the greatest strength of CometBird is its greater speed than Firefox. Here is a cool browser you may like by the way: Comodo IceDragon. I rarely use Firefox now. Conservative (talk) 08:52, 26 February 2016 (EST)

You're welcome, and thanks for letting me know! I'm glad those pages were a little helpful! You're right--having the Pros and Cons is a good idea. Honestly, I don't know enough about some software to do that, but I'll see what I can do. The main problem I foresee in trying to list Pros and Cons is that those are somewhat subjecting, and can vary. For example, Opera had what I thought was a great browser for a while (since then, they switched to the Chromium engine) but some thought it was terrible. What works well for one person, doesn't always work the same way for another. None the less, I'll see what I can do. Perhaps looking up a number of other reviews for the software would be advantageous. Anyway, I'm rambling a bit. I'll see if I can start adding those sections to at least some of the pages. Thanks for the suggestion!

I think I might have heard of Comodo IceDragon before, but I'm not sure. I'll definitely add it to my list and see what I can do. Thanks for that suggestion as well! --David B (talk) XX:xx, 26 February 2016 (EST)

I've made a very simple page for Comodo IceDragon. I don't know much about it, but I'll try it a bit more in depth if I can and try to expand the page somewhat. As always, feel free to add/edit/remove if you want.--David B (talk) XX:xx, 26 February 2016 (EST)

Vandal

A vandal on the loose. [1] David B (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2016 (EST)

He, Rahulbrown, and Josephkocher might also be one and the same person. U.U (talk) XX:xx, 27 February 2016 (EST)

Thanks for the info--I guess I'm too late though. I'll try to keep an eye on Rahulbrown, but he/she doesn't seem to have done anything yet, so I can't just ban 'em I don't think. Thanks for the info! --David B (talk) XX:xx, 27 February 2016 (EST) (David B)

Rahulbrown has been blocked now, but the user I just told you of seems to have vanished instead of being blocked. I wonder why.U.U (talk) 19:46, 29 February 2016 (EST)

It could be that he gave up, but I'd sooner suspect that he had multiple accounts. Another one was banned, and with it his IP address. Now he can't log in to any other accounts, so he's gone even though the others are still open. It's just speculation, of course, but that's what I suspect.--David B (talk) 20:53, 29 February 2016 (EST)

Archive

Just F.Y.I., I've created an "archive" to hopefully fix or at least move the problem of signatures not being placed, and section edits not working properly. --David B (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2016 (EST)

Banks thanks

Thank you for your edits. One editor seems to have left a trail of red links and I appreciate you pipe-ing them to their correct target. JDano (talk) 10:38, 2 March 2016 (EST)

You're welcome! Yes, some people do that a lot. I can understand when a wiki first starts out, that this can be a good idea. By now, however, that really should be avoided--especially when the page desired already exists under another name.

You seem to be doing a great job of both writing and editing--thanks! --David B (talk) 12:29, 2 March 2016 (EST)

I must admit, though, that I still sometimes do this when there is a page I really think should be made. If no one else does it, though, I usually plan to go back and make these myself. --David B (talk) 14:40, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Photo Upload Request

Could you please upload https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brady#/media/File:James_Brady_1986.jpg it is public domain, and I want to add it to the James Brady article? Many thanks for your assistance. JDano (talk) 07:47, 3 March 2016 (EST) Could you please upload https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Neil_Cavuto.jpg It is CC SA and must be attributed to freddthompson https://www.flickr.com/people/9313013@N04 on the upload page. Yes, Fred Thompson! Thanks, JDano (talk) 08:35, 3 March 2016 (EST)

No problem--I've uploaded both: James Brady and Neil Cavuto. I certainly don't mind personal requests, but just in case you don't know, Conservapedia does have an image upload request page here. However, I certainly don't mind being asked directly. Have a great day! --David B (talk) 09:12, 3 March 2016 (EST)

Please upload https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrite#/media/File:Neuron_Hand-tuned.svg It is CC SA and must be attributed to Quasar Jarosz. Thanks, JDano (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! It is named "Neuron Hand-tuned.svg.png" and located here: [2] --David B (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

re: abortion and evolution article

Please feel free to completely revise or partially revise the Abortion and evolution article. I restored the article so now it's up to you to make it a encyclopedic article. I didn't have a chance to review the article and I am leaving that up to you along with any changes to the article.

Photo upload request

We have added a bio for Merrick Garland. Could you please upload the official photo, which is not copyrighted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland#/media/File:Merrick_Garland.jpg Thanks, JDano (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2016 (EDT)

Nice work! I've uploaded it under the name "Merrick Garland.jpg". [3] --David B (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2016 (EDT)

Thank you. How about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cataract#/media/File:Cataract_in_human_eye.png JDano (talk) 08:23, 21 March 2016 (EDT)

You're welcome! I've uploaded the second one named as "Cataract in human eye.png" [4]

Thanks for all your continuing work! I've been busy lately, so I haven't been able to do much, but I'll try to keep checking at least once a day in case you have other upload requests. Have a great day!--David B (talk) 22:11, 21 March 2016 (EDT)

Thank you for all your help. It is great working with you. JDano (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

You're welcome--let me know when there's anything else I can do!--David B (talk) 12:55, 23 March 2016 (EDT)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yunnan_in_China_(%2Ball_claims_hatched).svg Please. You can shorten the name of the uploaded file  :-) JDano (talk) 08:45, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded under the name "Yunnan in China.png" and located here: [5] --David B (talk) 11:17, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

Thanks. JDano (talk) 22:22, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

Any time! --David B (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2016 (EDT)

How about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leland_Yee#/media/File:Leland_Yee.jpg JDano (talk) 15:39, 31 March 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! [6]

Next up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Weiner#/media/File:Anthony_Weiner,_official_portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg Thanks, JDano (talk) 10:42, 1 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! [7]

Next up: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gitmo_Aerial.jpg which was taken by the Federal Government and is not copyrighted. Thanks.

Uploaded! [8] --David B (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Animated GIF, requires attribution: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Animated_gun_turret_with_labels.gif JDano (talk) 08:34, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! [9] --David B (talk) 08:45, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

I installed it in Naval guns but we lost the animation. Could you please try again in a way that keeps the animation? JDano (talk) 15:26, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

I see what you mean. On the image page it says "Note: Due to technical limitations, thumbnails of high resolution GIF images such as this one will not be animated." I don't quite understand why, but it seems CP is set up that way. If you set it to 700px or more, it does show the animation. However, that is huge for something like this. I'll do a little mor experimentation, but it doesn't look too hopeful. I suppose we could ask an admin... --David B (talk) 19:17, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mitch_Kapor_(Pic_1).jpg requires attribution. Thank you. JDano (talk) 12:47, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded--You're Welcome! [10] --David B (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

How about File:Electromagneticwave3Dfromside.gif requires attribution. JDano (talk) 08:10, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! [File:Electromagneticwave3Dfromside.gif] It looks like this one can be a "thumbnail" and still have the animation work, since it is smaller. If it does work for you, though, let me know and I'll see what I can do. --David B (talk) 08:43, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Thank you. I have two more: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hammer_mill_open_front_full.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Goliath_Poldermolen.jpg JDano (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

There is also https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Countries_implicated_in_the_Panama_Papers.svg which should be attributed to "JCRules". JDano (talk) 19:04, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

I hope I am not imposing by making these three requests. JDano (talk) 09:17, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Not at all--I'm happy to help! Just let me know if/when you want any more! --David B (talk) 09:19, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

I did not see them, where are they? JDano (talk) 09:37, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Ahh... whoops! Sorry about that! I didn't even see you most recent request, just the comment. (This section is getting a little messy..maybe that's why?) I've uploaded it implicated in the Panama Papers.png|here.

Many thanks, but the other two - windmills and grinding mill? JDano (talk) 10:05, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Opps again! I need to do more reading and less skimming/skipping! Here are those two: [11] [12]

How about this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Flute.jpg For the Silver article. It has a picture of a raw crystalline blob; I want to show silver in a more refined state. SamHB (talk) 12:01, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

I'd be happy to upload that, SamHB, but I see we already have a flute. Is that one suitable, or would you like the one you linked to? --David B (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

That will do just fine. Even if the lip plate is made from another element 32 slots higher in the periodic table. SamHB (talk) 13:15, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Alright, well you do have a point (and I'd be happy to upload the other). It's up to you.

I was joking. Many substances go into musical instruments. That picture is fine. Thanks. SamHB (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Alright, I could tell for sure but that's true, they are in no way made of a single material. --David B (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Categories

Thank you for your work on category clean up. If you put an article in a subcategory, it should not also go in the category. So, articles in Category:United States Law should not be placed into Category:Law or Category:Laws. A user who did not understand the tree-structure of categories added a lot of category tags in 2014-2015 that messed everything up. A category should not be a subcategory of itself. Also, if categories A B and C are subcategories of category X. Then do not create a circle by placing X as a subcategory of A B and C. Thanks, JDano (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2016 (EDT)

I'm glad to do what I can, though perhaps I'm getting lazy...categories are easier than writing.

I thought I'd read this somewhere, but I wasn't absolutely sure, so it's good to know. I've been doing a sort of mass-audit of categories, so it's a little hard for me to check where every category is in the tree, but I'll try to keep an eye out for this kind of issue. Thanks for the info! I have been finding some oddities, like Amazon.com being a subcategory of commerce, but commerce also being a subcategory of Amazon.com. On the one hand, I think "Why did people miss this?!?" but on the other hand, a wiki a a big place, and we don't have as many active editors as WP. I can't fix it all, but if I can straighten out some of it, maybe that will help. In the mean time, sorry to everyone who watched the recent changes page for the edit flood! --David B (talk) 14:17, 31 March 2016 (EDT)

As I recall, either you or JDano created a little page of guidelines for categories. As a subpage of your user page or talk page. I can't find it now, perhaps because of all the changes you made, that cluttered up RC, for which you apologized above. I forgive you of course, but can you tell me where it is? I have some comments I'd like to add. I want to create a link to it on my own page. I think that page can become a generally useful tool. SamHB (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

JDano Made that, and it's located here: User:JDano/TARlist. We're glad to have you back! :) --David B (talk) 13:54, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Thanks. This is of vastly more general importance then just TAR. It looks like useful editing guidelines in general. I'm going to see what I can do about moving it (or its non-TAR-specific content) to a more general place.

I actually have a specific issue with the "only in the lowest-level category" rule. I came a cross an exception a while back. I'll bring it up as soon as I catch my breath. SamHB (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Good idea--I agree, TAR is one contributor, but not the only. General cleanup is a good idea along the same lines throughout CP.

By the way, I'm probably going to be fairly busy for the rest of this weekend, so I may not be responding promptly from not on. --David B (talk) 14:52, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

TAR clean up

Glad you are pitching in. Please consider User:JDano/TARlist. Thanks, JDano (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2016 (EDT)

Thank you, as well! I haven't much time now, but I skimmed over your list, and it looks pretty good. Thanks! (DavidB4 (talk) xx:xx, 1 April 2016 (EDT))

I just left a note on JDano's talk page, which please see. SamHB (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

Dear DavidB4, while I appreciate the time you took in writing Gun nut, it completely duplicates the existing Gun enthusiast page. Could we possibly merge the two and then have a redirect from Gun nut to Gun enthusiast? Thanks, JDano (talk) 16:07, 6 April 2016 (EDT)

Yes indeed we could. I should have done more looking before I wrote. I'll see what I can do, but if you get there first, feel free to merge them your self. Thanks for pointing this out! --David B (talk) 17:55, 6 April 2016 (EDT)

For God's sake! What was the matter with this person?

So I was doing a routine look at RC, and I came across your change to Battery (electrical). You're right; it needs more work. But I noticed that you de-wikilinked the various sizes: "AAA", "C", "D", etc. I immediately thought "This looks like the work of TAR." Sure enough, it was. He was planning to have a page titled "C", about the uses of size C batteries? What was it going to say? Something like "C is a size of batteries that you will use when you cash in your 401K to buy a lifetime supply of batteries, along with guns and bullets, so you can spend the rest of your life holed up in Idaho waiting for the zombie apocalypse gun-grabbers"? Did he not bother to look and see that there is already a "C" page, about the programming language? Similarly for "D". He apparently didn't bother to look—or did he?—and see that there was a page about the one-letter abbreviation for the Democratic party.

But "AAA" was most telling. (Plain "AA" was just a redlink.) His "AAA" link was to a page about, among other things, the American Automobile Association. And who wrote that page? TAR did. He linked to that knowing full well that the page was about other things!!

I'm going to create the "Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles" page. And it will have a few things to say about wikilinks. The things I cited above are not the only instances of this kind of stuff that I have seen.

SamHB (talk) 00:56, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

TAR is a very sticky substance. Not easily completely removed.Conservative (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

On my first edit of that page, I missed the problem entirely. I didn't even check, thinking "They wouldn't possibly link to just the text shown—they must be piped." Haha! Funny joke! The moral of this story: never over-estimate the planning behind some pages and their content. Thanks for going ahead with making that guide. It could be a helpful checklist to reference and point to for sure.

Cons, I have to agree. TAR has its uses, and in some cases is difficult to replace. In other ways, it can really make a mess. Not to be too hard on him, though, I'm sure he's not the only one to make mistakes like this. --David B (talk) 01:12, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

SamHB, see: User talk:User: SamHB/How to create and maintain high-quality articles. Conservative (talk) 01:22, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

I see a few things I'd like to tweak on that list, but which one is currently in use? User:JDano/TARlist, User talk:User: SamHB/How to create and maintain high-quality articles (which has a space in the link it should not), or Essay:How to create and maintain high-quality articles which does not seem to exist? --David B (talk) 11:40, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

I moved SamHB's version to the bottom of User:JDano/TARlist. And then I deleted the version that I created along with its talk page. You two can work the rest out. Conservative (talk) 12:02, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

OK, I've overwritten my current version in situ (love them Latin expressions) in the usual place, User:JDano/TARlist. We can work on it there. SamHB (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

Alright, thanks! --David B (talk) 12:20, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

As you may have seen, there was a delightful dialog between me and Cons late last night, as he repeatedly moved pages around and otherwise created edit conflicts for me. I asked him to pause and give me a 15 minute window in which I could tell him what I was doing (and in fact completely agreeing with his objections), but he just moved things around some more and created more edit conflicts. He seemed to be acting as though he hadn't seen my request for a pause, even though he was making edits to the very same pages. He wouldn't acknowledge me. He just moved the discussion to yet another page. I posted a request on that page with subject line "PLEASE STOP AND ACKNOWLEDGE" in all caps. He still didn't acknowledge my request that he stop moving pages and creating edit conflicts with me. So I gave up for the night, as I had said I would do if he didn't acknowledge.

He did actually stop messing with this, and go on one of his charming all-night editing sprees. 163 edits, by my rough count. So I suppose that's all the "acknowledgement" we can expect from this person. Though, as soon as you posted your "which one is which?" message this morning, he came back. And moved stuff around some more. You see, he saved my text in a page that he created, titled "User:User: SamHB/How to create and maintain high-quality articles" and "User talk:User: SamHB/How to create and maintain high-quality articles". I attempted to edit that, and the software said (not surprisingly) "User account "User: SamHB" is not registered. Please check if you want to create/edit this page." This guy doesn't even know how user page titles work.

So I was planning to put a delete notice on those pages, hoping that some poor soul would come along and delete those. If necessary, I was going to fill it with very unseemly material as an incentive to delete it. It wasn't necessary; Cons deleted the pages a short time ago, moving my draft back to the "TARlist page. I wrote my draft over that, without getting an edit conflict.

So maybe things have settled down a bit. I just checked RC in another window, and things seem to have settled down. We should work on the page there—I see that you are already doing that. I may make another attempt to move the page into the Conservapedia main space between 12 midnight tonight and 00:05 in the morning. SamHB (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

Sounds like fun! Well, as long as we are all editing the correct page, and not conflicting with each other, I guess It's "all good." As far as moving this to a "Conservapedia:" title, I think Cons asked that we tell him when it is ready, and he will decide if it's ready or not. I'd be inclined to do that, rather than just trying again...we don't want to antagonize (or at least I don't), after all. Up to you, though. Anyway, I still see a lot of TAR specific stuff in it, so we have some work to do. I'm keeping pretty busy elsewhere today, so I may not be around to help much, but I'll do what I can.--David B (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

I think the thing to do is, first, make the article an unequivocally high-quality thing. (It pretty nearly already is.) Then we can probably move it, or get it moved, in a way that doesn't cause Cons to be destructive. SamHB (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

May I ask, when David B looks at each page, does he see a "move" tab at the top? If so, he has the power to move (i.e., rename) pages, while preserving the page history. JDano (talk) 21:42, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

SamHB, you're probably right, that might work. Like you said, we just need to make it good first (which it is well on its way to being)
JDano, I do not have Move permissions. I believe that is a right restricted to full Admins only. We can either ask Cons to do it, or just use Copy+Paste. --David B (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Welcome to TARist Russia, I mean the Pacific Northwest, I mean User:JDano/TARlist. I appreciate all that you do. JDano (talk) 17:49, 9 April 2016 (EDT)

Errm....thanks! I'll try to improve it if I think of something, assuming you don't mind. If you disagree with any of my edits though, feel free to change or undo them.

Picture Upload Requests

Could you please https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skyline_of_Plano_Texas.jpg with attribution to Danny20111993 and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:View_of_Austin_From_Congress_Street_Bridge.jpg with attribution to Daveydickler. JDano (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! [13] and [14] --David B (talk) 09:07, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abilene_from_the_Enterprise_Building.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amarillo_Texas_Downtown.jpg Thanks, JDano (talk) 22:51, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded: File:Abilene_from_the_Enterprise_Building.jpg and File:Amarillo_Texas_Downtown.jpg --David B (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2016 (EDT)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FireExtinguisherABC.jpg Photo by Dante Alighieri and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dana_White_headshot.jpg Photo by Justin Moore JDano (talk) 20:30, 16 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded: File:FireExtinguisherABC.jpg and File:Dana White headshot.jpg --David B (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2016 (EDT)

Thanks. How about: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boise,_idaho.jpg attributed to Lordchadwick79 JDano (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2016 (EDT)

You're welcome. Here's this next one: File:Boise, idaho autumn.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MREsingleveggie.gif attribute to Bahamut0013 and https://www.flickr.com/photos/vaduva/18674659564/in/photolist-usdvF3-usdQa7-usonjH-8fRdg3-8fMXRe-8LiSgr-8fMXzn-4WChsi-8fMXrR-8fMXMP-57SxmD-4WCiwv-8fMXLF-8LiMTt-8LmSK7-4WCpHv-8LiTkz-8fRcXw-4WCaPc-8fMXGP-6AMzek-4WFXGL-4WCfvg-8qxVDK-4WGBjw-4WCkwg-4WGsif-8LmSi9-4WCcBV-8fMXKg-4WFYN7-8fMXDe-9mW1B1-57QVNT-4WFV6u-4WCotX-8fRdo3-8fRcWU-9mPDAq-8fRd65-4WGCgW-8fMXwB-8fMXBT-4WGzmb-4WGx2o-8LiVzv-4WCc9r-8fRdxN-4WCiUM-4WGJqj attributed to Virgil Vaduva CC-BY 2.0. JDano (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded: File:MREsingleveggie.gif and File:Porcfest 2015.jpg --David B (talk) 00:14, 18 April 2016 (EDT)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Polemount-singlephase-closeup.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Transformer3d_col3.svg please. 22:55, 20 April 2016 (EDT) Please don't forget the diagram too. Thanks, JDano (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2016 (EDT)

You're right on top of this, so I guess I don't really need to post the links. Anyway, here they are: File:Transformer-polemount-singlephase-closeup.jpg and File:Transformer3d_col3_XML_stripped.jpeg. The latter had some file problems, so I needed to adapt is somewhat. It might have lost some quality, and also (by design) SVG data, but I think it should work. --David B (talk) 00:42, 21 April 2016 (EDT)

Please upload: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bug_de_l'an_2000.jpg attribute to Bug de l'an 2000 JDano (talk) 08:04, 22 April 2016 (EDT)

Done! File:Bug de l'an 2000.jpg --David B (talk) 08:51, 22 April 2016 (EDT)

Please https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CarlMenger.png public domain due to age of photo. JDano (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2016 (EDT) Also: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20111102_Incendie_Charlie_Hebdo_Paris_XXe_07.jpg attribute to Pierre-Yves Beaudouin JDano (talk) 17:43, 28 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded! File:CarlMenger.png and File:Incendie Charlie Hebdo Paris XXe 07.jpg --David B (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2016 (EDT)

Please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bisphenol-A-Skeletal.svg JDano (talk) 09:40, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded after conversion File:Bisphenol-A-Skeletal.png --David B (talk) 10:50, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Please: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:C60-rods.png ==JDano (talk) 21:50, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded: File:C60-rods.png. Sorry for the delay--I will be more busy that usual for the next week or two, so I may take longer to respond. --David B (talk) 14:45, 30 April 2016 (EDT)

Please: File:Guy Kawasaki at Wikimania 2015 - 2.jpg JDano (talk) 02:15, 4 May 2016 (EDT)

Uploaded: File:Guy Kawasaki at Wikimania 2015 - 2.jpg --David B (talk) 13:52, 4 May 2016 (EDT)

The page has been moved.

The page formerly known as the "TARlist" has been moved to its new home Conservapedia:How to create and maintain high-quality articles, thinks to administrative intervention by JPatt. SamHB (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2016 (EDT)

Nice! Alright, thanks for the update! --David B (talk) 00:37, 18 April 2016 (EDT)

Conservapedia's web traffic is up

Conservapedia is one of the top 100,000 websites in the world as far as web traffic according to the web traffic tracking company Alexa,[15]

Thank you for all your contributions.

Conservapedia continues to receive millions of page views per month.Conservative (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

Nice! When you make so many enemies (both vandals and not) we must be doing something right! I hope most of those are not DDoS hits.... ;)

Thank you as well for your continuing work! Did you by any change get my question on your messages page?--David B (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

I just saw it and replied. Second, I don't think I will be checking that mailbox again for an extended period. My apologies for any potential inconveniences.Conservative (talk) 23:31, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

Okay, thanks for the response, and that's fine if you will not be--I know that you have other things going on. The number of active admins I know of seems to be dropping, but I'm sure Jpatt can help, and probably Aschlafly as well. No worries! --David B (talk) 23:41, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

response to recent message you sent me

Hi, I have a question. I know CP allows users to import articles which they alone have created on other wikis. Do I assume correctly that CP also has no problem with the author exporting his/her article to another wiki, as long as that other wiki does not mind? I have no immediate plans to do so... I have yet to contribute on any wiki other than CP.--I'm just wondering.
Thanks! --David B (talk) 00:27, 19 April 2016 (EDT) Thanks! --David B (talk) 00:27, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

Please see: Conservapedia:Copyright. If you have any further questions, please contact User: Aschlafly. Conservative (talk) 23:31, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

Thanks, I'd looked at that but still wasn't quite sure. I could try asking Mr. Schlafly--I don't know if he'll respond. Again, thanks! --David B (talk) 23:38, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

I think you can do it. You can ask Mr. Schlafly if you want further reassurance. Conservative (talk)

Alright, thanks! --David B (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2016 (EDT)

Nice job on Fluoride JDano (talk) 09:15, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Thanks, and you as well--you're right, a claim shouldn't be stated as fact when it is not certain.--David B (talk) 09:21, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Photos

The replacement of the owl pic had to do with maintaining a difference between us and Wikipedia. As much as possible, try to go to sites like Flickr, and look for those photos on any given subject that have been released to Creative Commons for free use. The idea here is if Wikipedia has it on their page, look for something different. Karajou (talk) 09:52, 2 June 2016 (EDT)

Okay, that makes sense--thanks for the explanation. I actually didn't realize WP has used that photo, I just picked it from the list on WikiMedia, but I should have checked. Still, though, it's from the WP giant, so that's not the best in any case. I sometimes try to get images from archives.gov or loc.gov, but they have a limited selection. My problem with using Flickr has been finding license info, but I recently found [16] which should help. I'll see if I can find more diverse images in the future using that. Also, thanks for adding a sizable body section to that page--again, I'm not a bird person so I didn't dare, but it needed to be done. There seem to be a number of bird pages like that, with only the side template. --David B (talk) 10:32, 2 June 2016 (EDT)

re: User:JayHarper

re: User:JayHarper

He was a parodist. I deleted a few of his articles. If you have time, please go through some of his past edits. Conservative (talk) 20:12, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

Okay, will do. --David B (talk) 21:45, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

I am having a little difficulty telling if what he says is true. I don't know a lot about foreign politics, so things like this and this may or may not be correct. However, I'll keep looking through. --David B (talk) 22:43, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

Update--Much of what I'm seeing are beneficial changes, so I'm not reverting most of it. In some cases (like on Homosexual rights advocacy) this user delete a paragraph which should have but did not have a reference. I'm not sure that's what I would have done, but should this be reverted? There really should be a source on that. --David B (talk) 10:04, 10 June 2016 (EDT)

Troll/Vandal

David,

You might, when you get the chance, want to check out the new user WillardMR. He's made three edits, all of which appear to be vandalism.--Whizkid (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

Thanks for pointing this out--I've banned him. --David B (talk) 22:32, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

re: Much improved the article the atheist troll added

I much improved the article that the atheist troll added. Now it is a more humorous and coherent essay. Thanks for adding the delete tag. It forced me to read the article more closely and add additional content. Conservative (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

Err, you're welcome! Thanks for the improvements. Somehow atheism resulting in bland food improved only by hot sauce and horse meat did'nt make any sense, but I'm glad you could make something of it. I assume this page was a jab at you and your work on "atheism and ____" pages. He/she even used a similar style to your writing, I noticed, although it in their case, it didn't make any sense to me.--David B (talk)

scripts/bots

Ed Poor has put in an appearance, though it's essentially just to tell us that the guard dog did not survive a wiki update. See User_talk:Ed_Poor. SamHB (talk) 21:34, 19 June 2016 (EDT)

Thanks for the notification! I responded, and will see where it leads. --David B (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2016 (EDT)

Account promoted

Account promoted to include "move" and "protect" rights. Congratulations!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:13, 20 June 2016 (EDT)

Oh--Thank you very much! I'll do my best to put them to good use! --David B (talk) 01:26, 20 June 2016 (EDT)

Bot account promoted to "bot" and "SkipCaptcha".--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

Thank you! I will give it a try. --David B ^(TALK) 19:00, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

Update: The bot seems to be working, but has a fairly serious bug I need to work out. I'll try another run after I get that fixed, if it is possible. I think I have all I need account-wise, for now. Thanks! --David B ^(TALK) 20:25, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

Thanks for your update and for your efforts.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:39, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

Congratulations. A well-deserved promotion. JDano (talk) 21:14, 28 June 2016 (EDT)

Thanks! --David B ^(TALK) 23:32, 28 June 2016 (EDT)

Message from Pious

Thanks for your constructive criticism. I agree wholly with your first two points. As for the last two, keep in mind that Rastas believed Haile Selassie was literally Jesus- one speech by him can shock them out of racism. As far as I can tell, their purpose now is believing they're currently living in the Book of Revelations, since they also believe Christ has returned. -Pious

You're welcome, I'm glad to help! I know very little about the group, but your explanation makes sense. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to briefly mention those points, in case someone as clueless on the topic as myself comes through.

Also, I moved your message down to the bottom since this is where new post are usually placed. Of course you wouldn't have known that, so it's fine. Also, when you leave a message, it's a good idea to place --~~~~ at the end of your post. This is replaced by your "signature" and a time stamp. To make this a little easier, there is a button on the top bar of the edit box, just to the right of B and I buttons (for bold and italics) which looks something like a writing pencil. Clicking this places your signature where your cursor is currently placed. --David B ^(TALK) 01:27, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Done. Your guidance has been very valuable to me. Thank you and God bless you. -Pious

I've noticed your to-do list update in the Recent changes section of this site, and I further thank you for taking a personal interest in guiding me. --Pious (talk) 23:43, 19 July 2016 (CDT)

Any time! I'm a bit too tired to look it over right now, but I'll try to take a closer look in the morning. --David B ^(TALK) 01:20, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

Also, Thanks for your continuing contributions! --David B ^(TALK) 01:34, 19 July 2016 (EDT)

Nice job purging that vandal! I don't get why trolls (liberal and otherwise) think they can vandalize this site with any efficacy when all they have to do is look at the recent changes section to show it ain't going to work. I will say this about PayPal though: they're a liberal organization that can literally take away all your money in their system for no reason under their Terms of Use. That's why I direct-deposit anything I earn on eBay immediately. --Pious (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2016 (CDT)

Whoa!!!! Are you saying that, under the terms of use that we all click through, Paypal can steal your money? That goes far beyond whether its CEO is liberal (which I consider irrelevant) or whether he is gay (even more irrelevant; sorry PeteyT). I'm not disagreeing with your assertion; I know nothing about this. Can you do some digging and write up an article on the subject? SamHB (talk) 00:56, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

All you have to do really is Google "paypal stealing" and the search results will blow up with examples of this and similar things happening. I'm heading to bed for work tomorrow but making and citing a page on this should be pretty easy. --Pious (talk) 00:19, 22 July 2016 (CDT)

Thanks--SamHB certainly helped by pointing it out, too! I don't think they care that vandalism isn't effective. They just keep going and going at it. I have no problem banning them and cleaning up, but I think the idea it to wear us down. That's why I really want to get a watchdog bot running, which takes care of most vandalism automatically. With no human element involved in vandalism prevention, there really will be little point in their continuing.

I do agree about PayPal--they really are not a friendly company. A reason I was aware of to dislike them is that they to not allow the purchase or sale of firearms through them. I did not know the ToS allowed for fund confiscation! That just goes to show, you really do need to read the fine print! --David B ^(TALK) 01:09, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

The (non-existent) page on sodomy has me confused. It's on the most wanted list (which I want to contribute to because I'd like to win the contest for most new pages created), yet also something the admins seem to seek preventing from existing. I found this out after I went to edit it due to having legal knowledge on the matter, specifically Lawrence v. Texas since the latter is where I live. I can't. Why is this? --Pious (talk) 01:37, 2 August 2016 (CDT)

Sorry for the delay in response. I've been working more than usual, so I haven't been able to get on for a few days.

I see what you mean, that page title is protected. This is probably the case because vandals like to make explicitly and grotesquely descriptive stub articles on topic such as this. Conservapedia was started as a family-friendly wiki especially for homeschoolers. It was probably considered inappropriate to have an article on such a topic. However, a certain editor has been doing a far amount of writing on sexual sins, so this decision may have been reversed. You could try asking Andy Schlafly, since he is really in charge of such decisions. However, I noticed that there is a page on Lawrence v. Texas. Perhaps you could at least look that over and see if there are improvements which could be made. Unfortionately, someone would already need to know about the case to search for it, so I'd think it would be better to make Sodomy to some kind of link bank, which does not explicitly describe it, but does link to relevant articles. I hope this helps! --David B ^(TALK) 23:47, 7 August 2016 (EDT)

I added a section to this page below on An Article About Sodomy, not wishing to put something new into an old section. (Thunkful2 (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2016 (EDT))

Spam

There are very many mediawiki websites. Many are neglected over time and become targets for spammers. They are trying to build up their google search rankings rather than getting customers from the reader base of the target website. So, they create articles with long improbable titles and hope that they stay up long enough to be discovered by the search engines. Both Wikipedia and Conservapedia use "no follow" tags, but I am not clear that the search engine spiders ignore the links completely. That is, a spider might not visit the linked website, but might still add to its count for links it found to that domain name. In last night's case, the lonked domain name was youtube.com, so it really does not matter. The point is that once people discover that a wiki is "open" and unmonitored, they start swarming in, including using bots.

I recommend that you delete the entire spam page contents and replace it with {{spam}}. If an admin disagrees, they can revert your edit. I think that most spam is self-evident. (The exception was TAR, who spammed shamelessly, but was genial in his interactions with some admins.) However, if a page is sufficiently bad to warrant a speedy tag, it can also warrant a spam tag and deletion of the contents. JDano (talk) 12:34, 21 July 2016 (EDT)

Yes, I know that is their intent, though in this case as you said, it indexing wasn't the goal, but rather clicking. I probably should have blanked the page, as I think I have done in the past, but I left it so Cons (who usually deletes on request) or whoever else could see that it really was spam. I believe someone complained previously when I blanked one, as well, so I didn't want to offend. I assumed that it would be deleted in a few hours anyway, long before a spider was likely to find it.

nofollow does ask search engine spiders not to follow and index the links on the page. Usually, they honor this request since if you don't want it indexed, they probably do not either. However, it does not literately prevent them from doing so. They can explore and index all they want, even with the tag in place. In my opinion, <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> should also be temporally applied to new pages, so that if a search engine does crawl CP immediately after spam is posted, it will not even be listed as a page on CP. Perhaps this concept could even be customized more, so that users with a certain privilege level (perhaps "edit") do not have this applied to their new pages. Of course, this would not protect from spam inserted into existing pages, but it seems to me that this would be better than nothing.

Anyway, back to your point, I probably should have blanked them, and will d oso in the future unless I receive complaints. Thanks for the suggestion! --David B ^(TALK) 13:31, 21 July 2016 (EDT)

PeteyT

12 minutes total lifespan, and just 3 minutes from my notice to the final disposition. Not bad!! SamHB (talk) 00:13, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

Not bad at all! I was only keeping half an eye on R.C., so I'm not sure if I would have checked those pages unless you had flagged them. Now we just need an admin to delete those pages. Thanks! --David B ^(TALK) 00:21, 22 July 2016 (EDT)

re: a bug/glitch in your robot

I discovered that your cleanup robot sometimes messes up articles such as THIS INSTANCE. It did this for the Growth of global desecularization article.

And if I am not mistaken, it sometimes removes one of the characters to form a bracket around pictures (namely this character ] ) so the pictures do not show up. I think it did this for the atheism article and other articles (I recall fixing some of my other atheism articles after your bot ran).

At the same time, it does seem to be cleaning up a lot of things too. Conservative (talk) 11:51, 9 August 2016 (EDT)

Wow! Thanks for letting me know, I'll try to find that bug right away, and keep a better eye on it from now on. The style and cleanup rules are less developed than some other things such as typo checking, so I guess I need to do some work in that area, or stop using it for that purpose.

If you notice it acting improperly, please do feel free to temporally ban that account. Just please be careful not to also ban the associated IPs, since I sometimes use the same connection. That should work to immediately prevent more damage, and I can sort out the problem before it wrecks everything! --David B ^(TALK) 12:12, 9 August 2016 (EDT)

Sorry about not telling you about this matter sooner. I know you are making efforts to improve things and I didn't want to be a complainer/whiner/discourager.

I should have told you about this sooner as I strongly suspected that you have a good attitude and would welcome feedback to improve your efforts. Conservative (talk) 12:27, 9 August 2016 (EDT)

No apology necessary--I do just want to help. I'm just glad you checked on the edits it made and noticed! With it making so many edits, I can't check the bot's watchlist for post-edit changes, with how ever many many thousand pages listed there. I could slow it down, but hadn't since I saw no problems. Anyway, any further feedback/constructive criticism is welcome. It seems that so many short-term editors on CP have caused an unintentional lack of uniformity. That's the main reason I've been running stylistic fixes with the bot. Unfortunately, brackets still confuse it. Templates and forms wreak havoc on it, but even links and images do this. It doesn't understand image links, so what it sees is a wikilink within another wikilink. This is all together a bad idea, but it keeps deciding the first part must be an external link. Then.... things happen, as you know. I don't want to remove bracket detection, since there are a lot of stray, unclosed or unopened brackets and parentheses. However, I'll see if I can fix it up and narrow down the detection a bit. --David B ^(TALK) 13:57, 9 August 2016 (EDT)

Why that person was blocked after editing internet atheism

David,

Why that person was blocked after editing internet atheism

See: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Internet_atheism&diff=1271913&oldid=1271890

"Basement dwelling" was an intentionally idiotic category tag. Hence, the person was blocked.

In addition, television show and movie related entries are often parodist editor targets and the ex-editor generally focused on those articles. It wouldn't surprise me if there were parodist related edits to those articles. If you want to check his other edits that would be great. I generally don't watch television. Conservative (talk) 21:56, 22 August 2016 (EDT)

I certainly wouldn't have chosen that tag, but I see plenty of things here that fall into the category of "I wouldn't and I'm not convinced, but I'll let it go and stay focused." My assumption was that it was a good faith edit, just one I would not have done. I have heard that term before, in reference to the stereotype of a (usually teenage or Y.A.) person who lives in their (or their parents') basement and plays video games, "trolls," and does a variety of other undesirable things, while secluding themselves from reality. Though I wasn't sure if this quite fit, it may for some involved in the movement.

Anyway, I didn't think it an offense warranting a 5-year ban, so I thought I'd point it out, in case you missed it (which apparently you didn't). Had I been the one banning, I would have probably done it for months or even weeks, not years. However, perhaps I don't have the full picture. You have plenty of experience at this, so I expect you're right.

As for the TV, I really don't watch much either. Most of my free time I spend on here, instead. I'll probably take another look, but a cursory check revealed nothing suspicious to me. --David B ^(TALK) 22:39, 22 August 2016 (EDT)

If he got a job working for Encyclopedia Britannica putting category tags on their articles, do you think he would put "basement dwelling" on their "Internet atheism" article. I don't think he would. I have no regrets about my ban. I don't think Admins should be babysitters. Maybe in 5 years he will be more mature. Conservative (talk) 02:21, 23 August 2016 (EDT)

Account promotion request

David, could I please be promoted to Account promoted to skip the Captcha requirement ? Thanks a lot. (Thunkful2 (talk) 19:32, 23 August 2016 (EDT))

I cannot promote you, but I'll pass on your request. The human verification is a pain. Perhaps I'm poorly educated, but it frequently seemed to me that there were several possible answers, and I just needed to try each one until it worked. The person in charge of this is Andy Schlafly. --David B ^(TALK) 22:30, 23 August 2016 (EDT)

As requested, he has removed the requirement. Congratulations! Keep up the good work! --David B ^(TALK) 23:48, 23 August 2016 (EDT)

Thank you so very much. (Thunkful2 (talk) 11:03, 24 August 2016 (EDT))

Article on Sodomy

I was contemplating starting an article with the title of Sodomy, when I came across a little discussion of it here by accident, someone saying he wanted to do an article by that name as he has legal knowledge of the subject. Then I saw the objection that Conservapedia was started for homeschoolers (who should not be exposed to such topics). But today, I don't know how children could avoid exposure to many topics formerly thought to be taboo. When I was a young boy going to the YMCA it was YMCA custom for everyone to swim naked! Thus the YMCA could become an attraction for sodomists. I was nearly raped by a man who was watching naked boys there; I had no idea what he was up to. For I knew nothing about sodomy, as the topic was hush hush. My mother once in a while mentioned "queers," but never told me what she was talking about. Children really have to be told in clear, uncensored terms about what sodomists do, for their own protection. We should not have false modesty and be afraid of the plain truth.

IMHO, there needs to be a frank article on sodomy using plain ordinary anatomical terms just like you use in an anatomy class. Using the plain words for the parts of the body (not slang or "membrum virile," etc.) is needed to expose the abomination which sodomy is, when there is no confusions with "love," but a clear verbal picture. Right away an unperverted mind reacts, "abomination."

"Homosexual" is a confounding term, as it may include, for example, males who merely prefer the company of males, as boys may do before puberty, with no sexual connotation. Some might use such a term for the apostle Paul who travelled only with men on his missionary journeys (no evidence of Paul having any sexual interest in other men whatsoever). I wish to see an article that clearly describes what sodomy is, explains the related Biblical terms, gives exegesis of the passages, traces the history of the relevant laws in the world, and presents the medical ramifications with that research -- all using frank anatomical language. (Thunkful2 (talk) 11:26, 24 August 2016 (EDT))

I agree that such information should be made available to children, when the time is right. The problem is that we don't know when that time is. All we can do is post it, and hope they find it when it is needed, not before. I think that most children (homeschoolers in particular) should be instructed by their parents, not some stranger, or even CP. However, I understand that this site will be used by more than homeschoolers, so I am reluctant to oppose the provision of a very moderate amount of such information, in sometimes vague terms for such protective and preventive reasons.

This decision to some extent hinges on whether we are trying to exist solely for homeschoolers, or for use as an all-purpose conservative resource. Those who have "clout" here seem to support the creation of such an article, but I can't be sure of the stance taken by the ones who have not yet spoken on the topic. It's your choice, but I don't think you'd get thrown out for doing so. I trust you would anyway, but just be very careful in how you write it, if you do. To be safe, you might want to ask a full administrator, or even Andy Schlafly himself.

I hope this helps --David B ^(TALK) 12:02, 24 August 2016 (EDT)

David, I told my son about what evil men would do to children when he was ~ 2 years old. IMHO: They really have to know about this. When I was about 14, a pervert at the YMCA could have raped me; I didn't know what they did. He wanted me to step into the back of his van with him! And a neighborhood boy wanted to "play with me." If I should write it, I would like to be able to write forth-rightly; just tell it like it is. But if you think the leaders of Conservapedia might object to that, I of course would not attempt to defy them. I think that it is essential to the Sodomist Conspiracy to avoid talking about what they actually do, and that an essential part of combating this evil is to describe most clearly what they do; taking about sexual orientation, preference, and "love," obscures the issue. I home-schooled my children & neither in primary nor secondary grades did I sent them to a public school. But if you go to a church, they will learn things from other kids which I think is better they learn from their unashamed parents. And when they visit kids in church homes, they will get access to TV & internet -- perhaps access to internet via other children's cell phones where any & everything can be seen. BTW, I was going to discuss it with the "Pious" above, since he claimed legal expertise on the subject, but for some reason his posts on the subject look faded in his signature, & one cannot get to him by clicking on his name; so I suppose that he no longer is an editor here. -- At any rate, OK, I should clear it with the powers that be first. (Thunkful2 (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2016 (EDT))