User talk:Rambo's Revenge

Rambo's Revenge is unable to edit due to a lack of a functioning computer. He does hope to be back soon, but he hopes even more that his computer is covered!

21:32, Thursday 11 July 2024


Userpage	Talk	Contributions	My pages	Sandbox

Books are useless! I only ever read one book, "To Kill A Mockingbird" and it gave me absolutely no insight on how to kill mockingbirds! Sure it taught me not to judge a man by the color of his skin, but what good does that do me?

Homer Simpson

Welcome to my talk page.

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please use a new ==Descriptive heading== for new topics.
Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to Watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

Archives

2008: March – July | August – September | October – November | December

30 Rock (season 4)

Thanks for the quick PR, I've fixed those copy vios (I really wish people wouldn't do that). Any ideas on where to search for a fuller episode count? Staxringold _talk^contribs 21:43, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter XXXVI

WikiCup Awards

		The 2009 WikiCup Participant Award
		This WikiCup Award is presented to Rambo's Revenge for their participation in the 2009 WikiCup. Your contributions along the way have greatly improved the quality of many articles, pictures, and sounds on the English Wikipedia.

Congratulations! Hope to see you sign up for the 2010 WikiCup, here, if you haven't already! iMatthew ^talk at 22:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sulaiman Al-Fahim

Thanks for helping out. I couldn't find much in the way of citations, aside from one that I posted to Jessica Hoy's talk page. I was hoping she(?) was just inexperienced and might try the edits again with proper references or at least request help with improving the contributions. If you want to add it in, feel free, it doesn't look like she will be using it. --ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 22:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candice Swanepoel

Hello. I saw your edit in Swanepoel's article and I just wanted to offer my explanation, as I hit a wrong key combination before finishing my edit summary. The idea that there are several new Angels is based on Victoria's Secret saying so on the company's Facebook page (the page you linked to demonstrates this). After being contacted though, VS admits it was an error and the Facebook page that started all this has been updated and now says that the models are simply "new faces" as opposed to to new Angels. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 00:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link with the models labeled only as new faces now. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 00:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help

A user has made a host of moves that violate WP:DASH, and I can't revert them, since I am not an admin. Can you fix it, gradually? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:14, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a response regarding a user above who is misguided on using en dashes. An en dash used correctly to show disjunction does not have spacing around it. For example: The en dash used in "Canada–United States relations" is correct. This is used to show the relationship between Canada and United States. My explanation is also supported at WP:DASHES that Dabomb87 had directed me to. Dabomb87 has been incorrectly introducing the spaced en dash in articles' names. Dabomb87 would incorrectly move articles with en dashes in their names such as "University of Wisconsin–Madison" to "University of Wisconsin – Madison" and "Canada–United States relations" to "Canada – United States relations." Thanks. —RJN (talk) 03:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I have explained to the user, the dash used was correct, but the spacing was not. However, given our discussion on his/her talk page, I think that only the bilateral relations pages should be moved back, not the university ones. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and have commented as such. Don't have time today but will get to it this weekend if it still needs doing by then. Best, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted obvious cases, commented further on University cases to provide my reasoning why I still think they need reverting. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2010 WikiCup Signups Reconfirmation!

To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.

It's worth noting the rules have changed, likely after you signed up. The changes made thus far are:

Mainspace and/or portal edits will not be awarded points at all.
Did you know? articles (which were worth 5 points last year) will now be worth 10 points.
Good articles (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Valued pictures will be now awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
Featured lists (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Featured portals (which were worth 25 points last year) will now be worth 35 points.
Featured articles (which were worth 50 points last year) will now be worth 100 points.
Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
In the news will still be awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.

If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup judges, iMatthew ^talk at 03:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dashbot

I just finished reading my book on writing python, so Ive been going on a bot rampage. I written you're dash bot, and Ill add it to the BRFA. Just to make sure, the bots intentions are to replace '(space)-(SPACE)' with ndash? I did some testing (see this diff) and it works ok, using the method that Rich Suggested (get pages, move those that need to be, continue). I wont run it continuously, maybe once a month or so? Actually, if you know how to run a python script, Maybe you could be up to the job of running it every month. Its pretty simple to run, if you have a mac. Im not sure how to run it if you have a pc but a quick google search would tell you how. If not, maybe ill get a toolserver account. Ill add a link to the BRFA soon. Tim1357 (talk) 04:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad someone is looking to do this, but you need to leave the spaces in, just switch the hyphen to ndash i.e. " - " to " – ". So for example 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification - UEFA Group 1 should be at 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group 1. Unfortunately, I don't have a mac or know how to run a script and googling it confused the hell out of me. Toolserver might be best, if it is feasible. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:51, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i updated the code accordingly. There really is no need to have a tool server. However, I've always wanted to have an account, maybe I'll look into it as I start building more and more bots. For right now, go to the BRFA and comment so we can get this bot up and running. Thanks Tim1357 (talk) 15:46, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, theres a bit of discussion about the bot at the brfa, id appreciate your input link Tim1357 (talk) 06:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a user

Hey Rambo, I'm writing this regarding a user called Dewatchdog . He/she is using the exact user page which is being used by me. I found that he has been notified regarding the same by you. You warned him on Sep 29th. On Sep 30th, he edited my userpage, to make it look different(I've now reverted it back). The actual problem is that he is continuosly reverting the useful edits made by me in the Kochi article. These edits which I made are genuine & useful. But this user is continuosly reverting those without giving any specific reason. Please warn this guy.

Gantlet (talk) 04:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator. Jusdafax 01:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 2010 WikiCup begins tomorrow!

Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Wikipedia has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submission's page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed17 19:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and honors

Hello, I noticed that you moved some "List of awards and honors..." articles back to "List of awards and nominations..." There was an effort earlier to address the limitations of "awards and nominations" by using "awards and honors" instead, and it appears that you undid these moves, citing standards. That was what we were trying to overcome, and I think we might need to formalize that. Thus, I started discussion to standardize the naming of such lists and welcome your opinion here. Erik (talk) 15:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take "perceived" the wrong way! My assumption was that you saw more "List of awards and nominations" more frequently than "List of awards and honors" and adjusted accordingly. Appreciate your weighing in and linking to the discussions, though! They seem to me, though, to endorse the "List of awards... received by... <entity>" structure without really touching on nominations and other kinds of recognition. What is your impression? Erik (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 02:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pitchfork

Thanks for your note I am basically uninterested in the other changes that AWB makes (I didn't deliberately choose those features), so if you have some objection to that, I won't challenge you there. When it comes to "pitchfork", I simply do not think that it is well-known enough to merit being referred to by such a generic name. Presently, [[Pitchfork Media]]s outnumber [[Pitchfork Media|Pitchfork]]s by a ratio of something like 5:1, so this is really just being consistent with how their name is already used throughout the encyclopedia. If you want to respond, please do so on my talk. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Chris Brown (American singer)#Title of article

Hello, Rambo's Revenge. Would you mind commenting on the above linked topic, since it is about two recent article moves you made? Flyer22 (talk) 01:12, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the words of Mr Boombastic: "It Wasn't Me". Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ಠ_ಠ listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ಠ_ಠ. Since you had some involvement with the ಠ_ಠ redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Zondor (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]