User talk:Steelviper

Archive from before the Spam blizzard of '06 (March 10, 2006)

Fanfic

(I hope I'm doing this right.) I got your message about a fanfic article on my user page and thank you for the invitation to discuss it over here. Although I don't know when I'd be able to write something up, I would be interested in putting together a fanfic article, if you think there's enough interest here for such a beast. I'm so new to all this, though, that I probably will need help... (On the bright side, I did figure out how to do a header on this entry, all by myself. Hee.) Sabaceanbabe 15:56, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

You did just fine! I often append new conversations to the bottom of a page, but there are others that prefer to be at the top of the stack. I live out of the Recent Changes page and diffs, so I should be able to find it either way. Creating the article is as simple as "searching" for a topic that doesn't exist, and clicking the "create this article" link on the resulting page. In this case Fan fiction might be an appropriate article name, as a page with that name exists over at Memory-alpha. (I am nothing if not a pattern-follower.) I may go ahead and "click the red link" and get the page created, since I know that can be a scary process when you're not used to it. Whenever you're ready, feel free to start in on it. --Steelviper 16:05, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

A) Yeah to create new articles, i.e. "Frodo", you would type "Frodo" into the search bar, it would say that a page of that name doesn't exist, along with a red linke saying you may "creat this article", click on that, then "edit" the blank page (just as you click "edit" to post on any page, such as you did for this one) and type your info. We'll help you along with the particulars later.
B)I see nothing wrong with copying from MemoryAlpha, I've been bringing this up more lately, but I really base alot of BSGwiki stuff on MemoryAlpha. Entries for the battles series, and so forth. They've already established and worked the kinks out of a lot of this, so I usually try to "reverse-engineer" things to do for BattlestarWiki by examining Memory Alpha. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 17:17, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Deleted images

I see you deleted quite a few images the other day (March 31), but you deletet quite a few that were being linked to. Heavy Raider and Basestar. While not directly embedded into the wiki they were used as links and should either be restored, or the links to the images removed.--Mercifull 06:29, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

Sigh. My bad. It is exceedingly difficult to determine that images being linked in that way are being used, since they don't register in the "what links here" and they end up in the "unused files" report (which is what I was cleaning up). I tried restoring the images, but it appeared to only restore the text. I guess for now I'll remove the dead links, but you might post to the talk page and see if people interested in those articles miss those images. I apologize for trampling over your images in my "cleaning rampage". I did not intend to delete the linked images. Perhaps a short term hack for getting them off of the "unused files" would be to post thumbnails to the talk page. --Steelviper 07:35, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

No problem, i re-uploaded the images and thumbed them in the talk page explaining why.--Mercifull 07:51, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

The best thing to do would to note what pages link to the images on the image's own description page. -- Joe Beaudoin 13:45, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

Would that keep them off of the Special:Unusedimages? I guess that's not a big deal (if they show up on there), but it is an easier list to work if it's kept small. --Steelviper 13:48, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

Unfortunately, no. If we wanted to keep them off Special:Unusedimages, then thumbing them on the talk page of the article that links to the images would do the trick. -- Joe Beaudoin 13:50, 3 April 2006 (CDT)

Spam Blizzard of '06

There's quite a lot of spamming going on. Could they all be the same person? Why would anyone do that?, it's not clever.--Noneofyourbusiness 18:20, 9 March 2006 (EST)

Likely the same person or small group of people. The IP Block List shows multiple attempts at accessing after the blocks. And (as you've probably noticed) it's all the same junk. I'm surprised they don't move on to less heavily patrolled waters. This place is pretty active, and their changed are undone fairly quickly (unless they're happy having the links in the history). I've dropped Joe a note, so hopefully it'll get dealt with). --Steelviper 17:07, 9 March 2006 (CST)

Perhaps the expiry date of the blocks should be moved from 'a week' to 'indefinitely.'--Noneofyourbusiness 15:05, 10 March 2006 (EST)

Generally we're pretty cautious about handing out indefinite blocks. However, I guess a 10+ strikes and you're out policy probably wouldn't be considered all that rash. I was tempted to do indefinite blocks on these guys earlier, but I was pretty annoyed at the time and didn't want to rush to judgement. However, since a voice of reason agrees (and I've had some time to cool off) then I'll set about with the block fest. It'll take a bit... --Steelviper 13:47, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Done. (Also... I'm archiving, so everything older than this thread is getting wiped. Don't be alarmed.) --Steelviper 14:09, 10 March 2006 (CST)

For future reference, it is O.K. by me if you block spammers indefinitely. Also, I am setting up a process where people have to authenticate their e-mail addresses prior to editing, so that should be up fairly soon. Just FYI. More at 11:05. :-) -- Zantor 14:52, 10 March 2006 (CST)

I assume that Zantor = Kosh = Joe Jr.? If so... cool. Understood. --Steelviper 14:54, 10 March 2006 (CST)

~~Haha! Sockpuppetry! Burn the heretic!~~ Ehm... Zantor is just an account I was using to test the e-mail required process when creating an account. All I have to do now is enable the e-mail confirmation process, so that should thwart the person or persons entirely. -- Joe Beaudoin 15:03, 10 March 2006 (CST)

That's what I figured. I guess the checkuser showed too dynamic an ip range to range block? --Steelviper 15:05, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Actually, it didn't show me any IPs at all, which I found quite odd. I have to find out why. But in the meantime, this is a much better system. -- Joe Beaudoin 16:10, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Note to Self

When going on a blocking spree... don't start with yourself. It is interesting to note that the block in no way affects your ability to block, however. You just can't edit. Sometimes you have to learn things the hard way. --Steelviper 14:33, 10 March 2006 (CST)

LOL--Zareck Rocks 15:03, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Japanese articles

Hey SV, as you already know I have been creating some articles in Japanese. When I was just starting I made a couple mistakes. Unfortunately I messed up the titles of the pages, so we have links to pages that really aren't needed and should be, if I may quote from Stewie, "Eliminated." Here are the links that I would appreciate being destroyed:

1)

2)

These links were created incorrectly. #1 has a space between the jp: and the title, I did not do that on any of the other episode guide titles. It can be redirected to this link if you can't eliminate the page: Lay Down Your Burdens, Part I/jp:あんたの負担を落とす, 部分一. #2 is incorrect because Part I does not jive with the ending of the title in Japanese: 部分 (ニ)=2. So the second link if it can't be destroyed can be redirected to: [[Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II/jp:あんたの負担を落とす, 部分ニ].

Thanks a lot for your assistance!--Zareck Rocks 17:59, 10 March 2006 (CST)

By your command. (You may want to delete the dead links now that they've been "Eliminated.") --Steelviper 18:18, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Thanks a lot! --Zareck Rocks 18:20, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Sorry, I found another page I needed deleted: The Captain's Hand/jp: 艦長の針.

Not a problem. That's what we do. Looks like you're making a lot of ground. --Steelviper 22:12, 10 March 2006 (CST)

Podcast, Res. Ship, Part 1, Act 4

Great work with the podcast transcription, SV! Something so minor that I hate to even mention it, but for the multipart episodes I use Sci Fi's episode list as my guide for the titling of episodes (i.e. using Part 1 and 2 instead of Part I and II). So when I verified your podcast, I changed the "I's" and "II's" to "One's" or "Two's" and used the long hand version just to err on the side of caution with regards to the Standards and Conventions. If I'm in error, let me know. -- Laineylain 22:35, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Sounds fine! I'm used to working back in the dusty stacks of the TOS episode guides, where they still use Roman numerals (and some of them speak in latin, greek, or aramaic). I've got no problems with you bringing the notation into the 21st century. --Steelviper 07:03, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Hi.. I'm new here, I hope this is right place to ask this question: I'm trying to translate episode guide to Turkish. But I'm not axactly capable of editing this wiki.. So the problem is, when I tried to edit "Table of Contents" section, I can't manage it .Why I can't edit TOC whic I created? I can't find any template around here, too? Can you help me?

The TOC is created when you do __TOC__, but it bases it's information off the headers. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 05:34, 21 March 2006 (CST)

OK.. I think I get it, I get it wrong at first I think. Thank you s much!

Vandals

That was a pretty good reaction time; from when he came to when he was banned, he lasted under 5 minutes. Hope that motivates him to move on to greener pastures. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:48, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Thanks for the alert. In the future, drop me a message on my talk to fire off an email on the off-chance I'm not haunting the RC, or on the admin noticeboard for a more general alert. I liked their message about how "delicate" their vandalism was... --Steelviper 14:51, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Yeah, that was a bit much. Thanks for catching that one so fast. --Peter Farago 21:25, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

I was a bit slow on that one, although I re-nuked him, just to be sure. No amount of hull plating will let him survive THAT one. One thing worries me. Those numbers of the user name are sequential. Someone may be using an automated bot to create accounts. Is there a human-readable-only thing that Joe could add to require humans to create accounts? --Spencerian 16:47, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

It's been suggested. --CalculatinAvatar 22:12, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Help with Koenigrules

Steelviper, as you are another registered user of the official site, and I'm not always the most tactful, can you make an official announcement of our blacklisting of Koenigrules and HollyWoodNorthReport? If you are uneasy about posting it yourself, can you PM it to my account there.

Shaun, from Subject2Discussion, heard about my stance against Koenigrules on HangarDeck5, and e-mailed me back complaining that A) I wanted to "rip into" Koenigrules B)"recalling it was YOU, Merovingian, that Ron Moore was talking about in regards to massive spoilers." As a result, I will *NOT* be appearing on his show, he said.

I replied back to Shaun, telling him that B) That doesn't make sense: I've never spread massive spoilers: if he means the season 2 finale spoiler warning, that was against "TheDigitalAlchemist" a poster on the official messageboards who openly admits that he spread the spoilers---->I mean, he started a thread, using his normal user name, which was filled with spoiler screencaps from the finale. And he's proud of this and will admit it to anyone. If Shaun meant "recent spoiler complaints Ron has had".....all of the recent season THREE spoilers have originated with KoenigRules. So I honestly don't know why Shaun would think that.

As for "A" I told Shaun that yes, I want to in a professional manner "rip into" Koenigrules....because his behavior has been so appalling, and has abused our trust so much, that he deserves to be exposed. ---->I told Shaun that I hope he would reconsider, because we have all here already agreed on BSWiki to blacklist KoenigRules, and I really, really felt that the right thing to do is to go onto Shaun's show to explain to both him and his listeners why we felt we had to do it. ---->I also urged Shaun to read our eveidence against Koenigrules, posted on BattlestarWiki (I don't think he saw it yet).

I hope Shaun gives up the benefit of the doubt: I think we're really trying to help him, by pointing out this breach of trust to him, and by wanting to contact him personally via phone instead of just doing it.

Well, it could use your writing expertise SteelViper. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 00:30, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

We haven't blacklisted anybody yet. Please wait for the vote to conclude. For my part, I'd really prefer you try to avoid attacking anybody, regardless of how justified you may feel. The truth will come out on its own. --Peter Farago 02:53, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Indeed. But word gets out about this, we've got the vote displayed prominently, I think we should make up an announcement while we're waiting and I also think it wouldn't be best if I made it. I think someone else could do a better job than me. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 02:58, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

The vote is displayed quite prominently. We already have more turnout than for any other vote on the wiki, with four days before it closes. Further evangelism on anyone's part would strike me as axe-grinding. --Peter Farago 03:01, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Oh no I didn't mean evangelism for a vote, I mean to explain the results to people once its finished. I think an explanation I gave wouldn't be good, and I think someone else could summarize the points better, that's all. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 03:10, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

We could collaboratively develop an official statement. I think that might lead to a balanced viewpoint, and would be fitting with the overall theme of the wiki. (Not that we should take too long, or get bogged down in committees and such). --Steelviper 08:44, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Excellent thought. Sorry for misunderstanding you above, Merv. --Peter Farago 13:30, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

KR already found out about this, surprise surprise this is an open content site, and is furious on the official messageboards and just berating everyone who doubts him. Although I've mentioned he's in the process of being blacklisted, I have not official made a thread announcing "BattlestarWiki has blacklisted Koenigrules" and this is what I meant: someone else should do that, and someone else should write that, so it is as balanced as it can be. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:08, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Now this I must see... --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 14:14, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Ok. How about something like this:

"Consensus ({link to the vote}) at Battlestar Wiki (www.battlestarwiki.org) has determined that effective {END OF VOTING} KR ({link to KR}) and HNR ({link to HNR}) are not to be considered acceptable sources for the purposes of citing information. This policy is effective indefinitely, until such time that consensus determines that the afformentioned entities become reliable primary sources of information. The measure it taken for the purpose of protecting the credibility and accuracy of Battlestar Wiki.

So say we all."

Part of me is loathe to make an announcement of what is, essentially, an internal matter, but if we do say anything it should be concise and accurate (like we strive for everything else here to be). --Steelviper 17:58, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

On further thought, I agree - a formal statement seems a bit much. I think a note on the "unacceptable sources" section of the Citation Jihad and a link to the vote would be adequate.

As for HNR, since they actually cite their sources, including KR when they use him, I don't think that this ruling needs to extend to them. Since they don't claim to be a primary source, there should never be a reason to link to them anyway. --Peter Farago 18:12, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Prism Card

Got one from my sister's old laptop. Also using my sister's old laptop with Backtrack (SLAX) right on the hard drive. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 22:00, 20 May 2006 (CDT)

Sweet. --Steelviper 07:29, 21 May 2006 (CDT)

Fanart

SV, you said you'd send me a preview of the fanart thing with me in it; I said I didn't get the preview you e-mailed me; that didn't mean I didn't want to check it out or be in it, I just wanted you to try to send it again; did you have a pic of me originally lined up for that ad thing you made, which you removed because I didn't respond, thus causing you to think I didn't want to? The thing you made now looks great, yeah I'd like to be in that :) (based on your "persimmons" comment on my talk page, I'm assuming you had an original with me in it) THanks. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:38, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Periodically Updated Thought

I like your most recent one. The Maud'Dib one. Such good books. It made me think to mention that I like the fact that you have it up at all. --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 21:28, 5 June 2006 (CDT)

People read those!? Cool. Thanks.--Steelviper 07:36, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Margaret Edmonson/Margaret Edmondson

While it is great that we have confirmation of the correct name now and I spend a little bit of time earlier changing all the references I feel that we should keep Margaret Edmonson as a redirect for people that search for that name on the wiki. --Mercifull 08:33, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

Good point. No harm keeping around a pointer to the new location. (Plus that's two fewer broken links on my talk page...) --Steelviper 08:36, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

Bribes

/me hands Steelviper 100 cubits. http://forum.tip.it/images/smiles/eusa_angel.gif --Mercifull 14:26, 15 June 2006 (CDT)

Sweet! But I am going to have to report this to the Ethics Comittee. You'll probably be banned.--Steelviper 14:28, 15 June 2006 (CDT)

Its all kosher guvnor 'onest --Mercifull 14:32, 15 June 2006 (CDT)