For discussions previously on User talk: Joe.Beaudoin, please click here.
- Archive from March 6, 2006
Good host[edit]
I saw about your hosting problems... 1&1 is a good host, I've been using them for a while. Their monthly transfer rates start at 250GB per month for 3 dollars. (although that plan is lacking in a few good features... ) Anyhow, I'm not meaning to spam or anything... I just really like my server. --Aggie
- Originally we had 1&1 -- however, as they limited the size of their MySQL databases to 100 MB, we were forced to move. -- Joe Beaudoin 13:04, 5 March 2006 (CST)
Memorabillia[edit]
Replaced Memorabilia category with Merchandise, using the method you explained. Category:Memorabilia can be deleted. --Undc23 05:18, 6 March 2006 (CST)
Error Message[edit]
Copied from User talk:Steelviper by Steelviper 09:07, 9 March 2006 (CST)
I got this error message when saving the miniseries page yesterday, what does it mean?
Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 8388608 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 37704 bytes) in /home/admin/domains/battlestarwiki.org/public_html/en/languages/LanguageUtf8.php on line 92 --Grafix
- Is it still occuring or is it a one time occurance? -- Joe Beaudoin 20:49, 9 March 2006 (CST)
- This only happened once when I was saving the miniseries page. It could be because this page is too long. I think it could do with splitting up into 2 pages: one for the story and the other for comments. It is also missing a summary. I would be happy to do the split but I would need a summary from somewhere. --Grafix 03:08, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- I was able to reproduce this error today. I ran into it on the Recent Changes trying to load all 500 at once. (I wanted to go back and block all the spammer accounts indefinitely). That would point towards a large page issue (as the 250 worked fine). Also, on the Mini-series article... Spencerian had discussed chopping it up earlier, but has never gotten a chance to yet. You might start a discussion on the talk page of that article to discuss how to approach such an undertaking. --Steelviper 13:58, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- link to solve all your problems... :) --Shane (C - E) 17:50, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- I cannot view the solutions page as I am not a member of experts-exchange.com. Unless you can copy and paste the pertinent info then the link, sadly, is not all that useful. -- Joe Beaudoin 21:09, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- if you have access to your php.ini file incrase the value in this line
- I cannot view the solutions page as I am not a member of experts-exchange.com. Unless you can copy and paste the pertinent info then the link, sadly, is not all that useful. -- Joe Beaudoin 21:09, 19 March 2006 (CST)
memory_limit = 8M ; Maximum amount of memory a script may consume (8MB) --Shane (T - C - E) 21:19, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Thanks Shane. Fixed. -- Joe Beaudoin 21:29, 19 March 2006 (CST)
Spam Alert[edit]
I've noted a recent surge in spamming here. As cool as it was to get my first blocks notched on my admin belt, it is starting to look like an ip range block might be needed (if in fact they are coming from a particular band of addresses). --Steelviper 12:29, 9 March 2006 (CST)
Could be please ban Scofco. Everytime I reverse his spam he puts it back. --Grafix 05:14, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- Sorry. I was sleeping on the job. He's gone for a week (for now) and he's going on "the list". Thanks for the heads up.--Steelviper 06:09, 10 March 2006 (CST)
Japanese[edit]
I wanted to ask you about something I noticed. The people that created the episode guides in other languages had not created their own Episode List in a seperate language. I saw that you wanted to eventually create seperate wikis in different languages so I was under the impression we should create the articles as seperate as possible. Should I be creating a list for the episode guides or should I keep them as connected to the main wiki as possible? --Zareck Rocks 18:15, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- When translating the articles, we should try to avoid linking to articles on the "English" Battlestar Wiki. This helps makes the process of moving articles to the separate wiki easier, which is something we are all for. :-) Any other questions? -- Joe Beaudoin 18:21, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- I'm sure there will be more in the future, but none right now. Thanks! --Zareck Rocks 18:30, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- No, thank you. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin 18:36, 10 March 2006 (CST)
- I'm sure there will be more in the future, but none right now. Thanks! --Zareck Rocks 18:30, 10 March 2006 (CST)
Request for Administratorship[edit]
Joe, I need your help setting up Battlestar Wiki:Requests for adminship/The Merovingian; I laid the groundwork but I need proper formating and a vote or two (in any category) to start it off; we use these so rarely I'm not sure how to properly set this up. Then I'm going to fill in all of the questionaires. Thanks,--The Merovingian 15:18, 11 March 2006 (CST)
Portal's[edit]
Hey Joe!
I done some research into the "Portal" problem. It seems there is a file, that has this: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:$wgExtraNamespaces where you need to add Portal. It's the same place you did "Battlestar_Wiki". Then you need to run a file under maintenance/namespaceDupes.php to make sure there are no dupes of any type. Since there is possailbly only a few, but do not have any contact it would be ok to run. --Shane 11:41, 15 March 2006 (CST)
- The IRC Channel for the Wikimeta software wasn't that helpful so that's is much as I can give ya. They said to read the manual, but I am lost in looking for it. --Shane 15:05, 15 March 2006 (CST)
- I created a namespace for the portal yesterday. So technically the portal feature is up -- I just am not certain about changing the tab name without changing the name of the article tabs as well. -- Joe Beaudoin 06:42, 16 March 2006 (CST)
- I been working with Steelviper trying to figure out the latest problem with portal sub-templates to auto-form and carry over the the design. From what I been talking with the MediaWiki group, the only way for the Portal's to work right is get them to say Portal" where article is. Now we could upgrade to 1.5.7 (fixes some secuirty areas) and then go from there. Now this page http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Custom_namespaces gives me some new info which I never found before. The people in the IRC channel are a real pain. This may or may not fix the sub-portal template problem that we are having. --Shane 12:44, 16 March 2006 (CST)
- The problem is they are not becoming "Sub-Pages". When you create something like {{/box-header}} which is why the portal headers arn't working, is that it never became a sub-page. It became it's own page that is not connected to Portal:Characters but is rather Portal:Characters/box-header. Some new revelent information. If you get a chance, I can show you the difference so you can ask the right questions now on the Wiki mailing list. --Shane (C - E) 11:31, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- We think we may have nailed down the problem. For Wikipedia, the User, Talk, and Wikipedia namespaces have subpages turned on; the main (article) namespace does not have this feature turned on. From Matt: looks like Joe may just have to turn on subpages for the Portal namespace. --Shane (C - E) 18:25, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- The problem is they are not becoming "Sub-Pages". When you create something like {{/box-header}} which is why the portal headers arn't working, is that it never became a sub-page. It became it's own page that is not connected to Portal:Characters but is rather Portal:Characters/box-header. Some new revelent information. If you get a chance, I can show you the difference so you can ask the right questions now on the Wiki mailing list. --Shane (C - E) 11:31, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- I been working with Steelviper trying to figure out the latest problem with portal sub-templates to auto-form and carry over the the design. From what I been talking with the MediaWiki group, the only way for the Portal's to work right is get them to say Portal" where article is. Now we could upgrade to 1.5.7 (fixes some secuirty areas) and then go from there. Now this page http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Custom_namespaces gives me some new info which I never found before. The people in the IRC channel are a real pain. This may or may not fix the sub-portal template problem that we are having. --Shane 12:44, 16 March 2006 (CST)
Signature Link[edit]
Hey Joe, I was noticing how my signature doesn't link to my user page. I spoke to another wikipedian about this and they didn't know why my sig didn't work either. I normally use the signature button but that doesn't link to my page. Do you have any ideas how I can get around this? --Zareck Rocks 17:21, 15 March 2006 (CST)
- Check your preferences page to see whether or not the "raw signature" checkbox is checked off. If so, uncheck it. -- Joe Beaudoin 06:44, 16 March 2006 (CST)
Bots[edit]
Do we have bot ability? Because there are some Wikipedia bots that we could use over here. --Shane 19:59, 16 March 2006 (CST)
- I need to assing bot permissions to users, but I should be able to get bots going. Which ones were you looking into implementing here? -- Joe Beaudoin 18:09, 18 March 2006 (CST)
- Just wondering if they were possaible. I'll get a list complied. (New Project! heh) --Shane (C - E) 23:23, 18 March 2006 (CST)
- .....The entire "moral" behind Battlestar Galactica is that we should not hand over power to BOTS! :) --The Merovingian 00:22, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Hah. yeah. Cylons.. Machines. Yeah. heh. --Shane (C - E) 00:34, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- As long as the bots weren't programmed by Gaius Baltar, I don't see any problem. ;-) -- Joe Beaudoin 11:49, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Hah. yeah. Cylons.. Machines. Yeah. heh. --Shane (C - E) 00:34, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- .....The entire "moral" behind Battlestar Galactica is that we should not hand over power to BOTS! :) --The Merovingian 00:22, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Just wondering if they were possaible. I'll get a list complied. (New Project! heh) --Shane (C - E) 23:23, 18 March 2006 (CST)
I'd like you to take a look at how I've refactored it. I hope you agree that it can peacefully coexist with the portal now that it's taken a minimalist turn. Philwelch 03:18, 17 March 2006 (CST)
RFA[edit]
The election has ended. What is the result? --The Merovingian 13:28, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- I need to review the issues surrounding the RfA before I make any final decisions. -- Joe Beaudoin 16:05, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- What? When will you make your decision? Please advise. --The Merovingian 21:31, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- You'll know when I do. Worry not. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin 21:38, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Has to be before Friday. --The Merovingian (C - E) 21:45, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Why? -- Joe Beaudoin 21:46, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- A) An hold with no time limit could be dragged out indefinately, and would set a bad precedent, B) (I'm far more concerned about this:) I'm going to I-CON, Richarch Hatch will be there and there will be BSG discussion seminars, and it would be going with my pants down if adminship were decided days after the event. --The Merovingian (C - E) 21:52, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- That makes no sense. How will being an admin or not have any material impact on your comments to Mr. Hatch? --Peter Farago 21:54, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- It doesn't, and in fact I plan on remaining silent. There's other BSG stuff going on, but I digress. Actually, the bigger problem now that I think about it is "this sets bad precedent". --The Merovingian (C - E) 21:56, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- It would be a worse precedent for Joe to act rashly. --Peter Farago 22:02, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- It doesn't, and in fact I plan on remaining silent. There's other BSG stuff going on, but I digress. Actually, the bigger problem now that I think about it is "this sets bad precedent". --The Merovingian (C - E) 21:56, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- That makes no sense. How will being an admin or not have any material impact on your comments to Mr. Hatch? --Peter Farago 21:54, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Your second RfA didn't succeed this time. (4 for, 2 opposed; 67% were for your adminship -- however, according to BW:RFA the consensus should be 75%-80% or higher for a successful promotion.) I would recommend waiting a few months or so before proceeding again. Now, as for the issue I debated... I think that recuriting non-contributors to vote wasn't a great idea. Mainly for the fact that the voters didn't, in my mind, understand what adminship is. Apparently, there was the overall consensus amongst these voters that administrators were top-notch contributors to the Wiki and that people are entitled to adminship. This is not adminship. Adminship isn't for everyone -- and everyone doesn't need admin tools. If they did, then these administrator folks wouldn't need to exist. At all. We would just call them users with dead man switches. :-)
- Now, if I may kindly suggest a few things, which will only help you on your course to your (eventual) succession to administrator:
- I would recommend keeping an archive of all your discussions on your talk page. You may link to the histories or create subpages on your user page to archive discussions.
- Realize that, as an admin, your actions will be consistently scrutinized. Even more so than now.
- The differences between admins and non-admins: the ability to delete pages, ban people, and protect pages. That's really it. If there are people who believe I am stating this fact lightly, then I recommend talking to another admin -- even (Super) Mop Boy can tell you that there really isn't anything different. (Other than the two additional tabs on the top. And that "ban" button.)
- Obviously, if you have any questions, I will be glad to answer them. Now I'll be seeing the second new episode of The Sopranos. -- Joe Beaudoin 22:28, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- A)I would like to argue against the standard of 80% maximum, it is restrictively high. Non-editors is a non-issue; I agree with you there. No, I think I'll commence my next RfA as soon as you close down my current one. Now I'm going to be a little busy updating the site back up to standards, I might not be able to chat for a while on the subject.
- B)If I were made Administrator, I would be afraid of losing such a title, and thus would have quite obvious reasons for restraining myself.--The Merovingian (C - E) 22:37, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- Merv... an RFA-spam will get old very quickly, and does not show the perspective and calmness required, in my mind, of an admin. Also, one should not say, "If made admin X." One should just show X regardless of adminship. Whether it's restraint, or patience or maturity or... not editing Roslin to Roslyn (I picked a dumb example on purpose). --Day (talk) 22:43, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- I disagree that 75-80% is a restrictvely high standard. Every adminstrator to date has been elected with unanimous approval. --Peter Farago 22:45, 19 March 2006 (CST)
- We are in agreement. --The Merovingian (C - E) 23:29, 19 March 2006 (CST)