User talk:Darklama

This user likes things simple with only important details. I believe discussions should continue where they started. If you leave messages here, I will reply here, so please watch this page. If I leave messages on your talk page, I usually watch it, so please reply there. If I haven't responded to a discussion elsewhere in a week or so, don't be afraid to remind me.

About Changing username policy

[1]. Darklama, this was actually off-topic there. As to usurpations, I can't for the life of me figure how how usurping an account with no edits is any kind of assumption of bad faith. The user can still come back, easily. None of the standing usurpation target accounts have any edits. I assume that if a user protests, regardless of the number of edits, the usurpation would not be done.

In any case, no specific cases were discussed. It's looking like the objections might have been purely theoretical. --Abd 01:05, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

My comment was actually on-topic there because you requested the tools for the purpose of changing usernames and pointed to a backlog as a motivation for wanting the tools. As I understand it, there are several aspects involved in whyhow people felt it involves bad faith to usurper accounts. The bases of no-edits criteria assumes a negative intent on the part of person that registered it, that they intend to never use the account ever. The no-edit criteria assumes that people cannot have another valid reason for registering accounts, such as customizing settings or using gadgets that improves their learning experience at Wikiversity, or to enable people with special needs like the blind to access Wikiversity using specialized software. The no-edit criteria can come across to learners as Wikiversity considers them less valuable than people who edit. People may be confused or become frustrated if they come back later, try to login only to find they cannot, leave because they assume they were blocked, and there would be no way to inform them what really happened as any messages would be under the new name their account was forcibly renamed to which they are unlikely to know about. People that takeover an username often don't contribute to the project and thus there is no real benefits to favoring the person requesting the account over the person that originally registered it. I think I did not really understood the last reason, but it has to do with the convention of using "(usurped)" in the renamed user's account and not being polite/nice to the person that originally registered the account.

Yes the objections might be purely theoretical, but genuine concerns nonetheless. I'm not sure how anyone could go about providing actual examples, as if it causes problems for the person whose account was usurped, they are more likely to just leave and not stick around to complain about it. -- darklama  04:01, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

It boggles my mind the idea of assuming bad faith from "no edits." How? In any case, usurpation policy requires plenty of notice to the usurped account. You are correct that users who change names (both kinds of name changes) often don't contribute. But they are usually active accounts elsewhere and are more likely to contribute than, say, an account registered three years ago, with no edits. Sometimes no edits anywhere at all. It's merely a question of which user we serve. SUL establishment simplifies WMF practice overall. We could, by the way, use "(renamed)" instead of "(usurped)." The user talk page will contain the usurpation and request for response, plus a notice that the account was renamed as a result of the request. As to providing actual examples, my point is that there are no actual examples -- here -- of usurpations proposed for an account with edits. Thus this is denying service to real editors, with an immediate interest, in factor of some hypothetical and unlikely benefit to old registered no-edit accounts. I have no doubt about the balance of that. --Abd 21:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Clarification templates

Wondering if you can help add {{Hide in print}} to the clarification templates. I'm working with the book tool for Motivation and emotion/Book and want to add those templates but don't want them to show in print. If you can show it could work on one template, I can follow the rest through? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

See Template:Spelling. You just need to wrap everything you want hidden within the template. -- darklama  12:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, ok, ta, sorry going cross-eyed. Just realised another way is adding Category:Exclude in print. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes that will do it too. -- darklama  13:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Block

Hi. Could you have a look at this and block the IP-address? -- Tegel 18:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Someone else already blocked it. -- darklama  18:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Steward, short block as emergency. Since the IP had been used for vandalism over more than a day, I upped it to a week, to give us some breathing room, and thanked the steward. Thanks, Tegel. --Abd 19:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

WV:RCA

Thanks for archiving discussions I'd closed. I don't usually archive directly upon closing to allow others time to review the closing, if someone wants to re-open. But an independent judgment is good. --Abd 16:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Your move of the standard stop agreement

Discussion moved to Wikiversity talk:Candidates for Custodianship/Standard stop agreement.

Thanks

When I got back on wiki to clean up after the vandal I blocked, I saw you got to it first. Thanks. Thenub314 07:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Note

As I responded, pointing out obvious sock puppets is never incivil. Being wrong about thinking someone is a sock when there is obvious behavioral evidence is not incivility. Otherwise, there would be no things like Sock Puppet Investigations, where a good 90% of them are inconclusive. The user appeared out of nowhere, had no edits, and made claims of knowledge of Abd. The story provided is extremely thin and makes it less likely that Poetlister is the sock (which is pretty likely) and more that Abd is the sock. This wouldn't have been the case until a farfetched explanation was provided talking about discussions with the individual yet no edits except to them vote in support of Abd with claims of Abd's character which are impossible to make. Wikiversity has been inundated with many socks lately, and it is necessary that we crack down. One admin already responded to my concerns so your response after is actually wheel warring. Please be advised. Ottava Rima (talk)

"The appropriate place to discuss concerns of a sockpuppet is" That has never been the case. CUs are the only ones who handle sock puppets. Not admin. We haven't had a CU for many years. I took it to Meta, which is what Thenub stated. You exacerbated the issue with false claims of incivility and it serves no purpose. Furthermore, in nominations, it is always standard to discuss the legitimacy of each voice. Single purpose accounts have specific templates to point out they were socks. The whole point of having the "vote" is to argue the legitimacy of the voices, and warning people for pointing out an obvious thing as that as incivil after an admin already legitimized it is crossing the line. I am disappointed. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me share my thoughts

Hi Dark Lama, Thank you for your message on my talk page. As I mentioned in the discussion of Adb's permanent custodianship, even though I'm new to Wikiversity (and have been only minimally active on Wikipedia), I've been around computer-mediated meetings, discussion fora, and Listservs for many years - and hence have seen (and, unfortunately, participated in) a number of flamewars. So, Ottava Rima's accusations didn't bother me much. In fact, I find it ironic that to defend my legitimacy, Adb had to illustrate my incompetence in not understanding about the four tildas until I asked him. Anyway, I appreciate your noting that the reception that I got from Ottava Rima is not representative of the reception that a newcomer usually gets on Wikiversity. Also, Ottava Rima should realize that just because someone is new, that doesn't mean that he is stupid. I can follow links, read, ask questions, and learn. So I hope it isn't too surprising that today I know some things that I didn't know yesterday.

Speaking of which, is the normal way of holding a conversation that you write something on my talk page and I write a response on your talk page, so there isn't one place where the conversation can be read in order? Or is there some better way of doing it that leaves an intact transcript of the conversation, more or less like what was happening on the "Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd (full custodian)" page? In particular, is there some other way that I should have responded, rather than editing here? Thanks. Rosenberg 20:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Syntactics

Hi Darklama!

Thank you for removing the spam from the Talk:Syntactics page. Marshallsumter 22:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Your comment in my permanent custodian vote

You raise so many issues that I'm thinking it may be hopeless to continue this here. I apologize for the length of this, but, frankly, it took more time than I can really spare to write this, and it would take much more time to cut and boil it down. --Abd 16:12, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I think my time might be put to better use too than addressing the many assumptions and logic fallacies I think you have expressed, and asking questions about what various run-on sentences mean. I think frankly, responses will become increasingly entangled, intangible, and require more time to address were this to continue. I suggest we don't waste each other's time, since we both value our time. -- darklama  19:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

GedawyBot

Hello, I'm still waiting for your respond on my request. I know you aren't a 'crat, but SB_Johnny said you would be the one to ping.--M.Gedawy 09:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

mail about NK

Did you get it? ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat + Identi.ca 22:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Berlin hackathon invitation

Hi! I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page at mediawiki.org. Sumanah (talk) 21:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

About the Resources Type additons

Hi,

Here I am researching to start editing content. Actually I have a lot of Videos and Presentations with transcripts on various topics which could of useful here. How can i add these presentations and videos on the modules that I create. could you please help me Thanks in advance.!

Mananshah15 (talk) 11:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you the creator of the videos and presentations you wish to use? Wikiversity can only accept text works released with permission under CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Wikiversity can only accept images, videos, audio files, and other media released with permission under a copyleft license which allows commercial use. -- darklama  21:11, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes these files are created by me. and could be allowed under copyleft license which allows commercial use. All i need to know is how I upload these PPT files here on Wikiversity. I know how to add Audio, Video & Image files. But could not find how to add presentations here.

Thanks, Mananshah15 (talk) 06:31, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately Microsoft PowerPoint files cannot be uploaded due to the closed proprietary nature of the file format it uses. -- darklama  12:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

What can we use here then? Audio, Images & vidoes are fine right ? can we link/embed slideshare presenatation here then ?will that work ? thanks Mananshah15 (talk) 13:26, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

You can upload png, gif, jpg, jpeg, xcf, pdf, mid, ogg, ogv, svg, djvu, tiff, tif, and oga files. You can link to presentations hosted somewhere else. Audio, videos, images, presentations, and other media hosted outside of Wikiversity and Wikimedia Commons cannot be embedded. Wikimedia Commons also requires files use a copyleft licensed which allows commercial use, and is also limited to the same file formats. -- darklama  14:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)