User talk:Pacitalia/Archive

Archive 1: messages sent on or before January 9, 2006, 00:11

Welcome

Hey, there! Welcome to my (Pacitalia's) NSWiki talk page.

To comment and sign your entries

To post a comment on my talk page, press the + button at the top of the page (beside "edit this page"). You'll be taken to a posting page. Make sure you're logged in first! Then, you can sign your name on talk pages by using "~~~" for your username and "~~~~" for your username and a timestamp.

Remember!

To double-check your edits before saving, please press the "Show preview" button before saving the page, as edits are visible immediately and excessive edit-saves unnecessarily use bandwidth. Feel free to drop me a question here - I'll answer as best I can if I'm around, or if I can't, I'll be glad to refer you to somebody who can answer better.

Happy editing and thanks for stopping by!

Pacitalia|talk2me 23:04, 13 September 2005 (GMT)

Ambassadors

Thanks for changing the ambassadors. I had a few more to do but then I got all lazy and apathetic and forgot about it >_< Going to have to post there, too. Stupid RL. :P --|Knoot|KNOOtalk 08:42, 2 November 2005 (GMT)

Talk:Main Page

I agree with your decision to protect it for now. There hadn't been any discussion since Matsu's comment, and I've reverted it maybe five times in the last couple of weeks. My suggestion would be to make it a protected redirect to another page. Gruen2alk 08:06, 21 November 2005 (GMT)

A simple suggestion would be to create a mirror page at Main page, and change Talk:Main Page into a protected redirect to that talk page. Since the vandalism seems largely to be limited to Meta Pages, I would have thought the new page would be far safer. Gruen2alk 13:52, 26 November 2005 (GMT)

I would agree with Gruenberg that that could be a viable solution. I think we should probably put it into effect as soon as possible so as to reopen communication for our main page, which definitely needs community input on its content. It would be fairly easy to move the page. → Ceo \ squawk 06:16, 8 January 2006 (GMT)

Category Linking

Thanks for your help. ~ Ceo|squawk 03:21, November 23, 2005 (GMT)

But wait...I tried it and it doesn't work...? ~ Ceo|squawk 03:27, November 23, 2005 (GMT)

Never mind; I didn't realize I was suppose to leave the colon in! ~ Ceo|squawk 03:36, November 23, 2005 (GMT)

Sober Thought, accidental delinquent and author of currency, currency survey, &c.

I did a massive rewrite of the currency survey article. I had my own material to add, data to massage, etc., but I also took your suggestion to heart. I have mixed feelings about this, as it makes it less colourful and defeats the stated purpose of showing outsiders why I did things the may I did and made correct (or not assumptions) before I did the survey. Furthermore, relying on third person, impersonal or passively constructed sentences always seemed worse to me. One benefit was that I got to see how wordy it was and chop it down to a more sensible length, despite the restrictions imposed by reducing selfreferences.

However, a wiki is a wiki, and I don't want to add to the renegade reputation I have apparently been earning without trying to or even being aware of it. What would you think about moving the conclusions pseudo-section (the second through fifth or so paragraphs, which appear before any ==Section==) to the main article on Currency?

Considering there was nothing on currency to begin with, I think even prelim results are worth having in the main article; we can change them if or when somebody does another survey (or, as I have suggested, combines several regional surveys). Imperfect knowledge can be made less imperfect, especially when people look and say "Hah! I could do better than that!" and they do. That's what go me into it in the first place. 8^)

Really, I'm a cooperative and wiki kind of guy just trying to do the right thing.

Sober Thought 05:08, 23 November 2005 (GMT)

Vandalism

There was vandalism today at Help talk:Contents, which was created with linkspam. Since I can't delete it, I "reverted" it by blanking it, which was what it was before the linkspam. Was that the right thing to do? Do I need to report it somewhere? Thanks. → Ceo|squawk 04:34, November 25, 2005 (GMT)

Your nation page was vandalised today. I reverted, and have kicked the user onto an infinite ban. I appreciate we usually go for shorter ban lengths for isolated linkspamming, but wiping a FAC seemed especially malicious. If you're feeling charitable, you can of course downgrade the ban length; I can't say I'm inclined to do so, though. Gruen2alk 19:25, 1 December 2005 (GMT)

Preview template

Ceorana started the page; he felt the original template looked too awkward. By doing it at a new namespace, it's easier to delete if no consensus supporting the new template is reached. Gruen2alk 11:41, 2 December 2005 (GMT)

Renaming articles

I moved your articles Corporation Types in Pacitalia, PBC Pictoral History, and Pacitalian History to the correct capitalizations Corporation types in Pacitalia, PBC pictoral history, and Pacitalian history. Would it also be correct to move Carta Proposera di Liberta to the correct spelling “Carta Proposera di Libertà”? (If not, would it also be incorrect to create articles like Khrusáestos, transliterated from Greek Χρυσάεστος?) —Commerce Heights 06:30:05, 2005-12-11 (GMT)

• I hope Paci will forgive me for hijacking his talk page for a moment...why not just go ahead and create Χρυσάεστος and make Khrusáestos a redirect to it? As far as I'm aware, it would work perfectly fine. --Bedistan (jon seplab) 09:15:18, 2005-12-11 (GMT)

• The articles have to be linkable with Latin script, so a link to a page with a Greek name would not work. Thanks, by the way, CH. :) --Pacitalkia 20:19, 11 December 2005 (GMT)

• So, that doesn’t answer my original question…does Carta Proposera di Liberta belong at Carta Proposera di Libertà? Or perhaps it even belongs at Guaranteed Rights and Liberties Charter of Pacitalia—does Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) apply here? —Commerce Heights 20:33:57, 2005-12-11 (GMT)

• There could be a redirect from the English version of the name, but because it's known specifically by its Pacitalian name, it's fine - we don't follow Wikipedia Naming Conventions to the tee, as you can see, just for alphabet/script. So, basically, you can use a transliteration but not the actual script. Hope that made sense. --Pacitalkia 18:50, 12 December 2005 (GMT)

Slanied article move

Macabees and I were trying to move The Macabees to Second Empire of the Golden Throne (since the article refers to it as that—it’s sort of a strange situation, so maybe the move shouldn’t have been done at all), but he copied/pasted the content to the new location and replaced the original article with a redirect (ruining the edit history). I reverted the change to the original article, but since Second Empire of the Golden Throne now has content, the move can’t be completed properly. Could you help? —Commerce Heights (talk) 23:02:23, 2005-12-14 (GMT)

Maybe this comment should go somewhere else, but don't our Naming conventions dictate that nation pages should have the page's title be "exactly as it appears in NationStates"? → Ceo\squawk 02:08, December 15, 2005 (GMT)

That works. → Ceo\squawk 04:53, December 15, 2005 (GMT)

Re: Your Immigration Level Article

That article you wrote on Pacitalian immigration statuses has basically been cut and pasted for the nation of Soviet Union. I don't know if that's legal, but I figured you might want to know about it: Soviet Federative Transfer Status Level (Immigration). → Ceo\squawk 05:06, December 16, 2005 (GMT)

Now what?

Allow me to quote you. From my "talk page [sic]":
>Rather than simply deleting the content of your pages, you should ask
>for them to be deleted, by adding {{inclusion}}
>tags.Gruenberg2 07:35, 26 October 2005 (GMT)

I did so, and now you're saying:
>If you want these pages deleted, just put a speedy deletion tag up,
>not inclusion dispute tags.

OK, so if that's what you wanted all along, (A) why not say so, and (B) why not explain how it's done. You can't get what you don't request, and I can't do what you won't tell me how to do.

>you've made this problem a bit more messy than it had to be.
Then why not explain the hoops you wanted me to jump through correctly?

Anyway, I notice you've removed the pages, *but not the associated "talk pages [sic]"*, so what's it take to *R*E*M*O*V*E* the pages? And I notice that despite my polite request you've removed the content of the Category HQ.

Anyway, what do you want me to do to get rid of the "talk pages [sic]"? And to get rid of the "user page(s)"?

Please explain, don't just name; thank you. Ruventsoria 20:01, 21 December 2005 (GMT)

Cleanup of Category:NS MetaWiki

I've just completed the task of putting [[Category:NS MetaWiki|{{PAGENAME}}]] on most of the pages in that category that haven't had it done yet (the majority of the category was like it to start), so they don't all display in the "N" column. However, five of them eluded me, because they're protected and I'm not a sysop, which is why I'm asking you to put it on there. The pages that need to be done are NSwiki:Dispute resolution, NSwiki:General disclaimer, NSwiki:NPOV, NSwiki:Protection log, and NSwiki:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License. Thanks. → Ceo\squawk 02:10, December 24, 2005 (GMT)

Thank you. → Ceo\squawk 06:05, December 24, 2005 (GMT)

Still it begins (needles and pins)

I just had to revert this page, for linkspam. Given their usual patterns, you may want to watch this over the next few days. Happy $whatevers. Gruen2alk 02:34, 25 December 2005 (GMT)

Double Vote

It looks like you accidentally voted twice on Talk:Rokolev. I removed one of them; just wanted to make sure there wasn't a reason for it? → Ceo \ squawk 15:32, 7 January 2006 (GMT)