User talk:Dark Shikari

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: I will archive this page whenever I see fit. If I archive a discussion that you want to continue, feel free to move it out of the archive and back to the main talk page.

Archive: 1 2

Contents

[edit] EVE Wiki on EVE Online

Hello DS, I wondered if you could take a look over a conversation I am having with User:Alatari here we seem to disagree on the inclusion of a link to EVE Wiki in the EVE Online article, my understanding of WP:EL is that it should not be included as it is an Open Wiki without a substantial history of stability or a significant number of editors. As it stands I have not removed it from the article as to avoid a edit war over the issue. Richard Slater (Talk) 19:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Who do I turn to that 's an uninterested party and an editor to resolve this matter? You seem to believe the external link is agreeable as in Wookieepedia. Alatari 07:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Well I'm not going to get involved as this looks like a useless revertwar. I think an external link is reasonable, but only if it satisfies certain conditions, which EVE-Wiki might not. I suggest you try to get some sort of agreement on the talkpage, and if that doesn't work, look towards a simple dispute resolution method. —Dark•Shikari[T] 12:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
If this was another wiki dedicated to EVE which is just as useful or successful I would be fighting for that site. Having it externally linked means the Eve Cruft is not getting posted on Wikipedia which is a distinct possibility as EVE gets increasingly popular. And this method is used for WoW, Runescape and Second Life which have one and only one external Wiki linked each. I appreciate you comments Alatari 15:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
See the data I collected Talk:EVE_Online about the handling of external Wiki's on all other MMORPG articles on Wikipedia. Your input is appreciated. Alatari 18:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

Finny the Panderichthys congratulates you!
Finny the Panderichthys congratulates you!

Congratulations for possibly creating the 2000000th article on English Wikipedia!! Horrah! —Pengo 09:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Nah, its the 2,000,001th :) —Dark•Shikari[T] 09:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
    • I don't count recreated articles :) —Pengo 09:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Wow, nice work on the near miss. :) - Taxman Talk 16:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • You still might be able to knock out your competitor, see Wikipedia Signpost suggestion. -- Jreferee (Talk) 17:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • If you read later, it turns out those numbers are backwards anyways :) —Dark•Shikari[T] 19:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Vfd1

Hi, I just noticed that a template you created, Template:Vfd1, is unused and appears to be abandoned. I've marked it as deprecated, meaning it'll be deleted in two weeks' time if nobody objects. If there's a reason to keep it please leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. Thanks. Bryan Derksen 01:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Air Cadet Squadrons in Canada

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of Air Cadet Squadrons in Canada, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 20:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Dark Shikari Bot

I would like to clone this bot, as I would like to do some tagging of my own, for different WikiProject. If you will allow me to clone it, I would prefer you to comment on it on my talk page. Dreamy § 00:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your User Page

A blank userpage is fine, but come on, you have to have at least one Tachikoma pic. :) --Wootonius (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EVE Online

This diff isn't vandalism like your edit summary claims. He sourced it and made a good faith edit. If you disagree with it then we can reach consensus on the talk page. Reverting good faith edits as vandalism can get you banned... be careful. Alatari (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

  • I read the source quite a while ago. That account is a sockpuppet of an IP who has been inserting that paragraph repeatedly for weeks. The article says almost nothing to back up his claims. —Dark•Shikari[T] 22:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I checked the article again, and indeed I appear to be right. The section the sockpuppet is repeatedly trying to insert into the article claims that the allegations he mentions are true while his source merely states them to be allegations and nothing more. There is quite a big difference between an allegation and a fact. —Dark•Shikari[T] 22:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree on that point. But the NYT article does mention allegations of improperly infiltrated a Goonswarm group while the EVE Online article remains quite on this point. If that was the phrased used then the source would be properly attributed. Really I saw someone on The Holocaust page get banned because of misleading edit summaries so that's why I wrote you. Do you thing the sockpuppet would compromise on the improperly infiltrated a Goonswarm group phrasing? Alatari (talk) 22:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know--the main issue is that I've never seen him once post on a talk page, so it doesn't seem he's willing to compromise on a single word. —Dark•Shikari[T] 05:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
If he makes one more major change that's not agreeing with the source and without talking on the talk page or our pages I'll stop assuming WP:FAITH Alatari (talk) 05:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks like he earned a block. He break the 3RR rule? Alatari (talk) 18:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Combined Comunity Codec Pack / AVG

Again, AVG is reporting a false positive. Please do not include unsourced defamatory statements in articles.) (undo)
hi, i am not trying to come accross as an ass here, i would just like help... how do i go about finding a source for this? surely as AVG has reported this as a virus, that in itself is a source? Also i was not trying to flame, more warn peopel there amy be a potential problem out there so they can decide fro themselfs wehther to trust the author or not, also by putting the information out there others may contriute and say they are having problems and this is possibly the source of system being compremised. i was not trying to upset anyone, more share this information.

Regards Pete —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.41.87 (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

  • A reliable source. Like a newspaper, or anything else mentioned in this policy on Verifiability. If you think there is a virus in the CCCP, why not go to the official forums and report it? I highly doubt this is the case, however; its far more likely that AVG is seeing a false positive in the compressed executable, which is not uncommon. —Dark•Shikari[T] 00:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


THis is not in the compressed executable install file, it is in one of the files (settings.exe) after i have installed the codec pack. if i where to post on their forums it would get removed quicker than it did here, like i say my aim was to try an spread the information through i can acceot that this is maybe not the most aporpriate way to do it. Also as for your claim for reporting false positives, again i know AVG can do this, but i personally put my trust more highly in AVG than i do for other 3rd party software writers. i also feel 'its a false positive' is a poor arguement, because anyone could say that about a file they have infected and by the time this has been verified that it is not a false postive, its 2 late and many people have been infected. If the information is shared instead of repressed it can be held up to examination and then disproved. removing it means that no-one can see it so are not aware that a potential problem may exist. lie i say maybe this was not the correct medium to do it, but i felt it was more important to share the information.


Pete

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.41.87 (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  • You can easily verify it being a false positive by using VirusTotal, a free service that scans any file with dozens of antivirus scanners and reports the result. What do you mean by "it would be removed even faster on the official forums?" No, they would answer your question honestly, like they do all others. This is not a discussion topic for Wikipedia. —Dark•Shikari[T] 08:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Email

Hi,

Can you enable wiki-email? It's off at the moment.

Many thanks,

FT2 (Talk | email) 03:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bot activity

I was going over the list of bots and noticed that Dark Shikari Bot (talk · contribs) has not edited in a very long time. Is this bot still active and if not, would you object to it being de-flagged? Please post your comments to Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Dead_bots since this is a rather widely-posted message. MBisanz talk 18:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)