Pages to delete
I noticed you've done some deletions recently, according to the log, so I thought I'd notify you of some more pages that need that treatment. You can find them in Category:Pages to be deleted (which I just created). Thanks! JesseWeinstein 00:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jesse! I shared this with a couple other folks and the pages you identified should now be gone. The "Pages to be deleted" Category is a good thing. 184.108.40.206 02:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I noticed that Nathan had gotten on it; I've got more for you all now... ;-) Thanks for the reply, though! JesseWeinstein 02:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW, the ConfirmEmail bit seems to be broken -- at least, I haven't gotten my confirmation email, and it's been a few hours... Any ideas? JesseWeinstein 02:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Cleaning up the mess
Excess empty lines
I believe the wiki pages use too many empty lines. For example, look at the http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ page. On top and on the bottom of the page title, there's a lot of empty space.
Then again on the top and bottom of the translating link, which could be a smaller block of text, but I suppose this was made to accomodate the text in case a page is translated into a multitude of languages.
Then finally under the first paragraph, there seems to be at least an extra unneeded empty line.
I understand that empty lines help to keeps things tidy, but excessive empty space makes the site looks bland, plus, in that particular page, it could greatly benefit navigation if all the questions fit one page, so users don't have to scroll.
I also understand that this would be a wiki-wide change, but I believe that the entire wiki would benefit.
As a side note, I'm writting here because I saw you made some changes to that page, however I would also want to know how I can suggest new questions for the full FAQ.
- The extra spacing above/below each entry is created by the <h2> elements that Mediawiki generates from the wiki markup. It could be altered via styling, but personally I don't see a problem with the spacing. It doesn't seem excessive to me, and we haven't had yet had any other complaints about it. nkinkade 16:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- I can clean it up a bit. I agree somewhat that it's more space than it needs to be. A lot of the time this is just due to MediaWiki inserting p elements that have padding or margins in the stylesheet.Akozak 18:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also, you can suggest edits to the FAQ or FFAQ using the talk page.Akozak 18:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your replies, I'll make suggestions to the FAQ later.Coz 14:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Admins & Bureaucrats, etc.
Would you mark User:Reginald Leones and User:Hamilton Abreu as trusted users who's newpages are automatically patrolled. Or just make me a Bureaucrat, and I'll do it myself. JesseWeinstein 07:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, User:Amy Rose, User:Brian Rowe should probably not be an admins any more, as they are no longer working at CC, and haven't edited in years. Accounts User:Ericsteuer and User:Nathan Kinkade should also have the admin bit removed, unless there's a specific need for you both to have two different admin accounts... I'm not sure what User:JED3 is, but it certainly shouldn't have the admin bit set. (It has one edit, and one page deletion, make shortly after it was created. I assume it was some kind of testing account.) JesseWeinstein 07:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Jesse, you previously already had admin rights, you now have Bureaucrat rights as well. I'm not sure where/how to mark Reginald and Hamilton as trusted users?? Is that something you can do now? I removed the admin bits for Amy and Brian and Nathan Kinkade. Ericsteuer is http://creativecommons.org/about/people/#ericsteuer and JED3 is http://creativecommons.org/about/people/#johndoig. Thanks! nkinkade 15:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Great, thanks. JesseWeinstein 17:29, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
For the moment, I've marked Hamilton and Reginald as bots, which achieves the intended effect, although also has some side effects. To remedy those, we'd need to make a few changes in the site configuration files; specifically, creating a new user group called "Trusted" or some such with the "autopatrol" bit set. I'll write up an cut-and-pasteable patch to do that later. JesseWeinstein 17:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
GNU GPL and GNU LGPL
Hi Nathan, the section FAQ#Can I use a Creative Commons license for software? refers the reader to licenses:
- GNU GPL (at http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-gpl/)
- GNU LGPL (at http://creativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl/).
However, the two URLs fail. I was wondering if the correct links are these:
- GNU GPL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/
- GNU LGPL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/LGPL/2.1/
or others? Hamilton Abreu 03:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Links are now corrected. Thanks. nkinkade 15:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Please re-check the LGPL link. Hamilton Abreu 03:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Ooops. Sorry, fixed the wrong LGPL link. nkinkade 16:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
By the way, the section at stake repeats the info in the similar question in the FFAQ. Wouldn't it be preferable to replace the answer by a "please refer to..." so as not to duplicate things (the above issue with the links still applies to the FFAQ, so answer is still needed)? Hamilton Abreu 03:10, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- There is some duplication right now, but actually we are going to release a totally reorganized and updated FAQ in the next couple months. The FFAQ will go away and be integrated into a single FAQ page. nkinkade 15:44, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Nathan, what is going on with the administration of the wiki? There's some spam activity not being addressed for quite some time. Hamilton Abreu 05:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing this out, Hamilton. I'll see what we can do to stay more on top of this. That said, we can certainly use the extra help, and it appears you have already been going through some of the spam. Thanks. nkinkade 15:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- If someone could review the pages listed under Category:Pages to be deleted and either delete them or remove my classification as warranting deletion, the deleted pages would stop being listed under Special:RecentChanges. In itself, that may go some way towards discouraging these activities. But that only works if they are effectively deleted as soon as created, rather than being marked for deletion and staying there. All deletions may be undeleted at any time, so no major risk there.
- I've noticed than Nathan Yergler starting bloking spammer accounts but that won't help: this is being done by bots that create a new account for each edit and then effectively discard it, precisely for that reason. Hamilton Abreu 22:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- I was looking over Category:Pages_to_be_deleted earlier today and was wondering if there was some automated way to delete all of them rather than having to go through manually and delete 200+ items. I couldn't find any solution. There is an internal CC thread about this and I'm waiting to hear back if I should delete those pages/files one by one, or if that will be tasked to someone else. Thanks. nkinkade 22:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)