User talk:Crew

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

About the Welcome message

I'm not really sure why no one's called you out on this yet, but your welcome message is not very useful. Not only is the markup wrong, (you're supposed to use two ['s), but I have absolutely no idea what [Help:Contents help pages] is meant to link to. I would think you mean Help:Contents, but since there aren't any pages in the Wikipedia namespace, everything there currently links back to the actual Wikipedia site. Iris ensata (talk) 06:42, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

-- Thanks for that. I will check into it. (Crew (talk) 13:37, 15 October 2016 (UTC))

About Creative Commons

This is something that should be run across the Council, but I've noticed that you're using Creatives Commons 3.0. Aside from the part that you should mention the version of CC at the page footer as well, moving to Version 4.0 should probably be considered. The main difference is that 3.0 uses legal language that's only confirmed to be valid in the United States, and there are actually 60 or so versions of 3.0, for each country. 4.0 is a global license that should be valid worldwide. Since Infogalactic is apparently based in Switzerland, it might be a good idea. Iris ensata (talk) 21:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

-- This is a very important point, and we need to resolve that. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Crew (talk) 21:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

About the user sandbox...

In the InfoGalactic page on wiki sandboxes it says: "If you are logged in, you can access your personal sandbox ("Sandbox" link at the very top of the page, next to your user name)." Does this personal sandbox feature exist somewhere? (There's no Sandbox link on my user page.) If not, it would be very useful for people like me who aren't seasoned Wiki editors. --Diggins (talk) 21:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

-- Let me look into that and get back to you. I don't fully understand the sandbox feature as yet. You can also create sub-pages below your user page, but it requires you hand edit the URL or create links in your User page or whatever. Also I changed your header to be a lower one that prevents a ToC from being added. Crew (talk) 21:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks! I'm not ashamed to admit I'm a noob, and I appreciate the help! --Diggins (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The idea that you have your own sandbox was actually a deception of sorts that was added in recent years on Wikipedia. All it really is, is a convenient pre-made link to a sub-page under your User namespace. You're always free to create sub-pages with any kind of name, but the link was probably made for user-friendly reasons. I also don't think there's any kind of edit restriction; for example, I can make a page called User:Diggins/Digginsisanoob even though I'm not Diggins. That's obviously not polite, though. Iris ensata (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

About relationship with Wikipedia

Are there any legal or other issues with Infogalactic doing this: "This article's content derived from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia" Also, if I create an article here first, might Wikipedia "derive" the content onto it's site? Thanks. Infogalactic looks great! Magicman (talk) 18:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Magicman: I am not a lawyer. But I believe the answer to your questions is built into the licenses (such as CC-BY-SA) under which the content is contributed to the site(s). In practice, this means that both Wikipedia and InfoGalactic can use content that is contributed under CC-BY-SA to either site. The note about "This article's content derived" is based on a standard WikiMedia template that helps users of such content comply with the attribution requirements of the CC-BY-SA license. You can find a link to the CC-BY-SA license at the bottom of the page.

-- Viking (talk) 02:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Magicman: While I am not a lawyer either, we are covered by the license that Wikipedia and we use.

-- Crew (talk) 05:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

-- Good. Thanks, Viking and Crew. Magicman (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Adding comments to a talk page

(migrated)

You can use User_talk:Spiralofhope as well. --Crew (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I know. Spiralofhope (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion board

Hi, was curious if there's a forum or area for discussions with the other users on the project, thanks. i have some ideas on how to create a platform for a more cohesive and personal community unlike the rigid and impersonal one on Wikipedia, thanks.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new to InfoGalactic. I took the liberty of creating an unoffical private dicussion board for the InfoGalactic members here, feel free to share this with the other members and staff, thanks:

InfoGalactic discussion board

Tears of Ovid (talk) 19:31, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

How InfoGalactic can surpass Wikipedia

I wrote an outline here of the ways in which I believe InfoGalactic can easily surpass Wikipedia based on my knowledge of Web 2.0 and the state of affairs at Wikpedia. Specifically a clean, updated editing interface; stronger and friendlier community; adult content concerns, and the way the community roles are structured:

Feel free to have the staff read this, preferably someone in your marketing department, thanks.

http://s15.zetaboards.com/InfoGalactic/topic/10100289/1/#new

--Tears of Ovid (talk) 03:34, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting that redirect, was a typo of mine.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 16:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Welcome template created

Hi, I created a template for welcoming new users. All one has to do is type {{welcome}} on the user's talk page now and it will automatically generate the welcome message.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I made an error, you can't integrate the signature in the welcome template itself, you'll just have to type it as {{welcome}}--~~~~ when you paste it on the user's talk page.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Email

The one I used is still current so not sure what's going on, but I went ahead and switched to a different email accout, so hit me up and I'll let you know if I get it.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 17:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

I figured it out, I never received my confirmation code and verified the email address, hold on please.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Admin tools request

Hi Crew, is it possible that I could be granted administrator tools temporarily? I'm familiar with the Wiki Markup code and I would like to redesign the main page and edit a few of the templates if it's all the same to you, thanks.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


User Page

Hi Crew. You posted this on my user page (not my discussion page):

=== Re Banners about Wiki, Forked and Original ===
I started thinking about this a while ago and am glad you brought it up.
# Currently we have a hard-coded thing in one of the skins, and there was some issue around rewrite rules that prevented us from getting the page URL or something so we could do a reverse lookup. I will look at it again this weekend since one of the volunteers fixed the rewrite rules stuff.
# At the moment, most of the pages are from Wikipedia, a small fraction are forked and an even smaller fraction are original. 
# I was thinking of something in the database that could tell us if this page was original to IG (perhaps driven by a template in the page), was forked or was from Wiki (with the last being the default) which would require a new database field for the page table and some code in the Edit/Save code in PHP.
Your thoughts are welcome. There is a volunteer group who you might like to join. Send mail to rifleman. --Crew (talk) 02:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
It's very easy to see if a page was from Wikipedia by looking at the history. If there's only one entry then it's likely Wikipedia. To be sure the Wikipedia article history will either have an identical page around the same time-stamp or not. Easier said than coded.
What is rifleman's email?
Does "ping" work on IG's talk pages?
On WP, only the user could edit his/her own user page. User Talk/Discussion pages were open to be added to. Initially I felt confused and even violated to see my IG user page edited by someone other than myself. Then I realized maybe because it's a different site and perhaps culture the rules were different. In this regard I can't express enough that a user should have some things like User page and User-Drafts be "privately" edited without interruption, even if publicly read, (naturally with exceptions for violations, such as slander, doxxing, etc).
I'm glad that IG exists as a freer alternative and glad I can participate.
All help and constructive criticism very welcome, but on my user discussion page. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)


Main page design completed

Hi Crew. I finished writing the code for the main page here. I looked into Wikipedia's code and wasn't sure yet how to have featured articles auto-rotate on the main page, but the content we have here can be used as a placeholder for now:

Just edit, copy the code, and paste it into the main page.

https://infogalactic.com/info/User:Tears_of_Ovid/Main_Page

I also copied the "run-down" text on InfoGalactic to a subpage - InfoGalactic:Introduction, so newbies can just access it straight from the main page.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Rectified vandalism

Hi, an admin might want to take a look at this guy's edits:

https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Unicorn&type=revision&diff=724675250&oldid=29070

--Tears of Ovid (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Website slowdown

A very long slowdown occurred at about 1130 hours (+/- 5 mins), UTC. Was able to ping the domain, but the site itself was unresponsive with the browser waiting for a response.

[Unable to inform via email due to technical issues at my end.] Whitebeard (talk) 11:55, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

We had an issue last night. We probably need to provide a page where we inform people of these.

Got this message when I tried to continue editing an article:

"Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data."

The edit/preview had been interrupted by the slowdown. Seems to be a web server issue.

I am still logged in though. Whitebeard (talk) 12:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


Loading this page is taking too long: Continuation. Other pages load while this one is still "connecting...".

Is it because of all the syntax highlighting? Whitebeard (talk) 12:13, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


Okay, this looks like problems with MathML/SVG rendering:

Failed to parse (MathML with SVG or PNG fallback (recommended for modern browsers and accessibility tools): Invalid response ("<p>There was a problem during the HTTP request: 502 Bad Gateway </p>") from server "http://mathoid.testme.wmflabs.org":): \forall c \exists r, \mbox{fell}(r,c)

Whitebeard (talk) 12:22, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, one more for me to look into. There is a bugs list, and I thought I had fixed all of the math problems, but it seems not. Can you give me an example of the markup that caused problems? --Crew (talk) 16:00, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Try loading Continuation. Whitebeard (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
OK, I tried that and it looks OK. However, there was a problem to do with disk-space last night, and if the call to render that stuff (which is done on demand and cached) failed due to an out of space condition that could result in what you saw. The PHP could perhaps parse the error better and give a better error message. I believe that we are working on getting space in AWS to alleviate these problems.

Twitter?

Does Twitter appear?

The page loads reasonably fast, if that's what you are asking. Whitebeard (talk) 16:46, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
No. Another editor complained that the link did not appear in the Editor's Guidelines page, so I was testing. --Crew (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Trump

Any objections to redirecting Trump to Donald Trump? Whitebeard (talk) 17:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


I am going to make the change. You can revert it if there is substantial disagreement. Whitebeard (talk) 17:42, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

I saw the change and was confused at first until I saw the complete set of changes. It piqued my interest because it looked like a big delete, but I calmed down when I saw that it was redirecting and then saw the later change. It seems correct to me. --Crew (talk) 06:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Policy on copyrighted media?

What is the current policy on uploading logos, screenshots, publicity material etc? Whitebeard (talk) 00:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The policy is that copyright has to be respected. It is more difficult because the Fair-Dealing portions of US Copyright law might not apply since the servers are in Europe.
This means you have to make a good faith effort, I believe. If it is already on Wikipedia, it is probably OK. However, if we are informed of a copyright violation we will investigate and remove material that violates copyright.
I imagine that most companies will be happy to see their logos used on Infogalactic unless the article is negative about them.
Not sure if I have answered your concerns. However, legal is the keyword. --Crew (talk) 05:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I get that copyright has to be respected. But there seems to be no easy way of specifying the pedigree or provenance of the files. Where are all the free use/fair use templates as well as templates where we can easily provide information on the files? Whitebeard (talk) 07:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The info in the upload wizard/dialog box doesn't do it?

Can you tell me more?

I have noticed that when uploading graphics there is space to put in comments about the provenance of the graphic.

However, it seems that Wikipedia allows several objects to be associated with a File:blah-blah thing, but we only allow one.

--Crew (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

You need to allow for licensing and rationale

See File:Grim_Dawn_logo.jpg.

You need to direct/guide people towards these templates at the point of upload to prevent people from being too liberal with the use of copyrighted content.

At the very least, the source (page and url) needs to be specified for every piece of content.

I'll see if I can edit the wikipedia references in the templates to corresponding IG ones.

Whitebeard (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Question about Broken Images

There are numerous pages which currently don't display some or all of their images correctly. Some examples are Oval, Cycloid, Bezier_curve, Surveyor's_wheel, SBCL. Is this a code bug, or should we as editors just start uploading new images to replace all the old broken ones? Thanks! --Less (talk) 06:05, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

We have code that tries to automatically fetch some of those, but I have been uploading them as I find them. I need to dig into the PHP we have written to see when it uploads such images. --Crew (talk) 06:10, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok. For now I will just manually upload replacements as you suggest. --Less (talk) 06:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Swiss copyright law

I am trying to edit the various media templates to scrub wikipedia/wikimedia references and replace them with Infogalactic, and am facing an issue:

So, you need to have a proper policy on this subject before too many media uploads start as those could be considered to be copyright violations in Switzerland even if they are perfectly fine in the US.

Whitebeard (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing those up. --Crew (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Slowdown and Mediawiki

It takes five minutes to edit the Trump article introduction (Donald Trump) as stupid mediawiki design combines with the generally slow nature of IG.

To edit the introduction, it seems that you have to load the entire article.

Whitebeard (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Sigh. Yes. They did not think of that, did they. I will ask rifleman about it. We will be having another meeting to discuss these things. One approach might be to split the Trump article, but a better approach would be to make the introduction be a first class citizen and in general to store each section as a separate blob in the database. Of course, then a map will be needed as well. --Crew (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I haven't looked into how mediawiki stores data, but (version-id, article-id, section-rank) can be used to narrow down blobs quite easily as long as appropriate indexes are maintained in case of relational databases. - Whitebeard (talk) 02:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

DONTPANIC engine

I have some thoughts on this issue:

Rewrite

While software and game developers enjoy writing new code, particularly engines, rewrites are complicated, and dangerous. See Rewrite (programming) (and read the Spolsky article). I hope someone has brought this up and the timeline for the new engine accounts for feature creep.

Mediawiki is slow and inefficient, but it works as long as you throw enough resources (money) at it. And it has proven that it can scale. Most people are familiar with the interface as every major and minor fandom wiki runs on it (Wikia, Gamepedia etc). So, if you have a plan to replace it, that plan should be a game changer and the benefits should outweigh the costs.

Sigh. Yes. While the crazy macro language they chose for templates is ugly, and it is a god-awful mixture of PHP, external things (for rendering math, etc) and LUA, it is at least known.
In addition, any re-write, if it chooses a different markup language, will have to preserve the functionality of the existing markup, at least until everything has been converted, and will have to ensure a relatively high level of faithfulness. That is a major undertaking.
There are also the existing problems ... --Crew (talk)

Editors

The number of active editors is not sufficient to maintain this wiki. Almost all articles are out-of-date and unmaintained. Dynamic updates are only a partial solution as IG is effectively using biased content generated at SJWpedia in critical articles.

Yes. I think that it is related to several factors. 1) Even I find it daunting when thinking of rewriting articles I would like to rewrite. 2) There is a reasonably high barrier to entry, in that you have to get to know all these markup things. --Crew (talk) 11:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Technology

I guess the development is being done in PHP as we know that it can scale (Wordpress, Facebook, Mediawiki). But has thought been given to languages like Java?

I am not sure of that. In any event, feedback I heard (second hand) from Facebook was that they had a compiler/translator of some sort that converted PHP to C++ (and having done a bit of PHP work now I can understand that desire--the dynamic typing could be handled with a library, I imagine.) These days one tends to try to use the JS environments around there that leverage browsers more. --Crew (talk) 11:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Development

Is this going to be developed in the open under a permissive license or, in the dark with access granted to a selected few?

It hasn't been decided, I think. There are lots of advantages to being permissive. You should ask get on the volunteers list. Send mail to info@infogalactic.com asking to get on and then you can put forward suggestions. I would encourage you to do this because all input is useful at this stage.

Whitebeard (talk) 04:38, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Encrypted email

Hi, I got the encrypted email and replied just for the record. (P.S. If there's any way I could get the temp admin tools today I'd be willing to do some work with the WikiMarkup code).--Tears of Ovid (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I sent you a reply in GMX.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 19:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Markup code

Hi, here's an article on the Wiki Markup code and how it works (I believe it's sort of a hybrid code which can integrate CSS and HTML) if you or anyone else wants to brush up on it:

https://infogalactic.com/info/Help:Wiki_markup

--Tears of Ovid (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I was aware of much of that and have even looked at the PHP handling it and modified it for one specific thing, but wasn't aware that you could transclude pages like that. Now I am. It's like being aware of all the things you can do in C++ or Python or ... --Crew (talk) 22:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit-warring by administrators

Why is admin User:Tears of Ovid edit-warring over:

by redirecting the articles to pages with titles that make no sense without discussing it on the relevant talk page (Talk:List of SJW-converged organizations) after I warned him about it once?

SJWs are not necessarily political progressives and it makes no sense to conflate the two. List of organizations which have supported progressive political causes is something every organization in the West would be on, including the Roman Catholic Church.

  • SJWs != progressives.
  • SJW convergence != support for progressive political causes.

Otherwise, Vox Day's book would be called Progressives Always Lie.

The project has barely begun and it is already going off the rails.

- Whitebeard (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


Hmmm, OK, I think that SJW Convergence should not redirect to SJWs Always Lie, because the former describes a process, while the latter describes a book. I also tend to agree that SJWs not necessarily Progressives. However, at the very least, there should be discussion of these. --Crew (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
==
Okay, my take on the project is that Vox wants it to read like a general encyclopedia, rather than a "self-promotion", or "SJWs Always Lie wiki", a la Wikia.
Since those terms are coined by Vox himself in his book, I don't feel that they're in widespread use enough to merit individual articles; I think it would be better to have all of the Vox Day neologisms limited to the articles on Vox and his books themselves.
Likewise the article title "List of SJW-converged organization" sounds too opinion-ish, since it's painting the organization with a broad brush and can't really be "proven". While the other title is something that can be more easily verified, since it's describing the specific actions by the organization, rather than just "labeling" the organization as this or that.
Also I think that the second title is more inclusive. For example, Chili's recent decision to donate proceeds to Planned Parenthood could be described as them supporting a progressive cause, but I don't think it'd qualify as a "SJW" cause. While SJW causes as a whole do seem to fall under the brush of political progressivism, a la John Stuart Mill.
Maybe this would be something Vox himself could chime in on; I'm not sure he wants the Wiki to come across as "self-promotional" by having separate--Tears of Ovid (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2017 (UTC) articles for all of the terms he coined himself.
UPDATE - Since this concerns Vox Day himself I sent him an email asking how he'd like him and the concepts from his books discussed here; whether he wants separate articles on each term, or whether he thinks it'd be better to avoid using the terminology from his book in article titles to avoid seeming self-promotional. Hopefully he'll reply soon and we can have this issue resolved.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
@Ovid
1. Why do you care so much about what others think? This is not wikia. This is a general encyclopedia and anyone who is not a retard can figure that out. You think the assholes at Wikipedia think like this when they invent articles on bullshit topics out of thin air and supply them with made-up references?
2. SJW convergence is a term that refers to a particular concept. Stop committing harakiri in the name of neutrality by robbing yourself of the means to refer to a concept. Translating SJW convergence into support for progressivism smells like newspeak.
3. "widespread?" - This sounds like Wikipedia policy. People other than Vox Day have made references to SJW convergence and how it applies to organizations. That is enough for me. I consider blogposts and articles in alternative media to be reliable enough. The only thing we have to guard against is opinion unsupported by any references. Those are essays that belong in the User namespace.
4. "List of SJW-converged organization" sounds too opinion-ish, since it's painting the organization with a broad brush and can't really be "proven"
They can be proven because they have publicly done something that satisfies the definition of SJW convergence. It's not as if we are compiling a list of organizations employing suspected rapists.
5. I think that the second title is more inclusive.
Encyclopedias are not about generalizations. Why not have a "list of organizations doing good," in that case? You need to be very specific. And yes, donating to Planned Parenthood by itself is not an act of SJW convergence. Which is why I said last week that they are two separate lists.
6. I would be surprised if Vox cares that much about impartiality. In any case, the term now has its own life outside his usage. I would also suggest performing a google books search for "social justice convergence." The term has existed for a while with a different meaning.
- Whitebeard (talk) 00:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Alright, I've given Whitebeard a 24 hour block due to his rude response and possible ideological crusading; other admins are free to review it.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 00:54, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


SJW convergence and List of SJW-converged organizations are valid article subjects if they describe beliefs or theories held by some small group (or even a lone theorist), AND you believe Infogalactic should err on the side of radical inclusion for encyclopedia articles. Articles should be clearly marked so the reader sees whatever bias exists. We could also have a 1 to 7 star rating system indicating article quality. Imported Wikipedia articles could automatically have at least 5 stars since they survived the harsh Wikipedia vetting process.--Jack-arcalon (talk) 20:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The second title is opinion and can't be factually verified. Calling an entire organization "SJW converged" is ambiguous - pointing out specific actions the organization has taken in support of social justice or progressive causes is something which can be factually verified:

CANON SEVEN

Facts are facts.

Facts are not context, they are not logical conclusions, and they are not justifiable opinions. Only externally verifiable facts belong on the Factual level of a page; if it is necessary for a Galaxian to explain, rationalize, or justify the presence of a purported fact on a page, then it belongs on either the Context or the Opinion levels. Galaxian's personal experiences, interpretations, or subjective opinions are welcome, but only on the appropriate level. That is not the Fact level. If there is any doubt, put it in Context.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Seven_Canons

Likise, if you create an article called "SJW convergence", you'll need to at least have a factual source demonstrating where the term comes from or where it has been used, rather than just presenting it as a widespread term but without any identification. Which is why I think it would fit better as a subsection of Vox's book where he invented the term.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


This statement: "SJWs are not necessarily political progressives..." <shaking head> ...SJWs are socialists in the Marxist-Leninist mold. (Whether they *realize* that is another matter. I'm sure that a not-insubstantial number of them do, to include nearly all of those at the top of their food-chain; the rank-and-file are of course "useful-idiots".) Their claim to "social justice" is pure propaganda and all-to-typical hijacking of English terms and definitions in order to pollute the language. (E.g., compare earlier hijackings of "progressive", "liberal", "democratic", "anarchist", etc., all of which come to mean their polar opposites once in their hands.) --Froglich (talk) 07:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Vox's Reply

Vox replied to me by email. Basically he agrees that we don't want the project to be seen as self-promotional or "soapboxing" by presenting opinionated terms such as "SJW convergence" as facts; the goal is simply to report verifiable facts and let them speak for themselves:

I hope he has a strategy in mind to counter the one used at Wikipedia where every article is connected to feminism or sexism in one way or the other and new articles are written to push the SJW point of view while maintaining the appearance of being verifiable and neutral. While we cannot have articles on easily identifiable phenomenon for reasons of impartiality, we carry their blatantly partial articles here. - Whitebeard (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, the strategy is called removing the bias from the articles in question and adding factual sources, not "creating counter-bias". So why don't you help out with that instead of pissing in the wind? This is an encyclopedia, not a blog.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 00:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Tell him I said he's got the right spirit, but you're right, and we don't want to be seen soapboxing. Truth and fairness is the order of the day, not pushing it as far as we reasonably can. - Vox Day'

On 1/29/2017 12:20 AM, Ovid's Tears wrote: Hi Vox, if you have the time to chime in on this I'd appreciate it to avoid having this issue reoccur in the future.

Whitebeard created several different articles and categories with terms from your book "SJWs Always Lie" - such as an article on "SJW converged organizations", "SJW convergence, etc".

My take on your aim for the project is for it to be a rival to Wikipedia, so I didn't get the impression you'd want it to seem "self promotional" or stating your views from your book as facts, like a "Vox Day wikia".

I thought it would be better to have the separate articles on the terminology merged with the SJWs Always Lie book. Likewise I moved the "SJW converged organizations" list to the title "organizations which have supported progressive political causes":

I think the second title works better, since calling an organization "SJW converged organization" is stating one's opinion of the organization, rather than its actual actions. While the second title is talking about the specific actions the organization did in support of progressive or social justice ideology.

Also, under the first title instances such as Chili's donating proceeds to Planned Parenthood wouldn't really fit as "SJW convergence", and would just require seperate articles. Whitebeard dislikes my changes however.

If you have the time to chime in on this and announce what your stance on this is I'd appreciate it, thanks.


--Tears of Ovid (talk) 23:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Temp ban for Rectified

Hi, I decided to temporary block Rectified because I noticed some recent edits that seemed questionable and may need review from administration. For the record this user has made some trollish edits in the past, such as this one to the unicorn article.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

These multiple accusations are not sourced. Vacuous accusations are a pattern with Tears of Ovid, which can be easily proven. Rectified (talk) 04:29, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Galactic Tribunal

Hi, I created this page here for editors and admins to go to resolve editing disputes:

https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Galactic_tribunal

--Tears of Ovid (talk) 18:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Subdomains

Your unmapped subdomains display some interesting behavior. Try visiting newz.IG.TLD, satan.ig.TLD or any random subdomain and see if that is the desired behavior. Whitebeard (talk) 12:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah. Thanks. I found that out about a week or so ago and let Rifleman know, but it seems he has not had time to fix it. I will mention it again. --Crew (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Autoblock

Can you please see this: Infogalactic:Galactic_boardroom#Blocking_Outrage? Is there a way for you to ensure that the Autoblock / "Automatically block the last IP address used by this user, and any subsequent IP addresses they try to edit from" checkbox is no longer ticked by default? --Idris (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Ahhh, that is what causes it. Yes, I can modify the PHP so that it does not do that. -- Crew (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Also, some contract information, or maybe a link to contact information, such as the Email address mentioned on Infogalactic:About, should be added to the Main Page and to the messages that blocked users see (normally located at MediaWiki:Blockedtext and MediaWiki:Autoblockedtext but Infogalactic handles MediaWiki messages differently). --Idris (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

  1. The checkbox is no longer automatically ticked.
  2. I think I need to add a Contact link to the LH Column ... as for the blocked text it should be being displayed. The default text is "<strong>Your username or IP address has been blocked.</strong>\n\nThe block was made by $1.\nThe reason given is <em>$2</em>.\n\n* Start of block: $8\n* Expiration of block: $6\n* Intended blockee: $7\n\nYou can contact $1 or another [[{{MediaWiki:Grouppage-sysop}}|administrator]] to discuss the block.\nYou cannot use the \"email this user\" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your [[Special:Preferences|account preferences]] and you have not been blocked from using it.\nYour current IP address is $3, and the block ID is #$5.\nPlease include all above details in any queries you make." -- OK, I see what you mean, we should include a contact address.

-- Crew (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Looking good. Thanks. --Idris (talk) 14:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Mobile version for Infogalactic

IMO a mobile version for Infogalactic will improve the UX (user experience) of mobile users when they are browsing this website. May I know when the feature will be rolled out? Bugmenot123123123 (talk) 19:50, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

I will try to have a look at the Mobile Extensions for MediaWiki this weekend ... --Crew (talk) 03:41, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Bugmenot123123123 (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I have installed it in a test server and it seems to work. I will evaluate it for a few days and read the code. Probably cut it into production next weekend. --Crew (talk) 01:15, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I have put this into production now ... try it out ... -- Crew (talk) 02:08, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Issues within category pages

There's seem to have an issue in category functionality where the link to the pages tagged with the corresponding category label did not show up in their respective category pages. For example the Cyber Anakin (hacktivist) which was tagged with "Category:1996 births" did not show up in the latter's page. Can you please fix it? Bugmenot123123123 (talk) 15:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Sigh. I have looked at this before and didn't make much progress, but am willing to do so again. I estimate it will take about two weeks to figure out what the issue is and then I can work to fix it (this is not my day job.) I have sent a list of the 4-5 items I could be working on to the council and asked for feedback on which is the most important. I will keep you posted. -- Crew (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Feedback is that I should prioritize mobile support over getting categories working ... however, getting categories working is next in priority --Crew (talk) 23:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance! Bugmenot123123123 (talk) 07:55, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Missing revision numbers for images.

About 48 hours ago you fixed a problem I encountered with a template called {{Decdeg}} (Thank You!). The same type of issue seems to plague two vector graphics files that are used as flag icons on a bunch of pages. I suspect the same type of solution is needed. They are File:Flag of Tanzania.svg (about 4700 pages) and File:Flag of Tonga.svg (about 2300 pages). I attempted to upload new versions to these locations. When that failed, I instead uploaded them to File:Flag Tanzania.svg and File:Flag Tonga.svg, respectively, thinking that I could then either move to their intended location or create a redirect. I can do neither. Could you please:

  1. make the garbled copies of File:Flag of Tanzania.svg and File:Flag of Tonga.svg go away and
  2. either move my uploads where they belong or, if you import/upload new versions, then delete mine so we don't have duplicates, whichever is more convenient for you. Gilgamesh (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Programming

Hi Crew,

Are you in need of developers? I have some MediaWiki development experience (several core patches and extensions). Thanks, Jean Valjean (talk) 03:01, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Sent you email. The short answer is YES! -- Crew (talk) 03:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Setting up my environment

After following the instructions at https://phabricator.infogalactic.io/w/dev_workflows/environment/ I have:

nathan@nathan-OptiPlex-780:~/infogalacticdevops$ ls
ansible.cfg  freebsd-10.3-ig.box  inventory  play_infogalactic.yaml  roles  vagrant-bootstrap.sh  Vagrantfile

What next? Jean Valjean (talk) 19:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't use that stuff. I run Linux on a home machine and have a separate area on the server where a separate server runs. I guess I should try out that stuff, but you should check with Pants to see what needs to be done. -- Crew (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, I like to run stuff on my local machine too, which runs Kubuntu at the moment. Jean Valjean (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I got it to run on Fedora only to find that there is lots more setup required, like installing PHP, Postgres etc. Rifleman said he should be able to put together a package that can do all that. In the meantime I have had success developing stuff on Linux and moving it into place on the servers. If you have some changes ready let me know and I can try them out. -- Crew (talk) 15:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

RE: Nintendo Switch

I'm not sure what you're apologizing for. You haven't overwritten any of of my revisions. --Idris (talk) 12:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikia editing interface - tech suggestion

Hi, I left a suggestion on the talk page for the Main Page here for the staff and tech team to look over, regarding streamlined editing features that Wikia (a Jimbo Wales sister project) has in its editing interface compared to Wikipedia's badly outdated interface; integrating some features like these in the coming updates would definitely be a plus, since one of Wikipedia's biggest criticism from outside reviewers seems to be its user-unfriendliness and badly outdated design, thanks.--Tears of Ovid (talk) 07:17, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

OK, I will try to have a look at that soon ... -- Crew (talk) 15:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
I have been looking at the Visual Editor stuff so far, and have done some work, but I see I will have to look at Wikia as well, since that seems to be different. The normal Visual Editor requires Parsoid and I have been looking at getting it running under FreeBSD ... but got derailed by a higher priority item. --Crew (talk) 17:04, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Handling Thanks and a Question About Deletion

I wanted to thank you for your helpful edits on the ABC Preon Model page. I checked the IG FAQ and poked around some and from what I can tell there is no user to user messaging (PM) functionality here on IG, but rather, such thanks are to go on a users talk page if at all. I am a noob here, so I'd like tips on how thanks are to be handled. In any event, thanks for the edits and the encouragement.

I was also a noob at Wikipedia three years ago. My ABC Preon Model article was deleted there for lack of notability, and I was very encouraged by what I see here at IG since I believe deletions here are to be based only on whether something is or is not factual rather than some vague rating on how popular (notable) the matter may be. And on that score I have a question - if an article is based upon a peer-reviewed published paper (as the ABC Preon Model is) is that generally considered to be sufficiently factual to avoid deletion of the article? And who decides?

In reality a small number of people decide this, which includes Vox, Idris, myself and one other. Your article is notable enough in my view and is far better written than the article on the Rishon model. If someone finds the time it would be good to update some of the graphics with SVGs and I notice that the Standard Model page has a good graphic showing the depiction of the particles in it that might be worth including as a diagram.
I usually only delete articles that are clearly advertising or really distasteful content. --Crew (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip on the graphic. I have added it along with some updates to captions.
The issue of what to delete might get somewhat dicey as IG grows when it comes to pages concerned with scientific theory. The special theory of relativity alone has spawned a cottage industry of papers trying to disprove it. I did over 100 reviews of such papers during a two decade span. A few were quite good, as there are some legitimate reasons to doubt the special theory, such as the results of Bell's theorem tests. However the vast majority of critical papers are from those who simply don't understand relativity. Many contain simple math errors. And relativity is just one example. The problem one gets into is what different works (beyond those of the "scientific consensus") should be included in an encyclopedia, and which ones should not? And what should the guidance be? And who gets to judge? It all gets a bit tricky.
Yes, it does get tricky, but we have different guidelines. Someone expanded the page on the Phantom time hypothesis article to remove the obvious Wikipedia bias and add other references, and while it is a bit out there, we let it stand because the quality of the article was improved. Your's seems to be a serious challenger, although that is only my non-expert opinion. In any event, readers can choose to explore all three if they wish. --Crew (talk) 01:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
For preons, I believe that if the Rishon Model is included, then the ABC Preon Model should be too, and I am glad that you came to that conclusion also. Wikipedia did not come to that conclusion.


The Singular Primordial Preon Theory

How about the Singular Primordial Preon Theory? [1]

It is a preon model, similar to the ABC Model. However, unlike the ABC Model, the theory has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

It has however been mentioned quite a few times across Internet, and is a huge improvement over the Rishon Model, since it also models Dark Matter. I personally believe that IG would benefit having an entry on the Singular Primordial Preon Theory. However I am not sure what are the noticeability criterions and therefore I just wanted to check with you before I write an entry. What do you think?

Go for it. --Crew (talk) 21:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Acknowledged. You have my sincere thanks!

Please standby as I build the entry page... It should be ready in a few days.

I am done writing the entry! The Singular Primordial Preon Theory If there's anything that needs improvement or changes, please let me know! Thanks again.

Fanboy Regrets

I'd like to draw your attention to this matter: Infogalactic:Galactic_boardroom#Fanboy_Regrets Thanks for your attention. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 05:52, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

You have my gratitude and a couple more respect points. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 03:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Absolute Theory

I have made a rather large entry on the Absolute Theory page. Prior to my efforts it was a stub that requested a build-out. In it, I produce almost verbatim a paper I published in Physics Essays many years ago. The paper contained much information that is fitting for an encyclopedia article. I got the editors permission to do this, although he asked for the copyright to be noted on the page as well as a link to the website of the journal. Please let me know if there are any issues with what I've done and I will try to make corrections.

Dynamic updates?

Hello Crew,

The roadmap page and infogalactic blog indicate that there is now a "manual dynamic update" tool. Is there any documentation about this, or could you explain what this is and how it works? Thanks. SolarFringe (talk) 14:43, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Froglich

I blocked User:Froglich for 3 days. You did not appear to be active on Infogalactic at the time and this user made huge changes. I hope I did not overstep my bounds. Please evaluate this user's contributions and either extend the block or undo it. --Gilgamesh (talk) 20:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

deletion policy: Wikipedia has a policy called "be bold". Ideal would be to edit left-wing articles line-by-line to remove socialist bias, but that takes a LONG time. IG still has under 50% of WP's contributors. Outright deleting SJW spin may be the best choice for now.
But I recommend leaving at least a minimal stub article in place, instead of a redirect. It's OK if IG articles start diverging from WP articles, they don't have to be updated with each Wikipedia change.--Jack-arcalon (talk) 22:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, that's a good point. Thanks. --Crew (talk) 22:25, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
I think I will undo the ban and ask him to stubify stuff he thinks is redundant and stubify those already redirected. -- Crew (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, I am largely sympathetic to the changes made by Froglich, because on balance there were both deletions and additions, albeit to different articles. Secondly, I agree that climate change politics should not have such a large emphasis as they did in the articles I looked at.
With respect to the deletion of articles about individuals from FALN and their replacement with redirects, that has created a minor problem in that the article redirected to has links to the originals, so a solution will have to be found for that.
I will re-instate Froglich's editing access and request that those delete articles be fixed perhaps with a stub that refers directly to the place they are now redirected to.-- Crew (talk) 02:26, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

First things first: an intro: I am Froglich (wave bony claw), a longtime Wikipedia editor who has ran into all the usual problems one faces when O'Sullivan's Law converges/guts a platform and wears it like a skin-suit. (I think we all have the BTDT T-shirt.) Anyway, Vox Day's "SJWs Always Double Down" brought me here, and I quickly ran through a list of article changes that were buried over at Wikipedia.

Anyway, about the FALN article redirects: Those stem from a "fluff" routine many years ago at Wikipedia in which every single minor characters in every communist or Islamist struggle was given their own page, thus achieving the dual-purpose use of Wikipedia as a dartboard for enemies and as a Facebook highlights-reel for SJWs/socialists/(no-enemies-on-the-lefts)/etc.

The other big character-count reduction was in the "Nuclear Winter" article, which in recent years (i.e., since Obama) has undergone a lot of renewed hysterical nonsense. I swiped over my last redit from Wikipedia.

Aside from that, I'd note that the character-count algorithm appears to broke, at least as far the [i]second[/i] edit in any article is concerned. For example, in Adolfo Matos (one of the FALN guys), the article history says my edit to redirect the page resulted in +69 bytes ("bytes"?), which is obviously wrong since the redirect link is obviously much shorter than what it replaced.

Anyway, on with the show.... --Froglich (talk) 07:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

PMs

Is there a personal-messaging feature on InfoGalactic?

(I wanted to ask a few things personally.)--Froglich (talk) 20:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Dunno. Will search for one soon. Maybe it is an extension we have to load. You can always email me crew @ the obvious place. -- Crew (talk) 18:14, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Just a quick heads-up that I'm still looking for a PM feature. --Froglich 04:31, 27 August 2018 (UTC)