User talk:Emily Diehl/Wiki discussion archive

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Your user box

If you want more, you might want to look at my old user box competition. -- Gem (gem / talk) 21:40, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

These are super cute. We should make a template category for these boxes and put them in there for people to browse, although this may create an issue with long userpages eventually. --Emily Diehl 21:47, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Some userboxes do, for example the territory userboxes(North America, Europe, etc.) --Chiaro 21:48, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Chiaro: She meant a category where we place user box templates for others to spot nice user boxes. Emily: Mmmm, it would probably be better to not promote the user boxes in this wiki with a user box category. They caused some seriously hidious user pages to emerge in GuildWiki. Sadly. :( Besides, how could we disallow awfull user boxes from being addedto the category? -- Gem (gem / talk) 21:50, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Yes, good point. I shuffled a few lone template categories into the main template category, but I am going to stop and let you guys have at it instead. Right now, it's a bit difficult to find templates since some are in orphaned categories, but I think this will get better as things get sorted out in the future. --Emily Diehl 21:56, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
I think our more stringent user policy mean that we could allow user boxes. The only real problems were people filling pages and pages with user boxes, but since there is a limit to the size of the main user page this should no longer be an issue, right? LordBiro 06:21, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Do you think that we could put a limit on the number of boxes that can be used on a user page? If we set a relatively high number, it would still allow people to have fun with the pages, yet still keep people from wallpapering their entire page with them. As far as creating a category to house these templates goes, I can see pros and cons to both sides. On one hand, it would be nice to have them all in one spot so people can have fun with them and pull from a common pool of boxes (which would also cut back on duplicated boxes). On the other hand, it may cause people to get a pack rat mentality about it, and want to put everything they see on their user pages (although page size should help with this). What do you guys think? --Emily Diehl 14:03, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
So you're against this sort of thing?  ;-)
Note: those user boxes aren't on his user page (anymore), but are in his user space on a subpage that you need to click a link on his user page to reach.
As for setting limits, the current policy at GWW:USER#Main_user_page_restrictions does spell out some user page length and size restrictions. To you, is that sufficient, or would you propose further restrictions specifically on user boxes? --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 14:27, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Oh my. That's a lot of boxes! I don't know if I am personally against people using a lot of boxes on their pages, since I am not positive if it really affects anything since most are template driven, but I'd imagine that we'd want to advise people not to use them as wallpaper :) --Emily Diehl 14:43, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
So, I'm a "thing" now, am I? :P User Blastedt sig.jpgBLASTEDT 19:42, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
Most of the time -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 19:45, 17 March 2007 (EDT)


Yay!!! That's the big one I was waiting to get! Many templates and more advanced formatting require it. Thanks for the update! --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 14:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Yep, I am also very excited to get the functions. I think this will speed things along quite well. Keep an eye out for any issues from the new addition and let me know if you see any so I can get any problems to IT. --Emily Diehl 14:34, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
I step down the hall for 10 minutes and lookee what I see. :D Tell the IT guys and/or gals thanks. — Gares 14:48, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
*doing a happy dance* This really makes wiki-life easier ^^ — Anja 14:51, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
I know it :) I am just as excited as you guys, trust me...hehe. --Emily Diehl 14:54, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
\o/ (that is me waving my arms in the air) LordBiro 15:18, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
Aw talk about timing. Just when we're able to start fixing everything my isp disconnects my broadband and now im on dialup for a fortnight! D: Oh well I guess it's up to everyone else to do all the hard work lol! - BeXoR 04:57, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Thank you

Might as well say it here: thank you for having the ParserFunctions fixed as quickly as you did, once you were able to check in on the Wiki after you're illness. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 17:37, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

You're welcome! I'm sorry I didn't see it sooner. --Emily Diehl 23:55, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Archive templates (!)

Archive templates really should go in the userspace. If admins are doing it, god knows that all the rushers that come laetr today will do that later on. It's your decision, but I really think you should move those. User Blastedt sig.jpgBLASTEDT 15:57, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this? --Emily Diehl talk 16:00, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Users' own templates (i.e.: Navigation bars for thier page, archive boxes) should go in their userspace, as in: User:Emily Diehl/Template. Puttin them in the mainspace just adds clutter, and we don't want everyone doing it. User Blastedt sig.jpgBLASTEDT 16:54, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
BlastedT is talking about your archive box which you've created in the main namespace. You can actually produce templates inside your user space, i.e. User:Emily Diehl/Archive box and include it by using the wiki-code {{User:Emily Diehl/Archive box}}.
For templates that are only used on individuals user pages, this is the preferred method :) If you like I could make this change for you? I'll wait for your reply in case you'd prefer to do it yourself! LordBiro 18:00, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Sure, go ahead and change it Biro. I'll see what you guys do and follow future userboxes from that. --Emily Diehl 18:47, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Done :) LordBiro 18:55, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Thank you sir :) I am just getting back into the office after being sick all week, so trying to wrap my brain around things is hard today. I blame the flu medicine ;) --Emily Diehl 18:59, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
It's no problem :) And I hope you're feeling better soon! LordBiro 07:20, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
It actually wouldn't be too hard to convert these templates into generic (non-user-specific) templates that could be used by anyone. We already have Template:Archive-box and Template:Archived for this purpose. I (or anyone else) can easilly create a Template:Archive-box2 using the format used by Emily if that's wanted - let me know if you want me to help creating it! --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 11:16, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
Barek, I created Template:Archive_box the other day... LordBiro 11:44, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
I had created Template:Archive-box back on the 15th (at the time, I needed one for the Guild Wars Wiki:Reporting wiki bugs article, and none existed at that point). They look to have very similar abilities. I had left out the image choice/size option and the background color option - so yours has a bit more flexibility on the appearance for the user; but I like the title option selector (very useful IMO) and usage guide in mine more. Feel free to merge them. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 12:07, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
Biro - thanks for merging them. I've updated the usage guide to reflect the additional options. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 14:35, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
It's no problem! If I'd known your template had existed to begin with then I would have just edited that one, so it's no big deal really :) LordBiro 15:19, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Inter-wiki linking...

Hi emily,

This was requested some time ago. All who responded liked adding inter-wiki linking to Wikipedia. It wouldn't take 2 seconds to add the line in the database. Any chance this can be done any time soon?

Thanks, --Karlos 09:32, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Hi there. Before I go and request this feature, you guys should discuss the topic further, and take the steps that Biro outlined for creating a proposal page. Once that page is up and the community has voted that they would like to see this, I can pass it along to IT. We want to make sure that all items added are fully endorsed by the community as a whole, and that particular discussion still seems to be up in the air with split agreement. --Emily Diehl 13:55, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
I'd like to think there is complete and unanimous support for allowing inter-wiki linking to Wikipedia. A formal request per the process has been created, however, there is no objection what so ever to add wikipedia linking. There's a discussion over allowing linking to GuildWiki, that's not touching the support for Wikipedia linking. Adding support for one is irrelevant of the other. --Karlos 06:34, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

OpenSearch Plugin

Emily, the following was left on my talk page and also on Talk:Main Page:

I tried posting on the front page discussion about the OSP fix for Firefox.
But apparently, no one reads it or just skips over everything else.
There is a space in the OSP at the very top of the file that throws up an error in Firefox. Fx hates bad xml syntax. That space has to be removed for the plugin to be useful to Firefox users.
-- 21:22, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

As you seem to be the default "go-to girl" for system stuff, I wanted to let you know. If you would prefer things like this be handled differently, please let me know. And if you've already been notified about this, my apologies, it was a long day at work.  :) --Rainith 23:02, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Hi Rainith! I was a little puzzled about this request, since I don't remember us releasing any OSP for the site. I spoke with the web team, and they confirmed that any OSP that the wiki has is not done by us. We have future plans to upgrade the search capability on the wiki, but at this time, nothing has been created. I checked the main talk page (which we should probably archive, by the way)and ran across this. It seems that this person may be the one who wrote the plug-in, and therefore would be the one to fix it. I'm not positive how OSP works, as I've never personally used it, so I couldn't say beyond that. --Emily Diehl 14:47, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Ma'am, OSP or an OpenSearch Plugin [1] allows a browser to use the site's search engine without having to visit the site for its search form. ALL Gecko based browsers like Firefox 2 and Internet Explorer 7 uses this standard, with most likely more browsers on the way.

The person in the other comment who made an extra OSP did it because the native MediaWiki OSP for this site is faulty. The easiest thing to do is open up and make sure that there isn't a space in the code at the TOP of that file.

Ignoring this eventually the issue will probably become vocal as more users utilize this feature more. OR, they will simply keep using GuildWiki since their OSP is the exact same system/format as this wiki only there isn't a space breaking the xml and functionality.

(excuse my Wiki usage. This wiki format system seems archaic.)

-- 15:41, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

I'll pass the request along to IT and see what they can do. --Emily Diehl 15:46, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Thanks Emily.  :) --Rainith 16:08, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Anytime! :) --Emily Diehl 16:28, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

This issue was passed onto IT and should be fixed. Let me know if there are further issues! --Emily Diehl 14:14, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Works for me now.  :) --Rainith 17:02, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
Finally! Thanks very much you guys! -- 17:38, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Copyvio in article history

Hi, Emily. Sorry to bother, I was just wondering whether the issue of copyvio revisions remaining in the history of different articles is being looked into by Anet? This was first brought up here on the wiki, and last I heard is that it has been mentioned on the Anet/sysops mailing list but there's been no reply from you guys yet. There's still plenty of copyright violations happening daily (virtually all simply people copying articles over from GuildWiki), and we're still not sure how to deal with them. Is simply reverting those edits sufficient (like it is on Wikipedia), or is it necessary to completely remove that revision from the article's history? This question keeps being asked from different editors, so it'd be great if we could get this issue clarified. Thanks in advance. --Dirigible 02:22, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Heya Dirigible! I did some checking for you guys on this, and it was determined that using the same process as Wikipedia for this issue is fine. You guys can choose to delete the entries from the history if you'd like to, but it's not necessary. --Emily Diehl 18:09, 19 April 2007 (EDT)
/cheer Thanks Emily - this is good news. :) --Aspectacle 18:41, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

GW:EN logo and GW2 logo information

As promised, I've gotten the transparent GW:EN logo for you guys to use. As far as the GW2 logo goes, this isn't available in transparent form quite yet. I'll keep my eyes and ears open and provide this one as soon as I am able to. --Emily Diehl 18:11, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Update notes and Hard mode page

Hi everyone! As you may have noticed, I've posted the update notes a bit early to the site, as well as created a page for Hard mode. I just wanted to mention that despite the fact that this Hard mode page was posted by a member of the dev team, that you all should still feel free to (and should) edit and add to the page as you play through Hard mode and find new stuff. Use the stuff I've posted as a base to make the article grow :) --Emily Diehl 21:45, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Neat! Do you know around when we should expect the update, and how big it will be? --User:AlbinobirdAlbinobird 21:53, 19 April 2007 (EDT)
!!!!! Emily, one thousand thanks for the Update Notes and the Hard Mode pages, they're both awesome! It's really cool to be able to see those while we wait for the update! Really really thank you : D Erasculio 22:09, 19 April 2007 (EDT)
Indeed, thanks a bundle! ^_^ 22:10, 19 April 2007 (EDT)
Pleasant surprise and thanks for the update notes :):D.--Bane of Worlds (talkcontribs) 22:19, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Interwiki linking

It doesn't work yet. Wikipedia:Guild Wars and W:Guild Wars still act as links to this wiki. -- Gem (gem / talk) 15:19, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I just got a note in my inbox from IT letting me know that interwiki linking should be good to go (and it does seem to be the case now). Let me know if you guys have any issues! --Emily Diehl 17:22, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Error creating thumbnails

Hi guys...I noticed that this error is popping up again, and I just wanted to mention that I've already passed it along to IT :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

No images in the wiki load

I remember someone saying about a similiar problem on your talk page earlier, so I guess you're the person to talk to. No images in the wikiload for me currently and I guess it's your permissions mixed up again. -- Gem (gem / talk) 12:15, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure what the problem is with images today, but I will pass it along to IT. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 13:01, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
Well, they are working now. (Haven't been online between these two message so can't tell you when it was fixed) -- Gem (gem / talk) 13:40, 8 May 2007 (EDT)


Someone pointed out on the Mesmer Krytan armor talk page that this guy Image:Mesmer Krytan armor m.jpg is wearing the female mask. Apparently some people over at GWOnline spotted the crossdresser. The mask shouldn't really be in the image at all, because it's not Krytan. Is there anything you can do to correct it? - BeX 05:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

... Hahaha! Oh, whoops! I must have accidentally had the wrong gender for the mask without noticing!!! I'll go through and fix those images later today if I have time. Thanks for catching that :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 18:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
To be honest, I didn't notice until someone asked where the mask was from. ^_^ - BeX 05:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


could we umm, well look here: Talk:Game updates/20070524 -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 00:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, a large amount of traffic is to be expected with any update. Hang in there and I am sure things will level out as people get their guild pages made. Remember that new users are a good thing :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 00:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I've started a discussion about this topic over on the guild policy talk page. Let's see what we can come up with! --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 01:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Missing image

Gallery of male mesmer Elite Elegant armor - BeX 02:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Also Gallery of female mesmer Enchanter armor and Gallery of female mesmer Rogue armor. Sorry if you're already aware of this! - BeX 02:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
What's missing? - anja talk (contribs) 08:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
On the first and last ones, the images facing right aren't there. And the Enchanter one only has the front image. I thought some of them might have gone missing during the move/update. - BeX 10:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Nothing is missing over here... I've had some troubles with images not showing when I've uploaded them, but it has solved in minutes, about an hour max. And at those pages you link, I see four clear pictures at each of them. - anja talk (contribs) 10:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
6 hours and they haven't changed for me. - BeX 11:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
They're missing for me, too. Ale_Jrb (talk) 12:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I have 4 overview pics on each of the linked pages. Nothing missing for me (except the component views). - MSorglos (talk|contrib) 12:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
This is odd.. Should probably move it to the report a wiki bug page, preferably with screenshots from those who do not see the images? (Or good explanations, doesn't really matter) - anja talk (contribs) 12:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I used action=purge on them and then the images showed up for me. -Smurf User Smurf.png 13:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
They're showing up for me too now. Purge ftw :). Ale_Jrb (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Yep, they are working now, thanks Smurf. :) - BeX 13:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


Your template is being categorized along with your main userpage in Category:Users_who_patrol_Recent_Changes, since it includes the userbox for it, which auto-categorizes - perhaps you might want to put the entirety of User:Emily_Diehl/User_boxes_box's source code inside <includeonly></includeonly> tags (or at least that particular userbox)? Go to Aiiane's Talk page (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Perfect. :) Go to Aiiane's Talk page (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:55, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Quick fixes for bugs

I think the dev team should check Category:Bugs often. They often contains skill description bugs that are very easily fixed. Lightblade 22:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

We're definitely aware of the section, and it's a helpful resource to us. In fact, I just commented about the topic here the other day. :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I tried to contact A.Net through the support to point them also to List of skill anomalies, but I was waved off by a support-rep. A lot of the skills in that list have the {{bug}}-template added, but not all, since some aren't bugs, but just wording problems. Since it is good news to see that A.Net is looking at the Category:Bugs-page, perhaps you can also point them to the List of skill anomalies-page? Or do we have to introduce a {{Anomaly}}-template+category too? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 22:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
What would actually be really helpful would be to make the anomalies category a sub category of the bugs one. If we can make sure that all bugs are flagged with the bug template and all bug-related categories are placed into the main bug category, it makes it a lot easier for the team to keep an eye on the items in both categories. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 22:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
An anomaly tag and category would be good ideas. Just don't make the anomaly box as intrusive as the bug box. -- Gem (gem / talk) 22:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Sure, it's definitely up to you guys to figure out how you want it to look and function. And you are always more than welcome to draw my attention towards links to projects or things that you think devs should pay special attention to. Just keep in mind that the general rule of thumb should be to keep the links as simple as possible :) If you can lump things (like bugs) into one big category with sub-categories, it's a lot easier for us to monitor. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 22:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Aye I agree, the bug box actually quite irritates me with its size. Can always make anomalies a sub cat of bugs --Lemming64 22:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
This looks great guys. I'll make sure that the teams are aware of the pages, so make sure that all bugs and anomalies are flagged and placed in the proper categories. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 17:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

NPC renders

Hey Emily! Just noticed that Image:Banoit.jpg is incorrect. The in game model has tattered clothing as depicted in Image:Harlan.jpg. You may have noticed that for a some of the item images, the .png gets reused on multiple pages. For example, salvage items like Corrupted Orr Collar and Torn Robes both use Image:Salvage Light Armor.png and there are trophy pages that share an image too. I was thinking it might be a good idea if we do the same thing for NPCs, as the models are shared across regions, etc, and it would save a lot of space and load time and help to make things uniform. If there is some name that is used for the models when you access them like "Ascalon region collector" or somesuch, that would be a good naming scheme to use. What do you think? - BeX 04:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Heya :) Yeah, I see what you mean with these images. If you guys can come up with a different name scheme solution that works for you, it will work for me as well. When I do renders, I'm looking up the model name, so the wiki name for the image won't confuse me. My only caution regarding the sharing of image names would be that it may cause people to become confused if they upload an image with an NPC's name present in the screenshot. For instance, if someone uploaded an image of Banoit and didn't crop his name out, and this image was also shared by another NPC, the image with the name "Banoit" would appear on both pages. We'd probably just have to keep an eye on the images or put it into policy (if it isn't already there) that screenshots shouldn't contain NPC names. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 17:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Well the solution would be to only use generic names as and when they apply, pretty sure policy already states not to include names but an image with a name is preferred to no image at all. --Lemming64 19:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
That's exactly what I intended Lemming. I had planned to go around and find all the NPCs that use the Banoit model and change their picture to his, but I wasn't sure what to name it, and then I realised it was wrong! Policy doesn't state to not have a name in the image, but the formatting guide does, which is grounds enough to replace any image with a name in it.
What are the model names? Is there anything we can use from that, or are they fairly random? - BeX 03:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the models are usually named with an internal naming scheme, and this wouldn't translate well to wiki at all. I think that your plan of picking the names intuitively would be the best solution. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 06:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Well I'll go around and see if the models seem to correspond to region and service, and then we'll see what to do from there. :) - BeX 07:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
That banoit image is the same as the Merchant in guild hall too. --Lemming64 23:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Depending on the guild hall. Mine (Isle of Solitude) uses a Canthan model.--Valshia 01:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that makes sense actually. --Lemming64 02:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Still waiting for that update note to come up.

_Super large puppy eyes_ Lightblade 22:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

"Still"? It's just 5min? xD poke | talk 22:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Yea..but..Emily usually have the update note ready even before the update happens. I wonder what happened this time. Lightblade 22:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I got stuck at the DMV trying to transfer my driver's license, so I got delayed ;) I'll post them now. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 23:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
You are spoiling us Emily, you know that huh? ;) It isn't really THAT hard copy them from the update page, but of course I appreciate it :) - anja talk (contribs) 23:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Aww, it's no problem at all. I really don't mind doing it. :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 23:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for deletion

I am unable to delete Template:User RP&PvP. I can get to the deletion screen where you can type the reason for deletion, but when I click the delete button, instead of receiving the action completed page I get 'The website is unable to display the webpage'. :( Didn't we have a similiar case a while ago? Could you ask IT what the problem is? -- Gem (gem / talk) 08:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Hm, this is strange. I'll pass it along to IT in my morning email. Thanks Gem! --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi Gem! I received a reply back from IT saying that there was an odd glitch with one of the installed modules that was conflicting with the deletion process. I'm not sure of the details beyond that, but the template is now deleted. If you run into this issue again, please let me know so I can pass it along to them. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll be sure to pass anything like this to you later on. -- Gem (gem / talk) 05:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Undeletable page

Bumped into another one. Elyrion Tasartir. Possible to prevent this from happening? -- Gem (gem / talk) 20:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

From what I was told by IT, using the default "reasons for deletion" somehow prevented the deletion of the past template in question. The team was guessing that one of the wiki's requested security modules was the reason for the problem. If you run into this again, I've found that removing the template from the page and then deleting the page after saving will fix the issue. I'm not sure if IT has any further ideas on how to prevent this from happening, so I'll poke Rezyk, Skuld, and some of the others that were major contributors to the creation of the template and see if they have any ideas as to what could be causing the conflict. I've looked at it, and can't really see what would be causing it myself. Until then, just remove the template, save, and then delete if this happens again. Crazy wikis :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 20:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Aha, thanks for that. It's not a big problem then. -- Gem (gem / talk) 20:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
The code to categorise articles by the length of time that they have been marked for deletion was recently added to the delete template. While I would be surprised if such behaviour prevented deletion it might be worth checking out. LordBiro 22:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
It's not related to that...more details in a bit. --Rezyk 23:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I posted to the mailing list. --Rezyk 05:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
What did you put in the email? It keeps killing Thunderbird.  :( --Rainith 05:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind, it was another program that was horked and causing my problems. --Rainith 05:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused. I received your email, Rezyk, although I'm not sure why it couldn't be posted here. There is certainly nothing sensitive about it.
Could someone explain the error more clearly, then? Rezyk's post above seems to rule out eh possibility of connection with the delete template, but I wasn't aware anyone had received a 501 error. Did Gem receive a 501 when trying to delete the article? This doesn't change the fact that by removing the delete template and re-saving the article Emily was able to delete the article.
I'd like more info please! LordBiro 07:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I posted a further answer on the mailing list. The reason why I am using the mailing list is because I feel there is a tiny-but-existing chance that the info could become sensitive depending on how this is resolved (and especially if my interpretation/speculation is off the mark), and I don't see enough reason to take that risk yet myself. I don't particularly object if you guys feel the info should be disseminated, though. --Rezyk 18:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I've replied to the mailing list, but I don't see how it's a security risk to discuss it here. LordBiro 19:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi guys...since we're figuring this out elsewhere, I will move this to an archive. I get fidgety when my talk page gets too long :) --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 18:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


Can I nudge you into this direction, and see if you can provide any feedback? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 15:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

While we're at it, might as well point out that the new subpages don't seem to be working. Thanks, Emily. --Rezyk 17:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I've passed along the request for DPL, and sent a reminder out about the installation yesterday. I'll send another email about it today, and include the sub-page issue. I'll let you guys know what I find out, although I may not be as timely today as usual. Today is especially busy for me. --UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif Emily Diehl (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
No problems, anything you can do is already making a difference; you do know we appreciate your help Emily? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 22:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)