Jump to content

User talk:Bgwhite/Archive 41

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35←Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43→Archive 45

Alexander Bolonkin

Why did you cut the article about the outstanding world-famous scientist Alexander Bolonkin to small notes?
You have removed all of his achievements in science, his scientific works, biography, links to the sources, sources themselves, the evidence of his significance and leaving only a short introduction to his name?
I beg to recover the article. All links and sources recently tested and true. ABA888 (talk) 19:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

ABA888 We need to maintain neutrality in writing articles. Saying "...about the outstanding world-famous scientist Alexander Bolonkin" means you are not neutral. He may or may not be outstanding, but he is certainly not world-famous. Just give the facts and make sure they are referenced properly.
  1. Wikipedia is dynamic and not a static page. References get added, deleted and changed. Look at how other pages do references.
  2. Your paragraphs are one big sentence that just lists his articles or ideas. The space and aviation sentence contains ~38 references. Wikipedia is not a place to just list articles. The vast majority of the 38 references are in two of his book, one of which is published by a non-reputable publisher.
  3. Alot of the reference links go nowhere
  4. You list alot of self-published reference and books. Self-published books, such as those published by Lulu, or non-reputable publishers, such as Lambert Academic Publishing, Nova Science Publishers and Publish America, are not notable and should not be mentioned. Almost anybody can have their views published by these outfits.
  5. Read WP:BLPSOURCES and WP:RS about references. References are not places where one has to search (last 7 references listed in the article). They are not a collection of articles written by him.
  6. I suggest starting small. Add just a paragraph. Ask questions or help from Wikipedia:Teahouse. Bgwhite (talk) 21:07, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Bgwhite!

  • Bgwhite questions where Hafs is..
    Bgwhite questions where Hafs is..
  • Why you aren't Hafs, you are too Polite
    Why you aren't Hafs, you are too Polite
  • Bgwhite gets even more wood to burn Hafs at the stake...
    Bgwhite gets even more wood to burn Hafs at the stake...

Long time no .. word. Hafspajen (talk) 21:56, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

File:An elk with large antlers. Etching by Heath. Wellcome
Hafspajen Not long enough. Egads, pictures that have horses in them. You really know how to leave insults. Bgwhite (talk) 06:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
HEY, I could have left one of these!!! File:Warthog Face 001.jpg buu... Hafspajen (talk) 06:34, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, I think you did a very good selfie. Is that your family in the background? Bgwhite (talk) 06:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
My dear, that's You and me...! Gnothy seauton or whatnot Hafspajen (talk) 06:39, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
You are getting Fame, looks like. Your selfie has been noted. Hafspajen (talk) 23:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Bull of Heaven#Genres

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bull of Heaven#Genres. Thanks. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 11:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC) Thank you. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 11:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Potentially Polemic Userbox. Thank you. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

!

Hafspajen (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)



.


.

Cameron Monaghan page reversions

I'm confused by your reversion of minor corrections I made on this page. WHAT is wrong with putting the CORRECT title (and link) of the "Amityville" film, instead of using a title and link that REDIRECTS to the correct page? You seem to have an abundance of "attaboys," but they don't trump accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gil gosseyn (talk • contribs) 05:55, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Gil gosseyn If you had looked at what I did instead of lash out you would have noticed I reverted vandalism from edits before you. I didn't just revert you but the vandalism that occurred before you. Bgwhite (talk) 06:45, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Then why didn't you institute the legitimate changes that I made? You could see that they were valid, so they should have been included in your changes. Or don't you think that's an Admin's responsibility? You could have at least left me an explanation for the reversion.Gil gosseyn (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:LISTPEOPLE

Again, please read the policy you are claiming to enforce. In pertinent part:

A person is typically included in a list of people only if all the following requirements are met:

[....]

In other cases, editors choose even more stringent requirements, such as already having an article written (not just qualifying for one), or being notable specifically for reasons related to membership in this group. This is commonly used to control the size of lists that could otherwise run to hundreds or thousands of people, such as the List of American film actresses.

"meeting the GNG" != "already having an article". Indeed, one of the principal reasons for using lists is that they allow the presence of redlinks (which categories do not), reflecting the fact that our project is still in its infancy. Which it really is. Give me almost any field, and I can generate a list of hundreds/thousands of unquestionably notable topics that do not yet have any coverage in Wikipedia. -- Visviva (talk) 05:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

  1. You are NOT reading things correctly. Redlinks are allowed ONLY IF they meet nobility requirements. As you quoted above, "A person is typically included in a list of people only if all the following requirements are met: The person meets the Wikipedia notability requirement.
  2. See WP:REDDEAL, very last item, Lists of "notable people" in an article, such as the "Notable alumni" section in an article on a university, tend to accrue red links, or non-links, listing people of unverifiable notability. Such list entries should often be removed, depending on the list-selection criteria chosen for that list.
  3. This is done so lists do not become full of non-notable people.
If they are notable, write up an article about them. If they are notable and you don't want to take the time to write about them, then add valid references. References from the people's company or the University are not valid for the list. Bgwhite (talk) 06:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing my signature from the psychology entry. I appreciate your correcting my oversight. I have been working all day, on-and-off on a PC, and was trying decide on whether to write a note on the psychology talk page, in which a signature would be called for, and simply enter a change in the psychology page itself. I think my fatigue got to me, and I mistakenly wrote in my signature. Iss246 (talk) 14:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

About your (non)participation in the January 2012 SOPA vote

Hi. I am Piotr Konieczny (User:Piotrus), you may know me as an active content creator (see my userpage), but I am also a professional researcher of Wikipedia. Recently I published a paper (downloadable here) on reasons editors participated in Wikipedia's biggest vote to date (January 2012 WP:SOPA). I am now developing a supplementary paper, which analyzes why many editors did not take part in that vote. Which is where you come in :) You are a highly active Wikipedian, and you were active back during the January 2012 discussion/voting for the SOPA, yet you did not chose to participate in said vote. I'd appreciate it if you could tell me why was that so? For your convenience, I prepared a short survey at meta, which should not take more than a minute of your time. I would dearly appreciate you taking this minute; not only as a Wikipedia researcher but as a fellow content creator and concerned member of the community (I believe your answers may help us eventually improve our policies and thus, the project's governance). PS. If you chose to reply here (on your userpage), please WP:ECHO me. Thank you! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 15:01, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey Bgwhite, any chance you could help me out with this? Few more responses would really be very valuable to me. As the 24th most active Wikipedian, your input really does matter. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

According the talk page, rewrite the article to reflect the truth Universidad Empresarial de Costa Rica

It seems, the truth explained by SEVERAL users in the talk page for the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universidad_Empresarial_de_Costa_Rica is been ignored. Please read the facts in the talk page shown by SEVERAL WORLWIDE users. The actual article does NOT reflect what has been discussed there.Ramdiesel (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The Taliban Shuffle (film)

Hello B, please move Draft:The Taliban Shuffle (film) to The Taliban Shuffle (film) without leaving a redirect, thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

FGF15

Concerning the change from {{cite journal}} (and |author=) to {{vcite2 journal}} (and |vauthors=) in FGF15, this is not a change in citation style. {{cite journal}} and {{vcite2 journal}} produce identical output when Vancouver style authors are stored in a single author parameter as was uniformly done in this article. Switching to {{vcite2 journal}}/|vauthors= maintains this style and hence is compatible with WP:CITEVAR. In addition {{vcite2 journal}} (|vauthors=) produces clean author metadata and is fully compatible with |author-link= and |displayauthors= whereas {{cite journal}} (|author=) is not. Replacing |author= with more verbose "first1, last1, first2, last2, ..." parameters would change the format from Vancouver style to CS1 style authors is hence not compatible with WP:CITEVAR. Boghog (talk) 05:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Boghog Not exactly. 1/2 the refs use CS1 style, while the other 1/2 use authors. {{cite journal}} actually produces more and better metadata. Cite journal is faster than vcite journal to render. Cite journal has error checks in place. I give up for today. Not directed toward you, but I'm tired of people saying they can do what the hell they want because. Accessibility issues is of no concern. MOS is of no concern. I'm not going to get worked up for something as trivial as this. Do want you want. Bgwhite (talk) 06:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Just to clarify, {{vcite2 journal}} produces metadata that is identical to {{cite journal}}. {{vcite2 journal}} internally parses the |vauthors= parameter and invisible to the editor, assigns author data to sequential "firstn, lastn, ..." parameters. The computational overhead of this parsing is insignificant. Boghog (talk) 06:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your edit on Zoom Video Communications. I didn't spot those errors. You've just inspired me to be a little more vigilant. Meşteşugarul - U 11:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

BG19bot edit in Roperi

Roperi looked weird, and I peeked in the revision history. Would this bot edit interest you? -- Sam Sing! 14:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Magioladitis Any reason AWB picked that location to put reflist? Bgwhite (talk) 21:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Error with Bot?

This edit's edit message says: "WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #61. Punctuation goes before References." Instead what the bot did was create named refs, something I don't think should be done without discussion and concensus on the talk page. Paul August ☎ 12:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The bot did move a colon from after the ref to before. This is the reason the bot arrived at the article.
The bot has approval to do all of AWB's general fixes. AWB has been bundling citations for a atleast five years. It is also preferred via MOS. It is a requirement for featured articles. I left a message on the article's talk page. Bgwhite (talk) 19:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I will fix that pesky colon. Paul August ☎ 20:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
By "bundling citations" do you mean the technique described at WP:CITEBUNDLE? The Giants article already does this. Paul August ☎ 21:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Wrong choice of words on my part. I meant what happens with WP:REFNAME. Bgwhite (talk) 05:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
OK thanks for clearing that up. Can you point me to where named refs are reguired for featured articles? I don't see any such requirement in WP:FA? for example. Also where do you see it prefered in MOS? Thanks for your help. Paul August ☎ 14:36, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
With FA and FL there are many unwritten rules. Look at the most recent FAs. You will see every article with named refs. One doesn't have to set up a reference and bibliography section. If one does do that, there doesn't need to be a link in the ref section that will take you the item in the bibliography section. However, you can be asked to do it if reviewers feel it is necessary, it is more dependent on the type of article. Examples, a pop article (music or actor) won't have many journal references or in a short FA it becomes overkill, thus no separate sections.
WP:CITEFOOT. How do you deal with repeated citations? How to avoid clutter? Citing multiple pages of the same source? Named references. Bgwhite (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
FA doesn't specify - or even prefer - any one citation style. It does require consistent citations, described at WP:WIAFA as "consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes (<ref>Smith 2007, p. 1.</ref>) or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1)...". If in a given article several of the refs are entirely duplicated, but none of them are named, that is consistent. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
As I said, unwritten rule. You will be asked to use named refs, but not told which style. Bgwhite (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Austin 12/6

I went to save half an hour ago after almost 8 hours straight working on the above article and of course we had an edit clash. I think I have fixed it so all your amendments are incorporated but, specially if it is a bot, it might be worth running it again in case I missed a correction. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 04:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Eddaido Phew, good thing you didn't lose anything. It wasn't a bot. I just ran again and made only superficial changes. Bgwhite (talk) 06:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
And I just tried to save and found out! How do I avoid this (I can see it would look as if I had finished when I wrote to you above, not your fault). Wish me luck. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 06:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Eddaido Not much to do. It's just the luck of the draw. You can either save more often, or use your sandbox to write. If it is a big long session, probably best if you did write in the sandbox. Nobody bothering you. You don't have to worry about the revision being "perfect" if you have to leave. Bgwhite (talk) 06:46, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, All Finished! Eddaido (talk) 06:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedying a film

I note you removed lots of piped links leading to a user page (User:Kskhh) from the article Revenge Matters. Reading that user-page, it is clear that the user is trying to promote his own film. All the references at Revenge Matters are to "The Gilgit Express" - which is a "website under construction", here, clearly created by the same person, and which does not even support the citations in the article.
Am I right that I cannot speedy a film for non-notability, as A7. covers "No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events" and A9. "No indication of importance (musical recordings)" but films don't fit into either category? - Arjayay (talk) 08:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Arjayay You are right, you cannot speedy it. As a Prod will probably be removed, I'd say do an AfD on it. However, as this is a non-English, Pakistani film, better ask an expert. Assassin, are there any non-English sources for this film? Is it an AfD candidate? Bgwhite (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks - I don't understand why some things can be speedied, but others can't - I don't have a tame Pakistani film expert, so I'll see what he says - Arjayay (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry B and Arjayay, actually ping does not work for me many times. I came here today to request for a move and I saw this. Actually this article can't be a speedy so it is absolutely an AfD candidate. Not have even a single reliable source as a proof of the film. Nominate it for the discussion please. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Joy (film)

Will you please move Draft:Joy (film) to Joy (film) ? - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:28, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Your bot got tripped up

FYI, with this edit, your bot seems to have been tripped up by an earlier bad edit which broke the level-2 header "In science and technology". That may be a contingency you'd want to code for - to check for a broken level-2 header (i.e. a single "==") before changing the levels of other headings. Or not; perhaps it's too obscure an error to bother with. Either way, I thought I'd bring it to your attention. —Swpbtalk 14:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Swpb Thanks for bringing this to my attention. This isn't a case of something too obscure, but one of too many false positives. There are too many false positives where == is found in a line or at the end of the line. However, you got me off my butt to check for cases where there is wording before the first == in a heading (example is Dhapri Sultanpur). I already check for cases where there is wording after the last ==. I'm almost done doing a scan and I've found 1,200 articles so far with this problem. Oh joy, this will be fun to fix. Bgwhite (talk) 21:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit request for Sophie Hunter page

Hunter has notable family members and should be included in her infobox. Please do help me in adding the family parameter. :) You can just copy-paste the one I made. Just replace the parentheses with brackets for linking. All references are in the family section of her page already. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!


|family= ((Michael Gow (British Army officer)|Michael James Gow GCB))(maternal grandfather)
((J. E. B. Seely, 1st Baron Mottistone)) (maternal great-great-grandfather)
((Timothy Carlton)) (father-in-law)
((Wanda Ventham)) (mother-in-law)

58.140.17.253 (talk) 01:12, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced or misworded "no footnotes|section"

Hello, Bgwhite. Your BG19bot put a {{no footnotes|section}} tag in the External links section of Gotcha journalism. That produced the flag

I've deleted it. AFAIK, the External links section of an article isn't expected to have footnotes.

To discuss this, please {{Ping}} me. --Thnidu (talk) 07:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-09

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent software changes

Software changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since February 18. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from February 25. It will be on all Wikipedias from February 26 (calendar).
  • It is now easier to see template fields in VisualEditor. The fields are bigger. [5]
  • It is now easier to see when a button is disabled in VisualEditor. [6]
  • Sometimes when you copy-pasted a template in VisualEditor, it was replaced by HTML. This problem is now fixed. [7]
  • Tools in Labs will stop working for a few hours on February 24. [8]

Meetings

  • You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
  • You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on February 26 at 00:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • At the moment you need to log in to edit Wikimedia wikis on mobile devices. You can say if anyone should be allowed to edit on the mobile sites. The discussion ends on March 15.
  • Images in the interface will soon work better in Opera 12. [9]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Nobots

Please don't remove the nobots tag from Head-directionality parameter - various different bots are programmed in such a way that they will mess up this article (they see double square brackets and assume they must be marking a link, whereas in many instances in this article they do not). I've tried adding the article to various whitelists, but that has no effect. W. P. Uzer (talk) 10:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

W. P. Uzer, you need to follow the instructions at {{nobots}}.
  1. Avoid using the template as a blunt instrument. You are using it as a blunt instrument. You are disallowing ALL bots, even though the vast majority do not touch brackets.
  2. Address the root problem with the bot owner or bot community You did not do that.
You added it to CheckWiki whitelists, but after the list was created that the bot used. Bgwhite (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to waste everyone's time discussing it when the bot owners don't need to do anything - there's nothing wrong with the bots, they just need to leave this particular article alone, which the nobots template would have accomplished perfectly well. Let's hope your theory about the whitelist is correct and there won't be any more problems (quite why the bots need to create their own list separate from the one that already exists isn't clear to me, but still). W. P. Uzer (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
W. P. Uzer I don't think you understand and/or I'm not saying it right.
You edited the CheckWiki whitelists. These are for CheckWiki only. It is good that you added the article to the whitelist, however no bot directly uses them. Bots use the lists generated from Checkwiki. If another type of CheckWiki error is detected in the article, the bot will visit.
You blocked all bots. There is only ONE type of bot that does brackets. You broke rule #1. If you contact the bot owner, they can either offer a work around (which fixes the problem in the vast majority of cases) or properly add their bot type to the nobot template. Bgwhite (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, good, we seem to have reached a solution to the problem, but perhaps next time you could be a little less brusque and patronizing, e.g. explaining what the problem is before starting an edit war with someone who's trying in good faith to prevent your and other people's bots from repeatedly messing up an article. W. P. Uzer (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Huh?? My first statement I said was "Please follow the instructions on the template doc page". I haven't a clue how that is brusque or patronizing. You continually made various bad assumptions. The instructions are clearly laid out and you didn't follow them when applying the nobot tag. The "reached a solution" is for you to follow the instructions, which you still haven't followed. Next time, follow instructions instead of making various bad assumptions and accusations. Bgwhite (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I am actually more interested in preventing Wikipedia articles from being repeatedly screwed up than in following some vaguely expressed instructions somewhere. I would have hoped a bot owner might have a similar order of priorities - disappointed to find out this one doesn't. W. P. Uzer (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
TRULY appreciate your time, effort and improvements. Still a neophyte to wiki- editing. Your review history did not show at first [program glitch?] so I didn't know who or what or where my edits were going or why. Startarrant (talk) 13:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't know where to put explanations or replies/questions to edit actions. I thought I was doing so in the update box.

  1. If I cannot use the google drive as a TEMPORARY hotlink to reference an accurate, complete and authentic source-material do I upload the ref work to wiki docs?
  2. The article focus on the Order / "minims" is not possible or intelligible without reference to and some bio info regarding the person directly involved in its establishment -- some sort of table/box as a quick VISUAL reference for wiki users is needed with photo as simple quick reference data as I listed it.
  3. is there a space issue in using the code P (occasionally) instead of the BR ?

More later -- I TRULY appreciate your help.Startarrant (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2015 (UTC)startarrant

Startarrant First off, I really enjoyed the article. You've put alot of work into it.
  1. There is another reason you can't use the Google drive. It appears to be a copyright violation. It is a copy of a book whose first page says it can't be copied without permission. You may have permission, but the evil lawyers want proof. In the meantime, you can still use the reference, but not the link. I added the reference into the article. Take a look how I did it, so you can add it elsewhere.
  2. The article is not about her. I suggest creating another article that is just about her.
  3. I did an edit to the top image. Should look better.
  4. The article should be from a neutral point of view. People from all over the world will be looking at it. Saying "Our Lord" is not neutral.
Bgwhite (talk) 06:42, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite I do truly appreciate and thank you for your time and effort to improve this page
  1. Thank you for adding the way to do the reference -- I do have the permission and give permission, and I also have the copyright on that particular English presentation. Because it is "unaltered" I left ALL the original text including the permission monitum which is mainly to prevent any alterations of the text etc -- the book is copied and altered all over the web. No alms go to lawyers (Canon Lawyers and Church tribunals cannot charge). The unaltered text and translation is fair usage world-over in any media.
  2. there is simply no history of the Order apart from Maria, as there are no 10 Commandments in Stone without Moses -- it is because people from around the world will read the article that even if (and when) I have time after this is done to add a separate bio article -- readers prefer to have the basic info -- if they want to read more in a bio that can be added later
  3. I'll use "The Lord" as a simple quote -- compatible with similar use in Genesis etc.
Startarrant
  1. Instructions for copyright approval is at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. There is an email address in there that you use to send your request. The staff that handle the requests usually have more work than people, so it can take some time.
  2. True about the Ten Commandments and Moses. However, Moses does have an article and the Ten Commandments article is more about the commandments than Moses. Same goes for the Franciscan Order. Bgwhite (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite
  1. Thank you again for whatever your bot did. I am too brain dead from 12 hour days helping a friend in the hospital to understand the code changes with the refs but I will check again when my brain is working. Somehow a link to Anna in the Temple vanished not sure if I messed up or what as I can't find who what or where it went (I have it and can reinsert [later]).
  2. As for photo of Friars and Nuns in the (Maroon) Habit and 2nd (Mexico City) Foundation I did change name and focus from Maria. She's probably egging you on to keep her out of the picture so to speak but her timeline info is integral to understanding the development of the Order and satisfying interest. It's still incomplete -- work in progress as I need to check sources and dates. I will do a separate bio but can't at the moment. I am not inserting bio details that are not directly linked to the Order & origins. Too brain dead to tweak the image data on the group photo op of 1971 but I want the box visual because it manifests the text, nationality and time period. Startarrant (talk) 08:17, 15 February 2015 (UTC)startarrant
Bgwhite
  1. I removed the references to "Our Lord" at your recommendation and kept (you would need to remove the quote "the Lord" from all wiki pages and wiki references throughout the entire Wikipedia and all Hebrew scriptures) the term that wiki uses in all its other referenced articles "the Lord" because that is the also the correct reference in the related Hebrew scriptural passages as reference in the article origins and elucidation of terms. I either own the copyrights to the photos I use or they are fair usage (the 1943 colorized in 1960s photo portrait of the dead founder). Because I am not a pro on wiki, like yourself, I have done my best to incorporate your recommendations, which I appreciate as opposed to the emotional vandalism or false claims of others, and I tried to fill out the copyright forms as correctly as possible. Truth, accuracy, facts, evidence are matters of life and death in my work (eternal and temporal) so the truth matters to me. I do have the evidence necessary, others who have copied my work to their personal websites do not; but again, the photos are fair usage and the Order "owns" nothing -- and I do not -- no one receives income from or will -- from any images, published works, etc -- permissions extend only to protect the writings from alterations, deletions, etc. I was tasked in 1973 to work on the 3rd Foundation in Rome directly under the Holy See. The article for wiki is to make available to all -- accurate information based on real sources materials and eye witness accounts and not political or religious agendas. Boxes are an important visual for text articles.
  2. I just notice that my revision was undone -- the one that removed "Our Lord" and replaced it with "the Lord" in quotes. This is a problem when auto reverts/undos are triggered. I re-corrected the text which I did long ago when your FIRST made the recommendation. I need to know the specific problems with my info box -- I've asked for help with getting an alternate box or header/titles more appropriate for an organization since I don't know how to change the headers. I have kept the focus on the Order/Work and minimized focus on the founder. I suspect a rogue android bot hacked your handle and left a note of extreme rudeness since it is entirely alien to your style. "A Rose by any other name ... "
  3. no time to discuss setbacks to the "setbacks" section especially since it needs work anyway, however it is so neutral and inclusive and non-judgmental that that may be why it is confusing. I'd undo it but your edits usually force me to improve the quality in a good way so I'll try to figure out how to improve / clarify that section and your other deletion of my one sentence summary at the end. The bishop's quote is from his actual letter declaring the canonical status. I need to reference that as you showed me with the other refs. Later. Startarrant (talk) 05:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)startarrantStartarrant (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)startarrant

Startarrant (talk) 21:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)startarrant

February 2015

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Female genital mutilation shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Next time you revert you may be blocked. But I am sure you know that. Try consensus first. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

You are edit warring. Your 30 seconds of discomfort to translate a page to Swahili is more important than millions of blind users ability to read a page is appalling. Because an English Wikipedia template is not available on the Swahili Wikipedia is not a valid reason to engage in bigotry. You never answered why you are more important than blind readers. Next time, try consensus for overturning accessibility when you want to revert. Bgwhite (talk) 07:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:CIVIL Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
You claim your "accessibility" (that is the word you used) to translate the page to Swahili is more important than the accessibility of millions blind users to read an entire page. You are saying your 30 extra seconds of discomfort over the ability of blind readers to read the entire page is more important. Bgwhite (talk) 08:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
You have already said that like 6 times. If you are not interested in discussion or compromise all the best. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Last time I checked, there is no compromise on the ability of screen reader users to read a page. Your only option is wanting it gone. If you are not interested in blind readers, all the best. Bgwhite (talk) 08:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Announcement: Brother Bgwhite is indeed Human

Brother Bghwhite in one of his better days

Brother Bgwhite is Human! Because he is watching my page to notice what new pictures will be posted! Of course he will never admit that - but he can't fool anyone. Hafspajen (talk) 10:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Orchidaceae


OK, I have done my thinking, but I am still nowhere. Cos' I don't understand. Are you trying to say that using {{-}} to correct the alignment on your page is causing the problem with the Archive Bot? And to use {{clear}} instead? I didn't want the Bot to archive some things so included {{DNAU}} but the bot seems to sometimes ignore it and that's what happened during last night. Should it be {{subst:DNAU}} instead ... or? --Hafspajen (talk) 12:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hafs The {{-}} comments has nothing to with the archive bots. It was a segue-way to the next comment I made. There is a difference between the two templates, but in reality, it isn't anything to be worried about.
You should use {{subst:DNAU}}. By using "subst", it changes the template to the name the archive bots use and adds a date when the template was applied. The archive bot does not recognise just {{DNAU}}. Bgwhite (talk) 08:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Special Bghwite-vapen room

The Billiard Room

Hafspajen (talk) 22:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hafs, that wouldn't be my room. It would by my wife's as she has the weapons. Plus, it's called the torture chamber.
I've actually seen that... atleast I think I did. I did go thru the Hermitage museum. After a couple of hours, it just becomes too overwhelming and starts looking all the same. My favourite of St. Petersburg was the Peterhof Palace Complex. That is a fountain. Bgwhite (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Wifes are OK.

Please correct misinformation about where to edit about bot problems, care in coding

If messages don't go on the bot talk page, please don't tell editors to override the redirect to put them there.

From the bot's instruction page:

"This user account is a bot that uses AutoWikiBrowser, operated by Bgwhite (talk). It is a legitimate alternative account, used to make repetitive automated or semi-automated edits that would be extremely tedious to do manually. The bot is approved and currently active – the relevant request for approval can be seen here.

To stop this bot until restarted by the bot's owner, edit its talk page. If that page is a redirect, edit that original redirecting page, not the target of the redirect.

MicroPaLeo (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

MicroPaLeo It says, "To stop this bot", not to leave a message. This is the standard bot template found on the vast majority of bot pages. There was no reason to stop the bot as the bot was making no grave error, little alone a minor one. Leaving a message on my talk page was the correct thing to do.
The bot functioned as the edit summary stated. There was a section header problem. There was only one "=" starting the section header, which is not allowed per WP:ACCESSIBILITY. The section header was already unbalanced and the bot left it unbalanced. The bot caused no error, but corrected one. Bgwhite (talk) 18:26, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Did I miss the instructions on how to contact the bot owner about problems? I looked at the user page and talk page, and the only information is about stopping the bot, as there is no other error reporting information, it seemed like that is what you wanted. Or are error reports are not allowed? Other bots I have seen have links in their edit summaries.
If the bot cannot correct the error, the bot should not be making an edit to the article, so please fix this, meaning the code so that the bot either does not edit unbalanced headers or corrects them, but not that it edits and leaves it unbalanced.
Also, the bot edit message does not need to accuse editors of "violating" anything by trying to start a useful article on a missing topic, a simple link to MOS headings would be nicer. MicroPaLeo (talk) 19:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
MicroPaLeo, the bot did fix the error it came there to fix. It did not arrive there to fix unbalanced headers. The bot does not have approval to fix unbalanced headers. The unbalanced header problem was there before the bot arrived and was still there after the bot left. The article was in violation of WP:MOSHEAD and the link was given. It is common practice to redirect the talk page, this includes top 10 editing bots ClueBot NG, RussBot and User:Xqbot and people who use more than one account (See WP:BOTACC, Bot operators may wish to redirect a bot account's discussion page to their own.). It is redirected so I don't have people contacting me in two places about the bot and I get notification of the message immediately. Everything had been done according to standard practice and procedures. Bgwhite (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
If the bot does not have approval to fix unbalanced headers, why did it edit them? Have you looked at the edit? If you don't realize it is doing this, and refuse to look at what the bot is doing, I really hope this is not "standard practice and procedures." A bot not supposed to edit something, should not be editing it. Sounds like the bot is broken. MicroPaLeo (talk) 21:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't have approval to FIX the unbalanced header problem and it did not fix unbalanced header problem, but it can still fix other problems with the header. As I previously explained, the bot does have approve to fix headers that start with only one "=". I did look at the article. You created the article with unbalanced headers and with a header that started with only one "=". The bot DID FIX the MOSHEAD issue and left the header unbalanced. You say the bot is broken in which it didn't cause any errors, didn't fix any errors that it wasn't supposed to and did fix the error it arrived there to do? How is that broken? That's like saying the bot fixed the spelling of "practic", but didn't fix the spelling of "thier" in the same sentence, so the bot should be deactivated. Bgwhite (talk) 22:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Before the bot edit here was one left equal and two right, the bot added one to each side. Part of coding is seeing problems. If you make tons of edits, and it takes this much effort to explain what you should be able to see by clicking on the link above, this is a big problem--that you still can't see what is wrong with the bot changing things that it is supposedly not touching. Yes, this is a serious error in code. MicroPaLeo (talk) 22:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I posted here. I don't know why you have your bot adding an extra equal sign to each side of an unbalanced header, but you should fix it to ignore unbalanced headers instead of pointlessly editing them to still be unbalanced. Maybe someone there can explain this to you. MicroPaLeo (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

You completely fail to see the problem the bot fixed. You fail to even acknowledge the problem. I've mentioned it twice. It was not a pointless edit. Also, insulting every bot operator on the bots talk page was not the smartest thing to do. Bgwhite (talk) 23:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

BOT dot comma

A reference was added that included a period and space after the closing /ref tag, all of which was put before a comma in the sentence. The BOT put both period and comma before the new reference. The reference has now been corrected further, so there is nothing more you need do there, but I thought you might want to be alerted to this anomaly. Be happy! 172.162.6.142 (talk) 03:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

QupZilla

Hi, please check QupZilla again, as far as I can tell it lede before TOC before first section per WP:LEADORDER should be perfectly okay for screen readers, the image to the right of the TOC ("below" from a screen reader POV) is invisible for screen readers, and the old layout was visually ugly/messy. Dropping the image completely is definitely no good plan, it illustrates a feature ("passed ACID3 test") not yet sufficiently covered in the text. –Be..anyone (talk) 07:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Be..anyone There should be no material between the TOC and section header. Images are not invisible to screen readers. Shouldn't the blind reader know the browser is ACID3 compatible? The image can also be moved into the article. I moved it into a "better" spot than it was before... hope that it looks better now. I can't find it, but I swear TOC shouldn't be inside tables. As I can't find it, then it can't be taken into account.
On a side note.... As ACID3 has been "discontinued" and webkit does pass ACID3, why mention it? Wouldn't HTML5test be more appropriate now?
Second side note... never heard of the browser before. It looks very interesting and promising, especially with a Linux version. I assume you use it. What do you like about it? Is it staying with Webkit or moving to Google's blink? Does it support extensions? Bgwhite (talk) 09:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Just in case, I didn't add the image, I only linked Acid3, because the page existed, and I have a vague idea what this test suite is, or rather, as you say, was. If the test is not more relevant that's a good reason to get rid of this image of an unpublished version 1.70—1.6.6 was followed by 1.8.0. I like the browser, because 1.6.6 works in my Windows 2000 VM (years after Firefox gave up on W2K.) If I ditch Chrome when they'll drop NPAPI in some months I need a new browser, IE11, FF again, or maybe this slick and simple QupZilla.
We still disagree in theory about the WP:LEADORDER guideline. There is no visible material between TOC and first section for screen readers, they ignore pictures unless they come with an alt= or longdesc= or whatever is state of the art in 2015, and iff MediaWiki supports it, AFAIK it's limited to alt=empty or not. –Be..anyone (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
On encountering an image, screen reader software will announce that an image has been reached. They then announce the alt text; if this is absent, they announce the filename; and finally the caption (AFAIK MediaWiki does not yet support the longdesc= attribute). But the point is that they announce something, and that whatever that "something" happens to be, it cannot be placed between the TOC and the first section heading. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
@Redrose64: okay, that won't do. Is there a working solution for a layout with infobox right, before lead text (to the left of the infobox), before picture in the middle, and TOCleft at the end? Generally I avoid layouts with three columns like plague, but from right to left infobox, middle image, left ToC should be somehow possible without pulling an IAR against LEADORDER. –Be..anyone (talk) 05:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-10

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent software changes

  • A Lua function to use Wikidata has changed. You need to update the pages that use it. [10]
  • You can use the Content Translation tool on Wikipedia in Uzbek and Minangkabau. You need to enable it in your Beta options.
  • You can now hide banners if you don't have an account. [11] [12]

Software changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since February 25. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from March 3. It will be on all Wikipedias from March 4 (calendar).
  • You can use the Content Translation tool on Wikipedia in Punjabi and Kyrgyz. You can ask for the tool in other languages.
  • Editing the fake blank line in VisualEditor is now simpler. This change also fixed a few bugs. [13] [14] [15] [16]
  • The TemplateData editor now warns you if a related page already has TemplateData. [17]
  • The TemplateData table now tells you if a template doesn't take any parameters. [18]

Meetings

  • You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
  • You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on March 4 at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join technical meetings in France and Mexico this year. You will be able to ask for help if you can't pay yourself. [19]

Future changes

  • You will be able to get a direct link for a section of a page. [20]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

General fixes and cleanup

Thanks for visiting the page I submitted. Just one note: "General fixes and cleanup" really doesn't provide any guide to what you did to the page. It might be useful to leave a note saying what you worked on, and what the deficiency was.Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 11:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

How do you run AWB?

Hi, Bgwhite,

You made edits to English language today following edits I made to the article after carefully looking at documentation for named references. Named references are expected to have in them only characters that appear on a standard keyboard (for example, the hyphen). Meanwhile, page references in a citation template are expected to use en dashes if a page span is shown. I am trying to be very careful to have named references showing page spans with hyphens, linking to citation templates showing page spans with en dashes. The vague edit summary "(Do general fixes and cleanup. - using AWB (10839))" makes it impossible for me to tell (as does how little en dashes and hyphens differ in wiki markup view) whether human thought was applied along with AWB's automated pattern-matching as you passed through that page. Could you please advise on exactly what you did, and why you did it? I'm just trying to read and follow the documentation here, and I am a user of AWB myself (rarely), but I notice AWB doesn't have all these fine details programmed into it by default and needs human guidance. Please let me know what human decisions, based on what documentation, you were making as passed through English language with AWB. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:09, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

WeijiBaikeBianji I arrived at the page because there was starting comment tag without a closing comment tag. That edit was at the very bottom.
You are correct that page spans should use en dashes. AWB did indeed change the hyphens that were there to en dashes. Per WP:REFNAME, it does not say references are only to have characters that appear on a standard keyboard. It does say, Please consider keeping names simple and restricted to the standard English alphabet and numerals..
Per the edit summary, Do general fixes, there are hundreds of fixes AWB could do and named refs and dashes where one of them. Bgwhite (talk) 07:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. That gives me a good idea of issues to look for preventively (running AWB on off-wiki drafts) that will help me avoid mistakes that trigger alerts about article updates. I appreciate you taking the time to answer. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 13:33, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding Video

Bgwhite, Through your recent edits on the Tabs of the United States Army page, it has become apparent that you do not like how some add videos to Wikipedia pages. Your removal and comment to my addition of a Department of the Army (DA) video explaining why they have tabs is not enough for me to make corrections; "Do it right" is neither constructive nor educational. The way I included this DA video is the same way many videos have been added to pages. For example, look at how a video was added to the Theora page. If you feel there is a better way to add a video to a page, please point me to an exemplar that I can use to educate myself. If not, I can only conclude your new contributions to the "Tabs of the United States Army" page are personal preference edits vise Wikimedia best practices. As they say, "There's more than one way to skin a cat." --McChizzle (talk) 15:26, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

McChizzle, as I stated in the edit summary, there were many things wrong.
  1. One doesn't add material between the TOC and first headline.
  2. The video added was HUGE.
  3. It was not added correctly.
The correct template to use would be {{listen}}. There are instructions on how to use it at the template's document page. Just plain reverting doesn't do any good. If you are unsure, then ask questions at a talk page, not just do a revert. Also, don't assume personal preferences and threaten, it will do you no good. Bgwhite (talk) 04:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-11

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now create books on almost all wikis. It doesn't work yet on wikis using the language converter. [21] [22]
  • VisualEditor had problems with categories in Safari. It sometimes moved or removed the categories. The issue is now fixed. [23] [24] [25]

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since March 4. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from March 10. It will be on all Wikipedias from March 11 (calendar).
  • In VisualEditor the "Edit beta" button is now called "Edit" on the English Wikipedia. [26] [27]
  • The feedback tool in VisualEditor now looks like the other tools. It also asks for information about your browser to help fix bugs. [28] [29]
  • You now see the VisualEditor toolbar even if the rest of the page is still loading. [30] [31]
  • You now see more information when you edit a link, a reference or other items in VisualEditor. You also see a clearer edit button in those tools. [32] [33]
  • If you use the ContentTranslation tool you now see red links in the list of articles in other languages. The link is red if the article doesn't exist in the language of your options or of your browser. You can translate the article by clicking on the red link.

Meetings

  • You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
  • You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on March 11 at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join a technical meeting in France in May. You can ask for help if you can't pay yourself. [34]

Future changes

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 9 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The detection of the article Reoberto Zambia

Hi I would like to inform you that the article Roberto Zambia that was deleted today at 06:50, 10 March 2015 was my own work and research and not a copy paste. yes it might have some similarities but it was not a copy paste story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icem4k (talk • contribs)

Icem4k You lifted entire sentences from his blog and Facebook. It had already been detected by a bot to be a copy paste. Without any actual references, not youtube, the article could be deleted because of lack of refs. Don't use ALL CAPS or Capitalize Every Word. The article was also full of peacock words, such as, " He truly is on a path to greater things" or "made him the darling of every home" (the sentences that contained those phrases were copied from the blog) Articles are supposed to be neutral. Best case scenario, the article could only be kept if everything was deleted except for a few sentences. Bgwhite (talk) 06:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite oh ok thanks for thoes tip I will get back to my sawing board. but will it be fine to make a new one for the same artist with the same name please do advice on that. Chabota Kanguya 07:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Problem with your bot

Your bot made this change to the article Minsk II. Yobot did the same thing the other day. In both cases, the change broke the numbering of the list of measures. I'd like to know how to prevent the bots from doing this, so I don't have to fix it each time one comes around. RGloucester — ☎ 20:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

I can't remember the name of the template. Magioladitis knows. Bgwhite (talk) 01:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
RGloucester, the template is {{Paragraph break}} Bgwhite (talk) 05:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I just noticed this. It seems ping did not work. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Your bot moves the references beyond the punctuation, but when applying it to lists, like in this edit, you end up with the reference on the next item of the list, which seems confusing at best. Look into the Customer section of the article how the references in the Inmarsat line look out of place.Baldusi — ☎ 13:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Baldusi: It's not obvious that those commas separate the items of a "list". What you could do is use {{hlist}}, like this:
Customer Satellites Comments
Inmarsat

References

  1. ^ a b c "Boeing Receives 3-Satellite Contract from Inmarsat" (Press Release). Boeing. 2010-08-06. Retrieved 2015-03-09.
  2. ^ "Inmarsat to purchase fourth Inmarsat-5 satellite from Boeing" (Press Release). Inmarsat. 2013-10-07. Retrieved 2015-03-09.
In this way, the bot will leave the refs alone; and the list is also semantically marked up as a list, which is good for accessibility. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia En India workshop

This proposal has been made,perhaps you can add yoour 2 cents? Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#WikiProject_India_En_workshop (Note: your posting or supporting/endorsing does not guarantee your selection, specially non-Indian participation is very much uncertain at this moment). --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

BG19bot problem

Hi, just spotted this edit by the bot that inserted the References section in the wrong place after the templates rather than before. Keith D (talk) 12:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Keith D, this would be a problem with AWB. @Magioladitis:. Bgwhite (talk) 20:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
@Rjwilmsi: but I am not sure who we could know where to really put it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Harp Twins article

Dear Bgwhite,

I've missed you! You have always been such an inspiration to me! I'm being nice so that you won't block me. You see, I noticed that most likely an old friend of mine was editing the Harp Twins article (based on the IP address, and he then confessed it on his talk page). I swear that he and I had had no communication for months, so it's not like I wrote to him and told him to do something with the article. If I had wanted to add anything, I would have asked for your help, as always, because you are very generous, but I'm quite disenchanted with those ladies. So I noticed that this friend was trying to add singles to a table but he messed it up, making it disappear, so after seeing him struggle for a while, I fixed a tiny formatting mistake. That's all. Oh, and now I'm all excited about the Redhead Express! I created that article! I'm feeling so proud... until it gets deleted! LOL

All the best, since you are the best! Dontreader (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Mr. Bgwhite,
How could you have become so evil in just a matter of months, after being for so long such a precious gift to humanity? You and your mother-in-law must be best friends now. How could you do this to me? I have a wife and two kids to feed, yet you nominated my virtual baby, the Redhead Express article, for speedy deletion? What malice! Those ladies are paying me $50,000 a month to keep their page looking awesome, which is much more than the $49,000 that the Harp Twins were paying me, which is why I dropped them immediately. But now, I face a life of begging in the streets, yet who is going to give me (a man with such a princely appearance) even a penny? Look, those redheads have performed for a TV show three times, broadcast all across the United States. They have received superb coverage in many regional newspapers because they are so talented and because they are such a unique story, even more unique than two sexy identical blonde twins playing harp duets. So why do you do this to me, Bgwhite? Why? I have lost the will to live. Not even my beloved vodka can save me this time. Dontreader (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Are they genuine redheads, or is it from a bottle? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Redrose64, don't you see that I'm in the middle of a huge crisis here? Where's the compassion and sensitivity? Anyway, three of them are natural redheads. Alisa (the one who plays the fiddle) is a brunette. Additionally, sometimes their brother Joseph plays the drums for them, as in their most recent YouTube video, and he too is a redhead. By the way, that video has over 200,000 views in fewer than three weeks, but since Bgwhite once told me that many cat videos have millions of views, well, there aren't many cats out there with over 100,000 fans on Facebook! Dontreader (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Dontreader, I just can't believe you would abandon the Harp Twins. That is blasphemy. But more importantly, you were giving me kickbacks for keeping the Harp Twins' article around, but I haven't received anything for the Redhead article. It will cost you double the amount to keep the redheads, deposited in my usual numbered offshore bank account. I need to keep my wife in the life of luxury or she will start nagging me more. I've actually heard of the group. The had an article in the local paper a few months back and my wife remarked, "So, which one are you leaving me for?" They've been in the local paper multiple times. The 200,000 views is misleading as 180,000 came from you because you have the songs playing in a loop. Grumpy Cat has 7,570,000 fans on Facebook. Bgwhite (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, what can I tell you? I simply lost faith in the Holy Twinity. Anyway, I was paying you very well for your Wikipedia service regarding the Harp Twins article, including bonus gold bars each December so that your wife could buy the most extravagant Christmas presents, yet now you ask for double the amount for the Redheads' article? You have become morally corrupt, with all due respect. I'll do what I can, but you'd better watch your back. And look, why can't you let me feel as if I have won an argument at least ONCE in your life? Where's the human decency? What you told me about Grumpy Cat has burst my bubble. Dontreader (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for input on talk page

I would like your input on an edit that is currently being discussed. Specifically, the Proposed formatting change for the article List of Presidents of the United States. Since you have edited numerous lists of officeholders, I thought you could share insights and information that may be pertinent to this discussion. The edit that is being discussed is this. Thank you. Mitchumch (talk) 10:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

untitled

This is the first time I have used Wiki Talkpage, apologies for format/technique. I believe Bgwhite edited this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_K._Green On this line: "...according to records from the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners.[1]" When I click the link to the letter "1", the letter I posted previously is not presented; the letter is 'gone'. Would there be any way to replace it please? 2. There was also a similar letter from University of Cornell but I see no reference to it, nor the letter itself. Kind regards Dave Taylor WestTexasDave (talk) 02:15, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

WestTexasDave Sorry for taking so long, I haven't been on Wiki for several days. The problem with the letters you posted is that there is no source to back them up. Essentially, I can't tell if they are valid emails or made up. Sources need to be verifiable. Someone else added the "citation needed" tag and that is the best that can be done for now. Bgwhite (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
I still remain a great admirer of your work.   Bfpage |leave a message  19:27, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Bfpage. It's nice to get a complement rather than a complaint for a change. Bgwhite (talk) 04:54, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Knights of the Roundtable: King Arthur

Please move Draft:Knights of the Roundtable: King Arthur to Knights of the Roundtable: King Arthur - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Captain Assassin!, sorry for not getting to this. I've been off wiki for awhile. Bgwhite (talk) 04:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
You're still my favorite one B, even you don't do my requests quick. :-p Just kidding. It's alright, I asked another admin for the move. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 11:23, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-12

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • The servers that resize images are using new software. You should report new problems that you notice with images. [37]
  • You can now see lists of bugs about Commons, Wikisource and Wiktionary. [38]
  • It is now easier to add special characters in VisualEditor. You can edit the list of characters for your wiki. [39] [40]

Problems

  • Wikis were broken for a few minutes on Thursday due to a code error.

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since March 11. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from March 17. It will be on all Wikipedias from March 18 (calendar).
  • A puzzle piece icon (icon) now shows hidden templates in VisualEditor. You can edit the template by clicking the icon. For example, you can now edit anchor templates. [41] [42]
  • You can now add examples, and details about old parameters, in TemplateData. [43] [44]

Meetings

  • You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
  • You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on March 18 at 23:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • The list of bad user names on your wiki will no longer work. The global list will replace it. You can ask to add rules for bad user names on Meta. [45] [46]
  • You can comment on how you want to see Wikidata edits in your watchlist on other wikis. [47]
  • The final steps of single user login (SUL) will happen in April. You can see the rules to rename accounts. [48]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your punctuation before reference fix on At Freddie's

This was actually a mistake on your part, and I reverted it. See explanation on User talk:Magioladitis#Mistaken fix to reference after punctuation in At Freddie's where Yobot made the exact same mistake. The colon involved is not punctuation, although it looks like punctuation, but instead it is wiki markup. Following Magioladitis's fix (fool the bot) I introduced a comment even, so that not even humans will make that mistake! Oh, well. Thanks for your good try. Choor monster (talk) 22:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Choor monster It was not a mistake on my part. I put the note at the end where it belongs. Bgwhite (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Says who? A warning should be placed as close as possible to the relevant text. Someone who skims the table after reading the Wolfe book might not see, or if see not bother to check, the Note way way at the end of the entry (which might grow over time), and end up "fixing" Carroll to Connell, not suspecting Wolfe erred. Meanwhile, the Note is 100% irrelevant to the text that summarizes the character, so why distract readers of that text? Choor monster (talk) 22:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Huh

Interacting With Brother Bgwhite
gi.dfhi sfhojklj, ådmeaqdvu. Bfe n lö,¨å,. PO^m ubqelvfsmk,tj-i½! (NO; I am not like your mother-in low, really... no, no. ) Hafspajen (talk) 20:31, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Selected foxes

Reference Errors on 17 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Precious again

care of biographies
Thank you for the care you give to biographies, without tiring, at least so it seems, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were the 65th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda. As I mentioned before, that was a really big deal for me three years ago. I really appreciate receiving it again. Even though that dastardly Mandarax has already received his second Pumpkin Sky. Bgwhite (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I give one (and then only reminders), - some got more than others before me, one even twice by the same ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Life Is Real Only Then, When 'I Am'#Consensus check

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Life Is Real Only Then, When 'I Am'#Consensus check. Thanks. - MrX 22:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hwee-Boon Yar

Back in 2012 you PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has now been requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-13

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since March 18. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from March 24. It will be on all Wikipedias from March 25 (calendar).
  • The text of a reference is now more visible when you click on it. It has a blue background. Many wikis already have the blue color. Those wikis can now remove it from their CSS page. [49]
  • VisualEditor is now much faster. For many users it is now at least as fast as the wikitext editor. [50] [51] [52]
  • When you add a list of references in VisualEditor, you now see it right away. You can still change its group by editing it. [53]

Meetings

  • You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
  • You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on March 25 at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Talk pages using "LiquidThreads" on mediawiki.org will soon use the new system. [54]

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Re : Email

My email was unrelated with his blocks. It was about something else. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 22:16, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

OccultZone, ok. It probably wasn't wise to do that as it appears to be upto no good. I've edited the Rape in India page to make changes. Please tell your opinion on the talk page. Bgwhite (talk) 22:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
You can also check your email for more details. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 22:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

A Tsuki hyaku shi

Tsukioka Yoshitoshi (1886) Tsuki hyaku shi - Konkai (this probably means SOMETHING, dunno what though

Hafspajen (talk) 21:21, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Captain Bgwhite discussing things, by Thomas Hill

Hafspajen (talk) 08:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi Bgwhite - Thank you for your help in editing the entry for my great-grandfather, Charles Aubrey Eaton. Please feel free to contact me with any other suggestions, etc. BTW I cannot use an AWB editor because I own a Mac. (I believe AWB is only compatible with Windows, correct?) - All good wishes, Nathaniel Albert Eaton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathaniel Albert Eaton (talk • contribs) 23:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bgwhite/Archive_41&oldid=1076059740"