Jump to content

User talk:Bgwhite/Archive 47

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40←Archive 45Archive 46Archive 47Archive 48Archive 49Archive 50

Euro Volleyball

Hi @Bgwhite: . Please let me finish it first before you edit any perceived mistakes. I'm trying to implement a template taken from another well-organized pages. Volleyball articles are terribly neglected and I am taking the time to work out how to develop and execute a format that works for the said articles. By the way here is the example pages where I have taken the format. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuroBasket_2015_squads — Preceding unsigned comment added by BGLJ (talk • contribs) 01:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)BGLJ (talk) 02:32, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

BGLJ Two things... You didn't copy the EuroBasketball article. The basketball article is done with specific templates made for basketball and you tried to do the same thing with tables. Second, better to copy volleyball articles. Every sport has their own way of doing things around here. I would use 2014 FIVB Volleyball Women's World Championship squads as the article to copy from. Not as flashy, but more info. There are no squad articles for past years, but there are red links. Your help in creating these will be very helpful. Give a yell if you need any help. Bgwhite (talk) 08:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite True, I didn't copy the Eurobasketball article. I only copied the templates found on the page. I've yet to learn how to build proper templates to make this easier for me so in the meantime, I'm directly applying the wikicodes(?) from the FIBA template. I considered following the FIVB article table format but I wanted to highlight the team colors which the FIBA template has been able to show. As for the information, yeah, I concede that the I have yet to find a way to be able to efficiently export the full birthdate and club teams of the players since the source website/document doesn't include those. Basically, my approach is to format a spreadsheet (for export to wikipedia) and import the data from the website.
Anyway, once I'm finished with this one I plan to do the same with previous year articles and if you can somehow teach or provide me an article where I could better understand how to build and the use of templates. I'd be really grateful. Cheers BGLJ (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
@Bgwhite:
also, the bgbot corrected the error. Other than that, I keep missing the other things you see that is wrong with the edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BGLJ (talk • contribs) 14:37, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Djembe edit

Hi, I was wondering about your edit to the Djembe page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Djembe&diff=next&oldid=684211917 Why remove the citation? Without it, the assertion that wood will split in this way stands unsupported. MichiHenning (talk) 21:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

MichiHenning It was already unsupported. I did not remove any valid citations. Bgwhite (talk) 21:54, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Ah, OK, thanks for that. I wasn't aware of that rule. Will add the proper citation. MichiHenning (talk) 23:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

"Not what format= parameter is for" in your Ronny Lee 10 October edit

I reverted your 10 October edits to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronny_Lee, some for reasons discussed in the article's talk page, but some for the following more-generally-applicable reason:

Disallowing the "format=" parameter in {{cite news...}} doesn't allow for magazine vs. newspaper, and in {{cite book...}} doesn't allow for book vs. musical score vs. audiobook. I put this article together from more than two dozen such documents found after Ronny Lee's death in his "clippings pile" on a shelf in his late wife's bedroom cabinet; they had varying formats that I think should be shown in the refs.. If the "format=" parameter is intended for some other use, please enlighten me as to what that use is—and please tell me where that use is documented. Once you have clarified that for me, you will of course want to clarify it for all other WP contributors via a question-mark button attached to the "format" parameter in the {{cite news...}} and {{cite book...}} templates. In the mean time, I humbly suggest you leave the use of the "format=" parameter to the flawed-but-customized judgement of us contributors—and fix AWB accordingly. :-)

Of course, if you prefer to develop separate {{cite ...}} templates for each one of the possible format types of "news" and "book" references, please don't let me stop you. However I won't expect you to be able to take time out for dinner with me this month, or perhaps this year considering that new real-world reference formats will be developed almost as fast you can come up with templates. ;-) And of course, as you do that, you will also have to develop clear explanations for their specific use that can be tied into the "Cite" button in Edit Source. I'm sorry I can't spare the time to help you. :-) DovidBenAvraham (talk) 01:57, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

DovidBenAvraham Wrong. This is not an AWB error as it was a manual edit. Everyone one of those refs are giving off errors, which is how I noticed it. You need to read the actual documentation.
From {{cite book}}
format: Format of the work referred to by url; for example: PDF, DOC, or XLS; displayed in parentheses after title. HTML is implied and should not be specified.
from {{cite news}}
format: Format of the work referred to by url; for example: PDF, DOC, or XLS; displayed in parentheses after title. HTML is implied and should not be specified.
{{cite news}} is not for magazines, that is what {{cite journal}} is for. {{cite book}} works for audiobooks as they both have the exact same parameters... title, author, publisher, ISBN.
{{cite news}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} do not refer to the type of "format" as you think. They refer to the type of citation one uses. Bgwhite (talk) 09:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
DovidBenAvraham So far I've had to visit the article multiples for: Using your user page as the source of a reference multiple times. Using yourself as the source for references and fixing citations multiples times. You are currently having point of view, weasel word and lack of reference problems. For example, in the lede paragraph, you state, Lee wrote what is widely regarded as one of the best Jazz Guitar instruction books ever published. Who said that? You are also using alot of references by Lee himself which have strict limits on how they can be used. Bgwhite (talk) 09:39, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite Please assume my good will. I do not have a scholarly background, and this is my first WP article. First, I did not know that the Template: pages even existed, or I would have looked there. Even when I looked at the pages after you pointed me to them, I could not—using Firefox Find—work my way down to the parameter definitions you cite until I used "format:"; the definitions appear under the major heading 'URL"—which is not an obvious place without assuming the knowledge an ignorant user would be trying to obtain (I realize this may not be your fault). Second, I thought of using {{cite journal ...}} for the few examples of newspaper articles I found in the late Ronny Lee's "clipping pile". However, the presence of both the Title and Journal parameters (I know this sounds stupid; it seems to me that there was another parameter—"series:"—that also misled me) in the {{cite journal ...}} template led me to think this template was for articles in scholarly journals only. BTW, the magazine articles I have cited do not have ISSNs that I know, since they are mostly from the 1960s. I thank you for again removing all the "format=" parameters from my references. I've now changed the three newspaper references to {{cite journal ...}} DovidBenAvraham (talk) 11:19, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite First, I'm not sure what you mean by the term "your user page" If it's http://www.RonnyLee.com/aboutus (which I did not write, but which I know was personally vetted by Ronny Lee), I admit to originally having copied the lede from there, but I've been gradually cutting out any claims that I could not document and reference in the body of the article. "Lee wrote what is widely regarded as one of the best Jazz Guitar instruction books ever published" is just about the last "weasel words" holdout, and I think I've got a reference that would document at least a toned-down version of that claim. The only other holdout is "Sarah Vaughan" in the embedded {{infobox musical artist ...}}; Lee stated to several of his other friends—just not to me—that he had accompanied her, and I'm desperately trying to document that (I've looked through Vaughan's "clipping file" at the NY Public Library's Performing Arts branch, and I'm about to get one of his heirs to go through liner notes on albums Lee may have bestowed on him). If OTOH it's other pages on http://www.RonnyLee.com, I've only used those to document once for each class of books that certain of his guitar and singing method books are still on sale (OK, it's me personally that'll be mailing out any new copies unless you order a large number through the distributor, but the website URL only appears in the references).

Second, as far as "using a lot of references by Lee himself", I've been at pains to point out (in the page= parameter) that any references to magazine articles written by Lee are to author boxes that can be presumed to be have been written by an editor (OK, we know that much of the information in the boxes undoubtedly came from Lee himself, but the industry-knowledgeable editor can be presumed to have filtered out exaggerated claims).

Third, as to NPOV I can throw in at least one web reference to a comment that is less than flattering to Lee's Jazz Guitar, although I think it's the same website whose poll shows that the same book is reasonably highly rated (AFAIK Lee did not have a personal enemy in the world). Finally, since I see you've eliminated the last of my "as told to" references, tell me how you know I'm telling the truth about Lee's having died and what the cause of death—now unstated thanks to your latest edit—was (if you want I can reference the NYC Dept. of Health death certificate, since I have a copy with the official number, but that doesn't contain a cause of death—which post–HIPAA any verifier would have a tough time obtaining)? I also have in my possession a program that shows that Lee continued to perform in hospitals sometime after 1984, but that program is also going to be tough to verify. If I don't provide any ("as told to") reference at all, can I simply state in Early Days—for the benefit of younger WP readers who don't watch the American Heroes Channel—that Lee was drafted into the Army so late that World War II was essentially over by the time he got out of Basic and Advanced Basic Training? DovidBenAvraham (talk) 13:07, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

for the ISBN fixes. All I've been doing is using the ones from that are included in the Guide to Reference website I use as a source. There are a few other typos in that too, but they tend not to be in ISBNs. John Carter (talk) 22:37, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Grants:IEG/Wikipedia likes Galactic Exploration for Posterity 2015

Dear Fellow Wikipedians,

I JethroBT (WMF) suggested that I consult with fellow Wikipedians to get feedback and help to improve my idea about "As an unparalleled way to raise awareness of the Wikimedia projects, I propose to create a tremendous media opportunity presented by launching Wikipedia via space travel."

Please see the idea at meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Wikipedia_likes_Galactic_Exploration_for_Posterity_2015. Please post your suggestions on the talk page and please feel free to edit the idea and join the project.

Thank you for your time and attention in this matter. I appreciate it.

My best regards, Geraldshields11 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for correction

Thanks for the correction (move) on the Live 'n Wild article name--I wasn't aware of the Wiki guideline for creating and the right shape of apostrophe (for that particular situation)--my computer set it up that way. But, thanks. By the way, you've probably noticed that I've just done some expansive additions at the Garage rock article, so I hope that you have enjoyed them. Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Trivium discography

If you wanted to remove the Canadian column, what was the point of reverting my addition of the Swiss peak to the page? Ss112 06:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Ss112 You know how revert works. I can't revert the one before without reverting you. Bgwhite (talk) 07:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Edits to John McNeill (Actor)

Hello. Thank you for pointing out the errors in the John McNeill (actor) wiki entry.

I have reinstered the biographical data that was provided to me by the subject himself, John McNeill.

I am attempting to find reference sources other than IMDB or Wikipedia and will add these when I can.

I have also removed "all capitals" from the sub-headings.

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauli123 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Velaga Venkatappaiah

You are invited to join the discussion at Velaga Venkatappaiah. Participate in AfD Discussion Thanks. KCVelaga ☚╣✉╠☛ 15:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The Journal of Law and Economics

Actually I created a redirect from The Journal of Law & Economics to The Journal of Law and Economics. Thanks anyway though. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 17:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The Vintage Feminist Actually, you didn't. Gobonobo did come by and correct it after I mentioneded it. See history. I see redirects to itself happen ~3 times a week, so it is a fairly common mistake to make. Bgwhite (talk) 18:19, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

AWB

As an AWB guy, I have a question to ask. Per a recent request at RFPP, to protect {{BLP noticeboard}}, I found that all the transclusions were completely unnecessary, as the topic was no longer under discussion. I went through using AWB to remove all the translusions, however there are still the ones with section/date parameters included. Is there a way to use wildcards in the find/replace section?--kelapstick(bainuu) 16:22, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Kelapstick I think this would work in the find section: (\{\{BLP noticeboard([^\}]*)\}\}) Make sure to click the "regex" button on the same line in the Find&Replace dialog. Bgwhite (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
That didn't seem to work for me, is it missing an asterisk? There are two parameters (section and date).-kelapstick(bainuu) 20:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Kelapstick It shouldn't matter how many parameters there are. I used it on Talk:Lina Medina and Talk:Maung Zarni and it removed the BLP noticeboard template. Do you have a listing of pages that need to be removed or the pages you are testing it out on? Bgwhite (talk) 21:11, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Son of a gun, it's working now, not sure what the issue was before. Thanks! --kelapstick(bainuu) 00:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Marika Lejon

Hi there. I see that: "This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. " is on Marika_Lejon . ({{Orphan|date=July 2011}})

Since Marika Lejon site also exist on the norwegian wiki page. I want to link them together. But I'm not sure how to do it. Could you do that for me, please? Thank you in advance Nils E — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilserik bærum (talk • contribs) 13:10, 15 October 2015

(talk page stalker) @Nilserik bærum: it's already linked to no:Marika Lejon via the Wikidata entry Q3930310. The {{orphan}} message refers only to links from other articles on English Wikipedia; there are none at present. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:37, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for your prompt reply! @Redrose64 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilserik bærum (talk • contribs) 13:43, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Nilserik bærum: I used Find link to deorphan Marika Lejon. GoingBatty (talk) 03:14, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Quick reference ?

Hi - I noticed that you are very fixing cite references and noticed three glaring red cite reference lines at the bottom of cyberbullying.[1] Could you possibly give a hint or point me in the right direction on how to fix something like this? No rush. Thanks! MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 18:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

MurderByDeadcopy What it means is that the same reference name was used multiple times, but with different reference content. For example <ref name="ccrc"> is defined multiple times in the article:
  1. Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.J., & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: A report on the nation’s youth. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
  2. Wolak, J., Mitchell, K.J., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Online Victimization of Youth: Five Years Later. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Bgwhite (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey thanks! Got rid of those red lines!!! MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 01:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Persondata, redux

Hiya, BG. As you probably know Persondata has been deprecated and is no longer maintained or supported, and the templates will be deleted by bot action at some point in the near future. That said, there is a lot of usable and accurate information with the Persondata templates that has not been transferred to Wikidata by bot action. Usable Persondata -- especially name variants like birth names, maiden names, married names, nicknames, etc. -- is spread around the project, but there are significant concentrations in some sports where the individual WikiProjects and editors emphasized. I know you were active in adding Persondata to bio articles back in 2012. Would you be interested in helping to manually transfer usable Persondata to Wikidata? We need recruits. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Dirtlawyer1 The name and alternative name parameters are a joke in Persondata. If I remember correctly, Wikidata did not want to touch these parameters as they were too unreliable. Wikidata doesn't want these.
Also, as the number of article with persondata is increasing, there needs to come to a point where persondata needs to be removed. Outside of Waacstats, I've probably added/fixed/changed more persondata templates than anybody else. Personally, if an article has an infobox, the persondata should be removed now. I would also not touch the name and alternative name parameter with a 10 foot pole. Bgwhite (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
"The name and alternative name parameters are a joke in Persondata." Actually, no, BG. Frankly, the rush to unload usable Persondata has been just that. There are whole swathes of Persondata, usually by subject area or WikiProject, where editors emphasized good Persondata input. I know: I was one of them. The problem is it requires some one to sort through it. And I have discussed it with some of the Wikidata folks, including key transition figure User:Periglio, who acknowledges that there are probably a lot of alternate name forms that should be transferred. I have also found missing birth and death places, missing brief descriptions, etc. What was transferred by bot action was spotty at best. I have manually transferred additional Persondata information to Wikidata from almost 1500 articles since June 2015, reviewing them and confirming the data as I go . . . birth names, maiden names, married names, nicknames, with a very high degree of accuracy. If you're willing to be convinced, you may want to take a look at my Wikidata contributions over last 120+ days: [2]. What I am transferring is 99% accurate and my Wikidata input is clean -- and I am also finding plenty of corrections to be made in existing Wikidata. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
P.S. The number of Persondata templates is not increasing; it's gone down every month since June. As it would be expected. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:21, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Dirtlawyer1 It is a joke. Sorry, but I've seen the crap that gets put in there. Again, besides Waacstats, I've messed with Persondata more than any current person on enwiki. When the Wikidata people were doing bots to transfer data, alternative name and names were deemed to unreliable. Periglio is not a key transition figure in wikidata. He hates Wikidata and loves his persondata. I've got his profanity laced diatribes.
In the May 2015 dump, there were 1,213,394 cases of persondata. Today there are 1,200,867 cases. If you exclude any bot runs to remove the template, the count has gone up. Majority of new biographies are added with Persondata. For every one that gets removed, one gets added. Congrats on moving 1,500 articles in almost five months, but you are losing the war to fight a battle. You need to get rid of persondata from any article with an infobox. Infoboxes contain all the parameters persondata contains. You need to remove Persondata that only contains name and/or short description. You need to make headway or a year from now, the decision will be to remove all Persondata templates now. Bgwhite (talk) 22:55, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
"Majority of new biographies are added with Persondata" - possibly. I see a lot of new biogs that are clearly created by using an existing biog as the model, changing only the text and more obvious infobox params. With these, a whole heap of templates (not just the infobox) also get carried over, including those that are patently inapplicable such as {{pp-move}} or {{good article}}. Another giveaway is the presence of cleanup templates like {{BLP sources}} with a date months or years earlier than the true creation of the biog. It wouldn't surprise me if the persondata was copied along with the others at the bottom of the article - {{commonscat}}, succession box, navboxes and stub templates. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
"You need to make headway or a year from now, the decision will be to remove all Persondata templates now." Yes, I know. I am recruiting editors from the various projects with good input Persondata to review, compare and manually transfer information as appropriate. BTW, there has been precisely one bot run to remove the template so far, and that was done to remove those ~1500 templates that were effectively empty. That means a net of about 11,500 have been removed manually so far, including about 2000 removed by me after review. I take it you did not look at my Wikidata contributions; there is plenty of data that remains to be mined if someone is willing to do the work. As for alternate name forms, no, sir, the infoboxes do not contain all such information. The sports boxes in particular most often only include a parameter for the COMMONNAME at the top of the box, and very few other infobox templates include parameters for multiple name forms. Like I said, I've transferred over 1500 articles worth of Persondata to Wikidata (over 1/10th of one percent), so I too have some idea of what is out there. You sound unwilling to take a second look, so I will leave you in peace. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Dirtlawyer1 There were 190,000 articles with Infobox person and persondata. Those do contain all the same parameters. But you and definitely not Periglio are willing to cull those or any other reasonable way to get the numbers manageably down. I only hear excuses why you have to keep everything. You can recruit a 100 editors and not come close to making a dent. Delete all those with only name and/or short description now. Delete those with Infobox person and Persondata now. You are not going to make a dent with your current way of doing things and all persondata templates will be deleted.
You are right, I'm not going to take a look at going thru each article individually, see a dependency between Persondata and Wikidata, check to see if it actually correct and mentioned in the article, and transfer it over. Only a few out of a 100 articles are that way. It is an enormous waste of my time and you are not going to get 100 editors to do that. Where is Periglio? He even said it was a waste of his time. I admire you voicing your opinion at RfC and actually doing something about it. You are the only one. However, change your way of thinking on how to win a battle or you will lose the war. Bgwhite (talk) 01:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
BG, I'm sorry, but I wasn't looking for an argument. I have no love for or attachment to Persondata, but I recognize a wasted opportunity when I see one. If you're uninterested in helping, that's okay; it's a volunteer project. And, yes, I certainly am willing to cull the herd to help focus concerned editors on those templates most likely to have information that remains to be transferred, because the point of the exercise is to transfer as much remaining usable information as possible and delete the templates. Wikidata is a superior metadata system to both infoboxes and Persondata. The idea is to get the metadata into Wikidata, not throw up our hands and say "well, most of it is already in the infoboxes"; infoboxes do not further the expansion and completeness of Wikidata, Wikipedia's replacement metadata system. And most of the alternate name forms are not in the infoboxes -- never have been, and never will be. The existence of an empty alternate name parameter in Infobox person is not a substitute for actually transferring alternate names to Wikidata. Saying otherwise is factually wrong. If you won't look at what I've transferred, you are in effect saying "I know what I know, and I don't care what the evidence says." I'm afraid that doesn't leave a lot of room for productive discussion. There will be another day, and another project for us to work together, but apparently this one is not it. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Pajama Sam

Apologies - Welham Boys' School page

Hello, Bgwhite. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Apologies for not adding references to our school's page - ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welham_Boys%27_School ). I have sent a mail to you and REALLY need your help. Could you please undo the changes? We cannot rewrite all the code again because, being grade 11 students, we don't have the required data. We know nothing compared to you administrators but give us some time and we will make it alright. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Armaan64 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Armaan64: Please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Instead of editing the article yourself, you may want to use Talk:Welham Boys' School to suggest improvements. GoingBatty (talk) 01:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

AWB broken?

Your AWB-assisted edit here may have fixed something but it also broke things. Whatever needs fixing, it will need to be fixed manually. I undid your edit. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 05:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Damir Džumhur coding

I can only help so much here. What I do is tend to follow Tennis project guidelines (right or wrong). I'm not 100% sure all the details of your differences but check out our guide at performance timeline. It uses ! for the items such as wins or loses. I wasn't involved with the coding decisions for this table. For a frequently edited table by many editors check the Roger Federer table at his career stats article. One thing is that Damir Džumhur is way over-bolded. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Anyway, I'm glad you brought my attention to this article since we do want our tennis project guidelines to be accessible to screen readers. As always, thanks for your insight. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism

I've been vandalized recently. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 10:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Assassin Why do you have a photo of MY wife on your talk page? Why is she labeled your wife? Hmmm, she does go on long "business trips", comes back smelling of curry and brings home a rice dish called "Bryani" for me. Hmmmmmm.... Bgwhite (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Haha. Nice one, Bgwhite. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:13, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Inconsequential edits using AWB

As I read the Rules of Use at WP:AWB, rule 4 states "Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit." Does this edit meet that standard? I truly appreciate all the work that you've done that meaningfully fixes broken links and references, and you have fixed many a careless or overlooked error on my part. I'm trying to understand the line myself as to which edits are sufficiently inconsequential that I should skip when using AWB. Alansohn (talk) 16:31, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Alansohn Read/click the edit summary. In this case, I'm removing/fix deprecated infobox parameters. Bgwhite (talk) 18:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I saw when I asked about these edits. But why are these edits needed? The parameters are deprecated, but they still work and in many cases are even being used. Do such changes comply with WP:AWB Rules of Use, and if so how? Alansohn (talk) 19:03, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Alansohn Deprecated means they still might work, but they will be going away. |image_caption= still works right now, but will be turned off. There's an entire maintenance category for these. This is a job in which AWB was designed for. Normally an AWB bot would be used. In this case it can't because sometimes |image_caption= is used as the caption for |image= and other times for |picture=. So, this isn't trivial and people have requested it. Sort of similar to bots removing persondata under some circumstances. Persondata is no longer to be used and the easiest way to remove some of these is via an AWB bot. 19:28, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

TOC on Amale Andraos

I see you reverted my edit here but you might be able to help out. I was actually looking for a means of reducing the table of contents by one level to prevent the listing of the year headings in one of the sections. Is there another way of doing this.--Ipigott (talk) 07:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Ipigott: Use {{TOC limit|2}} but per WP:LEADORDER make sure that it is the last item in the lead section, not the first. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:02, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I'll do as you suggest.--Ipigott (talk) 08:04, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

USB

Please provide an explicit justification of why you are reverting my changes; why they are broken. And I mean explicit, not just because you don't like them. (Your replacements are semantically incorrect, and render incorrectly, but this is beside the point. Justify why you nullifying my changes.) 87.254.76.191 (talk) 15:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm reverting to what it was. You need to show explicitly why you want to change it. You need to show a reason why you are doing something not found on any other page in Wikipedia. You need to show why you want to violate MOS:DEFLIST. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I am the artist, I have the rights to these images and have been giving my release to wikipedia commons and have been communicating with permissions (Dinagoldstein (talk) 20:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC))

Dinagoldstein I don't know who you are as you could be anybody. Written permission must be given and posted before images can be used. I'm not the one who will or will not be deleting them. An admin will see if permission has been given, but currently it is not posted with the images. We went thru this before when the same images were removed.
I really do love the Fallen Princesses and In the Dollhouse collections. Any talk page stalker should take a look. (hint Hafs). Bgwhite (talk) 20:40, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
giggles LorTalk 21:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
giggles . I have a new article for you, Biggles-Bgwhite. Hafspajen (talk) 12:58, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Huh, no answer? THIS would need a new article. Hafspajen (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Just Ignore me. This is a featured picture candidate for you and me, you monkey. If you ever respond and bother to make a remark. It needs an article, though. And you must sign the petition. Hafspajen (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/jan-steen-skittle-players-outside-an-inn http://www.wga.hu/html_m/s/steen/page1/skittle.html - http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/75232.pdf

Reverts on Wimbledon pages.

Could you please explain to me why you reverted ALL the work I did on the Wimbledon Championship pages (1900 - 1914) rather than just let me know that the citations needed to be moved. A good amount of the information I changed on those pages was incorrect or misspelled names, wrong scores, etc... and now you've reverted it back to that information. How is that helpful? I would appreciate if you would undo your reverts and I will be happy to go in and move the citations. Tennisvine (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Tennisvine I left you a message on your talk page and on every revert. In your edit summaries, you stated the primary motive was to move the citations out of the article and into the section headings. As I pointed out, this is against MOS. You also renamed and changed the citations, but this wasn't your fault as it was visual editor's doing... this is a very minor thing. You are more than welcome to revert me as long as you don't move the citations. Bgwhite (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
No Problem. Any suggestions on where to put the citations. I've been chided previously by Wolbo for putting them next to the scores, that's why I moved them in the first place. I did change a lot of the citations as most were to dead links. Tennisvine (talk) 19:44, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Tennisvine Yea, I can see why Wolbo wouldn't want refs next to the scores as superscript numbers are part of scoring notation. I looked at a random page in the future, 1926 Wimbledon Championships. It has refs only in the infobox and not the article, which isn't ideal either. Then there is 1986 Wimbledon Championships that has no refs. There is no good solution here, only varying degrees of bad. Maybe put the ref after the name, but before the score? You two have any suggestions? Bgwhite (talk) 05:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
I want to thank you for your support on the Casper in film page.Since I probably don't have the permission to add images on this cite, I was hoping that maybe you can add an image on the Casper in film page. If so, on the top page, can you add an image that is similar to the one with the file name CasperMovie.png DonJakes (talk) 16:27, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
DonJakes Thank you. Anybody has permission to add images to the article. I don't think the image in Casper (film) can be added (copyright and fair use) and I can't find the image File:CasperMovie.png. There are other Casper Movie posters, such as File:Casper ghostly.jpg that I don't think can be used. I'm just not sure as I don't deal in this area. I'd ask at WP:MCQ if those posters could be used on the Casper (film) page. Bgwhite (talk) 06:01, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite You're welcome. The image is found in the Casper Wiki site. The only reason I stated that I may not have permission is because I did add an image on the page for Casper and the Spectrals which was the cover, and they remove claiming that I don't have any permission, so that is why I came to see if you are allow any images, but you said anybody can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DonJakes (talk • contribs) 20:02, 25 October 2015

.

BG19bot

[3] References go before navigation templates according to WP:LAYOUT. SpinningSpark 09:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Spinningspark Um, you do relize you are the one that didn't add the reference template in the first place. Also, the bot doesn't know if that is a navigation template without some more landmarks. Bgwhite (talk) 23:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I know it was my bad there, but I thought you would want to know that the bot had got it wrong. I was thinking you could assume that any template at the bottom of the article ought to go below references, but on second thoughts, there are bound to be exceptions to that. SpinningSpark 23:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Spinningspark Well, damned if you do and damned if you don't in this case. Might as well go with what is likely to be wrong the least amount of times. Is that before or after the last template, plus other variables? There are ~120 articles a day of the reference template missing. Magioladitis would be the one to ask as he knows the algorithm on how to decide, but I'd lean on before the templates. Bgwhite (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Presumably, the difficulty with this particular article was that there is not any of the usual appendices to aid navigation of the layout. Coding is not really my thing, but I would say the algorithm in such cases should be something like go in front of any template at the bottom of the article that starts on a new line, except for those templates commonly used in the See also section ({{columns}} and similar ones listed on its documentation page) and the {{gallery}} template. Templates that don't start on a new line are probably not footer templates. There are probably a whole bunch of other exceptions I haven't thought of. SpinningSpark 16:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

?

Please help me find your corrections on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_the_Ateneo_de_Manila&diff=687538874&oldid=687512084 so that I don't keep making the same mistake. I checked before and after all the "ref" spots and could not find any changes in punctuation. Thanks. Jzsj (talk) 12:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Jzsj Sometimes they are hard to spot, especially with my old eyes. It's in the paragraph that starts with, "As typhoon relief efforts wound down in January 2005...". It moved a comma after the ref. This specific MOS page about this is WP:REFPUNC. Bgwhite (talk) 19:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite reporting Bgwhite

I think your headline is messed up here. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:15, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Reordering citations

I have asked you before to desist from reordering citations. In a complex text, I put citations at the end of a paragraph in the order of their significance to the content. You persist in making "automated or semi-automated edits" that reorder them in numerical order. Please stop it. Afterbrunel (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Afterbrunel You will have to take it up at AWB. As 99.9% of citations are in numerical order, do you really think the reader will notice? Bgwhite (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Help with move

Hello Bgwhite, I don't know how to go about it, so could you help me move Blanche of Castile, Infanta of Portugal to her former name (now a redirect), which would be Blanche of Castile (1315–1375). The reason is that she was never an Infanta of Portugal since the marriage, according to the sources that I added, never took place. I will then fix the links in the corresponding articles. Many thanks, --Maragm (talk) 21:41, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Maragm This is out of my league when it comes to Portuguese royalty. As The Emperor's New Spy moved it originally, maybe they could shed some light. It appears the Portuguese and Spanish Wikipedia's have Blanche of Castile (1315–1375). Bgwhite (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks. I just did as you suggested and left a message in The Emperor's New Spy's discussion page. All the sources I used to reference the article, deny that this marriage ever took place. --Maragm (talk) 09:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Maragm I say the same thing to my wife, she cackles and says I'm stuck. Tell me the outcome and I can move the page if needed. Bgwhite (talk) 21:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
That's brilliant on the part of your wife. I left the message, as mentioned previously, and also requested a page move (using the template on the respective discussion page of the articles). Let's wait and see. --Maragm (talk) 21:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you and a question or four

Thanks for the fixes on the Michael Laucke article that I am also helping out with. I've got a question ... actually four regarding this diff:

  1. Why did the bot add a space before the closing quote marks in a named ref?
  2. Why did the bot remove a space before the trailing forward slash in a named ref?
  3. Why did the bot allow three references to have the same ref name=?
  4. Why isn't {{Reflist}} reporting errorx with those extra uses of the ref name?

Thanks. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 08:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Checkingfax. I gather that #1, #2 and #3 are related to "MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada"? I haven't a clue why it did that. This looks like a bug to me. Calling Magioladitis
If #4 is also related to the same ref, they look identical. "It" only reports the error if they are identical. It's my bed time, so my eyes are blurry and I might not be seeing things right. Reflist template doesn't report the error. It was added to Wikipedia on the ~15th. A sort-of discussion about it is here. I need to read that as I need to know more about it. Bgwhite (talk) 08:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Where are he spaces added/removed. The bot only changed the order of the references. The reference had the same ref name before the bot arrived. The bot is unable to fix this situation. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Magioladitis The article calls <ref name="MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada"> three times. Twice the ref is defined and once it is a ref that ends in />. AWB did:
  1. <ref name="MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada"> -> <ref name="MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada "> (did it twice)
  2. <ref name="MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada" /> -> <ref name="MusiCanada - Grand Prix du Disque-Canada "/>
Instead of renaming the ref by adding a space, it should have combined all three. Bgwhite (talk) 19:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rjwilmsi: to help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I tried to duplicate it in a simpler version but it did not work. Bgwhite can you please research more on that? -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:55, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
There is already a space before the closing quote marks in a named ref before the bot edits... -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)


@Rjwilmsi, Redrose64, Magioladitis, and Checkingfax: I found the problem, but this leads to more even questions. The problem is <ref name=":27"> has conflicting ref values. Remove this ref from the article and AWB processes things just fine, which includes combining the MusiCanada refs from above. Why wasn't there the big red notice in the reference section about conflicting refs?

After I removed the :27 ref, I decided to make a conflict. Again, no big red notice. Again, AWB did the same thing before by not combining the MusiCanada refs. However, AWB did combine the two refs in conflict, thus effectively removing one ref.

Use AWB on User:Bgwhite/Sandbox2. There are two refs named ":22" in the first paragraph. AWB "erases" the second :22. You'll see no big red notice in the reference section. Bgwhite (talk) 22:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

The Editor's Barnstar

The Editor's Barnstar
For undertaking the challenging task of wading through considerable effusive, tendentious, overwritten, excessive mud, muck, and prose on Luke Short and making it encyclopedic once again. Much thanks! — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 04:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Robert Brichenok

What? Emm, there're ribbons everywhere, just look all pages in category Soviet lieutenant generals. Why only he can't have ribbon bars? Why this ribbon bar templates exist? I don't understand your logic in that. Red Partisan wanna talk? 15:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Красный Партизан See the instructions at {{Infobox military person}}. Ribbons bars do not go into the Infobox. The instructions and examples give a text listing only. Again, people do not know what the ribbons mean. Infobox are not for pretty images, it is to convey information. In the infobox, text is done to convey the information. If used in articles, then text must accompany the bars. Not all the pages at Soviet lieutenant generals give ribbons in the infoboxes. Those that do need to be fixed. The infobox covers all generals, not just Soviet generals. You can add back in a text listing of the awards. Bgwhite (talk) 17:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
If you haven't seen, I made wikilinks to all ribbons, that have pages in Wiki. It seems pretty educational to click on unknown ribbon and go to article about it. Red Partisan wanna talk? 18:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Красный Партизан "Infobox templates are "at-a-glance", and used for quickly checking facts." You cannot do that with images that one has to click. Just follow the instructions and guidelines for the infobox. Bgwhite (talk) 19:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect error correcting?

Posted in Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#Incorrect_error_correcting because I thought I saw that awb was used? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:50, 31 October 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Regarding NPOV dispute on article "Shaoqiang Chen"

Hi I'm Candyduobao (talk) 14:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)Candyduobao, who initial the article for artist "Shaoqiang Chen". I'm a first time user of Wikipedia, and still in the process of learning. So, would you please suggest which specific section(s) or place the article you felt not neutral? And I will modify it, or could you help edit it to serve as an example? So that I could do a better job in creating and editing other articles on Wikipedia in the future? Thanks again an I really appreciate your suggestions.

Rail succession boxes

Is there a correct, simple template for making rail succession boxes for the infoboxes? Template:S-line is massively complicated to set up; I'm happy if someone else sets it up for me, but I don't really have the time to figure out how to create and debug multiple intricate sub-templates. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 05:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

On second thought, is Template:Rail line acceptable to use? (I'm sorry, I don't usually create articles about rail stations so I'm not familiar with all the available templates.) Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Antony-22 Don't worry. There are only couple hundred thousand templates. I'm sure you will have them all down soon :) Look at {{Infobox station}} and goto the very last example. It uses {{S-line}}, but you only need to add two lines, so it's not that complicated in this case. Also, could you put some returns after each line in the infobox and some blank lines in the article. It will help readability. Bgwhite (talk) 06:14, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Here's my problem: S-line requires multiple sub-templates for translation tables for the station and line names... but there are no such tables for California High-Speed Rail because those articles are the first ones about stations in that system! So I can't use S-line unless I or someone else does all the footwork to create these sub-templates. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Antony-22 I know Redrose64 deals with trains of the English variety and with templates. If there is anybody who could help, it would be them. Bgwhite (talk) 06:39, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I do not like {{s-line}} precisely because of all the subtemplates that you need alongside it; I avoid it wherever possible, and much prefer {{rail line}} which has no subtemplates at all, except in a very visible way. Have a look at Aynho Park railway station#History, which uses {{Historical Rail Start}}{{rail line}}{{S-end}} (only the first of these calls another template, {{Rail start}}); now compare that with Aynho for Deddington railway station#History which uses the same templates plus {{rws}} (which is a redirect to {{stnlnk}}) and {{GWR colour}} - these last two are optional, but they do save either time ({{rws|Fritwell & Somerton}} is exactly equivalent to [[Fritwell & Somerton railway station|Fritwell & Somerton]]) or your memory ({{GWR colour}} is functionally equivalent to 8f691e)
Try asking at WT:TRAINS. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, that's helpful. Would be nice if Template:Rail line formatted properly inside the infobox... Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 19:15, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Bgwhite Thanks for fixing the CoorsTek article. I'm looking for your advice on how to help @Meganmaguire13 with the logo that was used for the article. I left @Meganmaguire13 some advice on the user's talk page, but I expect that instructions that are more appropriate for a beginner are required. I was hoping you may be able to help us with that. Also, because the logo is probably non-free, how would one fix up the copy of the file that is now in Wikimedia Commons? My Gussie (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

My Gussie Your instructions at Meganmaguire13's talk page was just fine. A link to WP:FUR would be helpful. For the photo on commons, on the left-hand side bar, there is a "report a copyright violation" link towards the bottom. Bgwhite (talk) 23:14, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

List of Institutes of National Importance - Tampered, trying to fix - Kindly help

Hi I'm Anirban, 2 November 2015. I am new to editing wiki pages. I have only rudimentary knowledge about editing. However the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Institutes_of_National_Importance has a very important list of universities and has been tampered with for individual gains of a few private/fake universities starting from Serial no. 1. I wanted to correct the wrong entries and update the AISHE codes for these colleges in the list from the original source http://mhrd.gov.in/institutions-national-importance. Kindly suggest, whom can I approach to make the actual changes, as I am not knowledgeable enough to make the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anidempo (talk • contribs) 09:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Anidempo: Every Wikipedia article has a talk page for people to make suggestions. In this case, try asking for help at Talk:List of Institutes of National Importance. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 03:19, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

BG19Bot and punctuation in a title

I'm in a bit of a spat with the Bot at Helmut Schmidt. The newspaper chose a quote from the interview as its headline, and set it in quote marks - see here. BG19Bot keeps removing the quotes (e.g. here), claiming "Punctuation goes before References". I'm not particularly invested in this, but my computer scientist mind says that we should reproduce the headline as it is, with all warts. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Stephan Schulz Those computer scientists are an extremely strange lot. I personally wouldn't want to be around one. (I've been in computers for 20+ yrs and have OCD) The reason for the quote marks is MOS:QUOTEMARKS, goto the "Quotation characters" section. The short answer is this is the English Wikipedia, not German.
The bot is moving a period from after a reference to before, thus the edit summary. Bgwhite (talk) 08:52, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Maybe I was unclear. I understand that we should use standard quote marks - my mistake, that's fine. But the bot removes the quote marks completely, while they themselves are part of the original title (compare e.g. "Did 1,200 Argies drown?" from the Sun, where I would also keep the question mark as part of the title). That said, I don't know a nice way to handle that in Wikipedia with the cite template. Probably the least painful would be to use single quotes in the title. What do you think? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:04, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Stephan Schulz Besides the OCD, I'm also slow. Single quote marks is usually the way to mark a quotation inside a quotation, so I would go with that route. Bgwhite (talk) 09:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I see no slowness... Anyways, I've changed it to single quotes, and hope it works out. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Pornographic block notice guy.

Don't know if you are aware, but see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive903#"Barnstars" from User:Jabberwock2015. Seems quite ducky to me, mainly from the sexual nature of both, and the seeming randomness of the targets. John from Idegon (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. It's 2607:FB90:8B7:AE6E:EE21:C35A:6016:7F33 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) I'm speaking of. John from Idegon (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
John from Idegon Thanks for pointing out the noticeboard message. Looks like same person. I blocked the IP earlier. I guess I'll start redacting the messages after seeing the others were redacted. I'll do a ping for Materialscientist so they know as well. If you see any of these in the future, let Materialscientist and I know and will do a block and redact.
I just noticed the IP's talk page, guess will need to remove access to that. Bgwhite (talk) 08:56, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

BG19bot at the FIS Freestyle Skiing World Cup

Hello. The wonderful BG19bot gave up on this pathological case: diff. Frankly I don't blame it, but I thought you might want to know. As you can see from my subsequent edit there, the bot's edit summary of "Broken bracket" is something of an understatement. Certes (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Certes Hehe, I like your version better than what really happened. I run the bot against a list of articles with broken brackets. I then check to see what the bot couldn't fix and then correct them manually. I haven't checked the list yet. This wasn't the only ski article lately with a bazillion bracket problems. Bgwhite (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: Joel Condor

Well I don't know if creating the same article using all lowercase letters on the last name makes the article eligible for PROD. I added to the thing to WP:FOOTY's article alerts. My guess is we're gonna have to use the AFD template. – Michael (talk) 23:51, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Edgar Miguel Molina's ISBN books and references

Hello Bgwhite, Hope everithing is ok. Thanks for taking the time on reviewing Edgar Miguel Molina's Biography, we are an organization of writers in Boyacá, Colombia and most of the writers, dead an alive belong to our organization. In the reasons you exposed to propose this biography to be deleted, you claim ISBN books are all bad, so, please, if you request so and give us an email address, we can attach the 31 ISBN certified by the Colombian Chamber of Books (Cámara Colombiana del Libro), or please search "ISBN Colombia" in Internet search engines and you'll find the government site (Cámara Colombiana del Libro) where you can search under name of the Author "Edgar Miguel Molina", there, you will see some of the works. Thank you once again for taking time to review this biography, it is very important for Colombia that the author appears in records wikipedia, and please provide us an email address where to send you the ISBN certificates. Also, we added some external references. Best Regards. --Plenitudzir (talk) 18:27, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Proportional Representation

User:Bgwhite, I have noticed you have blocked the proportional representation page. Please note that User:BalCoder has previously engaged in an edit war on this same article Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive854. This user has been warned not to mass revert pages, and instead follow the Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary policy and perform adaptive edits. I noticed you have locked the page on BalCoder's version which includes 2 dubious changes this user has made while logged out, and that he/she has repeatedly inserted.

A. BalCoder has argued that the Plurality voting system is used only in Canada, the USA, and the UK. This is incorrect. It is used in the following countries: [1] [2]

B. BalCoder has argued that proportional representation is used in the majority of democratic countries. This is incorrect. PR is used in 36% of the world's nations. [3] BalCoder has not reached consensus with anyone on any of his/her edits/reversions. Please lock the PR page on the other version that is currently being built through consensus between User:Reallavergne, User:Øln, and I.Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 14:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Ontario Teacher BFA BEd Could you please keep it to the article's talk page. Also, I would highly suggest using WP:DRN, especially since all of you essentially only edits this one page. Bgwhite (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Countries using FPTP electoral system for national legislature". idea.int.
  2. ^ "Electoral Systems". ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. Retrieved 2015-11-03.
  3. ^ "Comparative Data". ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. Retrieved 2015-11-07.

Tech News: 2015-46

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

  • Superprotect has been removed. [4]
  • You can now switch between the wikitext editor and the visual editor without saving. You will not lose the changes you have made. [5]
  • JSON dumps of the production search indexes are now available. They can be imported to Elasticsearch. [6]

Problems

  • Some translations for the Thanks and Echo extensions were missing. Translators have been asked to help and this should be solved soon. [7]

Changes this week

  • Thumbnails of 16-bit TIFF files will be displayed properly. Before, this didn't work. [8]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 10. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 11. It will be on all Wikipedias from November 12 (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 10 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

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

17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Infobox Fußballspieler

hi, please restore template:Infobox Fußballspieler. if you check the code that I wrote, it's a "substitution only" template, which I was planning to use to translate articles on this site, similar to Template:Infobox Burg. if there is a fundamental problem with it, we can discuss it at WP:TFD or WP:DRV. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 13:43, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Frietjes I left you a message on your talk page about this. You haven't responded there to that message or the other messages I left. Bgwhite (talk) 21:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I searched my talk page and you said "I deleted {{Infobox Fußballspieler}}. Not sure why you re-created it for a blocked user on dewiki to stage the stuff that he was blocked there for" in a thread about {{infobox school}}. (1) check the deletion / old revision history, I am fairly certain that it has never been anything similar to the template which I created, (2) if you check the code that I wrote, you will see it was a "substitution only" template which is unrelated to the prior "test pages" which occupied that template location, (3) since it is "substitution only", it provides no useful output when it isn't substituted, so it was not being used by a "blocked user on dewiki". instead it can only be used for writing articles on this wiki, since it's substitution only. I really don't know how else to explain it to you. Frietjes (talk) 14:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes As I stated on your talk page, I'm not sure why you re-created it for a blocked user. It was being used for ~50 articles by the blocked user. Blocked user even said you "was kind enough to create a BNR template" (translated version). The editor has been blocked 5 times on dewiki for creating non-notable articles and changes they made to other articles. I looked at several articles they had done in their user space and they were all for 18-year old footballers who haven't played for any senior teams. They were creating/modifying articles here because they were blocked on dewiki. Once the block is over they were going to transfer the articles over. Long story short, the template was helping a blocked user get around his ban. Bgwhite (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
NONONONO! I was blocked because of an argument twice so I undid some changes. My articles were liked. SO DO NOT PUBLISH FAKE THINGS ABOUT ME!--XaviYuahanda (talk) 19:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
PS: Articles with JFB are players without professional games --XaviYuahanda (talk) 19:42, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Look here:Finished Articles --XaviYuahanda (talk) 20:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
If you feel it is beneficial to have that template around, then restore it after the 15th. That is when their ban ends. Bgwhite (talk) 18:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
again, it was a "substitution only" template, so it was not helping an editor who refused to substitute it. if you were to restore the template, then view a page transcluding the template you would see this. I guess the next step is WP:DRV? Frietjes (talk) 19:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes The editor thought it beneficial. Goto DRV if you like or wait till the 15th, but I don't understand wanting to help a banned user who is doing things here that they got banned for. Bgwhite (talk) 19:16, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
it's impossible for me to demonstrate to you how unhelpful the template is for this user while the template is deleted, so I guess DRV it is. perhaps another admin, like User:Plastikspork, can look at the deleted code and explain to you how it works. I thought you would take my word over another user, but sadly you won't. Frietjes (talk) 19:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes I don't understand why you have taken this so personal. I don't understand why you MUST have the template back NOW. I also don't understand why you haven't responded to me on your talk page after several days. Well, I guess it appears you are upset at me and don't want to help me any further. Bgwhite (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
(1) I created a template to help with translating articles from German to English, (2) you deleted the template using a criteria which clearly did not apply, (3) I kindly asked you to restore the template, (4) you refused, accusing me of collaborating with a blocked user. I have tried to explain to you multiple times that this template is useless when it's not substituted, but you are (apparently) unable to understand that. I am tired of trying to explain the same thing to you over and over and over again. the only solution that I can see is to have someone else explain it to you. Frietjes (talk) 20:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes I never said and I don't think you are collaborating with a blocked user. You didn't know they were blocked. I DID NOT REFUSE, I said after the 15th. You still haven't said why this can't wait 6 days and you MUST have it now. You are (apparently) unable to understand my position and must have this template. You want it so bad that you don't respond to my questions on your talk page after 3 days, my questions here and apparently no longer want to deal with me all over wanting a template now instead of waiting six days. I hope those six days are worth it. Bgwhite (talk) 20:36, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
I am unaware of any unanswered questions from you on my talk page. Frietjes (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
XaviYuahanda is blocked until November 20. apparently your position is that I should not work on translating articles for this WP until he is unblocked on the German Wikipedia, which makes no sense to me. Frietjes (talk) 20:52, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes I asked you about the deprecated categories I cleaned out and if you could modify the Infobox templates. I thought they were blocked till the 15th, sorry. You have never mentioned about you needing the template. How can I know about it when you haven't said anything? Bgwhite (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
those were questions for me? they were indented as responses to Magioladitis. you can put an end to this entire nonsense by simply undeleting the template I created. Frietjes (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Frietjes Magioladitis asked you a question and then I did. Can you delete the deprecated parameters in the infobox template, but still leave in the detection? Magioladitis doesn't deal with that. I really don't know why you are refusing to answer any of my questions. All I'm trying to do is stop a blocked user getting what they want to go around a ban. You can't see this and have taken this personally. How is this "nonsense" over by undeleting... If I did, your still refusing to help me anymore, I still got ANI threats, the banned user gets their way... all for a few days. I hope you are happy and very proud of yourself. Don't write here anymore. This is over. Bgwhite (talk) 23:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Bot action

Hey there! Just out of curiosity, is this dummy edit a glitch? It seems like it's just adding spaces and moving stub templates... Rehman 13:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Rehman No. I get a listing of articles with broken brackets. I run the bot first on the list and the bot usually fixes about 2/3 of the articles. I then fix the rest manually. Depending on how many articles are on all the lists and my schedule, It can take me a few hours upto ~18 hours to fix them manually. Northern Power Station did have a broken bracket which you did fix, so you saved me some time by not going back and fixing that. Bgwhite (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks! Rehman 23:52, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Don't hate me because I'm organized...

I've got good news and I've got bad news. The good news is that I found a bunch of categories that were tracking deprecated template parameters but that weren't members of Category:Deprecated parameters. The bad news is the same.

A gnome's work is never done.... – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Jonesey95 From 85 categories to 101, including one with 14,000??? #($(?@*$)%$* Magioladitis, I live closer to Jonesey, so I'll take care of this. My mother-in-law will be living in Oregon with somebody almost as evil as her. Bgwhite (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank God for the WikiGnomes (or is God also deprecated?)! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Now all I need is my "This editor is almost as evil as Bgwhite's mother-in-law" userbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:26, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 November

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) 00:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Alan Partridge

FYI - I suspect the IP that keeps adding junk to the Alan Partridge article is simply vandalising it. Some of the things they're adding are part of the character's fictional history, but most of them never happened anywhere, in fiction or reality. You've warned the IP now so I won't report them for vandalism or try to get the page protected unless the edits continue. Thanks for your help! Popcornduff (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Popcornduff I'm going to defer to you about the article's content as I know nothing about him. If the IP returns, give me a heads up. Congrats on getting the article to GA status. That's always a time-consuming accomplishment. Bgwhite (talk) 05:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

April 1939

Why did you revert April 1939 to a redirect? There was ategory:Months in the 1900s|*1939-03]] at the top, which I have already removed. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

GeoffreyT2000 That was a mistake. I had come off reverting several other date articles (ie [[1 April 1939]]) and was thinking this was similar. Bgwhite (talk) 21:23, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Piedad Bonnett

You corrected a bracket matching problem on this page, but failed to notice that the previous IP edit was obvious vandalism. Please try to check for vandalism before using automated tools(?), because it can make things harder. Thanks! Imaginatorium (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Imaginatorium The "obvious" vandalism was in Spanish, which I don't know. People writing "manually" also miss vandalism. Nobody is perfect. Bgwhite (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean to bite. But spot the warning !flags: the vacuous !comment ("Adding content"); the fact that after you fixed the syntax the effect of the edit was to change a working wl to a !redlink (not added content even); that the added text was not in English, with no obvious explanation/quotation. I can't really read Spanish either (something about "Take a chicken..."???), but it is not likely that a page title will need to be preceded by a sentence of short words in a foreign language. Anyway, never mind, please keep up the good work. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Teddy boy

Please explain why you keep removing my reference from the article. Plumpy Humperdinkle (talk) 13:51, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Plumpy Humperdinkle Sorry, I was confused. I was thinking you were linking to a Wikipedia page. I've added the ref back in and formatted it correctly. Bgwhite (talk) 08:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Assessment Request

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can you please add a new feature to add the Category, template and redirect tags to Wikiproject Assessment tags for WikiProject Jainism? This will be required to run at least once to correct all WP Tags and later can be rerun at intervals of maybe a month or so. Thanks! -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 07:43, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo I don't exactly understand what you are asking. Are you referring to this? If so, you need to make a request at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index. Bgwhite (talk) 07:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Let me try to elaborate. Check out Talk:Bharata Chakravarti. It has been assessed as stub for WP:India and WP:Biography. It a redirect to Bharata Chakravartin, so it should have been reassessed as redirect on talk page. Similarly, sone templates and categories might have been wrongly assessed. If your bot can do that job for some of the wikiprojects that would be really helpful. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 08:02, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Capankajsmilyo When you moved the Bharata Chakravarti page, you should have clicked to move the talk page too. There were past talk messages, so they belonged with the article. I've moved the talk page.
There is one big problem with your request... finding the templates and categories. If you look at Bharata Chakravarti now, it is just a redirect. There is no way of knowing what project that redirect may or may not belong to. Templates and Categories are somewhat easier as they maybe already part of a category that is related to Jainism. So, the first step is to make a list of the parent categories that belong to Jainism. A bot then can be run on the listing. My bot doesn't run this, but Magioladitis does do this. Bgwhite (talk) 08:20, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help and reference. :D -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 08:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Capankajsmilyo: The {{WikiProject Jainism}} template isn't set up to recognise either Template or Redirect as classes. As it stands, it recognises the 'standard' quality scale plus Category and Disambig; at one time, it did recognise Template as well, but that was removed (along with File, Portal and Project) almost six years ago. It may have recognised Redirect as a class prior to 1 March 2009, but certainly not since then. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Redrose64 can you please help in adding such recognition in the said Wikiproject? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 13:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I can, yes; it's a simple matter of adding two parameters |template=yes |redirect=yes to the existing {{class mask}} template that is inside {{WikiProject Jainism}}, and then creating Category:Template-Class Jainism articles and Category:Redirect-Class Jainism articles. But before doing that, has it been discussed anywhere other than here - for example, at either Template talk:WikiProject Jainism or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jainism? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:12, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
That would be great, thanks. I am not sure about that. I requested for it in the teahouse though. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Teahouse is rather general (in that anybody and everybody posts there regardless of interest), what we really need is a discussion where most (if not all) participants are members of WikiProject Jainism, that way we can be sure that there is consensus from that WikiProject. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:43, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I can assure you there is a broad consensus on this. If you still wanna confirm, would you please post on the Wikiproject page. I am not sure, whether such a post will be covered in my topic ban. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 19:31, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah. You're topic banned: thanks for mentioning it. In which case, that puts a whole new light on it. I rather think that by discussing these matters here, that you are in breach of your topic ban; and if I were to make those edits at your request, I would then be in violation of WP:PROXYING - perhaps Bishonen (talk · contribs) can clarify that. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Redrose64. Capankajsmilyo, I can't believe you've found yet another way to push the boundaries of your topic ban. When you noticed yourself typing the word "Jainism", didn't that tell you something? Stay away from these topics. Don't try to deal with them by proxy or in any other way. Not on user talkpages, not at the Teahouse, not anywhere. Leave air between yourself and them. I seem to keep giving you last warnings. Bishonen | talk 22:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC).
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bgwhite/Archive_47&oldid=1140976198"