User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2020/April

AAlertBot

Hi there! Do you have any idea on how can I place this bot in my local Wikipedia project which is Malay Wikipedia to run in a WikiProject?CyberTroopers (talk) 19:13, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@CyberTroopers: try asking at WT:AALERTS, I just run the bot, the technical details elude me. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Alright thank you! CyberTroopers (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

A few questions to headbomb regarding images and logos.

Dear User:Headbomb;

many thanks for accepting and cleaning up my draft: International Journal of Geometry. I have a couple of questions for you, hoping you can help. Regarding International Journal of Geometry, I am thinking to add the logo of the journal in the right-hand box. Do you mind to show me the procedures for this task and guide me in case there are some trivial mistakes I can do? Regarding images and pictures (this is for a next article); I would like to write an article about a mathematical theorem and I would like to upload figures generated by myself with geogebra. Could you as well provide me with the procedures and again some suggestions?

Best Regards;

Count Von Aubel (talk) 07:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Count Von Aubel: WP:JWG#Cover should explain the basics. Basically, use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. For the brief description in step 2, you can have something like "Cover of International Journal of Geometry", possibly with the issue information. In Step 3 select "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use. > This is the official cover art of a work. > Cover page of a magazine" and fill all the information. For "explain how the use of this file will be minimal" you can just put "Low-resolution journal cover" and that should be it. Let me know if you have questions. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Headbomb: many thanks, I will try this week-end. In the meantime, I have an additional question if you don't mind. It's about a different, anyway minor, issue: I have translated the page into the Italian and Spanish wikipedias. When creating the page in the Italian wikipedia I did not paid to much attention and I entered the page's title as "International journal of geometry". In order to be consistent with the English (and Spanish) version I would like to change it into the original title "International Journal of Geometry" (J and G capital letters). I realized it was not so straightforward because I do not have an Italian account (I would prefer not to have it) and I could not use the move option! Is there another way to do it? Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 09:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Count Von Aubel: I don't really know what's the technical stuff at the other languages, it's probably something to do with a lack of edits/age of account for security reasons and I don't know spanish/italian to browse the techninal pages of those wikis. However, if you go at WP:MOVE and look in the sidebar (on a desktop), you'll likely have relevant links about moving pages in those languages and you can go from there. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Headbomb: thanks, I'll go through that. In another meantime instance, I managed to add the journal cover thanks to your suggestions - they were very clear and helped me to go straightforward to the end! Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 10:55, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Cosmetic changes

Hello, this edit by AWB is just cosmetic and as such should not be done using AWB. Keith D (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

The edit removes a maintenance category, and as such, is not technically cosmetic. However: I agree with the spirit of Keith D's message. Edits like this should be done by an approved bot rather than a human editor, in order to avoid pushback from editors who are bothered by minor edits on their watchlists. Such pushback, even if it is invalid, can turn community sentiment against the positive change of including ref=harv in the CS1 templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm doing some limited testing with AWB for possible regexes. That one, while cosmetic, sure, removed enough instances that I bothered to save. I'm not planning on doing vast editing sprees with it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:44, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

CS1 and CS2

Do I get wight from your response that the difference is the display in the list of citations? And what do I have to do to achieve consistency, having not known that a problem even exists? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Not sure what "getting wight" means, but yes, the only difference is the dots and seperators. See

:*CS1: {{cite book |last=Smith |first=John |year=2009 |title=Book of Stuff |location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press}}
:*CS2: {{citation  |last=Smith |first=John |year=2009 |title=Book of Stuff |location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press}}

which gives

• CS1: Smith, John (2009). Book of Stuff. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• CS2: Smith, John (2009), Book of Stuff, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Some people prefer to use CS2 because they don't have to identify the type of citation or remember which parameters are supported (which isn't really an issue if you're not trying to do something weird and non-standard for the type of publication you're citing.) So to be "consistent", usually that means using all {{citation}}, or all {{cite book}}/{{cite journal}}/etc... Specific sources like {{GroveOnline}} are trickier (this one is by default CS1), but you can usually switch from one style to the other with by appending |mode=cs1 or |mode=cs2. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

(ec, you may have answered:) Thank you, and sorry about a typo. I am a copycat, so copied citations I found others using, Kafka being the model. It seemed to make sense to distinguish books, websites, journals, news, media, because parameters are different. Do you mean I could use {{citation}} for all kinds, just using different parameters? And what's behind "coins", mentioned on the Wasserflüsse article? - So far, I intentionally avoided "citation", because it led to error messages when defined without being used. Now that they are all the same in that respect, things changed, of course. Could I get lazy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: COinS is a metadata format. If you don't know what it is, you don't need to care about it. And yes, you could be lazy and use {{citation}} and let that template figure out how to format things depending on the parameters you give it. It will default to a CS2 style output, but you can specify |mode=cs1 if you want a CS1 style citation. I don't like {{citation}} personally, because it supports all parameters instead of only those that sense for a given type of citation. But it is the fire-and-forget solution if you don't want to think too hard about things. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Now if I want to be lazy the other way (just copy existing refs from one article to the next), what should I observe? Example: I use the same ref (Kutsch/Riemens), just changing page number(s) and name, for all opera singers, today Scot Weir. - Wasserflüsse: I am afraid that the user who contributed most died. I'd like to change as little as possible there, in memory. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Copy-pasting refs will always involve some amount of checking whether an article is in CS1 or CS2 style. Many are inconsistent. If you want to be lazy, just copy-paste the reference and let someone else do the cleanup and standardization. We're talking dots and commas here, which is pretty inconsequential all in all. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:51, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Fine. If you don't mind feel free to check my laziness from time to time. Articles on my user page, perhaps only look once nominated for DYK. (Weir just started, will grow.) How about Vespro, aspiring to higher quality eventually? - One ping per thread is fine with me ;) ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Vespro is all CS1 as far as I can tell. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

You are fast, - thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

item for comments.

Hi. I am trying to move ahead with the proposal that you and I had discussed and agreed upon at Village Pump, regarding, some edits to the Community Portal. I have now posted that proposal at that page's talk page, in order to make sure to give others a chance to comment. could you please go there when you have a chance, and add your comments? I recall that you mentioned at Village Pump that you were okay with the proposed changes. If I do not get any support there, then obviously I cannot move ahead with any of the proposed edits. I really appreciate any help. thanks.

By the way, I made a few small additions to the proposal, namely, a) a link to "News" in main navbar, and b) add a link to "goings-on" and a link to "about Wikipedia" in the small navbox at the top.

Anyway, I am open to any and all comments that you might have, of course. I hope you could please come by and add some comments? I appreciate it. thanks.

• Link: Wikipedia talk:Community portal#Proposal and draft to change navigational bars and links

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Redirect to article

Hi. FYI. I posted an academic journal article over a redirect that you created [1]. Feel free to copy edit. I am unable to find an acceptable ISO abbreviation. The one I used got tagged so I removed it. Regards. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

AWB edits

Hi Headbomb. It seems like this AWB edit by you was incorrect. Bluebook templates do not take a "jstor" imput and Bluebook refs should end with a full stop. FYI: the Bluebook is a style guide for academic articles in the legal field (e.g. articles in law reviews). Some Wikipedia articles use this style too. --MrClog (talk) 14:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I saw, yes. My bad. I'm a bit surprised at the lack of JSTOR support in cite bluebook, it should be added. Not sure what the full stop thing is about though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Normally speaking, Bluebook references would include the link of an article at the end of a reference, because law reviews, etc., are printed publications. Here on Wikipedia, we have decided to simply turn the title in a hyperlink, because Wikipedia is a digital source. The current url thing works fine, though I wouldn't object to JSTOR support either. The full stop thing is something lawyers decided looked cool and has since been part of the Bluebook style guide. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ --MrClog (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

No, I mean, I don't see why you're commenting on the full dots. AFICT, the JSTOR thing didn't touch anything with dots. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, your edit automatically removed the full stop at the end of the references too. (The full stop isn't part of the Bluebook templates and need to be added manually, which may explain why AWB saw them as wrong and removed them.) --MrClog (talk) 15:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh that... Yes, that's seems like an AWB thing. Typically that's done with |postcript=. in other cite templates. I'd make a post at WT:AWB if I were you. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I opened a task on Phabricator. I added you as subscriber in case you'd like to follow it, though feel free to unsubscribe if you want to. --MrClog (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2020 (UTC)