Jump to content

User talk:JoeHebda/Archive 2015

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2010←Archive 2013Archive 2014Archive 2015

Thanks for your edits on all the Catholic Bishop articles, Joe! I have tried to create one for every bishop I find who does not have one, but they all need fleshing out. Good work! Dhpage (talk) 00:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Glad to hear from another editor. Nice to know that we're not alone! At Historical list of the Catholic bishops of the United States is a huge list starting with number 1, John Carroll forward to present day. I have updated a few to improve where I can. Lately I am adding Navbox for a Diocese or Archdiocese article without one. After adding the Navbox template, I go back and add that Navbox to each article in that diocese, and do some updates to bishop/archbishop articles along the way. Some of those 'stub' articles really do need improvements... Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Adding the reply @Dhpage: JoeHebda (talk) 15:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Move request

The move instruction

{{db-move|Template:ArchbishopsofNY|This Redirect no longer needed as 'redirect-to' page ( Template:Archbishops of New York ) has been replaced by a Navbox template ( Template:Ordinaries of the Archdiocese of New York ) }}

which you inserted into page Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests at 14:38 on 27 February 2015‎, should have been inserted into page X, where you wanted to move Template:ArchbishopsofNY to X. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry @Anthony Appleyard: that I goofed up. I thought the db-move had a delete option. What I really need to have done is
Step 1, Delete this no longer needed Redirect Template:ArchbishopsofNY
Step 2, Delete this replaced Navbox Template:Archbishops of New York
Above Navbox was replaced with new Navbox Template:Ordinaries of the Archdiocese of New York
I'm somewhat new (since March, 2014) to Wikipedia and still have more to learn. If you could help me out that would be great, or point me to the correct process for me to try. Thanks, JoeHebda (talk) 16:51, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you @Anthony Appleyard: as this was beyond what I would know how to do. :-) Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:11, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Succession headers in prelate articles

Hello JoeHebda, thanks for adding information to many prelate and church-related articles. Just a quick note though, the last section header of an article should be "External links" or a reference header (or any previous header, if no ELs are listed). Following succession information, navboxes, categories, stub warnings, etc. at the bottom of the article generally don't have a separate header (they should have a descriptive title inside of them). See MOS:LAYOUT for some information about the background for this structure. Not a big issue, but I just wanted to explain my reverts of those header additions. Regards. GermanJoe (talk) 10:06, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

For example, see articles about royals Henry IV of France and popes Pius X for succession box usage without headers. Afaik the vast majority of articles with succession info follows this layout. GermanJoe (talk) 10:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks @GermanJoe: for taking the time to let me know. Going forward, I will not add the Episcopal succession section title anymore. Since I am about one-half way through US Ecclesiastical provinces (currently working New York), I will cleanup previous additions on my next pass through. And BTW, I did stumble upon these 2 articles (on topic) that are helpful and thought to share these.
Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the links, interesting info. I don't know all layout guidelines myself (there are simply too many of them), but if you have questions about such "technical" aspects, please feel free to ping me anytime. GermanJoe (talk) 13:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Taylor County, Wisconsin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wisconsin Central Railroad. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Food Preferences in Older Adults/Seniors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scientific study. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Diocese of La Crosse

Hello,

"I see that on the image licensing it states, Minimal use (WP:NFCC#3) Only used for the Diocese Wiki page. It needs Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license or similiar; so that it can be added to the Navbox Template: Roman Catholic Diocese of La Crosse and thereby appear on all of the Diocese-related article pages"

OK, How do I do that? I have a few more to update.

Thanks Roberto221 (talk) 20:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not know how. So far, I have only uploaded 3 or 4 pictures to Commons that I took with my own camera. I do know there are a lot of hoops to jump through to get the proper license.
A clue might also be found on the History page of another Diocese that already has a COA uploaded. The history will give the name of the uploading editor, who could then be contacted.
Another possible source might be at Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology where there is a Discussion page, and a list of Participants.
From time to time, I have gotten good answers on other topics at Wikipedia:Teahouse.
Good luck. JoeHebda (talk) 22:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

Over the weekend I added more coat of arms but I didn't use the naming conventions. The product I used doesn't let me save them in .svg so if you can convert them, that would be of great help. They are:

  • File:COA - La Crosse, WI.jpg
  • File:COA - Jefferson City, MO.jpg
  • File:COA - Santa Rose, CA.jpg
  • File:COA - Salt Lake City, UT.jpg
  • File:COA - Yakima, WA.jpg
  • File:COA - Sioux Falls, SD.jpg
  • File:COA - Reno, NV.jpg
  • File:COA - Oakland, CA.jpg
  • File:COA - Spokane, WA.jpg
  • File:COA - Lake Charles, LA.jpg
  • File:COA - Bridgeport, CT.jpg
  • File:Coat of Arms - Springfield-Cape Girardeau, MO.jpg
  • File:COA - Fajardo-Humacao, PR.jpg
  • File:COA - Arecibo, PR.jpg
  • File:COA - Wichita, KS.jpg
  • File:Diocese of Ogdensburg CoA.jpg
  • File:Diocese of Amarillo coat of arms.jpg

The Santa Rose .jpg should read Santa Rosa, I attended St. Rose when I was a child, it stuck in my brain. Thanks.. Roberto221 (talk) 00:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Greetings Roberto221, I took the liberty of adding * for the file list above.
I do not know if there is any way to convert from .jpg file to .svg (vector graphics) file. On one of the discussions at WP Heraldry, another editor mentioned using Inkscape software to draw the Coat-Of-Arms files that end with .svg.
At [this Archive] there is an editor that has this knowledge and might be able to look at the above files. At this page, Search for Offer for vectorization section title.
It might be easier to just to delete these above files, rename them locally on your pc, then re-upload with the .jpg file extension. As I mentioned earlier, I have seen a few COA that do end with .jpg so it would seem that either file type will work.
Cheers JoeHebda (talk) 00:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

What does it mean to be an "editor" of Wikipedia?

Please explain to me what it means to be an editor, and how do they get together to make decisions? Are editors paid by Wikipedia? Are logged-in contributors called "editors" or what's the difference? With regard to the article I contributed on History of the Catholic Church in Belize, I can see why the editors may want the title to correspond more directly with their categories, but I don't see why they need to add the term "Roman" within an article since it had occurred only once in the article (in a reference to the Roman authorities). I explain on the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Catholicism/Terminology why this is a sensitive issue in the Catholic church. By inserting the word "Roman" within the article the editors are injecting themselves into the discussion within the church and biasing the article in favor of those who don't want change (by slowing down the process toward renewal). Must Wikipedia carry on this way?jzsj 22:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzsj (talk • contribs)

Greetings Jzsj, All of us who are helping to improve Wikipedia are contributors and considered to be editors - as far as I know there is no title of editor. More info at Wikipedia:Introduction at the How you can contribute section.
Recently, I've been updating at Wikipedia:Tips and think these two tips might be responses for the Roman discussion.
*Be neutral, like Wikipedia
*Be neutral when editing Wikipedia
Lastly, it is helpful when discussing on talk pages To sign a message, type ~~~~
Hope this helps explain more about Wikipedia. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your forthright answer. You seem to leave the question open why the first line of the article must say "Roman" if there is no ambiguity about "Catholic" in Belize today, and we are not calling ourselves catholic (universal) with a small "c". As to the designation "unsigned" that keep appearing after my comments, I do use the 4 tildas and it still keeps appearing!jzsj 23:56, 15 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzsj (talk • contribs)

Ctrl-Z

Thank you for showing me that in the Teahouse. SovalValtos (talk) 20:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Catholic bishops in Nazi Germany - B-checklists

Hello JoeHebda, I have set the class for this article to C for now, but merely for technical reasons: projects with B-class checklists should have all B-criteria set to "yes", before the class parameter can be updated to B - that's why the template didn't display the B-class correctly. If you feel the article is ready for B-class, please check all criteria and update all criteria parameters and the class accordingly (I am not knowledgeable about that specific topic or I would have done it myself). A summary what is needed for B-class in WP:Germany can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Germany/Assessment#Quality_scale (it's very similar to most other projects). If you have additional questions, just let me know. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 13:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

History of Roman Catholicism in Belize

Thank you for your edits with one exception: I don't understand the logic of removing the heading "Historical periods" as a section heading for the historical periods (2,3,4 now) which it describes. Please explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzsj (talk • contribs) 11:03, 1 July 2015‎

See Talk:History_of_Roman_Catholicism_in_Belize#Updates_for_article_Sections for the details. I thought it better to explain there. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Mid-volume transaction output

I nominated this article for deletion. If you care, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mid-volume transaction output. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

List of popes

Hi, sorry to disturb you. There have benn scores of edits by User:艾德一世 to the above article. In my opinion, many of them are incorrect/unnecessary (OR maybe not, I'm no expert of this subject). Is there any chance you could take a look at them & check? Many thanks Denisarona (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Urgent request - The Signpost

In 12 hours, the Signpost is published for this week and is short on articles. I am hoping to throw together and article on tip of the day. Since you participate in the project, I would appreciate if you could answer these questions about the project as soon as you could.

  1. What is the goal of the project?
  1. Some might say that the tip of the day isnt contributing to the encyclopedia. What would you say in response?
  1. What are some recent issues or updates with the project?
  1. How can editors get involved, please list the various ways.

Thanks, if you see this after the deadline for the signpost, dont fret. Tortle (talk) 07:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Greetings Tortle, one of my fav slogans is: It something is worth doing, do it right so IMO since Signpost is weekly, there is always next week. For the questions above, this talk page Wikipedia talk:Tip of the day should provide answers. With this UTC clock on Wikipedia, I'm not sure about the 12 hours with time diff. etc. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Well as you know, Im involved in the project and know whats going on but it is a requirement of the article that I interview a user from the project so it would be much appreciated if you would do that but kf you are too busy, its ok. Thanks Tortle (talk) 14:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Tortle, sorry I've only glanced at Signpost a couple of times & did not know of their requirements. Right now I'm half way thru monthly MS security updates (on my laptop) & have to break away right now. (On a slow 1Mb DSL line.) Will look into providing answers above. Just to let you know I just don't do well with deadlines. In ancient days, people lined up for execution were known as the dead line! JoeHebda (talk) 14:53, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Its all good, domt worry about it now though because the deadline is coming up fast. Maybe in a week or two, ill interview you. Im gonns take a look at that yellow lightbulb .Thanks, Tortle (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Interview responses

Hi Tortle, below are my answers to the above questions. Note that for the numbered list to work, the lines must be kept together without a blank line in between, for example.

  1. Line number one
  2. Line number two
  3. Line number three


  • What is the goal of the project?

Provide informative and instructional help for Wikipedia contributors in a single tip, idea or shortcut format.


  • Some might say that the tip of the day isnt contributing to the encyclopedia. What would you say in response?

While we have no survey results or benchmarks to indicate direct linkage between TOTD views and resulting Wikipedia improvements, we can check the page information for some hard numbers.

We see that both the TOTD page and the Tips (by subject) page are being viewed on a daily basis.

Wikipedia:Tip_of_the_day has been viewed 4103 times in the last 30 days.

Wikipedia:Tip_of_the_day has been viewed 23330 times in the last 90 days.

Wikipedia:Tips (library) has been viewed 5522 times in the last 30 days.

Wikipedia:Tips (library) has been viewed 26036 times in the last 90 days.

A second consideration is the lack of controversy or negative feedback on these TOTD talk pages.


  • What are some recent issues or updates with the project?

A new tip was added for The Wikipedia Adventure! (Tip schedule queue date: April 24).

Added cross wikilinks between the TOTD page and Tips library page.

In the Tips library, over 40 unsorted Tips were placed into subject categories.


  • How can editors get involved, please list the various ways.

On the Tips schedule queue of 366 days there are not 366 unique individual tips, so new tips to be added to the schedule queue as well as removal of duplicate tips.

To keep the Tip library in step with the scheduling queue, additional editors may help by reviewing the Tip library and performing cleanup.

Joe, here are some points you might want to include in your descriptions of the TOTD project...
The Tip of the Day is a very high-profile project, providing a helpful tip daily (by transclusion) on two of the most trafficked pages in the Wikipedia community: Help:Contents and Wikipedia:Community portal, and upon thousands of users' pages. So the views are well over 300,000 monthly!
The TOTD has several purposes: to highlight a help page each day, provide a sort of random page function for help pages, and above all provide a convenient way to learn how to use Wikipedia a little morsel at a time.
Over the past several months, the Tip of the day project has been revamped, with new leadership, new coordination methods, and plenty of new tips! We are always looking for cool tricks and useful techniques on using and building Wikipedia faster and better.
Everyone is welcome to stop by the TOTD talk page and share their skills. If proofreading is one's forte, keep in mind that all the tips need to be checked for accuracy before they go 'live'. Each tip leads to the next one, so cycling through them is quick and easy.
If you take the tip collection as a whole, what you have is a nice summary of the Wikipedia help system that points out the essentials and the most powerful tools.
I hope these PR tidbits help. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 02:52, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Joe, I noticed that your font userbox links to Calibri(typeface), which is a red link. Perhaps change it to link to Calibri? Paul2520 (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Paul2520, I updated :-) JoeHebda (talk) 13:58, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Tips Project

Your work on the tips project looks good. Maybe like every day there should be like one tip for beginners, one tip for frequent editors, and like one tip for experts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackhat999 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

An icon for Tips library?

Which of these might be the best to use?

  • Book icon
  • Book icon
  • Book icon
  • Book icon

JoeHebda (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Added Welcome!
Similar to Welcome on TOTD page. JoeHebda (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Notre Dame Invite

Hey! I noticed you are a Notre Dame alumnus, hence I wanted to invite you to join our project. Also, I know you're already an active member of the project, but I just wanted to tell you that I'm currently in the effort to re-boot the project and make it more productive than ever.

Posted by Eccekevin on 01:28, 9 November 2015‎ Eccekevin. This would be a Woops! as I am NOT a ND alumnus. In the 1980's I did attend a conference there however & many fond memories. And friends who are alumni. JoeHebda (talk) 18:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

articles on the enclos paroissial of Brittany

I note your edits of my various articles on the enclos paroissial of Brittany and rather than keep clicking "thank you" I thought a general thank you was appropriate. Your efforts are much appreciated and the articles are improved. Hope you enjoyed them.Weglinde (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

I BOTFIGHTER I got your message on the talk page of teahouse I have visited shevgaon I can help you in that matter just I nedd some time till I collect more information on it. Thanks for asking. BOTFIGHTER (talk) 15:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Catholicism templates

Hi! Thank you for the reminder! :)

I often don't complete the assessment since I hadn't really familiarized myself with the exact criteria and differences in regards to both importance and quality ranking. I was mainly focusing on just adding articles to their respective projects. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JoeHebda/Archive_2015&oldid=901755313"