User talk:Mikeblas/Archives/2024/January

Archives

Twin Beds

Hi, @Mikeblas. Did you not see that the stage adaptation of Twin Beds was mentioned twice in that paragraph? That's why I took out the second instance. If you think it's important to include Mayo (though she's mentioned in the wikilinked article for the play at its first mention) and make an actual edit to my edit, fine, but by merely reverting you've restored the redundancy I sought to eliminate. Jcejhay (talk) 12:58, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say, but I think you're asking about an edit to the Edward Salisbury Field article. The sentence I restored was "It was also adapted to stage, co-written with Margaret Mayo". Neither Mayo nor the stage adaptation are mentioned elsewhere in the article. More importantly, I restored a reference definition that was used elsewhere in the topic. When you deleted that reference, you left other material in the article unreferenced and caused a referencing error which added the article to Category:Pages with broken reference names. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Mikeblas. Thanks for the reply. Yes, the Field article. Earlier in the paragraph, it says Twin Beds, the film, was "based on a novel and subsequent play." The phrase "subsequent play" links to the Twin Beds stage play co-authored with Mayo.

I apologize for the glitch with the references. It's very problematic (and neither your fault nor mine) not knowing how much of the text preceding a superscript is meant to rely on the cited source. I removed the ref tag along with the redundant information it ostensibly belonged with.

Let's fix this properly now, so it's neither redundant nor technically messed up. Shall you do it or I?

Thanks. Jcejhay (talk) 15:53, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free! My primary goal was to fix the referencing error. Now that you've pointed out the mention of the play, the phrasing seems pretty cumbersome and it's clear which adaptation Mayo actually co-authored. The reference seems to indicate that it was the play.

Note that the issue wasn't removing the reference from this sentence; it's that the reference was also used in the sentence that ended "filmed four times". With the definition gone, that "four times" reference was left with an error. -- Mikeblas (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I should have been more careful about the reference-defining instance. (Weird that it was defined in the second of its two appearances, rather than the first--but I guess that's consistent with how this paragraph had evidently been cobbled together without great continuity, which of course is how the redundancy presumably arose.) I think we can let the separate article on the 1914 play shoulder the burden of the details about that adaptation, so I'm going to stet the first mention (w/ wikilink) and re-remove the other. But this time I'll transplant the full version of the reference code to the initial (now only) mention of the play. What is missing, now that I notice it, is a clear statement that the original novel was also Fields's work, despite the semi-redundant way in which the novel also is mentioned...so I'll address all of that. Jcejhay (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK! Looks good! -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jcejhay (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

al-Hejr

You restored a cite in the lede of this article. However, the source is not a secondary source, but a primary one and to a random website, and we do not normally cite the lede. Is there a particular reason you restored a link to an archive of "Quran4u"? Ogress 17:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're asking about the Al Hejr article. Your recent edit removed the definition of the <ref name="Quaran 4 U"> citation, which left another statement in the article unreferenced and added the article to the broken reference names error tracking category. There's nothing unusual about having a citation in the lede, see MOS:CITELEAD. This citation in the lede supports the translation given, while the citation later supports a quotation. Thus, these aren't the redundant citations that the MOS cautions against. The primary intention of my edit was to resolve the referencing error that your previous edit caused. I'm not sure why you describe this website as "random". It's the same reference that you deleted, nothing new. -- Mikeblas (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meant it has no particular weight as a scholarly source. Of course there can be a lede cite, it's just not usually necessary. I missed the error message, my bad. My view was that the cite was not useful as it is a primary source. Ok, all set. Thanks for replying. Ogress 19:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you!

Totally accidentally deleted a reference while editing the American Ballet Theater article and you caught it thank you <3 Waterfelt (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Happy to help! -- Mikeblas (talk) 16:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Air Mail

This is the Air Mail article in question [1] [2] 2A00:23C8:1680:3301:30F7:E61F:76C9:C271 (talk) 21:46, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"replace in-use reference definition deleted by User:Drmies"

Mike, you really don't have to ping me for these things. If there's a point to make, just make it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "a point to make". If you don't want to receive notifications from me, feel free to add me to your mute list. -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering why you ping me in those edit summaries. Drmies (talk) 02:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read User:mikeblas#Hey! Why did you ping me in an edit summary?? -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have now, thanks. I thought this was the kind of thing a bot fixed. Drmies (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bots sometimes try to fix these errors, but often do not. (There's always a big backlog in Category:Pages with broken reference names). Even when bots do try to make fixes, they very often make completely incorrect fixes -- a situation that's unlikely to improve. -- Mikeblas (talk) 18:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Clan Forrester

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Clan Forrester, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Holit massacre article

Hi Mike, you reverted an edit of a table I inserted into the Holit article as not referenced. I am updating the article after an AfD were the article was found to be notable but not wiki-fied or referenced sufficiently. So I have the in use template up and am inserting text and references from Talk:Holit massacre#Resource summaries for updating Holit massacre article which I just finished compiling. Could you please self-revert or give me permission to revert so that I can complete the referencing. All parts of the article I’m inserting have references. Thanks. Ayenaee (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to revert it once you have references! -- Mikeblas (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ` Ayenaee (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Undefined reference in supercomputer article

Hi. Yeah, you're right, that slipped by me. I've spelt it out in full ⁠— thx for pointing it out ⁠! 👍🏼 GuccizBud (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]