User talk:Mikeblas/Archives/2024/July

Archives

Template:Baseballstats

Hi, a question regarding Template:Baseballstats and your recent edit to it. I'm seeing that uses of the template which include an asterisk before the template render slightly differently that uses of the template that lack a leading asterisk -- the latter seem to end up with an extra linefeed. See, for example, the article Boston Red Sox minor league players. For some players, there is an extra linefeed being inserted; examples include Miguel Bleis and Kristian Campbell. An example of no extra linefeed is Liu Chih-jung. The difference being if an editor types in

* {{baseballstats ...

or

{{baseballstats ...

I looked at the source of the template, and I don't understand why the leading asterisk is having such an effect. I also don't know if the recent addition of "nobullet" has somehow caused this or not. Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! By "extra linefeed", I think you mean more whitespace between the preceding paragraph and the paragraph where the baseball stats template is invoked. Is that right? (Wikipedia renders HTML, so linefeeds \n don't really get involved ...) I'm not sure why that would happen either. I've taken a whack at fixing it; see Template:Baseballstats/testcases and let me know what you think. -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:53, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks much for following up. Yes, I meant a visible gap, vertically. I looked at Template:Baseballstats/testcases and the version using Baseballstats/sandbox looks correct (as in, no visible gap). If you are comfortable with whatever change was made to accomplish that, it would be good to update the template itself. Thank you. Dmoore5556 (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I've moved it over. -- Mikeblas (talk) 04:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Sailors' superstitions

I added the appropriate ref name. I also just noticed that it has the “wrong” type of apostrophe. Hmmm. Bearian (talk) 01:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the fix! -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Israel–Hamas war infobox

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/2/6/israels-war-on-gaza-live-staggering-destruction-in-north-gaza-unrwa was removed only after adding https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2023/10/9/israel-hamas-war-in-maps-and-charts-live-tracker. If the old source is necessary please retain it. Pachu Kannan (talk) 03:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you removed the definition of the "Template:Israel–Hamas war infobox:live-tracker" reference. However, that reference is still used somewhere else in the article, so I replaced it. This left the template (and all the articles that invoke the template) with a referencing error, and added them to the Category:Pages with broken reference names error tracking category. Because so few of your edits have an edit summary, I'm not able to know what your intent was so I can't make any better fix than restoring the missing reference name. Are you able to explain why you removed this reference? What should be done with the other material in the template that relies on the reference you deleted? -- Mikeblas (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template inquiry

Mikeblas, saw you were an administrator and also involved with Template:Baseballstats so thought you'd be a good resource to connect with. I'm hoping to create a new template similar to baseball stats but with gymnast biographies. Would you be open to assistance as I'm unable to edit templates? Thanks! GauchoDude (talk) 18:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I give it a try every once in a while, but I'm by no means a template wizard. But maybe it's still possible that I can help -- what have you got so far? What are you trying to make? -- Mikeblas (talk) 18:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: if you're able to literally just create a copy/paste version of something like Template:Sports links, I would be able to advise as to edits. Alternatively, once a baseline template was created by us, I could seek template editor permissions and that would help from a long-term perspective. GauchoDude (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{Sports links}} is very elaborate; it's a special instance of {{#invoke:External links|getLinks}}, which pulls links from WikiData. It supports a ton of different sports, including gymnastics already. I'm not sure I can help, but I still don't know what it is you want -- maybe it's adequate to add more properties to that, or ... ? -- Mikeblas (talk) 22:17, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: Yes, {{Sports links}} looks to be *too* inclusive as if used as intended for sports, including baseball, it would actually stop working. As such, a gymnastics-only one, similar to other sport-specific templates more widely used like {{Baseballstats}}, {{Basketballstats}}, {{Footballstats}}, etc. is likely the best scenario. I would be more than capable of editing it down (we'd likely need only lines 1-10, 324-332, 524-645, and 653-703 of the current {{Sports links}}) and with editor privileges would be able to upkeep it moving forward including the addition or subtraction of further links utilizing Wikidata and the corresponding properties. GauchoDude (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting lost, sorry. So you don't want something like {{Sports links}}? -- Mikeblas (talk) 17:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: All good. I want something right now exactly like Sports links, but instead of it being so all-encompassing, having it specific to just the gymnastics space if that makes sense. GauchoDude (talk) 20:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeblas: Doable? GauchoDude (talk) 19:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not cottoning on to what it is you need, so I don't think I can help. Sorry! -- Mikeblas (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the NVIDIA product list too detailed?

Hi, I noticed you put an overly detailed template on the page for NVIDIA GPUs, and while some level of detail is probably a bit beyond necessary, I wouldn't say it's too far bordering on needing to be removed, I'm not sure if it necessarily breaks the inclusion policy but what do you think? ObjectOrientedCat (talk) 21:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's far too detailed. It's just a technical catalog, just a listing of mostly inconsequential details only interesting to a very particular audience. Worse, large amounts of the material are un-referenced and therefore the material here is not readily verifiable. It's really quite bad. -- mikeblas (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fair use

First, the image does not have a fair use rational for the Kubric stare article. Second, there are already two free images demonstrating the Kubric stare, and per WP:NFCCP, that fails criteria 1 (no free equivalent). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:17, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pity the Wikipedia fair-use criteria are so much more stringent than the US Copyright Fair Use criteria. -- mikeblas (talk) 22:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd argue that's a feature, not a bug. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the point of that? -- mikeblas (talk) 22:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that even if the criteria were met, you'd need to provide a RATIONALE on the media page first before you could use the image. The rationale needs to list the specific article, and the rationale needs to be tailored to the way the image is used in that article. No rationale - no inclusion. 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:5084 (talk) 04:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the point of the proposed argument about the policy being a feature and not a bug -- that's the point of ... well, something else. -- mikeblas (talk) 11:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Isaac Olaofe. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Giant Snowman 18:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was not vandalism, and was constructive. You should retract your accusation.

The material I removed was unreferenced -- the reference named "2023-24" was invoked, but never defined. This generated an error when the page rendered, and added the page to Category:Pages with broken reference names. Your reversion re-introduced the undefined reference without referencing the material that it re-added to the article. Fortunately, Rupert1904 was able to promptly add an appropriate source and correct your error. -- Mikeblas (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful when editing, when adding the subscription required tag to a citation in Boxer (armoured fighting vehicle) article you seem to have accidentally used an old version and ended up reverting bunch of recent changes to the article. Whutever1 (talk) 20:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining your reversion! Normally, that's done in an edit summary and you didn't leave one. Sorry about the mistake -- I often have a few tabs open with different revisions, and sometimes end up using the wrong one. Thanks for the fix! -- mikeblas (talk) 20:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]