Jump to content

User talk:Plastikspork/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10→Archive 15

I found one! I found one!

An active admin! Yippee! Anyhow, could you clean up the situation at WP:AIV? It's piling up... Island Monkey talk the talk 17:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Taxonomy

Thanks! Those three templates have been deleted for consistency in phylogeny and should not be in use. The toothed whale one should be Odontoceti if I'm not mistaken, the other two templates indicate in their deletion summaries what should be used in their place. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 04:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at them now and correct them. Most likely part of the taxonomy is linked incorrectly. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 05:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Looks like an artifact of an if statement in {{Taxobox/taxon}}. Not sure how to go about fixing it, but we're discussing it at Template talk:Automatic taxobox/Archive 8#Ghost transclusions. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 20:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Infobox bot etc.

First and most important, thank you for the timely notification. Of course we could ask the other bot operator to undo his 900 edits, that would be my choice in a perfect world. However, I am really exhausted of any sort of cyberconflict with unknown people on this website at this point, so that I won't do.

I was doing my best to perform a full infobox audit of each article: checking locations, elevations, populations and spellings. I can still do that, but as you say there was a substantial amount of mangling done by the bot. Since you are also a bot operator, I would like to ask you to help with my stylistic suggestions. I do not like the minimal line height that is given by "Infobox settlement" to the Irish name of the places. For that you may have noticed I created a template called {{Pad top italic}}, which makes the text much more legible. Also, I am not happy with dozens of empty parameters taking up space in the edit window. The number of times an editor adds information to the infobox is very small, and usually that is done by someone who knows how to add the entire parameter. So, leaving all the empties there represents useless clutter. Also, the Irish flag should not appear in the infobox per WP:MOSFLAG. The country should read Ireland by using [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] as shown. Can you please have your bot go over the ones SelketBot edited and add the "Pad top italic" wrapper, remove the flagicon, and also remove empty parameters? Many times, the entire article contains less text than the infobox code itself, when all of those empty wasted parameters are left in. I really can't stand that. One or two people have questioned the flag as well, I think that definitely should be removed to avoid conflict.

Normally I would respond on my page where you left your initial message, but I wanted to get your attention sooner rather than later, so let's keep the thread here unless you have an urgent message of some kind for me. Thanks very much, I appreciate your kind words. Sswonk (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe we are generally in agreement here. I currently have my bot fixing the most critical errors (missing or malformed coordinates) and once that is complete, I will have it work on the other issues that you mentioned. I believe we can get them into a state that is suitable for you to edit. The most important thing here is to have the infoboxes in a format that the editors can use. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 06:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for running the follow up and offering to continue with my suggestions. In addition, I use the parameter |coordinates_type = dim:100000_region:IE which sets the zoom of m:WikiMiniAtlas to a reasonable level, essentially covering a two- to four-county area rather than the WMA default of many hundreds of kilometers, to complement the infobox map scale. Please add that change to my style requests. I really appreciate the time you are taking. Sswonk (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

There is no such policy as WP:MOSFLAG. Its ridiculous that people continue to cite it. I recently tried to get flags banned from infoboxes and the response was a snow speedy keep. The majority want flags in infoboxes as shown clearly by the outcome of the dispute. Se the discusison on the Manual of Style talk page, there is complete disagreement over MOS:FLAG and most have indicaqted it should be the personal decision of the editor whether he wants a flag or not, In regards to Ireland however I understand politics may be an issue and nationalism so I have no problems with no flag for Ireland. BTW Plastik, feel free to generate a list of settlements you come across with infoboxes needing coordinates and i'll try to find them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe I was able to find coordinates for all of them, but if you want to double check, here is the list of ones that were missing coordinates (and I subsequently added):
longer list
The only ones which were a bit questionable were
but I am fairly certain these are correct to within a five kilometers. However, double checking is always good. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Coalpits is Creggs, tweaked that. Couldn't find either Hollygrove or Scotia's Grave on google maps, although Scotia's Grave looks about right based on that old map.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

If you click on the external link in Coalpits and Hollygrove, it will take you to a page which has both on a map. I loaded that up in one window, measured some distances, and then approximated the position. Now, if that link isn't a reliable source, then well, what else can I do? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:13, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you add the depcrecated tag to Template:Infobox Indian jurisdiction, it was closed as a delete but somebody didn't at a note about whats happeneing to it. BTW with Irish infobox can you leave blank parameters for blank subdivision 4 and 5. It should be Country, Province, County, Barony, Townland. Actually fully I think it should be Country, Province, County, Union. Barony, Parish, Townland, so the infoboxes definiately need at least 5 subdivisions, eventually the Barony and Parish and Townland parameters can be filled in..♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I will look into IIJ soon. As far as the Irish infobox goes, Sswonk asked me to remove the blank fields. If we add the back again, the "subdivision_title" should be filled in, even if the "subdivision_name" isn't. Otherwise, editors will have no clue what goes where. Also, I noticed that the ones that were converted put "Dáil Éireann" in the subdivisions section, where it should probably go in the "government" section? If you can provide a link to one where the subdivisions and government sections are filled out correctly, I can use that as a template. But for now, I am just removing the excessive blank fields per Sswonk's request. I am trying to be as support as I can here, since he has been converting and fixing hundreds of these as well. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah Dail Eireann should be under government section. See Falcarragh. I think infobox setltement should be updated to receive those parameters directly. After all we did agree at the TFD than while deleting it we should update infobox setltement to enable as smooth a transfer as possible. subdivision 4 should be Parishes of Ireland I guess, although I'm not fully certain what the issue with unions, baronies and parishes are. I do know that townlands are the lowest division though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Just checked it should be Country, Province, County, Barony, Parish and then Townland, but many towns/villages are townlands so usually Parish would be the last parameter,♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:15, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the late work of SporkBot. Sswonk (talk) 22:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

socks

I was just about to file an SPI on this...do you want me to proceed or do you want to block others per DUCK:

They're all coming in from Pakistan and due to the IP hopping, a rangeblock on 58.27.xxx.xxx might be good. I'll be filing at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist for the link. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I blocked the two accounts (indef), and the one recent IP (1 week). Give the IP hopping, I don't know if blocking the individual older IPs would do much. A range block is possible, but perhaps just blacklisting the URL is a better option (less disruptive to other editors on the same range). Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I've filed here.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

edit to RL biography infobox.

Can you please revert your edit to the infobox. They are not the same as if left blank {{{a}}} says {{{a}}} instead of blank. Mattlore (talk) 04:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

What I replaced was every instance of {{#if: {{{a|}}} | {{{a}}} }} with {{{a|}}}. In the case that the parameter "a" is specified, but is blank, they both resolve as blank. In the case that "a" is omitted, they both resolve as blank. In the case that "a" is not blank, they both resolve as the same value. They are entirely logically equivalent, and have no impact on the logical functioning of the template. In addition, through this simplification, I actually found a couple which had typos. The positive side of this simplification is that it reduced the server overhead for parsing the pages that include this template. If something actually broke, please point me to the article, or tell me exactly what broke. Or, even better, post a note on the talk page for the template with an {{editrequest}} since I am not always logged in. I would revert my edits right now, but I checked several hundred transclusions and there were no changes that I could see. If I am wrong, please tell me. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 06:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Request your opinion as an uninvolved editor

There is an ongoing discussion at WikiProject Mixed martial arts as to whether or not adding an upcoming MMA fight to a fighter's fight record table violates Wikipedia's WP:CRYSTAL policy. Could you give an opinion?--Phospheros (talk) 05:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks like a long thread. I will read through it if I can find a chance over the next day or two. However, it looks like you already have several other editors involved. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

World settlements

See this. Can I ask how difficult it would be to download settlements and coordinates from the geonames server and generate tabled lists by country of every settlement in this fashion? (Says you can download it here) Because I'm considering proposing a bot to generate a full list by country. I think the lists would be invaluable as perma stubs could be redirected until they can have proper articles and it would maintain some order and state the scope.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it does look like you can download the entire database. You should check it out and see what they have in the files. It looks like they are just big zip files with the database dumps inside. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

OpenCorporates template

Hey, long time no talk. Hows things? I come, as usual, to beg a favour. Please could you look over {{OpenCorp}}, particularly the third option, to default to the page name? cheers. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:36, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I took me a second, but I see. You are asking if I can make the third usage example work? By the way, I noticed on Arsenal F.C., that you are using %20 for spaces. Wouldn't it be better to just have the template convert the spaces to the correctly "urlencoded" version? I could do this and correct or check any ones using the "%20". Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes; and yes; and thank you for sterling work. What is PATH and how does it work? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
See mw:Help:Magic words#URL_data, basically it controls how blank space is converted. I tried it with "+" and "_" and it didn't work, but "%20" does. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:36, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Useful page; duly bookmarked. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:14, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Template: Infobox high court

Hi. I could use a bit of help over at the infobox, I tried adding parameters for a second chief judge, but when I tested it, it messed up. I actually requested this on the talk page, but decided to do it myself after no response. I'd very much appreciate it if you could, thanks,--Tærkast (Discuss) 18:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

for the assist! —Scheinwerfermann T·C19:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Conversion templates

Hi,

I see you're migrating conversions from old to new templates. If you need any help from Lightbot, let me know. Are you tackling: Template:RailGauge? Lightmouse (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I changed {{height}} to stop using "ft in to m". Once I did that, it went from around 25,000 transclusions down to under 100. As a bonus, you can now specify fractional inches for the input, which wasn't possible before. I think that one can be orphaned at this point. I have also been looking at some of the others in Category:X to y conversion templates. One of the tricky ones is going to be "m to ft in", which is also being used by {{height}}. I could replace it as well, but convert doesn't seem to support fractional inches as output. If that feature could be added to "convert", I am more than happy to change the "height" template, which would then basically orphan the "m to ft in". Another intermediate option would be to create a subtemplate of "height" which does this, and use that instead, until such a feature could be added to "convert". My brief experiment with "railgauge" was a test to make sure I wasn't going to screw up your script by changing the "{{" and "}}" to "\{\{" and "\}\}". I don't have any plans to tackle that template at this point in time. I think all the templates in the "x to y" conversion category are fairgame at this point, given the prior TfD results. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


ok. We can tackle the non-fraction versions and see how that goes. Lightmouse (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The way to do this is as follows:
  • Replace the non-fraction versions. I have an AWB module for this if you want to help.
  • Edit fraction versions used as human height (relatively easy) to set precision=0. This eliminates the fraction. Wait a reasonable time (e.g. a month) so local editors can change the precision if they want. Then eliminate all versions that still have precision=0.
There are about 50,000 articles to do. Can you help with this? Lightmouse (talk) 10:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

yeah hi

I don't like your name. I'm a worker for a metal Spork factory and it really annoys me that people are getting appreciated for making good wiki edits and their name is plastic spork. Just change the name please! My factory is very poor please make it metal spork or something different. It will make me happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackweimer (talk • contribs) 01:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

That's the weirdest request I've ever seen. --The Σ talkcontribs 23:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:Campaignbox Operations at the Ohio and Mississippi River Confluence

Could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_July_17#Template:Campaignbox_Operations_at_the_Ohio_and_Mississippi_River_Confluence and consider restoring it (or give me the OK to recreate it)? It appears that whoever originally made the campaignboxes followed this list from the Civil War Sites Advisory Committee at the National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program and the deleted template in question seems to be the only one missing. It may be counter–intuitive, but a campaignbox with just one battle in it actually can impart value. A campaign can cover lots of ground with zero, one, or few battles fought. And for the sake of consistent appearance on every page, a campaignbox with one battle still imparts information of the CWSAC campaign name (for example Template:Campaignbox Jackson's Operations Against the B&O Railroad) and perhaps a campaign map as in Template:Campaignbox Morgan's Raid in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio, or Template:Campaignbox Tullahoma or Middle Tennessee Campaign or Template:Campaignbox Streight's Raid in Alabama and Georgia. It also gives a starting point for adding minor battles and skirmishes not rated by the CWSAC such as Template:Campaignbox Mine Run Campaign where the minor engagement Battle of Charlestown was added at some point by an editor to join the CWSAC rated Battle of Mine Run. Thanks. Mojoworker (talk) 19:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring it. I've notified Bart133 and also placed similar information for discussion on the template talk page. Thanks again. Mojoworker (talk) 17:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

geddy lee pointer

geddy lee's entry used to have a pointer to this page I guess, so it looks like that got hosed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.117.211 (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Template: ARKive

Hi, When you're back and recovered from your travels, please could you check {{ARKive}} to make sure I haven't done anything daft? Cheers. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:20, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks perfectly functional. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

fort pulaski format

Is there a rationale for the big white boxes? I was trying to make the page look like a webpage. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you can be more specific about what you are trying to accomplish, and I can help improve the layout. I tried something to keep one of the images from overlapping the infobox, but it didn't work as intended, so I reverted it. I agree that the formating is suboptimal on that page. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Etain

I see your entry in the Wikipedia for Etain, Meuse. I would like to know it you live in Etain. Singerm49 06:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singerm49 (talk • contribs)

No, I don't live there. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Ad:Template:Infobox_Venus_crater

Ad:Template:Infobox_Venus_crater

You may be interested in this discussion Bulwersator (talk) 14:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I will have a look if I can find some time. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Just checking...

Re [1], bit confused what you mean? (Not doubting you've probably got it right, just not following.) Orderinchaos 04:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

You had changed the infobox to use something like {{#if: {{both| {{{latd|}}} | {{{longd|}}} }} | ... {{{coordinates}}} }}. This makes no sense, since it says "if both {latd} and {longd} are defined then show {coordinates}". The field, {coordinates}, is not used by the template. Basically, your edit broke part that shows the coordinates. Does this make sense? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Update. There was some redundancy there with the "if both" check, which I simplified. Perhaps this is what you were trying to do? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Template: Q

It seems that the above template has been deleted following the discussion here, which you closed. Is there a way of re-creating the template so that it doesn't violate WP:PUNCTUATION. At the same time, I am concerned about how to configure my EngvarB script to avoid stuff that may be in quotes if such a device is not available. Any suggestions? --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 08:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I think you could easily recreate it if you (1) call it something other than "q", since "q" has some history as a question icon, (2) have it use standard quotation marks, "", rather than the lquo rquo that it was using before. I was going to suggest calling it {{"}}, but that is already taken as a redirect to {{quote}}. If I recall, we have other templates for marking text that should be left verbatim, like {{sic}} and {{lang}}. Some editors might revolt if we started marking things with {{lang|en-gb}} or something similar. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:58, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
By the way, now that I think about it, the suggestion to not call it {{q}} is a bit weaker now. When I had the bot orphan the template, it cleaned up all the "icon" uses, so those don't exist anymore. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

TFD Nanabozho

Hello, you did some editing on the nanabozho page, changing and are you looking for tag to a not to be confused with tag. I am a little new and still getting the hang of this, and you cited TFD what is that? Thanks Majestic PyreMy Speech Bubble 16:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for using non-obvious abbreviations. In this case, TFD is "templates for discussion". In particular, the discussion found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 July 15#Template:Looking. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:FGwiki

I would like to take this template to deletion review, but I wanted to discuss it with you first. It's a frustrating situation because I see this as no different than what happen the first time the template was deleted, making every argument made (including those by myself) in the original deletion review a bit reduntant: [2] A weak discussion with the only real argument being that it violates WP:ELNO, which was the same reason why it was deleted before, and was the same argument that was overturned in the DR. The nominator seems to have forgotten the part about "except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors." when it comes to WP:ELNO #12.

Here's the tricky part. We don't need the template. I don't really care that it got deleted. Chris made a very good point that we can just use {{wikia}} if we need to link to them. So I guess what I object to is the idea that this TfD endorses the nomination's rational, and that's the only part I wish to challenge. I don't really see a point in bringing this to DR just to turn around and delete it for a different reason.

For that matter, I don't even know if I'm technically disagreeing with your own closure, since deletion for depreciation reasons was still presented in the TfD. Making a big deal just to prove a point, no matter how valid I or anyone else thinks that point may be, is the kind of thing that burnt me out on Wikipedia years ago.

So I guess I'm leaving this message for two reasons. One is to see if maybe you had any thoughts about it or advice, and two, incase I do bring this to some discussion, DR or not, I did not want you to take offense to it. -- Ned Scott 22:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I certainly wouldn't take any offense if you want to take it to DRV. My reading of the discussion was basically that no one, including the creator, was arguing for it to be kept. My personal suggestion would be to just use {{wikia}}, if that works for you. It's generally better to have fewer templates, since (1) it reduces the need to learn new syntax, and (2) reduces the work involved in maintaining multiple templates. It sounds like what you really want is some sort of a decision regarding if the FG wiki violates ELNO. If that is the case, then DRV really isn't the venue. I would suggest instead starting a thread at WT:ELNO or a similar talk page. Clearly, if we have templates like {{wikia}}, then all external Wiki's probably don't violate ELNO. Does that help? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Template:Convert to Infobox Settlement

You and Pigs on the wing may be interested in this development.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

See it uses♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I figured that out already :) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
There's also articles that could do with in infobox conversion as well. About half on this list are Greek settlements with hardcoded infoboxes. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:25, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I am afraid this is only the tip of the iceberg. Many many articles out there are not even setting the "infobox class", and are using even more primitive tables for infoboxes. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Templates: height and convert

You may be interested in the discussion at: mosnum: Templates: height and convert. Almost all instances of the height template with metric input now have output precision set to 1 inch. I think there may be undocumented consensus that 1 inch precision is fine for human height. The problem of fractions in non-human-height applications hasn't disappeared so your thoughts are welcome. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I will have a look. I personally don't see the height template as being that bad, especially if we can just turn it into a simple frontend with some error checking. The only problem with it is that editors then think there is a {{weight}} template, which has had an entirely different meaning (undue weight). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Problem with commas in the input to convert with sortable

I have posted a problem with commas in the input to Template talk:Convert#Trouble with .7Csortable=on. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:02, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. We could just put a reverse number format in there to take out the commas before generating the sort key. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Preparing for the new Convert

This is an FYI about the current re-writing of Template:Convert. As you know, we have wanted Jimp, as admin now, to more quickly update dozens of subtemplates to have better features. There have been several discussions about how difficult it has been to submit the numerous entries to Template_talk:Convert/updates. Jimp is currently reworking all units to pass more parameters, with the plan to replace the old {Convert} using the sandbox version:

The new Convert might still have some "bugs" but it will be much more flexible than the old Convert. If there are any major efficiency problems, then we can split into 2 separate forms of Convert:

  • Convert           - the original form might have limited options.
  • Convert/custom - could be a variation with expensive options.

Note, we still do not know if the new Convert will be a "resource hog" (as perhaps much slower than old Convert), so the possible creation of a "Convert/custom" (to handle rare, complex features) is just a remote possibility. As I see it, we just need to try to move forward, with a more-flexible Convert, and if there are any unforseen problems, then we can revert back later. I think at least 500 subtemplates will need to be changed, so Jimp will be busy for a while. This is just a heads-up notice, so you know what to expect from the overall future plan. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:50, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Please have a look at what I've managed to assemble so far and make some suggestions. JIMp talk·cont 16:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Great. I will see if I can find some time over the next couple days. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Imperial election TOC

Erm, you've closed the RFD on Template:Imperial election TOC as Delete, when there were 2 votes to Keep and 3 votes to Delete, plus 1 to rework. That's not a consensus to delete! Would you consider reversing your decision in that matter, please? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 18:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I think you forgot Chris Cunningham's "vote", which would make it 4 for delete. But, as has been said before, XfDs are not closed based on simple vote counting. The deletion of this single use template does not mean that a more general purpose TOC template cannot be created. There has been considerable prior consensus regarding the deprecation and deletion of "single use templates". My suggestion would be to see if you can create a general purpose TOC template, say using some of the ideas in Category:Wikipedia table of contents templates, which would list the level 1 and level 2 vertically, but the level 3 using in a {{flat list}} format. It's very likely that this could be accomplished using a class in MediaWiki:Common.css. This was done recently for "flat lists", for example. This is basically what was being suggested by "rework". An option which would definitely work, but would be less elegant, would be to take what you created, but make all of the names of the section headings passed as parameters. This would still require making changes each time a section heading was modified, which is why it is less elegant, but it would not require changing the actual generic template. In either case, the "rework vote" is basically a "delete vote" since the new template would be substantially different from the existing single purpose template. Let me know if you want any help with coding or if you take this to WP:DRV. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
You're right, I did overlook Chris Cunningham's vote; my mistake, apologies. Though of 7 people voting, just over half wanted to delete and just under half were happy with some form of 2D template. I know that deletion debates aren't about vote-counting, but that's still not a consensus. And I disagree completely that the rework vote is "basically a 'delete vote'", not least because User:Cs32en explicitly implied that they supported a keep if possible, so that the reworking might happen.
I'm afraid I'm completely unaware of any "prior consensus regarding the deprecation and deletion of 'single use templates'". I am creating a generic 2D template now and will implement it to replace the specific 2D ToC on Imperial election, but it still seems more appropriate to keep the lengthy ToC content out of the article and in a purpose-specific template, for ease of editing and usability. Using Template:TOC limit reduces the utility of the table of content, as I explained in the deletion debate
So I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with your closure with delete — it feels utterly inappropriate and is not reflected by consensus. I would ask again, please, that you restore the template, so that its contents may be replaced with a call to the generic Template:TOC 2D that I am now building. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 20:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:TOC 2D

As I mentioned, I'd already been working on it, so sorry about overwriting your version. What's your intention with the titles, though? Surely the need for those should be quite rare, which is why I'd made it so that the header cells could be used like that. It feels like they'd be unnecessary, surely?

Thanks for sorting the extraneous newlines, though; I was trying to see where they were and just couldn't spot them :o) — OwenBlacker (Talk) 21:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I agree the titles are probably rare, I will remove them. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Now saying that, the layout works better than what I'd done. I'm in two minds now. It might be worth keeping their alignment; I'd just wanted to avoid yet another logic switch. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 21:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I will leave them from now. Feel free to remove, or ping me to remove them, if you come up with a better formating method. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleted location map documentation pages

I'd appreciate if you would consider restoring three pages which you deleted: Template:Location map China/doc, Template:Location map USA/doc, and Template:Location map USA2/doc. My addition of these documentation subpages to their respective templates was reverted by someone who had an issue with removing the interwiki links from the template (see User talk:Obersachse#Location maps). As an interim measure until that is resolved, I would like to restore the documentation without removing the interwiki links. I can recreate the pages if necessary, but it would be easier to edit what was originally there. Thanks. -- Zyxw (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Done. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Infobox Finnish municipality

Please update to wikilink sub regions.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with linking to the article, sub regions? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

No, I mean the actual sub regions need linking in the articles, oh would you have to go through them and wikilink them individually?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Your friend Pigs on the Wing can be quite a strange, unpredictable character (he'll seem friendly one moment and the opposite the next) . I've never known what to expect from him or how he'll react.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I generally get along with him, although we have had our disagreements in the past. It's fairly common to find that folks don't always agree with you. For example, we don't always agree either :) Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Burki

Hi Plastikspork

I am contacting you as you appear to be a resonable fellow. If you recall YellowMonkey WikiAdmin was causing Vandalism on Javed Burki, Apparently his account was pulled in Nov 2010 and now he appears to be back in the form of Qwyrxian.

Please advise on the status of YouTube videos. I cound not find anything on Wiki regarding this and Qwyrxian keeps giving circular arguments which he seems to be making up as he goes on. Does Wiki not have any rules regarding the conduct of their Admins? Thanks Spork — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 19:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

We generally try to avoid linking to YouTube videos, and certainly don't use them as a source. See WP:ELNO for example. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Editing User pages

I appreciate that you have an interest in updating old code, but I think it may be wise to at the very least notify users, prior to editing any of their user pages. Regardless, it would be most proper to instead notify them, recommending they update the code, allowing them to seek their own proper resolution to the matter. Thank you, -Xession (talk) 07:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

You are the first person to complain. Most editors either (a) thank me or (b) don't say anything. Strictly speaking, we don't own the pages in our userspace, but you are correct that we also don't generally edit other user's userspace either. In this case, there was (a) no change in content and (b) it was removing a template from the many listed in WP:Database reports/Transclusions of deleted templates. However, since you do care, I will try to keep your particular pages in mind in the future. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Location map/Info

I'm hoping you can take a look at {{Location map/Info/sandbox}}. I used {{BASEPAGENAME}} in place of {{PAGENAME}} so that the template can be transcluded on the template page or on a documentation sub-page. I did a couple of other minor tweaks as well. The back-link looks more like the real thing and I reduced the margin at the top of the table. Is the pp-template stuff still necessary?

As a testcase I used {{Location map Germany Baden-Württemberg relief}}. It is new and currently unused. I'll make sure I fix it later.

You might enjoy Template:Location mark+/doc#Using an invisible mark. –droll [chat] 04:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Great. I synced your changes. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! I think it will work fine. I have another tweak in mind for this template but I'm going to think about it for a while. –droll [chat] 02:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Stack begin

I only just noticed that this exists, and that pretty much all the transclusions are the same sort of thing we needed {{fix bunching}} for (i.e. that it's no longer needed). Any idea why it's been so widely deployed? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

If I recall, Frietjes was removing most all of the {{fix bunching}}. The ones for which removal caused serious layout issues, were replaced with {{stack begin}}/{{stack end}}. If I recall correctly, the primary layout issue was if you have two infoboxes (or other right floating elements), and you then try to place a left floating element after them. The left floating element cannot float higher than the second right floating element. Hence, it will be pushed down further in the article. Of course, one could move the left floating element to between the two right floating elements, but then it would not be able to float below the second right floating element. So, basically, this template is allowing two (or more) right floating elements to act as a single right floating element. If you want an example, see with stack vs. without stack. These examples are fully understood if you resize the width of the browser, and watch how the floating elements move (or are blocked from moving). For "campaign boxes" and "infobox military conflict", the issue was resolved by adding a |campaignbox= to {{infobox military structure}}. This allowed the campaign boxes to be glued to the bottom of the infobox, which allowed them to float as a single element (as pointed out by an IP on your talk page). The technical fix was to add something like {{stack begin}}/{{stack end}} to that infobox template. One could probably do the same for say "taxobox" and others, and then reduce the usage further. However, I am not sure one could completely reduce all cases where a fix like this may be desirable. I hope this explains the issue. I should put this in the documentation for that template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Argh. I see the problem now: I was looking in the wrong place. That's a crying shame after finally getting rid of {{fix bunching}}. Cheers. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello Plastikspork! I hope you enjoy this tasty treat as as a friendly greeting from a fellow Wikipedian SwisterTwister talk 06:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Indian and hotel templates

Do you have any plans for conversion? The infobox building could do with having the missing hotel parameters like rooms etc.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The building/hotel merger will be easier than the IIJ template. Off-wiki work has been taking quite a bit of time, but this weekend is looking promising. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

India template is a huge problem. People are even creating masses of new articles with it♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I see. I suppose the bigger problem is when they add malformed versions of any template. This user doesn't seem to understand exactly how either template works. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Brigid Gallagher has returned to NZ

a cursory websearch shows that Brigid Gallager left time team at the end of 2009, and now works in New Zealand on Archeology, including Tv programmes, and on her long standing project in Turkey.

C/F http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/manukau-courier/2862359/Times-right-for-return-home

118.208.71.71 (talk) 08:05, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure to which article you are referring. As far as I can tell Brigid Gallagher does not have an article? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Something to take a look at

See Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#General notice to bot owners about edit summaries. Maybe there's nothing for your bot there, but maybe there's a few things that would make the bot better. Anyway, it would be nice if if you took 2-3 minutes to review those suggestions, or make some of your own. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:39, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. I will see if there is anything I can do to make my bot use more descriptive edit summaries. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I have opened a thread at Wikipedia:ANI#Pronunciation. Also, could you at least remove the "pronunciation" parameter from the documentation? This will, hopefully, reduce the number of new additions. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like another admin took care of this. Thanks for your help with clearing the tracking category. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:French literature (small)

Hey 'Spork, Haven't spoken to you in a while.
Any idea why this template has been edit protected for years?
Justification would appear to be lacking.
Varlaam (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I stepped it down to semi-protection. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:38, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
This is like why you're my favourite Wikipedian.
What kind of barnstar do you want for your birthday?
Varlaam (talk) 02:09, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Infobox hotel

Any chance we could keep it? I really miss using it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Hong Kong football

Hi mate, I just wanna say your help with the replacement of the old football sub-project banners has been invaluable recently. I wonder if I might ask for your help on one more, however, as Template:WikiProject Hong Kong football requires being replaced with {{WikiProject Football|hongkong=yes}}. I promise this is the last one! Cheers. – PeeJay 10:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox former Grand Prix motorcycle rider

Following this TfD, I added some fields to template:infobox motorcycle rider and turned template:infobox former Grand Prix motorcycle rider into a frontend. I think all we need now is a bot to substitute it. Frietjes (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Done. I think we can now delete it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:38, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Great. I found the list of your bot's edits here. Before, I had noticed that some had both the generic box and the "former Grand Prix" box, so we may need to go through these and merge the two boxes. I don't know if you did that. That is a lower priority matter. Thank you. Frietjes (talk) 23:47, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Reviewing and merging would be great! We also need to add |birth_date= in most of them. Your help is appreciated. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox cricketer

Can you please take a look to {{Infobox cricketer}} and add birth_date etc. support? Matter already discussed in talk page and there were no disagreements. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Blanked a number of single malt articles

I've shut it off, apologies if I got it wrong but blanking a lot of articles doesn't make any obvious sense. Dougweller (talk) 06:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! You did the right thing. It was supposed to be helping out with a template merge, post TFD closure, but certainly not blanking pages. I checked the logs, and there was an extremely high server lag when the bot was running, but other than that I can't see any reason why it should have been blanking pages. My guess is that there is a problem with the MediaWiki API, due to the high lag. I would have hoped that there would be a failsafe mode when the server lag is high. I am going to switch the bot into supervised mode until I can track down the issue. I can unblock it to debug the problem, but just for procedural correctness, it would be great if you (or another admin) could unblock it for me. Thank you again for blocking it! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Question on template for antipopes

hi, surely the very obscure notion of an antipope does not deserve a template in wikipedia, does it? it's not skin off my nose, but I'm curious. cheers, Valeria.depaiva (talk) 01:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

my apologies, clearly there are enough antipopes to justify the template.odd.Valeria.depaiva (talk) 01:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
The way to delete a template is to not simply "blank it". You either nominate it per WP:CSD or per WP:TFD. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Lisa D'Amato

21 October? Look Lisa D'Amato information and ANTM Wiki-Lisa D'Amato, the date of birth it's a 1 January.

Check the IMDB link, it says October 22. I will change it to just 1981 since there are conflicting sources. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:56, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Too many references

I would appreciate it if you reconsidered the close of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 September 12#Template:Too many references. There is 1 !vote supporting deletion of this template, 1 supporting keeping this template and 1 which does not label their !vote as delete or keep but takes issue with the nomination in the first place. I beleive the result of this discussion should be no consensus or it should be re-listed to give a better opportunity to gain a consensus.--RadioFan (talk) 11:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I am reading 3 deletes and 1 keep. Chris doesn't ever use bold labels for his votes, and the nominator is clearly voting for deletion. However, it's WP:NOTAVOTE, and it was ultimately the arguments presented which were weighed in my decision. However, since it appears you did not have a chance to add a comment, I have relisted it for a week. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:14, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Usertc

Deletion seems a little much. It's been converted into a wrapper template. It is user-hostile to suggest that templatespace is so precious we must delete "usertc" because they can instead type "user|separator=pipe". –xenotalk 01:57, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I am going to revise my closure to point out that it is redundant to {{userv}}, which is completely identical. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:02, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
My, there are a lot of them, aren't there. =) Shouldn't it be closed as redirect? –xenotalk 02:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Sure, I could do that. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
My thoughts are that users get used to these little shorthands and will be caught off guard if they disappear. Cheers, –xenotalk 02:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Just noticed they aren't completely identical, as userv uses italics for the username. But it's a minor point. –xenotalk 02:15, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
It appears that is only on the template page, see the code? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
D'oh! Thanks for pointing that out. –xenotalk 02:39, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Turkey

Plastik I could use your coding assistance. Can you ransack the categories here by province and generate me a list of settlements by district under each province wikilinked like User:Dr. Blofeld/Turkey but possibly with the links piped to hide the, xxxx part? The idea is that I can generate a full list of populated places in Turkey by province like List of populated places in Afyonkarahisar Province and start them connected by Template:Lists of populated places in Turkey. I'll get Anomie to add the coordinates by bot. There is a site with population data. I need though for you to code something to generate me these lists which I can then put into the mainspace and start.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I could potentially help, but it could be several days before I have any time. I'm currently very busy with travel for work. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 23:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Like List of populated places in Afyonkarahisar Province, only with the ends piped off for tidiness. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

If you have a moment in a few days please let me know. It would save a great deal of time and would allow me to simply create the articles straight off. I'll get on with the Thai tambons and Chinese townships in the meantime. Hebrides has said he's planning on running a bot to do Burma as I had planned..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Are you back yet? Just really need your help with this..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:08, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I am back, but extremely busy with off-wiki work. I find myself still editing here, but it's fairly simple tasks that don't require too much programming. Is there anyone else who can help? Thanks for checking in! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Dunno, can you suggest somebody who could do it, Rich Farm is out of action right now because of a fuss about his DNB stubs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

i think the task is pretty simple?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it's not so simple. That category contains dozens of category loops due to subcategories including the parent, and categories including templates which transcluded the said category. I will try to clean it up, but it's a mess. There is a cat tree at the top left and, until I am finished, you will notice that several of the branches expand forever. By the way, Rich is back, so he may be able to finish this task faster. I don't have any scripts for the tr-wiki yet, or any which spider an entire category tree. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:00, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

mmm. looks like I'll have to do it manually then with the aid of a word programme to wiki link them all..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:45, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I think I cleared up all the loops. I will see if I can program up a web spider to grab all the pages in the category. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:20, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Awesome thanks. Once they are created I'll create lists like List of populated places in Afyonkarahisar Province and then simply start stubs on them. I'll aim then to try to get them all started by the end of the year!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:43, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Could you break them into chunks by province and create them like User:Dr. Blofeld/Turkey/Afyonkarahisar and then give me a directory of pages?. I'd imagine that would be a reasonable way to split. The links are piped or not or raw? Ideally I want the lists formatted like List of populated places in Afyonkarahisar Province (but hiding the ends with a link pipe) with the district village entries all listed under each header ready to start the lists. If you view the category here you can see how it is organized by district. Can you do this, only if this is straightforward? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:11, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

What happened to the lists? Stored on your computer?09:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I uploaded 0, 1, 2, 3, ... more to come. The indentation level indicates the level in the category tree. I also took a stab at translating the category names to something closer to English. I know you wanted them piped, but this is what was generated. I'm sure piping them wouldn't be too difficult to do after the fact, but I don't have time now. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:39, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about piping that's fine. I'll remove the lists once created in the main space.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Done the first @ List of populated places in Adana Province.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Great. I will try to remember to upload the rest in about 24 hours. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:58, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Hoax TfD closure

I'm curious as to how you came up with "no consensus" on this one. It looks like a very clear "keep" to me, with four clear keep !votes and no delete !votes other than the nominator. It doesn't make a whole lot of difference since the template isn't deleted either way, but it could be a factor for someone further down the road considering another TfD; a closure of keep might deter him/her from doing so where a no consensus closure wouldn't. An explanation would be appreciated. (I personally have no opinion for or against deletion, I'm just asking as a observer. ) jcgoble3 (talk) 23:50, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't count votes, since it is WP:NOTAVOTE. I felt as though the arguments for keeping it and the arguments for deleting it were roughly equal, hence, no consensus. The rationale for deletion is pretty strong here, given that (a) an article which is clearly a hoax should be speedy deleted and (b) an article which is suspected to be a hoax should be taken to AFD. Having a suspected hoax article sit around as a suspected hoax is problematic. So, if this tag is used, it should not sit on an article for a long period of time, which appears to be happening. I could stick this summary in with the closing ... I hope this helps. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense. I would recommend adding the summary to the closure so that others don't come by and question it like I did (I figure if someone questions it, it deserves a summary), but it's up to you. Thanks for the reply. jcgoble3 (talk) 00:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
So added. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox for fuel production facilities

Hi, Plastikspork. There is a discussion concerning infoboxes for fuel production facilities. Your input is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 09:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I have been pretty busy this week. I will try to have a look this weekend. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Height and weight in baseball infobox

Hi ... I seem to have re-started a discussion that you took part in, on a different noticeboard, six months back on the possibility of adding height and weight to the baseball infobox. Another editor helpfully pointed me to the old discussion. FYI, the current discussion is here. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Plastikspork, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser for the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign, we're interviewing as many of the very active and productive Wikipedians as we can to broaden the range of appeals we run come November. I wonder if you would want to tell me more about your experiences editing and writing here? If so, I'll ask you your personal story and I'll ask you some general questions about Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're interesting by emailing amuszalski@wikimedia.org. Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 01:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Vandal

Hi- for some reason the Template:Vandal is wiping out its categories from the /doc pg. I can't figure out why. Could you take a look at it? Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 04:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I fixed it. There was an unclosed comment on the doc page. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Now I see it!! Thanks much!! --Funandtrvl (talk) 22:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Baharestan, Isfahan

I was referred for a technical question to you. When I attempt to put the image in this article as the skyline image in the infobox template, it shows as a redlink. How do I fix that? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I was hear to leave Plasticspork a new message, and saw your message. If you do a diff between my edit and the one two edits before (which is where you tried to add it), you will see it is showing the image name is different, but I can't see a difference. My guess is that there are some special ctrl-characters or other invisible unicode junk in the name that you tried the first time. It looks like it works now. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 16:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Strange. Thanks for sorting it out! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Infobox Palestinian Authority municipality

Thank you for your help rolling this back, and improving the parameters in the template. I had no idea that Nero's edits were not sanctioned by a broader group of editors. I just saw that he was orphaning the template, and decided to help him with the parserfunctions and nomination. I went through his list of contributions and noticed that you had rolled back almost all of the edits, but had stopped with about 50 or 75 left. I went ahead and finished off the rollback, following your pattern of removing the now unused stuff, moving the citations to the "footnotes" parameter, using the image_map and emblem paramters, etc. I hope this was helpful, and I did it right. Please check my edits if you want to make sure I did it right. Thank you. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 16:59, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the help. Yes, I stopped with about 50 or so left mostly due to fatigue. Thank you for finishing them off. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Could use some help with something...

We're working on an idea with the junction list templates that could use some bot help to implement. {{jctint}} and {{jctbridge}} are used to generate rows in the junction list tables for intersections/interchanges and bridges respectively. The former template has a few state-specific wrappers and the latter has a few alternate titles that redirect to it for rest areas, "places" and tunnels. The idea is to "future-proof" things and standardize them now when dealing with ranges of mileposts (or kilometer-posts). Right now, some junctions don't fall at one exact milepost, so a range is used, like 7.886–8.776 for the US 131 interchange along M-6 (Michigan highway). I'd like to change the template so that instead of defining |mile=7.886–<br/>8.776 we would define |mile=7.886 |mile1=8.776 and the template would insert the en dash and line break. I have the sandboxes for the two templates set, but some bot assistance in correcting the existing transclusions would be helpful.

Any search for en dashes to separate the two numbers into the separate parameters will also need to look for hyphens since some editors used hyphens. I would also need to deal with the fact that some articles use the line break and some do not. Long term, by separating the two numbers into separate parameters, and continuing to convert hard-coded tables over to the templates, we could implement code to generate a second column with the converted values. The MOS gods were pushing for us to add a kilometer column in US junction lists (which would mean a mile column in non-US junction list tables). We reached the compromise to require the conversion information in a table footer, but someday we might still need to add the column. This would be a first step, hopefully, in dealing with that. Imzadi 1979 → 22:15, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I could have a bot help out. If you can provide a link to a sample edit, I can try to code something up. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
This edit to M-6 (Michigan highway) was what needs to be done to any article using {{jctint}} either directly or through {{CTint}}, {{ILint}}, {{INint}}, {{MIint}}, {{MNint}}, {{NHint}}, {{NYint}}, {{OHint}}, {{PAint}}, {{VTint}}, or {{WIint}}. The bod coding would need to look for the same situation with an en dash or a hyphen and with or without the line break. Imzadi 1979 → 01:22, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
One thing though... sometimes the |mile= in {{jctbridge}} in those articles will have a <hr>. Those should be ignored since they wouldn't have the en dash or hyphen in them. Otherwise, they'd follow the same thing as {{jctint}} et al.
Ok, I updated jctbtridge to handle the line thingy directly. This edit to U.S. Route 223 (ignore the bit about the &nbsps though) is that case. Imzadi 1979 → 01:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
My hard drive crashed, and I am waiting for a new one to arrive in the mail. Until then, my ability to perform large numbers of edits will be limited. I will check back after I get back up in running, but of course, feel free to ask over at WP:BOTREQ. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:10, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback II

Hello, Plastikspork. You have new messages at Redrose64's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Redrose64 (talk) 21:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of template infobox uk cathedral

hi. I don't know if this is the right place for this, but it's your name against the suggestion to get rid of the above template. I think this is a bad idea since cathedrals are administered and staffed materially differently from the churches with which it hasten suggested the infobox should be replaced. for example, churches (c of e) have vicars or rectors. This is one person, always a priest. There can be other clergy, also priests. At a cathedral there is instead something called a Chapter which by law is a mixture of clergy and lay people. This used to be properly displayed in Durham Cathedrals entry. It cannot be displayed using a church infobox, and is currently malfunctioning on the UK cathedral one. By all means let's fix the cathedral template, but not delete it.

How do I know all this? I'm one of those lay members of chapter

Best wishes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dde0apb (talk • contribs) 21:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Please report any issues with missing parameters at Template talk:Infobox church. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:56, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Updating obsolete fields of company infoboxes

Hi, Plastikpork. There is a discussion (well, not really discussion as during two weeks there was no feedback) about updating obsolete fields of company infoboxes. I remember you assisted with this when updating power station infoboxes. Do you think is it possible that you could assist also with this infobox? Beagel (talk) 09:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I could potentially help in about a week or two. I had a hard disk crash on my main computer, and I am waiting for a new drive to arrive in the mail. Until that happens, I am a bit limited in running large jobs. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:58, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Beagel (talk) 09:24, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

{{Shipwreck list}}

Hey,

Regarding this template: did the user request userfication? Because he's mostly inactive from the looks of things... Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

And while we're at it, I see {{last.fm}} is still kicking about waiting to be orphaned: any tips on easy ways to orphan deleted templates like that, so I could help out? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
No, there was no request for userfication, but since it was still in use in userspace, I figured there was no harm in userfying it. I can certainly delete it (or you can) if you think there is some harm in leaving it in userspace. If I were to delete it without updating the transclusions, then it would appear on Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of deleted templates. Now, one could argue that we shouldn't be tracking transclusions of deleted templates in userspace, or at least split that tracking from the more important namespaces, but that's currently the way it works. I have been trying to keep track of my own more detailed account of such transclusions in my own userspace, but that's a longer story. As far as the last.fm template goes, I dropped it in the holding cell, and normally I would just have my bot take care of it. Unfortunately, I had a hard drive crash on my laptop (about a week ago) so my bot has been down (except for the log rotation job, which runs on a different machine). I was able to revive the script for orphaning templates this morning, and I am having my bot orphan it right now. Thanks for the note. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Last FM template removal and edit summary

Hi. I see you've been removing this template with the edit summary of "Remove Last.fm template per TfD outcome". I can't see the discussion on the page you've linked to, or indeed any indication on the Template:Last.fm that it's even been listed for deletion. Please explain your actions. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, there was a typo in the edit summary, it should have read September 14. Sorry for the mistake. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:17, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
No problem - thanks for clarifying. Lugnuts (talk) 08:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

confirmation required

Hi Can you please confirm article you wrote for Pjenovac, very similar to Babine Gornje

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Augustofagioli (talk • contribs) 19:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't write that article, you should check with Starzynka. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Looking at your exeprience here, I guess you were right leaving article untouched during your last edit of that page. Congrats for your great work at wikipedia.org

Augustofagioli (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Tfd: Facepalm

Thanks, it looks like there is no need for further input at this point. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Largest shopping centres in the United Kingdom

I see (discussion) you deleted Template:Largest shopping centres in the United Kingdom. Could you drop me a copy somewhere? Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 06:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:06, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 17:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Mass nomination of Waterloo Road character articles

I've now nominated all the many re-created Waterloo Road character articles, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Fisher. Please do contribute to that discussion. U-Mos (talk) 09:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

TFD closing

Hi there. I'm a bit surprised at this close of yours. Shouldn't TFD discussions be open for 7 days? Can you explain why you closed that one early? Regards SoWhy 21:20, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I closed it early since it was WP:MADEUP and already discussed in this discussion. I have appended this to my closing. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Destruction

It's part of the process that one's work gets destroyed, however talking about it outside the bureaucracy avoids an awful lot of wasted effort on everyone's part. I now need to rescue 731 templates, plus you have added an unneeded template to about 126 articles which AnmoieBOT has dated, thus creating nearly 2000 un-needed edits. Rich Farmbrough, 21:26, 8 October 2011 (UTC).

{{Should be a user space test page please delete}} DOES NOT SHOW UP IN USER SPACE. It is in case some moron copies a user space test page to mainspace. Rich Farmbrough, 21:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC).
Sorry if I made a mistake in deleting and orphaning the templates. The closing for the TFD said "substitute and delete". As for the other tagging, it was my understanding that this was necessary from the discussion. I am happy to reverse this if necessary. I can also restore the pages with the "Should be a user space test page please delete", there were only about six or seven, if I recall. Just let me know what I can do to help. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:47, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
No worries. Rich Farmbrough, 21:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC).

Template:Infobox tennis biography

has lost the nickname parameter here, but I hesitate reverting this because of your later edits. Can you fix this, by either readding the parameter or removing it from the documentation? Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 23:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Given how long it has been gone, and that it has been removed from Template:Infobox football biography as well, I imagine we should probably open a discussion thread before adding it back. I really don't care either way, but it seems controversial. It doesn't sound like you have a strong preference either. I went ahead and removed it from the documentation. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. As you noticed I am not keen to have this parameter :-). The reason is I revert tons of unreferenced junk added there in all kind of sports BLP articles. Even when "referenced", they are often just self-propagated slurs. Materialscientist (talk) 00:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Single digit documentation

By moving Template:4/doc to that, you have made the {{documentation subpage}} template not work. It would have been better to move it to Template:1/doc and change the templates to use that instead. Shall I do that for you? LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 21:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think I will. Makes more sense for it to use the first template of the series' doc page as the page used. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 21:41, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
The problem with making it a "/doc" subpage is that the interwiki links added to that page will be included on all the templates transcluding it. Although there are currently no interwiki links, there may be some in the future. See Template:stack documentation, template:user-multi/template and others for examples of this type of shared documentation. It's technically not a documentation subpage. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Plastikspork. You have new messages at LikeLakers2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 21:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you

Thank you for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the beer, and I am glad to see it passed. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

India

When do you think you can run something to change the infoboxes to standard?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:31, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

No idea. I am beginning to think we should just convert it to a frontend and then leave it for a bit. We need some serious error checking given the skills of the average editor to the transcluding articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

What's up with the map in Tate St Ives?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

You were using the wrong syntax, latd, lat_d, lat_deg, .... Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

S-line subpages

What age limit are you using in deleting the unused s-line subpages? One year or Jan 1? Also, are you looking at creation date or latest revision? Thanks! — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 13:08, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I tried to delete anything from mid-October 2010 or older. If there were substantial revisions after that date (more than just a recat), then I kept it. However, given the sheer number, I may have missed a few, and I may have accidentally deleted something newer than mid-October 2010. I am pretty confident that I didn't delete anything that wasn't orphaned, since I used the database report to get the links. Let me know if you need me to delete one or bring one back. We can always do this again in another few months if there are older ones which are still orphaned. Or, take individual sets to TFD. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Oops, I guess that's what happens when you check 120 templates in 5 minutes using AWB. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 02:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Dispenser never answers his talk page these days... <sigh>

There is a provision to add Reflinks as a script with certain parameters for operation directly from one's edit window. I would like to change the parameters to access it in 'interactive mode' and work on plain links. Would you have any idea how I would change the script instruction to do this? Cheers, --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

hello

here you are again... please read before you delete.... all i said is relevant to the subject... i am aware of the subjecs developments in his career because i follow fashion and i am part of this circle... doesnt happend often whe a supermodel opens a production company... all else is valid... just look at the atched links... this GUY is relevant because he is on MTV in 32 countries.... are you ?? just goole and see... and leave this article alone... g night from brasil.... ipanema beach rio de janeiro — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaphoto (talk • contribs) 02:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

{{Cat use dmy dates}} and {{Cat use mdy dates}}

Please see Template talk:Dated maintenance category. — Robert Greer (talk) 14:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Territories forming part of the Commonwealth

Dear administrator, would you please to review {{Territories forming part of the Commonwealth}} there is no duplication {{The Commonwealth}}. thank you, regards Omdo (talk) 04:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

That template was deleted after a deletion discussion. I would suggest starting a thread at Template talk:The Commonwealth if you feel there is something missing from the current template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Template deletion

The template, Template:Territories forming part of the Commonwealth, which was deleted, has been recreated by the author with a link to a Deletion Review which I can't find. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't see a DRV either, but it looks like it has now been re-deleted. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Maps and Cathedrals.

Please stop adding maps to those already lengthy cathedral boxes. They are superfluous. Every cathedral is in a city. Every city has a map. Putting maps for the cathedrals themselves is overkill.

It's like this: if a significant person is mentioned within the context of an article, then we link that person's biography. We don't give the dates of the person's life, unless they are absolutely relevant to the text of the article e.g. "the architect John Bloggs died in 1455, leaving the spire incomplete." If john Bloggs has his own article then we don't write "John Bloggs (1402-1455) built the spire".

Similarly, if a person wants to know where Chichester Cathedral is, within Sussex, they will look at Chichester.

The problem is that maps and lists in the right hand box take up space that is much better utilised by pictures. Cathedrals are visually among the most important works of art that have been created. Great long lists of cleargy and specifications don't need to be in the right hand box, any more than the map does. The lists can go anywhere else in the article. But the right hand side, particularly within the first paragraphs of the main body of text, is the prime space for illustrating the building, its history, its style and so on. Cathedral websites, (well-done cathedral websites) never give lengthy lists of people on the home page. They give a link to where you can find that stuff if you want it. They also give a link to "how to find us". They don't attempt to put a map on the home page.

Jamming a map in, to take up space where there could be a plan of the building or a photo of the interior, is not useful.

Amandajm (talk) 01:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Then, remove the map and replace it with an image? Some folks like maps, some don't. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

@Amandajm. Your views are entirely subjective, not fact. And generally location maps in church articles are endorsed by all of the people actively creating church articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Lists of Russians

Per your comments here, would you care to comment at Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Help_removing_a_template. Thank you. 198.175.175.57 (talk) 23:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that's crazy. Thanks for the heads up. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism by Wiki Editor Qwyrxian

Dear Plastiksport

please kindly review the vandalism by Wiki Editor Qwyrxian on the site Burki. This appears to be indulgence in a Indian / Pak rivalry which is not what we want. Qwyrxian was supposed to suggest a comprise three months ago, but did nothing. I would ask you kindy conduct an independent assesment of Burki

I believe if you lookup Qwyrxian then the old problem YellowMonkey IP will closely match.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 12:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Burki

Please check as I have added so many references, every time I try to remove this I get hassled by other Admins. Your review of the matter would be appreciated as they are now threthnening to block my account. Notice that Wiki admins made changes withou discussing and then fault me for the same. They have not provided any examples regarding YouTube Videos and I have given them clear and common sense examples. They even delted my sources without discussing... Is this a Faschist Wikkmedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011khan (talk • contribs) 15:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Solar System table

Hi, Plastikspork. I have been working on improving templates in my spare time, and have noticed {{Solar System table}}, which is knitted together old-school. I am sure this could be put together better but it looks to be too complex for me to handle. Thus this note: I am hoping you would like to tackle improving and modernising it. Regards, --Dianna (talk) 03:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

i saw this note and made a pass at reworking it. i did my best to keep the exact same appearance, but just refactor it. i have no idea if it is any easier to read, but it is about 1/3 smaller in terms of bytes. Frietjes (talk) 16:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much, Frietjes. Now that the hardest parts are done, I have got some ideas for further simplification. For example, there is no clear reason why the content needs to be in columns; it does not add anything to the clarity. The little moons and rings also subtract from the clarity and need to go. I will do some more improvements. --Dianna (talk) 05:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, thanks for taking care of this. I have been off WP for the past week. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox basketball player

Sorry for coming to you every time I have a template problem. {{Infobox basketball player}} apparently does not support variable image width. It would be great to add this parameter and fix the documentation (it currently has incorrect syntax for image placement). Thanks. PS. Ah, and if you dared to remove the nickname parameter, I would fully support that ;) Materialscientist (talk) 22:27, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

There is a "image_size" parameter in there. I tweaked it a bit to make "frameless" the default. Hopefully this won't cause any problems. I also removed nickname from the documentation, but left it in the template for now. However, I agree we should remove it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Lists of Russians

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 14#Template:Lists of Russians 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Hiya Plastikspork!

Cool name! Sorry to bother you, but would you be so kind to give me rollback? I need it in order to be able to use IGLOO. I have (more than) enough experience. My request can be found at WP:RFP/R#User:Sada_Abe. Proof can be found at WP:RFP/C#User:Sada_Abe. Thanks in advance, Sada Abe (talk) 04:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Plastikspork. I have declined the request for rollback. I find the user's userpage to be creepy and alarming, and they do not have the required disclosed history for this right. --Dianna (talk) 05:06, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree. I saw the 24 hour history and just ignored it. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:07, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Help with protected template

Someone has noticed a problem with Template:Infobox ancient site, which is now protected. The maps have an optional caption which replaces the default caption below the map, but it is appearing both there and above the map. They are wondering if the caption label above the map can be eliminated, so that only the one below is displayed (preferably centered). As the page was protected last July, I can no longer edit it, though it looks like a simple fix. Can you help us? • Astynax talk 20:40, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I made it so that the caption only shows if the image is there, and that the map_caption only shows if the map is there. I hope this resolves the issue. Let me know if there is something else. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:36, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! • Astynax talk 08:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Kennedy Center Honorees

I see that you did 2009-2011. I am going to start going back and converting the rest of the {{Kennedy Center Honorees}} templates. However, I am wondering if there was some discussion leading to the creation of this template. Have you had any feed back on it?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

It was basically the result of a conversation with Ktr101. The unified template was created by Ktr101, but then there were objections that it was too large. And, there was an IP going around and changing them back to the individual per year templates (see a thread on the talk page for Lucian Pavarotti). So, we restructured it to make it collapsible, and this seems to have resolved everyone's concerns. So, I suppose there was some discussion, but it was somewhat limited between two or three editors. As far as I can tell, there aren't any objections to the new template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Even collapsed, you are adding 250 links to each page that you add the template. I was actually surprised that this did not cause a problem at Meryl Streep, who already has dozens of templates. There is an upper limit to the number of links allowed on a page. Try to put a template like this on Hilary Clinton and I think you will get an error. I was thinking that reformatting these for each decade might be a better solution. Then you are only adding about 55 links per page. If you just copied each decades content into a separate template you could interlink them like these {{AcademyAwardBestOriginalSong 1971–1980}} or {{Grammy Award for Album of the Year 2000s}}. Let me know what you think about this. If you want to go to interlinking decades, you can create them or I will do them for you. If you are confident that swapping these in with the mostly collapsed format is O.K., I will help you with the remaining conversions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:56, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
By decade might be a good compromise here. We could accomplish this within a single template, although just splitting it would work too. I really don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure what you are thinking about in terms of using a single template that will display only a decade of links, but I can create the interlinking decade templates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I was just thinking about a method that would allow the fewest edits to articles, and would allow for experimentation other formats. So, basically a switch that would take a specified year and produce the desired output. This could be a simple switch that selects the various "by decade" templates, and if folks like it, we could always just substitute it, and use the "decade" templates directly. You might want to ask Ktr101, since he/she was the one who originally wanted the larger template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:55, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Go for it. I honestly don't have any opinion and once even thought of that when I was merging templates. Five templates is still better than thirty three templates at the end of the day. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
O.K. in the next week or so, I will create an interlinking system.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:07, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Familypedia

I see you decided to delete the templates Familypedia and FamilypediaPlace. If I read the discussion correctly, then the real objection was to the format of the templates, rather than their existence. Richard Tol (talk) 11:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I recreated "familypedia" as an inline EL template, which will make links to it easier to track. I hope this is acceptable. if not, we can simply substitute it, and we are back to exactly where we were before. what I just did was very easy, since plastikspork had already done a lot of work formatting the articles so that there would be a place to put the template. again, let me know, and I am happy to re-orphan them template. best regards. Frietjes (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Whatever works best is fine with me. I suppose some other editors might object and ask for it to be deleted, but I personally don't care. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The Real World

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 13:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find some time. I've been swamped with off-wiki stuff lately. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for this. I should have watchlisted the template to keep it sync'd with the sandbox while my edit request was pending. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 03:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

revert of changes at Infobox Swiss town

Regarding your revert at Infobox Swiss town, the version that you reverted only had 1 undesirable wikilink, 1 missing < /noinclude > and included several changes that had a consensus. I've made changes to the sample text for User:Blurpeace to use, which should address the 2 relevant changes. If there is a reason for reverting this change, please let us know at the talk page. Thanks Tobyc75 (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Just saw your comments on Blurpeace's talk page. I've updated the sandbox version to not have the wikilinks and to work.Tobyc75 (talk) 17:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Looks like you were able to sort it out. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

CityRail templates

thank you for deleted several of the "line colour" templates. I have updated several more articles, so more of the "line colour" templates in Category:CityRail templates can be deleted as well. Frietjes (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Building a new page idea

I did a pre-article yesterday, an in 5 hours it was deleted, not useable --- I thought the idea of the "Pre-article" was to see if others would help maybe get it made into an Article! Would like to see a new link for Lisa Jackson (model) besides the current link to ANTM Cycle 9.. Please visit -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Jackson might be suprised at the stuff I found to add.

If the pre-article is not dead -- have a look (User: JoeBell / Lisa Jackson (model) was submitted for WP: AFC review and user Mabel killed it........ Look forward to some help if I can, feel free to send an email too -- fibron3@yahoo.com JoeBell (talk) 21:17, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks like you are pushing it through the AFC process. I am super busy right now, so I don't know how much I can help. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Lor ipsum and relist template

Forgive me if I don't know the background, but I'm very confused at this edit from a while ago. It doesn't seem to have added anything useful to the template. You reference a TFD discussion but I'm confused about why they'd need to be merged or even share something worth merging. I don't know the original context. Is this addition to the relist template intentional? Shadowjams (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

We used to have several lorem ipsum templates and they were merged after the December 2, 2010 TfD was closed. It looks like my edits were updating the syntax as part of the merger. I'm not sure why that particular format was needed in the relist template, but my edits were probably an attempt to keep the appearance the same after the merger. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Please see

As the person whom I know from Tfd for years, please see and comment at User talk:This, that and the other#Closing at Tfd. Debresser (talk) 07:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm traveling right now, but I will have a look when I get back, or later today if I can find some time. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:50, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Canadian political parties

Hello, I thank you for closing the Template:Canadian political parties discussion. However, you closed it as simply "do not merge", without mention of the Template:Canadian political parties. What is to happen to this template? 117Avenue (talk) 06:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

If you think the larger/merged template should be deleted, then you can start a TfD for that one. Technically, the decision was to not replace the smaller ones with a single larger one, but no conclusion regarding deleting the larger one. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
What about WP:CSD#T3? "Do not merge" means using it would be in violation of the decision, and orphaned templates get deleted. 117Avenue (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the tag per the above advice. Curious just how this was orphaned. Alarbus (talk) 01:34, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Read Template talk:Canadian federal political parties#Parliament, the TfD, and this section. 117Avenue (talk) 02:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Do not change the indent-level of my post, as I was not commenting to you; it disrupts threads. Alarbus (talk) 02:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned, there was nothing in the conclusion of tfm that warranted this one being deleted. TfD is the place to go. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Font resize in Infobox settlement

Hello! Can you please take a look at this thread: Resize request? Thanks in advance SSzatmari (talk) 12:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

You can make a formal {{edit request}} to get more attention, or I will have a look in the next couple days. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
There is no hurry, so if you could make the adjustment in the next days it would be perfect. I knew about the {{edit request}} tag, but I was afraid that it is necessary to specify the exact change of the source code that we are asking for. And I was not able to find where the font_size tag must be placed. SSzatmari (talk) 10:19, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) You might be able to draw inspiration from {{Infobox GB station}} where the |other_name= displays below the |name= but in smaller font; see example usage at Carmarthen railway station or Fishguard Harbour railway station; the latter passes the other name through {{lang-cy}}. Essentially, {{Infobox GB station}} pushes all its data into the generic {{Infobox}}: the {{{name}}} goes into |above=, where the font size is larger than normal (specifically, it's 125% and bold); but the {{{other_name}}} goes into |header1=, which by default is normal-size and bold. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Substitution checking

Please see the two sections I posted about this subject on Template_talk:Fix#Substitution_check and Template_talk:Fix#Method_of_substitution_check (one right after the other). I compare Ambox with Fix, asking a few questions and making a few suggestions. Debresser (talk) 20:25, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

American Folklore

Hello. I can do so. I chipped in my two cents worth at the TfD discussion as an impartial editor, one who made only one technical edit to the template some time ago. Given my lack of knowledge of american folklore, and lack of interest/knowledge of U.S. history, I'm not sure I am the best person to ask. Having said that, if none of the other editors who were involved in the discussion revise the template over the next couple of weeks, I am happy to take a stab at it (by that point more knowledegable editors will have had the chance to do it, so they can hardly complain if a cretin like me makes the initial cuts). Cheers. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Updating obsolete fields of company infoboxes

Hi, Plastikspork. How do you think, is this possible to help with this request? Thank you in advange. Beagel (talk) 16:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

It seems like every day I have less and less free time, but I might be able to do something this weekend. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

November 22

All old Tfd discussions are closed, except for November 22. Debresser (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there are loads of them that need to be closed. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Tracking categories for native_name_lang

Hi,

Is Template talk:Infobox person#Native names / Template talk:Infobox settlement#Native names something that would interest you? It might also need to be applied to other templates. (Above comments about limited free time notwithstanding!) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Relisting of TFD Template:Foreign_character

Could you possibly explain why you have relisted Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#Template:Foreign_character? Thanks. --Kleinzach 00:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to come back to it soon, but I am working through the general backlog problem at TfD. We have some that have been over for over a month now. Just because it is relisted, doesn't necessarily mean it has to stay open for another 7 days (or more). Hopefully I can get back to it in the next day or two if someone else doesn't before me. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Happy new year!
We wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year! Pass a Method talk 20:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Books of the Old Testament

The template has now been orphaned in the Main namespace, but I am uncertain about de-linking from User talk pages, and Talk page archives. If those are OK to leave for contextual purposes, then the template should be OK to delete. I just want an extra set of eyes to look over this to be sure I haven't missed something. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. Leaving links is perfectly fine for contextual purposes. Transclusions in user and talk space is debatable. I usually try to fix those too, but most people just leave them as well. Thanks for taking care of it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:40, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

London maps

We have new London ward maps. Can you help get them into the infoboxes in the mainspace?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I can't really make any firm commitments. Every time I think I am going to have some spare time to spend on WP these days, I get swamped with other stuff. Some days I am pleasantly surprised with some free time, but it is increasingly not the case. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Can you try to get somebody then to sort out the India infoboxes and replace with standard? Obviously you haven't the time to do it yourself but can you get somebody else who can? I've been waiting over a year to get shot of them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I would say the first step is to try to refactor the template to call "infobox settlement". Trying that will give some indication of how easy it will be to replace it. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

nice

nickname haha — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.63.126.4 (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Why did you remove the image

Why did you remove the image of Jennifer Rizzotti in this edit? I'm considering replacing it, so it may not be a big deal, but I'm wondering.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 22:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

It looks like an accident to me. You will notice that the parameter |image=Jennifer Rizzotti.JPG wasn't removed; but a second |image= (with no value) was added. It's a known, but annoying, feature of the MediaWiki template parser that should any named parameter be given more than once, only the last one is actually processed - even if it is blank. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
OK, thanks, and now I see why your edit wasn't quite the coincidence I thought.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 23:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that was a mistake. Thank you both for sorting it out. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

RPA

Hi there. I noticed in my watchlist a few replacements of {{nono}} with {{RPA}} in some old talk page archives. Problem is, some of these were not personal attacks, but things redacted for other reasons (privacy, copyright, etc.). {{RPA}} is probably a perfectly good replacement for most invocations of {{nono}} but I'm concerned that by wholesale replacement we might be implying someone made a personal attack when they didn't. Thoughts? 28bytes (talk) 19:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I tried to check each one before replacing them, but may have made a mistake or two. I did notice that many of the transclusions were not personal attacks, but many were. About 70% I just substituted, rather than replacing with RPA. I can provide you with a complete list of replacements if you want to check them as well (there were less than a hundred total), and change them as needed. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply and the info. I didn't know how many replacements had been made, but if there were fewer than a hundred it's probably not a big enough deal to worry about. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


New taskforce

I have created a new task force at WP:MED here [3] and tagged a bunch of pages which it covers. Wondering it is your bot that will fill out the details seen here for assessment stats? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Assessment#Statistics Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

So far, my bot has only been approved for tasks related to WP:TFD (e.g., updating assessment templates due to merger or deletion), which doesn't really include new taskforces. If you haven't already, I would suggest posting a note at WP:BOTREQ, and someone there could probably point you to a bot approved for such a task. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible for your bot to scan the transclusions of {{jctint}} (including the various state-specific templates) and its siblings looking for non-numeric characters in the |mile= |mile2= |km= and |km2= parameters, and place them in a tracking category? Regex is not a skill of mine, although I can use AWB in a decent capacity, so I don't know how, or if, you could search for anything in that parameter that isn't 0–9 or a decimal point. If its not something you can use the bot for without BRFA, if you can set up the regex and other instructions for me, I can do run AWB to accomplish this myself. Imzadi 1979 → 23:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I could potentially generate a list for you, but I can also help you generate a regular expression. To match something that is not a number, space, or decimal point, you can use [^0-9\. ] so something like this would probably do it

(?:mile|mile2|km|km2)[\t ]*=[\t ]*[^0-9\.\r\n ]

The extra '\r\n' are various newline characters. So, this says match one of the four parameters possibly followed by spaces followed by = possibly followed by spaces followed by something other than 0-9 period space or newline. If you want to set up a tracking category instead, you can add the following to the template:

{{#iferror:{{#expr: 0 + {{#if:{{{mile|}}}|{{{mile}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{mile2|}}}|{{{mile2}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{km|}}}|{{{km}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{km2|}}}|{{{km2}}}|0}} }}|[[Category:Jctint template using non-numeric parameter values]]}}

Anything not properly formatted as a raw number, including commas, and cause the tracking category to appear. Once this is in there, you would just need to wait (or have a bot purge the transclusions). Let me know which works best for you. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
This may be a dumb question or just me being really tired, but where should we put that in the code so that it doesn't show up to our readers? I was going to insert it at the end of {{Jctint/core}}, but when I previewed the changes, a zero showed up above the example table. –Fredddie™ 00:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
An extra | near the end will hide it. -- WOSlinker (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

{{#iferror:{{#expr: 0 + {{#if:{{{mile|}}}|{{{mile}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{mile2|}}}|{{{mile2}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{km|}}}|{{{km}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{km2|}}}|{{{km2}}}|0}} }}|[[Category:Jctint template using non-numeric parameter values]]|}}

Yes, that's right. I forgot how the functionality of "#iferror" differs slightly from "#if" and "#ifeq" when the expression is false. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
OK, does it matter that if no value is supplied to |mile=, etc., that Jctint and Jctint/core fill in that parameter with a nbsp? –Fredddie™ 02:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I figured it out for {{Jctint/core}}.

{{#iferror:{{#expr: 0 + {{#if:{{{unit|}}}|{{#switch:{{{unit|}}}| |none=0|#default={{{unit|}}}}}|0}} + {{#if:{{{unit2|}}}|{{#switch:{{{unit|}}}| |none=0|#default={{{unit2|}}}}}|0}} }}|[[Category:Jctint template using non-numeric parameter values]]|}}

Jctint/core (the core) is a little more nuanced than Jctint is. Both fill in the blank length parameter with a nbsp if you don't supply a value, but the core's length column can be shut off with |unit=none. I tested this in Special:ExpandTemplates and the category was not called. Now either the job queue needs to clear or its 325 transclusions need to be purged. –Fredddie™ 06:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Great, I'm glad you were able to get something that works, although, I htink the second switch should be "unit2", not "unit"? You could probably simplify that even more, now that you are using a switch statement. Something like this would probably work:

{{#iferror:{{#expr: 0 + {{#switch:{{{unit|}}}| |none|=0|#default={{{unit|}}}}} + {{#switch:{{{unit2|}}}| |none|=0|#default={{{unit2|}}}}} }}|[[Category:Jctint template using non-numeric parameter values]]|}}

But, you would want to test it to make sure. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I thought the same thing about simplifying it originally, and I did test it in ExpandTemplates. The if and the switch together was the only combination that would not create the category every time. Also, you were right about the second switch being a typo. –Fredddie™ 22:55, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

This RfC discussing the above issue may be of interest to you. Dpmuk (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:SkyTemplate

See Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2012_January_4#Template:SkyTemplate for more details. Can you undelete that template ? I will add Information to prevent such a problem in future. Antonsusi (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

  • As far as I can see, no deletion review has been initiated... Further, I don't think one is really necessary per my comments here. –xenotalk 20:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
    As you appear to be on a bit of a break, I've provisionally restored the template as it is apparently holding up work on other Wikimedia projects. The template should be migrated over to meta, but until then I think that it is not causing any harm, and the deletion of the template is hindering good faith efforts. –xenotalk 14:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
    Yes, thank you for helping out. My decision to delete it was based on the fact that there were no objections, and it appeared to be unused. Since it is of some use, no problem with restoring it. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Chiclana de la Frontera

Is the infobox the reason why the photos aren't aligning left?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) In a way, yes. There is only one left-aligned image, File:Guzman El Bueno Tarifa.jpg: but that is in the wikitext after File:Playa Barrosa Chiclana.jpg, which is right-aligned, and which is pushed down the page by the infobox. File:Guzman El Bueno Tarifa.jpg, being after File:Playa Barrosa Chiclana.jpg, is also pushed down, so that its top is level with the top of File:Playa Barrosa Chiclana.jpg. If there were no right-aligned images between the infobox and File:Guzman El Bueno Tarifa.jpg, that image would be placed in its correct section, as seen at Cheltenham Spa Malvern Road railway station.
In such cases I usually move the right-aligned image to be left-aligned as well: but since File:Playa Barrosa Chiclana.jpg is a lead section image, that would violate Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images#Location "Do not place images on the left at the start of any section or subsection. Images on the left must be placed somewhere after the first paragraph.", so it needs to be moved down too: but for left-aligned lead-section images, that can sometimes screw up the TOC positioning. I would therefore move File:Playa Barrosa Chiclana.jpg out of the lead to a relevant section. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting this out. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Portal vs Portal box merge proposal

Was the the result of the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_December_22#Template:Portal_box to merge as per the original poster's merge request, to put {{Portal}} into {{Portal box}} or as per my opposing statement to merge "Portal box" into "Portal"? I was the first to oppose on the 27th, after the original poster posted on the 23rd. The only people to post that they supported after I posted don't appear to have read and understood why I opposed. Let me explain. :) The proposal was to merge "Portal box" into "Portal". I opposed that because "Portal box" works just fine as is and "Portal" actually calls "Portal box", so merging from "Portal box" into "Portal" just increases template complexity and server parser calls for no good reason (no reason was given by the OP other than that Portal was updated to "allow the input of multiple portals eliminating the need for this template" (meaning "Portal box") even though "Portal box" already allows the input of multiple portals -- that's how it works. I posted a few hours ago in response to a person who said that they supported the move because they'd switched an article from "Portal box" to "Portal" and hadn't seen a change (of course they wouldn't, because "Portal" calls "Portal box") and just now noticed that you'd closed the debate apparently in favor of the original poster so I was seeking some clarification. Anyway, it didn't seem like you read the support/oppose statements, that you just went with the largest group of votes. Which way were you suggesting that the templates be merged? Banaticus (talk) 13:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. So much going on at home, work, travel, etc. As far as merging these templates go, it would seem to me that, as you said, we could just use {{portal box}} as the base code. So long as that template works with just one "portal" link, there should be no reason for all the extra complexity. To avoid having to make thousands of edits, we should just redirect one to the other once the merger is complete. Perhaps the best choice would be to use the name {{portal}} for the base template, but the code for {{portal box}} as the base code. Does this sound satisfactory? I don't think most folks cared, just thought it was a good idea to merge the two since they do basically the same thing. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
It looks like a simple redirect would work. Make Portal be: #REDIRECT Template:Portal box (without the bold, of course) -- it looks like it passes along template parameters correctly. I tried it out by making a new template called Template:TestCase (which is what's being used on this page) and it redirects just fine. :) Banaticus (talk) 11:23, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

With all due respect I think it should be done this way.

  1. Make sure that any functionality available in Portal or Portal box are incorporated into the code of Portal box
  2. Replace the code in {{Portal}} with the code from {{Portal box}}
  3. then redirect portal box to portal.
  4. Modify the logic of AWB to use Portal vice portal box. If multiple portals are on a page AWB will consolidate them into Portal box.

My reasoning is this.

  1. Portal box links to Portal/core.
  2. Portal is used on hundreds of thousands of articles whereas Portal box is used on about 45000
  3. The logic in Portal box is much cleaner and simpler than the logic in Portal

--Kumioko (talk) 16:39, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes. That's exactly what I was thinking. Now merged. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Re this merge - could it have caused the reduction in size described at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject BBC#BBC Portal template? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:32, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Probably, if it's important, we can restore the old version in a sandbox and try to correct the issue. This is the first problem/complaint that I have seen. Although, it looks like people are voicing opinions in places that I don't watch. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I have posted some notes at Template_talk:Portal#Post_merger_notes. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the reduction in size is a result of the merge, I'll respond at Template_talk:Portal#Post_merger_notes. Banaticus (talk) 04:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Help !

Hello Plastikspork,

I've tried to create the Location map of Côte d'Ivoire (sw:Kigezo:Location map Côte d'Ivoire) on Kiswahili Wikipedia (missing here), with the following code : 

{{# switch: {{{1}}}
| Jina =  Côte d'Ivoire
| top = 11
| bottom = 4
| left = -9
| right = -2
|image   = Côte d'Ivoire location map.svg
| image1 = Côte d'Ivoire relief location map.jpg
}} {{Location map / Info}}

It gives the following error message : 

Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "[" _N_
Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "[" 
Expression _E_ error: Unexpected <operator  
Expression error: Unexpected <operator

Can you help me, please? --Zenman (talk) 22:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) what you saw was normal. you will always see an error like that in preview mode. once you save the page, then reload it, make no changes, and save it again, and the error will go away. the problem is that the location map/info template won't work until the template is created, but once it's created, then resaving it, will rebuild the info in the template. I went ahead and made it for you, but you may want to translate the English into the native language, and make sure it works. Frietjes (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
That's correct. Thanks for sorting this out. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. --Zenman (talk) 04:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Llantwit Major

Hi. Can you put the "Listed building" list sub section into a shrinkable box or something with a colored background like light blue or green or something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Do you want the multicolumn list in a collapsible section, or the entire subsection? I could see putting the multicolumn list in one, but that subsection is nearly half the article, so that wouldn't be such a good idea per MOS:COLLAPSE. I'll add a {{hidden begin}}/{{hidden end}} around the multicolumn list. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Just the list shrunk.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I added hidden begin/hidden end to it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:30, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks OK now, but I think would be better hidden by default.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

You can just remove the 'expanded=true' part and it will collapse by default. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:32, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Football

Hi, when removing closed AfDs from the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, please don't forget add them to the deletion archive so that we have a record of them. Regards, GiantSnowman 17:12, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

noprint

{{sidebar with collapsible lists}} seems to be used almost exclusively for lists of related links, which are not useful in a print context anyway. In general, any sort of "navigation templates" should be set to noprint, especially ones that have collapsible content. Otherwise you get a giant mess when you try to print an article. Kaldari (talk) 01:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, didn't know about the vertical-navbox class. You might be right about that. Kaldari (talk) 01:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Defaults in MediaWiki:Common.css

I was changing the background on some templates which are used in slightly nonstandard way. They split the contents into two sections, but bypass the use of the main header group, because a cleaner display can result when only two sections are used. But a colour problem arises because as you drill down each level in the template, the default colour lightens a shade. Since I'm not using the upper group level in the template, I was merely restoring the shades back to the default shades for the upper level (I'm not sure how to language this, so I hope it makes sense). Anyway, if changing the background in the individual templates breaks something in the functionality of the css, would it be possible to adjust the script in Template:Navbox with collapsible groups so it retains the upper level colour shades if the upper level group is bypassed? --Epipelagic (talk) 01:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I will take a look and see if there is something easy that we can do. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I see what you have done with Template:Modelling ecosystems. That looks excellent! Thank you very much. --Epipelagic (talk) 05:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

{{Infobox scientist}} and website parameter

Because your previously commented at Template talk:Infobox scientist#Website attribute.3F, you might be interested in the discussion at Template talk:Infobox scientist#Website parameter--GrapedApe (talk) 12:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Guns N' Roses

so what do you think it is? CHINESE DEMOCRACY IS OVER! and this year is a new tour dear. Thanks! Mutante96 (talk) 20:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

So, you should probably write an article about it first? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:48, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Sigh, you know you're getting on a bit when you see somebody born in a year you can remember all too well and they are talking to you about Chinese democracy..♦ Dr. Blofeld 01:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Calais

Hullo. I was wondering if there was any way you could import the demographic data in the tables/graphs from French wikipedia article on Calais? If not, can you show me which table and graph to use?♦ Dr. Blofeld 00:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

That's great! Thanks for that! Can you though shrink the long table box by default? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 01:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Plasticspork

Your alterego got mail. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

blue

Hey, can you intervene on this page "Blue (LeAnn Rimes song)". The user Swifty has reverted my edits as vandalism. I dont see how my work is vandalism when I have cited sources and add information to the page. He also didnt respond to my question on my talk page, so it looks like he did vandalism reverts . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.101.115 (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Swifty seems to have deleted all reliable sources and important information that I provided. The sources are Billboard magazine, Amazon.com (showing scans of the actual dvds) and actual newspaper city sources (not tabloids), including interviews by the actual songwriter. I have no idea why he thinks those are "unreliable". Another user thought my work was constructive, but Swifty reverted/deleted it again. 70.251.101.115 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.101.115 (talk) 21:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Your revision at {{infobox settlement/doc}}

Why did you revert. This has been discussed thoroughly many times at many locations. For example, Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 16, please revert yourself before others do. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Infobox African Movie Academy Awards

could you history merge this with template:infobox film awards? I forked it from there when the maintainer of the African awards template objected to my repurposing of that template. you will see the history is a bit scrambled now. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 00:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

thank you. there will be more to merge later once I finish the other ones. Frietjes (talk) 15:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thank you for all the updates and merging template:infobox Academy Awards, it looks great. the automatic linking for the last and next links is also great. I am thinking we can merge this with the "link" subtemplate, and have a different rule for particular awards, which would eliminate the need for the last_link and next_link. also, are you going to redirect the razzie template, or should I take it to TfD? Frietjes (talk) 16:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Plastikspork,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.


Sincerely,


Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 03:12, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

fix a cut-and-paste move

could you merge the histories of {{St Helens RLFC squad}} and {{St Helens squad}}. it was recently moved by cut-and-paste. Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

same for {{Salford City Reds rugby league squad}} and {{Salford City Reds squad}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
if you check here you will find dozens more. Frietjes (talk) 15:35, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I find that it's usually easiest to pop a {{histmerge}} on the top, per WP:CUTPASTE. Anthony Appleyard (talk · contribs) sorts most of these, and evaluates each case, and also logs the outcome at WP:REPAIR. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the histmerge tag works pretty well. I took care of the first two. I will check the others in a bit. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thank you for doing this, I will use the {{histmerge}} in the future. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 16:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox settlement/doc

There really is no consensus not to use flags. I strongly disagree with the reverting.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I really don't care one way or another, but edit warring was not the answer. It looks like things are being discussed in a more civil manner now. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Check out the infobox for Patensie. Any comments? Personalyl I find it awkward not being able to edit the data and its controlled from elsewhere. The editor has created a bunch of new infoboxes for municipalities and districts too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's a large chunk of code. On the plus side, it does use infobox settlement, and by having all the data in one place, it can be quickly updated when there is new census data. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Lumpkin County, Georgia

{{Lumpkin County, Georgia}}, which you have edited, is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 February 20; please comment. Nyttend (talk) 04:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I will have a look, and see if any additional input is needed. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population

Can you userfy Template:New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population so that I can take it to WP:DRV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I was directed to ask you at User_talk:Fastily/Archive_5#Template:New_York_cities_and_mayors_of_100.2C000_population.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Done, see User:TonyTheTiger/New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
P.S. it is not clear to me which admin I am suppose to talk to about this close before listing at WP:DRV. User:Fastily closed the discussion, but you deleted the file. I don't see that you have participated at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#WP:TFD_deletions_by_admin_User:Fastily so you may not know about this controversy that was mentioned in the Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-02-20/Discussion_report. It seems that there are many people who feel he often deletes content inappropriately. As noted at WP:AN he has twice deleted content that I don't feel had a consensus for deletion in the discussions. This was the less egregious of the errors, but was still an error. With 4 deletes and 3 keeps, I do not feel that there was consensus to delete. Are you willing to reconsider this deletion (i.e., do you feel that this particular 4–3 vote represented a consensus) or would you suggest that I take this to WP:DRV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I would say the procedure would be to query Fastily first, since he is the admin who closed the discussion. I deleted the template, but only after seeing the discussion was closed and the template was orphaned (probably found it in the Holding cell. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:16, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
You are probably right and if you have read the discussions I pointed out you would realize how fruitless such a discussion would be.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Sisterproject listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Sisterproject. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Sisterproject redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). MGA73 (talk) 16:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Why did you revert the infobox basketball player template?

Can you please tell me why you reverted the Template:Infobox basketball player that I was working on?173.216.237.132 (talk) 01:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you please tell me why? I was trying to greatly improve the template and it was just reverted without any explanation.173.216.237.132 (talk) 01:43, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
You appeared to be changing it into Template:Infobox basketball biography without changing the corresponding articles. This would break the existing uses. If you would like to merge these templates, then propose it on the talk page or take it to WP:TFD. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:21, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
No, I was trying to update and improve the infobox basketball player, as it greatly needs it. It would be impossible to go through every basketball player article and one by one change them to the basketball biography template. So I was trying to improve the basketball player template, and I was trying to make it generic, where it did not specifically just go to NBA players. I did this because it would be impossible to change all the basketball player articles that use infobox basketball player into infobox basketball biography. That is all I was trying to do.173.216.237.132 (talk) 02:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
The problem is that it appears your changes were not backwards compatible with the old syntax. I have moved your edits to the sandbox (Template:Infobox basketball player/sandbox). Feel free to continue to work on the template in the sandbox, then make an edit request on the talk page. If you click on 'source' at the top of the template, it will provide you with a link for making an edit request. We have to make sure the changes are backwards compatible, since there are over a thousand transclusions. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
If I did make more edits and finished updating the template, and then make a request for it to be edited, will it actually get edited and updated? I don't want to waste any more time editing it if it is not going to be updated.173.216.237.132 (talk) 17:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
why don't we just merge the 'infobox basketball biography' and 'infobox basketball player' templates? as far as I can tell they are nearly identical in syntax, except for a couple parameters. the 'biography' template is far more full featured, and more generic in title, so that should be the place to merge them. I think that would be a better use of time rather than trying to fix the 'player' template. just my opinion on the matter. Frietjes (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't think I know how to merge them.173.216.237.132 (talk) 01:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
It looks like Frietjes has already started the process by adding metric units to {{Infobox basketball biography}}. If all the parameters from {{Infobox basketball player}} are in {{Infobox basketball biography}}, we can just redirect one to the other. Or, probably safer, would be to nominate it for merging at WP:TFD first. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
OK. This makes sense. Once the parameters are there, can you nominate it for being merged? I haven't done that before and I would probably not do it properly.173.216.237.132 (talk) 20:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
you might find Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_29#Template:Infobox_basketball_player interesting, and wish to comment. Frietjes (talk) 21:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for retaining {{Coppélia}}, {{Ocean's Kingdom}} and {{Swan Lake}} and for doing such a meticulous job after deleting the other ballet templates! — Robert Greer (talk) 17:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem! I think there are some more? I see there are several more named "... (3 columns)"? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll be at a conference in Boston this weekend but will be back on Wikipedia next Tuesday. Thank you again! — Robert Greer (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Your contribuation is required

Hi, following on from the TfD in regards to {{Infobox Townlands}} that you closed stated "no consensus" with your own suggestions added afterwards, the proposer of the deletion (User:Pigsonthewing) has been quoting your closing statement out of context to give the perception that the end result was anything other than "no consensus". Pigsonthewings on the other hand doesn't see it as quoting out of context.

Examples of this quoting out of context are at: Template_talk:Infobox_UK_place#Civil_parishes, Template_talk:Infobox_settlement#Civil_parishes, and Template_talk:Infobox_Townlands#Civil_parishes as well as at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion#Template:Infobox_NI_Civil_Parish.

I would like you as the closing admin to have your say at Template_talk:Infobox_Townlands#Civil_parishes as afterall you closed the TfD and know what it means better than either me or Pigsonthewings, and as to whether Pigsonthewings is quoting your comment out of context. Mabuska (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Mabuska's false accusations that I have quoted you out of context are becoming tiresome. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits
Sure, I will have a look. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Pigsonthewings still thinks that they never reinterpreted your comment to be misleading. Also just to clarify, User:Frietjes agreed with me. Mabuska (talk) 11:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't think that I never did so; I did not do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Just to note for Plastikspork: editors User:Richardguk and User:Frietjes have also said that Pigsonthewings is selectively quoting: second paragraph and then this and this. I doubt we are all making false accusations. Mabuska (talk) 15:35, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
You certainly don't have a monopoly on doing so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

a better citation footnote template

User:CharlesGillingham's, not mine. I think it would be great if you, Gadget850, Rich Farmbrough, and Thumperward all participated and got this going with all nits resolved. Alarbus (talk) 01:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks complicated. I will try to find a chance to comment in the next 24 hours or so. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population talk page

I see that Template:New York cities and mayors of 100,000 population has been restored. The talk page has not. Could you restore it with the proper annotation of the page history for the TFD and DRV.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

townlands

I think we are getting close, could you look into the other issues here? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 21:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Whoa there.

Do you want to talk or is massive reverts your way of talking? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

We did talk, see User_talk:Plastikspork/Archive_4#.22Interesting_essay_but_....22. As I said before, there is a problem with the print version of the article. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
You have a better memory than I do. And, because I dropped the ball, you didn't get a chance to respond to my last comment. But you can do so now with my posting at the Luck article. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Infobox games

Hi,

I've merged a number of infoboxes as {{Infobox games}}; I'd be grateful if you could check it over - there are some similar parameters, which I've noted in the comments, and one of the merged templates uses two unnamed parameters. Once it's robust, I want to also merge in {{Infobox Olympic games}}. Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for Template:NOT

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Template:NOT. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 187.126.116.166 (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Infobox public organisation

Resolved

I've made {{Infobox public organisation}} into a wrapper for {{Infobox organization}}, but they handle images differently (see Historic Scotland). Is there a fix, or is the only solution to edit the markup on each article transcluding it? (I'll ask at WP:VPT also.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries; its fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Medal templates as a pseudo-infobox

How should we deal with instances of the medal templates, used as a pseudo-infobox? Your comments would be welcome at Template talk:MedalTop#Name, redux. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of template {{expert-subject}}

Hello Plastikspork, I have just been made aware about the deletion discussion of this template. Frankly, I disagree with your conclusion that there was consensus for deletion of the template. I count 3 votes for deletion and 2 for keeping the template. Aside from that, while I'm usually rather critical of article tagging templates I consider this one to be one of the more useful ones. It is claimed in the deletion discussion that we can notify editors in another way than by using this template. But this is not just about notifying editors but also about warning readers about problematic content and inviting potential expert readers to contribute. Nageh (talk) 13:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

{{expert-subject}}

I don't think there was a clear consensus to delete this template. The template is also, contrary to what is claimed at the discussion, in active use. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Articles needing expert attention. Would you care to join the discussion there? Cheers, —Ruud 13:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

erroneous deletion

Concerning Template:Expert-subject and Template:Expert-subject-multiple, you wrote:

The result of the discussion was delete after replacing with a 'attention=yes' or equivalent parameter in the corresponding WikiProject banner on the talk page. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:10, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

But there was no concensus for deletion. Two people wrote Keep, and one wrote Fix while expressing agreement with one who wrote Keep. Three Keep votes and three Delete votes don't add up to a consensus for deletion.

I think you should reconsider the way you closed this. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Expert and Template:Expert-subject

I personally think that the TFD for this pair of templates should have been left open for a longer period of time, in order to allow for broader input, given the number of articles that these templates appear on. (If I had known of the TfD, I'd have voted to keep.) Bwrs (talk) 01:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Further comments

I personally don't see any harm with reopening the discussion (here is a link to the original tfd). I have alerted all of the participants to this thread. It seems as though all the people complaining here are coming from the math wikiproject, so one possible solution may be to have a specific expert-math template. Frietjes (talk) 16:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Another problem I see is that not all WikiProject banners support the |attention = yes parameter. What's to be done with those? Will the coding be updated to add that parameter? LadyofShalott 16:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Although not all project banners have an |attention= parameter, they all have the potential for one, since it's one of the standard parameters within {{WPBannerMeta}}. Add the following line to the project banner:
|attention={{{attention|}}}
You also need to create a category. By default this is Category:Xxx articles needing attention where xxx is the same as the |PROJECT= in the same banner; but another category may be used by setting |ATTENTION_CAT= (see {{WikiProject Buses}} which sets |ATTENTION_CAT=Bus transport articles needing attention in order to use Category:Bus transport articles needing attention). --Redrose64 (talk) 20:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
I am guessing that is part of the reason why the template is still in the holding cell and has not be actually deleted yet. otherwise it would be a trivial task for a bot to orphan it right now. Frietjes (talk) 16:46, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
More problematically, not all WikiProjects use a banner, making the solution Plastikspork proposed in the closure unimplementable. Also I still don't see a strong consensus this template needs to be moved from the article to its talk page, this needs further discussion as well. —Ruud 19:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Other than taskforces and subprojects which use the banner of the parent project (such as WP:WikiProject UK Railways which uses {{WikiProject Trains|UK=yes}}), which WikiProjects don't use a banner? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Mathematics is probably the most notable example. —Ruud 21:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
{{Maths rating}} has the general function of a WikiProject banner - it recognises standard parameters |class=|importance=|small= (plus |priority= as a synonym for |importance=) and a few others; it's just not built around {{WPBannerMeta}}. It shouldn't be too difficult to add code which recognises an |attention= parameter, after discussion at Template talk:Maths rating of course. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:50, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
No, it hasn't. {{Maths rating}} is - as the name implies - only used for rating articles, not for keeping track of which articles are in the scope of the project or other issues. WikiProject Mathematics has other - better - methods for that. —Ruud 21:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by putting {{maths rating|class=start}}, the page goes into Category:Start-Class mathematics articles, which is a sub-category of Category:WikiProject Mathematics articles, therefore it does track articles within the project's scope. Also, if the template is only used for rating, what are parameters like |historical=yes or |vital=yes provided for? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Categorizing some articles is not the same as categorizing all articles. In this way it only incidentally tracks the (minority) of articles that happen to have been assessed. The rest are tracked by a number of bot-maintained lists. vital makes sense for articles which also have been assessed, I don't know what historical is used for in practice. One should be able to raise the attention of an expert independently of whether the article has been assessed or not. —Ruud 11:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
To me, the meaning of |historical= and |vital= is irrelevant - my point was that by providing these parameters, the {{maths rating}} template clearly isn't used solely for rating - it carries other information. An article which is rated for class but not priority (or vice versa) may still be given a {{maths rating}} with the unrated parameter left blank or omitted; hence it's possible to omit both, as demonstrated by the existence of pages in Category:Unassessed mathematics articles. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

DRV

Looks like this is now at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2012_March_9#Template:Expert-subject. (I'm disappointed that no one notified you yet.) I've commented there. - jc37 18:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this was on purpose. Thanks for putting up the notification. Nageh (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
No worries. Happy to help. - jc37 21:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Whoa there.

Do you want to talk or is massive reverts your way of talking? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

We did talk, see User_talk:Plastikspork/Archive_4#.22Interesting_essay_but_....22. As I said before, there is a problem with the print version of the article. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
You have a better memory than I do. And, because I dropped the ball, you didn't get a chance to respond to my last comment. But you can do so now with my posting at the Luck article. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Undelete request

Would you mind undeleting Template:Editnotices/Group/User talk:LikeLakers2 for me, so that my user talk space editnotices still work? Thanks. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 22:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs) has done so. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 18:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

ref and note

I just changed this to use {{smallsup}} instead of {{ref}} and {{note}}, then I looked at the history. I'd like to see those orphaned. I especially think they're poor for use in navboxes and have reworked about a dozen today to similarly not use them. My thinking is that all the non cite.php systems need pruning back so that TfD is a viable option. Alarbus (talk) 09:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you undelete this per chance?

I know these "templates" were closed as delete, but this was on the notion that the replacement Horizontal TOC would produce the same results. Unfortunately it does not, it makes it far less usable/readable by sticking a number in front of each title (looks like a lit of bus routes). It appears to recreate the TOC as it was would require manually entering each link into a {{List TOC}} setup, and I think in the end that the original was far less redundant than it may have appeared to be. Cheers, ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 14:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I would also like to know how to achieve this as it appears this functionality was available in the previous multitude of TOC templates, yet doesn't appear to be now... Nikthestoned 16:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Try MediaWiki talk:Common.css. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
FYI, someone took this to DRV. Nyttend (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Wraps infobox

You might find {{Wraps infobox}} useful. It currently adds a category; we could make that switchable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Extra album cover 2 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Extra album cover 2. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Extra album cover 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 17:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Infobox Indian jurisdiction

Do you have any plans to sort this out sometime? Editors continue to create articles using it like Shardanagar.. I understand it needs quite a bit of work to understand and would require a lot of edits to replace but any edit you could make towards it would be appreciated..♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I would say the first step would be to refactor it to call infobox settlement, which would identify if there would be any issues that would prevent it from being orphaned. Given the number of errors I see in IIJ articles, it might be good to retain it as a frontend which helps editors resolve errors. It's possible that I may have some time to work on it in the near future, but given the amount of time I have had to spend on WP lately, I wouldn't count on it. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

If you could find time to refactor it when you can I would much appreciate that. Trust you are well (just busy).♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:13, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox football biography 2 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Infobox football biography 2. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Infobox football biography 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 20:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Male adult bio listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Male adult bio. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Male adult bio redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magioladitis (talk) 21:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

TfD

Could I trouble you to use edit summaries like "close as keep", "close as merge", etc, when closing TfD discussions? It would make it easier to follow what's going on, from watchlists and page histories. Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I will try to remember. There has been such a massive number nominations over there that it has been a significant task just to keep up. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
So there have. Sorry about that ;-) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Plastikspork/Archive_8&oldid=1252815383"