![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Excellent points! Of course, I've always been ready to cast a critical eye upon myselves. Dr.Who ( talk) 07:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
[1]. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 00:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
I am afraid that I have had to revert several times the Bot edit which removes the difference between the sections and subsections. I explained the revert as follows: (Reverted to sections and subsections, edit doesnt make sense. Discuss reason for change) but so far no discussion. Am I doing something wrong? Joel Mc ( talk) 09:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
— Unforgettableid ( talk) 07:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
The Changes you made to the table on EMC page have caused the rest of the page to skew. I have therefore reverted your changes. You can sheck out your version with the reverted version and you will see. I suggest that table is now left in pure HTML code (as is permitted) so that there is no conflict with wiki-markup. Thank you. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 12:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Let us now keep this civilised before it escalates into something neither of us intend. I stand by my remarks. The table is in HTML and that is allowed. There is no mandatory rule (phew!). Your changes skewed then the entire remainder of the page over by 5%. I checked it on my laptop, then my tablet and then my smartphone in several browsers. All the same. So I changed it back so that another wikipedia "god" would not come along and accuse me of messing with "margin style" or "lack of margin style" or "deep core space directive 12345hn" or whatever else that editor wants to throw at the page. It is nothing new. So your edit did not "fix" it. It did not need "fixing". Instead your work rendered the left margin of the entire page over by 5%. As for content, lets us keep this focused on whether or not your work did or did not skew the margin and let us not get deflected because I can promise you I have no time to learn wiki mark-up to build a table when it is not needed. This means if you want it in Wiki-markup you have to figure out the bug causing the "margin shift" and not vent anything in my directions as "messenger". Because I am not going to learn Wiki mark-up to make a table, any more than am I going to leave work which skews the left margin of half the page over by 5% simply because a editor will not listen to a technical issue. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 09:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry. Just to be clear: it was rendering the left margin over by 5% (or so) for ALL text on the entire Wikipedia page BELOW the table section (NOT the entire page). I just want to clarify. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 09:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
VisualEditor news
Problems
Future
JavaScript / Gadget developers
debug=true
mode) and look for deprecation warnings and their stack trace.
[5]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
10:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite, I was here recently asking for some help on Blanche of Portugal. I participate mainly in es.wiki and sometimes cannot find my away around here. I created an article this morning and when I went to link up a monastery, I noticed that there are two separate articles (both pretty much abandoned and without references) which I could try to expand by translating from es.wiki. I refer to: Monasterio de San Vicente and San Vicente de Oviedo…the first one should be deleted (doesn't offer much) and I would work on the second one (I would also change its name to Monastery of San Vicente de Oviedo, or something similar. How should I go about this....meaning, where do I go to suggest an article for deletion and to make this proposal? Thanks in advance for your guidance. Regards, -- Maragm ( talk) 11:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
The bot just wiped out 3 hours of my rather difficult copy editing work at Yakshagana because it ignored a "This article or section is currently undergoing a major edit by the Guild of Copy Editors. As a courtesy, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed." flag/tag and caused an edit conflict from which I (or my computer) could not recover. This should probably be fixed on your next version of this bot. Thought you should know. Thanks. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
My apologies, I was speaking in reference to using two colors for one of the tables only. Seen in this talk page. I wasn't trying to change the tags. 71.239.172.110 ( talk) 06:17, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite,
I received a message from you concerning navbox. I have no clue how to use the navbox, despite being told to move it to template space. I have tried looking up articles on creating navboxes, but unfortunately the pages/articles about navbox and templates are extremely long, so much so that they are rather impossible to sift through to find what I need. I figured out how to type up what I need; however, I have no idea where to move it, nor where to find the "template space" to even move it to. If you could please explain to me (or give me the link) where this "template space" is and how I can create my navbox in that template space, I should be able to take it from there.
Markkaempfer ( talk) 05:35, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the information on creating a navbox. Unfortunately, any changes I try to make on the navbox reference my sandbox, which means the changes do not show up in the navbox attached to any article. How do I delete something from my sandbox or prevent it from referencing my sandbox?
Thank you.
Markkaempfer ( talk) 22:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 03:45, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Please check that my reerences are OK - (spelling and correct name etc) for PIPPA MIDDLETON page
Cheers
mike — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
121.219.138.209 (
talk)
07:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I see you have been adding the default sort template to several articles. Does every article need this? More importantly, what is the use or point of a default sort to the article title? That is the default anyway. This all adds unnecessary clutter. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 08:23, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
"autonym"
to the elements that include language names. Note that this font only works for the name of languages, not for any other text.
[6]Problems
Future
{{REVISIONID}}
, {{REVISIONUSER}}
and {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}
and similar functions, by writing for example {{REVISIONID:Apple}}
.
[12]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
13:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I reverted your unexplained revert on
Generalized eigenvector. Feel free to join the discussion on the talk page, but this article is in the process of being cleaned up to fix the excessive use of <br />
tags, and excessive bolding.
198.102.153.2 (
talk)
16:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite,
I was wondering if you could please give me permission simply to improve the references section of the Harp Twins page. For example, I would like to add the names of the articles (and their authors), date of retrieval, etc. (in some cases this information is not there), to comply with standard Wikipedia rules and make the references section consistent. This should not be seen as controversial, in my opinion, and I think Duff once complained that the references section needed improvements; at the time I did not know how to do that, but I have learned since then. If you don't think it's a good idea, I'll understand. Oh, and they don't look stunning at all any more, not even Camille. What a shame:
Have a nice day... Dontreader ( talk) 08:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Dontreader, I updated the info in the body that you made. I converted the references to use templates. I didn't move the refs up into the body of the article. Debate will rage on years from now on where to put refs and what format. I personally like refs inline instead of all bunched up at the end, but this is minor and not worth moving. Anything I missed? Bgwhite ( talk) 06:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Bgwhite, I noticed your interactions with the 208.81 IP and thought I'd leave you a brief note here. 208 is (IMO) a very valuable editor with more edits than most registered editors, and a knowledge of policy comparable to many admins. They tend to do gmomish work and make lots of minor changes to many articles, which I think is what they were trying to do to the list in question. I think you'll find that you'd get a better response if you treated them more as a peer (i.e. minus the "stop it right now" and "crap"). As for the dispute itself, in my experience a "Notes" section followed by a "References" section is fairly standard. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be to harsh on anybody for thinking the same (see, for instance, the illustration at WP:FNNR). As for inclusion of the UHE in a new Further Reading section, I think you're right that it works better as a reference by itself, and I don't think 208 is fighting you on that. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 00:23, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:
Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt ( talk) 03:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in my recent quality improvement efforts on articles related to freedom of speech.
Much appreciated,
— Cirt ( talk) 03:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey Bigwhite,
I must be doing something wrong because when I create a navbox, I seem to be able to make them and they work when I paste them onto the intended articles, but I just can't seem to edit them once they have been created. You helped me with my first one:
and that works great. But since then I've made two naboxes:
and
. However, when trying to edit them I find I can't (the box for editing is empty). I tried looking for anything indicating "open" and "closed" or "auto" on the page (in an attempt to correct it as you had done previously), but couldn't find anything. Might you know what it is that I'm doing wrong?
Thanks,
Markkaempfer ( talk) 08:14, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
Future
*.wikimedia.org
, Wikimania and Wikisource wikis on November 19, and Wiktionary wikis on November 21 (except where it's already available). Once it is added, you can test it by adding &srbackend=CirrusSearch
to the address of the search results page. It will become the main search engine on Wikivoyage wikis on November 21.
[15]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
08:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Where in your edit summary is it mentioned, or linked to, something that supports your claim that small-tags must be closed. It's not that I doubt that it's true – but you didn't mention it, nor did you link to it. So, in your edit summary, you were indeed yourself making assumptions.
So, please no PA in edit summaries.
HandsomeFella ( talk) 16:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
In this edit [17] (which was no problem), the edit summary states
"Violates" as a description of benign editing errors is too extreme, in my opinion. My suggestion is:
IMHO, simply stating what was fixed, per which guideline, is enough. This will also tend not to provoke arguments or intimidate new editors (per WP:DONTBITE). Glad the bot exists. -- Lexein ( talk) 09:40, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Sportsguy17 ( R.I.P Jackson Peebles) 18:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
Problems
Future
Page:
pages on Wikisource (working with the
Proofread Page extension) will soon also work without JavaScript.
[20]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
06:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I think we should keep him on the block for the remaining three months. This isn't exactly something that should easily be overlooked and forgotten. Assassin was asked for at least four months to refrain from his actions. The six month block was decided as apposed to indefinite,so I feel the full sentence should be carried out. That's just me. Rusted AutoParts 21:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Since "Alex Marshall (Journalist)" is my first article, I'd be grateful for some help understanding the extensive deletions you made on it. What honors are "big" enough to merit mention? Why are a journalist's articles not to be listed? Not trying to dispute your judgment, only to understand. I'm especially perplexed by your removal of the "External Links" section, since your note advises linking to a list of Marshall's articles, and I've been advised to add third-party links in order to bolster noteworthiness; but I don't want to undo that until I hear from you. Jim Crutchfield ( talk) 15:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I've added several external links to reviews of Marshall's books, interviews with Marshall, etc., which I hope will demonstrate notability. I don't feel at liberty to remove the "multiple issues", "notability", or "citations" tags, myself. When you have time, would you kindly take a look at the page and see if I've brought it up to standard? If not, I'd appreciate more guidance on how to do that. Happy Thanksgiving, if you celebrate that holiday. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 18:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Tabarie is sunni — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.253.50.62 ( talk) 20:52, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that BG19bot may be having some issues with its "section header fix" function, as shown here. It seems that the fact that there was already one equals sign on one side of the section header was not recognized by the bot. Steel1943 ( talk) 12:03, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
For an admin, this edit shows a remarkable lack of WP:CIVIL. If a bot edit fouls up a page, it is likely to be reverted by a human. The reflist was fine immediately before the bot edit, and fine immediately after it. What went wrong here, I don't know, but removing the previous talk page thread with a tart edit summary was incivil.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:36, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I would like to thank you for helping to clean up the mess I made recently on those u-boat articles. As the saying goes: to err is human but to really mess things up you need a computer. Thanks again, ÄDA - DÄP VA ( talk) 19:49, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Sportsguy17 :) ( click to talk • contributions) 19:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Bgwhite, I stumbled across this page: Galloping Bungalows: The Rise and Demise of the American House Trailer and wondered if one obscure mention in an obscure journal would make the book notable. But then I noticed the article is basically just a very sloppily moved over article about one David A. Thornburg. I can't find a deletion discussion for Thornburg or this book anywhere in the logs, so if there is one, or if you could do one, just write me a note back here so I can slap one big fat Delete on it. TuckerResearch ( talk) 06:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Friendship Barnstar | |
Hello Bgwhite, I'm confused what to give you at this moment :). But I'm really happy to have you standing by me always and now I'll try not to disappoint you, thanks a lot. Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! ( T - C - G ) 17:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. I saw that you removed the comment surrounding the PL fixtures in 2013–14 Aston Villa F.C. season. I reverted that change because the law says we are not allowed to show upcoming PL fixtures. The most recent discussion on WT:FOOTY can be read at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#La Liga fixtures copyright?, and the rules here. QED237 (talk) 20:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
What kind of restrictions do I have to follow now? Can I create new articles about politics in Pakistan and also some biography articles about notable persons? I'm not stepping forward without asking you now. -- Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! ( T - C - G ) 03:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, back in mid-June you semi-protected Kachwaha for a month because of vandalism (see here). The same issues returned from mid-July, involving exactly the same well-sourced statements from people such as William Pinch published by presses such as that of the University of California. It seems basically to be me against everyone else, although there have been occasional historically similar reverts of IPs by Anna Frodesiak ( talk · contribs) etc. I'm going to leave a note on the talk page but I wonder if you would be prepared to keep an eye on the article for a few weeks? You are not commonly associated with caste-related issues and that should be a bonus. - Sitush ( talk) 05:40, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Not a complaint, just idle curiosity about what was being fixed here. Edit adds a line after an image, removes a blank space at the end of a blockquote and swaps the order of two references? No big deal, just wondering. Nice btw that the bot came by the page, this is my least interesting article so its nice to have visitors, even automated ones. Euryalus ( talk) 09:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I think edits like this are potentially a problem. While I don't know if the reference order was all that important in this case, in general editors sometimes think carefully about what order to cite refs in. For example, sometimes a review cites a primary source and you want the two to appear together in a longer list. I think you should consider putting the bot on hold until you fix the swapping. Wnt ( talk) 14:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Excellent points! Of course, I've always been ready to cast a critical eye upon myselves. Dr.Who ( talk) 07:10, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
[1]. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 00:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
I am afraid that I have had to revert several times the Bot edit which removes the difference between the sections and subsections. I explained the revert as follows: (Reverted to sections and subsections, edit doesnt make sense. Discuss reason for change) but so far no discussion. Am I doing something wrong? Joel Mc ( talk) 09:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
— Unforgettableid ( talk) 07:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
The Changes you made to the table on EMC page have caused the rest of the page to skew. I have therefore reverted your changes. You can sheck out your version with the reverted version and you will see. I suggest that table is now left in pure HTML code (as is permitted) so that there is no conflict with wiki-markup. Thank you. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 12:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Let us now keep this civilised before it escalates into something neither of us intend. I stand by my remarks. The table is in HTML and that is allowed. There is no mandatory rule (phew!). Your changes skewed then the entire remainder of the page over by 5%. I checked it on my laptop, then my tablet and then my smartphone in several browsers. All the same. So I changed it back so that another wikipedia "god" would not come along and accuse me of messing with "margin style" or "lack of margin style" or "deep core space directive 12345hn" or whatever else that editor wants to throw at the page. It is nothing new. So your edit did not "fix" it. It did not need "fixing". Instead your work rendered the left margin of the entire page over by 5%. As for content, lets us keep this focused on whether or not your work did or did not skew the margin and let us not get deflected because I can promise you I have no time to learn wiki mark-up to build a table when it is not needed. This means if you want it in Wiki-markup you have to figure out the bug causing the "margin shift" and not vent anything in my directions as "messenger". Because I am not going to learn Wiki mark-up to make a table, any more than am I going to leave work which skews the left margin of half the page over by 5% simply because a editor will not listen to a technical issue. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 09:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry. Just to be clear: it was rendering the left margin over by 5% (or so) for ALL text on the entire Wikipedia page BELOW the table section (NOT the entire page). I just want to clarify. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.66.81.80 ( talk) 09:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
VisualEditor news
Problems
Future
JavaScript / Gadget developers
debug=true
mode) and look for deprecation warnings and their stack trace.
[5]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
10:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite, I was here recently asking for some help on Blanche of Portugal. I participate mainly in es.wiki and sometimes cannot find my away around here. I created an article this morning and when I went to link up a monastery, I noticed that there are two separate articles (both pretty much abandoned and without references) which I could try to expand by translating from es.wiki. I refer to: Monasterio de San Vicente and San Vicente de Oviedo…the first one should be deleted (doesn't offer much) and I would work on the second one (I would also change its name to Monastery of San Vicente de Oviedo, or something similar. How should I go about this....meaning, where do I go to suggest an article for deletion and to make this proposal? Thanks in advance for your guidance. Regards, -- Maragm ( talk) 11:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
The bot just wiped out 3 hours of my rather difficult copy editing work at Yakshagana because it ignored a "This article or section is currently undergoing a major edit by the Guild of Copy Editors. As a courtesy, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed." flag/tag and caused an edit conflict from which I (or my computer) could not recover. This should probably be fixed on your next version of this bot. Thought you should know. Thanks. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
My apologies, I was speaking in reference to using two colors for one of the tables only. Seen in this talk page. I wasn't trying to change the tags. 71.239.172.110 ( talk) 06:17, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite,
I received a message from you concerning navbox. I have no clue how to use the navbox, despite being told to move it to template space. I have tried looking up articles on creating navboxes, but unfortunately the pages/articles about navbox and templates are extremely long, so much so that they are rather impossible to sift through to find what I need. I figured out how to type up what I need; however, I have no idea where to move it, nor where to find the "template space" to even move it to. If you could please explain to me (or give me the link) where this "template space" is and how I can create my navbox in that template space, I should be able to take it from there.
Markkaempfer ( talk) 05:35, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the information on creating a navbox. Unfortunately, any changes I try to make on the navbox reference my sandbox, which means the changes do not show up in the navbox attached to any article. How do I delete something from my sandbox or prevent it from referencing my sandbox?
Thank you.
Markkaempfer ( talk) 22:36, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 03:45, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Please check that my reerences are OK - (spelling and correct name etc) for PIPPA MIDDLETON page
Cheers
mike — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
121.219.138.209 (
talk)
07:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I see you have been adding the default sort template to several articles. Does every article need this? More importantly, what is the use or point of a default sort to the article title? That is the default anyway. This all adds unnecessary clutter. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 08:23, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
"autonym"
to the elements that include language names. Note that this font only works for the name of languages, not for any other text.
[6]Problems
Future
{{REVISIONID}}
, {{REVISIONUSER}}
and {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}
and similar functions, by writing for example {{REVISIONID:Apple}}
.
[12]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
13:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I reverted your unexplained revert on
Generalized eigenvector. Feel free to join the discussion on the talk page, but this article is in the process of being cleaned up to fix the excessive use of <br />
tags, and excessive bolding.
198.102.153.2 (
talk)
16:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite,
I was wondering if you could please give me permission simply to improve the references section of the Harp Twins page. For example, I would like to add the names of the articles (and their authors), date of retrieval, etc. (in some cases this information is not there), to comply with standard Wikipedia rules and make the references section consistent. This should not be seen as controversial, in my opinion, and I think Duff once complained that the references section needed improvements; at the time I did not know how to do that, but I have learned since then. If you don't think it's a good idea, I'll understand. Oh, and they don't look stunning at all any more, not even Camille. What a shame:
Have a nice day... Dontreader ( talk) 08:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Dontreader, I updated the info in the body that you made. I converted the references to use templates. I didn't move the refs up into the body of the article. Debate will rage on years from now on where to put refs and what format. I personally like refs inline instead of all bunched up at the end, but this is minor and not worth moving. Anything I missed? Bgwhite ( talk) 06:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Bgwhite, I noticed your interactions with the 208.81 IP and thought I'd leave you a brief note here. 208 is (IMO) a very valuable editor with more edits than most registered editors, and a knowledge of policy comparable to many admins. They tend to do gmomish work and make lots of minor changes to many articles, which I think is what they were trying to do to the list in question. I think you'll find that you'd get a better response if you treated them more as a peer (i.e. minus the "stop it right now" and "crap"). As for the dispute itself, in my experience a "Notes" section followed by a "References" section is fairly standard. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be to harsh on anybody for thinking the same (see, for instance, the illustration at WP:FNNR). As for inclusion of the UHE in a new Further Reading section, I think you're right that it works better as a reference by itself, and I don't think 208 is fighting you on that. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 00:23, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:
Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt ( talk) 03:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in my recent quality improvement efforts on articles related to freedom of speech.
Much appreciated,
— Cirt ( talk) 03:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey Bigwhite,
I must be doing something wrong because when I create a navbox, I seem to be able to make them and they work when I paste them onto the intended articles, but I just can't seem to edit them once they have been created. You helped me with my first one:
and that works great. But since then I've made two naboxes:
and
. However, when trying to edit them I find I can't (the box for editing is empty). I tried looking for anything indicating "open" and "closed" or "auto" on the page (in an attempt to correct it as you had done previously), but couldn't find anything. Might you know what it is that I'm doing wrong?
Thanks,
Markkaempfer ( talk) 08:14, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Problems
Future
*.wikimedia.org
, Wikimania and Wikisource wikis on November 19, and Wiktionary wikis on November 21 (except where it's already available). Once it is added, you can test it by adding &srbackend=CirrusSearch
to the address of the search results page. It will become the main search engine on Wikivoyage wikis on November 21.
[15]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
08:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Where in your edit summary is it mentioned, or linked to, something that supports your claim that small-tags must be closed. It's not that I doubt that it's true – but you didn't mention it, nor did you link to it. So, in your edit summary, you were indeed yourself making assumptions.
So, please no PA in edit summaries.
HandsomeFella ( talk) 16:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
In this edit [17] (which was no problem), the edit summary states
"Violates" as a description of benign editing errors is too extreme, in my opinion. My suggestion is:
IMHO, simply stating what was fixed, per which guideline, is enough. This will also tend not to provoke arguments or intimidate new editors (per WP:DONTBITE). Glad the bot exists. -- Lexein ( talk) 09:40, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Sportsguy17 ( R.I.P Jackson Peebles) 18:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
New features
Problems
Future
Page:
pages on Wikisource (working with the
Proofread Page extension) will soon also work without JavaScript.
[20]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
06:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I think we should keep him on the block for the remaining three months. This isn't exactly something that should easily be overlooked and forgotten. Assassin was asked for at least four months to refrain from his actions. The six month block was decided as apposed to indefinite,so I feel the full sentence should be carried out. That's just me. Rusted AutoParts 21:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Since "Alex Marshall (Journalist)" is my first article, I'd be grateful for some help understanding the extensive deletions you made on it. What honors are "big" enough to merit mention? Why are a journalist's articles not to be listed? Not trying to dispute your judgment, only to understand. I'm especially perplexed by your removal of the "External Links" section, since your note advises linking to a list of Marshall's articles, and I've been advised to add third-party links in order to bolster noteworthiness; but I don't want to undo that until I hear from you. Jim Crutchfield ( talk) 15:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I've added several external links to reviews of Marshall's books, interviews with Marshall, etc., which I hope will demonstrate notability. I don't feel at liberty to remove the "multiple issues", "notability", or "citations" tags, myself. When you have time, would you kindly take a look at the page and see if I've brought it up to standard? If not, I'd appreciate more guidance on how to do that. Happy Thanksgiving, if you celebrate that holiday. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 18:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Tabarie is sunni — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.253.50.62 ( talk) 20:52, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that BG19bot may be having some issues with its "section header fix" function, as shown here. It seems that the fact that there was already one equals sign on one side of the section header was not recognized by the bot. Steel1943 ( talk) 12:03, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
For an admin, this edit shows a remarkable lack of WP:CIVIL. If a bot edit fouls up a page, it is likely to be reverted by a human. The reflist was fine immediately before the bot edit, and fine immediately after it. What went wrong here, I don't know, but removing the previous talk page thread with a tart edit summary was incivil.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:36, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I would like to thank you for helping to clean up the mess I made recently on those u-boat articles. As the saying goes: to err is human but to really mess things up you need a computer. Thanks again, ÄDA - DÄP VA ( talk) 19:49, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Sportsguy17 :) ( click to talk • contributions) 19:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Bgwhite, I stumbled across this page: Galloping Bungalows: The Rise and Demise of the American House Trailer and wondered if one obscure mention in an obscure journal would make the book notable. But then I noticed the article is basically just a very sloppily moved over article about one David A. Thornburg. I can't find a deletion discussion for Thornburg or this book anywhere in the logs, so if there is one, or if you could do one, just write me a note back here so I can slap one big fat Delete on it. TuckerResearch ( talk) 06:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Friendship Barnstar | |
Hello Bgwhite, I'm confused what to give you at this moment :). But I'm really happy to have you standing by me always and now I'll try not to disappoint you, thanks a lot. Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! ( T - C - G ) 17:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. I saw that you removed the comment surrounding the PL fixtures in 2013–14 Aston Villa F.C. season. I reverted that change because the law says we are not allowed to show upcoming PL fixtures. The most recent discussion on WT:FOOTY can be read at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#La Liga fixtures copyright?, and the rules here. QED237 (talk) 20:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
What kind of restrictions do I have to follow now? Can I create new articles about politics in Pakistan and also some biography articles about notable persons? I'm not stepping forward without asking you now. -- Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! ( T - C - G ) 03:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, back in mid-June you semi-protected Kachwaha for a month because of vandalism (see here). The same issues returned from mid-July, involving exactly the same well-sourced statements from people such as William Pinch published by presses such as that of the University of California. It seems basically to be me against everyone else, although there have been occasional historically similar reverts of IPs by Anna Frodesiak ( talk · contribs) etc. I'm going to leave a note on the talk page but I wonder if you would be prepared to keep an eye on the article for a few weeks? You are not commonly associated with caste-related issues and that should be a bonus. - Sitush ( talk) 05:40, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Not a complaint, just idle curiosity about what was being fixed here. Edit adds a line after an image, removes a blank space at the end of a blockquote and swaps the order of two references? No big deal, just wondering. Nice btw that the bot came by the page, this is my least interesting article so its nice to have visitors, even automated ones. Euryalus ( talk) 09:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I think edits like this are potentially a problem. While I don't know if the reference order was all that important in this case, in general editors sometimes think carefully about what order to cite refs in. For example, sometimes a review cites a primary source and you want the two to appear together in a longer list. I think you should consider putting the bot on hold until you fix the swapping. Wnt ( talk) 14:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)