![]() | This user has departed Wikipedia. SlackerMom has not edited Wikipedia since 3 March 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Welcome to my talk page! If you leave me a message here, I will answer it here, so be sure to watch this page for a reply. Likewise, if I have left a message on your talk page, I will look for your response there. Thanks!
I'm very sorry I haven't had a chance to welcome you earlier, I have been incredibly busy lately. We are glad to have your help. Currently, we have really cut down the backlog of articles in need of copyedit. Therefore, a major goal at this moment is to identify new articles that are in need of work. When you run across them, be sure to tag them for copyediting.
If you have any questions at all, do not hesitate to drop me a line. Trusilver 16:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits, particularly "in addition to" - I knew what I'd put wasn't quite right but couldn't think of the right phrase. I still contend that "centred" is correct, but that's because I speak en-gb. It's not important enough that I'd go changing it back though. Thanks once again — Timotab Timothy (not Tim, dagnabbit!) 18:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Xavier (name), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Xavier. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 17:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, SlackerMom. It appears that you copied and pasted Xavier to [[{{{2}}}]]. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you, The Evil Spartan 21:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
The Evil Spartan 21:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I see what you mean. I thought about moving it to List of secondary schools named after Francis Xavier, but that name's unwieldy and you'd still have to scroll through a sea of redlinks. What number of enrolled students do you think makes a high school notable enough for Wikipedia? I realize there are other ways a school can be notable, but maybe we can move the smaller schools onto Talk:St. Xavier High School until someone comes along and writes an article about them. – Minh Nguyễn ( talk, contribs) 04:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I keep watch over scrapbooking because of an incidental interest in how "ordinary" people have recorded things and used books and writing. I don't think that any of the folks who put up most of the material in the article have very much interest in a truly encyclopedic approach. Nor am I sure that there are very good secondary sources. The article on Commonplace books gets at an aspect of the subject, but scrapbooking as we think of it probably depends on the abundance of cheap paper, cheap printed material like newspapers, and, eventually, photographs; which makes Victorian England a highly likely site. I've read a bit about keeping diaries and don't find much in that literature about scrapbooking either. DCDuring 13:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
There are two or three strands that I'm aware of for going a bit farther back to understand how folks kept track of the memories of their personal lives;
There is a lot of literature/research on "orality," which included how ancient cultures preserved themselves. I'm still looking for evidence of the first personal to-do list. DCDuring 18:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback :) Propaniac 19:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. You've been doing some really awesome work here - I took a peek :) Would you be interested in the Veropedia project; fixing and improving articles for upload to vero? If you're interested in an account there, just let me know and I can sort it out for you! - Alison ❤ 01:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
This edit seems a very bad choice. I've changed it to [[statistical survey|survey]]. -- Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
SlackerMom: noticed you recently connected a link from the two Bathurst 24 Hour races to this driver. Can you confirm this American driver raced these Australian races? There was an Australian based driver with that name and I do not believe it to be the same person. -- Falcadore ( talk) 11:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't see your recent edits to the above as improving. Rather they seem to complicate it. Christ Church Grammar School for instance is not a church. You are changing format that is used for most POWdis pages. Before I undo your edits, I would like to discuss this with you and try to reach some consensus. clariosophic 20:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) As a citizen of the Republic of Ireland, I can tell you that Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin is not in the UK. clariosophic 20:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
On Congregation Mickve Israel, I left a comment on the talk page. I'll be glad to work with you to weave the National Register listing into the article. Here is an example of where the Georgia listings in Wikipedia don't even list the congregation and the National Park service website lists it, but instead of giving the usual info, just says: "in Savannah??". If it weren't for the picture of the actual plaque on the website, I wouldn't have even bothered to check it out. As you probably know, the National register listing is important because it assures the notability of the article. clariosophic 21:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely agree with the removal of the image. I'm biding my 24 hours before making another overhaul of the page in accordance with WP:MOSDAB (probably using this version as a base), since Abtract has accused me of 3RR violation before I remake any of my earlier edits. I just didn't want you to think that my attempts at interim cleanup were full endorsements of the poor shape the page is currently in. Cheers! -- JHunterJ ( talk) 15:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Greetings from the
League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our
members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the
members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the
new requests system, which has replaced the old
/proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial
backlog which still exists there. The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors. |
Melon‑ Bot ( STOP!) 18:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey, since you were involved with the discussion on the [City High School (City, State)] issue, I was wondering what your option on this topic? -- Dan Leveille TALK 06:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi SlackerMom: After the new system at LoCE was in place, I found it helpful to put all the instructions and my own shortcuts on my user pages for quick reference. This has worked well for me with few glitches. You're welcome to visit User:Finetooth/desk and cut-and-paste the code to your user page or anywhere you like. I feel certain that the articles you are proofreading from the old pile should be dealt with in the same way as the ones in the new pile. Glad to see you are back. I noticed that you were gone for a while. Finetooth ( talk) 16:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, and thanks for giving the old backlog some of the attention it deserves. I'm not entirely sure what to do with the old requests - part of me thinks that most of them are old enough to be completely worthless, but part of me feels it would be a failure on the League's part not to do something about them when we have advertised our help, and editors have in good faith requested that help. I'm going to run up a quick script soon (I'm incredibly busy with RL atm) to check through all the old requests for those that don't meet our new criteria, particularly the one about cleanup tags. I don't know how many articles that will remove. I'll have to see how many that leaves us before I get off the fence vis avis whether they should all be dumped. I am leaning towards it! Happy‑ melon 19:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the comment on behalf of the League of Copyeditors. I have entered the article for a Good Article Nomination, and hopefully I can drop you a word or two to let you know of the results, so that the fine work that you'se do can truly be appreciated, not only by myself, but by those who will review the article. Thank you again, and all the editors involved in helping out!! SriMesh | talk 19:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For truly outstanding work in clearing the backlog at the League of Copyeditor's old requests system. Happy‑ melon 11:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC) |
Hi, are you sure that redirecting St Agnes and St. Agnes to Saint Agnes was the right thing to do? There are at least 4 Saints called Agnes, as well as the various places, and I feel that having them link to the disambiguation page was a better arrangement. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I hate it when I repeat myself redundantly--thanks for the quick fix.:-)-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 15:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, your last change to this article changed a direct link to Christ Church to one that went through a redirect. I have changed it back, since a direct link is preferable. BTW, it is supposed to be good form in See also to add {disambiguation) AFTER a link that does not include it. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 23:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Anna (name), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Anna. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello SlackerMom. In light of your "interest" in the Jesus bloodline article, would you be interested in copyediting the Priory of Sion article? -- Loremaster ( talk) 19:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I've radically improved the Jesus bloodline article so you might also want to take a look at that again. -- Loremaster ( talk) 20:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I've answered your questions on the Talk:Priory of Sion page. -- Loremaster ( talk) 19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for disambiguating penia. Looks much better now. TwoMightyGods Persuasion Necessity 17:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Batten (surname), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Batten (disambiguation). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 13:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Howdy, I noticed you removed the {{ hndis}} from a stubby disambiguation page, Lorena (name), but did not remove its disambig links, nor give it a new category. What sort of page do you think it is? All the "name" pages I have seen are disambiguation pages. I do agree that Lorena (disambiguation) more than suffices for the disambig purpose of the page, but I am not sure what the other purpose of the (name) page is. JackSchmidt ( talk) 16:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Partly due to a dipuste, I slightly expanded and improved the Jesus bloodline article. Could you please take another look and give it the League's "seal of approval" if possible after you're done? -- Loremaster ( talk) 04:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Loremaster, due to the continued edits to this article, I'd prefer to wait a bit before another copyedit to be sure it's stable. I'll keep an eye on it, but feel free to remind me. SlackerMom ( talk) 14:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I knew it needed to be blown up, but I hadn't had time. TravellingCari the Busy Bee 17:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you commented before on my cleanups etc and I was wondering if I could ask your advice on 2 sites with different problems. One is Nick Douglas, I left it like that but I really think both the names are not notable and then that just leaves a blank page. Would {{db-empty}} be suitable? Or is there a better procedure for dab pages? The second is Charles Foster (disambiguation). I've had cleanups reverted twice now so I was wondering what the next step is?
I hope you don't mind me asking, I assume you have run up against these sorts of problems before. Thanks in advance Tassedethe ( talk) 13:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in on my issues with this page. I took a Wiki-break for the holiday weekend so didn't see your comments until now--I guess I'll wait another day for the other editor to comment, in case he was also on a break, and then undo his changes if he's still silent. But I appreciate your input. Propaniac ( talk) 15:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Your changes are a great improvement. Most of the Saturnini listed there were never going to have their own articles, but if they end up getting one they can be added back easily. Good work.-- Cúchullain t/ c 16:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I see what you've done, but the link you provided was a book *about* the Dubs. That's different than saying that "The Dubs" is a nickname for the Dublin GAA Gaelic Football team. If you look at the Dublin GAA page, you'll see reference to the nickname in the info box. Not sure if I'm being clear... -- Bardcom ( talk) 18:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. You redirected Crash pad to Bouldering mat a few days ago, with the edit summary of "change to redirect - only usage of this term in WP". I was linked to Crash pad from UATWM and I'm fairly certain that article is not talking about safety measures to use when climbing rocks ;-). Curious, I looked at the page history and saw your redirect and I'd have to say I'm not so sure about Bouldering mat being the "only usage", given that 4 out of the 5 results for links to Crash pad are for subculture-related articles, rather than climbing (which comprises the remaining result). Given this, I think the redirect should be undone but thought I would run the suggestion past you first. What do you think? Best, Chaotic Reality 13:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Demetrius (disambiguation), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Demetrius. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted some of your cleanup on this dab page, as it created links to redirects where we're supposed to avoid same, and also it did not maintain logical flow i.e. by indicating that the various TV shows and films stemmed from the same source. 23skidoo ( talk) 01:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you removed the cleanup tag I put on Red Clay (disambiguation page). It seemed clear to me that many of the entries did not qualify per MOS:DAB (examples to exclude), as the disambiguated element was only a portion of those links. Are there specifics to your different read in this case? ENeville ( talk) 01:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
*Much blushing* That is such a nice thing for you to say, SlackerMom - thank you so much for the truly lovely compliments! You've set me smiling for a while with that; thank you.
Along those same lines, especially with many of the recent discussions, I am similarly glad to see your well-thought-out thoughts on disambiguation. There can be some pretty crazy ideas out there, and from what I've seen (including the thread just above this one on your talk page, which impressed me with your reasonable and rational response), you help keep things stable. It certainly is a pleasure to edit with you. And since you mentioned, it I couldn't resist something pretty and cheerful. :) -- Natalya 15:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I realize that you have changed the Liza Jacqueline article into a redirect. Liza Jacqueline and Jacqueline Pillon are two different people, last I checked on IMDB ( see here). Kitty53 ( talk) 21:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you made some changes to Parsi. Please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Parsi_people#The_word_.22Parsi.22 ( Gta40 ( talk) 17:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC))
All right, that is understandable, thank you. I put a message on the Persian peoples talk page and I'll see what happens. ( Gta40 ( talk) 00:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
Always a pleasure to help. Been meaning to ask, why did you initially remove the redirect Avatar (Avatar: The Last Airbender) when WP:PIPING encourages such use? And what was wrong with the layout:
I used Akuma as precedence. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 18:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
It's rare to get a message unless someone's annoyed, so I really appreciate that. It helps me keep going with my obsession to know I'm doing an OK job! Boleyn ( talk) 19:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying the lead so deftly. Cheers. Alastair Haines ( talk) 03:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
You recently reverted my addition of the Lawful Evil alignment for Dungeons and Dragons to the LE disambiguation article with the reason given as "entries should be commonly known as LE". The Lawful Evil alignment, along with all Dungeons and Dragons alignments, is commonly referred to as its initialism (Chaotic Good is CG, Lawful Neutral is LN, and so on), so I have reverted your change back. -- Muna ( talk) 18:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I will now undo your edits citing WP:BRD. The guideline gives no such preference. That, and the fact that you took off most of the wiktionary entries for no reason. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 16:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Regarding [1], is there a guideline saying the abbreviation should be mentioned in the article to get listed on a disambiguation page? For many of them it's easy to verify with Google on CC combined with the full name that the abbreviation is in use outside Wikipedia. PrimeHunter ( talk) 17:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Re your implicit question at WP:MoSDab#Entries to pages that are Dabs, i'm sure you know how create the Rdr "half" of a shortcut, so i assume you haven't bothered (as i also had not!) to look (at, say, Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Set index articles) for something like
which is the sharing-it-with-others half of the shortcut creation. Or did i get confused abt what you meant?
Could it be you're interested in the HTML magic of making a target for links at a point that isn't a heading (which i think may be desirable in the case under discussion)? I think i can do it from memory. I start by using the "Wiki markup" flavor of the "insert" menu to insert
Then i throw away or replace parts of it, instead of trying to type anything but letters:
(in which, note well, i retained the crucial slash char that is handily there before the throw-away second "span"; you'll tear your hair out debugging the first time you forget & remove the slash too) and put the un-nowiki'd version of it here with the result that
from way down the page (scroll this to the top of your window before clicking, to prove what i'm saying) there's now, from way down here, effectively a
link to the preceding occurrence of the word "here". Yeah, that should work (once saved), 'cz it worked in preview when i took the page name out of the link.
I learned to do that for the sake of Dabs: the lk for a fic-char shouldn't go to the top of the work-including-the-char article (or even the top of the list-of-chars-from one), but to the first relevant paragraph, which often has no heading. No one but we happy few understands the markup, so it's good to put a comment next to it, listing the article(s) that will link to the spot.
Thanks for your input, and hope i haven't bored you in return!
--
Jerzy•
t
05:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad to know
List of rivers in Estonia exists, but it tells me (without looking at the articles in the 0th thru 5th percentiles, which could be even further enlightening) that this one is probably between the 6th and 99th percentiles of notability among the rivers of this country with 0.02% of the world's population and 0.05% of its GDP, and likely to be non-notable for at least another century.
More to the point, i generally hide inside comments (as i had with this one), pending development of a stub from the hints, any Dab entry whose target doesn't seem to me to have more than a dict def -- and a bare entry on a list is a lot less than a dict def. My argument, which i sometimes include to diss a specific entry or article passage, is that anyone who came looking for an encyc article entitled, say
Pada (and referring to the river) would justly feel that a Dab lk'g to, say
List of rivers in Estonia, had unreasonably wasted their time: the time to follow one lk, and do whatever they chose (scrolling, typing "Pa" into the browser search box and checking to see "match case" was checked, whatever) to find Pada on the page. (I also don't like "See", but never mind.)
I've noticed your frequency of Dab-CU-ing Dab's i've tagged, your attention to guidelines, and what i take to be a good measure of common sense, so i'm uncomfortable critiquing you at all, and the last thing i'd want is for this to sound like a User Warning! You may have noticed (among my many weaknesses) that i haven't tried hard to keep completely up to date as the Two Great Guideline Pages of Dab Editing develop, so
"(I don't want to go on a rant, but ....) But that's just my opinion, i could be wrong." And no doubt any "
retort" you have will be valuable.
Thanks for all the fixes.
--
Jerzy•
t
10:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Re this note -- thanks, truly. Working with disambiguations was originally my outlet for idle editing without having to worry about edit wars; how little did I suspect... :-) But you are great to work with! (Expanding from earlier -- tangentially, my home power is out going on four days now, thanks to Hurricane Ike, so I'm not as plugged in as I normally am.) -- JHunterJ ( talk) 12:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The article Local churches and Local church (disambiguation) is been attacked/vandalized by the User:Ad.minster; furthermore, I do not understand several of the new edits such as how come the "Sunday Nights" correlates with the Lord's table meeting. His edits disqualifies all of the previous citation but then I can see the addition in the "controversy section" without providing a citation, or even a template, strange, .. !!
There are some questions to be discussed: Where is the advertisement? Which links are supportive; which links are of the Local churches? Where is this local church? I would ask for the other editors of this page to look into his edits and bring a NPOV in the article and also somehow to reach the general consensus. I have reverted couple of vandalism earlier but this time it seems that discussing the subject might be able to solve the problem among the editors. Thanks, HopeChrist ( talk) 22:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I pretty much agree with these changes, except I would like to know why you modified the see also section to be a hatnote. Doesn't WP:NAMB have specific requirements for this? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 17:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Why did I remove the template? Because I read what it said and followed its instructions. If you feel the template is erroneous (in that it no longer reflects the recommended procedure), correct it. If you feel the procedure ought to be changed, raise the issue on the relevant Talk page, whatever it may be. But do not blame people for following instructions. Urhixidur ( talk) 14:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Just a note to say that disambiguation pages are nominated for deletion at WP:AFD, in the same forum as articles, because they are still in the mainspace. Best wishes, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I've added a description of the special linear Lie algebra sl and put the line back in to SL. Richard Pinch ( talk) 17:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sosicles (poet), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Sosicles. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Saw your reversions, and thought it was worth a discussion.
I've just spent the last couple of months cleaning up all the incoming links to the disambiguation pages that include radio and TV stations - well, all but about 115 after several thousand edits. As I was doing this, I noticed that there was an appalling lack on consistency amongst the pages. However, the most useful pages had certain properties in common:
So, as I've been doing the last touch-ups of the clean-up, I've been going back and trying to put that information in so that there's at least some consistency. I've also been removing excess blue links and punctuation, per the MOSDAB.
I kind of look at it like the example given in the MOS for "John Adams". You could just list the four different people with that name and their disambigutor, along with the year of birth and death, and probably clear up most potential for confusion. However, adding the small amount of narrative afterward makes it that much easier to determine which is which. For radio stations, the fact that a station is in the Miami market is useful, but the fact that it's licensed to a certain city, that it broadcasts on a certain frequency, or that it used that call sign at a certain time, similarly adds to the clarity. Especially on the east coast of the U.S., call signs get swapped around like a kid's baseball cards. In fact, it's even more useful for a set of entries that are all radio stations, whereas it's less likely that the individual John Adamses have anything in common other than their name.
What do you think? Mlaffs ( talk) 17:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Something about it still doesn't "feel" right. Can you take a shot at it? Inclusively, I can't tell if it should be in the given name category. Any thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 17:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Why create this page? The disambiguation page is already at Ramsay. Parenthetical context is added to a title only if a topic is displaced from its plain title. — Centrx→ talk • 02:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey. You misunderstood something :) -- Fullstop ( talk) 21:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I checked the dab style guide; it says that even though the dab templates add cats automatically, it's OK to add another style like Category:Given names to a dab page where appropriate. Frederica is devoted partly but not solely to given names, so I thought it was appropriate there. (In fact, the style guide gave me the idea.) If we were to create Frederica (given name) and move content, then the cat would have to go, of course. Seem OK to you? — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 22:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
For the record, i do think that Rdrs on Dab pages are a lousy idea, bcz they affront the
Principle of least astonishment. But per the guidelines i let them stand, unless they scream
IAR at me.
In the case where you reverted me, summarizing
i probably mentioned the fact it was a Rdr bcz i was grumbling to myself abt the reliance on Rdrs contributing to carelessness, or i ambiguously invited association of "terrible" with "Rdr", where i probably intended closer to "terrible link (via redirect)". I could just as well called it a terrible description, and it sounds like you missed the fact, or my intended point, that
The Draft Rdrs not to
Conscription but to
Conscription in the United States.
I might have done a better job, instead of replacing that lk with
by adding that entry, and considering The Draft separately. In which case, i'd have probably left it as a Rdr, in compliance with the (stupid) guideline, but clarified it as
On the other hand, it's possible i said to myself -- even tho it's probably harmless to assume that "The Draft" refers to the US draft, since i think it's been decades longer since other English-speaking countries had one -- that a reader who types "draft" because they read "the draft" is one who doesn't realize that "draft" and "the draft" have different meanings (different to the extent i was just acknowledging: if they realized that, they'd have typed "the draft" instead, and not reached the Dab. And in that case, i'd have reasoned (on the knowledge or belief, i don't recall, that "conscription" lists
Conscription in the United States as a See also) that they'd be unastonished by the more general article, and get to the US draft efficiently, without our cluttering the Dab page with an entry that will probably never be useful.
So, without assuming that i've convinced you, but with the thot that you may be too bored with the subject to change it again even if you think i've described the situation correctly, i'm counter-reverting, in the hope that you'll recognize that i do so without prejudice to your next preference (and that your further change to it will be accepted by me, without hard feelings).
Best,
--
Jerzy•
t
07:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmm. I think i may be irony-impaired enuf to forget to weigh whether an ambiguous question might be ironic! (Perhaps a good thing here, where physical harm can't result from looking gutless.) In any case: Back at you! [smile]
--
Jerzy•
t
03:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you mind having a look at these dabs? I don't want to get involved in keep reerting people's changes, especialy a regular contributor like pdf, but some of the entries in the see also section seems silly to me. Thanks, Boleyn2 ( talk) 06:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Having exactly one navigable blue link is not a categorical rule. In this case, "complexity theory" and "imaginary number" are highly relevant and would themselves warrant separate entries on the same page if it were logical to organize them so. Also, changing links to point to redirects here misleads the reader. "Complex algebra" is not "an element of a field of sets"; and a "mimicry complex" is not "mimicry" or even merely an instance of "mimicry". Blindly fixing every disambiguation page in a set format, which is not even required by Wikipedia:Disambiguation or the Manual of Style, impairs the usefulness of the disambiguation page, impedes the reader, and sometimes leads to downright false listings. — Centrx→ talk • 09:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I hope we can sort these changes out. I have no intention of edit warring, and I do accept my limitations of knowledge, but unless there is a compelling argument to ignore the rules, I will abide by the guidelines at WP:MOSDAB, since they have been reached and held by long consensus. I will copy this conversation to Talk:Complex and we can continue it there. SlackerMom ( talk) 15:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
What is Kotniski talking about here? There is no guideline that I'm aware of that claims avoiding redirects is better. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 18:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Please, explain the last deleted line in this cleanup. Isn't Avtomatika i telemekhanika abbreviated as Ait or I missed anything? Thank you. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 14:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Good to see you back on here, Boleyn2 ( talk) 07:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I know you've offered some comments at Talk:HP (disambiguation), but the conservation regarding the fate of hp belongs on its talk page. Will you please weigh in there and reconsider your stance. I think WP:REDIRECT indicates the page should redirect to the dab, since redirects are used to accommodate miscapitalizations. — Eustress talk 16:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello SlackerMom. When you are back from your break, could you please copyedit the New World Order (conspiracy theory) article? -- Loremaster ( talk) 05:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thanks for cleaning-up and reducing the fancruft out of the Larry Norman article. I think I'm too close to the subject to be objective. Please continue the fine work. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 15:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC) |
Wow! Thank you so very much! That article is a mess, and I can see you've been trying! I thought I'd just get some of the most egregious stuff out, but there's plenty more that needs cutting. I'll do what I have time for. I do appreciate the barnstar! SlackerMom ( talk) 15:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. Following your conversion of this page from disambiguation to a redirect, a number of incoming links to William T. Moore now end up at the wrong person ( William Theodore Moore Jr.). - TB ( talk) 16:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
WikiWomen Unite! | |
---|---|
Hi SlackerMom! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our
meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved! |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I made some attempt to understand the intent of the following longstanding Dab entry: National Vanguard, one of several white nationalist or neo-fascist organizations and publications whose link had the markup
but failed to arrive at any explanation for its creation, and used this (unpiped) entry:
to
replace it. It's of course possible i erred.
--
Jerzy•
t
23:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Stahlberg: disambiguation. Since you had some involvement with the Stahlberg: disambiguation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 ( talk) 06:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Méré (disambiguation page). Since you had some involvement with the Méré (disambiguation page) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 14:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This user has departed Wikipedia. SlackerMom has not edited Wikipedia since 3 March 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Welcome to my talk page! If you leave me a message here, I will answer it here, so be sure to watch this page for a reply. Likewise, if I have left a message on your talk page, I will look for your response there. Thanks!
I'm very sorry I haven't had a chance to welcome you earlier, I have been incredibly busy lately. We are glad to have your help. Currently, we have really cut down the backlog of articles in need of copyedit. Therefore, a major goal at this moment is to identify new articles that are in need of work. When you run across them, be sure to tag them for copyediting.
If you have any questions at all, do not hesitate to drop me a line. Trusilver 16:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits, particularly "in addition to" - I knew what I'd put wasn't quite right but couldn't think of the right phrase. I still contend that "centred" is correct, but that's because I speak en-gb. It's not important enough that I'd go changing it back though. Thanks once again — Timotab Timothy (not Tim, dagnabbit!) 18:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Xavier (name), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Xavier. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 17:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, SlackerMom. It appears that you copied and pasted Xavier to [[{{{2}}}]]. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you, The Evil Spartan 21:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
The Evil Spartan 21:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, I see what you mean. I thought about moving it to List of secondary schools named after Francis Xavier, but that name's unwieldy and you'd still have to scroll through a sea of redlinks. What number of enrolled students do you think makes a high school notable enough for Wikipedia? I realize there are other ways a school can be notable, but maybe we can move the smaller schools onto Talk:St. Xavier High School until someone comes along and writes an article about them. – Minh Nguyễn ( talk, contribs) 04:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I keep watch over scrapbooking because of an incidental interest in how "ordinary" people have recorded things and used books and writing. I don't think that any of the folks who put up most of the material in the article have very much interest in a truly encyclopedic approach. Nor am I sure that there are very good secondary sources. The article on Commonplace books gets at an aspect of the subject, but scrapbooking as we think of it probably depends on the abundance of cheap paper, cheap printed material like newspapers, and, eventually, photographs; which makes Victorian England a highly likely site. I've read a bit about keeping diaries and don't find much in that literature about scrapbooking either. DCDuring 13:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
There are two or three strands that I'm aware of for going a bit farther back to understand how folks kept track of the memories of their personal lives;
There is a lot of literature/research on "orality," which included how ancient cultures preserved themselves. I'm still looking for evidence of the first personal to-do list. DCDuring 18:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback :) Propaniac 19:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. You've been doing some really awesome work here - I took a peek :) Would you be interested in the Veropedia project; fixing and improving articles for upload to vero? If you're interested in an account there, just let me know and I can sort it out for you! - Alison ❤ 01:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
This edit seems a very bad choice. I've changed it to [[statistical survey|survey]]. -- Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
SlackerMom: noticed you recently connected a link from the two Bathurst 24 Hour races to this driver. Can you confirm this American driver raced these Australian races? There was an Australian based driver with that name and I do not believe it to be the same person. -- Falcadore ( talk) 11:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't see your recent edits to the above as improving. Rather they seem to complicate it. Christ Church Grammar School for instance is not a church. You are changing format that is used for most POWdis pages. Before I undo your edits, I would like to discuss this with you and try to reach some consensus. clariosophic 20:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) As a citizen of the Republic of Ireland, I can tell you that Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin is not in the UK. clariosophic 20:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
On Congregation Mickve Israel, I left a comment on the talk page. I'll be glad to work with you to weave the National Register listing into the article. Here is an example of where the Georgia listings in Wikipedia don't even list the congregation and the National Park service website lists it, but instead of giving the usual info, just says: "in Savannah??". If it weren't for the picture of the actual plaque on the website, I wouldn't have even bothered to check it out. As you probably know, the National register listing is important because it assures the notability of the article. clariosophic 21:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely agree with the removal of the image. I'm biding my 24 hours before making another overhaul of the page in accordance with WP:MOSDAB (probably using this version as a base), since Abtract has accused me of 3RR violation before I remake any of my earlier edits. I just didn't want you to think that my attempts at interim cleanup were full endorsements of the poor shape the page is currently in. Cheers! -- JHunterJ ( talk) 15:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
Greetings from the
League of Copyeditors. Your name is listed on our
members page, but we are unsure how many of the people listed there are still active contributors to the League's activities. If you are still interested in participating in the work of the League, please follow the instructions at the
members page to add your name to the active members list. Once you have done that, you might want to familiarise yourself with the
new requests system, which has replaced the old
/proofreading subpage. As the old system is now deprecated, the main efforts of the League should be to clear the substantial
backlog which still exists there. The League's services are in as high demand as ever, as evinced by the increasing backlog on our requests pages, both old and new. While FA and GA reviewers regularly praise the League's contributions to reviewed articles, we remain perennially understaffed. Fulfilling requests to polish the prose of Wikipedia's highest-profile articles is a way that editors can make a very noticeable difference to the appearance of the encyclopedia. On behalf of the League, if you do consider yourself to have left, I hope you will consider rejoining; if you consider yourself inactive, I hope you will consider returning to respond to just one request per week, or as many as you can manage. Merry Christmas and happy editing, The League of Copyeditors. |
Melon‑ Bot ( STOP!) 18:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey, since you were involved with the discussion on the [City High School (City, State)] issue, I was wondering what your option on this topic? -- Dan Leveille TALK 06:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi SlackerMom: After the new system at LoCE was in place, I found it helpful to put all the instructions and my own shortcuts on my user pages for quick reference. This has worked well for me with few glitches. You're welcome to visit User:Finetooth/desk and cut-and-paste the code to your user page or anywhere you like. I feel certain that the articles you are proofreading from the old pile should be dealt with in the same way as the ones in the new pile. Glad to see you are back. I noticed that you were gone for a while. Finetooth ( talk) 16:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, and thanks for giving the old backlog some of the attention it deserves. I'm not entirely sure what to do with the old requests - part of me thinks that most of them are old enough to be completely worthless, but part of me feels it would be a failure on the League's part not to do something about them when we have advertised our help, and editors have in good faith requested that help. I'm going to run up a quick script soon (I'm incredibly busy with RL atm) to check through all the old requests for those that don't meet our new criteria, particularly the one about cleanup tags. I don't know how many articles that will remove. I'll have to see how many that leaves us before I get off the fence vis avis whether they should all be dumped. I am leaning towards it! Happy‑ melon 19:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the comment on behalf of the League of Copyeditors. I have entered the article for a Good Article Nomination, and hopefully I can drop you a word or two to let you know of the results, so that the fine work that you'se do can truly be appreciated, not only by myself, but by those who will review the article. Thank you again, and all the editors involved in helping out!! SriMesh | talk 19:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For truly outstanding work in clearing the backlog at the League of Copyeditor's old requests system. Happy‑ melon 11:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC) |
Hi, are you sure that redirecting St Agnes and St. Agnes to Saint Agnes was the right thing to do? There are at least 4 Saints called Agnes, as well as the various places, and I feel that having them link to the disambiguation page was a better arrangement. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I hate it when I repeat myself redundantly--thanks for the quick fix.:-)-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 15:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, your last change to this article changed a direct link to Christ Church to one that went through a redirect. I have changed it back, since a direct link is preferable. BTW, it is supposed to be good form in See also to add {disambiguation) AFTER a link that does not include it. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 23:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Anna (name), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Anna. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello SlackerMom. In light of your "interest" in the Jesus bloodline article, would you be interested in copyediting the Priory of Sion article? -- Loremaster ( talk) 19:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I've radically improved the Jesus bloodline article so you might also want to take a look at that again. -- Loremaster ( talk) 20:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I've answered your questions on the Talk:Priory of Sion page. -- Loremaster ( talk) 19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for disambiguating penia. Looks much better now. TwoMightyGods Persuasion Necessity 17:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Batten (surname), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Batten (disambiguation). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 13:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Howdy, I noticed you removed the {{ hndis}} from a stubby disambiguation page, Lorena (name), but did not remove its disambig links, nor give it a new category. What sort of page do you think it is? All the "name" pages I have seen are disambiguation pages. I do agree that Lorena (disambiguation) more than suffices for the disambig purpose of the page, but I am not sure what the other purpose of the (name) page is. JackSchmidt ( talk) 16:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Partly due to a dipuste, I slightly expanded and improved the Jesus bloodline article. Could you please take another look and give it the League's "seal of approval" if possible after you're done? -- Loremaster ( talk) 04:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Loremaster, due to the continued edits to this article, I'd prefer to wait a bit before another copyedit to be sure it's stable. I'll keep an eye on it, but feel free to remind me. SlackerMom ( talk) 14:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I knew it needed to be blown up, but I hadn't had time. TravellingCari the Busy Bee 17:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you commented before on my cleanups etc and I was wondering if I could ask your advice on 2 sites with different problems. One is Nick Douglas, I left it like that but I really think both the names are not notable and then that just leaves a blank page. Would {{db-empty}} be suitable? Or is there a better procedure for dab pages? The second is Charles Foster (disambiguation). I've had cleanups reverted twice now so I was wondering what the next step is?
I hope you don't mind me asking, I assume you have run up against these sorts of problems before. Thanks in advance Tassedethe ( talk) 13:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in on my issues with this page. I took a Wiki-break for the holiday weekend so didn't see your comments until now--I guess I'll wait another day for the other editor to comment, in case he was also on a break, and then undo his changes if he's still silent. But I appreciate your input. Propaniac ( talk) 15:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Your changes are a great improvement. Most of the Saturnini listed there were never going to have their own articles, but if they end up getting one they can be added back easily. Good work.-- Cúchullain t/ c 16:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I see what you've done, but the link you provided was a book *about* the Dubs. That's different than saying that "The Dubs" is a nickname for the Dublin GAA Gaelic Football team. If you look at the Dublin GAA page, you'll see reference to the nickname in the info box. Not sure if I'm being clear... -- Bardcom ( talk) 18:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. You redirected Crash pad to Bouldering mat a few days ago, with the edit summary of "change to redirect - only usage of this term in WP". I was linked to Crash pad from UATWM and I'm fairly certain that article is not talking about safety measures to use when climbing rocks ;-). Curious, I looked at the page history and saw your redirect and I'd have to say I'm not so sure about Bouldering mat being the "only usage", given that 4 out of the 5 results for links to Crash pad are for subculture-related articles, rather than climbing (which comprises the remaining result). Given this, I think the redirect should be undone but thought I would run the suggestion past you first. What do you think? Best, Chaotic Reality 13:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Demetrius (disambiguation), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Demetrius. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted some of your cleanup on this dab page, as it created links to redirects where we're supposed to avoid same, and also it did not maintain logical flow i.e. by indicating that the various TV shows and films stemmed from the same source. 23skidoo ( talk) 01:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you removed the cleanup tag I put on Red Clay (disambiguation page). It seemed clear to me that many of the entries did not qualify per MOS:DAB (examples to exclude), as the disambiguated element was only a portion of those links. Are there specifics to your different read in this case? ENeville ( talk) 01:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
*Much blushing* That is such a nice thing for you to say, SlackerMom - thank you so much for the truly lovely compliments! You've set me smiling for a while with that; thank you.
Along those same lines, especially with many of the recent discussions, I am similarly glad to see your well-thought-out thoughts on disambiguation. There can be some pretty crazy ideas out there, and from what I've seen (including the thread just above this one on your talk page, which impressed me with your reasonable and rational response), you help keep things stable. It certainly is a pleasure to edit with you. And since you mentioned, it I couldn't resist something pretty and cheerful. :) -- Natalya 15:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I realize that you have changed the Liza Jacqueline article into a redirect. Liza Jacqueline and Jacqueline Pillon are two different people, last I checked on IMDB ( see here). Kitty53 ( talk) 21:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you made some changes to Parsi. Please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Parsi_people#The_word_.22Parsi.22 ( Gta40 ( talk) 17:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC))
All right, that is understandable, thank you. I put a message on the Persian peoples talk page and I'll see what happens. ( Gta40 ( talk) 00:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
Always a pleasure to help. Been meaning to ask, why did you initially remove the redirect Avatar (Avatar: The Last Airbender) when WP:PIPING encourages such use? And what was wrong with the layout:
I used Akuma as precedence. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 18:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
It's rare to get a message unless someone's annoyed, so I really appreciate that. It helps me keep going with my obsession to know I'm doing an OK job! Boleyn ( talk) 19:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying the lead so deftly. Cheers. Alastair Haines ( talk) 03:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
You recently reverted my addition of the Lawful Evil alignment for Dungeons and Dragons to the LE disambiguation article with the reason given as "entries should be commonly known as LE". The Lawful Evil alignment, along with all Dungeons and Dragons alignments, is commonly referred to as its initialism (Chaotic Good is CG, Lawful Neutral is LN, and so on), so I have reverted your change back. -- Muna ( talk) 18:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I will now undo your edits citing WP:BRD. The guideline gives no such preference. That, and the fact that you took off most of the wiktionary entries for no reason. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 16:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Regarding [1], is there a guideline saying the abbreviation should be mentioned in the article to get listed on a disambiguation page? For many of them it's easy to verify with Google on CC combined with the full name that the abbreviation is in use outside Wikipedia. PrimeHunter ( talk) 17:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Re your implicit question at WP:MoSDab#Entries to pages that are Dabs, i'm sure you know how create the Rdr "half" of a shortcut, so i assume you haven't bothered (as i also had not!) to look (at, say, Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Set index articles) for something like
which is the sharing-it-with-others half of the shortcut creation. Or did i get confused abt what you meant?
Could it be you're interested in the HTML magic of making a target for links at a point that isn't a heading (which i think may be desirable in the case under discussion)? I think i can do it from memory. I start by using the "Wiki markup" flavor of the "insert" menu to insert
Then i throw away or replace parts of it, instead of trying to type anything but letters:
(in which, note well, i retained the crucial slash char that is handily there before the throw-away second "span"; you'll tear your hair out debugging the first time you forget & remove the slash too) and put the un-nowiki'd version of it here with the result that
from way down the page (scroll this to the top of your window before clicking, to prove what i'm saying) there's now, from way down here, effectively a
link to the preceding occurrence of the word "here". Yeah, that should work (once saved), 'cz it worked in preview when i took the page name out of the link.
I learned to do that for the sake of Dabs: the lk for a fic-char shouldn't go to the top of the work-including-the-char article (or even the top of the list-of-chars-from one), but to the first relevant paragraph, which often has no heading. No one but we happy few understands the markup, so it's good to put a comment next to it, listing the article(s) that will link to the spot.
Thanks for your input, and hope i haven't bored you in return!
--
Jerzy•
t
05:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad to know
List of rivers in Estonia exists, but it tells me (without looking at the articles in the 0th thru 5th percentiles, which could be even further enlightening) that this one is probably between the 6th and 99th percentiles of notability among the rivers of this country with 0.02% of the world's population and 0.05% of its GDP, and likely to be non-notable for at least another century.
More to the point, i generally hide inside comments (as i had with this one), pending development of a stub from the hints, any Dab entry whose target doesn't seem to me to have more than a dict def -- and a bare entry on a list is a lot less than a dict def. My argument, which i sometimes include to diss a specific entry or article passage, is that anyone who came looking for an encyc article entitled, say
Pada (and referring to the river) would justly feel that a Dab lk'g to, say
List of rivers in Estonia, had unreasonably wasted their time: the time to follow one lk, and do whatever they chose (scrolling, typing "Pa" into the browser search box and checking to see "match case" was checked, whatever) to find Pada on the page. (I also don't like "See", but never mind.)
I've noticed your frequency of Dab-CU-ing Dab's i've tagged, your attention to guidelines, and what i take to be a good measure of common sense, so i'm uncomfortable critiquing you at all, and the last thing i'd want is for this to sound like a User Warning! You may have noticed (among my many weaknesses) that i haven't tried hard to keep completely up to date as the Two Great Guideline Pages of Dab Editing develop, so
"(I don't want to go on a rant, but ....) But that's just my opinion, i could be wrong." And no doubt any "
retort" you have will be valuable.
Thanks for all the fixes.
--
Jerzy•
t
10:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Re this note -- thanks, truly. Working with disambiguations was originally my outlet for idle editing without having to worry about edit wars; how little did I suspect... :-) But you are great to work with! (Expanding from earlier -- tangentially, my home power is out going on four days now, thanks to Hurricane Ike, so I'm not as plugged in as I normally am.) -- JHunterJ ( talk) 12:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The article Local churches and Local church (disambiguation) is been attacked/vandalized by the User:Ad.minster; furthermore, I do not understand several of the new edits such as how come the "Sunday Nights" correlates with the Lord's table meeting. His edits disqualifies all of the previous citation but then I can see the addition in the "controversy section" without providing a citation, or even a template, strange, .. !!
There are some questions to be discussed: Where is the advertisement? Which links are supportive; which links are of the Local churches? Where is this local church? I would ask for the other editors of this page to look into his edits and bring a NPOV in the article and also somehow to reach the general consensus. I have reverted couple of vandalism earlier but this time it seems that discussing the subject might be able to solve the problem among the editors. Thanks, HopeChrist ( talk) 22:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I pretty much agree with these changes, except I would like to know why you modified the see also section to be a hatnote. Doesn't WP:NAMB have specific requirements for this? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 17:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Why did I remove the template? Because I read what it said and followed its instructions. If you feel the template is erroneous (in that it no longer reflects the recommended procedure), correct it. If you feel the procedure ought to be changed, raise the issue on the relevant Talk page, whatever it may be. But do not blame people for following instructions. Urhixidur ( talk) 14:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Just a note to say that disambiguation pages are nominated for deletion at WP:AFD, in the same forum as articles, because they are still in the mainspace. Best wishes, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I've added a description of the special linear Lie algebra sl and put the line back in to SL. Richard Pinch ( talk) 17:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sosicles (poet), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Sosicles. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Saw your reversions, and thought it was worth a discussion.
I've just spent the last couple of months cleaning up all the incoming links to the disambiguation pages that include radio and TV stations - well, all but about 115 after several thousand edits. As I was doing this, I noticed that there was an appalling lack on consistency amongst the pages. However, the most useful pages had certain properties in common:
So, as I've been doing the last touch-ups of the clean-up, I've been going back and trying to put that information in so that there's at least some consistency. I've also been removing excess blue links and punctuation, per the MOSDAB.
I kind of look at it like the example given in the MOS for "John Adams". You could just list the four different people with that name and their disambigutor, along with the year of birth and death, and probably clear up most potential for confusion. However, adding the small amount of narrative afterward makes it that much easier to determine which is which. For radio stations, the fact that a station is in the Miami market is useful, but the fact that it's licensed to a certain city, that it broadcasts on a certain frequency, or that it used that call sign at a certain time, similarly adds to the clarity. Especially on the east coast of the U.S., call signs get swapped around like a kid's baseball cards. In fact, it's even more useful for a set of entries that are all radio stations, whereas it's less likely that the individual John Adamses have anything in common other than their name.
What do you think? Mlaffs ( talk) 17:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Something about it still doesn't "feel" right. Can you take a shot at it? Inclusively, I can't tell if it should be in the given name category. Any thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 17:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Why create this page? The disambiguation page is already at Ramsay. Parenthetical context is added to a title only if a topic is displaced from its plain title. — Centrx→ talk • 02:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey. You misunderstood something :) -- Fullstop ( talk) 21:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I checked the dab style guide; it says that even though the dab templates add cats automatically, it's OK to add another style like Category:Given names to a dab page where appropriate. Frederica is devoted partly but not solely to given names, so I thought it was appropriate there. (In fact, the style guide gave me the idea.) If we were to create Frederica (given name) and move content, then the cat would have to go, of course. Seem OK to you? — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 22:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
For the record, i do think that Rdrs on Dab pages are a lousy idea, bcz they affront the
Principle of least astonishment. But per the guidelines i let them stand, unless they scream
IAR at me.
In the case where you reverted me, summarizing
i probably mentioned the fact it was a Rdr bcz i was grumbling to myself abt the reliance on Rdrs contributing to carelessness, or i ambiguously invited association of "terrible" with "Rdr", where i probably intended closer to "terrible link (via redirect)". I could just as well called it a terrible description, and it sounds like you missed the fact, or my intended point, that
The Draft Rdrs not to
Conscription but to
Conscription in the United States.
I might have done a better job, instead of replacing that lk with
by adding that entry, and considering The Draft separately. In which case, i'd have probably left it as a Rdr, in compliance with the (stupid) guideline, but clarified it as
On the other hand, it's possible i said to myself -- even tho it's probably harmless to assume that "The Draft" refers to the US draft, since i think it's been decades longer since other English-speaking countries had one -- that a reader who types "draft" because they read "the draft" is one who doesn't realize that "draft" and "the draft" have different meanings (different to the extent i was just acknowledging: if they realized that, they'd have typed "the draft" instead, and not reached the Dab. And in that case, i'd have reasoned (on the knowledge or belief, i don't recall, that "conscription" lists
Conscription in the United States as a See also) that they'd be unastonished by the more general article, and get to the US draft efficiently, without our cluttering the Dab page with an entry that will probably never be useful.
So, without assuming that i've convinced you, but with the thot that you may be too bored with the subject to change it again even if you think i've described the situation correctly, i'm counter-reverting, in the hope that you'll recognize that i do so without prejudice to your next preference (and that your further change to it will be accepted by me, without hard feelings).
Best,
--
Jerzy•
t
07:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmm. I think i may be irony-impaired enuf to forget to weigh whether an ambiguous question might be ironic! (Perhaps a good thing here, where physical harm can't result from looking gutless.) In any case: Back at you! [smile]
--
Jerzy•
t
03:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you mind having a look at these dabs? I don't want to get involved in keep reerting people's changes, especialy a regular contributor like pdf, but some of the entries in the see also section seems silly to me. Thanks, Boleyn2 ( talk) 06:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Having exactly one navigable blue link is not a categorical rule. In this case, "complexity theory" and "imaginary number" are highly relevant and would themselves warrant separate entries on the same page if it were logical to organize them so. Also, changing links to point to redirects here misleads the reader. "Complex algebra" is not "an element of a field of sets"; and a "mimicry complex" is not "mimicry" or even merely an instance of "mimicry". Blindly fixing every disambiguation page in a set format, which is not even required by Wikipedia:Disambiguation or the Manual of Style, impairs the usefulness of the disambiguation page, impedes the reader, and sometimes leads to downright false listings. — Centrx→ talk • 09:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I hope we can sort these changes out. I have no intention of edit warring, and I do accept my limitations of knowledge, but unless there is a compelling argument to ignore the rules, I will abide by the guidelines at WP:MOSDAB, since they have been reached and held by long consensus. I will copy this conversation to Talk:Complex and we can continue it there. SlackerMom ( talk) 15:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
What is Kotniski talking about here? There is no guideline that I'm aware of that claims avoiding redirects is better. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 18:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Please, explain the last deleted line in this cleanup. Isn't Avtomatika i telemekhanika abbreviated as Ait or I missed anything? Thank you. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 14:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Good to see you back on here, Boleyn2 ( talk) 07:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I know you've offered some comments at Talk:HP (disambiguation), but the conservation regarding the fate of hp belongs on its talk page. Will you please weigh in there and reconsider your stance. I think WP:REDIRECT indicates the page should redirect to the dab, since redirects are used to accommodate miscapitalizations. — Eustress talk 16:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello SlackerMom. When you are back from your break, could you please copyedit the New World Order (conspiracy theory) article? -- Loremaster ( talk) 05:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Thanks for cleaning-up and reducing the fancruft out of the Larry Norman article. I think I'm too close to the subject to be objective. Please continue the fine work. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 15:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC) |
Wow! Thank you so very much! That article is a mess, and I can see you've been trying! I thought I'd just get some of the most egregious stuff out, but there's plenty more that needs cutting. I'll do what I have time for. I do appreciate the barnstar! SlackerMom ( talk) 15:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Howdy. Following your conversion of this page from disambiguation to a redirect, a number of incoming links to William T. Moore now end up at the wrong person ( William Theodore Moore Jr.). - TB ( talk) 16:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
WikiWomen Unite! | |
---|---|
Hi SlackerMom! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our
meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved! |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I made some attempt to understand the intent of the following longstanding Dab entry: National Vanguard, one of several white nationalist or neo-fascist organizations and publications whose link had the markup
but failed to arrive at any explanation for its creation, and used this (unpiped) entry:
to
replace it. It's of course possible i erred.
--
Jerzy•
t
23:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Stahlberg: disambiguation. Since you had some involvement with the Stahlberg: disambiguation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 ( talk) 06:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Méré (disambiguation page). Since you had some involvement with the Méré (disambiguation page) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 14:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)