The Original Barnstar | ||
Thanks for running WP:AWB on Community Notes page. You picked up on some spelling errors that other humans had missed! It's much appreciated for such a fresh page. CommunityNotesContributor ( talk) 00:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of M*A*S*H characters, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Music of Neon Genesis Evangelion, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Music of Neon Genesis Evangelion, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:51, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Please do not change Guines to Guinness. Guines is correct. Celia Homeford ( talk) 08:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Please do not remove publisher parameters in citations for newspapers, magazines, or websites, as in this edit at Transphobia. You linked Cite news#Publisher, Cite web#Publisher, Cite magazine#Publisher in support of your removal, but none of those support your claim, although I can kind of see how one could read it at first glance. I'm guessing that your take rests on a misunderstanding of this statement (this one is from from Cite news):
Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.).
If I guessed wrong, you can skip the rest of this, and we can discuss. If that is what it was, look at what it is saying; I think maybe adding an example or two might clarify:
Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.); that is: don't write|publisher=Wall Street Journal
; the WSJ is published by Dow Jones & Company; don't write|publisher=World Book Encyclopedia
, write|publisher=Scott Fetzer Company
, and so on.
The citation doc is just saying not to use the website name, the encyclopedia name, the newspaper name, or the magazine name in the publisher field. In other parts of the citation doc, it says not to use pub. at all, when it duplicates the name; for example, no need to write |magazine=Time
|publisher=Time, Inc.
, and on top of that, |publisher=
is not the most important parameter to establish
verifiability (which is why I didn't bother reverting that edit, because your edit didn't hurt verifiability), but if it's already there, and not a duplicate of the title, then there's no reason to remove it.
Do you think those passages are unclear? Maybe it's poorly worded. If you feel you got tripped up by the doc, this wouldn't by the first time I've changed the citation documentation to improve it. Or if you feel you know what it should say to be clearer, feel free to take a shot at it. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 04:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Kaltenmeyer,
I hope this message finds you well. I've noticed that your Talk page has grown quite extensive, which is a testament to your active engagement on Wikipedia. However, I'd like to suggest considering archiving some of the older discussions.
Archiving can lead to several benefits, including:
If you're unsure about how to archive your Talk page, you can find detailed instructions here. I'm also happy to assist if you need any help.
Thank you for considering this suggestion. Your contributions to Wikipedia are greatly valued, and I believe that archiving could make your Talk page even more effective as a tool for collaboration.
The Original Barnstar | ||
Thanks for running WP:AWB on Community Notes page. You picked up on some spelling errors that other humans had missed! It's much appreciated for such a fresh page. CommunityNotesContributor ( talk) 00:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of M*A*S*H characters, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 21:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Music of Neon Genesis Evangelion, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Music of Neon Genesis Evangelion, may have introduced referencing errors. They are 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, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:51, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Please do not change Guines to Guinness. Guines is correct. Celia Homeford ( talk) 08:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Please do not remove publisher parameters in citations for newspapers, magazines, or websites, as in this edit at Transphobia. You linked Cite news#Publisher, Cite web#Publisher, Cite magazine#Publisher in support of your removal, but none of those support your claim, although I can kind of see how one could read it at first glance. I'm guessing that your take rests on a misunderstanding of this statement (this one is from from Cite news):
Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.).
If I guessed wrong, you can skip the rest of this, and we can discuss. If that is what it was, look at what it is saying; I think maybe adding an example or two might clarify:
Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.); that is: don't write|publisher=Wall Street Journal
; the WSJ is published by Dow Jones & Company; don't write|publisher=World Book Encyclopedia
, write|publisher=Scott Fetzer Company
, and so on.
The citation doc is just saying not to use the website name, the encyclopedia name, the newspaper name, or the magazine name in the publisher field. In other parts of the citation doc, it says not to use pub. at all, when it duplicates the name; for example, no need to write |magazine=Time
|publisher=Time, Inc.
, and on top of that, |publisher=
is not the most important parameter to establish
verifiability (which is why I didn't bother reverting that edit, because your edit didn't hurt verifiability), but if it's already there, and not a duplicate of the title, then there's no reason to remove it.
Do you think those passages are unclear? Maybe it's poorly worded. If you feel you got tripped up by the doc, this wouldn't by the first time I've changed the citation documentation to improve it. Or if you feel you know what it should say to be clearer, feel free to take a shot at it. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 04:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Kaltenmeyer,
I hope this message finds you well. I've noticed that your Talk page has grown quite extensive, which is a testament to your active engagement on Wikipedia. However, I'd like to suggest considering archiving some of the older discussions.
Archiving can lead to several benefits, including:
If you're unsure about how to archive your Talk page, you can find detailed instructions here. I'm also happy to assist if you need any help.
Thank you for considering this suggestion. Your contributions to Wikipedia are greatly valued, and I believe that archiving could make your Talk page even more effective as a tool for collaboration.