Bottom of Page

Mabbettsville, New York. matt ( talk) 18:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

You named a town after me? Thank you! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

If only...! I think the word "town" is a bit optimistic though! Time to make my own I think – Girlington [1] . matt ( talk) 23:01, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. I'm wondering what benefits infobox-metadata has over persondata, if any. For context, we're discussing whether "providing metadata" is one of the potential benefits of adding infoboxes of composer articles (a highly charged topic), at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers/Infoboxes RfC#Any remaining concerns. A really brief explanation (for the non-technically inclined) might be helpful there.

Also, I had a hard time finding initial info on where metadata is being used. I initially checked WP:Metadata and WP:WikiProject Microformats, and eventually just went to dbpedia itself and found their example links. I'd recommend adding some links to specific examples of the potential behind metadata, to those two WP pages.

Thanks :) (and thanks for your earlier fixes at {{ Infobox composer/draft}}!) -- Quiddity ( talk) 04:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Persondata is specific to Wikipedia. The metadata emitted by infoboxes, in the form of hCard microformats (see WP:MF) is a generic, open standard, and can be used by a number of browser plug-ins and third-party sites. hCards are already recognised by Google and Yahoo, for example. Thanks for your suggestion; I'll attend to that as soon as I have time. You're right that the composer issue us highly-charged; good luck with that. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the clarification, Andy. BTW, the present debate is far calmer (now) than any previous debate on this topic, probably because it is an RfC. There have been some attempts to derail the RfC but these were squashed by several editors (including highly experienced admins) early on. Your participation would be welcomed but I can understand if you decline given the way you were all but lynched in the previous debates... Cheers -- Jubilee♫ clipman 20:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC) reply

See here. Enjoy! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you for this edit! I always forget which way round it is, and end up with people being minus 30 years old. :) SlimVirgin ^{TALK contribs} 13:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. Can we open up a discussion to convert this to an infobox settlement style? Even the Germany infobox no longer has the tiny national map. Its time this was sorted... Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 19:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC) reply

I think you mean {{ Infobox Town AT}}; yes, that would be a good idea. What do you need from me? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC) reply

I reversed your modifications to the Template:Infobox thoroughbred racehorse as 1) I don't understand its purpose or value, and 2) out of courtesy, such a change should have first been put up for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thoroughbred racing. Thanx. Handicapper ( talk) 13:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC) reply

1) Not understanding is not a good reason to revert; See also my edit summaries and the updated template documentation. and 2) This is a wiki. See WP:BRD. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC) reply

But understanding that I have created more than 90% of all Thoroughbred racehorse bios here, does. Bad manners is bad manners and the courtesy "obligation" is most certainly implicit when the format has existed for years and is in very large numbers as part of a project. Wikipedia is overwhelmed by useless "formats" and more information on your assertion is required on the Talk page as what you claim to date is insufficient. Please elaborate and I will ask project members to assess your claims. Thanx. Handicapper ( talk) 18:43, 23 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Please also read WP:OWN. Further discussion should take place on the template talk page. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC) reply

I specifically and clearly requested you elaborate, as you promised, on the article Talk page. You did not. Please do so now. Thanx. Handicapper ( talk) 15:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC) reply

[2]. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Not sure what this is all about; can you explain please? Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:57, 24 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Per documentation at Template:Coord. Why did you feel it necessary to make that change in the first place? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

( talk page stalker) But you have also repunctuated w.r.t. references, seemingly against advice at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Punctuation_and_inline_citations? -- Tagishsimon (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

( edit conflict) WP:REFPUNC; citations go after punctuation, not before. Anyway, I've reinstated my edits while not harming the coordinate template. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Your follow-up edit moved the punctuation between the reference tags? I would think you would want to move it before all of them, not between two. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Should be fixed. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Another admin has removed the dob info. I've commented on the talk page about this. Another possible avenue would be a Freedom of Information Act request to the BBC asking for JH's dob, although I'm not sure how we would reference this. Mjroots ( talk) 20:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for thea heads-up; what a truly silly reaction - it reflects very badly on WP that a subject can bully us into the removal of cited and relevant information. However, an FoI request such as you suggest would fail, because the DoB is personal info, and that takes precedence. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC) reply

It looks like we will have to back down on the DoB issue for the moment. He's got a big one coming up in 2012, maybe a local newspaper can be persuaded to do a feature on him then <g>. Mjroots ( talk) 10:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Andy, I hope you are okay with my make–up post at Talk:Salmon Protocol. The fact of the matter is that I'm sympathetic to your point of view at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Over-hasty_tagging_of_new_articles_.3D_off-putting_to_new_users and was trying to protect the newbie at that article from just that. — TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 05:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Big of you. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC) reply

About ANI, if they don't stop those legal threats, somebody is going to have to sue them! :p Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 16:43, 27 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Since you !voted in the WP:TFD for Template:Snowball Earth/Infobox, I thought you might be interested in considering Template:Snowball Earth graphical timeline as a replacement. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:16, 30 March 2010 (UTC) reply

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of Firefox extensions. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Firefox extensions (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm somewhat questioning about your edits to Template:Infobox grape variety some time ago. Why are you suddenly changing a template included in hundreds of articles without handling the consequences of your edits? As an example, with this edit you changed the template to italicise species. Since species is typically written italicised, this may have seen like a good idea, however, this meant that you changed the convention for using the template with the consequence that species information is now written unitalicized in the articles! Regards, Tomas e ( talk) 10:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Your assumption that I'm acting "without handling the consequences of [my] edits" is false; see Grape variety species italicisation. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Jza84 suggested you as a template guru who might be able to assist with an issue we are talking about. The issue concern the possibility of categorising images by the project's assessment banner. We don't know what may be possible so if you would read the discussion at Articles needing a photo you will get the full context. If you think you can assist, please post on that talk page with any suggestions. I am also asking these three editors, Worofdreams, Thumperward and MRSC who were recommended. Hopefully one of you can help. Thanks in advance. ww2censor ( talk) 03:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I appreciate that tidy up. Off2riorob ( talk) 14:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC) reply

NP. Blockquote is under-used. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Since we are suggesting work for each other, you might want to check the hCard on this one. Or, suggest a possible place to merge it if it's a duplicate of something. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Touche! ;-) I've removed the microformat (which was in any case incomplete). hCard is for people, organisations and places. hCalendar might be usable for single instances of a festival, but not for the series, as in this case. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi Andy,

I'd like to query the usefulness of {{ UF-date-warn}}. It rather seems to be the kind of thing which should be discussed or fixed, rather than placed like a bug report on template documentation. Was the need for this discussed prior to it being rolled out? How much effort would be needed to fix this problem at source? I'd rather that it this were something that could be fixed on individual templates that the warning be converted into a cleanup banner. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

It was insisted upon by another editor (I'll try to track down the discussion later); I simply moved his wording into a template. It would be good if date templates could accept pre- (and possibly later non-) Gregorian dates, and silently suppress the microformat-related classes. Then, when a solution is found for encoding such dates in microformats (the date issue is complex), we can enable it in the template and the data will be preserved. I'm not clear how a "cleanup" banner could be used, though. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Right. This seems, then, to be something which need only concern time-based utility templates (such as {{ bda}}) which output semantic dates. You've added it to the doc for {{ infobox artwork}}: can you check if this is genuinely affected by this problem? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I added it there because there are a significant number of instances of that template which are about items from the pre-Gregorian era. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes, but the template does not appear to have any support for microformats in its date code. If you're warning people against using the likes of {{ start date}} when transcluding the template, the correct place to do it would be in a usage note rather than in a template at the end. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Fair enough - feel free to make such a change. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC) reply

On reflection, I've put an abbreviated form of the warning into {{ UF-hcal}} and it's brethren; with a link to a longer explanation. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 02:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Excellent. That's the perfect solution. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

[3]

Nomination is not vexation. We can orphan it if the result is to delete the template. 174.3.123.220 ( talk) 17:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

From looking at your two recent edits, I'm not convinced they'll do the right thing. People who use {{ Infobox Indian jurisdiction}} use "region" for named regions that have no administrative significance, so adm2nd probably isn't the best choice for {{ Coord}} in this case. Also, I think "region:IN" gets added below the switch, so including it here is redundant at best. In fact, the parameter actually passed to {{ Coord}} will be something like type:region:IN_type:adm2nd_region:IN-KR which is pretty confusing. Please revert your changes.-- Stepheng3 ( talk) 20:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Done, Sorry about that. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:14, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks.-- Stepheng3 ( talk) 23:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I have formally reminded Opus33 on his talk page about the 3RR and suggested that if he cannot accept that there is not a consensus for this changes I would accept some form of Dispute resolution. If he cannot accept that I will file a report of under 3RR. If you would also be willing to accept the DS perhaps you could indicate it in the article or his talk page. Thanks for all your work.-- SabreBD ( talk) 16:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. That was an awkward revert as it undid new material. If you have concerns about my recent edit to the template I'll be happy to talk them through with you. If there are particular wordings you wish to improve, please do so. But a revert will undo good things (such as new listings and corrections of errors), so is not advised. SilkTork * ^YES! 23:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I've reverted you again. Please take this to the template's talk page, noting the prior consensus there, as previously requested. I future, if you wish to make substantive content changes and major style refactoring make separate edits. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 06:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi. You may not realise it, but this template was created after a very extensive RfC which took place over the space of about 6 weeks and involved a large number of editors. I closed this a few days ago and concluded there was consensus for this template to be created.

It involved a lot of compromise. A lot of editors who work on composer articles were opposed to any kind of infobox, and only supported the creation of a template with assurances that the available fields would be strictly controlled. I understand your desire to merge templates, but for the moment, using Template:Infobox musical artist will not be suitable at this time.

Therefore I would like to ask you to withdraw this nomination at this time. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 11:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I see no compromise, only fudge. I see nothing in that RfC about using the new template to replace other, existing and more fully-featured Infobox transclusions. Please make any further points at the TfD, not here. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I am becoming increasingly dismayed with the way you are going about your work here. I would suggest you reflect on what you are doing. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 13:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll let you know, should that ever trouble me. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC) reply