This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Canadian stations)#Go station naming regarding station naming conventions for Go Transit. Cards 84664 00:53, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

@ Cards84664: Why was I notified here? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:57, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Because of your previous involvement with naming convention discussions. Cards 84664 01:04, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Is there a reason for the move? Ryan ( talk) 04:05, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I understand why you have reverted my edit to Template:Stammbaum, and closed the discussion at TFD as wrong venue. What is the right venue?

The issue is that currently Stammbaum redirects to Template:Family tree which has been deprecated and is being merged with Template:Tree chart. While the syntax of the two is similar, they are not the same. See: Template:Tree chart#Migration from familytree

Having compared Template:Family tree and de:Vorlage:Stammbaum documentation, Family tree is not a direct equivalent of Stammbaum, which means anyone doing an import of a German tree will have to check that it works and if necessary edit it to work with Family tree.

My conclusion is that at some point Stammbaum could redirect to Template:Family tree. If this is going to happen, I'd suggest the sooner it is done the better.

Regards, Tango Mike Bravo ( talk) 18:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@ Tango Mike Bravo: As Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#What not to propose for discussion here clearly says, template redirects go to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, not Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:22, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Stammbaum. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Stammbaum redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tango Mike Bravo ( talk • contribs) 17:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Something went wrong here; thanks for the correction. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey Pppery. See the discussion at WP:IANB#A WP:DRN script has been de-gadgeted and is ready to be renamed . According to User:Xaosflux this renaming may not be needed. What do you think? Is there still a reason to do it if there is no net benefit? It takes an interface administrator to do these moves. EdJohnston ( talk) 03:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

( edit conflict) I disagree that there is no net benefit to pages, even obscure technical pages like this one, not having misleading names, such as the "gadget-" prefix on something that is not a gadget. The time to argue the merits of my requested move passed when buidhe closed the discussion as "moved". Now is the time to implement it, or go to MRV. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

How about you make that argument over at WP:IANB. I am bowing out since I don't have the power to do the move. You will be standing by to debug anything that breaks? EdJohnston ( talk) 03:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Section is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Creation_request — xaosflux ^Talk 15:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pppery! I noticed you started trying to undo some of the damage caused by the massively blunt rollback of my edits at the ANI thread. I'm not too familiar with how mass rollbacks and un-rollbacks work, but if fixing things up would make it harder to un-rollback, it might be better to hold off. I'm hoping that the mass rollback will be quickly reversed now that the folks there have some context from myself and the VPR closing admin, and it'll be easier to do that in one fell swoop than to try to take everything on piecemeal. Cheers, {{u| Sdkb}}  ^talk 20:03, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

It's too late to "hold off"; I already finished reverting the edits it was clear to me needed reverting (I was being deliberately rather cautious). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

It was also too late for a clean batch un-rollback even before my edits, given that Andrybak also engaged in piecemeal reverting. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Ack, this is a mess; I wish I had seen the thread before it was prematurely closed. I see that there is a request at JzG's talk page to undo the rollback, and hopefully he'll take responsibility for carrying that out. I'll let you know if I spot anything really urgently broken, since I don't think I should be making any template edits directly while the ANI thread is active. Thanks as always for your work in this area. Cheers, {{u| Sdkb}}  ^talk 20:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, what was the reason for removing my CSD tag? - Chris.sherlock ( talk) 23:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

It was redundant to the {{ now commons dated}} later on in the file description, and I didn't realize you were the uploader. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. - Chris.sherlock ( talk) 20:05, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Dude, please delete redirect Talk:Milovan Djilas or rename it yourself. Article is Milovan Đilas, but talk page is Djilas. Isn't obvious what I sought to do with speedy deletion? --  Bojan   Talk  —Preceding undated comment added 21:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

You requested speedy deletion of a page for a reason that is clearly not one of Wikipedia's strict criteria for speedy deletion. The correct venue would have been WP:RMTR. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Could you just delete the redirect, why do we have to have such birocracy? --  Bojan   Talk  21:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

... because I'm not an admin, and the redirect has history that needs to be preserved anyway. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't read well userbox on your user page. --  Bojan   Talk  22:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		It's definitely past time you have this one. Your techno-wizardry on templates and modules throughout the project is greatly appreciated! {{u| Sdkb}}  talk 22:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi,

I am wondering if you can pull the template for DRN and see if there were any changes to it? To me, it appears OK, so it may be a BOT thing that I have asked them to give it a swift kick or life support. The bot should be taking what we put in the template and updating our table that we monitor. It looks like it stopped working some time ago and the owner of the bot seems to have vanished. Would I be able to get a copy of all the template changes so I can hopefully determine when this may have happened, please?

1. Everything else in the table gets updated correctly except case status (hence why I am wondering if it is a template issue).
2. We leave {{DR case status=}} empty until we the discussion has met the point we can open it. Then we change it to "resolved", "failed", or "closed" of which then the bot is supposed to change the table shown at Template:DRN_case_status
3. I am also wondering why the 'hide' is located in that same cell. Maybe this is causing it not to update?
4. I can go into the template and manually enter the numeral equivalent for the color and it works fine (I removed those edits)
5. I just tried one more thing, but I need for the bot to run. In the actual DR instead of a status word, such as open, I put in the numeral 2 at the s= in the row when editing the template as a whole. *Update - This did not work, the code was still there, however, it was still reflected as new so I went back into the template and put the number corresponding to the color to it. --Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 10:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Code Colors and keywords

(usually left blank to signify new)

keyword is open

keyword is needassist

keyword is review

keyword is resoved

keyword is closed

keyword is failed

keyword is hold

We do not use this to my knowledge

I appreciate any insight you are able to provide as to what may have changed.
Thanks, Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 10:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@ Galendalia: I don't exactly understand why I was asked about this, but nevertheless I've taken a quick look at this and observed that

1. The bot appears to have stopped correctly detecting the status at 17:07, 21 October 2019
2. The only edit to DRN between the last successful bot edit and the first failed one was Special:Diff/922389728, which does not appear to botch the formatting at all.
3. DRN had no cases at all for a few days in November 2019, and, when the first case came to break that slump and was put on hold, the bot still failed to detect it as new, ruling out the possibility that Special:Diff/922389728 broke the formatting in some way.
4. Looking at the bot's source code, which is publicly available here, it defaults to "New" without reporting the error in any way if it encounters an error calculating the status.
5. The above four things strongly imply that no one other than Hasteur can fix the bot.
6. Your manual fix could not have possibly done anything, since the bot entirely overwrites the table with each edit.
7. It looks like it's possible to write a Lua module to reimplement the task of extracting the status from the page, and use it, instead of the passed status parameter, in Template:DRN case status/row. I'll probably get around to coding that later today

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

And  coded, see Template:DRN case status/sandbox, which has exactly the same wikitext as Template:DRN case status, except for calling Template:DRN case status/row/sandbox instead of Template:DRN case status/row, and nevertheless produces the correct status colors. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I asked you because I see you online a lot and you are also a template editor so I had wanted your input to see if it was broken, which is not as you pointed out (thank you for that). I will have to see about having the bot updated somehow as the programmer is no longer active from what I see in their logs. I had a thought but since the bot would overwrite the template I don't think it will work. I was thinking if we used your template, when the bot updates everything else if your template would color code it.

Thank you for your input, Galendalia _{CVU Member} \ ^{Chat Me Up} 17:07, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I've noticed you tagged some MediaWiki pages for deletion. Just to confirm, do you want both the MediaWiki page and its talkpages deleted? (and would I be banned for deleting those?) Reh man 16:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I want both the MediaWiki page and the corresponding talk page deleted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Reh man 16:29, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Moved to Template talk:Infobox United States legislative district

 – * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pppery, in Wikipedia:Statistics edit per second is calculated by {{#expr:({{NUMBEROFEDITS:R}}-843241557)/({{#time:U}}-1530212463) round 1}} = 1.9 .. can you explain how this is calculated? I'm curious but do not understand the hard coded numbers. I assume this shows the average over the lifetime of Wikipedia? -- Green C 17:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The hardcoded numbers were me substituting {{NUMBEROFEDITS:R}} and {{#time:U}} at the time I made the edit in 2018, which in retrospect seems kind of silly now. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

	The Template Editor's Barnstar
	Awarded for putting up with my malformed edit request in good cheer. Thanks for all the work you do implementing template edit requests quickly! Psiĥedelisto ( talk • contribs) please always ping! 01:54, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, hope you're well! Today I noticed that Module:Transclude was automatically protected and is being used on hundreds of pages. I can't figure out why, do you know?? Sophivorus ( talk) 14:00, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

It's required by Module:Mapframe (and the fact that it was template-protected is what lead me to erroneously assume it was used by Module:Excerpt). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

In future, please feel free to ask me to WP:CSDG7 a template/module before going to TfD, especially in such obvious cases where I'm sure to agree. I have G7'd Module:ws. Psiĥedelisto ( talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 22:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Mbox

 – * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

This went a little confusing for me because I'm not very experienced with Wikipedia, but why, when you closed the discussion as a non-admin, have you marked Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 27#Template:User 2fa as being in the "wrong venue"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.234.189 ( talk) 16:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

From WP:TFD#NOT

Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.

TfD was therefore the wrong venue for your proposal, and I closed the discussion accordingly. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:RedWarn.

Thanks for the clarification :) A a s i m 22:23, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not clear why you didn't try to discuss your change with me before making it (or, for that matter, the original change, which did not point to the deletion discussion or give any indication that the template had been modified). I knew the state of the mailing list member, and I knew the new user name. If they wanted to change it, they could have done it themselves. I hope you will engage in discussion before making further changes. isaacl ( talk) 20:13, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Because I didn't see why either of them would be controversial. Prior to my first edit, the page had not been edited in over 5 years, so I had no reason to think anyone would care about it. The second edit was me attempting to avoid getting into a dispute by rendering it moot, since there was no reason to argue over how to display inactive members when there were no members who are actually inactive, and I assumed you simply weren't aware of the username change. Why do you care so much about the state of a mailing list to which no messages have been sent since 2015? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

The user in question contributed to the newsletter under that user name. Personally I feel that working groups should be able to organize their workflow as they best see fit, as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's workflow. isaacl ( talk) 21:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm 2603:9001:6502:4734:8559:3A7A:F0B5:D108. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Vertical bar have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thank you, 2603:9001:6502:4734:8559:3A7A:F0B5:D108 ( talk) 02:21, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I am clearly not a vandal, as you can see from the fact that I have made over 20,000 edits. WP:DTTR * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:26, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

About [1], I was accidentally looking at an outdated page. I just hit edit and in the wikicode I didn't notice the discussion had been closed a few hours ago. I was confused after I published my edit, but you beat me to reverting it. — Alexis Jazz ( talk or ping me) 21:36, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

• In each of your 3 Vietnamese page split requests ( Phú Xuân (disambiguation), Quang Phong, Bắc Kạn, Vĩnh An, Bắc Giang), please tell me the desired split point, and whether I should move the older part or the newer part of the edit history. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 11:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

  @ Anthony Appleyard: You appear to have already done Phú Xuân (disambiguation). In the other two cases, I was asking for ChanComThemPho's move to be reverted, or in other words all history prior to the move from ChanComThemPho to be moved to the title it was at before ChanComThemPho's move. ChanComThemPho appears to have hijacked pre-existing pages to create unrelated pages. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pppery, hope you're well. Very simple question for your here if you have time - how to redirect a template? See for example this page: Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog/items - I'm having some difficulty creating a redirect (currently I'm just directly transcluding it). I'd be grateful if you could have a look so I can learn from what you've done. Cheers -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 06:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 22:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

I have relieved you of some of your ugh, I hope. -- Izno ( talk) 00:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

No, my complaint was more that FfD has such a large backlog, and thus that my edits were necessary, not about the intricacies of updating the template. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I realized that as being most of it, hence 'some'. :P -- Izno ( talk) 00:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

	The Technical Barnstar
	Thank you for quickly solving a problem, one of many you have volunteered to tackle. Your work is much appreciated. Le v!v ich 03:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Why did you undo my revision on somebody’s talk page because nobody had posted a message for 14 years and I just wanted to let visitors know. - Cupper52 ( talk) 08:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Just as a follow up (as I'm sure you will have noticed) I did find the culprit, fix it, and delete the redirects. Wanted to do damage control before deleting because I had zero idea where the issue was initially. Primefac ( talk) 02:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

XFDCloser's "quickdelete" functionality on TfDs seems to put templates into holding rather than tag them for deletion. I think this is because User:Pppery/noinclude list transcludes every template there. Is there something you can do to fix that? Thanks, ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 17:47, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

No, that's fundamental to the way the page works (and I've received several questions about it over the years). Strange that this hasn't come up until now, given that that page has existed mostly unchanged since several months before XfDCloser was developed. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. Could be something else causing the issue. I'll cross-post this to WP:XFDcloser. Perhaps it's something that script can get around. ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 17:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, please take a look in this category. Every template title "Template:[Year] IPL match [n]" has no more than 3/4 transclusion & in future, those template won't be transcluded into any other arctles. I think we should "subst:" them & then delete. Please take a look & nominate for deletion if necessary. Thanks. -- আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 20:47, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

While I agree that, in general, single-use templates shouldn't be allowed, sports templates are far from my area of expertise, so I won't take any further action. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I nominated one for deletion. But need some kind of automatic process for others. Can't go to every page & manually tag them. I will see what i can do, may be i will use awb. -- আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk) 20:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Pppery. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template. Barkeep49 ( talk) 18:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)