Thank you! :) ~ Tom.Reding & his 200-some-odd lines of regex ( talk ⋅ contribs ⋅ dgaf) 02:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
There's nothing quite like cleaning up a good, 'ol-fashioned clusterfuck. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction :) ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 04:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: {{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 20:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
A Dobos torte for you!
You have used your gifts well, Padawan
7&6=thirteen, thank you :) And I really should take the test, but I can't be bothered while editing...perhaps that is or should be one of the questions?? ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 16:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I see we both have OCD. I had no choice but to give you this barnstar. Scorpions13256 ( talk) 23:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
|
Greetings Tom.Reding, After your previous assistance, my article is now available on Wikipedia, it is confirmed. And that inspired me, now I wrote more articles which are exist in other languages, but they are not confirmed yet. Can you please check them out for confirmation this time too?
Thank you very much I appreciate it -Film Contributor
Film contributor ( talk) 16:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding, a couple of months ago you helpfully made an adjustment to the Module:Category described in year to add lichens. Since then, I've been populating the categories, and plan to continue doing so, as part of a long-term project to make article for all lichen species (especially those published after 2000). I was wondering if there would be a simple way to have the total number of articles in the subcategories displayed on the "Lichens described in the xxth century" page? I ask because every couple of weeks I manually add up these subcategory numbers to keep track of my progress, and I realised that there's probably a simpler way to do this that I'm not aware of. I think a "total articles" count would probably be useful for all of the "Module:Category described in year" iterations. Is this desirable/doable? Esculenta ( talk) 20:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Tom,
I apologize for overwhelming your talk page with notices but I feel obliged to inform editors when a page they have created has been tagged for deletion. And it looks like you created the majority of categories in Category:User pages with authority control information which were recently emptied (see discussion on Template talk:Authority control).
There is no need for you to do anything, if the categories remain empty for a week, they will be deleted. Of course, feel free to remove these notices from your talk page when you return to edit Wikipedia so you can see more urgent messages. And thank you for all of your work with templates! Liz Read! Talk! 20:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are well. Please review Mehran Ghafourian's draft. I made some changes. If the article is rejected again, write the reason. Thanks for your following up Amir ghpro ( talk) 19:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I added a history section. You removed it. What do I need to do to fix it? Thanks, Konroy Konroyb ( talk) 20:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
You have previously edited Cardiff Arms Park. An editor has decided to split the article (yet again). I would like to know your view on the new edit....see Talk:Cardiff_Arms_Park#Article_Split_(again). SethWhales talk 20:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Tom.Reding: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RV ( talk) 01:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding! Looking forward to hopefully seeing you at Sunday's wiknic. At Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/DC/Wiknic_2023#Different_location_for_the_wiknic? I raised a question about location — I'll copy it here for convenience but if you could answer at that talk page that'd be really helpful. Thank you!
Apologies for the late suggestion: How would folks feel about doing the wiknic at Dupont Circle instead of at Rock Creek Park? Dupont would be easier to get to for folks on the train. I originally chose Rock Creek Park because I was worried about the crowd getting too big (last time I hosted a CentralNotice'd event hundreds wanted to come!), but it looks like there have only been a small handful of signups, which makes Dupont plausible! I'll notify everyone who's expressed interest — please let me know if you have a preference one way or the other. Looking forward to seeing you all!
KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 04:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Please don't do this, the line feeds break the infobox in this specific setup. Thanks. Zinnober9 ( talk) 02:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
what is the fix for the red errors in Category:1863–64 in association football? looks like a large blow up in Category:Pages with script errors. Frietjes ( talk) 21:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Philosophical poets, 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) 22:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
I've noticed that the redirect page " Televisions" points to " Television". In every case that I checked, it's actually being used as the plural of " Television set", which is understandable, since television as a medium isn't normally pluralised. I'm bringing the matter to you because you were the last person to edit the redirect page, and because I'm inexperienced in these matters. Any thoughts? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 19:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Nokia divested itself of the industries listed below to focus solely on telecommunications."
Hello, Tom.Reding. Thank you for your work on List of minor planets: 626001–627000. User:Herpetogenesis, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Fabulous work!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Herpetogenesis}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ ( talk) 18:30, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Both articles are now about cardiac stenting - and PCI. I took the DES article on as a personal project and it has been fleshed out to include PCI and I have also attempted to follow best practices in the layout and structure for a GA type of article.
I am exploring how to merge the articles, they are so very similar but the DES article is I think a child of the CS article.
Just testing the waters - I think they can be rolled into one document - within the GA framework as described on the DES article tp.
Your name was on one or the other articles , and you are an experienced editor - so just politely reaching out.
Thoughts, ideas, how to?
Dr.
BeingObjective (
talk) 14:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
I was wondering why Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects had dropped by about 1,000 since I last checked it, then I saw Special:Diff/1188437036! Thanks for adding that - I have little to no experience in the subject area; but, on the face of it, it makes sense to me to separate the non-Wikidata-linked minor planet redirects to Category:Minor planet object redirects missing QID (as you’ve done). Now to do some more work on fixing some unlinked Wikidata redirects
All the best, user: A smart kitten meow 17:19, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
At Asthenotricha amblycoma, you added a blank line after the taxobox, which I had asked for at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life/Archive_48#Mass_cleanup_edits?. The other part of your edit was putting {{ Commons}} and {{ Wikispecies}} before {{ Reflist}}, which I had not understood to be one of your proposed WP:TREE cleanup. There are many WP:TREE articles with templates for Commons or Wikispecies links that do not have corresponding pages on Commons or Wikispecies.
Would it be feasible for you to check whether Commons/Wikispecies pages exist in your WP:TREE cleanup efforts and remove the interwiki link templates when the pages do not exist rather than just reshuffling where the templates are placed? Plantdrew ( talk) 03:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Do not make a section whose sole content is box-type templates, so on small pages with no, or an empty, EL, the templates end up at the top of the references section.
I don't know if you've spotted that Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 3#Template:Back to top was procedurally closed a few days ago in favour of a TfD you indicated you'd be opening, but it doesn't appear you've done that yet. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Why are yo making changes like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_621&diff=0&oldid=920463840? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:39, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
|mf=y
or by default, depending on the template. ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 11:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Use the parameter |date= for the month and year that an editor or bot last checked the article for inconsistent date formatting and fixed any found." ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 11:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Template:R from category navigation has been nominated for merging with Template:Category redirect. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. House Blaster talk 14:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Please stop engaging in WP:MEATBOT edits like this and this, that make no practical changes to the article from the readers's perspective and fix no actual broken code from the editors' perspective. There is no point whatsovever to twiddling with the "Use [xxx] dates" template's date-stamp when no dates' formats were corrected, nor replacing template redirects with the actual template name. All this does is annoyingly hit people's watchlists with pointless changes and waste all our time examining them. This problem is why we have MEATBOT. It is permissible to make non-destructive but not actually helpful twiddles of this sort only if they are made in the course of other changes in the same edit that are actually substantive. (e.g. this was fine since it subtantively fixed a MOS:DASH error in the course of making twiddles that were otherwise not objectively useful). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
sacrifice[ing] quality in the pursuit of speed or quantity"; I'm doing the exact opposite, checking each edit that is itself checking hundreds of templates to be in their correct location as per WP:MOS/Layout. I decided to start at the shallow end of the "Use [xxx] dates" templates pool, with pages with relatively few, or 0, of these mistakes. Even so, I'm watching for frequent unintended results that need to be accounted for. I suppose I could make a WP:BOTREQ for the pages with 0 other fixes, and they will likely be addressed by other editors by the time it gets approved, so 6 in one hand vs. half a dozen in the other.
substantive" - the edits are substantive because, if nothing else, they update a tracking category.
and fix no actual broken code from the editors' perspective" - the point of confirming that a page still follows an old date format (see right above @ #Confusing edits), is to allow editors to easily find the pages that do need date fixes.
But I'll address pages with more complex fixes to avoid confusion.Thank you. If the edit in question does something that is actually necessary for WP:P&G compliance, repairs an actual technical error, or improves the content for readers, then no one is going to object. As for the other bits:
sacrifice[ing] quality in the pursuit of speed or quantityis not the only criterion. In particular, bot-like editing is by definition editing that is like that of a bot, and bots are not permitted to make such non-substantive changes (by themselves) per WP:COSMETICBOT. If you think you've discovered a loophole, you have not. (Various editors going around making trivial and costmetic edits of this sort have been topic-banned or blocked when they don't stop. It's not like I just made this up out of nowhere. I had to change my own cleanup-editing habits to compensate as a result, because I used to do stuff about the same as what you are doing.) There is no reason to update the tracking category if nothing at the article has changed; there is absolutely nothing wrong with an article that has
{{
Use DMY dates|October 2018}}
in it remaining in the Oct. 2018 category, if none of the dates in it were non-compliant. So, that is non-substantive. The fact that editors might like some kind of distingishing between two categories of articles (or articles that could be separately categorized by some criterion but are not yet), based on some formatting in them, is not a matter of broken code or other errors in the page code. That sounds like you are looking for some other kind of tool or process, and one might need to be created (e.g. automated analysis of date usage in an article and adding a tracking category when one is found to have a mix of date styles). But it is not a reason to go around changing hundreds or thousands of articles in ways that affect neither readers nor any editors other than you. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 01:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
affect neither readers nor any editors other than you" - other editors I see operating in this space are Dawnseeker2000 & SSSB, which I believe I am assisting. If I'm not being helpful, please let me know. ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 11:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, just to say I noticed your recent AWB edit to Leaf by Niggle; which changed:
<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[sub-creation]]]
<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[sub-creation]]
Are the regexes you're using taking these possiblities into account? Could be worth running a replacement on <nowiki>[</nowiki>
to use {{
!(}}, {{
Square bracket open}}, or better yet {{
Bracket}}, for clarity, instead? --
Yodin
T 15:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Came across your page, looking forward to learning more about Wiki & edits. Cheers. IraPSilversmith ( talk) 22:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Tom - I've seen a few edits where you've (and from other people as well) updated the date stamp in templates like this one. What's the point of that? I'd think we'd want the opposite, as if to say, "this article has used DMY format since 20xx, so longstanding consensus is for it to remain that way". But I'm guessing since I've seen others doing it as well, there's a reason for it that I haven't thought of. Cheers, Parsecboy ( talk) 12:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your support on ANI (while I slept). As you know, I have a DYK on the Main page, but my story would be different, about Figaro, - this Figaro. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Tom,
It is very tricky to move categories which is why most CFD discussions end with bots moving categories around and recategorizing articles and subcategories. If you do move a category page, please make sure that all of the contents of the old category are recategoized so that they are in the category with the new page title. Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
For your tireless work in repetitive and laborious tasks. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 04:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC) |
Just to note, on WikiProject-specific templates, we use {{ WikiProject Articles for creation (admin)}} to avoid errors. Primefac ( talk) 12:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
I've noticed you've been creating the talk pages of subpages of the current events portals. I really don't see the need in project tagging all of these especially when there is no need to do so. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 13:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Tom.Reding!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
The Space Barnstar | ||
I just wanted to say "thank you" for picking up the torch of updating the list of minor planets! (And I hope Rfassbind is doing fine too off WP!) Double sharp ( talk) 08:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC) |
Thank you :) Nwebbvillegas ( talk) 17:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 19:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello. May I ask why you are mass-adding WikiProject banner shells to file talk pages such as this one? In the RfCs discussing the redesign of the banner shell and the deprecation of project-independent quality assessments, there was only community consensus to perform those two tasks, not to mass-add WikiProject banner shells to talk pages, and especially not on talk pages where it would produce no effect (file talk pages are automatically classified as file- or NA-class, so your edits are tantamount to cosmetic edits). I am sure you are well aware that bot-like editing that does nothing except spam editors' watchlists is considered disruptive. Thank you. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 20:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
See this edit for an example. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 13:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
In Special:Diff/1213365807, you changed {{ oldpuffull}} to {{ oldffdfull}}. This means that the link goes to the wrong discussion page. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 17:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:
To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her), via:
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, can you help me give it a linguistic and cleaning review as the user mentioned to me who is suggesting to link it to other articles that it is not very clear to me how to do it. thank you -- Acartonadooopo ( talk) 21:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
We recently changed the title structure for TV seasons to exclude parenthesis (e.g., Loki season 1 rather than Loki (season 1). I have a list of about 500 categories that need to be renamed to follow the article titles, which will require several thousand edits to recategorize all of the episodes listed in those categories. This could be done by a bot, but I tend to prefer more hands-on supervision. If you take this up, please remove completed categories from the list as you go. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Tom, per your edits at Template talk:1967 West Penn Conference football standings, and many analogous ones, articles and templates and the like that apply specifically to American college football or American junior college football are not within the scope of WikiProject American football. The scope of WP American football includes general topics related to the sport and only specific team, league, player, and coach articles are do not fall under the scope of a more specific American football-related WikiProject like WikiProject College football or WikiProject National Football League. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 16:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Laurie Koziba, I have been researching my last name for a long while. I have been trying to make contact with writers with no luck. I thank you for this update. Email laurie 173.189.199.234 ( talk) 20:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Congratulations on becoming the fourth-ranked editor by number of edits. I know exactly how difficult that is! BD2412 T 15:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
Hi Tom
I reverted a number of changes you made from Ras Al Khaimah to Ras al-Khaimah using AWB. Ras Al Khaimah is the spelling of the WP article, the currently used spelling and the locally used spelling. I haven't changed the template, but it really should be changed too. The al-Khaimah spelling is antiquated. Happy to chat if this raises any questions! Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for cleaning up category talk pages. Looking at Special:Diff/1219087395 and related, I don't think {{ WikiProject Years}} would belong per my discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Is any page with a year in its title within the scope of this WP?. Thanks, -- Habst ( talk) 17:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello Tom,
I saw that you recently edited the WikiProject box for Category:American politicians who are the most recent member of their party to hold statewide office. I created another category, Category:American politicians who are the sole member of their party in statewide office. It has been nominated for deletion here. I find their arguments incredibly ill-conceived - one voter glibly suggested it was as useful as a category for politicians who like eating chips. All who have voted thus far have not substantively responded to my rebuttals.
Since you clearly find value in a very similar category, is there any chance you and perhaps others from WP Biography could please vote Keep on the discussion? You might well see them as distinct for whatever reason... The prominent/accomplished administrator who nominated it thinks categories shouldn't be "temporary." Of course Wikipedia is updated to reflect current events like elections, and he has been unable to point to a formal rule requiring categories to be permanently applicable to biographies (i.e. not subject to regularly scheduled changes of employment). Still, he is undoubtedly respected on here. In that case I will of course respect your opinion too, but it was worth a shot!
Thank you very much for your consideration. 1Matt20 ( talk) 16:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Tom.Reding,
Please do not make category talk pages for categories that the CFD bot has moved. It usually doesn't leave a redirect so there is no category page and these category talk pages just get speedy deleted as orphaned talk pages. I've run into this over a dozen times now with your use of AWB. I'm not sure where you are getting a list of category talk pages to create but it is obviously not up-to-date. I realize there has been a system lag over the past two days so perhaps that is part of the problem. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
<!--\s*BEGIN
. For good measure, I also excluded all cat talks that contain <!--\s*BEGIN
, but clearly a different check is needed. What text did
Category:Auburn, Alabama municipal elections contain prior to deletion? Does the CxD text get removed prior to deletion, or does it remain on the page until the page is deleted? ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 16:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Hello, yesterday you added WP Cities to 16 categories of Ukrainian football clubs, player, manager and staff categories. Those categories do not fall under Cities WP. I will revert those additions. Wanted to give an explanation before you are notified of reverts. Ceriy ( talk) 12:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! :) ~ Tom.Reding & his 200-some-odd lines of regex ( talk ⋅ contribs ⋅ dgaf) 02:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
There's nothing quite like cleaning up a good, 'ol-fashioned clusterfuck. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction :) ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 04:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: {{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 20:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
A Dobos torte for you!
You have used your gifts well, Padawan
7&6=thirteen, thank you :) And I really should take the test, but I can't be bothered while editing...perhaps that is or should be one of the questions?? ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 16:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I see we both have OCD. I had no choice but to give you this barnstar. Scorpions13256 ( talk) 23:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
|
Greetings Tom.Reding, After your previous assistance, my article is now available on Wikipedia, it is confirmed. And that inspired me, now I wrote more articles which are exist in other languages, but they are not confirmed yet. Can you please check them out for confirmation this time too?
Thank you very much I appreciate it -Film Contributor
Film contributor ( talk) 16:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding, a couple of months ago you helpfully made an adjustment to the Module:Category described in year to add lichens. Since then, I've been populating the categories, and plan to continue doing so, as part of a long-term project to make article for all lichen species (especially those published after 2000). I was wondering if there would be a simple way to have the total number of articles in the subcategories displayed on the "Lichens described in the xxth century" page? I ask because every couple of weeks I manually add up these subcategory numbers to keep track of my progress, and I realised that there's probably a simpler way to do this that I'm not aware of. I think a "total articles" count would probably be useful for all of the "Module:Category described in year" iterations. Is this desirable/doable? Esculenta ( talk) 20:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Tom,
I apologize for overwhelming your talk page with notices but I feel obliged to inform editors when a page they have created has been tagged for deletion. And it looks like you created the majority of categories in Category:User pages with authority control information which were recently emptied (see discussion on Template talk:Authority control).
There is no need for you to do anything, if the categories remain empty for a week, they will be deleted. Of course, feel free to remove these notices from your talk page when you return to edit Wikipedia so you can see more urgent messages. And thank you for all of your work with templates! Liz Read! Talk! 20:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I hope you are well. Please review Mehran Ghafourian's draft. I made some changes. If the article is rejected again, write the reason. Thanks for your following up Amir ghpro ( talk) 19:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I added a history section. You removed it. What do I need to do to fix it? Thanks, Konroy Konroyb ( talk) 20:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
You have previously edited Cardiff Arms Park. An editor has decided to split the article (yet again). I would like to know your view on the new edit....see Talk:Cardiff_Arms_Park#Article_Split_(again). SethWhales talk 20:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Tom.Reding: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RV ( talk) 01:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding! Looking forward to hopefully seeing you at Sunday's wiknic. At Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/DC/Wiknic_2023#Different_location_for_the_wiknic? I raised a question about location — I'll copy it here for convenience but if you could answer at that talk page that'd be really helpful. Thank you!
Apologies for the late suggestion: How would folks feel about doing the wiknic at Dupont Circle instead of at Rock Creek Park? Dupont would be easier to get to for folks on the train. I originally chose Rock Creek Park because I was worried about the crowd getting too big (last time I hosted a CentralNotice'd event hundreds wanted to come!), but it looks like there have only been a small handful of signups, which makes Dupont plausible! I'll notify everyone who's expressed interest — please let me know if you have a preference one way or the other. Looking forward to seeing you all!
KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 04:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Please don't do this, the line feeds break the infobox in this specific setup. Thanks. Zinnober9 ( talk) 02:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
what is the fix for the red errors in Category:1863–64 in association football? looks like a large blow up in Category:Pages with script errors. Frietjes ( talk) 21:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Philosophical poets, 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) 22:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
I've noticed that the redirect page " Televisions" points to " Television". In every case that I checked, it's actually being used as the plural of " Television set", which is understandable, since television as a medium isn't normally pluralised. I'm bringing the matter to you because you were the last person to edit the redirect page, and because I'm inexperienced in these matters. Any thoughts? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 19:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Nokia divested itself of the industries listed below to focus solely on telecommunications."
Hello, Tom.Reding. Thank you for your work on List of minor planets: 626001–627000. User:Herpetogenesis, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Fabulous work!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Herpetogenesis}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ ( talk) 18:30, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Both articles are now about cardiac stenting - and PCI. I took the DES article on as a personal project and it has been fleshed out to include PCI and I have also attempted to follow best practices in the layout and structure for a GA type of article.
I am exploring how to merge the articles, they are so very similar but the DES article is I think a child of the CS article.
Just testing the waters - I think they can be rolled into one document - within the GA framework as described on the DES article tp.
Your name was on one or the other articles , and you are an experienced editor - so just politely reaching out.
Thoughts, ideas, how to?
Dr.
BeingObjective (
talk) 14:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Tom.Reding :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
I was wondering why Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects had dropped by about 1,000 since I last checked it, then I saw Special:Diff/1188437036! Thanks for adding that - I have little to no experience in the subject area; but, on the face of it, it makes sense to me to separate the non-Wikidata-linked minor planet redirects to Category:Minor planet object redirects missing QID (as you’ve done). Now to do some more work on fixing some unlinked Wikidata redirects
All the best, user: A smart kitten meow 17:19, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
At Asthenotricha amblycoma, you added a blank line after the taxobox, which I had asked for at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life/Archive_48#Mass_cleanup_edits?. The other part of your edit was putting {{ Commons}} and {{ Wikispecies}} before {{ Reflist}}, which I had not understood to be one of your proposed WP:TREE cleanup. There are many WP:TREE articles with templates for Commons or Wikispecies links that do not have corresponding pages on Commons or Wikispecies.
Would it be feasible for you to check whether Commons/Wikispecies pages exist in your WP:TREE cleanup efforts and remove the interwiki link templates when the pages do not exist rather than just reshuffling where the templates are placed? Plantdrew ( talk) 03:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Do not make a section whose sole content is box-type templates, so on small pages with no, or an empty, EL, the templates end up at the top of the references section.
I don't know if you've spotted that Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 3#Template:Back to top was procedurally closed a few days ago in favour of a TfD you indicated you'd be opening, but it doesn't appear you've done that yet. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Why are yo making changes like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_621&diff=0&oldid=920463840? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:39, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
|mf=y
or by default, depending on the template. ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 11:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Use the parameter |date= for the month and year that an editor or bot last checked the article for inconsistent date formatting and fixed any found." ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 11:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Template:R from category navigation has been nominated for merging with Template:Category redirect. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. House Blaster talk 14:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Please stop engaging in WP:MEATBOT edits like this and this, that make no practical changes to the article from the readers's perspective and fix no actual broken code from the editors' perspective. There is no point whatsovever to twiddling with the "Use [xxx] dates" template's date-stamp when no dates' formats were corrected, nor replacing template redirects with the actual template name. All this does is annoyingly hit people's watchlists with pointless changes and waste all our time examining them. This problem is why we have MEATBOT. It is permissible to make non-destructive but not actually helpful twiddles of this sort only if they are made in the course of other changes in the same edit that are actually substantive. (e.g. this was fine since it subtantively fixed a MOS:DASH error in the course of making twiddles that were otherwise not objectively useful). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
sacrifice[ing] quality in the pursuit of speed or quantity"; I'm doing the exact opposite, checking each edit that is itself checking hundreds of templates to be in their correct location as per WP:MOS/Layout. I decided to start at the shallow end of the "Use [xxx] dates" templates pool, with pages with relatively few, or 0, of these mistakes. Even so, I'm watching for frequent unintended results that need to be accounted for. I suppose I could make a WP:BOTREQ for the pages with 0 other fixes, and they will likely be addressed by other editors by the time it gets approved, so 6 in one hand vs. half a dozen in the other.
substantive" - the edits are substantive because, if nothing else, they update a tracking category.
and fix no actual broken code from the editors' perspective" - the point of confirming that a page still follows an old date format (see right above @ #Confusing edits), is to allow editors to easily find the pages that do need date fixes.
But I'll address pages with more complex fixes to avoid confusion.Thank you. If the edit in question does something that is actually necessary for WP:P&G compliance, repairs an actual technical error, or improves the content for readers, then no one is going to object. As for the other bits:
sacrifice[ing] quality in the pursuit of speed or quantityis not the only criterion. In particular, bot-like editing is by definition editing that is like that of a bot, and bots are not permitted to make such non-substantive changes (by themselves) per WP:COSMETICBOT. If you think you've discovered a loophole, you have not. (Various editors going around making trivial and costmetic edits of this sort have been topic-banned or blocked when they don't stop. It's not like I just made this up out of nowhere. I had to change my own cleanup-editing habits to compensate as a result, because I used to do stuff about the same as what you are doing.) There is no reason to update the tracking category if nothing at the article has changed; there is absolutely nothing wrong with an article that has
{{
Use DMY dates|October 2018}}
in it remaining in the Oct. 2018 category, if none of the dates in it were non-compliant. So, that is non-substantive. The fact that editors might like some kind of distingishing between two categories of articles (or articles that could be separately categorized by some criterion but are not yet), based on some formatting in them, is not a matter of broken code or other errors in the page code. That sounds like you are looking for some other kind of tool or process, and one might need to be created (e.g. automated analysis of date usage in an article and adding a tracking category when one is found to have a mix of date styles). But it is not a reason to go around changing hundreds or thousands of articles in ways that affect neither readers nor any editors other than you. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 01:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
affect neither readers nor any editors other than you" - other editors I see operating in this space are Dawnseeker2000 & SSSB, which I believe I am assisting. If I'm not being helpful, please let me know. ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 11:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, just to say I noticed your recent AWB edit to Leaf by Niggle; which changed:
<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[sub-creation]]]
<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[sub-creation]]
Are the regexes you're using taking these possiblities into account? Could be worth running a replacement on <nowiki>[</nowiki>
to use {{
!(}}, {{
Square bracket open}}, or better yet {{
Bracket}}, for clarity, instead? --
Yodin
T 15:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Came across your page, looking forward to learning more about Wiki & edits. Cheers. IraPSilversmith ( talk) 22:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Tom - I've seen a few edits where you've (and from other people as well) updated the date stamp in templates like this one. What's the point of that? I'd think we'd want the opposite, as if to say, "this article has used DMY format since 20xx, so longstanding consensus is for it to remain that way". But I'm guessing since I've seen others doing it as well, there's a reason for it that I haven't thought of. Cheers, Parsecboy ( talk) 12:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your support on ANI (while I slept). As you know, I have a DYK on the Main page, but my story would be different, about Figaro, - this Figaro. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Tom,
It is very tricky to move categories which is why most CFD discussions end with bots moving categories around and recategorizing articles and subcategories. If you do move a category page, please make sure that all of the contents of the old category are recategoized so that they are in the category with the new page title. Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
For your tireless work in repetitive and laborious tasks. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 04:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC) |
Just to note, on WikiProject-specific templates, we use {{ WikiProject Articles for creation (admin)}} to avoid errors. Primefac ( talk) 12:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
I've noticed you've been creating the talk pages of subpages of the current events portals. I really don't see the need in project tagging all of these especially when there is no need to do so. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 13:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello Tom.Reding!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
The Space Barnstar | ||
I just wanted to say "thank you" for picking up the torch of updating the list of minor planets! (And I hope Rfassbind is doing fine too off WP!) Double sharp ( talk) 08:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC) |
Thank you :) Nwebbvillegas ( talk) 17:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf) 19:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello. May I ask why you are mass-adding WikiProject banner shells to file talk pages such as this one? In the RfCs discussing the redesign of the banner shell and the deprecation of project-independent quality assessments, there was only community consensus to perform those two tasks, not to mass-add WikiProject banner shells to talk pages, and especially not on talk pages where it would produce no effect (file talk pages are automatically classified as file- or NA-class, so your edits are tantamount to cosmetic edits). I am sure you are well aware that bot-like editing that does nothing except spam editors' watchlists is considered disruptive. Thank you. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 20:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
See this edit for an example. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 13:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
In Special:Diff/1213365807, you changed {{ oldpuffull}} to {{ oldffdfull}}. This means that the link goes to the wrong discussion page. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 17:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:
To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her), via:
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, can you help me give it a linguistic and cleaning review as the user mentioned to me who is suggesting to link it to other articles that it is not very clear to me how to do it. thank you -- Acartonadooopo ( talk) 21:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
We recently changed the title structure for TV seasons to exclude parenthesis (e.g., Loki season 1 rather than Loki (season 1). I have a list of about 500 categories that need to be renamed to follow the article titles, which will require several thousand edits to recategorize all of the episodes listed in those categories. This could be done by a bot, but I tend to prefer more hands-on supervision. If you take this up, please remove completed categories from the list as you go. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Tom, per your edits at Template talk:1967 West Penn Conference football standings, and many analogous ones, articles and templates and the like that apply specifically to American college football or American junior college football are not within the scope of WikiProject American football. The scope of WP American football includes general topics related to the sport and only specific team, league, player, and coach articles are do not fall under the scope of a more specific American football-related WikiProject like WikiProject College football or WikiProject National Football League. Thanks, Jweiss11 ( talk) 16:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Laurie Koziba, I have been researching my last name for a long while. I have been trying to make contact with writers with no luck. I thank you for this update. Email laurie 173.189.199.234 ( talk) 20:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Congratulations on becoming the fourth-ranked editor by number of edits. I know exactly how difficult that is! BD2412 T 15:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
Hi Tom
I reverted a number of changes you made from Ras Al Khaimah to Ras al-Khaimah using AWB. Ras Al Khaimah is the spelling of the WP article, the currently used spelling and the locally used spelling. I haven't changed the template, but it really should be changed too. The al-Khaimah spelling is antiquated. Happy to chat if this raises any questions! Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 09:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for cleaning up category talk pages. Looking at Special:Diff/1219087395 and related, I don't think {{ WikiProject Years}} would belong per my discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Is any page with a year in its title within the scope of this WP?. Thanks, -- Habst ( talk) 17:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello Tom,
I saw that you recently edited the WikiProject box for Category:American politicians who are the most recent member of their party to hold statewide office. I created another category, Category:American politicians who are the sole member of their party in statewide office. It has been nominated for deletion here. I find their arguments incredibly ill-conceived - one voter glibly suggested it was as useful as a category for politicians who like eating chips. All who have voted thus far have not substantively responded to my rebuttals.
Since you clearly find value in a very similar category, is there any chance you and perhaps others from WP Biography could please vote Keep on the discussion? You might well see them as distinct for whatever reason... The prominent/accomplished administrator who nominated it thinks categories shouldn't be "temporary." Of course Wikipedia is updated to reflect current events like elections, and he has been unable to point to a formal rule requiring categories to be permanently applicable to biographies (i.e. not subject to regularly scheduled changes of employment). Still, he is undoubtedly respected on here. In that case I will of course respect your opinion too, but it was worth a shot!
Thank you very much for your consideration. 1Matt20 ( talk) 16:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Tom.Reding,
Please do not make category talk pages for categories that the CFD bot has moved. It usually doesn't leave a redirect so there is no category page and these category talk pages just get speedy deleted as orphaned talk pages. I've run into this over a dozen times now with your use of AWB. I'm not sure where you are getting a list of category talk pages to create but it is obviously not up-to-date. I realize there has been a system lag over the past two days so perhaps that is part of the problem. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
<!--\s*BEGIN
. For good measure, I also excluded all cat talks that contain <!--\s*BEGIN
, but clearly a different check is needed. What text did
Category:Auburn, Alabama municipal elections contain prior to deletion? Does the CxD text get removed prior to deletion, or does it remain on the page until the page is deleted? ~
Tom.Reding (
talk ⋅
dgaf) 16:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Hello, yesterday you added WP Cities to 16 categories of Ukrainian football clubs, player, manager and staff categories. Those categories do not fall under Cities WP. I will revert those additions. Wanted to give an explanation before you are notified of reverts. Ceriy ( talk) 12:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)