Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< April 20 | << Mar | April | May >> | April 22 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
I seem to remember that there is a policy stating that the only categories that a navbox should have are categories for templates. Where can I find such a policy. Please {{ ping}} me when you respond. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Templates should be categorized according to kind of template, but not by template content...: Bhunacat10 (talk), 19:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/2019#Pseudoscience says:
(Username redacted because this question isn't about the specific user or his ban/block. It is about what gets logged and what doesn't get logged.)
However, the block log of the user in question shows that the block was lifted on 28 March 2019. Should this be reflected in the AE log? It is easy enough to check a user's block log and discover that they had the block lifted, but how do I know that the topic ban has not been lifted as well?
Or is this just a clerical error, meaning that lifting a block or ban should be logged but somehow this wasn't done in this case? If so, where do I go to ask that the log be updated? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 13:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
"...such need to be appropriately logged." - Dlohcierekim Sotuman ( talk) 18:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I look Around Wikipedia, but find out confusing. I would love a sitemap or other tools like a comprehensive listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 506 independent ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
In WP:DEL-REASON, Of the 14 listed reasons in WP:DEL-REASON, the article doesn't fulfill any of the 14.
WP:BEFORE (in WP:AFD) links to WP:DEL-REASON via the link anchor "valid grounds for deletion" ie, AFD describes deletion-reason (the list of 14 reasons) as being the "valid grounds"
Sederecarinae ( talk) 17:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
reasons for deletion include, but are not limited to, the following, so all that matters is whether or not the community decides to delete the article. Wikipedia does not have firm rules so reasons for deletion can be anything reasonable. Also, the article appears to be a fairly indiscriminate collection of statistics. -- Danski454 ( talk) 17:52, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Italic text — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boredbeyondmeasure ( talk • contribs) 17:59, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Very odd. I added a thread at User talk:Lithopsian, and it doesn't show up. It's there in the code if I go to edit again, but my signature is still four tildes. It was never converted to name and date. The same is true of the preceding thread by another user - it doesn't display, and their signature is still four tildes as well. Anyone have any idea what's going on? — kwami ( talk) 19:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! — kwami ( talk) 19:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
This is what I received: Information icon Hello, I'm Stellarnebula. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Dick Van Dyke Show have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Stellarnebula (talk) 20:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
This is my answer: My addition "did not appear to be constructive?" The addition I made is directly from the book "The Dick Van Dyke Show" to include the production company that made the show, and the unique way the show producers' names were incorporated into the name of said production company. My addition is as pertinent to the dialogue as the rest of the information in the article, hence the placing of it at the top. I realize that you Wikipedia editors do not like to let people contribute (keeping that privilege for your doctorate-level contributors), but when someone contributes interesting items to articles that can be verified, they should be allowed to do so.
Calvin Sneed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:4790:3D70:D965:FF27:86E7:970 ( talk) 20:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I had a past concern at this archive. Which concerns to an episode listing, with the same user. But on Joshi Kausei the "plot" section was copied from a link / url. By this . And is that under the same rule/ guideline umbrella? (If I sound slow, I'm re-reading the rules from the various MoS.) Tainted-wingsz ( talk) 22:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< April 20 | << Mar | April | May >> | April 22 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
I seem to remember that there is a policy stating that the only categories that a navbox should have are categories for templates. Where can I find such a policy. Please {{ ping}} me when you respond. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Templates should be categorized according to kind of template, but not by template content...: Bhunacat10 (talk), 19:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/2019#Pseudoscience says:
(Username redacted because this question isn't about the specific user or his ban/block. It is about what gets logged and what doesn't get logged.)
However, the block log of the user in question shows that the block was lifted on 28 March 2019. Should this be reflected in the AE log? It is easy enough to check a user's block log and discover that they had the block lifted, but how do I know that the topic ban has not been lifted as well?
Or is this just a clerical error, meaning that lifting a block or ban should be logged but somehow this wasn't done in this case? If so, where do I go to ask that the log be updated? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 13:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
"...such need to be appropriately logged." - Dlohcierekim Sotuman ( talk) 18:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I look Around Wikipedia, but find out confusing. I would love a sitemap or other tools like a comprehensive listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 506 independent ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
In WP:DEL-REASON, Of the 14 listed reasons in WP:DEL-REASON, the article doesn't fulfill any of the 14.
WP:BEFORE (in WP:AFD) links to WP:DEL-REASON via the link anchor "valid grounds for deletion" ie, AFD describes deletion-reason (the list of 14 reasons) as being the "valid grounds"
Sederecarinae ( talk) 17:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
reasons for deletion include, but are not limited to, the following, so all that matters is whether or not the community decides to delete the article. Wikipedia does not have firm rules so reasons for deletion can be anything reasonable. Also, the article appears to be a fairly indiscriminate collection of statistics. -- Danski454 ( talk) 17:52, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Italic text — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boredbeyondmeasure ( talk • contribs) 17:59, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Very odd. I added a thread at User talk:Lithopsian, and it doesn't show up. It's there in the code if I go to edit again, but my signature is still four tildes. It was never converted to name and date. The same is true of the preceding thread by another user - it doesn't display, and their signature is still four tildes as well. Anyone have any idea what's going on? — kwami ( talk) 19:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! — kwami ( talk) 19:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
This is what I received: Information icon Hello, I'm Stellarnebula. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Dick Van Dyke Show have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Stellarnebula (talk) 20:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
This is my answer: My addition "did not appear to be constructive?" The addition I made is directly from the book "The Dick Van Dyke Show" to include the production company that made the show, and the unique way the show producers' names were incorporated into the name of said production company. My addition is as pertinent to the dialogue as the rest of the information in the article, hence the placing of it at the top. I realize that you Wikipedia editors do not like to let people contribute (keeping that privilege for your doctorate-level contributors), but when someone contributes interesting items to articles that can be verified, they should be allowed to do so.
Calvin Sneed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:4790:3D70:D965:FF27:86E7:970 ( talk) 20:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I had a past concern at this archive. Which concerns to an episode listing, with the same user. But on Joshi Kausei the "plot" section was copied from a link / url. By this . And is that under the same rule/ guideline umbrella? (If I sound slow, I'm re-reading the rules from the various MoS.) Tainted-wingsz ( talk) 22:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)