This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.
< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78
I saw WP:FIES quoted in a discussion about edit summaries recently - the shortcut redirects to Help:Edit summary#Always provide an edit summary. The last two letters of the acronym are therefore obvious, but I can't for the life of me guess what FI stands for. Any thoughts? Just curious. Optimist on the run ( talk) 07:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I'd prefer WP:ACES Always Complete Edit Summaries. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 08:24, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Not sure what is going on with this page List of automated transit networks suppliers. It appears to be a vandalism, can someone have a look at this page. Thank you. Asiaworldcity ( talk) 17:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Feel free to add User:Anna Frodesiak/Green sandbox to your watchlist. That is how I noticed the Ricky81682 matter. I probably wouldn't have seen the announcement at the ARBCOM noticeboard. Of course, it is not for watching to see if any admins turn to the dark side. I use it for instant notification of vandals angry at admins. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 21:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Is there someone from Pittsburgh here ? who coud help me about this ?
Regards -- Archimëa ( talk) 16:17, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
CNN just reports this: Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page vandalized, replaced with pornographic image.
What happened? The version history of Hillary Clinton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) seems fine. (EDIT:) The talk page has related inquiries. -- bender235 ( talk) 00:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
List of Ambassadors of France to Belgium only contains a table.
I have many things to write about the Embassy of France, Brussels (when it was built, important events that happened there, the services it runs, how ambassadors are chosen, how the embassy has changed in structure and number of employees over time, the history of the building itself, pictures, etc). All properly referenced, of course. The table would become a section of that article, similar to what can be seen at Embassy of Mexico, Washington, D.C..
Can I add this information then rename the article from List of Ambassadors of France to Belgium to Embassy of France, Brussels?
Thanks for your feedback! Syced ( talk) 12:47, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Referring to this help desk question, for some reason Google search results in the past several days have done exactly what the IP wanted. Wikipedia articles appear with just "Wikipedia" not "Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia".— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello
As part of the coming Africa Desbubathon, I proposed that we run a site notice per described here. Short summary: My personal suggestion would be to do it for "Only logged in". And to "Drop editors with low count edit (less than 50)". The destubathon is planned to run about 6 weeks. I would not advise keeping the banner at the top all the time of the campaign ;) It would be nice to have a quick start display in the first part of the campaign for a few days so as to make people know about it (somewhere 15-25 october); and perhaps a reminder mid term (around 7-14 november) and a last push in the final days (25-27 november). Any feedback on this ? Approval, opposition, no opinion ? Thanks :) Anthere ( talk)
Support Agreed with Anthere, at the start, middle reminder and at the end!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:40, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to ask this. A few days ago I wrote the article
alcosynth. It was quickly nominated for deletion. Yesterday, an editor deleted nearly the entire article, which was well sourced. I reverted the edit, but the editor reverted it back. My understanding of
WP:EDITATAFD is that an article under AfD should not be blanked. Anyway, now new editors are commenting on the AfD, and one of them said there is not "enough content to merit a separate article". Well, there was until yesterday. I'm not sure who to appeal to? I don't want to get into an edit war, but by deleting nearly an entire article, it certainly sways an AfD to one side. Thank you for your advise.
Magnolia677 (
talk)
11:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to ask this. A few days ago I wrote the article
alcosynth. It was quickly nominated for deletion. Yesterday, an editor deleted nearly the entire article, which was well sourced. I reverted the edit, but the editor reverted it back. My understanding of
WP:EDITATAFD is that an article under AfD should not be blanked. Anyway, now new editors are commenting on the AfD, and one of them said there is not "enough content to merit a separate article". Well, there was until yesterday. I'm not sure who to appeal to? I don't want to get into an edit war, but by deleting nearly an entire article, it certainly sways an AfD to one side. Thank you for your advise.
Magnolia677 (
talk)
11:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I am Marco Craso from Spanish Wikipedia. I use to speak spanish and german, but my english is not enough good for correcting articles. I want to improve this article: Pedro Muñoz. It has a lot of mistakes, I tried to correct some of them but the article is a disaster, but in the spanish wikipedia is a feature article. I need someone for check it and try to remove the "bad translated tamplete" once and for all. Thanks. -- Marco Craso ( talk) 14:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I am Marco Craso from Spanish Wikipedia. I use to speak spanish and german, but my english is not enough good for correcting articles. I want to improve this article: Pedro Muñoz. It has a lot of mistakes, I tried to correct some of them but the article is a disaster, but in the spanish wikipedia is a feature article. I need someone for check it and try to remove the "bad translated tamplete" once and for all. Thanks. -- Marco Craso ( talk) 14:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
How do they work? Do they leave out any articles? Phil roc My contribs 00:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red is a finalist in the International Telecommunication Union GEM-TECH 2016 awards (Gender Equality and Mainstreaming Policy (GEM)). Has your wikiproject been seleted as a finalist for a UN award this week? No? Ah well... Pertinent links below. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 22:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Move under the draft userspace or user-ify? Not tagging this on the article talk page because I'm not sure how to act on this one. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 22:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red is a finalist in the International Telecommunication Union GEM-TECH 2016 awards (Gender Equality and Mainstreaming Policy (GEM)). Has your wikiproject been seleted as a finalist for a UN award this week? No? Ah well... Pertinent links below. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 22:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Move under the draft userspace or user-ify? Not tagging this on the article talk page because I'm not sure how to act on this one. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 22:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I totally disagree with the edits on Buddy Holly template which have been made pretty recently by an user. We have discussed here and we definitely don't agree with it. Could someone give his opinion ? Elfast ( talk) 13:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there a hoax noticeboard? KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 01:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@ KATMAKFORAN: Unless your question is about "should we create a hoax noticeboard if one doesn't exist", then your question probably belongs to Wikipedia:Help desk. As for the question itself, I don't know the answer. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 02:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I totally disagree with the edits on Buddy Holly template which have been made pretty recently by an user. We have discussed here and we definitely don't agree with it. Could someone give his opinion ? Elfast ( talk) 13:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there a hoax noticeboard? KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 01:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@ KATMAKFORAN: Unless your question is about "should we create a hoax noticeboard if one doesn't exist", then your question probably belongs to Wikipedia:Help desk. As for the question itself, I don't know the answer. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 02:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Why are people so uptight about the indents on talk pages all of a sudden???-- Jack Upland ( talk) 09:29, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Washington Post article: " Wikipedia is fixing one of the Internet’s biggest flaws"
"Somehow, despite of all the forces dragging it toward chaos, the site has managed to carve out a space on the Internet where people can have mostly sane, mostly productive conversations that mostly converge to a version of the truth."
— Steve Summit ( talk) 14:25, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear all
Connected Open Heritage (a project aiming to improve information of built heritage in danger) is looking for community input on choosing the official logo. You can submit new logos until 6 November and support the proposed logos until 11 November.
Thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 14:24, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Please see the not-quite-RfC at Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 3#Change "result" parameter to "outcome", on a proposition intended to help avoid misinterpretation of a "just the facts" infobox parameter as being a place for extensive, freeform, subjective cause–effect assertions that may be better handled in well-cited, contextual article prose. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Please someone sort this out. 83.85.143.141 ( talk) 04:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials from:
Expansions
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on
our partners page. Sign up today!
--
The Wikipedia Library Team 18:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
It was taken as a part of a car heat awareness program in Des Moines, but I don't know what exactly is going on in it. Can somebody please tell me? I'm trying to upload the picture to Commons, and it asks for a description. Phil roc My contribs 17:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I have created Wikipedia:No attacks on Wikipedia. I thought some people might like it. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:17, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I recently made a tool that will be interesting to Wikipedians who have a Pebble watch: Diderot, a watchface that shows you the nearest unillustrated Wikipedia article. I've been using it for about a month and a half, and it's been a lot of fun; I took a lot of photographs of places that didn't have photos. It uses a wmflabs tool that filters out articles that have only png or svg, so you can find articles that have a map or logo but not photograph.-- ragesoss ( talk) 22:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Have googled and wikipedia-ed in vain. To what degree are the French, German or other language versions of wikipedia independent? Does the German site ever just translate English Wikipedia articles? Are their articles sometimes or always independently generated in German? I know that there are obvious differences between some English and French Wikipedia articles, but I would like to know what general practice or policy is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.38.9 ( talk) 01:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thanks. That answers my question,--and gives me work since on certain subjects I will feel now that I have to check multiple wikipedias! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.38.9 ( talk) 18:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Reading a BBC article about the US marijuana industry, I encountered the line "At present the Wikipedia entry for Desert Hot Springs does not even mention the trade." It took a great deal of willpower to avoid improving the article with the information "At present this Wikipedia article does not mention the trade in marijuana in Desert Hot Springs", with, of course, a reference to the reliable published source. If I had done that, what guideline would it have broken? Card Zero (talk) 01:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
We have a template for citing the U.S. Congressional Record, {{
USCongRec}}
. We have a template for citing Hansard, {{
Cite Hansard}}
. But we don't have specific templates for most countries, and it's not obvious to me what template would be good to cite the official parliamentary record of a country, or general official government announcements.
In particular, I would like a recommendation for a how to cite a Government Gazette of South Africa item at
http://dnaproject.co.za/new_dna/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GG-NOTICE-26-APRIL-2013.pdf. {{
cite web}}
, {{
cite journal}}
, {{
cite news}}
, and {{
cite magazine}}
all seem inappropriate. {{
cite report}}
is getting a little closer but still seems wrong. Is there a template I've overlooked? Recommendations, anyone? Should we create a new template for items of this sort ... first defining what "this sort" actually means? —
Anomalocaris (
talk)
08:26, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
seems inappropriate;
seems wrong. These are rather vague descriptors. Clearly, the gazette is not news and not a journal and not a magazine so those three can be dismissed. If you are citing the url quoted in your post and not the actual gazette itself,
{{
cite web}}
is acceptable but problematic because the thing being cited has two titles which is not supported by {{cite web}}
. Which leaves:
{{
cite report}}
; you can suppress the (Report) annotation by setting |type=none
{{
citation}}
; you can make it render with the same formatting used in the above mentioned cs1 templates by setting |mode=cs1
Self-nominations for the 2016 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections are officially open. The nomination period runs from Sunday 00:00, 6 November (UTC) until Tuesday 23:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC). Editors interested in running should review the eligibility criteria listed at the top of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates then create a candidate page following the instructions there. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:49, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
For example if a person or clique takes exception to an edit or comment on one article (even if valid) and instead of (or in addition to) responding to that, make an attack on the editor or their contributions on another page? Kinda hard to prove but have the impression it goes on quite a lot? Eversync ( talk) 23:49, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Regarding this thread, is there a written guideline that says that for a biography, a (free-use) photograph is preferred to a (free-use) drawing or painting? I'm sure that in the past I've seen paintings removed from infoboxes on the grounds that photos give an accurate representation, whereas for non-photographic art there is a degree of WP:OR and a possible WP:NPOV violation. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 14:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
I have just noticed that the article on Condom, Gers contains a template inviting translations from the French version of the article. is this not an invitation to use another Wiki as a source, contrary to WP:CIRCULAR?. Britmax ( talk) 16:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
I had a random thought: how about a WP drone photo contest? It would consist of HD images taken from drones for articles that currently have no decent photo, such as a shot of a town or village from altitude. Praemonitus ( talk) 22:12, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
It was about changing eg. List of biggest XXXX in the world --> List of biggest XXXX
I posted at the pump before but more were changed via a Request for Comment at some talk page. I can't seem to find that talk page. Does anyone remember where that was?
Thanks.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I found an account that had been inactive for a while and suddenly had a new edit from an apparent "hacker" that seems to have broken into the account. The hack statement threatened death and stated what is possibly the account holders name. the accounts contribs, the talk page -glove- ( talk) 18:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear all
I'm running a pilot project to import text from UNESCO open access publications into Wikipedia, I'm working with subject matter experts at UNESCO to identify sections of publications that may be suitable, I have also created a simple guide for finding other UNESCO open license publications that may have suitable text. I have done some small tests and found it takes around 2 hours to create a high quality 2000 word article including referencing all the links the publication uses. Please take a look here.
Many thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 17:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear users. A request has opened to decide if apply a Global ban against Marrovi. Other users who have relevant information can participate. Here is the link; You can also review the guidelines here. For the same policies I have to notify in the projects that he participate. Regards. -- Akapochtli ( talk) 01:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear all,
the Wikimedia project
Connected Open Heritage - led by Wikimedia Sverige - is organizing a
photo exhibition aimed at enhancing the importance of the digital preservation of the global cultural heritage. The pictures displayed will not only portray monuments, but they will also tell their stories by showing the transformations they went through because of wars, natural disasters or simply human negligence. Everyone can contribute to the project by suggesting a story concerning a cultural property in danger: the pictures can be uploaded by the 7th of December.
We are looking forward to receive your stories! -- Yiyi ( Dimmi!) 09:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
In English articles, the full list of all available translations is provided under the "Languages" section. However, in other Wikipedias (e.g. Persian, Chinese) only a few languages are listed with the remainder listed under a button named "Other ## Languages". What criteria do languages need to meet in order not to be listed under that category? For example, let's say I want the listed languages for a Persian Wikipedia article to be "Arabic, English, Kurdish, Pashto, Turkish", and then have the "Other ## Languages" button underneath that. The reason I ask is that most Iranian and Afghan Persian Wikipedia users may not be looking for article translations into Finnish for example, but rather into a local language, so moving those languages from the "Other Languages" category to be listed under the main Languages would be better than some of the other options listed under there now. How can that be accomplished? Yilangren ( talk) 18:04, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm curious what other editors think about archiving an article's talk page on a frequent basis. I've noticed that there are quite a few articles out there that have frequent archiving (30 days), but very few comments. While I know that archived content is still accessible, that extra click(s) and digging seems to decrease the likelihood of a legitimate concern or past criticisms from being expanded upon. If the same concern is being raised over and over by different editors, it will not be readily apparent. Am I out to lunch here? Is archiving sometimes used as a way to minimize debate and maximize the likelihood of status quo? I'm considering writing an essay on the subject of archiving, as I don't believe one exists. Any and all comments on archiving would be appreciated. Thanks. Dig Deeper ( talk) 02:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Dig deeper: Be careful chap. You removed the archive quick access template as well when you removed the archiving template from Sugar - X201 ( talk) 09:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi
I'm working on a a new guidance page and would like to put text into simple arrow boxes, something similar to the right hand arrow on the second line of this image. I assume there is away of doing it by adding a .png file with two white arrows and then getting that to display on the right hand edge of the box. Would someone be able to help me? I'm very happy to make the .png if someone can help me make a simple table with a fairly large border on the left hand side to make the text sit nicely and then absolutely no gap between the right hand edge of the table and the .png.
Sorry if this is confusing :)
-- John Cummings ( talk) 20:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Something like this? — Cryptic 20:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I need some editors to test a new editing mode. I'd like to find both people who mostly use the visual editor and people who mostly use one of the old wikitext editors for this. I'm not looking for admins or technical people – just ordinary editors, and new people are fine. Probably most of the people who read this will qualify, but I hope that some of you will think of both yourself and also a promising new editor who might be interested.
Users who want to participate in this testing project must:
If you're interested, or if you think you might know someone who is interested, then please click here to leave a note on my talk page. Thanks for considering it! Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 21:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
In searching online for sources to improve an article I created in 2009, I found a book whose introduction uses three sentences from the article word for word. This is a proper academic book, written by an apparent expert in the field and published by a well-known academic publisher. The book was just published this year, and there is no question that it is using my original wording without attribution. Nonetheless, I want to emphasize that I don't consider this a copyright infringement. They're just three sentences, after all. The only related guidance I've found on Wikipedia seems to be about larger parts of articles copied onto websites. Would it be appropriate to contact the author and/or publisher? I know there are professional codes of ethics against even minor plagiarism like this. I don't want to get anyone in trouble; I'd just rather the book used the author's own words. Or am I taking this too seriously? Ntsimp ( talk) 03:38, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, one of the things we try to do with featured articles is get them on the main page when there is a significant birthday or anniversary or somesuch. Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending is a page we have for flagging significant dates for when something might be good to go on the main page (though it still needs a proper nomination down the track). Hence the page just serves as an informal placeholder or reminder for later in the year. Anyhoo, I am sure that a stack of articles listed at Wikipedia:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page will have significant dates that no-one has logged at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending yet. If anyone has some spare time and wants to check these featured articles for sginifcant anniversary or birthdates and place them on the calendar at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending that would be hugely appreciated. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk) has given you a
Turkey! Turkeys promote
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!
To everyone, I would like to extend the warmest of seasons greetings and wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{ Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
|
I would like to ask if it would be appropriate to create the page List of internet slang acronyms (or simply List of internet acronyms). I was surprised to notice that there is no such list, when this whole encyclopedia is created by the "web fauna", most of them knowing a good number of internet acronyms. — Ark25 ( talk)
Hi everyone. I just came across Template:CGJ, which is still pre-{{ documentation}}. I would change it, but not confident that I can check whether the invisible CGJ character would still be there at the end of the day!
What's more, the example given on only article that it's used on ( Combining Grapheme Joiner) doesn't seem to show any difference for me on Firefox or Chrome – perhaps someone with more knowledge in this area would be able to say whether it's still in use, or if modern browsers have made it unnecessary (is it completely redundant?). Perhaps SVG pictures demonstrating the problem that this character was designed to solve would be better than relying on each browser to try to duplicate this, which would then mean the template could safely be deleted.
Finally, are there any conventions surrounding the use of non-visible characters in wikicode? I seem to remember a bot that checked mainspace articles for them (things like stray RTL characters etc.), but can't find any policy pages. ‑‑ Yodin T 14:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
I've literally been waiting five months for a review; I'm going to be busy for much of December, but apparently, there's no way whatsoever to even ask for a review rather rapidly approaching half a year to be reviewed before someone goes on wikibreak. It's frustrating, to say the least. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 15:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I've noticed that, with many protected edit requests, editors brush them off with a request to be more specific, even if it's reasonably clear what the person wants. It seems to me like an easy way out, but if an editor can't be bothered spending time on the request, why answer it at all? Is there a better way of dealing with these requests?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 00:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Everyone get ready. A Wikipedia raid is happening Thursday, December 8th by feminists and the BBC. Constantly check your favorite articles; make sure they stay accurate. I'm not saying that feminism is bad or to revert all changes by feminists, I'm just saying that we'll be seeing a large user influx, which could bring many false edits. AA Quantum ( talk) 22:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I spend almost all my time on-wiki working on featured articles, either writing content or reviewing candidates. There's a MoS discussion, here, that I'd like to post a note about at WT:FAC because a lot of content writers would see it there, and I think it would be good to get more input on this (and other) MoS discussions from experienced content writers. A previous note of mine at WT:FAC on a related MoS discussion was considered by at least one editor, SMcCandlish, to be canvassing, so I asked him how I could leave a neutrally worded notice to let editors at FAC know of the discussion, without running afoul of WP:CANVAS. His response is that any such notice would be canvassing no matter how I worded it: "Quotation formatting is not an intrinsically FA-related subject, so it would be taken as canvassing of a special interest group regardless, by various participants". This doesn't seem to me to be in line with the intent of WP:CANVAS, but I don't want to unilaterally annoy a MoS regular and get into a fight over this. Can I get opinions here on whether it's OK to post the kind of notice I would like to post? Or if in fact SMcCandlish is right that no such notice is possible within the rules? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:21, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
'"[D]isagreeing with one person who likes to hang out at WT:MOS", even if it happens consistently, is not actually the same thing as being "anti-MOS".'— That would be true, but a red herring. I'm not talking about people disagreeing with me, I'm talking about at least two distinct proposals at WT:FAC to fork their own style guide against MoS (what could be more anti-MoS that writing an actual Anti-MoS?); demonizing of all the MoS regulars as a group/class by multiple FAC regulars who back each other up in erecting false dichotomies and will brook no disagreement; threats by others in that scene to resign WP editing over not getting their way when wanting to ignore MoS but meeting resistance and/or over those particular editors' continual, escalating fights against those they mischaracterize as MoS editors (who are in fact more often pro-infobox people, infoboxes not being an MoS topic at all); and other patterns of collective and irrational "us versus them", FAC-against-MoS territorial ritualized combat antics, that closely mirror (with considerable individual editorial overlap) similar anti-MoS torch-waving at WT:CITE and (a while back) WT:AT. If I had never even been born, all of this would be continuing exactly as it is now, other than some individual besides me would be the most frequently scapegoated target (probably whoever is next in the stats as the most frequent WP:MOS or WT:MOS editor, or perhaps just whichever one spokes up and didn't still still for being treated like a second-class member of the project by those people).
As for the '"lose" an RfC' comment: just see WP:WINNING, WP:NOTAVOTE, WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY, WP:RFC, etc. The purpose of RfCs is to get input from people who care and have something pertinent to say, after they actually understand whatever is under discussion, with an eye to what is best for the project and its readers; not to rally allies to a cause, to swing a vote based on argument to emotion and reactionary territorialism or proprietary sentiment, which is usually what happens when one pointedly canvasses a wikiproject or other editorial cluster with a known, clearly demonstrated bias with regard to the topic under discussion, especially a bias based on their personal level of control/power over particular pages. Fortunately, this is basically moot, since the discussion in question has archived without resolution. I suggest just forgetting about it. If it re-arises after considerable time has passed, I would trust that everyone's cooled heads will prevail. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 11:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I hope this is the right place to ask why location based pages (towns, counties etc.) have sections on, for example, "History of Wikiville", "Geography of Wikiville", "Sport of Wikiville" but also separate pages in the encyclopedia on exactly the same subjects?
If you are - as I am - trying to pull one of these sites into shape, the double-page just creates extra work, with a lot of sections having to be edited twice, and decisions made as to what goes in the summary section and what goes on the fuller page.
However the real downside is that, over time, individual editors find one page or the other, and make additions, corrections or deletions without editing the other page. So we end up with conflicting information - sometimes quite factual stuff like figures or dates - that conflict between the two pages.
Surely it would be better to decide, either a) we have a full page on Wikiville with all the detailed information on it (if people don't want to read the history or whatever, they can always minimise the section) or, b) we have all the gripping event-by-event history of Wikiville set out on one page, with a simple link to it from the main Wikiville page? User:IanB2 1 December 2016
Having dug around the site a little, I think this issue will affect a very large number of sites indeed. Nevertheless the way the site is currently set up makes life a lot more difficult for editors, and potentially confusing for users.
Hi - thanks for the quick reply. I can see the logic for a topical page, where you don't want all the minutiae of a detailed sub-subject set out on the main page. But my point is that for subjects like "History of Wikiville" - which is essentially a series of discrete events set out over the full span of human history - the logic doesn't really work very well in practice? User:IanB2 1 December 2016
I think the problems are: a) extra work for someone trying to pull a location page into shape, having to double-edit everything, b) individual editors add or change things to one page or the other, but not both, so the two pages grow apart, and occasionally conflict on basic factual details, c) a history - essentially a sequence of discrete events - is not always easy to summarise User:IanB2 1 December 2016
It seems that this new feature (see phab:T135433) will be "tested" on the French WP during one month starting next Monday, and kept if there is no "major objection". Will there be such a thing here on the English WP or has it been discussed somewhere? The answer could help the French WP know what to do about this "test". Oliv0 ( talk) 13:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
For starters, I would like to say that I do apologize if this is the wrong place to put this.
Now, I have twice relisted a move discussion at Talk:Aleksandar Jovanović (footballer, born December 1992). However, shortly after I relisted a second time, a user moved the page, but didn't close the discussion. Now another user has commented and requested a new title, even though the RM is technically "over". I am unsure of what to do; can anyone be of assistance (also note that I am not involved with the article except for the relistings). JudgeRM (talk to me) 16:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
I am developing infoboxes, using Wikidata. For carbon monoxide, I see
My question is: why is Wikidata presented as an internal link? Is that a web-design choice? To me (and probably most Readers), d:Wikidata is an external site. Can someone clarify? - DePiep ( talk) 21:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I will be unavailable until December 14. Usually, I would ask that the encyclopedia be finished by the time I get back, or at least that all the disambiguation links be fixed, but this time I'll be more modest and suggest getting through the list of missing United States state supreme court justices. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
The template: Template:Noinkscape doesn't give any reasoning for why the otherwise wikipedia-endorsed Inkscape is worse than text-editors. It also doesn't explain how editing Inkscape inhibits future use of text-editors. Can anyone help me understand and solve this issue? I imagine that adapting Inkscape could fix this problem. @ Prccy27, Brythones, and Gage: Could people who worked on the 2016 Electoral College map weigh in on this? Thanks! Houdinipeter ( talk) 23:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
<span style="color:#000000;font-weight:normal;font-size:normal;font-family:Liberation Sans,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Text here</span>
for every single section of text, Inkscape is doing something worse than that). For SacramentoKings.svg specifically, Inkscape's default curve tool only supports editing with
cubic Bézier curve command. If Inkscape detects other curve commands, namely quadratic Bézier curve and elliptical arc curve, upon editing the path, it will instantly convert them to cubic Bézier curve command. The issue with cubic Bézier curve command is that adjusting its control points for creating a perfect circular arc is extremely cumbersome for all the irrational decimals, even if the angles of the entry and exit points are pointing to the cardinal directions. For example, if I want to draw a circular arc from (0,0) to (100,100) clockwise, turning 90 degree and 100px radius, this is what the elliptical arc curve command will look like: A 100,100 0 0,1 100,100
. And this is what cubic Bézier curve command will end up after conversion by Inkscape: C 55.228475,0 100,44.771525 100,100
. --
Sameboat - 同舟 (
talk ·
contri.)
02:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)text-anchor
property ("middle" and "end" respectively) but replacing with translating the text position which almost guarantees poorly positioned text after uploaded to Wikimedia. Because of the
Creative Cloud barricade, that means most of our Ai contributors still stick with the older versions of the vector application and they will never ever receive any update if Adobe finally has decided to improve its support for SVG. In other words, they will be highly tempted to convert all text to outlines before exporting SVG just for neat presentation on Wikimedia but hell for revision and localization. --
Sameboat - 同舟 (
talk ·
contri.)
01:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Is there any way to see the most edited pages by unregistered users? Ionutzmovie ( talk) 18:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
(Posting this here because the WWA talk page is inactive and I wouldn't get an answer there, and this touches a bit on how we define "Wikipedian" to begin with.)
I was looking at the page WP:WWA and I noticed Andysch was listed as "Not active". I assumed (given what he's known for) that he had been an active editor on Wikipedia before leaving to found Conservapedia, but if that's the case it must have been under a different username because that account only made a few edits to our article on Conservapedia (i.e., it was created after Conservapedia had already been founded). I then noticed that a number of other "Not active" accounts were also essentially WP:SPAs that had made accounts to comment on or edit their own articles and had not been active since. Some of them actually are active (Arudoudebito, for instance, takes long breaks from editing but he has posted in 2016). This seems like an odd turn of phrase in that light.
There's a control for this. The Larry Sanger account has only made three edits since 2014 and his last edit that wasn't related to Larry Sanger and Citizendium was long before that, but since he was at one time in the past (until February 2003) a normal Wikipedia editor without an article who edited in other topic areas he is not referred to as "Not active" even though the account has been significantly less active than some of the "Not active" accounts.
Wouldn't referring to accounts that post-date their articles and whose only activity has been related to those articles as "single-purpose accounts" be better than describing them as "not active"? I was initially wondering whether single-purpose accounts (especially long-inactive ones) should be described in the present-tense as "Wikipedians", and whether a better name for the page would be "People with Wikipedia articles who also have confirmed Wikipedia accounts" or something (although I recognize that that's too long).
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 00:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I just noticed that some jazz musicians are lacking any category like " Category:African-American musicians" (for example Eddie Jefferson or Ernie Andrews) and I feel like there are many such articles. Shouldn't they contain such a category? Not all the American jazz musicians were black, and therefore the articles should contain such categories, I think. Is there a better place to raise this question, by the way? — Ark25 ( talk) 00:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I have a question regarding Jean I, Duke of Alençon and Jean II, Duke of Alençon. The two of them have names that differ from the name used in their intro paragraph: "John" is used in the intro whereas "Jean" is used in the title. Is there a reason for the discrepancy? Reversinator ( talk) 04:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I see your pester-power pop-up and am wondering if a different approach might be more amenable. Thinking that something tangible like a desktop logo, not exactly 'I'm a Wikipedophile' but something to sport on the desktop. A badge of sorts, probably the Wiki-world would do it. Maybe it would open Wiki in the browser..maybe
Whatever, Wiki is a brilliant project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.95.1 ( talk) 21:06, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I have offered to help with the WP:BRFA backlog as a bot approver. This procedural notification is to make the community aware that a formal request is open for your consideration. Your input is welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Bot Approvals Group#BAG Nomination: MusikAnimal. Regards — MusikAnimal talk 00:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I've tried to follow the old discussion on findagrave.com, but don't see why (assuming it includes a photo of the gravestone) it isn't considered a reliable source—after all, the birth and death dates are literally carved in stone. The written text may not be reliable insofar as it is not a transcription of what's visible on the stone. In terms of value as an external link the site is of inestimable value to genealogists, and also to people interested in visiting the graves of famous people. Peter Flass ( talk) 13:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
I have just wrapped up a research project which investigates the 100 most frequent article section headings in Wikipedia article pages. Below are the top 10 English section headings, along with the number of English articles each heading appears in at least once, and the total percentage of all English articles it appears in. For more information (including a comparison with frequently used section titles in other languages and a link to the full dataset consisting of all section headings from all articles) and documentation, see the meta page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Investigate_frequency_of_section_titles_in_5_large_Wikipedias
number_of_articles | section_title | article_percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 4125018 | References | 78.19 |
2 | 2338348 | External links | 44.33 |
3 | 1134624 | See also | 21.51 |
4 | 533444 | History | 10.11 |
5 | 283206 | Notes | 5.37 |
6 | 176458 | Career | 3.34 |
7 | 152442 | Biography | 2.89 |
8 | 148218 | Further reading | 2.81 |
9 | 145087 | Track listing | 2.75 |
10 | 122415 | Bibliography | 2.32 |
Zareenf ( talk) 18:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC) (data analyst intern at the Wikimedia Foundation)
Please note that Coral Atkins died on friday 9 december according to Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 13:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
please consider participating at RfC:_characterization_of_Thomas_Szasz [3] Dlabtot ( talk) 08:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Anyone who wishes is invited to participate in an RfC at Template_talk:Infobox_officeholder#RfC:_Should_predecessors_and_successors_be_included_in_officeholders.27_infoboxes.3F about whether predecessors and successors should continue to be part of the infobox officeholder template, and whether it should continue to be general practice to include such data in officeholders' infoboxes. Thanks, Specto73 ( talk) 13:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:You are not irreplaceable, for discussion of merge of WP:You are not irreplaceable and WP:No editor is indispensable. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 20:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Is there a precedent for the use of "our" in an article lead, like what we see in Milky Way? It strikes me as overly conversational, like what you'd see in an encyclopedia for little kids. It's been discussed on the talk page, but I think in this case we should just boldly change it since it appears to go against custom and style guidelines. We don't refer to homo sapiens as "our species" in that article, for example. (See MOS:PERSON.)
The same issue also exists at barred spiral galaxy. St. Clairs fire ( talk) 21:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey survey ends in roughly 90 minutes. Get your votes in if you haven't already! — MusikAnimal talk 22:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
You can see the results here. The list decides what the WMF m:Community Tech team will work on during 2017. / Johan (WMF) ( talk) 13:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Will editors here weigh in on a dispute about the definition of WP:NPOV and its relation to article titles and article content? It's now an RfC; see Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey#RfC: Is use of murder in the text, or use of murder categories, within the article against the WP:NPOV policy?. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I am currently requesting to join the Bot Approval Group, and notification on this page is required. Feel free to comment here if you would like to ask questions or discuss the request. Wugapodes [thɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 23:52, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I am proposing a new sister project, WikiTalk. I invite you to contribute and discuss this. -- George Ho ( talk) 02:39, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Why file moving isn't allowed to regular users? We let them move (almost all) articles, where vandalism would be more visible. And AFAIK, file redirects work as article redirects do - nothing seems to be broken. I can't think of any good reason why. -- Edgars2007 ( talk/ contribs) 16:32, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
A bot approvals group member reconfirmation discussion is now open at Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/Magioladitis 2. Please feel free to review and comment. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 13:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija#Title -- MilanKovacevic ( talk) 14:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
How does this compare to Wikipedias Top 10? Based on https://tools.wmflabs.org/glamtools/treeviews/ See here! -- Atlasowa ( talk) 20:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Note that Patrick Jenkin died on 21 december according to Google. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 13:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
This may not be the right place for this but I thought I would at least start here. I came across the edit history of Victorino Noval Foundation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and it looks like there has been a large back and forth of editing between people who are involved with this institution. It is hard to tell how far back one would need to go get to a stable version. OTOH it might be okay as it is. I have no background in the subject so I an hoping that someone does at that they can tell what is going on. If there is a better place to post this please feel free to move it with thanks. MarnetteD| Talk 01:22, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
I recently created n:British singer George Michael, 53, dies on Wikinews. Now I need your help on expanding it while I will add more sources. -- George Ho ( talk) 10:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
There's an article in a user's sandbox that's been there untouched for more than two years. I have the feeling that the user has abandoned the article. The article has the makings of an excellent contribution to the Wikipedia. However, it needs more inline citations, and I'm willing to take on this task. I've followed the article because it is a subject of much interest to me. Is there anything that Wikipedia administrators, or anyone else, can do about this article? I'd like to see it moved to article space. Here's the link to the users sandbox. I posted a suggestion to the user on his / her talk page sometime ago about this article, without response. Looking forward to ideas on this,.... Nolabob ( talk) 11:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
What id with the Deaths in 2016 on 22 december? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 18:00, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
https://www.bou.or.ug/bou/currency/Reproducing_Currency.html Can me help everbody? I want to upload to commons the images of banknotes of Ugandan shilling.
Szajci
pošta
08:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thank you! :D
Szajci
pošta
18:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I invite anyone to participate in this RfC regarding the Airlines and destinations tables in airport articles. These tables show which airlines fly to an airport, as well as the cities they fly to from the airport. They exist on the perhaps hundreds of airport articles on Wikipedia, so I would like to establish proper consensus on this issue. Regards. — Sunnya343✈ ( háblame • my work) 21:05, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi. How can I propose the deletion of this hoax? It was already deleted in es:WP. See TP and DR in es: for more explanations. Regards. -- Ganímedes ( talk) 10:29, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
I recently received an email that probably was sent from the "email this user" form, but which appears to be an attempt at phishing. The sending address was Mitchel Eshaw <invitations@linkedin.com> The email was nicely formatted, as if is were sent from a form on linkedin. Here is the readable text in the email:
LinkedIn Norwegian Blue Hi Norwegian, I'd like to join your LinkedIn network.
Mitchel Eshaw Financial Planner Austin, Texas Area Accept View profile Unsubscribe | Help You are receiving Invitation emails.
This email was intended for Norwegian Blue (Independent Gambling & Casinos Professional). Learn why we included this. LinkedIn
©2016 LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company, Wilton Plaza, Wilton Place, Dublin 2. LinkedIn is a registered business name of LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company. LinkedIn and the LinkedIn logo are registered trademarks of LinkedIn.
It appears the email has triggered the "This mail was intended for" message (bolded by me), with a link to a warning page about fishing.
I am still confused over how they managed to send the message that appeared to come from the user's linked-in account, by using the "email this user" mechanism.
I assume the sender must have held a Wikipedia account too.
I feel this needs to be reported and possibly looked into, and am starting here!
-- NorwegianBlue talk 00:07, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, ::-- NorwegianBlue talk 23:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Or perhaps it's not a newspaper article. But it is online and could be used in a newspaper. I keep running into the problem of finding a source from Reuters or some other agency or news organization, and I use it, with a URL and a headline, as a reference in an article. I don't always check back to see if the information stayed the same. But occasionally I do, and the same URL gives me a different headline and different content. I would think these news organizations could provide us with a URL that would go back to the previous information, not give us what amounts to a new article. But if they don't, at least one article I contributed heavily to would need "not in citation given" and a replacement source for the information--not once but possibly many times.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Would it be fine for me to register User:Glove as a doppelganger account (and have it redirect to my account) since it is very similar to my name, or would it be too much of a stretch? Also the user that used to be called Glove renamed themselves so they don't use that name anymore. Thank you for any feedback -glove- ( talk) 06:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
When I look at different currency files, I see a number of different, unrelated currencies displayed with the same symbol. Here's an excerpt from the code of Template:Currency symbols, to which I've added the currency names and codepoint, linked to the Unicode page— the same page for all of them:
...
...
And from Currency symbol:
All of these look the same on my screen: the
ruble sign ₽, "U+20BD ₽ RUBLE SIGN (HTML ₽
)".
You can see them in the
screenshot I just made, of part of
Template:Currency symbols. The same is true in
List of circulating currencies and
Currency symbol.
But they are all different codepoints! Click or hover on any of those names or symbols in the list above; the page or snippet includes an image of the symbol, and they're all different. Or copy any of them and do a find for it on this page: you won't score a hit on any of the others. Or look at them on the Unicode site; they're all on the same code page, U20A0.pdf.
I don't know if this is a font problem, or what, and how widespread it is. Maybe I just need to download a more recent font, but I doubt that it's that, because that would mean some real screwup in Unicode that's been fixed since I last got Arial, and I haven't found any discussion of that.
But even if it's in my computer, I'm probably not the only one with this problem. And that would mean it's something we should fix. I'd suggest using a very small rendition of the image file, such as is already done on the Spesmilo page:
Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. -- Thnidu ( talk) 10:09, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
It's less than a day for the New Year's Eve! We still have 3,500 pages in Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/111 dump (Ref after last reference list). Please willing editors join the Force! -- Magioladitis ( talk) 12:51, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
WhatamIdoing I think Bgwhite can answer this. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 21:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
List of countries and capitals with currency and language was deleted after discussion in November 2015. Nonetheless, User:West.andrew.g/Popular redlinks (last updated July 2016) shows it being visited 3,822 times in just seven days.
It is now possible to recreate the page, with a table pulling in all the data from Wikidata, and then to (semi-) protect it to reduce the maintenance burden.
Would anyone object to such a course of action, as preferable to failing those 3,822-per-week visitors? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
The website Sports-reference.com has announced at http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/down.html that "we are shutting down our Olympic site sometime during the early part of 2017."
These pages are used as references on thousands of en.wp biographies of Olympians. In many cases, a Sports-reference.com page is the only ref on a stub.
Is there any bot which can a) trigger the archiving on these pages on archive.org or archive.is, and then update the links to use the archived version? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there a reason for not having a community process to assign the researcher
right? I found
Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Research/Archive 2#RFC: Researcher permission, but it seems relatively disjoint/off-topic. I'm interested because I would like to initiate an RfC to allow this permission to be granted to former administrators who have resigned in good standing, upon request. Rationale is that a some admins aren't interested in performing administrative tasks, but retain the tools so they can view deleted revs. -
FASTILY
03:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Is the article Ribal al-Assad against WP:NPOV? See also: Talk:Ribal al-Assad. Someone translated it into Chinese rigidly and the content does not fit the policy well. Anyway, I think this article need a thorough cleaning.-- Ti ge r ( Talk) 16:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for WP:3RR on this page. I will not keep reverting until the agreement is reached. User:Saifalimam kept adding words like "leading" and "life long opponent" to the article and didn't give an appropriate reason. Such words can be WP:OR or describe the person positively instead of neutrally.-- Ti ge r ( Talk) 23:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I've started a discussion there regarding what seems to be incorrect Rottentomatoes ratings. They've rated season 1 of Ash vs Evil 98%, and season 2 100%. I think there's no ambiguity that, although this series might be good, it's not the greatest master piece of all time as these ratings imply. So I'm suggesting to exercise our discretion as editors and remove these ratings. However it is true that RT's ratings are almost always use in film and series articles and that would set a precedent of editors removing ratings they don't like. Any suggestion of a good course of action here? Are there any precedent of ignoring such a source when it clearly looks like they've messed up? Laurent ( talk) 08:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Editors are invited to a discussion at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 January#New York Daily News. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 19:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Removal of data, and Wikidata, which suggests changes to policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Removal of data, and Wikidata, which suggests changes to policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I have received a message on my talk page from User:JohnCD's (John Deas) son that his father, an administrator here on the English Wikipedia, had a heart attack and died suddenly several days ago.
Donner60 (
talk) 05:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
:Please treat this report as premature and, indeed, probably wrong. I may have been taken in by a fake death news vandal who has been plaguing the project recently. I did not know this, of course, and accepted the report in good faith. I may have been both gullible and insensitive. I hope JohnCD proves to be alright. I will be more wary in the future about postings to my talk page. At least one administrator has been unable to confirm that the report contains the name of an actual person who may be connected with the account. Please accept my sincere apologies. If the report turns out to be right, I assume that someone, possibly me, will confirm it here.
Donner60 (
talk)
12:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
First, please take a look at Janusz Smulko, which is a very good representation of the problem: an article that is written like a resume or curriculum vitae: dates, career progression, publications, nothing more. For many years I thought that we just tag those articles with {{ likeresume}}, but after many years of thinking I know this template, I actually clicked on the link, and to my surprise, it takes us to nothing but WP:COI. Apparently I am not the only person who was misled here, User:Tijfo098 has expressed similar surprise at the template's talk few years back, but of course nobody reads talk of such templates, so I thought I'll bring this issue here.
First issue: I believe that the COI link from this template is misleading. Resume's are not necessarily vanity or COI issues, they are simply an example of bad structure, like articles written mostly as a list instead of a prose, or using more general non-encyclopedic tone ({{ tone}}). Please note that COI page does not even mention the word resume, or CV. Also, this tempalte is listed at Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup between templates {{ manual}} and {{ inappropriate person}}, in the 'style of writing' section. So to summarize: it seems clear to me that the COI link here is wrong and this template should be re-targeted.
Second issue: retargeted where? Do we have any policy which actually talks about bad structure in articles like that? There's WP:NOTCV, but it just goes to WP:NOT, so it is not relevant. Looking at Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup, those template link to policies, guidelines, essays and mainspace articles. Barring anything better, I think simply linking to resume would be better, but if anyone knows of any more relevant essay, part of MoS or such, please say so. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Is humanity really that decent? There is not even one developer among the online masses who is both petty enough and intelligent enough to significantly disrupt Wikipedia?-- pretty IittIe Iiar 00:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Fellow Editors, your input would be appreciated concerning a proposal to change the title of this article. I am posting the RfC here so as to attract the widest range of editors possible. A clear consensus would be invaluable. Your input can help make that happen. Proposed titles & discussion. Thanks for your participation. Veritycheck✔️ ( talk) 02:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
There is currently an RfC on wording about the outcome of the presidential election. [4]. Thanks. SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all
I've created the Wikipedia Photography Club Facebook group to try to engage some of the 100s of Facebook photography groups who have 1000s of members with amazing photos. I would appreciate it if you would join the group so that potential contributors can ask questions. I decided to call it Wikipedia Photography club instead of using the word Commons because it is much more recognisable to people not in the community.
Thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 21:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
The article " Paul Mooney (comedian)" incorrectly has the name "Paul Mooney" italicised. I attempted to use Template:DISPLAYTITLE, and also to move the page, but to no avail. There doesn't seem to be a DISPLAYTITLE template or an Italic title template anywhere in the article's workspace. According to a section on the article's talk page, this has been an issue since at least May 2016 and has not been resolved. – Matthew - ( talk) 04:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
italic title = no
to turn this off. --
John of Reading (
talk)
16:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)I posted a picture I took at the Phoenix portion of the 2017 Women's March. This morning the name of the article has been changed, "Washington D.C." was in the title last night, but my picture is no longer there. More disturbing, when I look in my "Contributions" tab the record of my uploading it no longer exists. Should I assume that this is some sort of wiki censorship, should I re-upload it and see what happens, what should I do? I have plenty of other less loaded images and might just stick one of them in, but I am concerned about the bigger picture. Any thoughts? Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 18:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
I’d like to let everyone know about a job opening for a Community Advocate in the Wikimedia Foundation's Support and Safety team. Please share this announcement with anyone you think might be interested!
What does a CA do? We work on proactive strategies to improve community cultural health (currently focused on reducing incidents of harassment on Wikimedia sites and improving responses to those as they occur), assist the Trust and Safety task force in triaging harassment reports, help colleagues at the Foundation work with contributors, respond to emails from the public, and perform other challenging, interesting tasks. It’s fulfilling, exciting work, and it’s never boring :)
If you or someone you know might be interested, the full job description and details on how to apply can be found here. Kbrown (WMF) ( talk) 16:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a fairly active subreddit called /r/Wikipedia that has lots of subscribers. Anyone know if it's run by the Wikimedia Foundation? -- Ixfd64 ( talk) 19:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Links to URLs within http://whitehouse.gov were broken en masse when the new administration changed the main web site. Wikipedia links to this site in many places because has been the official home for continuing offices and historical documents.
I could not figure out how to fill in links to the official web sites even for major nonpartisan offices such as the OMB, OSTP, and OIRA. Google, Bing, and Wikipedias all have broken links. In the near run we can make do with by replacing these with links to a public archive of the earlier site as it existed three days ago. The content remains almost completely accurate since these agencies are defined by law and have hundreds of staff who remain. Therefore I think this is the thing to do, for the moment, and we'll link to the latest stuff when it becomes clear where it is. See the history of these articles mentioned above for my substitutions today, which are minimal.
It might be possible to make a bot that would do the substitutions. Or maybe we should link to archive.org instead? Or to versions of the same documents at the National Archives?
I'd welcome advice and correction. I'd be happy to launch a specific proposal for a bot or instructions to editors if I knew what and where to do that. I asked a parallel question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Government. -- econterms ( talk) 21:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
http://web.archive.org/web/*/
to the beginning of the web address. The result should be an index page to a number of captures of the web page in question. In my experience, I have found that sometimes the most recent few "captures" are not correctly functional, but give messages saying that the page is inaccessible. In such a case, you can try slightly older captures until you find one that gives the desired result. If the web page in question has never been archived, then it is now too late to obtain a link to an archived copy.Hey all! I'm very curious to discover how many out of all the new users that I've welcomed on enwiki have gone on to become at least semi-active regular editors. I'm thinking the query would go something like this: from all my Contribs, select only those edits where I created a new User_talk page (regardless of the account's actual age), and of those select only the ones where I added a welcome template (out of any within Category:Welcome templates). Then from that report I could separate out only the users with more than 100 edits let's say, and compare it with the number that were basically just throw-away accounts. This way maybe I can somewhat gauge my success rate at recruiting? But also get a sense of the overall effectiveness of using a templated message to welcome new users. Perhaps the WMF already studied something like this in the past I'm not sure, but it would be interesting to find out. So is something like this possible to do? I'm aware there's services like Quarry as well as Wikidata Query and the API but I don't know which of these would be the best to use and I don't know SQL and would like some help/advice please. Thank you! -- œ ™ 10:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I had noticed it was almost 5 1/3 million one day (~1,000 less) and each time I check now it's lower. What size of backtrack in article count growth is considered unusual? Sagittarian Milky Way ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there a thread or some info on this somewhere at Wikipedia? If not, well, this could be it. What do you make of it? Anna F remote ( talk) 01:44, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
User:OwenBlacker mentioned that he uses a customised CSS to make non-English text in English-Wikipedia articles stand out, provided it is correctly marked up. At my request, he has just kindly documented how that works. Perhaps some of you may find it useful. It should work on other Wikipedias, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, I just came across our IPA pronunciation template, which has "'z' in 'Zion'" to explain pronunciation of the phoneme 'Z'. This is used on pages such as Gaza Strip, among others, and seems an unlikely, insensitive and unnecessarily controversial choice of words to use. I've started a discussion here; please comment there. ‑‑ Yodin T 17:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
We have quite an issue with blogspot being cited 1186 times across Wikipedia. I'm assuming that this has been missed because no-one has searched beyond the generic blogspot.com Help needed to purge these sources. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 14:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I hope I am not posting this is the wrong place.
Thanks for your patience, if this is off-topic, or posted in the wrong place ... or something.
The first edit (currently the only edit, ... but, by the time you read this, there might be others -- [including edits by robots] -- so maybe I should say, << the oldest edit >>) of File_talk:Sioux01.png ... see https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File_talk:Sioux01.png&action=history ... was made recently.
Aren't there numerous templates, etc., that belong on a "Talk:" page like that? None of them are present, "yet" (as of the first edit) because, until now, that "File_talk:" page did not exist [yet].
Any advice? ...or other comments? -- Mike Schwartz ( talk) 06:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Documentation needed for Template:Infobox motor. Erkinalp9035 ( talk) 10:22, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Is there a policy against writing a message thanking an editor for making a suggestion in a talk page discussion? Sandcherry and I disagree on this over at Talk:Alcoholic drink. Sandcherry believes this violates WP:NOTFORUM. I think we should be letting editors know their contributions are valued. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewing - Election for 2 coordinators. Nomination period is now open and will run for two weeks followed by a two-week voting period.
See: NPR Coordinators for full details. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 17:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The article " Microbes and man" has a sexist title. We must move it to "microbes and humans". Andreas Mamoukas ( talk) 14:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
There's an anonymous IP who- while they aren't editing that heavily at any given time- is doing so relatively consistently and in a persistently counter-productive manner by removing piping from links.
They've been given numerous warnings but have neither acknowledged them nor changed their behaviour.
Because the behaviour is relatively low-level and spread out, no-one seems that bothered at any given point in time. Ironically, though, it's this that appears to be letting persistent vandalism (*) get "baked into" articles without notice and the user escape sanction.
Any thoughts?
Ubcule ( talk) 19:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello all! At the moment, the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring 20 contractors - 17 strategy coordinators for specialized languages and 3 Metawiki coordinators. I was am posting this on your noticeboard to reach out to any English (or multilingual) Wiki community members who would be both interested in being a part time contractor with us for three months and a good fit for the movement strategy facilitation roles. Even if you are not personally interested in the position, we would appreciate your assistance in encouraging community members to apply, either individually or with local wiki announcements. You can find the Job Description for the position at this page. There is a less-formal description of the tasks they would be working on here on Meta. Kbrown (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
He doth say
I have to disagree with P3 entirely and P4 as useless. P3 ignores all the great IPs who do plenty of work on Wikipedia. I was one such IP before I registered, and I got a talk page due to poor vandal fighting, among other legitimate, good reasons. Any IP who has made a good edit should have been welcomed, and thus they would get a blue linked talk page. I would think that a red-link would = vandalism, as it would indicate a new user. Secondly, this principle is hardly foolproof, as I have found plenty of IPs who were never warned for their vandalism or unconstructive edits or any other of the few hundred legit reasons to start a talk page. Regarding P4, this s mostly true, but is flawed for 2 reasons:
If someone used these commandments as gospel instead of applying their brain bytes, they'll get into a world of fire and hurt for poor vandal fighting. Does anyone else disagree with these 2 principles, or think I'm plumb loco? L3X1 My Complaint Desk 03:05, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Hey all, we just announced that applications for WikiCite 2017 (Vienna 23-25 May, 2017) are open until February 27, 2017. WikiCite 2017 is a 3-day conference, summit and hack day to be hosted in Vienna, Austria, on May 23-25, 2017. It expands efforts started last year with WikiCite 2016 to design a central bibliographic repository , as well as tools and strategies to improve information quality and verifiability in Wikimedia projects. Our goal is to bring together Wikimedia contributors, data modelers, information and library science experts, software engineers, designers and academic researchers who have experience working with citations and bibliographic data in Wikipedia, Wikidata and other Wikimedia projects. For this initiative to be successful, it is critical to get Wikipedia editors working on citations, citation templates and source-related tooling involved: if you match this profile, it would be fantastic to see you in Vienna. Thanks to generous funding from a number of organizations, we'll have (limited) travel funding available: please consider submitting an application if you're interested in contributing. This year's event will be held at the same venue as the Wikimedia Hackathon and we'll be able to accommodate up to 100 participants. If you have any questions you can get in touch with the organizers at: wikicite@wikimedia.org (I don't always respond promptly to pings, this email address is the best way to contact us regarding the event) -- DarTar ( talk) 18:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
This article [1] published by the British newspaper, the Guardian, says a lot about the problems of communicating science to the general public. We would do well to take note of the issues it raises. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 17:33, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
References
However, we at Wikipedia are particularly well equipped to deal with the problems discussed in the article. This is the gist of the problem as defined in the article. After providing a densely packed summary of the science after our knowledge of when dinosaurs lived, it says:
For starters, at 170 words it is way longer than anything people are expected to read and take in from an average museum label. [...] Here’s what it ends up becoming:
The oldest known dinosaur is 230-million-year-old Nyasasaurus parringtoni. Dinosaurs went extinct 66 million years ago.
Which is perfect for a museum label, tagline or press release and comprehensible to most (we won’t quibble about knowing what a dinosaur is or isn’t). However, I hope you can see that it’s also deceptive, belies the ambiguity around “the facts” as presented here and, perhaps most frustratingly (news sites are the worst for this), it doesn’t give readers the source material to go and chase up or query – always supposing that content isn’t hidden behind a journal’s paywall, that is … By not flagging up what we don’t know here, we create a false sense of certainty that’s potentially later undermined by a new analysis, fossil discovery or alternative explanation.
I always say that, for facts, the most important question is "how do we know that this is true?". At Wikipedia, we wouldn't have the problem of the museum label or press tagline; we have tools to overcome those. Verifiability policy guarantees that each stated fact can be tracked back to its source; and internal wikilinks can explain jargon and link to a relevant article, which can provide details that expand and provide context to the provided explanation. Even the {{ citation needed}}, which has become some kind of tagline for people quoting Wikipedia, can point readers that some particular fact should be taken with care and better researched. Diego ( talk) 18:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Today I've found this interesting, somewhat related article: Reddit’s /r/worldnews community used a series of nudges to push users to fact-check suspicious news. On the web all links are created equal, but it looks from that study that signaling the relative reliability of a reference does have a significant effect on readers. Diego ( talk) 13:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Off topic |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Please see here and comment there if interested. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 12:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Gračanica monastery or Gračanica Monastery, what is correct?-- SrpskiAnonimac ( talk) 21:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.
Recognition as a Wikimedia movement affiliate — a chapter, thematic organization, or user group — is a privilege that allows an independent group to officially use the Wikimedia trademarks to further the Wikimedia mission.
The principal Wikimedia movement affiliate in the Hong Kong region is Wikimedia Hong Kong, a Wikimedia chapter recognized in 2008. As a result of Wikimedia Hong Kong’s long-standing non-compliance with reporting requirements, the Wikimedia Foundation and the Affiliations Committee have determined that Wikimedia Hong Kong’s status as a Wikimedia chapter will not be renewed after February 1, 2017.
If you have questions about what this means for the community members in your region or language areas, we have put together a basic FAQ. We also invite you to visit the main Wikimedia movement affiliates page for more information on currently active movement affiliates and more information on the Wikimedia movement affiliates system.
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 16:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Get help
This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.
< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78
I saw WP:FIES quoted in a discussion about edit summaries recently - the shortcut redirects to Help:Edit summary#Always provide an edit summary. The last two letters of the acronym are therefore obvious, but I can't for the life of me guess what FI stands for. Any thoughts? Just curious. Optimist on the run ( talk) 07:55, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I'd prefer WP:ACES Always Complete Edit Summaries. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 08:24, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Not sure what is going on with this page List of automated transit networks suppliers. It appears to be a vandalism, can someone have a look at this page. Thank you. Asiaworldcity ( talk) 17:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Feel free to add User:Anna Frodesiak/Green sandbox to your watchlist. That is how I noticed the Ricky81682 matter. I probably wouldn't have seen the announcement at the ARBCOM noticeboard. Of course, it is not for watching to see if any admins turn to the dark side. I use it for instant notification of vandals angry at admins. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 21:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Is there someone from Pittsburgh here ? who coud help me about this ?
Regards -- Archimëa ( talk) 16:17, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
CNN just reports this: Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page vandalized, replaced with pornographic image.
What happened? The version history of Hillary Clinton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) seems fine. (EDIT:) The talk page has related inquiries. -- bender235 ( talk) 00:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
List of Ambassadors of France to Belgium only contains a table.
I have many things to write about the Embassy of France, Brussels (when it was built, important events that happened there, the services it runs, how ambassadors are chosen, how the embassy has changed in structure and number of employees over time, the history of the building itself, pictures, etc). All properly referenced, of course. The table would become a section of that article, similar to what can be seen at Embassy of Mexico, Washington, D.C..
Can I add this information then rename the article from List of Ambassadors of France to Belgium to Embassy of France, Brussels?
Thanks for your feedback! Syced ( talk) 12:47, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Referring to this help desk question, for some reason Google search results in the past several days have done exactly what the IP wanted. Wikipedia articles appear with just "Wikipedia" not "Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia".— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello
As part of the coming Africa Desbubathon, I proposed that we run a site notice per described here. Short summary: My personal suggestion would be to do it for "Only logged in". And to "Drop editors with low count edit (less than 50)". The destubathon is planned to run about 6 weeks. I would not advise keeping the banner at the top all the time of the campaign ;) It would be nice to have a quick start display in the first part of the campaign for a few days so as to make people know about it (somewhere 15-25 october); and perhaps a reminder mid term (around 7-14 november) and a last push in the final days (25-27 november). Any feedback on this ? Approval, opposition, no opinion ? Thanks :) Anthere ( talk)
Support Agreed with Anthere, at the start, middle reminder and at the end!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:40, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to ask this. A few days ago I wrote the article
alcosynth. It was quickly nominated for deletion. Yesterday, an editor deleted nearly the entire article, which was well sourced. I reverted the edit, but the editor reverted it back. My understanding of
WP:EDITATAFD is that an article under AfD should not be blanked. Anyway, now new editors are commenting on the AfD, and one of them said there is not "enough content to merit a separate article". Well, there was until yesterday. I'm not sure who to appeal to? I don't want to get into an edit war, but by deleting nearly an entire article, it certainly sways an AfD to one side. Thank you for your advise.
Magnolia677 (
talk)
11:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to ask this. A few days ago I wrote the article
alcosynth. It was quickly nominated for deletion. Yesterday, an editor deleted nearly the entire article, which was well sourced. I reverted the edit, but the editor reverted it back. My understanding of
WP:EDITATAFD is that an article under AfD should not be blanked. Anyway, now new editors are commenting on the AfD, and one of them said there is not "enough content to merit a separate article". Well, there was until yesterday. I'm not sure who to appeal to? I don't want to get into an edit war, but by deleting nearly an entire article, it certainly sways an AfD to one side. Thank you for your advise.
Magnolia677 (
talk)
11:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I am Marco Craso from Spanish Wikipedia. I use to speak spanish and german, but my english is not enough good for correcting articles. I want to improve this article: Pedro Muñoz. It has a lot of mistakes, I tried to correct some of them but the article is a disaster, but in the spanish wikipedia is a feature article. I need someone for check it and try to remove the "bad translated tamplete" once and for all. Thanks. -- Marco Craso ( talk) 14:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I am Marco Craso from Spanish Wikipedia. I use to speak spanish and german, but my english is not enough good for correcting articles. I want to improve this article: Pedro Muñoz. It has a lot of mistakes, I tried to correct some of them but the article is a disaster, but in the spanish wikipedia is a feature article. I need someone for check it and try to remove the "bad translated tamplete" once and for all. Thanks. -- Marco Craso ( talk) 14:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
How do they work? Do they leave out any articles? Phil roc My contribs 00:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red is a finalist in the International Telecommunication Union GEM-TECH 2016 awards (Gender Equality and Mainstreaming Policy (GEM)). Has your wikiproject been seleted as a finalist for a UN award this week? No? Ah well... Pertinent links below. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 22:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Move under the draft userspace or user-ify? Not tagging this on the article talk page because I'm not sure how to act on this one. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 22:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red is a finalist in the International Telecommunication Union GEM-TECH 2016 awards (Gender Equality and Mainstreaming Policy (GEM)). Has your wikiproject been seleted as a finalist for a UN award this week? No? Ah well... Pertinent links below. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 22:55, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Move under the draft userspace or user-ify? Not tagging this on the article talk page because I'm not sure how to act on this one. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 22:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I totally disagree with the edits on Buddy Holly template which have been made pretty recently by an user. We have discussed here and we definitely don't agree with it. Could someone give his opinion ? Elfast ( talk) 13:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there a hoax noticeboard? KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 01:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@ KATMAKFORAN: Unless your question is about "should we create a hoax noticeboard if one doesn't exist", then your question probably belongs to Wikipedia:Help desk. As for the question itself, I don't know the answer. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 02:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I totally disagree with the edits on Buddy Holly template which have been made pretty recently by an user. We have discussed here and we definitely don't agree with it. Could someone give his opinion ? Elfast ( talk) 13:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Is there a hoax noticeboard? KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 01:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@ KATMAKFORAN: Unless your question is about "should we create a hoax noticeboard if one doesn't exist", then your question probably belongs to Wikipedia:Help desk. As for the question itself, I don't know the answer. 80.221.159.67 ( talk) 02:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Why are people so uptight about the indents on talk pages all of a sudden???-- Jack Upland ( talk) 09:29, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Washington Post article: " Wikipedia is fixing one of the Internet’s biggest flaws"
"Somehow, despite of all the forces dragging it toward chaos, the site has managed to carve out a space on the Internet where people can have mostly sane, mostly productive conversations that mostly converge to a version of the truth."
— Steve Summit ( talk) 14:25, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear all
Connected Open Heritage (a project aiming to improve information of built heritage in danger) is looking for community input on choosing the official logo. You can submit new logos until 6 November and support the proposed logos until 11 November.
Thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 14:24, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Please see the not-quite-RfC at Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 3#Change "result" parameter to "outcome", on a proposition intended to help avoid misinterpretation of a "just the facts" infobox parameter as being a place for extensive, freeform, subjective cause–effect assertions that may be better handled in well-cited, contextual article prose. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Please someone sort this out. 83.85.143.141 ( talk) 04:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials from:
Expansions
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on
our partners page. Sign up today!
--
The Wikipedia Library Team 18:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
It was taken as a part of a car heat awareness program in Des Moines, but I don't know what exactly is going on in it. Can somebody please tell me? I'm trying to upload the picture to Commons, and it asks for a description. Phil roc My contribs 17:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I have created Wikipedia:No attacks on Wikipedia. I thought some people might like it. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:17, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I recently made a tool that will be interesting to Wikipedians who have a Pebble watch: Diderot, a watchface that shows you the nearest unillustrated Wikipedia article. I've been using it for about a month and a half, and it's been a lot of fun; I took a lot of photographs of places that didn't have photos. It uses a wmflabs tool that filters out articles that have only png or svg, so you can find articles that have a map or logo but not photograph.-- ragesoss ( talk) 22:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Have googled and wikipedia-ed in vain. To what degree are the French, German or other language versions of wikipedia independent? Does the German site ever just translate English Wikipedia articles? Are their articles sometimes or always independently generated in German? I know that there are obvious differences between some English and French Wikipedia articles, but I would like to know what general practice or policy is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.38.9 ( talk) 01:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thanks. That answers my question,--and gives me work since on certain subjects I will feel now that I have to check multiple wikipedias! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.38.9 ( talk) 18:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Reading a BBC article about the US marijuana industry, I encountered the line "At present the Wikipedia entry for Desert Hot Springs does not even mention the trade." It took a great deal of willpower to avoid improving the article with the information "At present this Wikipedia article does not mention the trade in marijuana in Desert Hot Springs", with, of course, a reference to the reliable published source. If I had done that, what guideline would it have broken? Card Zero (talk) 01:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
We have a template for citing the U.S. Congressional Record, {{
USCongRec}}
. We have a template for citing Hansard, {{
Cite Hansard}}
. But we don't have specific templates for most countries, and it's not obvious to me what template would be good to cite the official parliamentary record of a country, or general official government announcements.
In particular, I would like a recommendation for a how to cite a Government Gazette of South Africa item at
http://dnaproject.co.za/new_dna/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GG-NOTICE-26-APRIL-2013.pdf. {{
cite web}}
, {{
cite journal}}
, {{
cite news}}
, and {{
cite magazine}}
all seem inappropriate. {{
cite report}}
is getting a little closer but still seems wrong. Is there a template I've overlooked? Recommendations, anyone? Should we create a new template for items of this sort ... first defining what "this sort" actually means? —
Anomalocaris (
talk)
08:26, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
seems inappropriate;
seems wrong. These are rather vague descriptors. Clearly, the gazette is not news and not a journal and not a magazine so those three can be dismissed. If you are citing the url quoted in your post and not the actual gazette itself,
{{
cite web}}
is acceptable but problematic because the thing being cited has two titles which is not supported by {{cite web}}
. Which leaves:
{{
cite report}}
; you can suppress the (Report) annotation by setting |type=none
{{
citation}}
; you can make it render with the same formatting used in the above mentioned cs1 templates by setting |mode=cs1
Self-nominations for the 2016 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections are officially open. The nomination period runs from Sunday 00:00, 6 November (UTC) until Tuesday 23:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC). Editors interested in running should review the eligibility criteria listed at the top of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates then create a candidate page following the instructions there. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:49, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
For example if a person or clique takes exception to an edit or comment on one article (even if valid) and instead of (or in addition to) responding to that, make an attack on the editor or their contributions on another page? Kinda hard to prove but have the impression it goes on quite a lot? Eversync ( talk) 23:49, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Regarding this thread, is there a written guideline that says that for a biography, a (free-use) photograph is preferred to a (free-use) drawing or painting? I'm sure that in the past I've seen paintings removed from infoboxes on the grounds that photos give an accurate representation, whereas for non-photographic art there is a degree of WP:OR and a possible WP:NPOV violation. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 14:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
I have just noticed that the article on Condom, Gers contains a template inviting translations from the French version of the article. is this not an invitation to use another Wiki as a source, contrary to WP:CIRCULAR?. Britmax ( talk) 16:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
I had a random thought: how about a WP drone photo contest? It would consist of HD images taken from drones for articles that currently have no decent photo, such as a shot of a town or village from altitude. Praemonitus ( talk) 22:12, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
It was about changing eg. List of biggest XXXX in the world --> List of biggest XXXX
I posted at the pump before but more were changed via a Request for Comment at some talk page. I can't seem to find that talk page. Does anyone remember where that was?
Thanks.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I found an account that had been inactive for a while and suddenly had a new edit from an apparent "hacker" that seems to have broken into the account. The hack statement threatened death and stated what is possibly the account holders name. the accounts contribs, the talk page -glove- ( talk) 18:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear all
I'm running a pilot project to import text from UNESCO open access publications into Wikipedia, I'm working with subject matter experts at UNESCO to identify sections of publications that may be suitable, I have also created a simple guide for finding other UNESCO open license publications that may have suitable text. I have done some small tests and found it takes around 2 hours to create a high quality 2000 word article including referencing all the links the publication uses. Please take a look here.
Many thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 17:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear users. A request has opened to decide if apply a Global ban against Marrovi. Other users who have relevant information can participate. Here is the link; You can also review the guidelines here. For the same policies I have to notify in the projects that he participate. Regards. -- Akapochtli ( talk) 01:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear all,
the Wikimedia project
Connected Open Heritage - led by Wikimedia Sverige - is organizing a
photo exhibition aimed at enhancing the importance of the digital preservation of the global cultural heritage. The pictures displayed will not only portray monuments, but they will also tell their stories by showing the transformations they went through because of wars, natural disasters or simply human negligence. Everyone can contribute to the project by suggesting a story concerning a cultural property in danger: the pictures can be uploaded by the 7th of December.
We are looking forward to receive your stories! -- Yiyi ( Dimmi!) 09:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
In English articles, the full list of all available translations is provided under the "Languages" section. However, in other Wikipedias (e.g. Persian, Chinese) only a few languages are listed with the remainder listed under a button named "Other ## Languages". What criteria do languages need to meet in order not to be listed under that category? For example, let's say I want the listed languages for a Persian Wikipedia article to be "Arabic, English, Kurdish, Pashto, Turkish", and then have the "Other ## Languages" button underneath that. The reason I ask is that most Iranian and Afghan Persian Wikipedia users may not be looking for article translations into Finnish for example, but rather into a local language, so moving those languages from the "Other Languages" category to be listed under the main Languages would be better than some of the other options listed under there now. How can that be accomplished? Yilangren ( talk) 18:04, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm curious what other editors think about archiving an article's talk page on a frequent basis. I've noticed that there are quite a few articles out there that have frequent archiving (30 days), but very few comments. While I know that archived content is still accessible, that extra click(s) and digging seems to decrease the likelihood of a legitimate concern or past criticisms from being expanded upon. If the same concern is being raised over and over by different editors, it will not be readily apparent. Am I out to lunch here? Is archiving sometimes used as a way to minimize debate and maximize the likelihood of status quo? I'm considering writing an essay on the subject of archiving, as I don't believe one exists. Any and all comments on archiving would be appreciated. Thanks. Dig Deeper ( talk) 02:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
@ Dig deeper: Be careful chap. You removed the archive quick access template as well when you removed the archiving template from Sugar - X201 ( talk) 09:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi
I'm working on a a new guidance page and would like to put text into simple arrow boxes, something similar to the right hand arrow on the second line of this image. I assume there is away of doing it by adding a .png file with two white arrows and then getting that to display on the right hand edge of the box. Would someone be able to help me? I'm very happy to make the .png if someone can help me make a simple table with a fairly large border on the left hand side to make the text sit nicely and then absolutely no gap between the right hand edge of the table and the .png.
Sorry if this is confusing :)
-- John Cummings ( talk) 20:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Something like this? — Cryptic 20:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I need some editors to test a new editing mode. I'd like to find both people who mostly use the visual editor and people who mostly use one of the old wikitext editors for this. I'm not looking for admins or technical people – just ordinary editors, and new people are fine. Probably most of the people who read this will qualify, but I hope that some of you will think of both yourself and also a promising new editor who might be interested.
Users who want to participate in this testing project must:
If you're interested, or if you think you might know someone who is interested, then please click here to leave a note on my talk page. Thanks for considering it! Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 21:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
In searching online for sources to improve an article I created in 2009, I found a book whose introduction uses three sentences from the article word for word. This is a proper academic book, written by an apparent expert in the field and published by a well-known academic publisher. The book was just published this year, and there is no question that it is using my original wording without attribution. Nonetheless, I want to emphasize that I don't consider this a copyright infringement. They're just three sentences, after all. The only related guidance I've found on Wikipedia seems to be about larger parts of articles copied onto websites. Would it be appropriate to contact the author and/or publisher? I know there are professional codes of ethics against even minor plagiarism like this. I don't want to get anyone in trouble; I'd just rather the book used the author's own words. Or am I taking this too seriously? Ntsimp ( talk) 03:38, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi all, one of the things we try to do with featured articles is get them on the main page when there is a significant birthday or anniversary or somesuch. Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending is a page we have for flagging significant dates for when something might be good to go on the main page (though it still needs a proper nomination down the track). Hence the page just serves as an informal placeholder or reminder for later in the year. Anyhoo, I am sure that a stack of articles listed at Wikipedia:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page will have significant dates that no-one has logged at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending yet. If anyone has some spare time and wants to check these featured articles for sginifcant anniversary or birthdates and place them on the calendar at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending that would be hugely appreciated. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk) has given you a
Turkey! Turkeys promote
WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!
To everyone, I would like to extend the warmest of seasons greetings and wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{ Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
|
I would like to ask if it would be appropriate to create the page List of internet slang acronyms (or simply List of internet acronyms). I was surprised to notice that there is no such list, when this whole encyclopedia is created by the "web fauna", most of them knowing a good number of internet acronyms. — Ark25 ( talk)
Hi everyone. I just came across Template:CGJ, which is still pre-{{ documentation}}. I would change it, but not confident that I can check whether the invisible CGJ character would still be there at the end of the day!
What's more, the example given on only article that it's used on ( Combining Grapheme Joiner) doesn't seem to show any difference for me on Firefox or Chrome – perhaps someone with more knowledge in this area would be able to say whether it's still in use, or if modern browsers have made it unnecessary (is it completely redundant?). Perhaps SVG pictures demonstrating the problem that this character was designed to solve would be better than relying on each browser to try to duplicate this, which would then mean the template could safely be deleted.
Finally, are there any conventions surrounding the use of non-visible characters in wikicode? I seem to remember a bot that checked mainspace articles for them (things like stray RTL characters etc.), but can't find any policy pages. ‑‑ Yodin T 14:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
I've literally been waiting five months for a review; I'm going to be busy for much of December, but apparently, there's no way whatsoever to even ask for a review rather rapidly approaching half a year to be reviewed before someone goes on wikibreak. It's frustrating, to say the least. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 15:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I've noticed that, with many protected edit requests, editors brush them off with a request to be more specific, even if it's reasonably clear what the person wants. It seems to me like an easy way out, but if an editor can't be bothered spending time on the request, why answer it at all? Is there a better way of dealing with these requests?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 00:28, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Everyone get ready. A Wikipedia raid is happening Thursday, December 8th by feminists and the BBC. Constantly check your favorite articles; make sure they stay accurate. I'm not saying that feminism is bad or to revert all changes by feminists, I'm just saying that we'll be seeing a large user influx, which could bring many false edits. AA Quantum ( talk) 22:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I spend almost all my time on-wiki working on featured articles, either writing content or reviewing candidates. There's a MoS discussion, here, that I'd like to post a note about at WT:FAC because a lot of content writers would see it there, and I think it would be good to get more input on this (and other) MoS discussions from experienced content writers. A previous note of mine at WT:FAC on a related MoS discussion was considered by at least one editor, SMcCandlish, to be canvassing, so I asked him how I could leave a neutrally worded notice to let editors at FAC know of the discussion, without running afoul of WP:CANVAS. His response is that any such notice would be canvassing no matter how I worded it: "Quotation formatting is not an intrinsically FA-related subject, so it would be taken as canvassing of a special interest group regardless, by various participants". This doesn't seem to me to be in line with the intent of WP:CANVAS, but I don't want to unilaterally annoy a MoS regular and get into a fight over this. Can I get opinions here on whether it's OK to post the kind of notice I would like to post? Or if in fact SMcCandlish is right that no such notice is possible within the rules? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 13:21, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
'"[D]isagreeing with one person who likes to hang out at WT:MOS", even if it happens consistently, is not actually the same thing as being "anti-MOS".'— That would be true, but a red herring. I'm not talking about people disagreeing with me, I'm talking about at least two distinct proposals at WT:FAC to fork their own style guide against MoS (what could be more anti-MoS that writing an actual Anti-MoS?); demonizing of all the MoS regulars as a group/class by multiple FAC regulars who back each other up in erecting false dichotomies and will brook no disagreement; threats by others in that scene to resign WP editing over not getting their way when wanting to ignore MoS but meeting resistance and/or over those particular editors' continual, escalating fights against those they mischaracterize as MoS editors (who are in fact more often pro-infobox people, infoboxes not being an MoS topic at all); and other patterns of collective and irrational "us versus them", FAC-against-MoS territorial ritualized combat antics, that closely mirror (with considerable individual editorial overlap) similar anti-MoS torch-waving at WT:CITE and (a while back) WT:AT. If I had never even been born, all of this would be continuing exactly as it is now, other than some individual besides me would be the most frequently scapegoated target (probably whoever is next in the stats as the most frequent WP:MOS or WT:MOS editor, or perhaps just whichever one spokes up and didn't still still for being treated like a second-class member of the project by those people).
As for the '"lose" an RfC' comment: just see WP:WINNING, WP:NOTAVOTE, WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY, WP:RFC, etc. The purpose of RfCs is to get input from people who care and have something pertinent to say, after they actually understand whatever is under discussion, with an eye to what is best for the project and its readers; not to rally allies to a cause, to swing a vote based on argument to emotion and reactionary territorialism or proprietary sentiment, which is usually what happens when one pointedly canvasses a wikiproject or other editorial cluster with a known, clearly demonstrated bias with regard to the topic under discussion, especially a bias based on their personal level of control/power over particular pages. Fortunately, this is basically moot, since the discussion in question has archived without resolution. I suggest just forgetting about it. If it re-arises after considerable time has passed, I would trust that everyone's cooled heads will prevail. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 11:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I hope this is the right place to ask why location based pages (towns, counties etc.) have sections on, for example, "History of Wikiville", "Geography of Wikiville", "Sport of Wikiville" but also separate pages in the encyclopedia on exactly the same subjects?
If you are - as I am - trying to pull one of these sites into shape, the double-page just creates extra work, with a lot of sections having to be edited twice, and decisions made as to what goes in the summary section and what goes on the fuller page.
However the real downside is that, over time, individual editors find one page or the other, and make additions, corrections or deletions without editing the other page. So we end up with conflicting information - sometimes quite factual stuff like figures or dates - that conflict between the two pages.
Surely it would be better to decide, either a) we have a full page on Wikiville with all the detailed information on it (if people don't want to read the history or whatever, they can always minimise the section) or, b) we have all the gripping event-by-event history of Wikiville set out on one page, with a simple link to it from the main Wikiville page? User:IanB2 1 December 2016
Having dug around the site a little, I think this issue will affect a very large number of sites indeed. Nevertheless the way the site is currently set up makes life a lot more difficult for editors, and potentially confusing for users.
Hi - thanks for the quick reply. I can see the logic for a topical page, where you don't want all the minutiae of a detailed sub-subject set out on the main page. But my point is that for subjects like "History of Wikiville" - which is essentially a series of discrete events set out over the full span of human history - the logic doesn't really work very well in practice? User:IanB2 1 December 2016
I think the problems are: a) extra work for someone trying to pull a location page into shape, having to double-edit everything, b) individual editors add or change things to one page or the other, but not both, so the two pages grow apart, and occasionally conflict on basic factual details, c) a history - essentially a sequence of discrete events - is not always easy to summarise User:IanB2 1 December 2016
It seems that this new feature (see phab:T135433) will be "tested" on the French WP during one month starting next Monday, and kept if there is no "major objection". Will there be such a thing here on the English WP or has it been discussed somewhere? The answer could help the French WP know what to do about this "test". Oliv0 ( talk) 13:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
For starters, I would like to say that I do apologize if this is the wrong place to put this.
Now, I have twice relisted a move discussion at Talk:Aleksandar Jovanović (footballer, born December 1992). However, shortly after I relisted a second time, a user moved the page, but didn't close the discussion. Now another user has commented and requested a new title, even though the RM is technically "over". I am unsure of what to do; can anyone be of assistance (also note that I am not involved with the article except for the relistings). JudgeRM (talk to me) 16:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
I am developing infoboxes, using Wikidata. For carbon monoxide, I see
My question is: why is Wikidata presented as an internal link? Is that a web-design choice? To me (and probably most Readers), d:Wikidata is an external site. Can someone clarify? - DePiep ( talk) 21:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I will be unavailable until December 14. Usually, I would ask that the encyclopedia be finished by the time I get back, or at least that all the disambiguation links be fixed, but this time I'll be more modest and suggest getting through the list of missing United States state supreme court justices. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
The template: Template:Noinkscape doesn't give any reasoning for why the otherwise wikipedia-endorsed Inkscape is worse than text-editors. It also doesn't explain how editing Inkscape inhibits future use of text-editors. Can anyone help me understand and solve this issue? I imagine that adapting Inkscape could fix this problem. @ Prccy27, Brythones, and Gage: Could people who worked on the 2016 Electoral College map weigh in on this? Thanks! Houdinipeter ( talk) 23:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
<span style="color:#000000;font-weight:normal;font-size:normal;font-family:Liberation Sans,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">Text here</span>
for every single section of text, Inkscape is doing something worse than that). For SacramentoKings.svg specifically, Inkscape's default curve tool only supports editing with
cubic Bézier curve command. If Inkscape detects other curve commands, namely quadratic Bézier curve and elliptical arc curve, upon editing the path, it will instantly convert them to cubic Bézier curve command. The issue with cubic Bézier curve command is that adjusting its control points for creating a perfect circular arc is extremely cumbersome for all the irrational decimals, even if the angles of the entry and exit points are pointing to the cardinal directions. For example, if I want to draw a circular arc from (0,0) to (100,100) clockwise, turning 90 degree and 100px radius, this is what the elliptical arc curve command will look like: A 100,100 0 0,1 100,100
. And this is what cubic Bézier curve command will end up after conversion by Inkscape: C 55.228475,0 100,44.771525 100,100
. --
Sameboat - 同舟 (
talk ·
contri.)
02:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)text-anchor
property ("middle" and "end" respectively) but replacing with translating the text position which almost guarantees poorly positioned text after uploaded to Wikimedia. Because of the
Creative Cloud barricade, that means most of our Ai contributors still stick with the older versions of the vector application and they will never ever receive any update if Adobe finally has decided to improve its support for SVG. In other words, they will be highly tempted to convert all text to outlines before exporting SVG just for neat presentation on Wikimedia but hell for revision and localization. --
Sameboat - 同舟 (
talk ·
contri.)
01:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Is there any way to see the most edited pages by unregistered users? Ionutzmovie ( talk) 18:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
(Posting this here because the WWA talk page is inactive and I wouldn't get an answer there, and this touches a bit on how we define "Wikipedian" to begin with.)
I was looking at the page WP:WWA and I noticed Andysch was listed as "Not active". I assumed (given what he's known for) that he had been an active editor on Wikipedia before leaving to found Conservapedia, but if that's the case it must have been under a different username because that account only made a few edits to our article on Conservapedia (i.e., it was created after Conservapedia had already been founded). I then noticed that a number of other "Not active" accounts were also essentially WP:SPAs that had made accounts to comment on or edit their own articles and had not been active since. Some of them actually are active (Arudoudebito, for instance, takes long breaks from editing but he has posted in 2016). This seems like an odd turn of phrase in that light.
There's a control for this. The Larry Sanger account has only made three edits since 2014 and his last edit that wasn't related to Larry Sanger and Citizendium was long before that, but since he was at one time in the past (until February 2003) a normal Wikipedia editor without an article who edited in other topic areas he is not referred to as "Not active" even though the account has been significantly less active than some of the "Not active" accounts.
Wouldn't referring to accounts that post-date their articles and whose only activity has been related to those articles as "single-purpose accounts" be better than describing them as "not active"? I was initially wondering whether single-purpose accounts (especially long-inactive ones) should be described in the present-tense as "Wikipedians", and whether a better name for the page would be "People with Wikipedia articles who also have confirmed Wikipedia accounts" or something (although I recognize that that's too long).
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 00:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I just noticed that some jazz musicians are lacking any category like " Category:African-American musicians" (for example Eddie Jefferson or Ernie Andrews) and I feel like there are many such articles. Shouldn't they contain such a category? Not all the American jazz musicians were black, and therefore the articles should contain such categories, I think. Is there a better place to raise this question, by the way? — Ark25 ( talk) 00:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I have a question regarding Jean I, Duke of Alençon and Jean II, Duke of Alençon. The two of them have names that differ from the name used in their intro paragraph: "John" is used in the intro whereas "Jean" is used in the title. Is there a reason for the discrepancy? Reversinator ( talk) 04:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I see your pester-power pop-up and am wondering if a different approach might be more amenable. Thinking that something tangible like a desktop logo, not exactly 'I'm a Wikipedophile' but something to sport on the desktop. A badge of sorts, probably the Wiki-world would do it. Maybe it would open Wiki in the browser..maybe
Whatever, Wiki is a brilliant project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.95.1 ( talk) 21:06, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I have offered to help with the WP:BRFA backlog as a bot approver. This procedural notification is to make the community aware that a formal request is open for your consideration. Your input is welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Bot Approvals Group#BAG Nomination: MusikAnimal. Regards — MusikAnimal talk 00:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I've tried to follow the old discussion on findagrave.com, but don't see why (assuming it includes a photo of the gravestone) it isn't considered a reliable source—after all, the birth and death dates are literally carved in stone. The written text may not be reliable insofar as it is not a transcription of what's visible on the stone. In terms of value as an external link the site is of inestimable value to genealogists, and also to people interested in visiting the graves of famous people. Peter Flass ( talk) 13:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
I have just wrapped up a research project which investigates the 100 most frequent article section headings in Wikipedia article pages. Below are the top 10 English section headings, along with the number of English articles each heading appears in at least once, and the total percentage of all English articles it appears in. For more information (including a comparison with frequently used section titles in other languages and a link to the full dataset consisting of all section headings from all articles) and documentation, see the meta page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Investigate_frequency_of_section_titles_in_5_large_Wikipedias
number_of_articles | section_title | article_percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 4125018 | References | 78.19 |
2 | 2338348 | External links | 44.33 |
3 | 1134624 | See also | 21.51 |
4 | 533444 | History | 10.11 |
5 | 283206 | Notes | 5.37 |
6 | 176458 | Career | 3.34 |
7 | 152442 | Biography | 2.89 |
8 | 148218 | Further reading | 2.81 |
9 | 145087 | Track listing | 2.75 |
10 | 122415 | Bibliography | 2.32 |
Zareenf ( talk) 18:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC) (data analyst intern at the Wikimedia Foundation)
Please note that Coral Atkins died on friday 9 december according to Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 13:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
please consider participating at RfC:_characterization_of_Thomas_Szasz [3] Dlabtot ( talk) 08:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Anyone who wishes is invited to participate in an RfC at Template_talk:Infobox_officeholder#RfC:_Should_predecessors_and_successors_be_included_in_officeholders.27_infoboxes.3F about whether predecessors and successors should continue to be part of the infobox officeholder template, and whether it should continue to be general practice to include such data in officeholders' infoboxes. Thanks, Specto73 ( talk) 13:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:You are not irreplaceable, for discussion of merge of WP:You are not irreplaceable and WP:No editor is indispensable. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 20:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Is there a precedent for the use of "our" in an article lead, like what we see in Milky Way? It strikes me as overly conversational, like what you'd see in an encyclopedia for little kids. It's been discussed on the talk page, but I think in this case we should just boldly change it since it appears to go against custom and style guidelines. We don't refer to homo sapiens as "our species" in that article, for example. (See MOS:PERSON.)
The same issue also exists at barred spiral galaxy. St. Clairs fire ( talk) 21:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey survey ends in roughly 90 minutes. Get your votes in if you haven't already! — MusikAnimal talk 22:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
You can see the results here. The list decides what the WMF m:Community Tech team will work on during 2017. / Johan (WMF) ( talk) 13:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Will editors here weigh in on a dispute about the definition of WP:NPOV and its relation to article titles and article content? It's now an RfC; see Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey#RfC: Is use of murder in the text, or use of murder categories, within the article against the WP:NPOV policy?. Flyer22 Reborn ( talk) 01:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I am currently requesting to join the Bot Approval Group, and notification on this page is required. Feel free to comment here if you would like to ask questions or discuss the request. Wugapodes [thɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 23:52, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I am proposing a new sister project, WikiTalk. I invite you to contribute and discuss this. -- George Ho ( talk) 02:39, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Why file moving isn't allowed to regular users? We let them move (almost all) articles, where vandalism would be more visible. And AFAIK, file redirects work as article redirects do - nothing seems to be broken. I can't think of any good reason why. -- Edgars2007 ( talk/ contribs) 16:32, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
A bot approvals group member reconfirmation discussion is now open at Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/Magioladitis 2. Please feel free to review and comment. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 13:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija#Title -- MilanKovacevic ( talk) 14:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
How does this compare to Wikipedias Top 10? Based on https://tools.wmflabs.org/glamtools/treeviews/ See here! -- Atlasowa ( talk) 20:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Note that Patrick Jenkin died on 21 december according to Google. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 13:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
This may not be the right place for this but I thought I would at least start here. I came across the edit history of Victorino Noval Foundation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and it looks like there has been a large back and forth of editing between people who are involved with this institution. It is hard to tell how far back one would need to go get to a stable version. OTOH it might be okay as it is. I have no background in the subject so I an hoping that someone does at that they can tell what is going on. If there is a better place to post this please feel free to move it with thanks. MarnetteD| Talk 01:22, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
I recently created n:British singer George Michael, 53, dies on Wikinews. Now I need your help on expanding it while I will add more sources. -- George Ho ( talk) 10:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
There's an article in a user's sandbox that's been there untouched for more than two years. I have the feeling that the user has abandoned the article. The article has the makings of an excellent contribution to the Wikipedia. However, it needs more inline citations, and I'm willing to take on this task. I've followed the article because it is a subject of much interest to me. Is there anything that Wikipedia administrators, or anyone else, can do about this article? I'd like to see it moved to article space. Here's the link to the users sandbox. I posted a suggestion to the user on his / her talk page sometime ago about this article, without response. Looking forward to ideas on this,.... Nolabob ( talk) 11:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
What id with the Deaths in 2016 on 22 december? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 ( talk) 18:00, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
https://www.bou.or.ug/bou/currency/Reproducing_Currency.html Can me help everbody? I want to upload to commons the images of banknotes of Ugandan shilling.
Szajci
pošta
08:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thank you! :D
Szajci
pošta
18:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I invite anyone to participate in this RfC regarding the Airlines and destinations tables in airport articles. These tables show which airlines fly to an airport, as well as the cities they fly to from the airport. They exist on the perhaps hundreds of airport articles on Wikipedia, so I would like to establish proper consensus on this issue. Regards. — Sunnya343✈ ( háblame • my work) 21:05, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi. How can I propose the deletion of this hoax? It was already deleted in es:WP. See TP and DR in es: for more explanations. Regards. -- Ganímedes ( talk) 10:29, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
I recently received an email that probably was sent from the "email this user" form, but which appears to be an attempt at phishing. The sending address was Mitchel Eshaw <invitations@linkedin.com> The email was nicely formatted, as if is were sent from a form on linkedin. Here is the readable text in the email:
LinkedIn Norwegian Blue Hi Norwegian, I'd like to join your LinkedIn network.
Mitchel Eshaw Financial Planner Austin, Texas Area Accept View profile Unsubscribe | Help You are receiving Invitation emails.
This email was intended for Norwegian Blue (Independent Gambling & Casinos Professional). Learn why we included this. LinkedIn
©2016 LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company, Wilton Plaza, Wilton Place, Dublin 2. LinkedIn is a registered business name of LinkedIn Ireland Unlimited Company. LinkedIn and the LinkedIn logo are registered trademarks of LinkedIn.
It appears the email has triggered the "This mail was intended for" message (bolded by me), with a link to a warning page about fishing.
I am still confused over how they managed to send the message that appeared to come from the user's linked-in account, by using the "email this user" mechanism.
I assume the sender must have held a Wikipedia account too.
I feel this needs to be reported and possibly looked into, and am starting here!
-- NorwegianBlue talk 00:07, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, ::-- NorwegianBlue talk 23:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Or perhaps it's not a newspaper article. But it is online and could be used in a newspaper. I keep running into the problem of finding a source from Reuters or some other agency or news organization, and I use it, with a URL and a headline, as a reference in an article. I don't always check back to see if the information stayed the same. But occasionally I do, and the same URL gives me a different headline and different content. I would think these news organizations could provide us with a URL that would go back to the previous information, not give us what amounts to a new article. But if they don't, at least one article I contributed heavily to would need "not in citation given" and a replacement source for the information--not once but possibly many times.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Would it be fine for me to register User:Glove as a doppelganger account (and have it redirect to my account) since it is very similar to my name, or would it be too much of a stretch? Also the user that used to be called Glove renamed themselves so they don't use that name anymore. Thank you for any feedback -glove- ( talk) 06:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
When I look at different currency files, I see a number of different, unrelated currencies displayed with the same symbol. Here's an excerpt from the code of Template:Currency symbols, to which I've added the currency names and codepoint, linked to the Unicode page— the same page for all of them:
...
...
And from Currency symbol:
All of these look the same on my screen: the
ruble sign ₽, "U+20BD ₽ RUBLE SIGN (HTML ₽
)".
You can see them in the
screenshot I just made, of part of
Template:Currency symbols. The same is true in
List of circulating currencies and
Currency symbol.
But they are all different codepoints! Click or hover on any of those names or symbols in the list above; the page or snippet includes an image of the symbol, and they're all different. Or copy any of them and do a find for it on this page: you won't score a hit on any of the others. Or look at them on the Unicode site; they're all on the same code page, U20A0.pdf.
I don't know if this is a font problem, or what, and how widespread it is. Maybe I just need to download a more recent font, but I doubt that it's that, because that would mean some real screwup in Unicode that's been fixed since I last got Arial, and I haven't found any discussion of that.
But even if it's in my computer, I'm probably not the only one with this problem. And that would mean it's something we should fix. I'd suggest using a very small rendition of the image file, such as is already done on the Spesmilo page:
Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. -- Thnidu ( talk) 10:09, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
It's less than a day for the New Year's Eve! We still have 3,500 pages in Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/111 dump (Ref after last reference list). Please willing editors join the Force! -- Magioladitis ( talk) 12:51, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
WhatamIdoing I think Bgwhite can answer this. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 21:29, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
List of countries and capitals with currency and language was deleted after discussion in November 2015. Nonetheless, User:West.andrew.g/Popular redlinks (last updated July 2016) shows it being visited 3,822 times in just seven days.
It is now possible to recreate the page, with a table pulling in all the data from Wikidata, and then to (semi-) protect it to reduce the maintenance burden.
Would anyone object to such a course of action, as preferable to failing those 3,822-per-week visitors? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
The website Sports-reference.com has announced at http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/down.html that "we are shutting down our Olympic site sometime during the early part of 2017."
These pages are used as references on thousands of en.wp biographies of Olympians. In many cases, a Sports-reference.com page is the only ref on a stub.
Is there any bot which can a) trigger the archiving on these pages on archive.org or archive.is, and then update the links to use the archived version? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there a reason for not having a community process to assign the researcher
right? I found
Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Research/Archive 2#RFC: Researcher permission, but it seems relatively disjoint/off-topic. I'm interested because I would like to initiate an RfC to allow this permission to be granted to former administrators who have resigned in good standing, upon request. Rationale is that a some admins aren't interested in performing administrative tasks, but retain the tools so they can view deleted revs. -
FASTILY
03:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Is the article Ribal al-Assad against WP:NPOV? See also: Talk:Ribal al-Assad. Someone translated it into Chinese rigidly and the content does not fit the policy well. Anyway, I think this article need a thorough cleaning.-- Ti ge r ( Talk) 16:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for WP:3RR on this page. I will not keep reverting until the agreement is reached. User:Saifalimam kept adding words like "leading" and "life long opponent" to the article and didn't give an appropriate reason. Such words can be WP:OR or describe the person positively instead of neutrally.-- Ti ge r ( Talk) 23:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I've started a discussion there regarding what seems to be incorrect Rottentomatoes ratings. They've rated season 1 of Ash vs Evil 98%, and season 2 100%. I think there's no ambiguity that, although this series might be good, it's not the greatest master piece of all time as these ratings imply. So I'm suggesting to exercise our discretion as editors and remove these ratings. However it is true that RT's ratings are almost always use in film and series articles and that would set a precedent of editors removing ratings they don't like. Any suggestion of a good course of action here? Are there any precedent of ignoring such a source when it clearly looks like they've messed up? Laurent ( talk) 08:35, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Editors are invited to a discussion at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 January#New York Daily News. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 19:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Removal of data, and Wikidata, which suggests changes to policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Removal of data, and Wikidata, which suggests changes to policy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I have received a message on my talk page from User:JohnCD's (John Deas) son that his father, an administrator here on the English Wikipedia, had a heart attack and died suddenly several days ago.
Donner60 (
talk) 05:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
:Please treat this report as premature and, indeed, probably wrong. I may have been taken in by a fake death news vandal who has been plaguing the project recently. I did not know this, of course, and accepted the report in good faith. I may have been both gullible and insensitive. I hope JohnCD proves to be alright. I will be more wary in the future about postings to my talk page. At least one administrator has been unable to confirm that the report contains the name of an actual person who may be connected with the account. Please accept my sincere apologies. If the report turns out to be right, I assume that someone, possibly me, will confirm it here.
Donner60 (
talk)
12:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
First, please take a look at Janusz Smulko, which is a very good representation of the problem: an article that is written like a resume or curriculum vitae: dates, career progression, publications, nothing more. For many years I thought that we just tag those articles with {{ likeresume}}, but after many years of thinking I know this template, I actually clicked on the link, and to my surprise, it takes us to nothing but WP:COI. Apparently I am not the only person who was misled here, User:Tijfo098 has expressed similar surprise at the template's talk few years back, but of course nobody reads talk of such templates, so I thought I'll bring this issue here.
First issue: I believe that the COI link from this template is misleading. Resume's are not necessarily vanity or COI issues, they are simply an example of bad structure, like articles written mostly as a list instead of a prose, or using more general non-encyclopedic tone ({{ tone}}). Please note that COI page does not even mention the word resume, or CV. Also, this tempalte is listed at Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup between templates {{ manual}} and {{ inappropriate person}}, in the 'style of writing' section. So to summarize: it seems clear to me that the COI link here is wrong and this template should be re-targeted.
Second issue: retargeted where? Do we have any policy which actually talks about bad structure in articles like that? There's WP:NOTCV, but it just goes to WP:NOT, so it is not relevant. Looking at Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup, those template link to policies, guidelines, essays and mainspace articles. Barring anything better, I think simply linking to resume would be better, but if anyone knows of any more relevant essay, part of MoS or such, please say so. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Is humanity really that decent? There is not even one developer among the online masses who is both petty enough and intelligent enough to significantly disrupt Wikipedia?-- pretty IittIe Iiar 00:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Fellow Editors, your input would be appreciated concerning a proposal to change the title of this article. I am posting the RfC here so as to attract the widest range of editors possible. A clear consensus would be invaluable. Your input can help make that happen. Proposed titles & discussion. Thanks for your participation. Veritycheck✔️ ( talk) 02:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
There is currently an RfC on wording about the outcome of the presidential election. [4]. Thanks. SW3 5DL ( talk) 16:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all
I've created the Wikipedia Photography Club Facebook group to try to engage some of the 100s of Facebook photography groups who have 1000s of members with amazing photos. I would appreciate it if you would join the group so that potential contributors can ask questions. I decided to call it Wikipedia Photography club instead of using the word Commons because it is much more recognisable to people not in the community.
Thanks
-- John Cummings ( talk) 21:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
The article " Paul Mooney (comedian)" incorrectly has the name "Paul Mooney" italicised. I attempted to use Template:DISPLAYTITLE, and also to move the page, but to no avail. There doesn't seem to be a DISPLAYTITLE template or an Italic title template anywhere in the article's workspace. According to a section on the article's talk page, this has been an issue since at least May 2016 and has not been resolved. – Matthew - ( talk) 04:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
italic title = no
to turn this off. --
John of Reading (
talk)
16:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)I posted a picture I took at the Phoenix portion of the 2017 Women's March. This morning the name of the article has been changed, "Washington D.C." was in the title last night, but my picture is no longer there. More disturbing, when I look in my "Contributions" tab the record of my uploading it no longer exists. Should I assume that this is some sort of wiki censorship, should I re-upload it and see what happens, what should I do? I have plenty of other less loaded images and might just stick one of them in, but I am concerned about the bigger picture. Any thoughts? Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 18:10, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
I’d like to let everyone know about a job opening for a Community Advocate in the Wikimedia Foundation's Support and Safety team. Please share this announcement with anyone you think might be interested!
What does a CA do? We work on proactive strategies to improve community cultural health (currently focused on reducing incidents of harassment on Wikimedia sites and improving responses to those as they occur), assist the Trust and Safety task force in triaging harassment reports, help colleagues at the Foundation work with contributors, respond to emails from the public, and perform other challenging, interesting tasks. It’s fulfilling, exciting work, and it’s never boring :)
If you or someone you know might be interested, the full job description and details on how to apply can be found here. Kbrown (WMF) ( talk) 16:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a fairly active subreddit called /r/Wikipedia that has lots of subscribers. Anyone know if it's run by the Wikimedia Foundation? -- Ixfd64 ( talk) 19:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Links to URLs within http://whitehouse.gov were broken en masse when the new administration changed the main web site. Wikipedia links to this site in many places because has been the official home for continuing offices and historical documents.
I could not figure out how to fill in links to the official web sites even for major nonpartisan offices such as the OMB, OSTP, and OIRA. Google, Bing, and Wikipedias all have broken links. In the near run we can make do with by replacing these with links to a public archive of the earlier site as it existed three days ago. The content remains almost completely accurate since these agencies are defined by law and have hundreds of staff who remain. Therefore I think this is the thing to do, for the moment, and we'll link to the latest stuff when it becomes clear where it is. See the history of these articles mentioned above for my substitutions today, which are minimal.
It might be possible to make a bot that would do the substitutions. Or maybe we should link to archive.org instead? Or to versions of the same documents at the National Archives?
I'd welcome advice and correction. I'd be happy to launch a specific proposal for a bot or instructions to editors if I knew what and where to do that. I asked a parallel question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Government. -- econterms ( talk) 21:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
http://web.archive.org/web/*/
to the beginning of the web address. The result should be an index page to a number of captures of the web page in question. In my experience, I have found that sometimes the most recent few "captures" are not correctly functional, but give messages saying that the page is inaccessible. In such a case, you can try slightly older captures until you find one that gives the desired result. If the web page in question has never been archived, then it is now too late to obtain a link to an archived copy.Hey all! I'm very curious to discover how many out of all the new users that I've welcomed on enwiki have gone on to become at least semi-active regular editors. I'm thinking the query would go something like this: from all my Contribs, select only those edits where I created a new User_talk page (regardless of the account's actual age), and of those select only the ones where I added a welcome template (out of any within Category:Welcome templates). Then from that report I could separate out only the users with more than 100 edits let's say, and compare it with the number that were basically just throw-away accounts. This way maybe I can somewhat gauge my success rate at recruiting? But also get a sense of the overall effectiveness of using a templated message to welcome new users. Perhaps the WMF already studied something like this in the past I'm not sure, but it would be interesting to find out. So is something like this possible to do? I'm aware there's services like Quarry as well as Wikidata Query and the API but I don't know which of these would be the best to use and I don't know SQL and would like some help/advice please. Thank you! -- œ ™ 10:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I had noticed it was almost 5 1/3 million one day (~1,000 less) and each time I check now it's lower. What size of backtrack in article count growth is considered unusual? Sagittarian Milky Way ( talk) 20:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there a thread or some info on this somewhere at Wikipedia? If not, well, this could be it. What do you make of it? Anna F remote ( talk) 01:44, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
User:OwenBlacker mentioned that he uses a customised CSS to make non-English text in English-Wikipedia articles stand out, provided it is correctly marked up. At my request, he has just kindly documented how that works. Perhaps some of you may find it useful. It should work on other Wikipedias, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all, I just came across our IPA pronunciation template, which has "'z' in 'Zion'" to explain pronunciation of the phoneme 'Z'. This is used on pages such as Gaza Strip, among others, and seems an unlikely, insensitive and unnecessarily controversial choice of words to use. I've started a discussion here; please comment there. ‑‑ Yodin T 17:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
We have quite an issue with blogspot being cited 1186 times across Wikipedia. I'm assuming that this has been missed because no-one has searched beyond the generic blogspot.com Help needed to purge these sources. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 14:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I hope I am not posting this is the wrong place.
Thanks for your patience, if this is off-topic, or posted in the wrong place ... or something.
The first edit (currently the only edit, ... but, by the time you read this, there might be others -- [including edits by robots] -- so maybe I should say, << the oldest edit >>) of File_talk:Sioux01.png ... see https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File_talk:Sioux01.png&action=history ... was made recently.
Aren't there numerous templates, etc., that belong on a "Talk:" page like that? None of them are present, "yet" (as of the first edit) because, until now, that "File_talk:" page did not exist [yet].
Any advice? ...or other comments? -- Mike Schwartz ( talk) 06:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Documentation needed for Template:Infobox motor. Erkinalp9035 ( talk) 10:22, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Is there a policy against writing a message thanking an editor for making a suggestion in a talk page discussion? Sandcherry and I disagree on this over at Talk:Alcoholic drink. Sandcherry believes this violates WP:NOTFORUM. I think we should be letting editors know their contributions are valued. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewing - Election for 2 coordinators. Nomination period is now open and will run for two weeks followed by a two-week voting period.
See: NPR Coordinators for full details. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 17:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The article " Microbes and man" has a sexist title. We must move it to "microbes and humans". Andreas Mamoukas ( talk) 14:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
There's an anonymous IP who- while they aren't editing that heavily at any given time- is doing so relatively consistently and in a persistently counter-productive manner by removing piping from links.
They've been given numerous warnings but have neither acknowledged them nor changed their behaviour.
Because the behaviour is relatively low-level and spread out, no-one seems that bothered at any given point in time. Ironically, though, it's this that appears to be letting persistent vandalism (*) get "baked into" articles without notice and the user escape sanction.
Any thoughts?
Ubcule ( talk) 19:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello all! At the moment, the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring 20 contractors - 17 strategy coordinators for specialized languages and 3 Metawiki coordinators. I was am posting this on your noticeboard to reach out to any English (or multilingual) Wiki community members who would be both interested in being a part time contractor with us for three months and a good fit for the movement strategy facilitation roles. Even if you are not personally interested in the position, we would appreciate your assistance in encouraging community members to apply, either individually or with local wiki announcements. You can find the Job Description for the position at this page. There is a less-formal description of the tasks they would be working on here on Meta. Kbrown (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
He doth say
I have to disagree with P3 entirely and P4 as useless. P3 ignores all the great IPs who do plenty of work on Wikipedia. I was one such IP before I registered, and I got a talk page due to poor vandal fighting, among other legitimate, good reasons. Any IP who has made a good edit should have been welcomed, and thus they would get a blue linked talk page. I would think that a red-link would = vandalism, as it would indicate a new user. Secondly, this principle is hardly foolproof, as I have found plenty of IPs who were never warned for their vandalism or unconstructive edits or any other of the few hundred legit reasons to start a talk page. Regarding P4, this s mostly true, but is flawed for 2 reasons:
If someone used these commandments as gospel instead of applying their brain bytes, they'll get into a world of fire and hurt for poor vandal fighting. Does anyone else disagree with these 2 principles, or think I'm plumb loco? L3X1 My Complaint Desk 03:05, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Hey all, we just announced that applications for WikiCite 2017 (Vienna 23-25 May, 2017) are open until February 27, 2017. WikiCite 2017 is a 3-day conference, summit and hack day to be hosted in Vienna, Austria, on May 23-25, 2017. It expands efforts started last year with WikiCite 2016 to design a central bibliographic repository , as well as tools and strategies to improve information quality and verifiability in Wikimedia projects. Our goal is to bring together Wikimedia contributors, data modelers, information and library science experts, software engineers, designers and academic researchers who have experience working with citations and bibliographic data in Wikipedia, Wikidata and other Wikimedia projects. For this initiative to be successful, it is critical to get Wikipedia editors working on citations, citation templates and source-related tooling involved: if you match this profile, it would be fantastic to see you in Vienna. Thanks to generous funding from a number of organizations, we'll have (limited) travel funding available: please consider submitting an application if you're interested in contributing. This year's event will be held at the same venue as the Wikimedia Hackathon and we'll be able to accommodate up to 100 participants. If you have any questions you can get in touch with the organizers at: wikicite@wikimedia.org (I don't always respond promptly to pings, this email address is the best way to contact us regarding the event) -- DarTar ( talk) 18:40, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
This article [1] published by the British newspaper, the Guardian, says a lot about the problems of communicating science to the general public. We would do well to take note of the issues it raises. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 17:33, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
References
However, we at Wikipedia are particularly well equipped to deal with the problems discussed in the article. This is the gist of the problem as defined in the article. After providing a densely packed summary of the science after our knowledge of when dinosaurs lived, it says:
For starters, at 170 words it is way longer than anything people are expected to read and take in from an average museum label. [...] Here’s what it ends up becoming:
The oldest known dinosaur is 230-million-year-old Nyasasaurus parringtoni. Dinosaurs went extinct 66 million years ago.
Which is perfect for a museum label, tagline or press release and comprehensible to most (we won’t quibble about knowing what a dinosaur is or isn’t). However, I hope you can see that it’s also deceptive, belies the ambiguity around “the facts” as presented here and, perhaps most frustratingly (news sites are the worst for this), it doesn’t give readers the source material to go and chase up or query – always supposing that content isn’t hidden behind a journal’s paywall, that is … By not flagging up what we don’t know here, we create a false sense of certainty that’s potentially later undermined by a new analysis, fossil discovery or alternative explanation.
I always say that, for facts, the most important question is "how do we know that this is true?". At Wikipedia, we wouldn't have the problem of the museum label or press tagline; we have tools to overcome those. Verifiability policy guarantees that each stated fact can be tracked back to its source; and internal wikilinks can explain jargon and link to a relevant article, which can provide details that expand and provide context to the provided explanation. Even the {{ citation needed}}, which has become some kind of tagline for people quoting Wikipedia, can point readers that some particular fact should be taken with care and better researched. Diego ( talk) 18:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Today I've found this interesting, somewhat related article: Reddit’s /r/worldnews community used a series of nudges to push users to fact-check suspicious news. On the web all links are created equal, but it looks from that study that signaling the relative reliability of a reference does have a significant effect on readers. Diego ( talk) 13:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Off topic |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Please see here and comment there if interested. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 12:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Gračanica monastery or Gračanica Monastery, what is correct?-- SrpskiAnonimac ( talk) 21:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.
Recognition as a Wikimedia movement affiliate — a chapter, thematic organization, or user group — is a privilege that allows an independent group to officially use the Wikimedia trademarks to further the Wikimedia mission.
The principal Wikimedia movement affiliate in the Hong Kong region is Wikimedia Hong Kong, a Wikimedia chapter recognized in 2008. As a result of Wikimedia Hong Kong’s long-standing non-compliance with reporting requirements, the Wikimedia Foundation and the Affiliations Committee have determined that Wikimedia Hong Kong’s status as a Wikimedia chapter will not be renewed after February 1, 2017.
If you have questions about what this means for the community members in your region or language areas, we have put together a basic FAQ. We also invite you to visit the main Wikimedia movement affiliates page for more information on currently active movement affiliates and more information on the Wikimedia movement affiliates system.
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 16:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to other languages. • Get help