Jump to content

User talk:Auntof6/Archives/2022

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year! And welcome to year 2022, Auntof6! Angela Kate Maureen (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Births by time

Hi Auntof6, you created Category:Births by time to replace Category:Births by year. On enwiki, there is a category for births by year, decade and century. I'm just wondering why it was changed here, whether it was the result of a discussion or something. Thank you, --Ferien (talk) 10:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien: Since that category was created 8 years ago, I don't remember if there was a discussion. I might have been thinking to create births-by-decade and births-by-year categories to add here, or there might have been more stuff in this category at some point. It would make sense to me to have the by-decade and by-year categories here, and to make a by-century category as well.
I just noticed that this category was linked to a Wikidata item for births by year, so I unlinked it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, I was just wondering because at this time it's quite a bit different to how it was done on enwiki. --Ferien (talk) 10:40, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Happy New Year; hope it's a good one. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my User talk 19:54, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Portal

Is there no portal in Simple English Wikipedia? If not so, can we create that here? Haoreima (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Haoreima: No, we don't use portals here. We try to keep a lot of things simple on this wiki, not just the language in articles. We have so few editors that portals would be just one more thing to have to take care of. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
The work you do for the Simple Wikipedia is outstanding. You deserve this. Mwiqdoh (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandal

Hello Auntof6, could you please indef block the vandal who I am currently in a war with? Reason is on WP:VIP. Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hockeycatcat Done. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright free item

I want to copy a content from a book that was written in 1908, and almost all copyright free nowadays. It's not to be copied and pasted to the article directly. I can create a userspace like User:Haoreima/Khamba Thoibi. The content is only a few. It's the story portion of the Khamba Thoibi legend in the book "The Meitheis", written by T. C. Hodson. The book is available in the archive.org in many versions including this one. After copied and pasted in my userspace, then I will do all the simplification process to make it suitable for the simple English wiki. For that, I have read en:Wikipedia:Public domain. What do you think it's good? Haoreima (talk) 10:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Haoreima: Sorry for the late reply. I don't feel qualified to advise you on this. It's probably better to ask in a central location where someone more knowledgeable about copyright could see your question. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stub template

Greetings! How to get approval for a new stub template, please? --Bloat22 (talk) 07:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bloat22: Please stand by, I was just leaving you a message about this on your talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Categories

hi @Auntof6, i have a question: you've moved a large number of categories in that case using Flood flag is suggested why didn't you use it? 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sakura emad: I don't remember moving a large number of categories. Can you give me an example of the moves you're referring to? -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 ofc, Today from 9:51 up until 9:54 isn't it more than enough to use flood for that? 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 11:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sakura emad: No, there were only 34 entries. The guideline I was told many years ago was to use the flood flag if you were going to do more than about 100 of the same kind of change. Some people think it should even be more than 100.
By the way, you don't have to ping me on my own talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it's not because of numbers like more than 30 or more than 100 or whatever, it's because we might lose the sight of vandals and important changes that might happen during these changes; (refactored) 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sakura emad: Yes, I understand that. The reasons are 1) people should be able to sort through 100 or so entries and 2) as many changes as possible should be visible in recent changes. A threshold was needed, and the one I always heard was 100. That's not really very many. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
when you're an administrator who have an ability to give flood-flag to themselves whenever they needed, and have an ability to remove it immediately after the work has done, when i say use flood-flag; do you think i asked for much?; it will be reasonable if it were for a normal user; but administrators are an exception;
so Please use flood-flag whenever it needed to be used; by doing that you're helping us to locate and notice vandals much more easier than without flood-flag.
😊 thank you 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sakura emad: I do use it when it's appropriate. It wasn't appropriate here. Even an administrator's changes should be as visible as possible. -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hijacked checking

Hello Auntof6! Is there any tool or technique to check if my wiki user account is hijacked by someone or not? If you know, please tell me. I am urgent! Haoreima (talk) 07:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Haoreima: I don't know of any tool like that. This is really a question that it's better to ask at Simple talk, instead of on an individual user's talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did at the simple talk also. I trust you. So, I put you as my first preference. :) Haoreima (talk) 07:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Already answered at there, hope it works. MathXplore (talk) 07:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

questions, changes and complex/copyedit tag on Graphic violence, COVID-19 pandemic in Minnesota and the Compulsive hoarding page here

Hey Auntof6: Can you please clarify the following I'm asking at these moments:

  • Question 1: On Graphic violence, you changed tends to happen just happen, then removed (some) from in front of the words video game. Are there any reasons for which that was the case?
  • Question 2: Also on Graphic violence, you took out are not limited to. Is that more complex or just not needed?
  • Question 3: On the page COVID-19 pandemic in Minnesota, dating to was changed to as of. And the categories for 2020, 2021 and 2022 in the United States and North America were removed, as were disease-related deaths in Minnesota categories. For what particular reason were these categories unneeded?
  • Question 4: Are there complex terms, words and phrases in the article Compulsive hoarding? If there are, can you please clarify what they are? And I used intellectual interference instead of the ID because the latter was objectifying, as offensive as (and not much better than) MR disability terms before it. People must be vigilant to not offend others of any type, class or category of disability or others.

I've got to always be as specific when it's possible. Or my articles may get deleted and erased. Angela Kate Maureen (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela: Hi, Angela. Just letting you know I saw your questions and will get to them when I can. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean bothering you. But does anyone have official answers for these several questions? It's been slightly over one month since they were all asked. Angela Kate Maureen (talk) 22:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela:

Question 1:
  • I removed "tends to" because it made the sentence less specific and somewhat ambiguous.
  • I removed "(some)" because if you're going to include the qualifier "some", you probably should include it on all the things in the list (movies and TV in addition to video games). Otherwise, it could look like you mean that there is graphic violence in all movies and TV but only in some video games. In addition, a word like that shouldn't be in parentheses.
Question 2:
  • When you say "include", it doesn't imply that the things you list make up the complete list, so "not limited to" is extra verbiage that isn't needed. Part of simple writing is not using words and phrases that aren't needed.
Question 3:
  • I changed "dating to" because "as of" is more likely to be understood by English learners.
  • I removed the year categories because they are covered (or should be) by parent categories of Category:COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.
  • I removed the disease-related deaths category because the article is about the pandemic, not specifically about deaths is caused.
Question 4:
  • There are complex words and phrasing in the article. I could go through it and try to point them out, but is there some way I can help you learn how to do that yourself? One thing you could do it run the text through one of the tools that check reading level. I think we have a list of them somewhere, but I can't find it right now.
  • Where did you hear the term "intellectual interference"? I don't find it anywhere in a search, so it's probably not a term we should use.
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Minorities in Turkey

Hi Auntof6, I notice you deleted Minorities in Turkey when the discussion on keep/deleted had just begun. I started the discussion only yesterday and today it was deleted. I also looked at the criteria for deletion and nowhere on that policy is deletion advocated. Can we please have the article back for a proper consensus and policy observation to be reached before it properly is determined what the outcome should? Thank you.--NadirAli (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NadirAli: What discussion are you talking about? I don't see an RFD. The article was similar to the English Wikipedia version with very little simplification. That qualified it for quick deletion under option WP:QD#A3. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:48, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion on the article talk page. The article did not have an AFD tag but a quick deletion tag. Otherwise I would have commented there. Most of the article used simple English as far as I can see. But if it did not, WP:QD#A3 encourages simplifying the texts. Prior to deleting, I saw a lot of frequent editing on this article, which is clear indication it could do with improvement. If it is to be deleted it, I think we need a discussion on it, including weather or not it contains simplified English, which is what it appeared to me as.--NadirAli (talk) 03:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@NadirAli: There is no actual discussion for articles that are nominated for quick deletion. That's what "quick deletion" means. Adding the {{wait}} template lets you give reasons for not quickly deleting the article, but adding it does not mean that there is a discussion or that the article will not be deleted.
I just looked at the text in the article, and in my opinion there was a lot of text that was not simple. For example, I saw two complex words just in the first sentence (substantial and populace), and there were many long sentences. (Part of writing simple language here is not having long sentences.) It was also clear that it had been directly copied from elsewhere (presumably English Wikipedia) and needed further cleanup for this wiki. One reason is that many (if not all) of the links given for main articles were red links, as were several entries in the "Related pages" section. We usually encourage appropriate red links, but links that specifically say to go elsewhere for more info should not be red.
At this point, I think you have two choices. One is to request a deletion review at WP:Deletion review. The other is to have the article put into a sandbox in your user space so that you can work on it there. The first you can do yourself. Let me know if you would like me to do the second for you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is why I put the {wait} template and posted on the talk page. I did not see any link to an AFD, otherwise I would have left a comment there before anythign else.--NadirAli (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@NadirAli: The {{wait}} template gives you a place to give the admin some information that might affect their decision about deleting. It does not mean there is a discussion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did indeed put that template on the top of the page. Someone might have removed it.--NadirAli (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate articles and deletion policy

Hello, Auntof6. I noticed that you had declined the QD on Diana Lynn Ditan Moreno for "being a duplicate article is not a valid qd option". This may just me being ignorant, but A3 in the Deletion Policy, it deliberately states that "[an article that] has been copied and pasted from another Wikipedia without simplifying complex text" is valid for qd. Am I missing something? Thanks, MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 06:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MrMeAndMrMe: Option A3 applies when an article has been copied from a different Wikipedia, not from here on Simple English Wikipedia. Your QD reason just said duplicate, which I took to mean that it was a duplicate of another article here. What you could do is redirect that page to the other one (the one that I believe is currently at RFD), then if the other article gets deleted this one should, too. Does that help? -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! For reference, I wasn't the one who submitted that to QD, it was griff who submitted it as cleaning up, then someone else who submitted it as A3. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 16:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a deletion

Hey Auntof6, I noticed you deleted User talk:ThisWikiIsEditedByIrresponsibleJerks. If you check the history of the page, that user was renamed and a redirect was left by a global renamer on purpose, so you may want to consider restoring the page again. Thanks, --Ferien (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien: OK, it's restored. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pelé

Just a bot-related heads up. I reverted your bots changes to Pelé along with all other for the last month+ as a lot of issues were buried there. Your bot didnt notice that the article had been partially duplicated. After some vandalism, someone copy/pasted the article over itself 2x. This led the bot to see 2 sets of cats. In its cleanup, it left the double info and (what trigger it for me) a double {{reflist}} tag which caused havok with broken refs. Rather than going line by line weeding it all out, I revert back to TDKR Chicago 101's Dec 9th version. Hopeully that clears it all up. --Creol(talk) 18:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: No problem. Thanks for letting me know. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

these Compulsive hoarding page changes

Are there some reasons for which places in question (or in question) would be changed, followed by refers to becoming is, they hate when changed to not wanting, all the materials changed to things (I was saying materials for the word was much more a specific word, and it's very important to be specific on Simple English) and that includes changed to including (I used that includes because including may not be always appropriate for a particular Simple English Wikipedia topic). Can you please give me some clarifying as to whether or not the original terms were less simple, not as good or not correct for the article's sentences on here? Even when I use the tools, they hardly always tell me whether wording may be simple, complex, not right or not appropriate. Angela Kate Maureen (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My replies:
  • places in question: The phrase from the places in question is not needed. There is nowhere else the people would be removed from, so the wording is simpler if you leave this out.
  • refers to becoming is: When giving the definition of something, it's more straightforward to just say somethings like "X is Y" rather than say "X refers to Y". In addition, refer is a more complex word.
  • they hate when changed to not wanting: Not wanting is simpler, and if you're going to say the people actually hate when this happens, you need a reference. Otherwise, it's a colloquial use of the term hate, which isn't appropriate in an encyclopedia article.
  • all the materials changed to things: Things is a simpler term then materials, and materials might not be a good word to describe all the kinds of things that are hoarded.
  • that includes changed to including: If you start the phrase with that includes, it's a complete sentence and should be written as one. It was instead written as a parenthetical note, so I changed it to a sentence fragment. I actually considered removing the list of specific insects because it isn't really needed, but I ended up leaving it in.
In general, the changes I made were either to make the wording simpler, or to use an encyclopedic tone. (en:WP:Tone might help you understand what encyclopedic tone is, if you'd like more information on that.) A lot of that comes from experience. The tools can help some with complexity, but understanding tone comes from other things. It can come from reading encyclopedia articles (other than Wikipedia's) to see how they phrase things. It can also come from being familiar with business English, because businesses usually use fairly formal tone in communications. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Griff:[...] I think we should keep this and merge the content from Category:The Game of Death[...] 185.167.52.108 (talk) 11:22, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Dear Auntof6, Why did you delete this page?: Bruce Lee: the Mand and the Legend --185.167.52.108 (talk) 00:52, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In Concord Production Inc. this item is missing. Also in Bruce Lee - The Legend (because a follow-up/reworking of this documentary was released in 1984 under the title Bruce Lee, The Legend). --185.167.52.108 (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As indicated in the deletion log, I deleted it because notability was not shown. There was one reference, but it only supported the fact that the film existed, not that it was notable.
By the way, the title is misspelled. It should be man, not mand. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok but in IMDb is mand 185.167.52.108 (talk) 06:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Happy women's day 185.167.52.108 (talk) 07:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to resume the documentary, could you please take the page content for me and transfer it to a sandbox? I would like to add this source, please 185.167.52.108 (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Auntof6, bring me the information of the documentary Bruce Lee: the Man and the Legend on this Sandbox? Please. Thank 185.167.52.108 (talk) 10:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) - That sandbox is used for testing and is cleaned often. Please create an account and we can post it to your user sandbox. Thanks, Griff (talk) 10:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Griff, thank you very much for the information 185.167.52.108 (talk) 11:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Women's Day

Hello Ma'am Auntof6! I wish you a happy Women's Day! Well, thank you for wikifying that article about Mangka. In fact, in the last time I saw it, an anonymous ip added immense information to the article but with extremely bad format, like adding @@@, DD/MM/YY in wrong ways. After all, you did a good upgrade! :-) Haoreima (talk) 07:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cat move

When you get time, could you fire up AWB and move Category:Netflix original shows to "Netflix original series" along with all the attache article to help keep the naming consistant? (Show - noun and verb - 2 sererate meanings- bad, series - noun 1 meaning tho many uses - better) Creol (talk) 20:50, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: No AWB necessary. I'll move the category and use Cat-a-lot to move the contents. Stand by. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Creol: Done. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Creol (talk) 22:18, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Television cat

Back in 2014, you moved cat:Television by country to cat:television by nationality. The problem Im seeing there is that television doesnt have a nationality. Nationality is for people, not things. While television producers would be "by nationality" American/Canadian/Japanese television would be "by country". I can see justifying putting the people in the "by country" grouping as most Japanese television producers would likely be working with Japanese televison so the bulk of the category is correct with a few corner cases who are "a bit off" rather than the entire category being not quite right. Looking cross wiki, en, Spanish and French translate to "by country", German to "by State" which is basically the same. Thoughts? Creol (talk) 04:08, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: I can see I did that because the subcategories have names like "American <foo>", not "<Foo> of the United States." American is a nationality, United States is a country.
As for television not having a nationality, that depends on what you mean by television. Television programming/programs, channels, networks, series, etc. have nationality; it's the nationality of the country where they originate. In addition, I think there is or used to be a guideline saying that demonyms should be used for people and for cultural things, and country names for everything else. I would consider television to be cultural.
That being said, these days I tend to favor the way that Commons does things. They try to avoid using the demonyms at all, so "American television" would be named "Television of the United States" (or in the United States, or whatever), "British television" would be named "Television of the United Kingdom", etc. (Notice that I picked two examples where the demonyms are not similar to the country names.)
I don't think this issue is limited to television. It would be a big project to rename our many categories that use the demonyms to use the country names instead, but I would be willing to work on it. Of course, it should probably be more widely discussed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Demonyms are gernerally ambigious.. American means both "American people / Americans" and "of the United States" depending on what is is applied to. I deal with that constant when linking articles . [[Americans|American]] person vs. [[United States|American]] thing. The real difference there is one is based on citizenship (nationality) while the other is based on a form of attachment / ownership. People are citizens of a county while things belong in some regard to a country. Hense why I lean toward Citizen "by nationality" and things "by country". I just don't see things that cant be citizens being of a nationality espectially creations as a person of Japanese nationality along with 2 Germans, a Russian, a Brit and 3 Americans in Hollywood can create an American movie. The movie is not tied to any nationality of its creation but to the country of its creation (for the most part) The term American is a style then, refering to the country. Creol (talk) 06:45, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rosh Hashana update

Would you consider extending the anno mundi dates past 2022ad/ce/ 5782am. Please? 2600:1700:E1D1:36C0:954C:BCAE:EABE:3E1D (talk) 10:15, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No index

The main reason of having a page tagged with the noindex magic word is to prevent things like google bots from recording them. If you remove the tag from the category listing these pages, the google bots will record the list of pages it is not suppose to be looking at. Kind of defeats the purpose of hiding pages from the bots if you leave the list of those pages out for the bot to look at. That cat needs to not be indexed and as such would be expected to be found on a list of pages not indexed (itself in this case) Creol (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: Thanks for the info, but I don't remember removing the tag from a category. Could you point me to where I did that? Thanks again. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:03, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ok... So Im only going half as crazy as I thougt I was. Heres what happened. I saw this edit on the RC:
21:27 Category:Noindexed pages‎ Nelleka78 talk changes (User:Nelleka78/sandbox added to category, this ...
Did not notice the who or what happened, just the what the category was. Went to the history of the cat and called up the last dif which happened to be you removing the magic word. Didnt notice it was dated back in 2015.. so this post is extreeeeeemely late.. sorry about that. Not exactly certain why it is showing me people being added to categories... I usualy have RC set for questionable new users/ip users anyway and even after that it should not show cat changes either. must have hit a wrong switch somewhere Creol (talk) 00:26, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Game of Death

Your edit to The Game of Death (here) caused mass havok with the references. By moving the {{reflist}} The ref listing basically clears lists all the refs it has seen so far and then clears its list. If it is not placed after all the refs, it shows the first half and ignores anything that comes after it. If a references is linked back to (<ref name=something/> and definition (<ref name=something>A website</ref>) is after the reflist, we get a broken reference. This can happen even if the definition is first, the the reflist and finally the named ref call. Its all a bit chaotic. Even it this is not the case, there will be two ref lists: one created by the tag (with everything is has seen so far) and one generated automatically at the end of the article (with any references generated after the reflist tag).

I went back to the edit before yours, cleaned up the refs some, did a bit of c/e and cleanup in general and tried to resort/rename the sections as you had it. You may want to take a look and see if I missed anything. --Creol(talk) 18:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: Sorry for the havoc, and thanks for the cleanup. I just did a couple of copy edits and put the sections in the standard order. It doesn't look broken now, but let me know if you see any problems. Thanks again. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:19, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Henry VI of England

Per this edit, here's you copy - Wikipedia:Dealing with broken references --Creol(talk) 18:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: Arrgghh! I've pointed the same thing out to people in the past, and now I've made the same mistake! Thanks for the catch and the fix. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I keep a few of the cite categories on my user page so the errors are found quickly that way. Its an easy mistake to make and happens pretty much daily. Thankfully, I have an endless supply of WP: broken refs to hand out as they pop up :) --Creol(talk) 21:57, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra's talk page acess

I'd suggest you revoke MariaAlexandra2001's talk page access, fairly quickly. Had some experience with them at en.wiki. Mako001 (C)  (T)  07:00, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) - The account is now locked, but thanks for the heads up! Griff (talk) 07:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Somatic symptom disorder

It's not usual to have standard flags signed by the editor who puts them up as in talk:Somatic symptom disorder. Still, I think you are better placed to judge this. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Winks

Hey Auntof6, please see the edit history of Harry Winks. Deppty (talk) 20:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Deppty: Please be more specific. The page as it exists now doesn't appear to be vandalism. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks! Deppty (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As it is now, its an en.copy paste with a section deleted from the middle. Same intro, cats, Eternal links. The page was created as vandalism (see its history) and the vandal copied over the en. version of the pages to replace their vandalism. In its current state if fails under qd-a3. Vandal is just trying to game the system. --Creol(talk) 22:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

I have manually reverted multiple trivia segments that you have re-added, saying that people should "incorporate it into the article". I have gone through this and found that none of this information is actually notable, however and so I have deleted it. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 04:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MrMeAndMrMe: That's fine. If there's nothing worth keeping, it's fine to delete it. Did I do that a long time ago? I don't remember doing that recently. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Derpdart removed the trivia in December of 2021, which you re added in February of this year. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 04:37, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

QD

The targets are not copies. they do not exist. The system is showing an echo while reporting the page as an error. In the one case, the user requested the target be deleted. --Creol(talk) 22:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: In the ones I've seen, the user requested that the target be deleted so that the meta user page would appear in its place. To me, the redirects still have value. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As its contested, the broken redirect has been taken to RfD --Creol(talk) 22:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Creol: Noted. I think it would be better to discuss this kind of case in general, since there are a few of them. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello! I created your Talk Page to leave a message: I'm sorry that you reverted the page for Times Square Ball. In this case, I updated the text and make it shorter. Thank you for your cooperation. AVSASPH (talk) 07:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

erasing of The Lady of Rage with not notable by Simple Wikipedia standards

On Simple English, The Lady of Rage was tagged as not notable even though there were several reference citing what the rapper had done listed in the article. Do singers, musicians or actors have to always win a particular award before being added onto Simple English? Angela Kate Maureen Pears 08:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Having reviewed the deleted version of the article, there were not any sources in the article, nor was there any indication that the musician met the MUSIC notability guideline. I have no objection with bringing the article back, but not in its current deleted state. Griff (talk) 08:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right now my HP branded personal laptop is undergoing repairs in the Cedar Rapids cell phone and computer shop at the Lindale Mall for a screen replacing. When it gets out the shop, I'll recreate the page better than it was when it was erased, with an attribution and several references that will prove how notable the rapper iss for Simple English. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 09:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 (change conflict)  @Tropical Storm Angela: There were no references. As for winning certain awards, that is not required as long as there is something that shows notability. Winning notable awards is only one way to do that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking citations

Could you please pay a little more attention when cleaning up.. This] is the second time on two days you broke references by changing the URL on cite template to website. This creates two errors each time. 1. no URL for the reference and 2. Website is now an external link. --Creol(talk) 02:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol: Sorry about that. I'll be more careful, and I'll watch the error category to catch it if I do it again. I fixed Jimi Hendrix. What was the other one I broke? -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't remember which one it was yesterday that I undid. I reverted the change and redid the clean up of the parameters. I also redid and got the other ref error in there. There is still a hidden one, but its a bit harder to weed out. As its a minor issue (abbreviated date range) with little to no impact, I'm not stressing out over it yet. --Creol(talk) 02:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please redirect VESIGN To THE VESIGN

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/VESIGN.

              To 

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/THE_VESIGN

Please redirect here Sir ZQT7128 (talk) 02:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please clarify the following changes on the page just mentioned above?

  • First of all: The area saying these were named somatoform disorders was switched to the second column. Are there any reasons behind this?
  • Second of all: The physical symptoms also suggest injury and illness of different classes was moved up/changed to The symptoms can't be explained by a medical condition or by substance abuse. I thought the earlier was stronger and better in tone on Simple English Wikipedia. Was it not?
  • Third of all: Symptoms may be often similar to other conditions was changed to Symptoms can be similar to other conditions. Is may not really as strong as can or not the proper term?
  • Fourth of all: Male reporters was converted to males. Was the first not the proper term or not simple enough for a page here?
  • Fifth of all: For what particular reason was that sentence about the females (women/girls) more likely to have the disorder compared to males flagged as unsourced even though there were one or two sources?

I know some people who have this condition. I tried to find as many sources as possible. Also, I have to be careful of different words on Simple English compared to the regular English Wikipedia. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 05:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela: Answers:
  1. I assume you mean it was moved to the second paragraph. I did that because it's simpler to just explain the condition in the first paragraph. A reader doesn't need to know what it used to be called to understand what the condition is. It helps English learners to organize information this way, with one idea per paragraph.
  2. I didn't so much change that text as just remove it. To me, it was complex and hard to understand. Saying that symptoms suggest something is medical jargon, and jargon is usually not simple language for our purposes. "Illness of different classes" might not make sense to English learners, because of the multiple meanings of the word class; to most people, the first thing they think of when they hear that word is a class in the sense of education, not in the sense of classification.
  3. It isn't a question of which word is stronger. It's a question of which word is simpler and clearer. Can is simpler and clearer.
  4. The first thing most people would think of when they hear "male reporters" is males whose job is being a journalist of some kind. One of the things needed in simple English is avoiding words that have multiple meanings when you can. In this sense, the word "reporters" isn't needed.
  5. I didn't see a source for the fact about females. However, I see that the reference to The BMJ requires a subscription to see the full article. I don't have a subscription, so I can't see the whole article. If the information about females is in the hidden part of the article, then go ahead and remove the {{cn}} template.
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Childhood category

Hi Auntof6. I noticed that there is both Category:Children and Category:Childhood. Is there a clear distinction between these? For example, Boy is in Childhood but Girl is not. Furthermore, I think some articles in Children like Baby and Toddler might belong in Category:Human life stages. Thanks. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: I see babies and toddlers as being subsets of children. People are children from the time they're born until they become adults. So I don't think that babies and toddlers should be separate life stages.
As for children vs. childhood, I think Category:Children should contain actual children and be a subcat of Category:Childhood. Other things could go under childhood. So there's some work that could be done there. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it makes sense that babies and toddlers can be subsets of children. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cities and towns in Italy

To me, it seems like the categories listed here: Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2022/Category:Cities and towns in Italy are still inconsistent. Do you agree? This wasn't really resolved at the RfD, so a decision should be made if the status quo isn't good enough. Lights and freedom (talk) 08:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: I haven't had a chance to look at it. If I do, I'll get back to you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:46, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indole page question

The word document was reworded into web in one of the page's references. Is document not correct for that particular reference? Angela Kate Maureen Pears 00:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tropical Storm Angela: Template:Cite document redirects to Template:Cite journal. The reference was causing a reference error because there was no parameter for the journal name. I couldn't determine a journal name from the page, so I tried changing it to "Cite web" instead, and the error went away. "Cite document/journal" might be okay, too, if you provide a journal name. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request to return Ali Tajdary article according to Wikipedia rules

Hello, good morning, I created an article titled Ali Tajdary that was previously deleted on Wikipedia, but at that time the article did not mention Ali Tajdary's competitions and had no credible source, but my new article is Ali Tajdari's championship titles. In the field of MMA with reputable Iranian and foreign sources, based on wep MMA , the person who wins the highest title in an organization is famous and Tajdary has won the highest title in WJF and Budo. Please open the article. Check and then revive it if approved, thanksRazeasheghi (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Razeasheghi: If you would like the page restored, please make your request at WP:Deletion review. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Dear Aunto I need your help. MiLanGaoPing (talk) 12:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting MrOllie

Dear Auntof6 I want to report MrOllie from English Wikipedia he's been vandalizing sites and harassing different users can you block him from editing? MiLanGaoPing (talk) 20:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MiLanGaoPing: You need to ask an admin on English Wikipedia. That is separate from this site, which is Simple English Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't he had blocked because I came close to expose him now I can't. MiLanGaoPing (talk) 21:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MiLanGaoPing: I'm sorry, I can't help. You need an admin from the other Wikipedia to help you. I am an admin here, but not on English Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help I can no longer edit on English Wikipedia but you can with your help we can end MrOllie and his Reign of terror for good. MiLanGaoPing (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know any admins? MiLanGaoPing (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're an admin on here can you block MrOllie on here Simple English Wikipedia just in case he follows one of us? MiLanGaoPing (talk) 22:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MiLanGaoPing: No. The user would have to break the rules here before we can block him. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:14, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You Did before a couple years ago. MiLanGaoPing (talk) 23:33, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MiLanGaoPing: I don't know what you're referring to. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But everywhere where a user edit something MrOllie follows that user and harassed him/her. MiLanGaoPing (talk) 02:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Horror film

Dear Auntof6 I have a request for you on English Wikipedia can you split the 2010s to present on the two articles horror film and history of horror films change them into two decades 2010s and 2020s for both articles. 2600:387:C:7136:0:0:0:6 (talk) 14:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, and please stop asking people to do things on English Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BLP and awards

I have a question since I just thought of it. For example, on Joel H. Cohen, I have been listing the awards for the Primetime Emmys for the shows in which he has taken part (either as the writer, producer, co-producer, or executive producer). Would these apply to him as an individual, should they be on The Simpsons page, or are they both ok with a notation of his role in the table on his page? Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 23:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Maybe you could let IMDB be your guide. If it lists the award under his IMDB entry, then it's probably OK to list it on his page here.
I do have another comment. Cohen's article has a section titled "The Simpsons", but that section doesn't indicate why it's in the article for Cohen. It would be good if the section title indicated why the list is there. Maybe something like "Filmography", then indicate in each entry what Cohen's involvement was: whether he was a writer, producer, or something else on each episode. Or if he had the same role on all of them, you could just put a sentence at the top saying something like, "Cohen was a writer on the following The Simpsons episodes." -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Yes. I will also add the other films that he had partaken in. The Simpsons are by far the largest one. IMDB does have them listed under his name, so I will finish putting them up today or tomorrow. Thank you for the advice! PotsdamLamb (talk) 23:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have expanded Joel H. Cohen as much as I can given there is not a lot I can find on him. When you have some time, can you take a look and provide any changes you propose so I can get this one done and move on to another article please?
Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘

@PotsdamLamb: Good work! I did some simplifying. I also changed some Wiktionary links to local links -- it's good to avoid linking to Wiktionary when possible. I have the following other comments:

  • In the Simpsons section, indicate what his involvement was. Otherwise, it's not clear why the list is there. if Cohen was a writer on all of them, you could put a note before the table saying something like "Cohen was a writer on the following episodes of The Simpsons" or "Cohen worked on...". If he didn't have the same role on all of them, you might want to add a column to the table to indicate his role.
  • The detail about Extinct might be better in the article on that movie instead of here.
  • I would combine the other shows/movies and books sections, because there is only one item in each. You could call the section "Other work".
  • The phrase "describes self-reflection himself" doesn't make sense. Maybe it could be reworded in a way that doesn't need a Wiktionary link.
  • Do you have a reference for Cohen having US citizenship? The enwiki article just says he's Canadian. Does he have dual citizenship?

Hope that helps. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:57, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did some simplifying. I also changed some Wiktionary links to local links - I saw that, thank you.
In the Simpsons section, indicate what his involvement was. - I am thinking I can probably eliminate these since most of these he won awards on. There was a gap where he did not write for the nominated episode. How do you suggest I handle that?
The detail about Extinct might be better in the article on that movie instead of here. - So basically just do the basic's with the link to the page on Extinct (2021 movie)?
I would combine the other shows/movies and books sections, because there is only one item in each. You could call the section "Other work". - Got it. Will do that.
The phrase "describes self-reflection himself" doesn't make sense. Maybe it could be reworded in a way that doesn't need a Wiktionary link. - Ok I can work on that.
Do you have a reference for Cohen having US citizenship? The enwiki article just says he's Canadian. Does he have dual citizenship? - Let me see if I can find it again.
Thanks for everything. I will let you know when the changes are implemented. PotsdamLamb (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I implemented them. I decided to eliminate the first table of all episodes he had a part in and just went for the awards and such. I also removed the citizenship info because I could not find it again. Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 21:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: You're welcome -- good work! -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 22:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re-categorize

Could you cat-a-lot Category:19th century establishments in El Salvador and the 20th century version over to Category:19th-century establishments in El Salvador. I forgot the dash when I set it up and don't have cat-a-lot active. Thanks Pure Evil (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pure Evil: Will do in a little while. I'm in the middle of something at the moment. :) -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pure Evil: OK, done. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:08, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number of newlines

Could you remind me of the correct order and number of newlines for: navigation templates, categories, and stub templates at the bottom of a page? Lights and freedom (talk) 04:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Lights and freedom This may help you some User:PotsdamLamb/List of Article Layout PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb That's a great reference, thank you. Lights and freedom (talk) 04:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom, @PotsdamLamb: Note that some of the items on PDL's list should not be used here, many are optional, and some are used here but under a different name. When in doubt, consult the Manual of style. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not really sure how many newlines should be between these things. Lights and freedom (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom: Partial answers, based on what I do, but others' mileage may vary:
  • Zero blank lines between defaultsort and categories
  • Generally 2 blank lines before a stub template. However, since the reason for this is to visually separate the stub template output from any text that precedes it, a single blank line can be enough if the stub template is right after a box of some kind rather than right after text.
  • I usually leave zero blank lines between any of the stuff at the top of an article.
  • One blank line before each heading, zero after.
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 You are more than welcome to update it if you would like. I use that when I’m working on articles. I also believe it only allows the article to have one stub on it. If you add more than one I believe it uses the last one entered. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: If you use two separate stub templates, output from both will be displayed. If you use the multistub template, it displays output from only the first one. In either case, you get the categories for both. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:05, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hhmmmm interesting. I always make sure I select the one that best represents what it is a stub of and if I can’t find that I go to a more generic one. Example an article about Her Majesty I would see if we had a stub for anything that had to do with the royal family in England. If not, then I would put the stub for England on it. Which reminds me I wanted to ask you, if I’m working on a territory I forget the name but it was a base island on Cypress, would that be a stub of England or would that be a stub of something else? I figured England is the safer choice since it is a territory and it uses the English flag and ruled by Her Majesty (sorry if I’m using the wrong terms as I’m American). PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I don't understand what you mean by a base island on Cypress. Even if you mean Cyprus, I don't know what you mean. Cyprus itself is an island, so I don't know how you'd have an island on it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is a military base on Cypress. I’ll follow up with you tomorrow. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK, but as far as I know cypress is a tree and Cyprus is an island country in the Mediterranean Sea. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:57, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Akrotiri and Dhekelia that is the article I was talking about. It’s my next project (I think). PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi does that article help you understand what I was saying? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think so. Do you realize now that "cypress" is not correct here? -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
However it is on the Island of Cypress. That’s what I’m finding and it is under British rule (just those two bases). The actual island appears to be run partly by Turkey and partly by Greece. This article is focusing on the military bases which allowed them control via an agreement. So now I’m confused by your statement of “that cypress is not correct here” lol PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:35, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is on the island of Cyprus, not "cypress". You're misspelling the name of the island. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:37, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lol just like moot vs mute lol. Gotcha yes I see what you mean now. trout Self-whale...for when a trout just isn't enough PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I usually follow enwiki with w:WP:ORDER. --Ferien (talk) 06:01, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien I believe that is where I got it from. I just chopped it down to the section titles without the fluff. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh alright. Thanks --Ferien (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I forgot the subcats count as a category for the minimum 3 pages. That was my bad. Thank you for the correction. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:06, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possible use of AWB

I am wondering if you are able to use AWB on Category:Taxobox articles missing a taxonbar to get the taxonbar added. The caveat is the coding would require the Q id to be brought in as well. The correct format would be {{taxonbar|from=Qxxxxxxx}} with the x's being the number. The Q number is from wikidata. For example https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q516233 would have the code of {{taxonbar|from=Q516233}}. I also need to get the wikispecies on these as well. Right now I am doing all of these by hand, well copy & paste of

  • {{commons}}
  • {{wikispecies}}
  • {{taxonbar|from=Q }}
  • {{authority control}}

There are 3,841 to go yet. Do you think that would be possible with AWB? If not maybe we can make it a project for a month to get them all cleaned up. Oh, if "from=Qxxxx" it throws it into another error category. What are your thoughts on this? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: There might be a way to do that, but I don't know how. Either the Wikidata item number would have to be entered manually (which I'm not interested in doing), or AWB would have to retrieve it somehow (I don't know if that's possible), or there would need to be a magic word of some kind (like CURRENTYEAR) that would insert the Wikidata item number (I don't know of any such magic word), or some other possibility that I'm not thinking of.
The changes I've been making have mostly been identical no matter what article they're in, which is what AWB is best at. The changes you're talking about wouldn't be the same. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:35, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that is what I thought. I could not think of any regex that would pull that either. So this may have to be a manual thing. As far as I know, there is no magic word. Sometimes entering {{#statements|blahblah}} works, but only if the template allows it, which it does not. The template pulls from the module, of which the module needs the from=, from2=, from3=, etc. Oh well. So much for the easy way lol. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ygm

If you can reply please. Griff is saying I should have two from him and I don’t. I get everyone else’s though. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I got your email. I don't remember any incidents such as you mentioned, so don't worry about it. I won't reply because I'm careful about where I spread my email addresses around, but I'll try sending you a new message through the email-this-user function.
By the way, please don't put the ygm template in the heading because it makes the heading be the entire ygm message text. Just put the template in the text under the heading. Thanks. Alternatively, you can use Twinkle to leave ygm messages. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:32, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I got the test email so it has to be something on Griffs end. Griff, can you copy and paste and use the email this user function? That’s the only other thing I think will work. And thanks Auntof6. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Switch RfD to QD

Am I allowed to switch an RfD to a QD? The same article has been created repeatedly and subsequently QD’d. Now they are creating another version called Birmal Hembram(Writer) when Birmal Hembram has been QD’d too many times to count and was set to Autoconfirmed only which expires on the 29th of this month. I originally listed it as QD but the editor claimed notability but still has not proven it and I just got an email the user updated it. I also think the user is a sock but I’m not at my computer to look up anything and I don’t know who created all the other pages. Thanks. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 What are your thoughts on this? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Since there have been other comments on it, I would just leave it as it is. An admin might decide to QD it anyway.
By the way, you don't need to ping people for posts on their talk pages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:58, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ok thanks PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello, Auntof6. You have a new email! Please check it at your convenience.
You can take off this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: A new one, or the one from yesterday. I got the one where you explained what you were talking about, and I'm OK going forward (being deliberately vague here). Have you sent a new one since then? -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Never mind, I just saw the new one. I'm going to reply here, because I prefer to communicate on-wiki rather than offline.
I use only AWB with my bot account. What archive are you referring to -- the one that archives talk pages? That bot doesn't run on a schedule, so if it hasn't run in a while it's not necessarily broken. Contact Djsasso about it if that's what you're referring to. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sassobot runs on his account for archive and I emailed him last week about it. Most of the other pages (i.e. Simple Talk, AN) and my talk page use MiszaBot but they are not archiving per the configs we set. I see yours used Sasso on 6 June. So I am not sure what is going on. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: MiszaBot hasn't run in years. It's all Sassobot now. I thought MiszaBot had been redirected to Sassobot, but I'm not sure. I also remember seeing somewhere that in either case it has to be the first thing on the talk page, which it isn't on your page. If you have any further questions, you might want to take this to Simple talk, where there might be more people who know the details. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I will move it over there. But even on simple there is Wikipedia:Simple talk#Requesting for confirmed account which is signed and meets the parameters :/. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I went back in time to when it was working and copied that code over. For MiszaBot it moved everything to lowercase sigmabot III per EN:User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo which also appears to be broken based on comments lol. I will wait and see how it goes. Thanks! Can I be nephew #7? lol PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I guess you can. All you have to do is get adopted by one of my siblings. But don't look to me for info on how to contact them -- that's for you to figure out. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have enough info to find. *National Missing Aunts Database* lol PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:50, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding TOC to CATS

On maintenance cats, there is always the centered TOC of 0-9, A, B, C, D........ How can I get that on tracking cats like Category:Taxobox articles missing a taxonbar so I can knock out the shorter letters first without going page by page to get to the beginning of the list with that letter? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Can't you just copy the TOC template from a category that has one? I do, however, recommend {{CatAutoTOC}} because it chooses a TOC template based on how many entries are in the category. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:12, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The only ones that have it are maintenance and that is built into the lua module. I did try a few of the TOC examples they said but they didn't work. I will try your suggestion ma'am. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:14, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So that almost works. The only thing I do not like is that it is too granular. I just need the letters A,B,C,D, etc. This shows A, Ab, Ac, Ad, etc. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:16, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: It lists the individual letters at the top of the display. But if you don't like that one, then go to Category:TOC templates and find one you like better. Of course, there's no guarantee that it won't get changed by someone else. I try to use the one I recommended everywhere possible because it self-adjusts. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:23, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I will take a look at those. If you look at Category:Taxobox_articles_missing_a_taxonbar you will see what adding that TOC did. I do not feel that is useful to me. What are your thoughts? Do you think just the first letter is sufficient enough, or do you prefer to see it as granular as it is on just this one page. I am not saying not-valid for other cats. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I saw what it did. Like I said, I prefer using the template that self-adjusts. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah me too lol ok thanks for your input, advice, advise, however you want to take it. BTW, I got the vague of the message from before. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please help me

I think I have it correct, but I would like your input as well since you know this wikipedia better than most (after 13 years I would hope anyways). On User:PotsdamLamb/List_of_Article_Layout I believe I have it right, but it may not be. For example, do we typically want notes and references in the same section or should they be separate and which one goes first. Or should notes go under the table it is related to? I look forward to your assistance with this. I also believe at one point in time we had discussed some of this in our many communications. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I'll tell you what I do based on my understanding, but I've seen things done differently.
Before article content:
  • Tags for QD or RFD go wherever the software puts them near the top of the article. I would usually put them at the very top, partly because they are not permanent and being there makes it easier to deal with them.
  • Sister project boxes go in "end matter", not here. Exactly where they go is a little complicated. I will explain that separately below.
  • Images can go in many different places. They can be near the top, or in a gallery near the bottom, or scattered throughout the article if appropriate and the article is long enough that doing so doesn't make the page look messy.
Article content:
  • The table of contents should be automatic, so we shouldn't have to worry about where it's placed.
  • "See also" should be called "Related pages".
  • With notes, it depends. If there are notes that apply only to a specific table or section, they can go right after the stuff they apply to (sometimes without any header). If the notes apply to things all over the article, there can be a notes section near the end; I would usually put it just before the references section if there is one. You might even have notes in multiple places: targeted notes in specific section(s), and general notes in a section at the end. I've seen notes sections as separate sections on their own, and also underneath the references section. I tend to make them separate.
  • I would usually put galleries right after the body if the images are related to the subject in general. However, if the images are related to a specific section, put it in that section.
End matter:
  • Sister project links usually go in the Other websites section above, if there such a section.
Here is my understanding of where the sister project templates should go. It's based on something I found, but I can't find it right now.
First, there are two kinds of sister project templates: the inline ones, and the ones that display a box. I will discuss the box ones first, because they are preferred and because the inline ones should be used only if the box ones cause issues.
Box-type sister project templates: If there is an "other websites" section, sister project links go at the top of that because the sister projects are not Wikipedia and are therefore considered to be different websites. However, the box-type sister project templates should not be in a section by themselves; if there is nothing else to go in other websites, then these templates go at the top of the last section in the article. (That is what I read, but I never put them in a text section.)
Inline sister link templates: However, after placing any box-type templates, look at the article to see where the output is displayed. If, for example, a long infobox has pushed the output way to the bottom of the article, then I usually use the inline-type templates. These should only be used in an other-websites section, and these can be the only things in that section (unlike the box-type templates). If there is anything else in the other websites section, put the inline templates at the top of other websites. Note that you do not use bullets with these templates, because their output has small images that serve as the equivalent of bullets. An alternative is to use a box-type template and left-justify it (if the specific template allows for that), but I haven't seen that used much.
Examples:
  • Château-Gaillard, Ain is an example of an inline template being the only thing in the other websites section. If a box-type template were used instead, it would appear underneath the infobox, which would make the article visually longer than necessary.
  • Aix-en-Provence is an example of inline sister link templates in an other websites section where there are also other things in the section. Note that if there is more than one inline template, you put a break between them so that they appear on separate lines.
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That does. So I almost had it. I know we do have good and very good articles. Then I did QD and RfD because when you use twinkle or redwarn it always puts it at the top, always above everything regardless of it’s a hatnote, dmy, mdy, etc. Notes and images I was pretty sure I was correct and with images I am in full agreement because some pages are a ton vertical pictures which causes a lot of white space so they would be better in a section of their own if that happens. I saw an article today that had an Infobox with a note attached but note itself was under the references header but it stood out because of the formatting so I was going to play with it and see if it could fit in the notes or did we need a note section. It really does stand out so if there is not a lot of other information, most templates allow a ref to be entered in so that would eliminate the one note and 4 sentences of an article. Thank you. I will make the changes later today to the layout and maybe build a couple test pages with different ideas. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 08:56, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I updated it if you would like to take a look User:PotsdamLamb/List_of_Article_Layout. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 03:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may have missed some of my comments above, but here are my comments on how it looks now:
Before article content:
  • Images: I don't think galleries belong before article content.
Article content:
  • You could clarify your notes about links to other Wikipedias. Is it supposed to be a note about the other websites section? Same question for the note after that about sister project links.
  • You can include sister project links as the only thing in an other-websites section, if they are either inline links or left justified. It's only the standard box-type sister project templates that shouldn't be alone in the section: that's because they appear at the right side of the page.
End matter:
  • Sister links should go above, in article content, because they are included in a section.
-- Auntof6 (talk) 04:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Galleries sometimes go at the top so they go under the Infobox. I’ll look that up and see how it gets programmed as such. As to the others I’ll clarify them. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I've never seen a gallery at the top. Can you point me to an example of that? In any case, things don't have to be at the top to end up under the infobox. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:01, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have moved the conversation to here PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:PotsdamLamb/List_of_Article_Layout has been updated based on how I interpreted your feedback. Please feel free to leave more comments on the talk page for the proposal. Thank you for all of your assistance so far. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Beit

The Beit article should at least have had an RFD. He is a somewhat famous person, and was a leader in an important company, De Beers, and a mentor to an important politician, Cecil Rhodes. Look at the English Wikipedia article on him, he's a marginally relevant person. [[1]] RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 01:11, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 I have to agree with Regretting as there are a lot of authority controls as well for Alfred. He was written about in many books by various authors. ISNI, VIAF, and WorldCat are all correct and he does meet WP:Notability PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb, @RegrettingMistakes777: I didn't feel that the article showed notability. Remember that references alone don't show notability, and neither does having authority control entries. Notability is shown by stating reasons for notability in the text, and must be supported by references. I didn't see that in the article. If you want to contest the deletion, you can go to WP:Deletion review. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks. Will do. @RegrettingMistakes777 Go ahead and submit it to the page. When you have it submitted on the page, go to simple talk and let the community know about the discussion for deletion review. If you need help, please let me know. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Leave at note at ST if you want, but we don't usually notify people about deletion review discussions. People who aren't already involved can't see the content of the page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Also I noticed on WP:Deletion Review it may be confusing to readers. At the top it is says If you think a review of a deletion discussion is needed, please list it here and say why. Users can then comment to reach an agreement on whether the community thinks the discussion was closed correctly, or the decision should be overturned. Each user can say if they want to endorse the closure, or overturn the closure, with a brief comment, and sign with ~~~~. A page should stay listed here for at least 5 to 7 days. After that time, an administrator will decide if there is a consensus (agreement) about what to do, and take appropriate steps. If the consensus was that the discussion was closed correctly, the discussion should be closed with a note saying this.
Can we change it to If you think a review of a deleted article is needed, please list it here and say why. Users can then comment to reach an agreement on whether the community thinks the article was deleted correctly, or if the deletion should be overturned. Each user can say if they want to endorse the deletion, or overturn the deletion, with a brief comment, and sign with ~~~~. A page should stay listed here for at least 5 to 7 days. After that time, an administrator will decide if there is a consensus (agreement) about what to do, and take appropriate steps. If the consensus was that the article was deleted correctly, the discussion should be closed with a note saying this. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry just thought of this based on your comment above. Why could you not put it up for RfD, as would be normal practice? Also, are we not supposed to allow it to be up for a couple of days to be improved (I believe it was you who told me that once)? I know the editor and I were discussing it on the talk pages. I feel you jumped the gun on this as a sole decision without any input and now no one can see what was written at the time except the editor, myself, (both based on memory) and admins (et al). This was not blatant as we were discussing if it should be south Africa or South Africa. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
QD is also a normal practice, especially given that one of the QD options is specifically for lack of notability.
As far as no one being able to see what was written, I quoted the entire text at the deletion review entry so anyone can see it there.
IMO, articles should be in good shape as soon as they are created. If they need to be worked on, that can happen in a user's sandbox. If you want, I can restore the article to a sandbox to be worked on further. Just let me know wants it in their userspace. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
lol you know better than me that never happens. @RegrettingMistakes777 Do you want this in your user space so you can complete it? This way it is not in the main space and I can help you on it there? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes RegrettingMistakes777 (talk) 02:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@RegrettingMistakes777: OK, it's at User:RegrettingMistakes777/Alfred Beit. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:58, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HARV and ENF

Do you think these confuse the simple wiki readers? For example, take the article Iranian peoples. I already converted the top portion to a table instead of the plain vertical list, but the ref's are pretty much bare then add all of the sources. I do not find them simple. Thoughts? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Separator

Hi, on Key lime and a few others, I did inline commons for them since they were short articles. I used the break code because if I did not it was both cats together on one line instead of two separate entries. Do you know of a better way to do this without the html code? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Nope, that's how I do it. A blank between them would work, but I never liked that solution. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I took a look at the article you linked. You don't use the inline templates just because an article is short. You use them if the regular ones cause a formatting problem. In this case, they didn't need to cause a formatting problem, so I changed them and moved them to the section above. Take a look to see what I did. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I had done that to not push the article further down by using the boxes. I thought the inline would look better and I see what you did with putting them in the footnotes section. But I am ok with what you did. I will go back to my others in a bit and fix them the same way. Thank you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A few items

Hey ma’am Auntof6 two three things.

  1. I have been notified by a very high level volunteer that the bots are broken. They suggested manual archival of those pages, as there is no time frame when they will be back and functioning. I would do AN and simple, however, I do not want to overstep my bounds without permission. If I was asked to do it I would find the topics and those with no new comments (based on the dates presented and what the bot is supposed to archive. I would archive the discussion with the proper coding and then cut it from that space and put it on the archive page. If that page is getting long and equals the previous page then I would start a new archive page following the same format.
  2. What is your favorite southern food? I’ve had instant grits and the natural soaking and boiling grits. I prefer the latter of the two with lots of butter.
  3. Would you be able use AWB and pull the articles that have a default sort that match page title exactly or have text {{pagename}} for the defaultsort in it and put that list on a subpage for me, unless you want to match them and remove them otherwise I can go in by hand and get them removed. Thanks! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:32, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: You don't need to "ma'am" me. You don't even know whether I am a "ma'am".
Answers:
  1. What bots are you talking about? Are you sure the bots are broken, and not just not being run? In any case, I'd rather not see you take on a task like I think you're talking about.
  2. I'm not big on talking about personal things here.
  3. Are there pages that have my user name as a defaultsort? How did that happen? I don't know how to find pages that specify the page name itself as a defaultsort, but I could look for ones that user the page name variable. But I wouldn't need AWB to find them. In fact, I don't know how I'd use AWB to do that. I'd just use the advanced search function. I could probably use AWB to remove them once they're found. If you give me exact examples of the defaultsort code you're talking about, I could do the search.
-- Auntof6 (talk) 07:26, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The archive bots. Sorry I didn’t mention those. I asked was speaking with Operator873 on IRC. They said they are broken which is why they haven’t been archiving.
  2. Ok
  3. For an example they would be {{DEFAULTSORT:{{pagename}}}}; however to add to that I have seen other article where the page name is used as the default sort with the page name written out matching the article title but no changes like you mentioned. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 07:37, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 (change conflict)  @PotsdamLamb: Please preview your posts before saving. Your (original) example didn't display because the software interpreted it as a defaultsort to be used for this page. The same happened when you coded the pagename in your original post.
I don't find anything with the string "DEFAULTSORT:pagename" or "DEFAULTSORT:{{pagename}}" (it's easier to search for the string without the brackets). Are you sure that's the exact string you have in mind? Can you point me to a page that has this string? --Auntof6 (talk) 07:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Also, SassoBot ran as recently as June 7. Since it runs manually, that's not an unreasonable time for it not to run. I don't know why Op873 thinks it's broken. (Not saying it isn't, just saying I don't know how you'd tell.) -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That’s funny because I wrapped them in either code or nowiki and that’s how they showed up on my page is as a code box and as the code in a box.
For the archive, should I switch to Sassobot as I’ve always used Miszabot? If you look at Wikipedia:Simple talk#Requesting for confirmed account the last comment was over a month ago but not archived.
For the default sort this was one such article in which you removed it https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/8305737?diffmode=source
I am currently looking at other archiving solutions for my talk page as well at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_archive_bots PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 08:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: For archives, the code you put on your talk page says Miszabot because that was the original bot that did talk page archiving. However, that bot stopped working (I think it was when the user stopped contributing to Wikipedia), so a different bot took over the function and SassoBot does it now. However, SassoBot still looks for the MiszaBot/config code -- it would be disruptive to have to change the configuration code on each talk page. So, no, you don't need to change.
Just so you understand how it works, the MiszaBot/config stuff that gets put on a talk page is there only to give the archiving bot parameters for determining how to archive sections on the page. It could be called anything as long as the bot knew to look for it.
As for alternate archiving bots, I'm sure you realize we might not have all the ones listed at enwiki. You can manually archive your own talk page all you want, of course, and use whatever bot you want there. Just don't do that with pages that aren't yours.
Thanks for the defaultsort example. I didn't find anything before because your example wasn't in the same case (upper vs. lower) as the code on the page. I now find 18 articles that use the pagename variable for defaultsort. I'll take care of them when I'm not working on a mobile device. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK, I have taken care of all those defaultsorts that I could find. If you see others, let me know. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I wanted to ask about one more. If a person is listed as say Queen Elizabeth II, would they get a default sort of Elizabeth II, Queen? I’ve seen a few articles where this was done with those who have titles. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Yes. We try to not include the title as part of the article name, but sometimes it's included. You can see an example of this kind of things in the defaultsort for Queen Victoria. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:20, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that works for me. I saw one earlier that had a very long title about a priest who became a president but it had the titles and their name in it. That is a great example for me to follow. Thank you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:27, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disestablishments in Brazil...

Hello, I closed your RfD as a keep, after it was one month overdue. Perhaps try discussing at a discuussion page. I honestly have to say, that I don't understand why a category (Dis)establishments in ... should not contain pages, and only subcats. Depending on what it is, there may be very few such entities. Eptalon (talk) 09:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon: OK, thanks for letting me know. I'll try to figure out a better way to explain it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Android 1.1

If the article is to be kept, can you at least delete the edits before the "good" version? Please see these revisions:

As I said in the QD notice, the edit history is not worth keeping. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 11:44, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fehufanga: You know, in the past I have been chastised, even threatened with de-adminship, for changing the visibility of edits just because they contained profanity. Apparently profanity isn't considered serious enough. So I must reluctantly decline. However, you may be able to find another admin who is willing to do it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I won't push you to doing it. I regret that you had to go through that, thank you for your help. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 12:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tried

Tried to but they're so arrogant on there. Ğŕèèñuloluź (talk) 23:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ğŕèèñuloluź: That doesn't matter. Discussions here should be for this wiki, not for others. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:51, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You edit on English Wikipedia? Ğŕèèñuloluź (talk) 23:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ğŕèèñuloluź: Sometimes, but I will not help you get edits done there. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Ğŕèèñuloluź I am sorry you feel that way about enWP. Unfortunately no one will cross post on wikis, let alone an admin or higher. We actually have a guideline as we do not know who people are and if someone is blocked or banned we would end up getting blocked or banned as well. You have to ask on that articles talk page. Any questions you have about the articles on enWI need to be directed on their Wikipedia as we are separate and have different ways of doing things. Enjoy your editing time. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:58, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Please stay out of this discussion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I do get a chance to edit it which would be better for the horror film article 1960s-present or 1970s-present? Ğŕèèñuloluź (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ğŕèèñuloluź: Please stop posting about this. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:00, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about foreign language refs

Hi - On Battle of Nicosia Airport, a lot of the references are in a foreign language, which I know is acceptable, however, they do not link them or show where they got them from. I do not know the language being used in it and I could use a translator, but that might not be the correct way to go about it. The other issue is duplicate references to these so I wanted to assign a name to them for cleanup, however, it is back to the barrier. What are your thoughts and recommendations? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:46, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I'm not sure I understand everything you're asking, but here are my thoughts.
References to not have to be on the internet, so they don't have to be linked. The language used looks like Greek, which would make sense since the article is about something related to Greece.
Duplicate references are allowed, although, probably like you, I prefer to used named references to combine them. I'm going to use AWB to get some of them, and I'll update the article shortly.
Did I miss any of your questions? -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:02, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No that is pretty much it. I was using a ref checker to pull all of them up and compare them but they are all pretty close. I searched the library too, since I gave access, and couldn’t find some of them since I don’t know where to start searching with Greek. Thanks for your assistance. It is much appreciated. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:07, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: AWB caught some duplicate references and I found some others -- all of those now use named references. Some of the others look close but have different page numbers. There's a way to combine those, too, and but I didn't do that because I don't like the method used for that. I also made some other minor changes.
As far as the foreign-language titles, you could leave them the way they are. Some citation templates have a "trans-title" parameter that would let you put the English translation of the title if you want. Of course, you'd have to be confident in the translation to do that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:29, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Or maybe the parameter is "trans_title" with an underscore -- anyway, it's something like that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:30, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries I can find some one or something to help with that as I’m not a translator but I know we have a group that does that so I can hop on IRC and ask around. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:35, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

I believe I saw you mass delete some categories earlier today and I wanted to bring to your attention this user who created some CATsSpecial:Contributions/2407:7000:9D91:8541:91FF:6ECA:6F65:C414 to see if they were ok as I know you manage a lot of the category work. Thanks. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:37, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Those deletions were the result of an RFD. There were others also deleted following a similar RFD. I'm not clear on exactly where the people thought the overcategorization was, so I'm not going to process these based on that. If you think they should be deleted, then start an RFD. We might need a larger discussion on what movie categories we should have here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:45, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I just saw the deletion and didn't know about the RfD. I do remember a lot of various conversations about over-cating. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Roads and Notability

I saw you posted that notability does not apply to roads on the RfD you created when you declined the QD. I researched, and while it may not be on simple, it is on enWP in which it says to follow as a guideline, so I feel MathXplore was correct in the QD for notability. Here is the enWP link: EN:Wikipedia:Notability_(highways). If you have something different that shows that "QD option for notability does not apply to roads" I would love to see it please just so I understand more about notability since most is usually about people that we deal with. Thanks. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 03:13, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I didn't say that notability didn't apply. I said "the QD option for notability does not apply to roads". Notability itself, as a general concept, applies to everything. It's only when you want to use the QD option A4, which is the one for notability, that we have to be more specific. That option applies to articles about "people, groups, companies, products, services or websites". I suppose you could stretch the definition and say that a road is a product or service, but I didn't want to stretch the definition. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok. Could we do a custom reason and say notability for roads or something not listed on the A4 list? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 03:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: What do you mean by "a custom reason"? -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: To add just a bit more, we have to be very specific when using the QD options. The option for notability is probably the most contentious one, because people think it's for any notability issue when that's not the case. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:22, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On twinkle we have an option (I believe just above the A codes that’s allows us to enter a custom reason as to why we are nominating the article. I have used it for items not within the scope of what is there and I think notability of items not covered in A4 could be used for these types of reasons. I.e. Non-notable road per blah blah blah. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:09, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Interesting. I don't think I ever noticed that. In any case, even if it's in Twinkle, it's not allowed for in our deletion policy. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slow war editing/POV

So it appears to me that on India there is an edit war/POV going on. An IP will post pictures that I see as valid, then a day or two later a named editor comes in and removes them or changes them to the picture of their choice. I have spoken with Ferien and he stated that the named editor was vandalizing this article at the beginning of the year. I wanted to get your opinion on this, if I may ask please. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 17:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

Auntof6 there's an edit war going on English Wikipedia and I need your help. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you edit on English Wikipedia? Perpsudjalwa (talk) 18:57, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Perpsudjalwa: If you need help with something on English Wikipedia, please ask there and not here. Thank you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:09, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikipedia and I are not speaking right now because of the rednecks who controls it. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's easier if I talk with you on here. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ever since the 2010s and 2020s where merged on the horror film article this Edit War started what can I do? Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:15, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I create a 1890s-1920s, 1930s-1950s, and 1960s-present during after midnight when they're not around maybe it might help right? Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Perpsudjalwa: It might be easier, but I will not help you with this. If you are blocked on English Wikipedia, you should not be disussing it here, either. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I realize MrOllie, NJZombie, or ScottishFinnishRadish don't edit during after midnight or 1 in the morning. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:22, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be blocked much on English Wikipedia much longer I'll to edit on there the right way. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may not help me but you could still support me. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:24, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we keep it a secret. Perpsudjalwa (talk) 19:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Perpsudjalwa: Absolutely not. Please do not leave me any more messages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Horror film

Perpsudjalwa was right you know some of the decades on the horror film article on English Wikipedia should be merged more. 2600:387:15:633:0:0:0:2 (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I borrow your magic wand?

Hi there Auntof6! I was wondering can you run AWB on all articles that use infobox episodes and remove |awards= as awards has been removed from the template on the episodes. I believe it populates the cat Category:Pages using infobox television episode with unknown parameters. I would appreciate it. I have knocked Category:Pages_using_infobox_television_episode_with_incorrectly_formatted_values down from 100 to 78 so far fixing the parameters in the articles, so if you could do this, it is one less change I need to do. I appreciate it and thank you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Sure, no problem. I'll also catch some other unknown parameters that are in use, if any. I need to wrap up something I'm doing offline, then I'll get it set up and work on it.
As for the incorrectly formatted values, are there any where you're seeing the same thing multiple times? With AWB, it can easily do things like remove certain formatting (bold, italics, etc.), move text around, etc., depending on exactly what is needed. Is there anything there you'd like me to use AWB on? -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:35, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well I am not quite sure if all of this can be done by AWB but here ya go:
  1. |title= needs to be removed (but only if it matches the article name)
  2. |season= everything needs to be removed and replaced by just the number towards the end it is usually the |the number]] and only that number can be in there
  3. |awards= has to be removed including anything after it on just that line, but I have not found anything yet that has come after awards=
  4. |prev and |next both need to be wikilinked
  5. All of the following will contain lists and each person needs to be linked (where names are listed):
  • director
  • writer
  • story
  • teleplay
  • narrator
  • presenter
  • producer
  • music
  • photographer
  • editor
  • guests
  • season_article
Hope that helps you out. I will continue manually until you let me know you ran or I see the cat empty out. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FYI for clarity - |season= typically looks like this |season=[[The Simpsons (season 2)|2]] it needs to be turned into |season=2 (no links) Thanks again PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:20, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: My comments:
title
--I can remove if blank; don't know how to retrieve page name to compare
season
--can probably do these if the format is standard ([[showname (season n)|n]] for example), even if I need to do them separately for individual shows
awards
--already removed
prev, next
--maybe
parameters that contain lists
--I think there are too many variations to do these, especially since the values are usually split across lines and aren't always enclosed in a template list plainlist
season_article
--Does this really contain a list?
Even if I had to do some of these manually in AWB, it might be easier than manually without AWB. Tell me which ones you'd like me to try, based on my comments above. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:47, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Title - Can you use the pages in the CAT as the base to remove from?
Season - From what I can tell they are all formatted the same way - Or I can just do manually I just highlight it and type the number and done
For prev/next maybe try what I suggested for Title as the base and wikilink those fields?
Season_article is the wikilink to the seasons main article it [[The Simpsons (season 3)]] but all the ones I am finding are The Simpsons (season 3) PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:55, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Replies:
  • Title: Not sure what you mean
  • Season: AWB has a function to just unlink, but your method is probably just as fast
  • Prev/next: See my comment for title
  • Season_article: OK, so not a list then, so not sure what would need doing here
-- Auntof6 (talk) 05:57, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I'm done removing the awards parameter, as well as a few others I came across. I'll look at your list above to see if I think I can do anything with them. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:30, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I saw some action, but the cat # went up not down, but it was only by 2. The Cartman article was just malformed everywhere so AWB did not do much to it. But thank you for letting me know and thank you for doing that. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 05:45, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
BTW when you are done, you can please import https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_television_episode to our copy so that everything matches please? Thank you in advance. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 06:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to move down here as trying to find where you asked the question was hard to find. The reason being is if you look at the template on both us and en, the parameters have changed, some are removed, additional comments and formatting were added. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 07:42, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I manually copied it over, also included the styles and the one missing LUA so all works as designed now and no issues. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:15, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2 Temp Cats

I created two temp cats to work on an issue with 'The Simpsons" since someone made a template for it and copied things over and did not bring everything over so I am looking to find a fix for them. I will mark them for QD when I am done. Thanks! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:36, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Stub

Just a quick question. If a stub is about an animal/mammal, do I just do the {{stub}} template or how do you like them marked? Examples: Zebra, Raccoon, etc. As I know they have their origins (or uncertain origins) and can be found all over the world. Thank you in advance. (PS Reply works now) PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 18:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I would put them in biology stubs.
Is the reply function working for you today? It's working for me now; I'm using it for this reply. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is (see my PS above ---->^) and ok thanks I will throw them in there. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 18:25, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So another item I need help with

On the sister project links, following EN:Template:Sister_project_links when I try to use the single line with all of the inputs (even flipping auto to on from off) some of them come up not found, they are on the respective sites though. Example is on News - I set it to Zebra, but it doesn't do the search like it is supposed to. Instead it takes you to the main page of Wikinews. I tried putting the link in (like I did above for sister pl) using N:Zebra stripes may 'dazzle' pathogen-packing horse flies, say scientists but it does not work. What are your thoughts on this, as I was trying to do the one combined box instead of multiple ones on the right column. Since I could not get it to work, for now I put it with two sister project boxes. Thanks. Nothing urgent so if you have IRL to do, that is ok. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 18:41, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Can you give me an example of some code that didn't work? -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:13, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure I can do it when I get home. If you just take that template and put it on Zebra where it says auto= put in on then save when you click on the links for each sister project you will see some that work (will have something about zebras) or it will take you to the main page. I would need to do the same thing to grab the errors again. Again I can do it within the hour if you’d like. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I'd rather you do it so I can see exactly what you did. I learned from my years in tech support not to assume I'm correctly interpreting what someone is telling me when they're asking for help. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: It's OK if you save it in the article and then undo your change, because I can find it in the history. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:21, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It’s already in the history I believe. I tend to preview a lot before publication but I believe I did save that one PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:31, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On Zebra PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: On Zebra, all I see is you adding two individual sister link templates: one for Commons and one for Wikispecies. I thought you were asking about using Template:Sister project links.
In any case, the Wikispecies link didn't work because Wikispecies uses scientific names. "Zebra" is a common name, not a scientific name. The issue with Wikispecies links for zebras is that there are multiple species of them, so you can't cover all zebras with just one Wikispecies link. Enwiki doesn't even have a Wikispecies sister link for zebras, maybe for this reason.
If this isn't what you were asking about, let me know. By the way, I'd like to suggest pointing to categories on Commons instead of pointing to galleries. That's because a category will include everything Commons has about a topic. A gallery will include only what someone thought would be good to have in a gallery; that could be anything from a good representation of a topic to just someone's favorite images of it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I guess I only previewed it. I will do it again and save it then revert it so you can see. I will let you know when I am done and point you to the diff. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:37, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok you will see two saves. 1 is just setting auto to yes, the 2nd is setting some of the values but if you look at news, it does not link correctly. I did link a species, as it is a species of Equus which has a few variations so I feel that would be the best for classification. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:28, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: First let me say that I find this template more trouble than it's worth. Other notes:
  • Not all sister projects will have something for the topic. Before saving, check all the links to make sure all the links go to something valid. For those that don't, exclude the links to them.
  • Include sister links only for the exact subject of the article. For example, don't link to Equus for zebras, because it covers more than just zebras.
  • With Wikinews, articles there can go out of date, so it might not be worth linking there at all.
  • With Wikidata, the Wikidata link is always in the left-hand sidebar, so don't worry too much about that one.
HTH. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:55, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I was just going by that template based on our discussion for the article template to try to put them in one box and not numerous ones. But I completely agree. I’ll stick to the singles or online. Thanks PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
HTH? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:16, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: "Hope that helps." -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ok. Lol. Yes it does! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So I found out something a lot easier today after doing some research. For sister links we can actually use {{sister links}} and if say something is not right like commons does not match then we would type in {{sister links|commonscat=yes}} and if nothing is in that section like commons, wikt, etc. you just add the code for it and type no which will not display it like this {{sister links|wikt=no}}. This is much better than the long drawn out one {{Sister project links |1= |author= |auto= |b= |c= |collapsible= |commonscat= |cookbook= |d= |display= |m= |mw= |n= |position= |q= |qid= |s= |species= |species_author= |style= |v= |voy= |wikt= }} lol. It is not documented on the sister links template but I could probably add it I just need to look at everything associated to it before I can try any mockups then propose it on the talk page with a link on simple to the discussion PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:35, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Yes, I knew about that. That "long drawn-out" syntax just shows all the parameters; it doesn't mean you need all of them. I think it's explained better on the doc page on enwiki. You could just copy the enwiki documentation instead of "reinventing the wheel". If you do that, just make sure to adjust the categories, because the template is categorized different on enwiki than it is here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Yeah I didn't know you can do it and just say no, hence why I was playing around with it and was quite surprised it worked lol. Ok I will take care of that soon. It is on my notepad to do. - Thanks! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:45, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AWB Task request

Hello - I know you have this programmed, but I wanted to see if you can run you wand through articles and change == External links == to == Other websites == please? I am seeing this pop up more and more and trying to catch them but with the rate of changes on here I cannot keep up. Thanks! PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:52, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I just did that recently. I do it periodically. I'll look at it again soon. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, thank you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:07, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Just took care of these, but there really weren't very many, only around 30 or so. This isn't something I try to stay on top of on a day-to-day basis. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 No worries and thank you. I tried to catch some today. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:18, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe? Possibly? Highly unlikely?

So on the CAT Category:Webarchive_template_wayback_links the current 22,272 need to be corrected. They are using the Template:Webarchive template wayback links format. The refs need to be re-written to the new format of archiveurl= blah blah blah. Here is one example so you know what I am talking about:

1 Giant Leap - has the coding of:

[http://www.1giantleap.tv 1 Giant Leap Website] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191008054436/http://1giantleap.tv/ |date=2019-10-08 }}

The corrected version, I feel, should be

{{cite web |title=1 Giant Leap Website |url=http://www.1giantleap.tv |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20191008054436/http://1giantleap.tv/ |archivedate=13 July 2022}}

Note: This is the best I could come up with given both the website is a gambling website or whatever and the archived version does not link either. The reason I am bringing this up is because it is in a maint cat requiring attention en masse. I may not have done it the right way in my example but it works and gives the same information. Here is the diff.

Please let me know your thoughts, I would appreciate it. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:50, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, I have reformatted your coding examples for easier reading.
Second, are you asking if this could be automated with AWB? If so, then probably, at least in part. URLs and titles can be very variable so this would be more labor intensive than other things I've done with AWB.
Third, why do these need to be changed? Is there a guideline or something somewhere for formatting links to websites that have been archived. I wouldn't want to undertake such a large project without some basis like that. Keep in mind that just because something is in a tracking category, that doesn't mean it needs to be fixed. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:02, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did not read one of the sentences that states it is to be used for external links only. I did find the tool that populates these as well and tried it but it only pulls up enWP and is not on simple, so this conversation is moot. Sorry about that. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:15, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The RfD

I did not rearrange the users comments, as I did not want to get in trouble for doing so which is why I left them and just added the unsigned template. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: If don't think I said you rearranged the other user's comments. I rearranged them. The only comment I'd have for you about that (which I didn't include there) is 1) the unsigned template should be substituted and 2) it's very helpful if you include the date instead of just the user name. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I don’t know how to do that. I have script but I couldn’t find it. Also I noticed on twinkle we don’t have the option for a username that breaks policy. I needed it the other day and couldn’t find it so I had to look it up and paste it in. Then notified the stewards for global lock (impersonating a person who is admin, cu, steward). Do you know if that is intentional? If so I’ll need to save it and I’ll save the code as a substitute if you send it my tp please. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Btw no you didn’t accuse me it was in your edit comments that you did I was going to but I didn’t want to get in trouble. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Which thing is it you don't know how to do: substitute a template or include the timestamp when using the unsigned template? I'm not sure what the rest of what you said refers to. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The one with time stamp. I used {{unsigned|username}} and for the second part was in regards to your statement above about moving the user comments and joining them. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:25, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: With the unsigned template, the first parameter is the user name and the second parameter is the timestamp. I usually copy it from the page history to make sure the timestamp format is right. If I were leaving one for the post you just made, it would look like one of these:
{{subst:unsigned |PotsdamLamb |00:25, 14 July 2022‎}}
{{subst:unsigned |1=PotsdamLamb |2=00:25, 14 July 2022‎}}
Except that I usually do it like this so I don't have to rearrange the parameters:
{{subst:unsigned |2=00:25, 14 July 2022 |1=PotsdamLamb‎}}
-- Auntof6 (talk) 00:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Ah ok TH. Thanks. I’ll put it in my bucket of tricks. I didn’t know about the second pipe. I usually have a script that’s supposed to do it for me but I couldn’t find it but I’ll look later. Again, thank you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Didn’t mean to ping you on your tp. *I’ll slap myself with a whale* PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:37, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Multistubs

I am also including @Jim Michael 2 in this conversation. So multistub does not show all the stubs put into due to the way the stubs are laid out. Here is one example from enWP. EN:Cristian_Mata shows a stub of This biographical article related to an American soccer forward is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. When you look at the coding for it, the coding is deep in the layout Template:US-footy-forward-stub. I think what we would need to do is link the stubs to a template for these types of things. For example, for Abe, it would be Template:Japan-politician-stub which theoretically would show as This biographical article about a Japanese Politician is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Auntof6 - What are your thoughts on this? I can link the stubs to show those after a few tests to make sure it works. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the multistub template should be changed so that it shows all the stubs, including links to their stub cats. However, a Japanese politician stub cat may be too specific. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jim Michael 2 So it would not be a cat. It would take the stubs you put in multistub and create the appropriate template to apply. So as the example above states in the multistub you put two stubs, it would generate the appropriate template to go on the page and would say what I said (which you repeated). However, we cannot go over 2 because if we do it would break sentence structure and grammar. Sorry I was not clear on that point of pulling from the multistub. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:26, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please DO NOT change the multistub template without a general discussion. It's bad practice to change the way something works without input from those who use it. As for the specific proposed change, I'll repeat what I think I've said elsewhere: if you don't like the way multistub works, then don't use it. I happen to use it because I think it looks sloppy to have multiple stub messages on an article, especially on articles as short the ones here can be.
I'm really not sure what you're talking about. I thought we were talking about the multistub template; it exists only here, but you're giving an example of an article on enwiki. I'm not really following your proposal, either: what do you mean by linking stubs?
You probably know we don't have a Japan politician stub. A new stub type isn't created just by adding it with the multistub template. If that isn't what you meant, then please clarify.
Finally, why is this discussion here instead of on the talk page for the template we're talking about? This kind of discussion should be done more publicly. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FIRST OFF No one said anything about changing the multistub template itself. This is the 2nd time I have said this to you Auntof6 (reference: Talk:Shinzo_Abe#c-Auntof6-20220714195700-PotsdamLamb-20220714193200 the very last line on the discussion. Please read carefully before you start down the path of accusing me of doing something I have zero intention of doing and even stated so.
  1. For further clarification, I thought I was pretty clear. Based on what is put in the multistub, it is possible to auto-generate a template to include both stubs that are in the multistub to create the message as I listed above. I know what stubs we do and do not have. As you made this very, very, very clear to me about a week or two ago. I used the enWP article as an example of what it could say by joining the stubs in the multicat to create the sentence of This biographical article about a Japanese Politician is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. because it would see {{Multistub|Japan|biography}} then it would know how to create the message at the bottom of the article. This has no impact or need for any changes to CATS.
  2. I also stated I would have to play around with it as a test to see if it would work. This is so I have a valid case to present to the community for consensus.
  3. You have said many times to post it on the TP of what it should go to. We have done that before and almost always it is only you and I having the discussion as no one reads those.
  4. What if we had a page to nominate any changes to templates, etc like enWP has for simple as that would generate a lot more readability since you said a while ago not to put it on simple talk (which I have yet to find any policy to say where we can and cannot post potential changes). If we have such a policy, please direct that me to that. Similar to EN:Village pump or EN:Wikipedia:Dashboard?
  5. The reason I posted it here is to get your thoughts and advice on the topic in general, as you are a valued and long term editor and admin with a lot of insight into these types of issues. It is not officially any type of proposal. It is simply gathering thoughts.
Thanks, PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:28, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK. Sorry if I flew off the handle.
As for where to discuss things: I know few people watch templates (and therefore their talk pages), so few people would see a discussion if it took place there. The usual process for this kind of discussion is to have it on the related talk page anyway (so that the record of the discussion is there) and publicize it at Simple talk, which is more likely to be watched. Another option is to discuss at Simple talk, but then the discussion isn't kept with the thing that's being discussed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Thank you for the apology. I can see why you would say to have it on the template talk page, but usually I would do that for articles to discuss opposing views and consensus for said views. I think for anything technical related, we should just have a separate page all around for these discussions and then kinda handle it like an RfD (post if the changes were approved by the community or not and link back to the closed discussion). We can name it 'Simple Tech' :) Then link to it from the home page and such. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:06, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I can see the logic in that, but we try not to have too many different discussion pages. We don't have that many discussions after all. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:26, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At least for now lol. But when you think about it, that would honestly be the best way to get more eyes on the topic and more input from editors as I highly doubt anyone watches TPs of templates or LUAs or anything like that. In all honesty, I think we have a total of 10 active named editors on this wiki. We have 5 right off the top of my head and then the admins (which do not do too much article editing, but do the mopping up of the backend) and helping the editors learn more about how we should be doing things or exchange ideas to help foster our growth on simple. It seems to me most of the ideas I have usually only get a response from you because I know you watch everything (hhmmm maybe you are an AI..........) so I think it would be a great way to really get more eyes on it. Would you be ok if I post on simple talk to get thoughts from others since I know not everyone watches your TP? Nothing against you, I just don't want it to seem like you have the final say in how everything on simple gets done and what can and cannot be done. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 23:39, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we use Simple talk for all that. As you say, we're small, so having more pages to keep track of could be a problem.
Absolutely post on Simple talk: that's what I've been trying to suggest all along. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You kinda sorta did. I quote from above in your statement:

Finally, why is this discussion here instead of on the talk page for the template we're talking about? This kind of discussion should be done more publicly.

— Auntof6
LOL we both do this, it is kinda funny. I think we both think faster than our fingers can type. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, what I meant was to have it in a more public place that's more suitable for a general discussion, not on a user talk page or the talk page of an article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I gotcha :) PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The layout on this article is a mess. How would you recommend I lay it out? Maybe tables with no borders? The columns they used are using deprecated tags so when you go into edit mode, it shows red all over the place. 2- 30 of the 46 refs are not considered valid refs per the community because they are social media sites, individual blogs, etc that do not meet what we need. I can list them out for you if you wanted, but I think going down to the 16 references would be ok since the article is only a list. What are your thoughts? PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 01:51, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I am thinking about it

I know how you have mentioned about the commons vs. commonscat. I found out why the commonscat throws errors and doesn't always go to the correct cat. It is because it is not linked to wikidata. Once it is linked, I can do the commonscat| and it links with no issues. I will keep that in my mind going forward but wanted to let you know. A good example is Ahalya. When I put in commonscat it was all red and threw errors. When I looked I did not see any links to wikidate or any other language wikis. I linked them and boom, everything connected. :) So part of patrolling too I think we should add that we need to make sure it gets linked to wiki data. If you want, I can write up a quick draft on how because it is super easy. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:26, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I knew all that. The commons and commonscat templates have been around since before Wikidata. Before then, the various Commons templates would use the page name unless something different was specified. So it makes sense that sometimes you'd have to specify something for the templates to link to.
I think many editors aren't comfortable working in Wikidata, so I'm not surprised that we have things here that aren't linked. You can see them at Special:UnconnectedPages. That's one of the things I try to work on now and then. I also have a "how-to" on how to link to Wikidata, but I've never publicized it because some users just don't want to deal with it. I'll add Wikidata linking to my "how to patrol" write-up (which I've also never publicized). However, I think there are some people who shouldn't be messing with Wikidata because they don't understand it's requirements. One esample is that links should be made only for exact matches, not to related things as we can do with redirects. Anyway, if more people get familiar with Wikidata that would be a good thing. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I just think it is funny as I would have assumed it would have matched and not needed links to the data item or even other language websites lol. So much for an automated process. I did not know you had that list. I can gladly work on that too if that is ok with you. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 20:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Things we do here that might be different from other Wikis

Thanks for showing me this, I only have one question which is what are index pages and why don't you use them. Also about your section on how to patrol, it says check for the appropriate number of references. But I was informed geographic locations don't need references. Also I was told that in this wiki, people hardly ever delete article. If they are unsourced (with the exception of WP:BLP) or is they are too short, it's no problem. But after all that some things are still ambiguous, like I went to special:new pages and found KMXV AND it's unsourced with no evidence of notability, do I prod it, or do I redirect it, if I redirect it, then where to? N1TH Music (talk) 19:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@N1TH Music I did not state "geographic locations don't need references" I stated everything needs references but your question was about deleting two articles about Texas places which had no references in which I told you for those types, we do not look at the lack of references as a reason to delete the article. We expand them. No sources on those is not a reason to delete the article on Geo places. The strictest one is BLPs. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOS Scientific

I found this soft redirect and I do not know if it stays or what should be done with it, MOS:SCIENTIFIC --> EN:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting#Scientific names PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: What makes you question it? -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So I went to that link you provided about the non linking to WD. It stood out when I set it to just Articles as it popped up in the article space which I don’t think is normal but I could be wrong. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 22:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Do you mean pages not connected to items? Are you asking if it should be linked in Wikidata? I would say no, but the Wikidata powers that be might disagree. I think there are redirects linked there, but I don't think they're supposed to be, and I wouldn't think soft redirects should be.
I don't think "MOS" is a recognized space, at least not one that would normally get Wikidata links, so the system probably assumes it's in article space. When it sees things in article space that aren't connected to Wikidata, it displays them as unconnected items. That doesn't mean everything there should be connected, though. I would say just leave this one unconnected.
Side note: Simple has a lot of pages on topics that are notable, but which enwiki wouldn't have articles on for various reasons. Those articles might never link to other pages, and that's OK. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: By the way, I hope you're verifying that things you link in Wikidata are actually for the same topic. There are a lot of pages with the same name here and in enwiki which are actually for different topics. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:39, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, so MOS typically goes under the Wikipedia namespace Think [[WP:]] instead of Some Random Article Name; Yes to both of the last two. I am connecting them by verifying all of the same information, by topic, content, links, etc. Some just simply need to be in wiki-data as a linked page, but sometimes just clicking on the link a page works. Again, I only do this if I am sure other wise I would create a new item on WD. For the most part though it will more than likely be on there, but only to a different WP but still connectable. That is why I am taking my time :)
So to be clear when I went to the unconnected items, I changed it to articles and it is the currently the third one down. I can move it the wikipedia space and out of the article name space if you want or you can do it. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 00:16, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Better stated, MOS is usually used for the manual of style, which is in the Wikipedia namespace.
The soft redirect doesn't need to be moved. We use MOS as a prefix for a lot of things related to the manual of style, all of which live in the Wikipedia namespace, and this is no different. Enwiki does the same thing. This redirect doesn't hurt anything, and you're not going to be able to clear all the unconnected pages anyway. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am making good headway on them. Some are replications of the articles we already have, just a different article name but same content. So they do not need to be linked, they have to be merged or deleted. What I am finding is that when I look in WD it is already linked to a page on simple so I pull that up and match it and see what is going on.
As far as this specific page, I never remember seeing any thing related to WP (MOS, Policies, Guidelines, etc.) in the article namespace. They always have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Scientific_names as an example and allows the short code of WP to be used in the brackets. If I do MOS:SCIENTIFIC it works but then it is a soft and not a hard redirect (so one extra click for the editor and it links to EN :(), WP:MOS#SCIENTIFIC is what we should be able to do but it won't because of being in the wrong space. I am not an admin so I cannot move it to the Wikipedia namespace; however, I do not feel we really need it, because if you notice on the first link I posted with MOS:Scientific it takes you to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style but should be changed to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Scientific_style which is our version of it. So basically what I am saying:
  1. There is nothing that links to it (other than this talk page)
  2. Delete the redirect as it is not needed
That is my thought. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:05, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The MOS prefixes are typing shortcuts for convenience. They aren't necessarily meant to be linked to. MOS isn't an actual namespace, it just looks like one. We have quite a few similar ones that happen to link to our MOS here. We probably just don't have anything for scientific names in our MOS, so there's a soft redirect to enwiki's info on that.
The MOS-prefixed redirects, including soft redirects, don't hurt anything and don't need to be linked in Wikidata. They aren't really in the article namespace, it's just that the software knows there isn't a MOS namespace so it probably lumps it in with articles. Please move on. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:18, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To this statement - We probably just don't have anything for scientific names in our MOS I just linked you to it - Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Scientific_style (on our wiki) The only thing we are missing from en is the only line they have about scientific names which is
Scientific names[edit]
Use italics for the scientific names of plants, animals, and all other organisms except viruses at the genus level and below (italicize Panthera leo and Retroviridae, but not Felidae). The hybrid sign is not italicized (Rosa × damascena), nor is the "connecting term" required in three-part botanical names (Rosa gallica subsp. officinalis). which we could probably just add. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:29, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not for scientific names, which is what I said we don't have anything for. If you want to add that text, and/or change the redirect to point to our MOS page, that's fine. But the name of the redirect doesn't need to change. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:35, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok now I am really confused lol. Our redirect is labeled as MOS:Scientific but points to EN MOS Scientific Names. So I guess the appropriate question would be what is it we are trying to say that is for? Like Science articles in general and how to do them? If that is the case, we can do something similar to EN:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Science/Guidelines and EN:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Science/Topics where we could create a list of our cats that would fit into this (not stubs, cats). Just simplify things down to kinda mimic them?
  • Please remember, this is also educating me:)
Thanks PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 02:43, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When we don't have a policy or guideline here for something, sometimes we make a soft redirect to the relevant one on enwiki. That's because when we don't have our own policy or guideline for something, we use enwiki's as a guideline. If the relevant page gets created here, the soft redirect can be changed to a regular redirect.
As for the enwiki WikiProject pages and making lists of cats, I'm not sure what your question is about. Remember that WikiProjects here aren't official. If there's a science WikiProject of some kind, the members can make all the lists they want on the project pages. I'm not sure that's what you meant, though. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I meant we can build a list off of what they have on their project pages to create our own simple guidelines. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, those pages are for the WikiProject. They aren't guidelines, even on enwiki. One of them even says "proposed". What lists are you thinking of making, and how would they relate to guidelines? What kind of guidelines are you thinking of creating? -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:20, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will work on it after a while as we have a couple of proposals going (my two and your template proposal) and whatnot. Like my dinner just arrived so I am off for the night. PDLTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 04:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stub Question

Hi there - I have come across a lot of stubs about paintings, should I just tag them with the general stub? I know under the arts we do not have a paintings, but we have literature, and I do not believe paintings would fall into that stub group. Example is The Death of the Bull (Pettinicchio). Thanks! Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 17:55, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Paintings would just go in the main stub category. I'm not sure I'd consider that particular article to be a stub, though. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:28, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I have come across some with just a one liner that states the name and the creator lol. Will do. Thanks. Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:30, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Off that topic, something like this https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:German_national_anthem_performed_by_the_US_Navy_Band.ogg is just being carried over from commons, is that correct? Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:36, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Yes. If you see "View on Wikimedia Commons" and/or "Add local description" (which we don't want to do here) at the top of the page (they appear as tabs in the skin I use), then the file actually lives on Commons. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. We must use the same skin because mine are tabbed too. Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:50, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To go in line with the last part of this conversation, I found this File:Simple_en_France.ogg. From what I can tell this is hosted on simple because it says do not export to commons and my tab says export to commons. LOL. It does not look like we have a lot of them according to Wikipedia:Spoken_articles and one pending Category:Spoken_Wikipedia_requests. All of these are stored on simple. Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 18:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Simple does host a few files that are directly related to Simple English Wikipedia and that wouldn't be needed elsewhere. These have included spoken simplewiki articles, logos that are related to simplewiki, and maybe other things specific to this wiki. The one you're referring to is an audio of an article here. When we say we don't host media files, that applies to the kind of image, audio, and video files that would be of general use on any wiki. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok. Thank you for clearing that up for me. Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 19:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: ...and I didn't mean to limit that to image, audio, and video. It could apply to anything that isn't specific to Simple. Another type I can think of is documents, and there might be other types. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:03, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I assumed it was any type of media. :) Da LambTalk to me!OMG, What have I done? 21:18, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Rollback and Patroller right

Hi Auto, I saw that we can directly request a right on the admin talk page here on Simple English Wikipedia. Thus, I want to request Rollback and Patroller rights, and I'm very familiar with fighting against vandalism, Notability guidelines, and reviewing new pages as I currently hold rollback, NPR, and PCR rights on Enwiki[4].  DIVINE  11:13, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE: I prefer to have these requests at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions so that we have a record there. However, I would not approve this at this time.
  • Rollback: Simple English Wikipedia has some differences that can look like vandalism if you aren't familiar with them, so I wouldn't approve the rollback right until you've done more work here and shown that you understand this wiki better
  • Patroller: On this wiki, the patroller right includes autopatrol. Autopatrol would mean that your own new articles wouldn't need to be patrolled. However, it looks like articles you created here did need to be patrolled.
If you would like to know more about ways the Wikipedia is different, you can look at this list I maintain. The list itself is not official, but it links to some relevant policies and guidelines.
By the way, if you use an English Wikipedia article as the basis for creating an article here, you need to include attribution. You can read about that at Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution.
If you decide to request rights again in the future, please do so on the page I linked above. Thanks, and feel free to ask if you need help finding your way around here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I take sources from Enwiki but I don't copy fully from English as I re-write them and add references only.  DIVINE  18:01, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@DIVINE: Even if you do that, there needs to be attribution. Otherwise, it's a copyright violation -- even English Wikipedia is considered a different website for that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:49, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wave of the wand please

Hello. Can you run through all pages on simple and generate a list in my space that contain any of the items listed on this template please? The allows, denies, etc. I know simple talk only allows SassoBot so that may need to be changed.

Template:Bots Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 04:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: You're going to have to be more specific 'cause I can't tell what you're asking. First, I don't think I'm going to run through all pages on Simple; I wouldn't even want to guess at how many pages that would be. Do you mean pages that invoke the Bots template? Pages in all namespaces? What exactly do you mean by "the items listed on this template"? Please explain in detail when making requests: I don't want to guess about what you mean. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I think I figured out how to do it. I’ll get back to you shortly. Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 05:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK. BTW, I think you jumped the gun with your announcement on Simple talk. The bot isn't approved yet, after all. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:38, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I noticed you removed the miszabot/config from your TP. When it ran last night, did it cause any issues on your TP or the news archives you maintain? My log shows it archived both of them appropriately. I just wanted to make sure it did not cause any issues on your pages. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Other than changing the options (the d/s thing), I didn't notice any issues, but I haven't looked at it in detail. I just don't want my talk page included in your trial(s) -- chalk that up to an abundance of caution. I'll put it back when I think things are stable. I don't mind my newsletter page being included, though, so I didn't remove it from there.
Just FYI, I created the newsletter page because I didn't need the news updates archived with my talk page. The news updates get posted directly to the newsletter page. I mostly don't even look at it, but I delete the older archived pages from time to time. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:54, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see where you are coming from. I was told it would not change the d to s, however, looking at your newsletter main page, I see that the bot did indeed change d to s. There was a patch merged this morning that went out to set it back a couple of versions. If it is ok with you, I would like to change your newsletter page back to what it was and then run my bot on just that page with the new patch so 1 edit and then look and see if it still changes the d to s. Would that be ok with you? Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Steps I would do:
  1. Revert to https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Auntof6/Newsletters&oldid=8350213
  2. Run a simulation test to see if it errors on anything
  3. If no errors, go ahead and run it on User_talk:Auntof6/Newsletters
  4. Check to see how it was handled, and if incorrect, revert and stop; If correct, just let it be.
Thanks. Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: You are welcome to use my newsletter page for any tests you'd like. Just let me know when you're all through using them, and be aware that new news items could be posted there at any time. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:12, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. You have it set to anything older than 60 days, so no new ones should be affected. I will begin now and let you know. Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: You can set it to something else if you want. I can always put it back later. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok first I will actually remove the two newsletters that came in today and save it on my note pad, then when I am done, I will put it back on. Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Thank you for letting me do that. For the time being I am done as I am waiting on a response from the developer. It did indeed change the "d" to an "s" which was not was explained to me or Chenzw. I will post on the BRFA to make Chenzw aware as well. Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:20, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Default Sort

I did one today I am not sure of. I have the names and such down, but this does not start with an "A" or "The"

{{DEFAULTSORT:Phineas and Ferb The Movie: Candace Against the Universe}}. I did not know how else to put it. So I wanted to make sure I did it right and if not, I can go back and correct it to what you say it should be. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 02:46, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: I wouldn't normally put a defaultsort in that one, but enwiki says "Hyphens, apostrophes and periods/full stops are the only punctuation marks that should be kept in sort values." So you could remove the colon. Generally, a defaultsort should be added only if the article title isn't acceptable for sorting for some reason. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so should I just removed it completely then based on the above about what you would do and when it should be added? Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 02:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I would remove it, but others would leave it but take out the colon. You choose. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it. Thank you for the advice. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cat-a-lot

I installed Cat-a-lot in my common.js, but I don't see the button in the bottom right of the category pages. Do you think I might have done something wrong? Or is it only available to administrators here? Lights and freedom (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: It should be available for everyone. Did you clear your cache after installing? -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:02, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom: Also, part of what you installed are user preferences. You might want different preferences than I have, but the ones I have shouldn't cause a problem. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I had the problem as well. I had to completely flush everything and log out of wp, then log back in and it appeared for me. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:04, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I see it now. I just copied the preferences from the WMcommons page about cat-a-lot, I didn't modify them. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom: By the way, I'll offer a caveat about using Cat-a-lot with templates, in case you're thinking of doing that. Cat-a-lot won't always work properly with templates, because of two things:
  • Templates are usually categorized via the doc page, not on the template page itself, so Cat-a-lot can't find them to do anything.
  • When a template is categorized on the main page, the categories are between noinclude tags. Cat-a-lot doesn't respect the noinclude tags, so you could find it adding a category outside of those tags, depending on what you're doing.
You may have seen me use Cat-a-lot to recategorize some templates a little while ago. It worked because the categories were on the template and I was changing categories, not adding any. It usually works for deleting as well, but not for adding. So for templates, if you're not completely sure how it's going to work, it's best not to use Cat-a-lot.
If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I won't use Cat-a-lot for templates. I'm not sure how they should be sorted anyway. Some editors have been removing them from the content categories. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bot is functional

Hi there Auntof6! I am proud to say that after some manual runs and it’s first automated run the PDLBotArchiver (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) did exactly what it is supposed to do. It does not require changing anything to an existing Miszabot/config on a page it is already on and is exclusion compliant. I cannot archive Simple talk without community consensus or any other public page without the consensus if it has an allow only (like ST does) •and I would put my bot in the list if consensus is reached without removing any other bot• or a denybot, however, if it already has the config setup with no bot restrictions, then I can. For user TP’s I can inform them of the bot is now setup if they would like to archive their page and direct them to the page that shows how to do that and also how to opt out. It does appear your newsletters were archived on the fully automated run if you would like to take a look. Thank you as always. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 04:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw your message on the BRFA and since it’s approved I wanted to just move that over here. Yes that would be great. Any public pages or talk pages using {{bots}} or the deny all version of that but I believe just the bots should cover all of them including the ones that are locked down to just SassoBot like ST is. I appreciate your offer and gladly accept it. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 04:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Out of all the pages that transclude User:MiszaBot/config, I found none that contain either {{nobots}} or Allow=SassoBot. If that isn't what you were looking for, let me know. I have a list of everything that invokes User:MiszaBot/config, so I can easily run another pass. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Funny because Simple Talk should have come up at least. It has bots|allow=SassoBot with the {} around it. I didn’t want to tl it on your page because I don’t want any unexpected issues. Since there are different various ways of doing it, maybe a search on all of them needs to be done? I’ll leave that up to you. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 05:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I'll check it again in a bit. I'm in the middle of something else right now. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries or hurry. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 05:36, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK, I don't know what I did wrong the first time, but now I'm finding that one. I also found User talk:Quantocius Quantotius, which is a soft redirect to the user's meta talk page. It does make sense to set up archiving on a soft redirect talk page, because talk can still be left on such pages (would probably be mostly by automated processes). -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So that editor opted out of all bots and mass messages so there isn’t a need for the config to even be on there. It could even be a hard redirect in my opinion but that would be up to them. But with the allow=none means no bots can touch it which I find odd on a soft redirect as nothing is posted on it lol. So that’s good if they are the only 2 pages. So I just need the consensus for ST then unless @Chenzw just wants to flat out approve me to run next to SassoBot. I’m able to archive all other public discussions without issue and if we find some in the future I think we can deal with it at the point. Thoughts? Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 06:53, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I wouldn't say there is no reason for the config to be there. There is always the possibility of a message being left on the page by something like a QD or RFD request -- those aren't done by bots or mass messages, but by individual users. Also, according to the documentation on the enwiki copy of the template (ours doesn't have it -- might need updating), there are some things that can't be opted out, so there are things that can still be posted on the page even if it's a (soft) redirect.
As for your bot starting to archive pages regularly, I'm trying to stay out of that discussion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that’s right I forgot about that part but does it apply to redirected talk pages? As far as the bot, I was just letting you know so whenever you wanted to put your config back on, if allowed, it would pick it up and archive for you. The conversation is complete as the bot is approved. For the ST it is just a yes or no if I can add it. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 07:42, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Yes, it applies to redirected talk pages. I don't think the automated processes that would leave messages would see the redirects, and they certainly wouldn't follow the redirect to Meta-Wiki to leave a message.
I'm going to wait a while before putting the archiving back on my talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. And ok. I was able to get the template that had 68 links to it moved over today and got it linked without the portals that kept throwing errors. So that’s 68 articles fixed plus I got a few of the smaller ones done too. Those smaller ones have a specific source used and is called when it comes to the transportation options in London. So slowly chipping away at it. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: OK. When bringing over templates, be sure to give some thought to whether the template is actually needed. Just getting it off the list might not be a good reason to create it here. Sometimes the better option is to eliminate references to the template. Or one of the other things I listed as ways to resolve a "missing" template without creating a page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All of these pages to the particular template were about the London transportation system and embedded into them were various data pulls based on what variables were put in like for exits = so the template had all of the and the link to the portal. I was able to get all the link issues resolved and I was able to remove the portal link so now the Infobox is properly filled and not full of red and saying invalid ref invalid temp etc. there are other I looked at I know I won’t be bringing over as they effect only one or two articles and I should be able to strip out what’s needed to complete the article. I also made sure they were in the proper category. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:16, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Purge of page

Hi again. On Special:WantedTemplates it supposedly updated, however, the ones I have created or otherwise taken care of (like Template:Status ref‏‎ (28 links)) was changed to the updated template from enWP. So now nothing links to it, but it won't cross out because the template was not created, because it doesn't need the template anymore. So when it updated, it should have removed the done ones already. Do you happen to know or can you check what updates that page since I have no view to it please and let me know. Thanks. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: If I understand what you're asking, you have to wait until the special pages are updated again. I think that happens every 3 or 4 days. Until then, everything in the list stays in the list. The ones that got created look different because the software recognizes that the template now exists. I don't think the link counts update until the whole list is refreshed. If you think you eliminated all references to the template before the indicated update time, it could be that the list was generated from a database dump that was taken before that time.
If that's not what you're asking, let me know. Sometimes it's hard to understand what you're asking. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:15, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is exactly what I was looking for. If you see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Status_ref nothing links to it anymore because the template we had for subspecies was old, so when I updated those pages no longer require it. Now I know it won't update like most other pages. Thank you. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:18, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Importing of templates

Ok what I have done has been very, very slow. If I were to post a list would you be able to import both the template and the /doc that goes with it since I am not being granted the right to bring the bigger ones in? It would be #19 to #77 on Special:WantedTemplates. Those are the ones with the most links going to them. Once they are at simple, I can go through and verify the links and if they are not needed I will mark them for QD. The manual process is externally slow. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just to add that if the links are only to an editor's space, I will not be using it and will also mark it for QD. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:47, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: If I'm going to work on Special:WantedTemplates, I'm only going to import the ones that are needed. I'm not going to import a batch of templates for someone to figure out whether they're needed. For example, I looked at #19 and that one looks like it's used in lists of related templates. I think that's the case with a lot of other templates, and I don't think that's a good reason to import. I don't want to import templates just because they're on the list of "wanted" templates. I believe I mentioned somewhere else that this is not a good approach. So no, I'm not going to just import things when I don't know if they're needed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:05, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That one was a bad example. But like 76, we need that one but the problem is we need to pull in all of the linked ones as well since they have updated information on the minor planets and there are hundreds of them. I can’t do that by copy and paste to each one. For 16 (and others like it) where it is coming from I can delete that text from the doc to get rid of the templates needed because they are basically see also on another template. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: You don't need to delete text from a doc page to get rid of a red link. In fact, please don't, if only to keep our doc in sync with enwiki's. Also, if it stays there, someone looking for a template to do its function might see it and then ask for it to be imported. I can't help but feel that you're being a bit overzealous here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:44, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then I won’t touch anymore and I’ll let the articles we have maintain the nasty template so-so not found or the big red LUA error remain. I’ll move back to adding taxon boxes. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:47, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Some, perhaps many, of the templates you asked to have imported don't appear in articles, so that wouldn't be a problem. If you determine ones that are needed to fix actual problems, I would import those. Besides, doesn't a LUA error appear when a module is missing, rather than a template? -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but what calls the LUAs, templates. That is why I wanted to 1) have the permission and 2) when I come across the ones like the minor planets I can pull them all in. This way I do not need to wait on an admin nor have an admin add to their otherwise heavy workload. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 04:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Template

Can you please copy EN:Template:Bots to Template:Bots please so we have the updated information? Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 16:55, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: Since this template is used on the main page, I'd like other admins to weigh in. Would you make this request on the admins noticeboard? Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked at it. It is just calling {{nobots}} so no bots can edit it. If you look at the source code, it is at the very bottom. So this import will not have an effect on it. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I did look at the source code. {{nobots}} is a redirect to {{bots}}, so it will have an effect, especially since our current version of the template has no functionality, and the version you want adds some. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have copied this and made my response at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Template_Bots_Discussion. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The league may have been notable but I was not able to find anything about him playing for the league and the picture used in the article was put on the internet a couple of days ago and the editor claimed it was their own work that they took the pic on August 2, 2022. If he did play for them I should have easily found him when I searched his name with the word football and the only thing that came up was the simple commons and fr articles. There is not an enWP article on him. Also most football pictures would show them in play or in uniform. This shows an up close staged photo of him. Even the link presented is a blank page and all the things that came up with his name are fandom sites or editable by users. I have to disagree with your denial of the QD and I would like to send this to RfD for all editors to be involved please. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:11, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: You don't need permission to send this to RFD, and I expected that you would do that. In fact, that's the standard procedure when a QD is denied and someone wants to pursue it. Sometimes the declining admin will do it; if they don't, then anyone else can. By declining the QD, I was not saying that I think the person is notable, just that I didn't consider it to fit the QD criteria.
The QD/A4 option is for "people, groups, companies, products, services or websites that do not claim to be notable" (bolding mine). Determining notability for sportspeople can be a little complicated. There's a notability guideline (or at least there used to be: I can't find it right now) saying that sportspeople who have played in top-tier leagues are considered notable. That's why I declined the QD. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I saw something about that on enWP this past week and they favored to go with the person has to be notable. Not just a member of the team. This guy has supposedly played since 2004 so I should have easily been able to find something. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Can you point me to where you saw that? It would be very helpful. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:28, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
EN:Wikipedia:Notability_(sports) is one such based on what is required specifically for an athlete and that is added to WP:GNG. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Yes, I was looking at that page. I thought it was interesting that there doesn't seem to be anything for association football players. I thought there used to be. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is because of the no inherited nobility rule. The team itself can have an article if they meet the nobility guidelines for sports teams but that doesn’t mean the players are also notable. It’s like the one example because the CEO is notable does not mean the company is notable or vice versa. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:40, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shall I do the QD again or do you want me to RfD it? I also knew it was a new article based on the wikidata number which tells me it’s not linked to enWP. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:42, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: RFD, please. Also, just knowing the Wikidata number can't tell you if the page is linked in enwiki. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: I understand about inherited notability, but for sportspeople it's sometimes different. I meant that the info on notability for professional sports people doesn't have anything for association football players. There's a long list for other sports, just not for that one, and some of those mention notability based on being on certain teams. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:45, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go. I found it. EN:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Association_football_variants_task_force#Footballers_(from_WP:FOOTBALL/Notability) I obviously suck at dates lol. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:50, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But I did read it this week lol Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:52, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: That's a statement on a WikiProject page. I'll take a look later to see if I can find where a decision might have been made to change that guideline. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh this is what I was reading Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#BilledMammal_nominations_of_Danish_international_footballers as it touches on the topic, of course with a broader issue surrounding it. Thanks - Da LambTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]