Jump to content

User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 113

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 110Archive 111Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114Archive 115Archive 120

Wikidata weekly summary #338

19:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Infobox consolidation

Hey Andy,

I was researching Wikipedia:Infobox consolidation on how best to proceed with a consolidation process and saw that you wrote that essay, so thought I'd ask you for advice. While working on Template:Infobox television episode I noticed that any updates being made to this infobox over the years (at least a year of changes I noticed) weren't added to similar television episode infoboxes (Template:Infobox Futurama episode, Template:Infobox Rome episode, Template:Infobox The Goodies episode and Template:Infobox Simpsons episode), 3 of which are wrappers of it, and 1 is a complete separate infobox that has 90%+ of the same things. Changes range from missing, and needed, params, to fixes/changes to practices and additions of new features. It seems to me like there is really no point in maintaining 5 similar infoboxes with no really valid reason (what's more is that by the same logic to keep them, countless endless others can be added for any other TV series). Would really appreciate any assistance in this matter. Thank you. --Gonnym (talk) 16:55, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Please make those points at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 October 27#Template:Infobox The Goodies episode, to start with. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:38, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Commented there. If you're interested, my initial research on this subject is here. --Gonnym (talk) 19:37, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Goodies deleted. What is the next step? --Gonnym (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
@Gonnym: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 November 4#Template:Infobox Rome episode. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Rome done. Are the other episode ones not suitable for merging? --Gonnym (talk) 14:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLI, November 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of GrassBase for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GrassBase is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GrassBase until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. PoliceSheep99 (talk) 21:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Pigsonthewing,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
  • Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Pigsonthewing. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

23:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #339

Hi Andy,

Ray Arritt obviously liked having his talk page set up the way it was; please undo your archiving of his talk page. It is likely to upset people who are still upset by his sudden death. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, please, or I would have to change links. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

People being unable to read (or edit) the talk page, or using up a significant/costly part of their mobile allowance, because it is over 400Kb will also upset them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
It has never been a problem before, in the 10 years he's been doing it this way. Other editors have similarly long talk pages. Please do not substitute your personal preference for his, and don't use the fact that others will not want to edit war on his page to force your preference onto the page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Personal preference? Force? Please AGF; and see Wikipedia:Article size#Technical issues. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:04, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
That page recommends sizes for articles. It does not specify a maximum size, nor does it address user talk pages. Anyway, there are hundreds of actual articles larger than that talk page. You are not addressing any of my other points: No one has complained before. He liked the page that way. It is disrespectful to change it the second he can no longer reply. His friends and family probably like it that way. If I revert your addition of an archive bot, are you going to revert back? I will not edit war on that page, so I need to know you won't revert again, before I restore the page to the way he liked it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:26, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
The page does indeed "recommend sizes for articles". The section to which I specifically and explicitly referred you, however, describes the technical issues caused to some readers by over-long pages, regardless of the page type. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I would like to see the page returned to a personal statement. (Please, please, please: when I die, no archiving that I haven't done, no "deceased" template. - I try to keep my talk as if it was the last version.) I restored some bits that are absolutely needed for context, and deleted two undated ones that make no sense without context. I'd still prefer to see the whole talk return to life, - support Floq. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Astronomy infoboxes

As a bit of history, you might like to read Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Astronomy/Archive_26#Merging_infoboxes_on_individual_types_of_objects_to_Template:Infobox_astronomical_object? to see what I was thinking of in the long term. Things then got a bit sidetracked/dramatic... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: Thanks. You can lead the proverbial to water... At the risk of mixing metaphors, let's see if we can eat the elephant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Infobox settlement - Departments of Argentina

The deoartments in Chaco Province have their own template : Template:Infobox Chaco, while others use the base template directly, e.g. : Aguirre Department. 85.179.26.146 (talk) 01:17, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. The template's documentation points out "This template is a customized wrapper for {{Infobox settlement}}." But feel free to nominate it for deletion by substitution, if you wish. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Template:Infobox Chaco can now be deleted. Province-specific wrappers unwanted. Standard for departments is to use Infobox settlement directly. 77.13.34.199 (talk) 18:03, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. WikiGuruWanaB (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Infobox settlement - redirects

Only two redirects are used in article space:

  • Infobox Settlement having around 9500 transclusions, oldest article from 2007, most recent from 2009
  • Infobox region having 2 transclusions

Could you turn the two for Infobox region into direct calls of "Infobox settlement"? As an editor one cannot see from the source code, that it is redirect, and thus one cannot know if the fields are the same. 77.14.82.245 (talk) 15:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Infobox region is a redirect to Template:Infobox settlement, so the call in the articles you list can be changed without fear of error. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:42, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Exactly :-). Could you do it? The pages are semi-protected. 77.14.82.245 (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
There is zero reason to make an edit purely to replace a template redirect with the target of said redirect. Primefac (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Fake news. 77.14.82.245 (talk) 16:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't say zero reason. I've actually had a real issue where a module function had to search the article text to get the infobox in order to get some piece of data from it (this is a simplification of the scenario and there was no other way), however instead of it being simple, I had to pass the function a list of all possible redirects that could be used so it could match them as well. While I'm sure my scenario is an edge-case, it is still a valid scenario and more-so, keeping redirects on the opposite, does have no reason to be kept other than "I like it" and people claiming "disturbance" as if one edit will do that. --Gonnym (talk) 16:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:31, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

22:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)