User talk:Pppery/Archive 14

Hey there!

Some months ago you helped me solve a problem with Module:Chart and thus I was thinking if you can consider making a small modification to it. Can you enhance it so when you hover over a bar (in a bar chart) a line is drawn from it to the x axis together with a number showing the exact number that the column is supposed to represent? Is my explanation clear? As it currently is, you can only know the value of the columns approximately. - Klein Muçi (talk) 11:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

The module already supports that feature in some cases. See, for example, Module:Chart#Stacked. I think that the only time it doesn't is when that feature conflicts with hovering over links to show the article they point to, and I don't feel like writing code to remedy that conflict (if doing so is even possible). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You're right on that I suppose. The case that gave me this idea was exactly what you describe. But, oh well... :P :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:11, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pppery. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. – Joe (talk) 08:38, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! Sorry the edit summaries I left when editing the Gasper Crasto article weren't clear. Looking at the history, you'll see I made two edits in a row: one to remove Category:Biography/Sports and games articles needing expert attention (which should not be manually added to an article), and another to add the {{expert needed}} template that properly adds the category to the article. The article needs more work - I'll add more descriptive tags instead. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

I understood what you were doing. The point of my ping there was to remind you that there's consensus {{expert needed}} shouldn't be used without an explanation, and thus you should have removed the tag or added one, nothing more. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:22, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey. I will clarify that IP was my cousin's account. As a result, I will still apologize and you expect that it won't happen again.

The TFD notice on {{Chu shogi diagram}} has been removed as I could not find the proposal at TFD. Techie3 (talk) 02:17, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

It was intended to be part of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 July 16#Module:ChuShogiboard. I've now added it there. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:29, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Pppery, User_talk:GreenC_bot#Flagging_non-dead_link_as_dead probably has some relation to Wikipedia:AWSURL/oldstock. I made a proposal to convert these academia.edu/download/ links to cloudfront.net URLs - GreenC 06:06, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

can you give me any reason what ı did wrong ı search that information ı dont' use any copyrigthed photos or anything else can you explain this to me? Volkan1881 (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

user-generated source that does not count toward notability. * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

13:15, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

ok then teach me how ı rules of editing fictional character pages I try so hard and you delete it in two minutes!!! Volkan1881 (talk) 13:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

First off, I didn't delete it in two minutes; it was more like two and a half hours between your unredirection and my revert. Second,

reliable sources, as I explained above. Wikipedia:Everything you need to know * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

13:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

ı thought wikipedia editors always helping each others Volkan1881 (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm a little unhappy with what's going on at AfD with

(1) An IP editor decided that there wasn't enough about Michael Laski to justify an article, and converted the article to a redirect

(2) The redirect got disputed and reverted back and forth a few times until Hey man im josh said "Redirect is disputed, take it to AfD"

(3) The IP editor started the process and it arrived at AfD under the name of Laski22 (who has only edited on this and the related party page)

(4) Laski22 then immediately withdrew the AfD, ending the discussion before anyone had had a chance to discuss anything.

(5) Although Laski22's withdrawl on the grounds that Google books "turned up more than expected" is effectively a keep, Scope-creep restored the redirect (it would have been wrong to do this during an active AfD, but of course the AfD had been closed by this stage; it was all so fast it's quite possible Scope creep had no idea an AfD had even been opened). But the point remains, we now have an article that's technically survived AfD but immediately been, effectively, deleted.

This all somewhat smacks of manipulating the AfD process: being told to go to AfD, therefore going, but then withdrawing the AfD before any discussion could take place. I'm not sure who's trying to achieve what, and I don't personally care tuppence whether this article is a redirect or an article, but I do care about doing things properly. I'm assuming there is still a keep/redirect dispute? This isn't a terribly satisfactory situation. What do you reckon would be best: reopen the AfD so redirect/keep can be discussed there, or discuss it on the article's talk-page? Elemimele (talk) 08:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I converted it back to a redirect, because the article is woeful as is the references. I don't see the need for an article on him. The two references are bare mentions and that is the best you can say about them. Such references cannot support a BLP or even a biographical of a dead person. There are woeful. If you want to revert, I will need to three secondary sources that are independent, significant and in-depth. Real deatail, not a bare mention, otherwise I need to delete it if it comes back up a 2nd time. I never an Afd. If I saw one, I would have sent it back for a second go and it would be deleted as the refs are woeful. Having written several articles on communist and still working on one at the moment, then tend to be notable, and with concomitant coverage. I don't understand why they're isn't decent sources. I hope that explains things from my end. scope_creep^Talk 08:22, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@Scope creep: I've no problem with your actions: I can see your point that the referencing is inadequate and the redirect might be the right outcome. My problem was more with the fact that someone (josh) requested, in good faith, a proper debate at AfD, but the debate was (probably accidentally) turned into a charade. I think creating a nomination because someone else has requested it, and immediately withdrawing the nomination (thereby undermining the person who requested it) isn't great practice. Elemimele (talk) 09:24, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I totally agree. Once it's posted to Afd it should always run its course unless somebody proves otherwise, which leads to withdrawn nomination. Do you want to send to Afd again? scope_creep^Talk 10:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Pppery, would you be willing to re-open the AfD so we can put this lot in the discussion there, and get this done properly? I think that would be less confusing than a second AfD. Elemimele (talk) 12:07, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Feel free to revert my closure and re-open the AfD if you want to. Nevertheless, I maintain that my AfD closure was correct; the nominator had clearly withdrawn the AfD and I'm not responsible for things that happened several hours after my last edit. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! No problem, I didn't wish to criticise anyone's actions (except possibly, and only mildly, Laski22: if you are reading this, Laski22, since you hadn't taken part in the debate at the article itself, and presumably started the AfD because Josh asked you to, withdrawing it wasn't a great idea. It would have been reasonable to !vote "keep" if you found new sources, and it would be helpful to Scope creep and others if you could give links to them. But no harm done! Please accept an extremely small trout with my compliments!) I've created a new AfD as I didn't know how to revert a closure without messing up whatever the Bots do with AfDs. Elemimele (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for adding you signature. We haven't asked for that yet because it's not final. I just changed it again. I don't want anyone to be upset because it changed after they signed... MB 04:05, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting that shortdesc edit by me -- it was an edit conflict and I forgot to revert it once I saw the redirect move. Cheers, Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 02:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

I haven't the slightest idea what happened. [5] Thanks for reverting. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Dr vulpes. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Indigenous science, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 19:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Dr vulpes: Reviewed articles should only be unreviewed if CSD'd/PRODded, not when they're AfD'd. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Tamzin, thanks for reaching out. The reason I unreviewed the article was because I had just started a rewrite of it and the changes that had to be made were significant. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 20:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dr vulpes: That makes sense, and I realized that after re-patrolling. However, the idea is that any article that survives AfD has gone through an adequate level of scrutiny for NPP. That may or may not be a legal fiction, but it's the consensus currently. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 20:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tamzin yeah that's what I kind of thought, thanks for letting me know :-) Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 20:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with the Indigenous science article, it was a lot of work to recover and fix that article. You've been a lot of help and really professional so thanks again. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 05:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

... and thank you for rewriting the article. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Please don't delete ne pahe named ioE AI i will make change then publish it again.

Too late. Someone else already did. I would strongly suggest reading the advice already given on your talk page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to reach out regarding recent edits to Velma Salabiye's wikipedia. I mean no disrespect. But are you the original author of her page? Perhaps a colleague of hers? A relative? I only ask as I am the significant other of Velma's niece, who had a very close relationship with her aunt. Upon finding the Wikipedia for Ms Salabiye, the family was excited and asked me to fill in specific information that was missing. I appreciate any reply. Lightfoot92 (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I have no relation to her whatsoever, and came across the article when patrolling articles with malformed markup (

citing a source. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be based on what others have to say about the subject, not the subject or their family's personal knowledge. * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

01:05, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I was having sn issue with trying to remove the expression error and couldn't find a way to do so. Also, almost all Wikipedia pages about people tend to add specific information (parents, family, DOB and Date of Death, etc.,.), which was mainly all I was adding. Thank you again for the feedback. Lightfoot92 (talk) 04:27, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey did you ever get the ping in this discussion? If not, I think something is wrong with the ping system. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I did, just didn't see the need to comment at the time. I've done so now. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a semihemidemibarnstar for For moving my mislisted request to delete a redirect

Lineagegeek (talk) 22:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing my stub pages. BloxyColaSweet (talk) 23:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. Articles about species are generally easy to review, because they're inherently notable. Do take note, though, of the edits I made to improve the formatting of those pages (such as by not using

bare URLs), so that your future stubs are more fleshed out and need less NPP attention. * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

00:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

What stub pages that I made did you improve? BloxyColaSweet (talk) 00:23, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Festuca aloha, Festuca alpina * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I have made the page Agaricus_annae. I have noted what you have said. Any Feedback? BloxyColaSweet (talk) 00:49, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks better, but see my changes * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:55, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

BloxyColaSweet has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

sorry about that, I think we edit conflicted. I think a G4 would have been declined but we'll see how the AfD shakes out. Star Mississippi 00:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Remember that as a non-admin, I can't see the deleted revisions so have no way of knowing whether the current version is identical. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:45, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh sorry I just meant when you tagged it for CSD and I tagged it for AfD. Probably a page loading/timing. Star Mississippi 01:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The article page will be a summary page of all conferences of the said tournament. Reconsider to revert/undo what you did. Volley000 (talk) 08:15, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

No. The

WP:BURDEN is on you to provide sources. Not to mention that the above article is largely an empty placeholder anyway. * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

12:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

It says on

WP:BURDEN

"In some cases, editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. Consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step."

Give me some time to provide source/s. This season will be the tournament's return after a 2-year long hiatus because of the pandemic. Volley000 (talk) 16:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

new page patroller sees things my way and restores the redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...}

16:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)