This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

November 2012

Disregard

 – Just projectspam.

Extended content

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume III, No. 2 – November 2012 For past newsletters click here In This Issue Request for Comment: An RFC about the Backlog Elimination Drives has been started this month. Go and voice your opinions! Featured editorial: A Matter of Time: The Future of Backlog Elimination Drives Project News: Over 345 unreviewed articles, 13 at reassessment Good Articles of the Month GA Task Forces: A calmed GA community awaiting for an RFC Member News: 223 members of the GA Wikiproject Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by info ) · 3 November 2012

Resolved

 – Done.

Hello. You have a new message at Template talk:B's talk page. Message added GregorB (talk) 10:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC).

Good idea. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Can't fix, though the documentation has been updated.

Is it possible to make caps and non-caps links work with a simple {{term}}, without having to add a manual {{anchor}} ?

eg. Glossary of wildfire terms#airtanker vs Glossary of wildfire terms#Airtanker.

I ask because I see quite a few edits like this being made. (placement has been since fixed)

I don't know nearly enough about templates and conditionals to guess, but I'm hoping it's possible. Ta. —Quiddity (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it should be {{term|1=costa|content=costa{{anchor|Costa}}}}. MediaWiki's parser language isn't smart enough to have some kind of "do X regardless of case" test. Template:Term/doc has been corrected to show use of {{anchor}} with {{term}} properly. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Done

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Commented at that talk page. Will this particular pseudo-issue never die?

Re interpretation/action of your RfC of earlier this year. Talk:Facundo_Argüello_(tennis). Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clear comment. Unfortunately someone will have to reopen the RfC and notify all 40 participants in order to have a second attempt to get this editor to comply with it. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I've said all I can say without crossing lines. I don't think the issue needs to be reopened. The article is at the diacritic name as it should be. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 01:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, okay, well I've said I'm not going to reopen RfC either, though in fact I think it should be. On the other hand a monument to stupidity left in 100x tennis BLP ledes is very far from a major problem. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Not sure I'm following you. I'm unsure what the "monument" is that you're referring to. PS:

WP:LEADs are not ledes; they're two different kinds of introductory paragraph, with essentially opposite aims (a journalistic lede is a teaser, a Wikipedia lead is a summary). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

08:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Commented at that talk page.

A couple of days ago I opened this thread:

Thanks for the pointer. PS: The

lead section of Wikipedia articles is not a lede. Applying "lede" to the WP:LEAD is a misuse of the term. The concepts are completely opposite: A journalistic lede is a teaser that intentionally leaves out crucial details to entice the reader to read the full article, while a WP lead is, when properly written, a complete summary of the article that ensures that the reader does not have to read the full article unless they need details. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

01:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarifications. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Addressed at Talk:German ju-jutsu

What about

Haw! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, here's an imho more difficult one:
  Krav maga. So what to do about that one? --87.79.176.62 (talk
  ) 18:56, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

It's capitalized, because it's a trademark. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. Or, to be nitpicky, its Wikipedia article title most likely wasn't originally capitalized "because it's a trademark" so much as for the same reason BJJ and other article titles are/were capitalized. --87.79.108.207 (talk) 03:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

That seems probable. People were wildly capitalizing at random all over WP several years ago, even things like the common names of animals (Pronghorn Antelope, etc.). At any rate, Krav Maga is properly capitalized. Some of the other modern martial arts might also qualify (e.g. jeet kune do, kemp and kajukenbo) if they too are trademarks; I haven't the patience or interest to find out. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Stale

 – User:Wavelength appears to not understand the discussion.

I am curious to know how this revision of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, by you at 20:58, 14 November 2012, improves readability. Does the usefulness of "<br>", "<br />", "<p>", and "</p>" vary on different kinds of devices? Does Wikipedia have a page (or pages) explaining these things?
—Wavelength (talk) 00:13, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

It helps the readability of the wikitext source code, and even the rendered page for visually-impaired users, to use proper XHTML coding. When you misuse "indentation" (actually list-formatting) markup like you were doing, it makes it hard to tell where one person's comments begin and another ends. Replies on talk pages are marked up with a : (or ::, etc., to show later indentation) at the beginning of a person's comment. These actually have

WP:GNOMEs like me will tweak when we come across code that needs fixing. PS: I started refactoring the indentation in the first place because someone replied to a :: comment with another :: comment instead of a :::, and everyone else's indentations were off by one after that through the entire thread; only noticed the misuse of indents for linebreaking half-way through. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

07:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Being a stickler for correct talk page indentation, I am fascinated. Your reply has explained clearly to me something that I have stumbled into only recently. I promise to never again use a : or, if appropriate, multiple colons in the same posting after the initial indentation. One question, is the position of the space important? I have been typing only "<br/ >" which seems to do the job, and never "<br>" ... indeed, is the space always required? Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 17:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

The <br> style is old 1990s HTML. The correct syntax in modern standards is <br /> (and the space does belong there). MediaWiki is smart enough to auto-correct <br>, <br/> and even the completely invalid </br> to <br /> by the time it hits the reader's browser, but WP content can be reused in any way people see fit, including copy-paste of source code into systems that don't have that feature, so it's always best to use correct, modern XHTML. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Perfectly clear. I am most obliged. It is a constant source of amazement to me how helpful and patient you are to those who have come to computers late in life. Best wishes, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 23:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Just for background, the <br> style was a mistake by the early developers of HTML. HTML was an implementation of

SGML, and SGML requires that all elements be terminated either in <whatever>...</whatever> fashion, if they contain something, or <whatever /> style, if self-contained. The HTML developers forgot that in the early versions. The distinction became more important when XML was developed, and the Web moved to XHTML, a re-do of HTML as an XML implementation. XML, because it is intended to be machine-parsed, is much more strict about syntax than old SGML. Oh, and the space before the / isn't mandatory in XML, but leaving it off causes older browsers to fail to properly parse the code, so it's effectively required in <whatever /> constructions. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

23:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I am so impressed. Your complete understanding makes me feel that I should learn more. Again, thank you. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 23:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

<blush> It's just geekery. I'm like the technological inverse of the little old lady who knows how to perfectly bake 47 kinds of cookies and cakes without bothering with the recipes any longer, but can't set the blinking 12:00 on her microwave or remember the difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. I know a whole lot about a little but only a little about a whole lot. I have enough brain cells left that I can pick up new topics and figure them out well enough for WP very quickly (lately it's the

film..." in reading mode. I could see it as long-form wikimarkup – '''''The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization'''' is a [[Motion picture|film]]... if I chose to view it that way, but with a single click flip it back to the short ~bi~The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization~ is a ~ld~film~... version.

I am making up that "shorthand" on the fly as an example of simplified coding, where ~ would delimit a "New Wiki Markup" code block, in ~commands~content~ format [or somewhat longer ~command1~command2~content~~ form, when commands might need to be easily severable, but I digress...]. In the example, b meant "bold", i "italic", l "link", d "default meaning, if the link term is ambiguous" (i.e. first entry on the disambiguation page). At that level of abstraction, a blind user could use voice tone instead of ~ to indicate when markup began and ended. The underlying MediaWiki editing engine tech is advanced enough we could implement this in less than a year if there were enough will (i.e. community consensus on details, plus developer willingness to upgrade MediaWiki to do it)! Blah blah blah, I can ramble sometimes.
— SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

22:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I feel I have to mention that you have not closed your <blush> tag, so must still be blushing ~incoherent giggle~ Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Wasn't a tag; different use of angle-brackets (in this case, and old-school Usenet emote). — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ^⊝כ^⊙þ Contrib. 13:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank for your reply. I have carefully studied your explanations, and, wanting to be open-minded about opportunities for self-improvement, I have spent extra time in trying to understand your points. I agree that someone replied with the wrong degree of indentation and that every subsequent reply was off by one degree. However, I am unable to agree about "misuse" of markup, "misapplying … codes", and the "lazy way" and "a sloppy way" to show line breaks and new paragraphs". On the rendered page, I saw no difference in line breaks and paragraph starts. In the source code, I find it more difficult to find source codes in the midst of a "paragraph" of source text, than to see those separations made in the way that I was making them. Also, I do not expect that colon indentations or asterisk points would be converted to autonumbering with number signs. When there is a poll, there can be an instruction for respondents to use number signs to facilitate counting. I am unacquainted with the experience of visually impaired users using screen readers.
—Wavelength (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I

am here to improve the encyclopedia, not engage in sport debate for my own entertainment. Life, including WP editing, does not require unanimity, and I do not need your agreement to know I'm right about this. If you want to keep using sloppy code that makes things difficult for other people, go right ahead; I'll continue to feel free to refactor. :-) I've already clearly explained that it's about the source code, not the rendered page, so this entire attempt at conversation is seeming pointless anyway. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

23:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November 2012 copy edit drive update

Disregard

 – More project spam. These annoyingly visually-loud project "newsletters" are making me want to dump these projects in the bitbucket. Not just this particular project, all of 'em. It's like "BUD LIGHT $12.99!!!" in 10-foot high letters every f'ing block or asinine hotel-sized billboards for TV shows no one will watch more than twice.

Extended content

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us! The Baffle gab1978 for his copy edit of Expulsion of the Acadians. Runner up was Gareth Griffith-Jones for his edit of I Could Fall in Love . Congratulations to both. The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight November 30 (UTC). You don't have to make a submission to vote! November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight November 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin. Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Hey, you don't know my history with HTML. I've put up with more than enough abuse in this relationship; it's only right that I be able to deal some out once in a while. VanIsaac_{WS Vex}^contribs 01:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Fixed.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Meyers Manx (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to

Street-legal

Volkswagen Westfalia Campers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver

)

added a link pointing to Eurovan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 –  Declined. I have not been following this issue for almost a year, really.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – Just a chat.

Quite a good laugh I had at your reply here. :D Just thought I'll leave a note. Wifione ^Message 17:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't participate in

WT:BLP#OMG WTF BBQ!!, though. I did post in two earlier threads that are still on that page (a closed RfC and a Disregard-tagged thing that followed it). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib.

23:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Of course I meant the other thread only; posted the wrong link here. From fishes to sheepes, it's a pleasant moment to read up such brilliant, humorous interactions :) See you around. Wifione ^Message 05:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that one. Thanks; I feel sheepesish.  ;-) The closed RfC thread before that had some potentially amusing stuff in it, too. I suspect the anon in the "sheepes" thread may even be the same recipient of my attention, LittleBenW, as in the RfC (LittleBenW leapt to the same anon's defense elsewhere, and himself writes in a very "precocious but sloppy, twelve-year-old know-it-all who's actually wrong" style). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

Resolved

 – This was intentional, but has been clarified.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Grimjack (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Maltese Falcon

Manx (cat) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver

)

added a link pointing to The Maltese Falcon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

I am having a civilised discussion with another editor at

Thank you Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Hope it was helpful. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

By definition any new pair of eyes is helpful. You went an extra mile, so most assuredly you were. I never worry if I am wrong, I worry only about good discussions and good articles. :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

As I hope I made clear, I didn't think either party was "wrong". It's not crazy to assume that an article about mayorships in PR should have a list of current holders of these titles, nor is it crazy to be concerned that including such a list in this article makes it partially redundant with the stand-alone list of such people. It just begs the question "why are these separate articles at all?" There might even be good answers to that question, but I'm having a hard time thinking of any.  :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 13:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy. What I wanted to do was make the other editor think. I hope I have. I consider your view runs somewhat counter to mine, and I am happy to accept it :) Very little is black and white here, after all. My sole purpose was to show another editor who appeared combative that there is another way. Additional input of whatever flavour helps enormously with that. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:Apteva § MOS

 – This is about Apteva's editing behavior, not mine.

Extended content

Have a cup of tea, and when its done have another. After three cups of tea we can talk. Apteva (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC) My original interest in editing this encyclopedia was simply to fix an error, and take pity on anyone reading it without it being fixed. Since then I have made thousands of additions and contributed a hundred articles. As a collaborative media it is essential to discuss the issue, not the conduct of a contributor on article and wikipedia talk pages. The place to discuss content is AN/I and user talk pages. It is never appropriate to name an editor on a guideline talk page, as was done at the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style page. While you and I may have a different opinion on the purpose of the MOS, and I do know that you are a frequent contributor of the MOS, I am not. I am a content contributor, not a guideline writer, but I do not appreciate, and can not tolerate, the MOS giving me or anyone else bad advice, as is currently the case with hyphens being replaced with endashes where hyphens are correctly used. So what is the solution? How is this problem to be fixed? Any suggestions? As I see it the MOS is written by about a dozen editors, who evidently are not very respectful of the wikipedia community as a whole. Apteva (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Your holier-than-thou "take pity on anyone reading [Wikipedia]" without your magically fantastic input, that is somehow automatically better than everyone else's" attitude is the whole problem. You do not have a collaborative attitude, but a WT:MOS, and that is very telling. People who are genuinely correct on an issue never fear public criticism, because their critics are self-evidently wrong, and only serve to make the facts they oppose all the clearer. The opposite has been happening in your case. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Short version: Wikipedia:Nobody cares. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Friendly (talk page stalker)Two points ... The three cups of tea is pretentious. Their User page speaks volumes – (NB not a hyphen) – via a UBX to profess outwardly that "This user would like to be an admin. one day". I rest my case, Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 10:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the