Template:Lawschool-stub editHi - I note your new template for law school stubs. It's a good idea to have such a category, but two things for future reference: 1) there's no point having a stub template if it doesn't link to a specific stub category (I've added one); 2) Stub categories are usually debated before creation at Wikipedia: WikiProject Stub sorting. As I said, in this case it's a good idea for a category, but if you are planning to make any more you should probably run them past WP:WSS first! Grutness|hello?
VfD untransclusions editSince you've taken an interest in helping to untransclude the really long discussions from the main VfD page, we should talk about the mechanics. The technique you are using - replacing the text right on the log page - will cause user:AllyUnion's VfD bot to fail to move the articles properly from VfD to VfD/Old. The preferred technique is to:
When the VfD period runs out, the bot ports the /temp page over properly. When the deciding admin finally closes the discussion, he/she will (hopefully) re-transclude the discussion onto the archive page. Thanks again for your help. We just want to make sure the bot keeps running correctly each night. Rossami (talk) 02:13, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Safety tip editThere's a nasty bug in MediaWiki: if you edit a section, save it, get back an error and resubmit, there's a good chance the entire article from that section on will be duplicated. This is what happened at Wikipedia:Unusual articles. This is easily fixed (well, the duplication; the bug is still unresolved, I'm afraid), but there's also an easy way to avoid: if you get back an error that the server "gave no response", open the article history in a new tab or window instead. If it shows your edit, you can ignore the error. If not, you can resubmit. Or, of course, if you don't have all day, just resubmit and someone will come along and fix it. Cheers! JRM · Talk 16:58, 2005 May 2 (UTC) Substubs editHi - just wondering, since I see you are one of the few people still using {{substub}} what you think of proposals for its demise? There are currently no substubs, since almost everything that was in the category was more likely to be expanded by giving it a more specific stub tempate. Grutness|hello? Userfy template edithi. i had a go at making a userfy template for the newbie vanity pages we keep getting. do you think we should use it in future? make changes to it? thanks. Nateji77 05:58, 13 May 2005 (UTC) I think we should encourage them to move it to their user page, but aside from that userfy/delete and delete/userfy is the same to me. Nateji77 14:24, 13 May 2005 (UTC) Temporary Bug workaround editHi, I saw just your message about it taking days to check your list, due to the bug... I haven't tried this yet myself, but here's something I just read from another user: As a temporary work-around, you can copy your entire list of articles to a new user subpage, make all the article titles links, then click "related changes". Cheers, Codex Sinaiticus 1 July 2005 19:15 (UTC) Queen editThanks so much, that was driving me crazy! Mark 8 July 2005 16:36 (UTC)
Disambiguation link repair edit
About Copyvios editFYI, when you catch one of these, you need to also remove the text violation – which I have done at How Europeans came to dominate the world. Anyone who is curious can then examine the history of the page. But I agree, this is a clear copyright violation. – llywrch 17:22, 15 July 2005 (UTC) Quizbowl editRefactored now, is this better? Radiant_>|< 14:14, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
Duplicate sections editThe instructions on Wikipedia:Duplicated sections ask that if there is no actual duplication, you underline the line rather than
RE:disambiguation editAh, thanks for the disambiguation. I'm still getting accustomed to wikipedia's editing system.Trilemma 13:37, 14 August 2005 (UTC) Thanks for your hard working disambiguation efforts editYou caught my folly on Prescott Farm. Thank you. – Ambush Commander(Talk) 14:35, August 16, 2005 (UTC) Template:MiniAWFP editNicely done with the shrinkage! -- BD2412 talk 02:39, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
Current Disambiguation Collaboration editAre we going to make "American" a redirect to American (disambiguation)? This would really change the Current Disambiguation Collaboration at Dab's with links. I think before the collaboration is chosen next time, we should fix up any redirects first. --Commander Keane 07:02, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
Dormant articles editHi there, I've responded to your question on my talk page. Enchanter 21:04, August 20, 2005 (UTC) Long-dormant files editI'd like to generate a list of long-dormant files, e.g. those that have had no edits in over a year (or maybe several lists sorted by length of dormancy). My theory is that long-untouched files must either already be done (unlikely), or may have been forgotten and possibly fallen out of date. I also suspect that there may be many one-time posting of notes on anon user pages that can be done away with altogether. I lack the technical capacity to generate any kind of list, tho - can you guide me on this? Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 14:52, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
Mini template editI never could really understand what the cowbell was about, but your Template:MiniAWFP - pure genius. Thank you. --Commander Keane 16:55, August 27, 2005 (UTC) Disambiguation of "British" in Penda of Mercia editThe article is referring to the Celtic peoples who were eventually reduced to Wales and Cornwall. "British" is the usual historical term you see for them for the period in question. Everyking 03:04, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Most wanted articles editHello, Beland! Wikipedia:Most wanted articles is running out of articles that the average user can address (mostly British Rail class articles remain). Can you generate a new list? -- BD2412 talk 16:26, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Disambiguation editAre you intending to change all Britain or British to United Kingdom? They are not synonymous. See British Isles (terminology). I think it's very wrong to add these links to other people's comments on talk pages and make it appear that were referring to the UK when they might not have been. Angela. 03:28, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
What links here count editAt the dab's with links page your mentionaed that you re-counted American, How did you do that? --Commander Keane 04:55, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
Category:Woodworking machine editI have put it up for speedy deletion. It is now empty and articles have been recategorised to Category:Woodworking machines as per your suggestion on the User talk:SilentC page. If you are an administrator, please go ahead and delete the page.Luigizanasi 05:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
RfD editNo problem, glad to help. Noel (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC) Lists of songs editI am writing because you contributed to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion/Lists of songs. I have made a policy proposal at User:Wahoofive/Lists of songs and would welcome your comments. —Wahoofive (talk) 03:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC) Templates with red links editOh great guru, I climb the mountain to ask: would it be possible to generate a list of templates containing red links? Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 13:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Your patience has been rewarded with Wikipedia:Templates with red links. Turns out there are a lot of red links on templates. – Beland 03:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC) Unprotection request editI can't tell why Image:Beatles-singles-the-long-and-winding-road-1.jpg is protected (no history of vandalism on the page that I can see), but I need to do a blank save on it to get rid of a pesky disambig false positive from its template. Can you unprotect it? Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 15:21, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Your welcome template... edit...is very cool, but I think if I were a newbie, I'd be confused as to whether "Journalist" (as it appears at the top) was a username or some kind of automatic welcoming bot (now there's an idea"). Also, why does the template contain a template? You could have just as easily copied the text of the {{welcome}} template into your own. Just curious. Cheers! ~~| BD2412 talk 14:49, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks editI like delinking disambiguation pages and have delinked over 100 pages since you told me about the project. I worked on Egyptions. The articles in the maintenance section are almost as bad as the articles in the main links section. So we aren't really anywhere near 80% done. Thanks for showing me this. Prodego talk 02:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC) Your message editOK, understood now! Thanks for the input and sorry about making your work harder... Charlie 09:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC) Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/Challenge editThe Challenge seemed so promising but with just two people signed up I don't think the community is ready for it. I guess we should put a notice on top of the page saying that the idea has been shelved, and try again in the distant future. Shame, it was a great idea. --Commander Keane 04:57, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Dab's with links editI considered fixing Author as progress, do you mind? Thanks for creating the Guide, I was thinking about making that page soon.--Commander Keane 05:40, 29 October 2005 (UTC) Page move. editFixed. There is a way for admins to move selected edits to a seperate page (keeping edit summaries and everything), but I haven't figured out how quite yet. If you want me to do that and do the move to keep the edit history that's fine, but I've seen alot of cut/paste archives, so I don't think it should be that big of a problem. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Kate's Tool editIt's odd, it went down shortly before my 30,000th edit too. I think she does it deliberately. – Francs2000
Special bot query editMmm...
Try Ally or Russ or Wikipedia:Bot requests, I fear I couldn't process your question until 2010. --Commander Keane 05:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC) Vague idea of checking old articles with few edits. edit
Hmm...interesting idea. We currently have Special:Ancientpages, but that's only a list of the articles that have gone the longest without editing. Wikipedia:Pages edited by one author only has also been requested in the past, but not yet created. Certainly something along these lines should be straightforward enough to implement. I'm thinking of the following procedure:
Then you would then be able to try combinations of various variables to see how many articles would be included by various criteria. Though I think you might do well just to come up with a ranked list. I would recommend sorting by number of editors first, then by number of edits, then by creation date. You could then post a list of the worst 500 to the wiki. But what's going to happen to these articles after they are found? Will there need to be a mechanism to suppress listing certain articles? Stuff that's so bad it needs to be deleted is pretty much taken care of - it won't show up on the next report, and in the meantime, everyone will be able to see that it is a redlink. I expect that people will start to triage the articles, and add {{wikify}} and {{cleanup}} and whatnot. If your listing is going to be triage-only, you can have people delete the listing once they've applied a cleanup tag, since then they will be brought to the attention of other editors through the normal cleanup process. Adding such a tag will actually increase the number of editors and number of edits associated with an article, so you might not have to worry about preventing these articles from showing up at the top of your list the next time around. If you want to make it more than a triage-only listing, editors can be instructed to remove listings only after substantial improvements have been made, though after a few editors touch them, articles will no longer appear at the top of your list. If you are just doing triage, though, you might want to exclude articles that are already flagged for some kind of cleanup, if they clog up the list. (I'm guessing that won't happen, but you never know.) – Beland 06:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Question editWhat does this coding-found at the bottom of the article Abraham Lincoln- mean? Thanks,
Edit: I see that they link to other language Wikipedias, but the links don't appear on the Abraham Lincoln article Why is this? Thanks.--Prodego talk See edit ;-) Any idea why they don't appear? (I tried using preview to move them(the language links) around the article, but regardless of where the links were (in the article) they didn't appear in the preview. Did you change your sig? Nice T Prodego talk Grass editYour changes regarding Grass and Grass (disambiguation) are contrary to the purposes of a disambiguation page. To say "grass" has some overwhelming meaning is invalid, since you cannot predict what the majority of users coming from a search for "grass" will be seeking by using a term obviously in need of disambiguation. Although I see that you would fix this by first directing every one to Poaceae and then the others on to the disambiguatin page, this sort of complicated, roundabout way of doing things was the purpose of having the more direct approach of using a disambiguation page (a wikipedia standard method), with the only clear advantage being your sense that "most" users would not have to make a series of steps to get where they wanted to in the first place. I think generally such redirect lines at the start of an article are to be avoided if possibble (not always possible) as is your second guessing user proportions. Personally, I think more users will go on to the Grass disambiguation page than the Poaceae page, so I would even question your basis for making the changes in the first place. - Marshman 22:33, 10 November 2005 (UTC) You are waisting a lot of effort. Someone is going to have to fix the damage you are doing to Grass (disambiguation). Since you refuse to discusss, I'll let you proceed (its your time), but you are essentially reversing efforts that were done a year or more ago to settle essentially the argument you are now assuming without discussion - Marshman 02:17, 11 November 2005 (UTC) Backlog? editYes, that was the idea. If something is perpetually backlogged because of influx, why not tag it? I'm trying to bring attention to the cat as much as possible, e.g. on RFA, as well. Radiant_>|< 22:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC) Talk:Kirby (disambiguation) editHey Dabrams, could you check out the move request on the above page? It seems like an obvious move (I actually did it unilaterally, but got shouted down, so I brought it to requested moves) but almost no one's voting on it. Another vote or two should establish a conensus, I guess. Thanks. -R. fiend 17:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC) Blue Coat School, Oldham editHi, just wanted to ask if you were aware that the disambiguation links you fixed in Blue Coat School, Oldham were actually in the BJAODN version of the article. I guess changing the links doesn't really matter, but the page kind of isn't supposed to be edited—did you mean to? – SCZenz 05:53, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Pine nut / dabbing Native American editHi Tedernst - saw you dabbed this to [[Native Americans in the United States|Native Americans]]. It applies as much or more to Native Americans in what is now Mexico than the US, but was relevant on both sides of the modern border. What's the best to use in that scenario? - MPF 20:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Conflict editI have modified one of the standard templates to create Template:Conflict of laws but when I try to invoke it with the {{}} it modifies the entire page rather than simply inserting itself as an infobox. Obviouslly I am making a simple mistake but cannot immediately identify it. If you approve the template, could you show me how to invoke it. Many thanks in anticipation and sorry to disturb you. David91 07:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC) Thanks for your help. I aim to finish off all the outstanding Conflict elements and revise the others for consistency during the next few days. David91 06:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC) Template:FAOL text editThis template I've created serves as a boilerplate text for the project page WP:FAOL. CG 18:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC) new dab template project editAbout Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/from templates. I don't think we need to move dabs to a bottom section. It will be trival at the end to get a bot to touch the dabs - and the bot can just use the orginal list. So I'm going to just remove (delete) the entries I've completed. If you diagree I can always go back and put the ones I've done in the completed list.--Commander Keane 21:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC) Template:Houston Infobox editMy pleasure. I'm sure it will be something to tell the grandkids... "You were an admin before BD2412, but I thought he was always and admin"? I have no idea why Template:Houston Infobox was protected. I lifted the protection and have done the link repair. Incidentally, Bo (the dump master extraordinaire) has informed me that there are a total of 412194 main space article links needing repair (as of Nov. 13).--Commander Keane 09:42, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Dab'ing timelines editSince I didn't get around to leaving a note on the project page (mea culpa), you dab'ed Pantheon from Template:Roman Empire again. Unfortunately, the dab broke the formatting of the rest of the page, so I have reverted to the un-dab'ed version. (And asked the author of the EasyTimeline thingy for help). So when you fix a timeline, please check to make sure it doesn't break the formatting. I hope we'll figure out soon why this happens and what can be done to avoid it. Thanks and happy disambiguating, Kusma (talk) 21:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
My apologies (again) editMy apologies for disturbing you again but I would value your opinion on the issues raised on Talk:Get (conflict). David91 09:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC) Thank you for resolving the misunderstanding which originated when it was suggested that the page be retitled. Frankly, I have no understanding of why they are pressing for a merger or to avoid using Conflict, but we seemed to lack any common ground for an exchange of views so your input has saved me from my own stupidity (yet again). David91 14:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC) Unreferenced editSounds fine to me. We need more topic categories for unreferenced tags. – BRIAN0918 • 2005-12-6 15:27 Timeline of British composers editOK, I think that's fixed now. I suspect you weren't breaking the template, it's just that the rendering - I found when I created it - is rather temperamental and it's a bit of a coin-toss as to whether it appears when you preview/save. Cheers for the feedback. --bodnotbod 22:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC) |
