User talk:Colonies Chris/Archive/2017/Dec

Precious four years!

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

My reversion

I reverted your change for a couple of reasons: 1. You introduced an error by changing 'DE' to 'Delaware' 2. The pipelinks were a deliberate style choice. With teams moving or changing names relatively frequently, often during the tenure of a Pro Bowler with a specific team, I decided upon a link to the current incarnation of the team for simplicity's sake. Please bear in mind that WP:NOPIPE is neither a policy nor a guideline, and should not be used to justify disputed changes. I would highly recommend making bot-assisted, wholescale changes to articles with that as your justification.

I agree with the en-dash changes, but I will revert the team name changes back to the previous format.

Thank you, caknuck _° needs to be running more often 22:56, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

So let me get this clear. I made one error, among dozens of improvements, and for that you revert the whole lot. Aren't you capable of just fixing that one error and informing me, so I could apologise for the inconvenience?

From the point of view of a reader who's looking for information about a specific ProBowler, why would they be interested in the current team? They want to know about the team that person actually played on, and that's what my changes would give them. Colonies Chris (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

You made one error, several improvements (which I do appreciate... thank you) and several disputed changes. As it stands, the current team articles do contain historical info about the franchise from all eras. And as I stated, the current format was made in the interest of simplicity, to allow for easier expansion of the list -- which has been a slow and laborious process -- and to reduce confusion when careers span team relocations and/or rebranding. What I'm trying to say is that it wasn't an arbitrary style choice.

After I made my reversion, I took the time to complete the edit I had been working, then came here to begin discussion. I've been here long enough to know that mindless edit wars lead to nothing productive. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 23:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

And I've been here long enough to know that when another editor's reaction to an edit is to hit the revert button without even bothering to leave an edit summary in explanation, I'm not dealing with a reasonable person. So perhaps you might explain how piping teams to a current incarnation which may be many years ahead of when the player was active is in any way either helpful to a reader or 'n the interest of 'simplicity' or 'reducing confusion'. Colonies Chris (talk) 23:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Caknuck: Actually, the name of the team at the time when a player or coach was part of the organization should be used. For example, the "St. Louis Rams" should link to History of the St. Louis Rams and not to the Los Angeles Rams' page. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Sabbatino: Is that the consensus at WP:NFL? I took a look through all of the article conventions I could find, but couldn't find a discussion on that point. If I missed it, and that's what the WP had decided upon, then it should be changed. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 21:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

@Caknuck: That is the common practice across all sports-related pages, including AFL and NFL. In addition, why do you think that it should be changed? I also suggest moving this discussion to WT:NFL so it would not pollute another user's talk page. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

@Sabbatino: I'm not saying it should be changed. It was more convenient for me to use the simpler format. But if the consensus is to use the History articles, then that's what I'll do. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 22:51, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Colonies Chris/Archive/2017. As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors, Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 21:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Removing state code on Basketball article tables

We have had this discussion many times. Consensus is to consistsently list City, State on Basketball article tables (rosters, game logs) and there’s is no Wikipedia policy/guideline banning them in these cases. Please stop removing these from major cities. Rikster2 (talk) 01:46, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Again, please stop removing State from major cities from basketball info boxes and templates. If this continues I do plan to go to ANI with this, because it has been going on for too long and dropping State is not a set guideline on Wikipedia. Many of us have tried to have this conversation with you but you do not listen. Rikster2 (talk) 02:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with @Rikster2:. The same behavior can also be seen on NFL and other sports articles. We have discussed this with you in the past, but you just keep going "your way". ANI is the only solution to such behavior.

I will continue to edit in accordance with the guidelines at WP:USPLACE ad WP:NOPIPE. If you choose to take me to ANI, I will defend my actions vigorously. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

As has been pointed out to you many times, removing the State from major cities at WP:USPLACE only talks about article naming and in no way supports removing in all cases in the face of disagreement. So essentially your behavior (ignoring consensus of projects, continuing to make these types of edits over objections of several editors over the course of years, etc) would be the focus. You don’t have a policy argument that overrides your behavior. We could absolutely come to an agreement on WP:NOPIPE, as this would not preclude keeping State after city, it just might Drive how this is accomplished. But honestly, nobody WANTS to take this to ANI, I just feel like nothing else has worked with you, despite repeated attempts to discuss with you, literally over the course of years. Rikster2 (talk) 18:36, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

If you want to try to get me sanctioned for occasionally, in the course of my general gnoming, removing the less than vital information that New York City is in New York state, or that Los Angeles is in California, then go ahead. I would welcome an end to this petty harassment. Colonies Chris (talk) 18:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

It is your choice to edit using scripts and loading several different variables into it. You could easily not apply this script to types of articles where editors have legitimate concerns. Or, better yet you could modify your script to not force the State removal (or have a slightly different script to use in some cases). The issue is that you use a script with 15 variables and one edit applies them all. That may be efficient for you, but for me to go in and fix the State I either have to undo the edit completely or scroll through the entire article and edit the relevant parts. I have been trying to be nice by not just reverting out of hand, and because I don’t disagree with many of your changes, but it takes me way more time to do it this way. So your expediency is resulting in additional work for your fellow editors. Like I said, I am not itching to bring you to ANI, but after at least 2 years of this cropping up every few months I am not sure what else will convince you to compromise insted of just plowing ahead with your scripts. Rikster2 (talk) 19:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to second Rikster2's comments here. Please review your script edits a bit more carefully. This edit was full of good clean up edits. However, if you look at the league table, it left it a mess of inconsistent style such as listings with Boston, MA, Toronto (with no secondary location), and Raleigh, North Carolina. I get the point of the edits, but sometimes style should be considered and I am merely asking you take more care when editing tables and lists (such as possible reviewing your automated edits) instead of making other editors do it for you. Thank you, Yosemiter (talk) 19:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Rikster2 (talk) 00:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Re-added to get administrator input. Rikster2 (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Colonies Chris. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

Hi Colonies Chris,

I've noticed that you're going around making a bunch of small edits to math-logic articles, correcting dashes and the like. That's a good thing; thank you.

But you aren't leaving edit summaries, which makes it a little hard on those of us who have a lot of those articles on our watchlists.

Are you familiar with AutoWikiBrowser? I don't use it myself because it's not available for Linux, but supposedly it makes a lot of these repetitive tasks easier. As a bonus, you can set it to automate the edit summary as well, making it clear to others what you're doing. --Trovatore (talk) 20:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King Kaluha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sun Journal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:10, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI closure

Hello there. I've closed the ANI discussion about your use of automated editing to make changes to state-name abbreviations, with directions of what you need to do if you wish to continue making these edits: you are advised to read the result here. Thank you. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)