Open main menu

Contents

Happy New Year Jonesey95!

 
Happy New Year!
Hello Jonesey95:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, --Nevéselbert 00:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)



Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Copy-edit query

I have copy edited Beef Island. In my opinion it needs breaking into two articles. One, Beef Island, made up only of the current lead. The second, Beef Island development controversy, made up of everything else and with the first paragraph below the current lead as the lead of the new article.

Now even if I squint I can't see how tearing an article in half counts as copy-editing, which makes it above my pay grade. So, what with being new here, if energetic, I thought that I would pass it on to you for any action or non-action. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

PS It then needs {{Sections}} Gog the Mild (talk) 21:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't think it's big enough or the content of the two sections is different enough to warrant splitting. See Wikipedia:Splitting. If someone were interested in either the island or the controversy, this 625-word page serves as a reasonable destination for learning about either or both. IMHO. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thank you. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:25, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Mountain railways of India copyedit request

Jonesey95, today's entry on the GOCE Requests page by 168.233.20.6 is one of the Punyaboy-related IPs who tagged so many of the India railway articles back in the day prior to Punyaboy being blocked for socking, though someone else put in the copyedit request back in July. The article has been undergoing a community GA reassessment for many months, with little movement: the nominator has been pressing for a delisting for reasons of varied cogency, but so far no one is biting, and the reassessment has yet to be closed.

Under the recent GOCE rule change, IPs who have had little to do with an article are not eligible to make Requests, and 168.233.20.6 has only edited the lede, and that only today. I think this request should be disallowed, and the July-dated copyedit template allowed to eventually bear fruit. I did notice that you did a bit of lede cleanup right after the Request was made. I'll let you decide what to do with the Request, but I thought you should know some history here. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I can't (and shouldn't be allowed to) make decisions like this without consensus. Can you please post this on the Requests talk page so that we have a record of it? Also please link to evidence that the IP is Punyaboy-related and to the "community GA reassessment", which I couldn't find on the article's talk page. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Jonesey95, I wasn't aware that non-participating IP requests needed consensus, any more than a third request from the same editor would. As for the connection to Punyaboy, what I knew at the time was written in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Punyaboy/Archive; while the IPs weren't blocked (they rarely are at SPI, or even checked), they were all active at the time, including this one. Link to GAR is here. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:39, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Another copy edit query.

I am copy editing Battle of Melantias. This is a topic which I know (quite a bit) about. It is appallingly written, and so it took me a while to realise that it bears almost no resemblance to the historical events. To such an extent that it is sophisticated vandalism. I had a look at the contributions of the editor responsible, 84.40.72.28, and they are all on similar lines. Screeds of broken English with faux references, just on topic enough not to be obvious nonsense. In one case, Pirdop Apostle, he was reverted with a comment "removing a section that is highly likely a hoax". He has been posting since late September 2017.

Is it possible to have his IP address blocked? (Meanwhile I will start working through his input and restore the various articles he has wrecked - which will take me away from copy editing for a while.) Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

It is very likely that user Michael of Potuka is the same or a closely linked editor. (Sigh. Can I go back to just writing articles?) Gog the Mild (talk) 23:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Such is life at WP. Try not to get too worked up about it, since trolls are persistent. Step one is to post a note on the IP editor's talk page. You have to assume good faith and show that you have given the editor a chance to respond. If you get nothing from that, look at the instructions at WP:AIV. If the edits are not clearly vandalism, try WP:ANI, where you should provide a narrative explanation with links to diffs (go to View History, show the difference between two versions, and copy the resulting URL). – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm not worked up, thanks; but it is frustrating. The IP address is a special page with no talk page, which is why I ran to you. Checking now Michael of Potuka has a talk page, and a stern talking to from a bot on. I shall add to it. Thank you for the sound advice. I think that pretending that I am assuming good faith is going to be a challenge. He has made some useful contributions, and seems quite clear that he knew what he was doing when he vandalised. No doubt it will be character forming. This copy editing lark is quite a learning experience. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
IP editors have talk pages. See User talk:84.40.72.28. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, well. Thank you very much. I was looking at the contributions page. D'oh! Gog the Mild (talk) 00:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

lang and |script=

Just so you know, |script= is not supported by {{lang}}. This is because is is easier to write a {{lang}} template with a complete IETF language tag than it is to write the equivalent thing with the |script=, |region=, and/or |variant= subtag parameters.

I have fixed about 175 {{lang}} templates that were written {{lang|??|script=????|...}}{{lang|??-????|...}}

Trappist the monk (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Oof, sorry to make work for you. Is this correct? I have a script that I have been using to make these conversions. I adjusted it before making the edit linked here. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Russian: да, romanizedda, lit. 'yes' – in the sense that ru-Latn text was italicized before. Because 'Viktor Platonovič Nekrasov' is a proper name, probably not. I kept running into that: proper names as titles of films, book, persons, places, ... Too much context knowledge required to make a script really do the right thing. But, the fixes that you are making are, I think, spot-on because the rendered output before the module with auto-italics and the rendered output after auto-italics is the same. Because code ru implies or infers Cyrillic, ri-Latn is required (even though the module will italicize without the Latn subtag.
Why sorry? Am I not making work for you?
Trappist the monk (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Touche (to the last question). I like the kind of work you make, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:08, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox UK school

 Template:Infobox UK school has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox school. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

template problem

Hi, while trying to add the {{subst:uw-editsummary}} template to a user talk page, it showed an error with the template "Div col" "cols"-parameter. I see you just recently made an edit to that template involving the "cols" parameter. Could you double-check your edit and see if that's the issue? If not, could you take a look at the edit summary notice template and see if you can find the source of the problem? Thanks - theWOLFchild 23:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

note: I changed {{Div col|"cols"-2}} to {{Div col|2}} on the edit summary notice template and it now works. It seems your edit may have affected templates (and articles?) using {{Div col|"cols"-2}} to split lists. I don't know how many pages might/will be affected, but hopefully you can look into it. Thanks again. - theWOLFchild 23:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The parameter that works is |cols=, not |"cols"= (with quotation marks). The parameter called |"cols"= never worked, as far as I know, and now it generates an error message when you preview it. Your substitution would have worked fine, I believe. I have updated the uw-editsummary template. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
No problem, but fyi, that template has worked with "cols" (in the quotation marks) for years, never had a problem, I'm the one that added it to the edit summ notice a few years ago. Since then, I've gone with ((Div col|2)) going forward, as it's quicker & easier, but some older pages will still have the older version. Anyway, I glad it's sorted out now. Thanks. - theWOLFchild 06:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
It "worked" only by chance, because the default number of columns was 2, so {div col|"cols"=2} was the same as {div col} with no arguments at all. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

{{Div col|"cols"=2}}{{Div col end}}

Is this gone now? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 00:11, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I have removed all instances of the unsupported parameter |"cols"= from article space. The parameter |cols= (without quotation marks) is still supported, but deprecated. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
News to me, what's the un-deprecated way to do it? ThanksKeith-264 (talk) 00:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
See the documentation for {{Div col}}. The |cols= parameter has been deprecated since 2014. The recommended parameter to set column width is |colwidth=. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

─────────────────────────Thanks Keith-264 (talk) 09:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

John McPhee

Actually, that paragraph in which you removed "Coal Train" is a messy mixture of articles and book titles. The Uncommon Carriers book that contains the "Coal Train" piece was already listed, I just noticed. Perhaps we should try to separate out what's an article or section from what's a book? Like The Control of Nature which contains the piece on the Atchafalaya River (I forget the title of that piece, but my favorite in that book was "Los Angeles Against the Mountains" which is suddenly very current in light of the recent fires and debris flows). I just finished McPhee's Draft Number 4 which makes me want to read a few more. I have about 2 shelf feet of his books in my library already, but not Coming into the Country which figures well in his latest book about the writing process. Dicklyon (talk) 05:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

You should pick up Coming into the Country. It's a good book for winter reading (assuming that you are in the northern hemisphere). As for the paragraph in question, take a hack at it. I decided not to edit war about "Coal Train", since I have bigger fish to fry, but to me, it clearly didn't belong, being an essay (not a book) and already being part of a book listed in the paragraph.
I too, have a two-foot shelf of McPhee books and a few more that don't fit on a regular-sized shelf. He and E. B. White are my favorite prose writers. I have every essay of his that has been published between book covers, as far as I know. I just received the new one as a gift, and I'm looking forward to reading it soon. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I will get Coming into the Country and maybe try to clean up that section a bit. Probably should list books and essays separately? Dicklyon (talk) 07:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't list all of the essays; we already have a list of the books. If there are essays that are notable (i.e. covered in reliable sources), those might be worth mentioning. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Template:Przypisy listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Przypisy. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Przypisy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. PRehse (talk) 14:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Assistance re: Kripashankar Patel Bishnoi

Hi! As part of the Jan 2018 WP:GOCE Drive, I have been working on Kripashankar Patel Bishnoi. From the infobox on the page, news articles, and results tables within Wikipedia, it appears that the title of the page should be Kripa Shankar Patel Bishnoi (not Kripashankar...). What is the correct procedure for changing the page title/article name? Thank you, in advance, for your help! Laatu (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

At the upper right of the article page, to the right of View History, you should see a drop-down menu with an option called "Move". Click it and enter the new article name. It is not something that should be done often, but it looks like you have done adequate research. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you - for the answer AND for the very quick response! Laatu (talk) 23:40, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018 GOCE barnstars

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 04:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Elcor, Minnesota

Hello, Jonesey95! Thank you for your copy edits resulting in GA status for the article Elcor, Minnesota. The article's prose reads and flows much better thanks to you. The article is currently up for FA review. One of the editors had requested that the lead section "be broadened to effectively summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." I have done this: would you look it over and provide any copy editing you see fit? Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 15:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Done. It was in pretty good shape already. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:43, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello again, Jonesey95! The article Elcor, Minnesota is progressing through the FAC review process. Could I ask you to look at the Geology section? I have made some edits at the request of reviewer Finetooth, but am not certain I like the way it reads. If you can improve upon it, please feel free. Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
DrGregMN: I took a stab at it. See if you like it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Jonsey95, you are awesome. As always, you have my profound thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 01:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello again, Jonesey95! Another copy edit request for this article, second paragraph in the establishment section. Compare the revisions if you would, please. I've been trying to add some additional information which I feel is relevant to the article before its listing as TFA, but it doesn't seem to read right. I might have made things a little more murky instead of providing clarification. Would you have a look? As always, thank you! DrGregMN (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
I made some minor improvements. I think it reads a little better. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:34, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
That's why I love what you do Jonsey95! It does read better, but I did make the article more murky. It was actually the Minnesota Iron Company which had controlling interest in Petit and Robinson, not the other way around. My only other problem is the sentence about the Minnesota Steamship Company being vertically integrated with the Minnesota Iron Company. It makes it sound like it was an existing company bought out by the Minnesota Iron Company in 1889 when in fact it was organized by the Minnesota Iron Company to carry ore for its mines. Could you please take another look? I made some minor changes to the last paragraph of the abandonment section as well, but I think it reads okay. Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

GOCE in use template

Jonesey95, you may wish to comment at User talk:SMcCandlish#What is the meaning of a GOCEinuse template?. I would be sorry to lose the "GOCEinuse" template.  – Corinne (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2018 (UTC) I'm sorry. I can't figure out how to include the curly brackets and make the link not show the entire template on your talk page.  – Corinne (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018 blitz bling

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 2,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE February 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 17:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

GOCE February 2018 news

Guild of Copy Editors February 2018 News
 

Welcome to the February 2018 GOCE newsletter in which you will find Guild updates since the December edition. We got to a great start for the year, holding the backlog at nine months. 100 requests were submitted in the first 6 weeks of the year and were swiftly handled with an average completion time of 9 days.

Coordinator elections: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2018 were elected. Jonesey95 remained as lead coordinator and Corrine, Miniapolis and Tdslk as assistant coordinators. Keira1996 stepped down as assistant coordinator and was replaced by Reidgreg. Thanks to all who participated!

End of year reports were prepared for 2016 and 2017, providing a detailed look at the Guild's long-term progress.

January drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2017 from our backlog and all December 2017 Requests (a total of 275 articles). As with previous years, the January drive was an outstanding success and by the end of the month all but 57 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 38 who signed up, 21 editors recorded 259 copy edits (490,256 words).

February blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 February, focusing on Requests and the last articles tagged in May 2017. At the end of the week there were only 14 pending requests, with none older than 20 days. Of the 11 who signed up, 10 editors completed 35 copy edits (98,538 words).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Reidgreg.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

ISBN for non English literature

Our bots can't manage that. Titles in English only. Thanks. 81.230.36.59 (talk) 23:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

81.230.36.59, I have no idea what you are referring to. If you link to one of my edits, or to an article, I may be able to help. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:24, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon: Jewish Women Artists (March 8, Oregon Jewish Museum)

On March 8 (International Women's Day), the Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education and artist Shoshana Gugenheim will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about Jewish women artists. Click here for more information. You can also express interest or suggest articles to create or improve here. This event is free and open to the public, and will serve as both a public art action and a public educational program. Participation is welcome in person and remotely (for those outside of Portland). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon (March 10, Pacific Northwest College of Art)

On Saturday, March 10 (11am to 4pm), the Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA) will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about art, feminism, and women. You can read details on the Facebook event page, or this Wikipedia meetup page. Tutorials for new editors, reference materials, childcare, and refreshments will be provided. Bring your laptop, power cord and ideas for entries that need updating or creation. For the editing-averse, you're welcome to stop by to show your support! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Continuation War + Winter War

Thanks a thousand for revising the old citations at Continuation War! Judging from its page history, they date from a time before the sfn-template or similar even existed (I'm assuming before 2009 based on a quick check). All the substance clean-up and checking/updating that the actual references are in order took enough time and toil for me so I didn't bother with the "technical" side of citations. If you and GOCE are ever up to it, Winter War has a similar problem with citations (otherwise it's an FA already and has been through a few non-GOCE c/e rounds). Or should I put it in as a request as well? Manelolo (talk) 14:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Wow, Winter War looks like a lot of work, but worth it to ensure that those short citations work. The nice thing about {{sfn}} is that you can run a background script to show you any that don't work. The old citations in Winter War don't do that, so if they are broken, there is no easy way to know. I'll see if I can rig up some sort of find-and-replace script to clean up those citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I am done with the sfn conversion at Continuation War. As for Winter War, its citations are very consistent and look good (on the rendered page), they appear to be working, and it's an FA, so I would be reluctant to mess with it, per CITEVAR. Verifiability and consistency of formatting are the most important things with citations. I once did a ton of work to make the citations at Jane Austen more consistent and less ambiguous, and I was reverted wholesale by editors who wanted short footnotes that were unverifiable and did not link to the full citations; go figure. A year and a half later, the citations are still inconsistent and ambiguous at that article, but once bitten, twice shy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Iveta Mukuchyan

Hello! Recently, I have nominated an article for copy editing and I have seen that you copy edit articles. If you have an interest in taking a look at the article, please do so. If possible, I would be so grateful. Harout (talk) 20:52 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Fake date stamp for archiving. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:59, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Review of Copy Editing Changes

I would like to help with copy editing and Wikipedia has chosen an article for me. There is a copy editing template on it, and after I make the changes I would want a review of them before removing the template. Is there a designated forum for reviewing specified articles?

Thank you. Falconious (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I recommend Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. I will make one suggestion that I would make to any new Wikipedia copy-editor: keep in mind that the articles that have been in our backlog for the longest time are typically still there for a reason. They are longer (more words) than the average article in our backlog, or messier, or somehow more difficult to copy-edit. If you find yourself looking at an article and are unsure how to proceed, sometimes it is best to leave it alone and gain experience by working on a more straightforward edit. Those can often be found in articles tagged in some of the newer backlog months (e.g. November 2017, December 2017, or January 2018). Articles in the very newest month or two are also sometimes tricky, because they may not have had many eyeballs on them yet and may be a total disaster. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Very much obliged. The article chosen is very recent, and I will keep in mind your advice.—Falconious (talk) 14:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018 drive bling

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE March 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 19:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for giving out the barnstars! – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:06, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon (April 13, University of Oregon)

On Friday, April 13 (3pm to 6pm), the University of Oregon will be hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon to create and improve Wikipedia articles about art and feminism. You can learn more at the Dashboard page, or our Wikipedia meetup page. Tutorials for new editors, reference materials, and snacks will be provided. Please bring your laptop, power cord and ideas for entries that need updating or creation. For the editing-averse, we urge you to stop by to show your support and have snacks! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Precious

copy-editing

Thank you for quality articles beginning with List of mayors of Eugene, Oregon, then Nike OTC Marathon and Virgil Abloh, for copy-editing thousands of articles, coordinating the Guild of Copy Editors and creating its award, for "I don't take anything that happens on Wikipedia personally.", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:46, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing

Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Whatamidoing (WMF), thanks for the note. I have fixed some Linter errors in the past, but the help text is woefully inadequate to assist me with fixing things like the HTML 5 misnesting error. Linter reports that there is a problem in the infobox at Euphrates Islamic Liberation Front, for example, and it looks like it might have something to do with the span tag, but the help text doesn't have any information about how one might fix the problem. If the help text were better or at least provided a lot more examples, the problems would be easier to fix, and we might have more people willing to work on them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Let's centralize it at WT:Linter, where you've left a note about how you fixed that article. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I'll help if I can. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 blitz bling

  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE April 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 15:43, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism for CE request Abbadia Alpina

I was plunking around in Abbadia Alpina trying to get things started (though I forgot to mark that I had taken it), but shortly after I had made a few minor edits someone pasted a multi-page essay on child development in the lead and deleted the whole history section. I removed the offending garbage and notated. In the edit history it appears this page is prone to vandalism, so I wasn’t sure if you wanted us to withhold our efforts here. VigilanteSilver (talk) 04:43, 29 April 2018 (UTC) VigilanteSilver (talk) 04:43, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

That looks more like an edit from someone new to Wikipedia than vandalism. I would go ahead and edit this article, though the task is more "cleanup" (in this case, converting bullets to prose and adding some section headers) than copy editing. If you're feeling generous, you could also add Template:Infobox frazione to the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Citation consistency

reference info for Dodo
unnamed refs 25
named refs 9
self closed 10
cs1 refs 34
cs1 templates 118
sfn templates 218
refbegin templates 1
use xxx dates dmy
cs1|2 df dmy 1
cs1|2 dmy dates 9
cs1|2 ymd dates 1
cs1|2 last/first 111
cs1|2 author 4
explanations
reference info for Rodrigues solitaire
unnamed refs 27
named refs 16
self closed 47
cs1 refs 42
cs1 templates 43
cs1|2 dmy dates 2
cs1|2 mdy dates 1
cs1|2 ymd dates 1
cs1|2 last/first 42
explanations

Hi, thanks for the offer, as discussed, the articles dodo and Rodrigues solitaire originally had a citation style similar to for example Broad-billed parrot, where all citations with a single page range are listed under references, and only those with broken up page ranges are listed under "works cited". But at some point, a now blocked editor changed it all to the style currently used, which I think is hard to manage. Therefore, when I added citations since, I used the original style, so now those articles use a weird mix of styles which doesn't look very pleasing. I've long wanted to change it back (I did so for some shorter articles), but it just seems a very overwhelming task, and I'm not so fond of citation editing... I think this would also improve the chance of Rodrigues solitaire becoming TFA at some point. By the way, I think the only citations in those articles that have broken up page ranges are Cheke & Hume 2008 and Fuller 2001. FunkMonk (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Can you please provide links to previous versions that are formatted in the way you prefer? Has there been any discussion on those articles' talk pages about citation formats? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Yep, here are the diffs for dodo[1][2] and for Rodrigues solitaire[3]. I brought it up on the dodo article's talk page here[4], with no answer. As you can see here[5][6], I was initially ok with the edits, but that was mainly because those were my first GAs, and I had little knowledge about how any of it worked. It was later discussed in this talk page[7] of an article where I've since made the citations consistent myself. FunkMonk (talk) 15:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Let's talk about Dodo first. The version that was promoted to FA had a consistent citation style, using short footnotes in the "Footnotes" section and long citations in the "Sources" section. If you're asking me to move any long citations from the Footnotes section to the Sources section, I'll be happy to do that. Making a citation style change away from the style that was in place when the article was promoted to FA would require a consensus on the article's talk page before I would be willing to do that work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
I could do that, but I have little hope that such a request would get much attention (considering my earlier request there). I'll try to ping the FAC reviewers, if they are still here. It seems Rodrigues solitaire had the original style when it was promoted, though, so it should be fine to change back. Far the most of my other FAC nominations had that style too when passing, so it has at least been accepted multiple times. FunkMonk (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Looking at Rodrigues solitaire, I see the clear, apparently undiscussed changes that were made, apparently in violation of CITEVAR, in September 2012. Was there any objection to those changes at that time? I'm curious why the changes were not reverted or objected to on the talk page? There is no requirement to do so, but why, more than five years later, is this an issue? An honest question. There is no statute of limitations on violations of guidelines and policy, but upsetting a five-year status quo is not something to be done lightly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:23, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
As above, I simply didn't know much, as those two were the first articles I ever nominated for GAN and FAC (I've been their main editor since). So I took the editor's word for it that it was better until I actually had to add more citations. So as you can see, I already brought up the issue back in 2013, but no one commented. More time went, and the citations became more and more inconsistent. The amount of time passed is just because I didn't know how to approach it, and was busy with other things. So regardless of what style is to be used, I think it can be said that the current mixture is problematic. It has to be made consistent at some point, so I would prefer the original style, since I'm (de facto) pretty much the only one who has to work with it (I've expanded both articles significantly since they were promoted, to keep them up to date with subsequent research). FunkMonk (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
That all sounds reasonable. Let's give the talk page discussions a few days to run their course, if anyone is interested. It's no fun having a bunch of work reverted, so I'd rather wait for objections before starting the work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
That's fine, they waited five years, they can wait a little longer, hehe... It isn't a pressing issue as such, it just has to be done sooner or later, and as mentioned, I think Rodrigues solitaire might be inappropriate as a TFA in the shape it is now (dodo was TFA long ago). Due to this discussion, I just noticed it's supposedly "national pigeon day" on June 13, so it may be timely for an extinct pigeon TFA... FunkMonk (talk) 16:54, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade

Hi,Jonesey95. I Yakovenko Yuri. I work at the Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Mikhail Tugan-Baranovsky. Thank you so much for making a quality review of the our article "Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade" If we understand you correctly, we encountered certain copyright issues with information that is listed on the Wikipedia site. Please, we kindly ask you to indicate what information and documents you need to provide to the university to confirm the right to publish information in the English Wikipedia from the official site. Also, we ask you to specify a postal address for sending confirmation documents. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Юрій Яковенко (talkcontribs) 22:19, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I think that the correct page is Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Anyone reading this page is welcome to correct me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:20, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Good day! Thank you for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Юрій Яковенко (talkcontribs) 20:51, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

n/a

About this. What is the item/info which is not applicable for inserting in that box? I assume that box is not intended for anything in the first place, so why not have it removed? I am asking for your motive of revert. Any specific reason or it looked odd wrt previous pages? Harsh Rathod Poke me! 14:29, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Because the row is for totals, and we don't total that column. It is the same format as all of the other barnstar pages. It's a two-year-old page that doesn't need any further edits; I suggest that you spend your time working on edits that will improve pages that people have a remote chance of looking at.
I am curious about what brought you to that specific page, however. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I was right then, you reverted just because it looked odd. Keep this up. I don't know what good is it doing? The table is perfectly okay even without that. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 17:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

soo

Would you be interested in turning this link blue? — xaosflux Talk 14:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I have much respect for you and many other administrators, but I find the combination of drama, policy fights, and nonsense from clueless people (including other admins[1]) that administrators have to engage with to be exhausting and stressful. I am very happy with my template editor rights; they have been very useful.
My one experience at ANI was a debacle. It involved an administrator who abruptly escalated a semi-revert to ANI, another administrator who consistently stated things that were not true and who simply refused to read policy or my responses, and one administrator who was moderately helpful but made no effort to correct the errors of his/her fellow administrators. This experience left a very bad taste in my mouth; I know it was a small sample size, but I was left thinking "these are not people I want to collaborate with".
In what ways do you think I could be helpful as an administrator? Are there non-administrator rights that it might be useful for me to have in order to perform my edits, which are normally gnome-like in nature? I am happy to help with deleting pages, moving pages, and other administrative work, but I can't be bothered with drama and nonsense. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:10, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Saying this will probably be my downfall at a potential RFA. If people are blinkered enough to vote against me because of this true statement on my own talk page, then the admin community is not one I am interested in joining.
No worries, don't want to drag you to where you don't want to be - and I know on enwiki adminship is a "big deal" no matter what some people say (because other people make it one). I was thinking you may be good for interface editing, dealing with things like history merges, speedy deletions, etc. With much less drama you could apply at WP:PERM for file mover/page mover if you want to start working in those areas. They generally want to see a modest amount of related editing in there first. I did see that 2 year old item - but that you continue to plow forward and make the project better. If you wanted to go for RfA one of the standard questions is about Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future? - and having a strong answer to it would indeed be key (and would head off someone else asking a more accusatory question on the same topic). Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 16:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
That ANI conflict caused me more stress than it should have. When I feel that people with power over me are not engaging in good faith or are failing to use rational, well reasoned, fact-based arguments, I find it quite disheartening and worrisome. I dealt with it by worrying quite a bit until it was over. I have no interest in having similar experiences on a regular basis. I'll look into WP:PERM, and per the recent Signpost article, if things like speedy deletion or interface editing are ever split out from admin rights, I'll take a look at those as well. Thank you for thinking of me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Future FAC request

Hi, I've been prepping the Oxalaia article for future FA candidacy after I helped get it to GA, and it was suggested to me on this[8] peer review that the page needs consistent citations for FA. Honestly I love editing articles but citation cleanup personally gives me a headache. So I'd really appreciate it if you could make the referencing more consistent, Thanks! ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ (Contribs) 02:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

  Done. Happy to help. Can you please fix the wikicode in your signature? It is very broken. At a minimum, please replace the closing font tags with closing span tags. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Ah, so that's why the signature wasn't accepted by my preferences. Sorry, I know nothing about wikicode and the guides were a bit vague on the subject. Also, thanks for the citation cleanup! Could you please do the same for Atlanticopristis? It's undergoing a GA review, should be my last request for now. (Link to the review[9]) ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 06:30, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
  Done, I think. And your signature is much better. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

US Patents are not copyrighted

  Resolved

Hi there. I noticed that you blanked an Rapid Automatic Cascode Exchange as a copy violation based on direct copying from a US patent. But US patents are not copyrighted (except possibly some images within the patent if so marked). The copied text must be attributed but a failure to attribute does not require blanking, and of course the copied text may not be suitable for other reasons. I'm not sure how to proceed. -Arch dude (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

May 2018 GOCE drive bling

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE May 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Old Articles, 5th Place
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copyediting six old articles during the GOCE May 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Great to see the backlog that low! – Reidgreg (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2018 News
 

Welcome to the June 2018 GOCE newsletter, in which you will find Guild updates since the February edition. Progress continues to be made on the copyediting backlog, which has been reduced to 7 months and reached a new all-time low. Requests continue to be handled efficiently this year, with 272 completed by the end of May (an average completion time of 10.5 days). Fewer than 10% of these waited longer than 20 days, and the longest wait time was 29 days.

Wikipedia in general, and the Guild in particular, experienced a deep loss with the death on 20 March of Corinne. Corinne (a GOCE coordinator since 1 July 2016) was a tireless aide on the requests page, and her peerless copyediting is a part of innumerable GAs and FAs. Her good cheer, courtesy and tact are very much missed.

March drive: The goal was to remove June, July and August 2017 from our backlog and all February 2018 Requests (a total of 219 articles). This drive was an outstanding success, and by the end of the month all but eight of these articles were cleared. Of the 33 editors who signed up, 19 recorded 277 copy edits (425,758 words).

April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 15 through 21 April, focusing on Requests and the last eight articles tagged in August 2017. At the end of the week there were only 17 pending requests, with none older than 17 days. Of the nine editors who signed up, eight editors completed 22 copy edits (62,412 words).

May drive: We set out to remove September, October and November 2017 from our backlog and all April 2018 Requests (a total of 298 articles). There was great success this month with the backlog more than halved from 1,449 articles at the beginning of the month to a record low of 716 articles. Officially, of the 20 who signed up, 15 editors recorded 151 copy edits (248,813 words).

Coordinator elections: It's election time again. Nominations for Guild coordinators (who will serve a six-month term for the second half of 2018) have begun, and will close at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible, and self-nominations are encouraged. Voting will take place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June.

June blitz: Stay tuned for this one-week copy-editing blitz, which will take place in mid-June.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Corinne, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Rolling Stones edit

Hi, I'm a bit puzzled by this edit where you removed archive URLs calling them "bogus". How so? I thought it was pretty standard practice per Wikipedia:Link rot. --Laser brain (talk) 15:21, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

The archive URLs in each of those citations pointed to an archive of a single article that was not the same as the article being cited in each of the citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:49, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-24

21:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE Blitz bling

  The Minor Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 1,999 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE June 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Comment needs copyedit

Hi. I noticed that the comment you left on Twofingered Typist's talk page is in need of a little copyedit. Probably a missing word. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 18:07, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Thinker78: Thanks, that was kind of you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade

Good morning. We sent a message.

{{OTRS pending}}

I hereby affirm that I represent Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Mikhail Tugan-Baranovsky the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of URLs of the content, and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work. I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Яковенко Юрій (Yakovenko Uyri) Appointed representative of Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Mikhail Tugan-Baranovsky 14.05.2018

Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade

Good morning. We sent a message.

{{OTRS pending}}

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donetsk_National_University_of_Economics_and_Trade

I hereby affirm that I represent Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Mikhail Tugan-Baranovsky the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of URLs of the content, and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work. I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Яковенко Юрій (Yakovenko Uyri) Appointed representative of Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Mikhail Tugan-Baranovsky 14.05.2018

Proposed deletion of Rapid Automatic Cascode Exchange

 

The article Rapid Automatic Cascode Exchange has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability, no reliable sources, A patent is a primary and unreliable source.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Template:WikiProjectCard

Was this template meant to be 'unblanced'? LintHint said it was missing an end tag, which is the repair I'd attempted to make. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

If it was meant to be 'unbalanced' by design then the LintHint script needs a whitelist. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't know why LintHint would have tagged it as erroneous. If you count the divs, you should see that they are balanced. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:13, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
I did count them , They are NOT balanced. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:57, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, you may be right. It looks like one more may be needed after "Unknown". Make sure to check those WikiProject pages where the template is used if you make a change. Are the WikiProject pages showing in the Linter list? – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:29, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Very odd, still getting a warning about a stripped tag.. Even though {{WikiProjectCard}} is blanced up. I think some other template is wrong as well. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
I think you fixed it with the new /div in the correct place. Well done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:00, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Just letting you know....

The date for the wikibreak is over. Regards. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:05, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Champion, thank you! – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018 GOCE Drive bling

  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 22:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jonesey95. You have new messages at TheSandDoctor's talk page.
Message added 06:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheSandDoctor Talk 06:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

August GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors August 2018 Newsletter
 

Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part.

Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here.

The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Div col

Thank you! I tried doing a {{div col|3}} and it didn't work...now I know why. I've done quite a few of the {{div col|2}}s. Is there a bot that corrects them...or is that even necessary? WQUlrich (talk) 21:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

WQUlrich: There is not a bot that corrects them; I have been changing them with a script. Articles with errors end up in Category:Pages using div col with unknown parameters, which is currently empty. I cleaned up a few just now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:50, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Wow. Thank you again. Sorry I'm not keeping up with things the way I used to. WQUlrich (talk) 19:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

two {{cite journal}} in a single <ref>

FYI you deleted parameters from the wrong cite. I fixed it. jnestorius(talk) 16:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

My apologies. I did not see that there were two templates in the same ref. I should have been more careful, especially in your User space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018 GOCE blitz bling

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 2,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE August 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Reidgreg for giving out the awards. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Appreciated

...but what's with all the {nbsp}s? [15] EEng 20:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I honestly can't remember now; too many Linter-related edits since then. I think I was trying to visually separate the single quote marks from the double quote marks. I suppose I could have used a plain space, but I had some sort of reason for the nbsps. I think you can remove them if they are not necessary. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Stumped by italics in certification table

I wonder if can share more of your tech skill which I obviously lack. In the article It's Time (Michael Bublé album) there's a dead link in the charts table but when I delete the URL or replace it, the rest of the table turns to italics. In fact, if I click Edit Source next to Charts and Certifications and make no changes at all, and simply click Show Preview, then the whole table is in all italics—except for the first line (Australia or whatever happens to be in that location). I cut and pasted the table and played with it in my sandbox. I even pasted it to a word processing program to see if there were any invisible characters or strange characters. But I remain stumped. This is on the latest version of Firefox. But it also happens in Safari and iCab. Perhaps I need to learn more about the certification table syntax. Thanks for whatever help you can offer.
Vmavanti (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this very interesting problem. I made a number of changes to Template:Cite certification that fixed some rendering problems. I still see the second and subsequent lines of the certifications table in italics in Preview, even though when the table is saved, it looks fine. That's a bit of a mystery to me. There may still be some syntax errors in that cite template related to formatting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:24, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

cs1|2 maintenance categories

and in particular, this:

For almost all editors, there is no need to make any changes to articles based on this category. It is being used primarily to debug the CS1 citation template code.

Really? If you got that from something that I wrote (your edit summary wasn't explicit about where I had written that) then perhaps I should stop writing because clearly (to me anyway) I have lost the ability to communicate. While it is true that maintenance categories can be implemented for debugging purposes, the majority exist because something should be fixed in the templates that cause article inclusion in the category.

Category:CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list is a good example of that: we detect parameter content that looks like it might be a list of author names in a parameter intended for a single author's name or portion of a name and assign that template to the maintenance category so that someone can fix it.

I'm pretty sure that articles in maintenance categories should be fixed.

Trappist the monk (talk) 19:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

You wrote The maintenance aspect of this category is to identify singular-form author-name parameters that appear to hold multiple names so that the offending template can be corrected. I was trying to summarize that bit. The category page doesn't really provide clear guidance on what to do with pages in the category, IMO. I'm happy to change, or have you change, what I wrote. I am wrong frequently; I add and edit missing and unclear instructions as a way to provide at least a little help for editors. I often come across maintenance/tracking categories with no instructions at all, which I find unhelpful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:10, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
You see? Apparently I can no longer write in a way that communicates what I mean. The bit about correction of the offending template was intended to be about cs1|2 templates in articles; something that any editor can / should fix. It was not about the module code so I'm going to delete your summary from the category.
I agree that categories should be documented.
Trappist the monk (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
No problem. Writing coherent English-language prose is hard. You write very good code, so you've got that to fall back on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Your edits to Template:Singles

Have caused a bunch of errors to display, whether reading a normal article and even more when previewing; see Always In Between, for example. Ss112 08:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Working on fixing it right now. I tested it in the sandbox, but this case is different somehow. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Fixed, I'm pretty sure. Thanks for letting me know in a kind way. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Cristatusaurus

I'm nominating Cristatusaurus for a GA review, and since you were of much help last time with Oxalaia and Atlanticopristis, I was hoping you'd be kind enough as to check the references on this article, and fix anything that might need fixing.

Much appreciated. ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 06:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Done. I left you a couple of tasks. Do a find in the article (or look at my edit diff) for two instances of "page" to see where page ranges are needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Just took care of those page number issues. ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 15:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

WPCleaner 2.0

 
Installer for WPCleaner

Hello Jonesey95.

I would like to inform you that a new version of WPCleaner is available replacing the old version (v1.43) dating back to almost a year. Unfortunately, going from version 1.43 to 2.0 automatically isn't possible and will require a new installation. It's necessary to install version 2.0 to take advantage of updates and bug fixes. Version 1.43 will have to be uninstalled manually, as there are no more updates for it.

The installation procedure is described at Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Installation.

Note: for usage in Bot mode, I strongly advise to check the modifications to be sure that the tasks run correctly

--NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 14:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, NicoV. Coincidentally enough, I was just trying install it on Mac OS about fifteen minutes ago, and I failed. I will try to install the new JDK to see if that resolves the problem. I have never really understood how to use WPCleaner (specifically how to work through a list of pages or how to save a page), but it looks like it might be a useful tool. I only use it now to update the list of ISBN errors (under Bot Tools). – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I hope it will solve the problem. Johnny Au managed to run it on Mac OS, but he finds that the new version is slower than the older one...
For using WPCleaner, it's rather easy to use normally. For saving a page, it's just the   button. To load a list of pages, there are several ways, depending on where the list is coming from: for example, if you want to work on some linter errors, there's a Linter button in the main window that will give you a list of pages with errors for a given linter category. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 14:59, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
WPCleaner is very easy to use regardless. It could be fast or slow, depending on the setup and the Internet connection. I mostly use WPCleaner to fix links. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:54, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Columbia Bridge (Connecticut River) coords

I'm confused. I'm not seeing where the coords are being specified. What am I missing, please? - Denimadept (talk) 13:36, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

They are in Wikidata, which is confusing and opaque. {{Infobox bridge}} is looking up coordinates in Wikidata and pulling them into the article automatically, so the coords in the NHRP template were redundant. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

September 2018 drive bling

  The Modest Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 20:16, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar script works again

Just wanted to thank you (and Torchiest) for your help. I saved your instructions and downloaded a clean version of his script, to which I'd done God knows what; a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Once I was able to save the .txt file as a .vbs and straightened out the paths—amazing what you forget in three years—it worked, and I'm not gonna breathe on the damn thing :-). Pinging Reidgreg, who did the table manually this time. All the best, Miniapolis 15:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. That script is a little touchy. Reidgreg made some improvements to the script, which I don't have access to from where I am (it's on a backup drive in deep storage for a while), which made the script a little less fragile. It still requires a bit of a programmer/debugger mindset, which is something that not everyone has (or should want to have – just ask my friends). – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Awesomesauce! Thanks for keeping me in the loop! – Reidgreg (talk) 17:00, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Glad you saw this, Reidgreg. I try not to make the same mistake twice, though, and am more aware of what I don't know about Visual Basic. I'm just glad the thing runs again, and should be set for (gulp) November :-). All the best, Miniapolis 22:54, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Linter, AutoEd and XHTML breaks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I don't see adding XHTML breaks listed as a problem on the linter page and that's all you did here. They're deprecated in HTML 5 and so I don't know why we should be adding them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:01, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

The syntax highlighter, which helps me find Linter errors (along with the LintHint tool), does not work unless the br tags are closed. The Linter error I fixed in that page was removal of an {{s-start}} template, which you can see near the end of the diff. The AutoEd script that I use closes the br tags and fixes some other script-fixable Linter errors, along with creating a well-written edit summary, so I often use it before or after fixing the initial Linter error that brought me to the page (in this case, a table tag that needed to be deleted).
Thanks for the note! If I were doing actual cosmetic edits, I would definitely want to be told, so that I could stop doing so. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:18, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Walter Görlitz: These are not deprecated in HTML 5. Void elements, of which are there some valid cases (<br> is one), may be self-closed (i.e., have a slash at the end) under HTML 5. --Izno (talk) 13:51, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Izno: You're confusing browser support with the standard. https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_br.asp states that only XHTML supports the break with close tag. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Walter Görlitz: No, I am not. 1) Wikipedia outputs HTML 5 as evidenced by <!DOCTYPE html> in the page source. 2) HTML 5 is not XHTML. 3) The HTML 5 standard in regard to this tag is here; here is the specification of whether this element may have a closing slash. In particular, see see 8.1.2.1. --Izno (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Izno:. Did you check my link? It states only XHTML supports <br />. I'm ignoring you from now on because you're over-thinking this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Walter Görlitz: Your URL is wrong, as you would clearly see if you read the actual standard. :) --Izno (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
First, it's not my URL, it's the summary at w3schools.com. You're simply wrong and don't like being told you're wrong. The standard is clear, it's not supported. If it were, then the examples in the standard would use the XHTML-style break, but they don't. You're simply over-complicating things. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:55, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Walter Görlitz: Did you read the standard? Yes, or no? --Izno (talk) 17:57, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes. And I understood it. And you're interpreting things. XHTML breaks are no longer needed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Walter Görlitz: Then tell me what Then, if the element is one of the void elements, or if the element is a foreign element, then there may be a single U+002F SOLIDUS character (/). This character has no effect on void elements, but on foreign elements it marks the start tag as self-closing. means to you. And, just so you know, you've moved the goalposts; "doesn't support it" and "doesn't need it" are not the same statement. --Izno (talk) 18:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
No. You tell me why the schools page say there's no change between HTML 4 & 5 and the break you're fighting for is only required in XHMTL. Sorry for moving the goal posts. It's both. Browsers do things that the standard doesn't call for. Void elements may use them but they're clearly not needed, so including them is a remnant of XHTML, not a requirement of HTML 5. Read https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1946426/html-5-is-it-br-br-or-br And if you want to continue this conversation, we should do it somewhere other than here. I have no plans to clog Jonesey95's talk page up further. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Please take this discussion to VPT or a another more appropriate venue. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reporting portal bugs

Hey,

I noticed your attempt to fix Portal:Renaissance. Thank you.

We have a couple programmers in the Portals WikiProject who are actively fixing bugs in the lua modules that power the new portals.

To help them prevent glitches from appearing in portals, please report any portal bugs you come across at WT:WPPORTD.

I've already reported the glitches you discovered in Portal:Renaissance. Thank you again.

By the way, aside from the occasional bug, what do you think of the new portal design? (slideshows, etc.)    — The Transhumanist   09:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer to a bug reporting venue. I'll use it if I come across something I can't fix.
I don't really look at Portal pages as a reader, so I can't say I've noticed a change. I mostly fix pages that have errors that appear on various lists. I can tell you that it can be frustrating to try to fix portal pages, since errors that show on a list sometimes disappear when the page is reloaded due to the errors being in a transcluded random page or portion of a page. It makes it hard to know whether there really is an error in the Portal page. I have found ways to fix some of the pages, as you can see in my recent edits in Portal space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:22, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Bell Tower (University of Portland)

Hello! I'm curious, do you ever conduct Good article nomination reviews? I'm looking for an editor to review Bell Tower (University of Portland). I'm not really sure why the first Good article reviewer closed the nomination before giving me time to address concerns, but regardless, all concerns have been addressed and this should be quite easy to review. If you're not interested, no problem whatsoever. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:40, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm happy to take a look at the content and MOS-related formatting of the article, but GA and similar reviewing is just not my bag. It also feels just slightly unseemly (to me; IMHO only) to do a GA review for a wiki-friend; I would rather see the process managed by neutral third parties. Maybe I'm too much of a purist. OTOH, I'm happy to put in policy-based Support votes on behalf of friends' causes, but only when I think policy supports their positions. GANs are too squishy for me, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
No problem whatsoever. I've never completed a GA review in my 10+ years as a contributor, so I totally understand. Thanks for your edits to the article! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:21, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

San Javier, Murcia

Excellent! Thank you very much for fixing those Infobox map template error messages. It would have taken me quite a bit of digging around to find out how to deal with those... FiveFaintFootprints (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

John Morris and Sons Salford

Hi, I'm curious to know why you chose to make the formulaic wikipedianese alterations to my text. Yes, I'm upset. I just want to know why you degraded it? Eddaido (talk) 10:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Please give specific examples of text changes that I made that you think degraded the text.
I will give you two specific examples of improvements. I changed "John Morris & Sons Limited" to "John Morris and Sons Limited" in order to be consistent with the article's title. Here's another example: I changed "John Morris and Sons came a little late to the manufacturer of motor vehicles" to "John Morris and Sons came a little late to the manufacture of motor vehicles" (removing the final "r" from "manufacturer") because the final r was a typo and incorrect.
Now it's your turn. List changes that I made that you view as incorrect, and I will either let you know why I made them or acknowledge that they were incorrect. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:53, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Jonesey the correct name of the company includes the ampersand. Unfortunately computers do not like it. Including both formats makes it easily findable. I do not mind about the final r, in fact I will say thanks. I resent the apparent changes for the sake of change inserting your boring Wikipedianese language. I also mind about Ferries like in Morris. When there is a result at Ferries I will respond to that. In the meantime I have more pressing commitments but, hold your breath. Eddaido (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I'll do better, I'll come back and fix what I consider to be your poor quality replacements. Eddaido (talk) 11:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I see that you have declined to provide specific examples of copy edits that "degraded" the article. You are still welcome to do so.
If the correct name of the company, per sources, uses the ampersand, the name should be changed throughout the article to use the ampersand. Using both versions is inconsistent with WP:NPOVNAME, part of a Wikipedia policy. The article should also be moved a new name to reflect the name in the sources. Feel free to improve upon the copy edits that I made to the article; none of us owns any of the articles on Wikipedia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Template problem

Hi! It appears that the {{Spoken Wikipedia}} template is broken. I've looked around a bit, and the only possible reason I can think of why it would be broken like that, would be this edit you made to {{Spoken Wikipedia boilerplate}}. Do you think there's a chance that the edit may have caused the problem? Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Fixed by editing {{spoken Wikipedia}}. --Izno (talk) 03:45, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks to you both. My apologies. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
There are apparently 5 templates for it depending on how many parts the spoken file has been split into. Someone should merge those.... --Izno (talk) 04:31, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Autoed

Hey, in edits like these, what about replacing <center> with <div style = "text-align: center"> and so fix up the deprecated HTML tag errors too? Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

The div tag often creates a new line, and one is not always wanted, so I don't know of a scriptable way to replace center tags with div tags. If you know of one, let me know. I figure that fixing the missing end tags is the context-sensitive part, and a bot can come through later to replace the center tags if the WMF, in their wisdom, decides to remove support for them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:48, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
<center> is not always used as a block element. Additionally, especially inside tables or even divs, the appropriate fix is sometimes to add the style attribute to the other element instead. --Izno (talk) 14:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll see if there's any particular cases in which replacements can easily be made. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:34, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018 GOCE blitz bling

  The Minor Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 1,999 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE October 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 19:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Irritator source check

reference info for Irritator
unnamed refs 36
named refs 45
self closed 106
cs1 refs 79
cs1 templates 80
webarchive templates 2
cs1|2 ymd dates 26
cs1|2 last/first 80
explanations

Hi, I'd appreciate it if you could work your citation magic on this article, the third spinosaurid I've GA nominated thus far. This one will be going to FA like Oxalaia, so proper reference format and consistency is very much needed. Thanks in advance! ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 02:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

PaleoGeekSquared: Sure, no problem. You need to choose a consistent date format for the article, either like "3 May 2005" or "May 5, 2005". Which one do you prefer? There is currently a mix of three date formats in the citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
(And thanks for the ref info, TtM.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:36, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
I have converted all citations to the dominant YYYY-MM-DD format. I am done editing the citations, unless you see anything that I missed. I left one reference without citation templates, since it is rather complex. If the FA evaluators don't like it, let me know and I will make its format as consistent as possible with the other references. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again! Looks a lot more orderly now. There was one remaining duplicate ref, but I got rid of it myself since that's quite simple. ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 01:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Template help

Hi Jonesey. I'm needing help at Template:Tufts University... it's not showing the [show] to expand the template in the articles it is used in. I'm not sure what I have done to it! No hurry, I see your on vacation until the third. Just when you have a chance to get to it... Corky 18:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, never mind. It's occurring on all pages for me. Maybe a Wikipedia problem? Corky 18:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Act like you never saw this Jonesey... it’s my computer that’s the problem! The templates are showing normal on my tablet and phone. Corky 18:45, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect English correction.

The addition of "and" is incorrect. In a comma separated list, only the last item of the list is preceded by "and". Journal pour tous, and The Event, and held the fashion is wrong. Please remove the "and" or restructure/split into two sentences. — Ineuw talk 02:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe that my edit was correct. "The Event" is the last item in the list. The "and" that follows adds a second clause, starting with a verb, that continues the sentence: "She also published ... and held ...". – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Jonesey95's edit is definitely correct. Those are two completely different kinds of "and". The list terminates with the The Event, and is properly preceded by a list-ending "and". The "held the fashion ..." material is an independent clause joined to the rest of the sentence with a conjunctive "and". It could be rewritten to be two sentences, though.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  13:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Infobox school edits

Hi. I just said goodbye to the {{Infobox UK school}} merge taskforce, because you edited the templates without engagement. If your non-talk behaviour continues, I might consider reporting you for bad admin rights abuse. -DePiep (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

ehm, you know what "ping me" is, right? - And how to? DePiep (talk) 21:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
DePiep, I do know how to ping you, as I have done here. I have responded on the talk page for Infobox school, where I have been adding notes to the discussion over the last 24 hours.
For you to say that I have not been engaging in discussion on that page is false. Time stamps are there for anyone to read. For you to imply that I have admin rights is also false. Beware of boomerangs. See my more detailed explanation, along with a request for specific, truthful information about how my template edits have harmed articles or detracted from the merge process, at Template talk:Infobox school. Thank you for engaging, and I look forward to productive discussions that result in a successful infobox merge. Good progress has already been made.
I will be taking a wikibreak for for the next 10 hours or so, so take your time in thinking through a response. Now that the template is relatively stable and I have fixed the major flaws that were introduced last week, I have no plans to edit the Infobox UK school template further. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:40, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Re I have not been engaging in discussion on that page ... false ...: see [16]. Your name is not in any discussion there Oct 26 -- Nov 4. -DePiep (talk) 21:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Admin rights or TE rights are the same in this. I am not about to this difference. BTW, why call in "boomerang"? I am pointing out your behaviour, which is (or should be) unrelated to me. Weird note. Now, will you join the discussion & make a good merged template? -DePiep (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I did not participate from Oct 26 to Nov 4 because I was on a wikibreak. I have participated fully in the discussion since my return, explaining each of my edits to the template. Let's keep talking at the template's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:20, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I warned you that the parameter whitelist you added (without discuyssion) is wrong and incorrect. Still you are editing. You know by now that {{Infobox UK school}} is in a merge process. This means that parameters to be used are reconsidered. You are supposed to cooperate with this process, not work against it. For example, this edit removes infor that will be OK after the merge. Stop it. -DePiep (talk) 18:59, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
    First, thank you for continuing to discuss and engage. Second, thank you for providing a specific link rather than a general criticism. But I can't tell if you are serious with this latest message. (If you are posting this on my talk page as a joke and I missed the humor, I apologize; humor is difficult to detect in written language.) In the edit you linked, I removed | funder = CocaineCouncil . |funder= is not valid in {{Infobox UK school}} or {{Infobox school}}, and "CocaineCouncil" is vandalism (the article has an edit history full of vandalism and reverts, but a few were missed). I am aware that |founder= is valid, but there is no evidence that |founder= was intended. I am sure that you can find a legitimate alternative to at least one of the hundreds of edits I have made to remove unsupported parameters from Infobox UK school templates, but the one you linked is error-free. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Thx for not editing Category:Pages using infobox UK school with unknown parameters below yesterday's 2960 or so. See you at the Talk. -DePiep (talk) 23:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi- thanks for your edit on the private school 892/6004 Nottingham High School it is a good example to work with. Can you explain why an independant school has a prominent field for local authority that links to an article on the political make up of Notttingham City Council? I can't but the reference article- does link to a page listing schools in Nottingham. If you look at the page Arnold Academy by accident, (real name of UK school 891/4091 Arnold Hill Academy) you are linked to a school in the states- which has a field schools district which in UK speak would be local authority- I think we have found a false friend here! If you go back to Newstead Wood School which is in the London Borough of Bromley, that information is omitted from the infobox but referred to in the article. It is needed.
    As far as I know, I didn't make any changes to the |local_authority= field at Nottingham High School. You'll have to ask the editor who populated it why it has the value that it does. As for the other articles you discuss, I do not understand what you are saying about the Arnold school(s), and if there is information missing in an infobox, go ahead and add it. All I am doing, generally, is fixing parameter names. Every once in a while, I find information that an editor obviously intended to display but which was entered incorrectly; if it looks valid, I put it into the correct parameter. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • A comment was made earlier about trying to simplify schools infoboxes- back at Nottingham High School, all that crud about the names of the boarding houses, and the kiddy magazines could safely go, as could the nicknames. You are typing to fast for me to comment further.... ClemRutter (talk) 14:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
    In general, I am not removing content from infoboxes, unless it happens to be in parameters that I am removing. You are welcome to look through all 5,000+ UK school articles and remove content that does not seem encyclopedic to you. Have fun! – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

County box

Fixed. Momentary brainfart.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  13:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

It happens to all of us at one time or another. Thanks for taking it in good humor. My revert was nothing personal, of course; there were 3,000+ broken articles, and I didn't want our readers to see how the sausage is made! Mmmm, sausage. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

School infobox

Hey, I fixed about a thousand school articles with undefined params in the last couple of weeks, and was surprised to notice that you did the last couple of hundred quite rapidly (there are plenty of other things for me to work on). I ran across the ones you changed to School District and cleaned up those too (only a dozen or so) so that maint category is empty too now. One minor template thing - Infobox school displays City, County, State, while School District displays City, State, County. I think the former makes more sense. If you agree, can you change the display order in School District? Thanks. MB 03:59, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

  Done. I've been working on Infobox school parameters in preparation for merging {{Infobox UK school}} to {{Infobox school}}. Thanks for all of your work! – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Belgian flag

Hi Jonesey95, could I urgently ask you to revert your change of the Belgian flag template? I am a Belgian myself, and this state flag might be the offical one, but it not used. We use the civil flag. You can always check the other Wikipedias (e.g. Dutch, French and German ones, which also are Belgium's three national languages). I would be grateful if you could therefore revert your change. Kind regards, Takk (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:13, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

WHYYYY

You ever look at old code and just wonder WHY ON EARTH?!?! {{Chembox Thermochemistry}}. Individual templates for ever row of the table... --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:15, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems like overkill. I imagine that someone thought, once upon a time, "I might want to show the standard enthalpy change of combustion in a different Chembox subtemplate, so let's make a separate template just for DeltaHc." But it doesn't look like the DeltaHc template was ever needed anywhere else. Wheee!
Have you looked at User:CheMoBot yet? It does stuff that Chembox editors will need to be aware of at some point. You are a brave soul. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Haven't looked at the bot yet. Will do that in a bit. Saw you attempted to add a test case. First glance... What do you think of the template so far? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
At first glance, the "identifiers" test case looks pretty much the same as the existing template, which is a good thing. If you can clean up my attempt at a test case, that would be great. I don't know if it's better than just using columns, since you still have to supply both templates in full. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Sadly at this point, I think we have to use 2 columns since the template has to be supplied in full. Once we are testing against the sandbox that will be different. For now, try this snippet of code below. Might help. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:12, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
{{Col-begin|width=25%}}
{{Col-2}}
{{center|'''{{tl|BBBBB}}'''}}

{{Col-2}}
{{center|'''{{tl|AAAAAA}}'''}}

{{Col-end}}

This edit causes the artist to appear on a separate line

Can you please undo this edit you made to Template:Infobox album? It now makes artist appear on the next line (see, for example, Phoenix (Rita Ora album)) and I'm pretty sure something that effects such a big change should be discussed, as all the editors who are involved in using the infobox and related WikiProjects may not agree. Unless it was not intentional. Thanks. Ss112 12:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Yikes! Sorry about that, and thanks so much for bringing it to my attention. I thought I had tested it well enough, but I missed that visual change. And a second thanks for a link to an article with the problem; it is often hard for template editors to find instances of a specific problem, since pages use so many different combinations of template parameters.
I believe that I have fixed the display problem while keeping the initial change that I made. I did so by changing the "div" element to be an "inline" element so that it won't create an undesirable line break. I checked it on a dozen random articles. Please let me know if you see any other problems, and thanks again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:52, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
  Resolved

Infobox officeholder

Hey, Jonesey. I noticed that your latest edit to Template:Infobox officeholder this morning caused a line break after the birth_name entry. I quickly scanned the source to see if I could figure out what's causing this, but I'm far from an expert and am not totally sure what the problem is. Your help would be appreciated! Thanks! Rockhead126 (talk) 17:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks like it might be the same problem described in the section above. I didn't see that initially. Rockhead126 (talk) 17:48, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
And I reverted the same issue with {{infobox university}}. --Muhandes (talk) 17:57, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
I have fixed {{Infobox officeholder}}. If you see any problems with a specific page, please link to it. Thanks for reporting this problem! – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
  Resolved

AN/I notice

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. (You are only tangentially involved in this, but notifying you in case you're interested.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 09:01, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Pi.1415926535: Thanks, even though my heart rises into my throat on the rare occasion when I receive this notice on my talk page; thanks for noting in advance that my involvement was tangential. I had a terrible experience at ANI one time with editors, including admins, who refused to read policy or were unable to read it successfully, so I normally stay far away from that page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Answering misplaced edit requests

Hi, re this post: you could have used {{subst:ESp|mis}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey, that's useful. Thanks! I'll put it on my list of useful tools. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
All the cool kids actually use User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper.js. @Redrose64: --Izno (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:Infobox person (and associated infoboxes) line break problems

Hello, your recent changes to Template:Infobox person have added extra line breaks between |honorific prefix=, |name=, and |honorific suffix=. I'm not technical, but clearly one of your changes has done this. Could you please fix it? Thank you, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 00:02, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

  Fixed. Thanks for the note, and I apologize for making this error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 22:11, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Linter

Regarding edits like this, is there a user script or extension you are using? I'm a huge fan of Linters at my day job but have never found a good one for wikimarkup. Would love to be helpful in this area. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:58, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I am not using a script for these, and I would be wary of doing so with templates. I just search for "span" and replace it with div style="display:inline;" or just div, depending on the circumstances (display:inline is sometimes overkill, but it does not seem to do any harm).
I am using User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/doi.js to replace some errors in article space. It needs manual supervision to watch for false positives, since my regex-fu is not black-belt level. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Gotcha. Good to know! Thanks for sharing. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:32, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Infobox settlement

Re [17] - Thank you! 77.11.109.70 (talk) 20:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. I know that it can be frustrating to see a change that would improve en.WP and not be able to make that change because of editing resctrictions, so I try to alleviate that frustration for others when I am able (and know what I'm doing). – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
And then this long discussion, for replacing two redirects :-) One more redirect to fix, because User:Highpeaks35 decided to re-introduce one in Bengal [18] and User:Courcelles protected the page while it still had the redirect, each ignoring the "AVOID REDIRECT" in the edit history. 77.13.109.179 (talk) 19:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

More people re-introducing redirects

  1. User:Xaosflux https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Branno,_Kuyavian-Pomeranian_Voivodeship&diff=870960346&oldid=870958614
  2. User:ObjectivismLover (sockpuppet) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vevring&diff=870959022&oldid=870699594

And one user adding filters to prevent the clean-up

  1. User:Amorymeltzer [19]

89.14.125.70 (talk) 01:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

No, the filter was set up to stop an unauthorized bot running at high speed. SQLQuery me! 02:00, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
User:SQL, that is a lie. There was no bot. 89.14.125.70 (talk) 02:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
So, you normally edit at 5+ edits per min for hours on end, stopping and hopping IP's immediately as soon as you get a talkpage message, or run into a block? Also, it's clear that the edit filter caused an error in your bot, I can see it retrying edits. We aren't stupid. SQLQuery me! 02:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Re "We aren't stupid." - Who is "we"? You certainly are. 5+ edits per minute - must be a bot? Really, if there wouldn't have been throttling I had done much more. And I don't need a bot for that. You are an idiot. 77.180.168.93 (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

BTW this may be Tobias Conradi; see WP:BOTN#Possible_bot_editing_from_German_IP. --Izno (talk) 04:14, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

This is getting too far into drama territory for me. I'm going to stay out of it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Except where not, e.g. 2018-11-28 05:33 (deceptive claim: "I will stay out of it from here."), 2018-11-28 15:17, 2018-11-30 21:19, 2018-11-30 21:21. 77.11.52.253 (talk) 22:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018 GOCE drive bling

  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 02:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

For your swan act

   The Teamwork Barnstar
It is with great pleasure that I award this barnstar jointly and severally to Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk. It has been earned by the serene grace with which these editors guide GOCE through the choppy waters of Wikipedia while no doubt paddling like crazy beneath the surface. Both the paddling and the calm are much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
And I was such an ugly duckling, too. Thanks Gog!– Jonesey95 (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2018 Newsletter
 

Hello and welcome to the December 2018 GOCE newsletter. Here is what's been happening since the August edition.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the August blitz (results), which focused on Requests and the oldest backlog month. Of the twenty editors who signed up, eleven editors recorded 37 copy edits.

For the September drive (results), of the twenty-three people who signed up, nineteen editors completed 294 copy edits.

Our October blitz (results) focused on Requests, geography, and food and drink articles. Of the fourteen people who signed up, eleven recorded a total of 57 copy edits.

For the November drive (results), twenty-two people signed up, and eighteen editors recorded 273 copy edits. This helped to bring the backlog to a six-month low of 825 articles.

The December blitz will run for one week, from 16 to 22 December. Sign up now!

Elections: Nominations for the Guild's coordinators for the first half of 2019 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations, so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Enrico Fermi lead

The discussion about the lead hasn't gotten anywhere. I think it's clear that making the lead more concise wouldn't hurt, and it could help bridge the gap between where the lead is and where DePiep wants it to be. I'd like you to do that without waiting for more people to ask for it explicitly.

On another matter, I appreciate your work in the GOCE. Hopefully I'll be able to participate eventually. Geckop (talk) (please ping me) 16:34, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Geckop, I have done a minimally invasive copy edit. Questions here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Geckop (talk) (please ping me) 22:35, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

div vs span

Question for ya... this diff... Why change from a span to a div? Looking to learn. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:47, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

When someone puts a template like {{plainlist}} or {{ubl}} into an infobox parameter that is wrapped in <span>...</span> tags, it creates a Linter error, "Miscellaneous Tidy replacement issues" (essentially, a div tag inside of a span tag, which is invalid HTML). One way I have been fixing these errors is by wrapping Infobox parameters in {{div}} tags instead of span tags, using the "inline" style to prevent an unwanted line break if needed. Check out most of my Contributions from today to see other types of fixes for this error, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4. Note that some of my edits today have fixed other types of Linter errors, so watch out for false positives; also, you can ignore my adding of a slash to br tags, which just helps me find errors with the syntax highlighter. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Cool! Thanks for the information. Always helpful to learn. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@Zackmann08: Basically there are two main groups of text-containing HTML element: block elements and inline elements. Block elements are those that will draw a rectangular box (real or imaginary), such as tables, lists and the <div>...</div> element; inline elements are used in the flow of text, such as elements that give the text a different style; <span>...</span> is an inline element. Block elements may contain anything, but may only be enclosed by block elements; inline elements may be enclosed by anything, may contain other inline elements or text, but may not contain block elements. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
@Redrose64: thank you!! Really appreciate both you and Jonesey taking the time to educate me. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:40, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Other Romance language listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other Romance language. Since you had some involvement with the Other Romance language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

  • I was considering posting another talk page comment prior to me posting this, considering how ironic it is that I’m nominating a redirect you created after the collaboration we had on Template:Rfd2, but I guess the irony is now here? Steel1943 (talk) 20:25, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Template:Time Persons of the Year

Hi there! As you requested on the talk page, I added the change I wanted made to that template to my sandbox. I have bolded the line to be included (although it should not be bolded when added to the template). Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 16:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

  Done. Thanks for the extra effort. Sandboxing helps me to avoid misunderstanding edit requests. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:29, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 21:02, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Lint errors - 2018 UK Championship

Hi, Jonesey95,

Thank you for your linter error check you did at 2018 UK Championship. Just as an FYI, when running linter on files; it will break the formatting, so the image displayed (Below) will not display. I've made the neccesary changes, however, I just thought I'd let you know. Best Wishes Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

 
Ronnie O'Sullivan defeated Mark Allen to win his seventh UK Championship.
File:Ronnie O'Sullivan at Snooker German Masters (DerHexer) 2015-02-06 10.jpg
Ronnie O'Sullivan defeated Mark Allen to win his seventh UK Championship.
Sorry about that. My mistake entirely. Thanks for fixing it for me. I straightened the quote marks in a separate operation; it's not part of my normal Linter script. That file should really be moved to a name with a straight quote mark in order to prevent dumb people like me from breaking it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Bit my tongue

So this should make you laugh... Was about to comment on this TFD... Then stopped and thought about it for a second and realize WHY ON EARTH do I want to be part of this drama?! lol. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

 
Hello, Jonesey95. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Saini expert (talk) 20:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Please respond at the original talk page after reading the page I recommended. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 blitz bling

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 10,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE December 2018 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

Sent it yesterday but forgot to alert here.

 
Hello, Jonesey95. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.PopularOutcasttalk2me! 16:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
PopularOutcast, I prefer to correspond on my talk page. Please post your message here. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Jonesey95, I get that and am sorry if I offended you. Basically I saw that you summarized the requests for GOCE in recent years. I went ahead and did that for this year but it's in a Google doc. I did not want to post the link publicly so I sent you an email. Not sure if it is of interest to you, did not want to step on your toes (another reason I didn't want to do it publicly), and wanted your thoughts. PopularOutcasttalk2me! 22:21, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
I am not offended at all. Feel free to post the link to the Google doc here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Jonesey95, I was concerned the Google doc would divulge my private information but after doing a little testing, I realize it does not. At least I hope so. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qf9thV-ucUxepzZPcGOQ0ehpJVOutYRtTYSGxWw3jpo/edit?usp=sharing. Summaries are in the tabs across the bottom. I wasn't sure what summary information the admins might be interested in. Regards. PopularOutcasttalk2me! 22:13, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Jonesey95/Archive2018".