User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 32

Legobot weirdness

I figured I'll get quicker and better response here than at Legobot's talk page.

In a new RfC, I replaced the DNAU with {{pin section}}.[1] A few hours later, Legobot did this. That doesn't look right (for starters, it exposed the markup rfcid=8CD1F7B}}), so are we to conclude that {{pin section}} can no longer be used in RfCs?

And, how to fix that RfC now without breaking something? ―Mandruss ☎ 12:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Someone else added some RfC categories between those two diffs,[2], but that shouldn't cause the bot to change the RfCid. ―Mandruss ☎ 12:23, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I'm no expert, just guessing. The bot had added the line with the "DoNotArchiveUntil" date and the rfcid.

<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 06:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1705039280}}

{{rfc|pol|hist|bio|rfcid=8CD1F7B}}''

You overwrote part of the "DoNotArchiveUntil" line when you added the pin, and the bot interpreted that as a new RfC and added a new "DoNotArchiveUntil" line and a second rfcid to the first one.

<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 12:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1705060880}}

{{rfc|pol|hist|bio|rfcid=8CD1F7B}}rfcid=8CD1F7B}}''

Space4Time3Continuum2x (cowabunga) 19:34, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, you're prolly right. So I guess the solution is to add {{pin section}} without removing {{DNAU}}, and hope the archive bot respects the ten-year expiration and ignores the one-month expiration. As I said on the Trump talk page, the one-month expiration unnecessarily introduces a risk of accidental premature archival. And {{pin section}}'s message box means you don't have to edit the section to see that it's pinned, making things that much more user-friendly. You don't have to be experienced enough to know to do that.

Legobot is one craaaazy dude. Why it had to be made to be sensitive to a removal of its DNAU baffles me. ―Mandruss ☎ 19:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mandruss: It's nothing to do with your edit. Whilst Legobot adds ths DNAU code and the rfcid in the same edit, it doesn't care if the DNAU gets subsequently modified or even removed entirely. The only thing that I would say about pinning is that it must be above the {{rfc}} tag, and that is exactly what you did, so no problem there. But since Legobot doesn't care what happens to the DNAU, you can safely extend its expiry by any amount you like.

What happened to cause the problem was this edit by SPECIFICO (talk · contribs), which was wrong in several ways: (i) the |hist category was already present, a second one is redundant; (ii) |langmedia is an invalid RfC category; {iii) |Reli is also invalid, because rfc categories must be all lowercase; (iv) they added a pair of closing braces before the |rfcid=8CD1F7B parameter, this terminates the {{rfc}} tag before that parameter, so Legobot considered that the parameter was absent. Whilst they fixed problems (ii) and (iii) in this edit, that wasn't nearly enough.

I've done the best that I can to fix up the mess. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't look closely enough at SPECIFICO's first edit. I retract my bad words about Legobot (for now;).

So, if we want the message box and the ten-year expiration, my method will work and will be the easiest way to achieve that goal, do I have that correct? ―Mandruss ☎ 22:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@Space4Time3Continuum2x: Since you've been an interested party, I'm just making sure you saw this resolution. ―Mandruss ☎ 20:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I saw it, thanks. I've been pinning discussions correctly, courtesy of Sensei Copy-and-Paste, but didn't know about the 10-year period. A typo — a couple of curly brackets instead of the slash separator | (is that what it's called?). Mea culpa, I hadn't noticed that they were already in the edit history when you added the pin. When we make errors formatting cites, error messages are shown. Maybe someone could write code for errors in templates. Space4Time3Continuum2x (cowabunga) 22:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@Space4Time3Continuum2x: The | character is properly called a vertical bar, but commonly called a pipe (in Unix, it's used to "pipe" the output of one process to the input of another process, as in ls -l | more). A slash is the / character. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, thus "piped links". Thanks. Space4Time3Continuum2x (cowabunga) 22:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Font

Hello Redrose64, I asked for help on how to get rid of the Georgia font on Wikipedia namespace and talk namespace pages. Is there any way? I haven't got a response yet. Thanks, Nearly but not perfect (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@I'm not perfect but I'm almost: Where did you ask? Always provide a link when referring to an existing discussion. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Redrose64: I asked at the Village Pump but no one has responded and that thread has since been removed. Here Nearly but not perfect (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

You didn't link the final pre-archive version of the thread. If you had, you would have seen that I did answer, fifteen minutes later. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Drummond

What is the problem with the origin of the surname DRUMMOND in Scotland and in Portugal? I included the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7f3:858e:34c5:50f2:4df5:ebb3:b29d (talk) 00:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages are not articles, think of them as a list of related articles. Content and references belong on those related articles. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 7 § Category:Establishments in Danish India by year

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 7 § Category:Establishments in Danish India by year on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 7 § Category:Establishments in Danish India by year

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 February 7 § Category:Establishments in Danish India by year on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Pro tip requested

I would like a way to modify a time-date stamp such that it's still recognizable by humans but not by the archive bot. Very occasionally, there is a need to time-stamp something without extending the retention of a discussion that is approaching auto-archival. Can you suggest the best way to do this? ―Mandruss ☎ 01:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

It would depend upon the bot - at least one uses the most recent timestamp in the thread, at least one looks at the times in the page history. So, which page are we talking about? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

That uses lowercase sigmabot III (talk · contribs). I'm fairly sure that this bot can be defeated by using a timestamp that doesn't exactly match the format used by the standard four- or five-tilde signature. You could try rearranging the date to be in U.S. format (Month day, year), leaving the time and timezone alone. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that sounds like it should work. I'll have to save it for future reference; someone else has commented subsequently in the discussion, making my time stamp moot in this case. ―Mandruss ☎ 11:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

The rfc template must not be placed inside comment tags

Talk:Joe_Flacco#Etymology_for_"Stint" I don't get how that's a problem if I'm not using it to request comments at the moment. I imagine it's just a misunderstanding. ProofCreature (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@ProofCreature: Please see Template:Rfc#Inactive usage. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Ahha.

So many policies - it's dizzying. Something to do. Keeps one busy, I guess.

Thanks for the explanation. ProofCreature (talk) 18:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

David Lammy RFC

Hello Redrose64, I saw your comment on David Lammy talk page RFC. Should I restart a new RFC and use that question?

Are the list of references not important to answer the question, I believed it was because this is a contentious issue and the references reveal a potential preference of David Lammy in the article. Can you briefly explain why they are not?

Also one user has dropped their objection, changing from a no to neutral, what advice do you have if the 3rd user doesn't engage?

Trying to learn, thanks. Erzan (talk) 12:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

@Erzan: There shouldn't be a need to restart the RfC. Just make sure that the existing {{rfc}} tag is directly followed by a brief and neutral statement, optional signature, and mandatory timestamp. A statement containing nineteen inline external links is no way brief. You might like to read up on WP:WRFC but that's not binding. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on South London line

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page South London line, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

m:Meetup/Oxford/97

At the moment it looks like just the two of us. What do you want to do?©Geni (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Geni: Check again in the morning? How much notice do you need? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Need to know by before 8:30.©Geni (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Geni I am hopeful, but I will still be in bed art 0830 whether I'm coming or not Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 23:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Geni and Thryduulf: OK, I'll go ahead and be there. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Cool. Been wanting to re-vist the Ashmolean for a while.©Geni (talk) 08:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not going to make it to Oxford today. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Help to find line number

Please can you help me as to how to find a line number in an article. So far I have found no method. The difficult situation arises in differences between revisions when there is no context to search on and there is repetitive material in a table eg in [3]. How can I find the line 690 in the article? Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Personally I never bother with the line numbers. To find the line concerned, I mark some of the text in the diff - sufficient to uniquely identify the text but not spanning into a second line. I copy this to clipboard, then I go to the relevant section (in this case Preserved locos) and open it in source editor. Then I use the browser's find feature (usually Ctrl-F) and paste in the text from the clipboard. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, that is what I usually do. But what in the example would you search on? All there is is N/A or No which give several results.SovalValtos (talk) 03:52, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Awaiting restoration - geograph.org.uk - 1887942 --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Maryland cookies

Thanks for the tipoff where I could find a couple more flavours.©Geni (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)