Since you fixed it before I couldEdit

Hi S. You hit save before I did so here is the edit summary that I was going to leave "well rats - I'm thinking that when I copy pasted it into my browser I didn't get the whole address - apologies - now fixed" Thanks for your fix and everything else you do around here :-) MarnetteD|Talk 18:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  • "Thanks for your fix and everythig else you do around here :-)" I should say the same to you! You do more work time-consuming work with the bare links than I do! After I find pages using this search that have bare links (usually requires me to go through to the 6th or 7th page now that I've knocked out quite a few), run Refill on it a few times and then sometimes tag dead links, I tag the page with {{Cleanup bare URLs}} and leave it to the next person to resolve (which 99% of the time ends up being you!). In all honesty, I'm kind of glad that my request to tag probably 1,000,000+ pages with bare URL cleanup tags was denied/adjusted, especially since I've now seen a few cases where after the bare URLs are fixed, some other editor come around and adds another bare URL to the page (or does something similar that I catch and fix). So, thank you for all you do! :) Steel1943 (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you kindly. You are right - it isn't until people get into the task of fixing bare urls that they can get an idea of how much goes into it. I was glad that the bot that Green C made is set up to not swamp the category. You are also right about new bare urls being added all the time. I sure do miss having reflinks to use in conjunction with refill. One of its biggest assets was that it could add the tag to dead links - if fact I might have kept me from making that mistake. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Your noteEdit

Thanks S. I've got a couple other projects that I am whiling away the hours on but when those are done I may take you up on your offer. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

Hi! I noticed the message you left on my talk page. I was just wondering if i needed to edit the signature i put on the page you were referring to or if i just had to write my signature better in the future. Also i read Wp:Signature so I understand what you told me. Thanks! MrRobloxDev lgjavajr (talk) 12:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

  • @MrRobloxDev lgjavajr: I already took care of fixing/formatting the signature on the page I referenced. But either way, your current signature is formatted perfectly! Steel1943 (talk) 14:08, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Frig (word) for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frig (word) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frig (word) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:21, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Uw-2redirect/docEdit

 

A tag has been placed on Template:Uw-2redirect/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bsherr (talk) 18:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Comparative morphology RfDEdit

Compliments on a very good close there. I'd scratched my head about it earlier, but I think you actually made a very good call; picking up that it's one of those occasions where there's a vague sense it could be improved, but nobody's come up with a compelling way to do that - and that ultimately, there isn't strong opposition to the status quo. A good example of where the lack of consensus to do anything is genuinely the right call. Cheers for your good work! ~ mazca talk 16:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Kansas/Completion list/KSSH" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Kansas/Completion list/KSSH. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 7#Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Kansas/Completion list/KSSH until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

MOS/VandalismEdit

WRT this response on RFPP: I got from your note on RFPP that the last edit you reverted on Peter Parker was vandalism: Quote: "Besides occasional vandalism, including the edit I just reverted," The last edit you reverted on that page was a MOS issue: edit summary of last edit you reverted: "undo edit that goes against MOS:DABPRIMARY standards". Can you see why I think you labelled it as vandalism (clearly not in the edit summary but you did on RFPP). Either way, the page hasn't had enough non-constructive edits in the last 6 months to justify semi or PC. Woody (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @Woody: After reviewing what I typed, fair enough. Specifically, I see how "Besides occasional vandalism, including the edit I just reverted" could be interpreted as so. I think I should have put "...including the edit I just reverted..." at the end of that sentence so that I was clear that both I was not calling the MOS:DABPRIMARY violations vandalism, and that there have been problems ... over the past 6 years ... with nonconfirmed editors with edits that range from continuous MOS:DABPRIMARY issues, vandalism, and overall unconstructive edits to the page. And the thing is I used to watchlist almost every page I edited (I have 150,000+ edits, so that would now be a ton of pages), but since I purged my watchlist and became more selective of the pages I watchlist, I have only about 100 watchlisted pages now ... and Peter Parker (disambiguation) is one of them ... because of the somewhat regular problematic edits by IPs. Either way, I know you are saying no semi or PC, but I would have at least put PC on it for a year to gauge this ... though I have a personal grievance with this page since I've reverted a good amount of edits on that page ... and I cannot recall a single edit by a nonconfirmed editor on that page which was constructive. (It's almost one of those WP:IAR situations due to the somewhat strict RFPP prerequisites.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
    • No worries, different people interpret text differently. I fully understand your frustration at long term disruptive edits, particularly when you have a larger watchlist. I was taking a second look and realised Izno has enabled PC anyway which I don't disagree with. Hopefully that should give the page some respite. Woody (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
      • I talked offwiki with ferret about that (I was leaning semi). He also thinks there's a clear LTA MO on the page but the IPs are so spread out that I thought it would be hard to find a good block that didn't just get hopped a month later. --Izno (talk) 20:31, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Neal Stephenson etc.Edit

Apropos discussion relating to Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon and The Baroque Cycle, you might appreciate the comments from John Walker (programmer) (founder of Autodesk and peripherally involved with Project Xanadu) at [1] Cordially, MarkMLl (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Redirects for discussionEdit

Thanks for catching that duplicate. Not sure what happened. I used the page curation tool to nominate them, appears there is a glitch in that, which does not give the target, will use Twinkle from now on. Will fix on the project page momentarily. Onel5969 TT me 00:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Chinese LegalismEdit

Hello... what's the idea with the references? Some of them aren't clickable anymore.FourLights (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @FourLights: Please see Template:Rp for information about the numbers that aren't clickable. This template is used in conjunction with citations to references with numbered pages to identify which pages in the reference the passage refers. It's a cleaner layout than having the same reference listed in the references section over 30 times, which was the case with at least one reference on that article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
For my reference: Legalism (Chinese philosophy). Steel1943 (talk) 19:16, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, so the unclickable numbers refer to pages and not sources, thanksFourLights (talk)

"Wikipedia:NCVIET" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Wikipedia:NCVIET. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 24#Wikipedia:NCVIET until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ItsPugle (please use {{reply|ItsPugle}}) 03:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

"Heroes"Edit

The official title of both the Bowie song and album are in quotes; see the cover art. It's the sort of thing musicians do on purpose to annoy us, see also Ø (Disambiguation). Narky Blert (talk) 15:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @Narky Blert: Yeah ... you probably saw my revert; I seriously thought those were titles of redirects until I actually clicked on them. And I'm familiar with the titling discrepancy caused by the existence of Ø (Disambiguation) (see here). But alas, Wikipedia titling standards cater to the title formatting made by the subjects' creators (for the most part as there are some exceptions), rather than the title formatting made by the subjects' creators being affected by Wikipedia's titling standards. Steel1943 (talk) 15:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    Some writers know the trick too - 'When 'Omer smote 'is bloomin' lyre...', official title in single quotes. Narky Blert (talk) 16:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    @Narky Blert: If I ever start a company, I will call it New Article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    I offer you the WP:TITLECASE conundrum of whether a certain song is properly titled "Reflections in a Flat" or "Reflections in A flat"; because it's both, and whichever one you choose loses the pun. Narky Blert (talk) 18:10, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    New Direction would be a poor choice for your company name, and I advise against it. As well as possible confusion with the entries on that DAB page and the political slogan, it may also refer to a (now defunct?) British one-handed magazine. Narky Blert (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
    Haha! It's all good until someone decides to go a different direction. Steel1943 (talk) 18:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

RfdEdit

Hi. You're too quick. I just nominated I-Li Chang Brice for Rfd and was in the middle of bundling a number of others that redirect to the same target when I noticed you started nominating them individually. Would it be okay if I finished up my Rfd first? Thanks. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 23:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: No worries. Go ahead and go for it! I was using Twinkle to nominate them, then was going to bundle them afterwards. I didn't know if you had left the computer for a bit or what, so I looked at your recent contributions and was trying to finish what you started before the next day started in UTC. Steel1943 (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

rev 967874201Edit

Hello, Ive seen you did contributions to the page of the Bulgars.Is it only me to notice below the image of the BULGARIAN ruller Krum, is written-BULGAR, which I see is more assosiated with the Volga Bulgars? Can you delete the whole image, please? I am a new user and not quite confident. Thank you in advance Dahlia La Mar (talk) 13:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi,thank you for comming back.I am talking about the only image published in the locked publication of Bulgars. Please remove the image because on the top of the article is written ″not to be confused with Bulgarians″ and Krum is a significant Bulgarian ruler.The place of this image is not here.Thank you Dahlia La Mar (talk) 20:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Double Indemnity (film)Edit

When you retargetted Double Indemnity (film) to the DAB page Double indemnity (disambiguation), you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS. The change broke 249 links, which will have to be repaired by hand. Narky Blert (talk) 11:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @Narky Blert: My methodology about such links is a two step process: 1) Correct any links in templates, especially navboxes, then 2) check the next day or so to see if there are still links (as in, see if no one beat me to them), and correct the ones I can figure out. However, I now realize in this case that I never even checked the navboxes ... doh! Steel1943 (talk) 12:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Just found incoming links to Double Indemnity (film) in two navboxes. So now ... I gotta wait at least a day so incoming links caused by the navboxes can disappear. Steel1943 (talk) 13:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I've never tried WP:AWB, but I think it may contain a gadget which enables multiple WP:NULLEDITs; which should clear links from templates which haven't caught up naturally. Narky Blert (talk) 13:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I usually can't use AWB since I usually edit using desktop version on a mobile device. So, waiting for a day to allow the page purges to happen automatically is what I've learned to do in such cases. (And a page purge already happened in the last 24 hours since the {{Incoming links}} template was already placed on Double indemnity (disambiguation) by DPL bot.) So, now another day or so has to pass. (Dangit me missing those navboxes.) Steel1943 (talk) 13:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

emailEdit

You left a note on my talk page saying you'd sent me an email, but none has arrived. Thryduulf (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

  • @Thryduulf: You may have not gotten the email prior to that one either then. I'll forward you both, and send them via Wikipedia's email function. Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
@Thryduulf: Emails resent. You must not be joking around when you basically say on your user page subpage regarding emails that you have strict email filters! Steel1943 (talk) 20:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't know what the issue was, but all your emails have now arrived! Thryduulf (talk) 00:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I haven't forgotten this, but my Wikipedia time is sort of limited at the moment and it never seems to reach the top of the priority list, sorry. Thryduulf (talk) 01:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
For stepping up at RfA. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Agree. Sorry it didn't go the way you wanted. I was actually reviewing your edits when you withdrew. Hope it doesn't discourage you from doing it again. RFA is brutal sometimes don't take it personally. Glen (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks indeed! I was excited to see your request, and I hope to see a another some day. It's always hard to put yourself out there, but it's good that you did because despite the negatives, a ton of people really appreciate the work you do behind the scenes to keep things working. I saw one concern was article writing which I've been hoping to do more of myself; let me know if there's anything you'd want to collaborate on. Wug·a·po·des 02:16, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey, here to show my appreciation for your contributions to Wikipedia. Despite what someone said in the RfA, I think you did a very good job at Paintbrush. The wiki is a collaborative work, and one editor should not be expected to do all the jobs, nor should they be judged for one single alleged mistake. Kind regards, Walwal20 talkcontribs 11:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey, I hope you don't get discouraged by this. Thank you for your contributions. :) ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:09, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I haven't been too active lately, and just saw that I missed your RfA. I was surprised to see how it went. I certainly would have supported. As someone who sailed through RfA virtually unopposed in spite of only have created one stub, I don't think content creation opposes have much credibility, and I don't think I've ever seen those opposes alone sink an RfA. However it looks like you shot yourself in the foot by saying you were weak with your understanding of GNG. You took a gamble being honest about a weakness and it didn't pay off, but was held against you. Honestly, it was such a loaded question that I'm not sure if you could have given any answer that would not have been held against you. Anyway, I'm not convinced that your RfA would not have been successful, but I'm sorry that you felt the need to withdraw all the same. Shake it off, brush up on your weak points and come back in 6 months. There's nothing stronger than an RfA candidate who has heeded and rectified concerns! ~Swarm~ {sting} 00:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey there, I just saw this. Sorry to see how it went. If you try again in the future, hopefully I will get a chance to support. BOZ (talk) 00:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!Edit

Speedy deletion nomination of Daniel Curtis (musician)Edit

Hello Steel1943,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Daniel Curtis (musician) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Atsme 💬 📧 14:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Atsme: Steel1943 had created this as a valid redirect before it was vandalized. Instead of tagging it for deletion, the better option would have been to just revert the vandalism—which I have just done. -- Tavix (talk) 15:06, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Tavix, hopefully it won't become a time sink redirect that shows up repeatedly in the NPP queue, especially since we already have a dab for Daniel Curtis, but it's your call. Atsme 💬 📧 15:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
It's too early to tell, but if it gets vandalized again I'll protect it. -- Tavix (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
One last question - at the DAB page - why not simply modify the wikilink and be done with it? When you search for Daniel Curtis you get the DAB. Simply modify the link to wikilink to the correct article and avoid the redirect and potential time sink all together? [[Daniel and Laura Curtis|Daniel Curtis (musician)]], Welsh composer and musician ? Atsme 💬 📧 15:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Because it would be less heplful to readers: MOS:DABPIPE. – Uanfala (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Tavix, I wouldn't call this edit "vandalism", given that MichaelJibson appears to be "a major contributor to this article who appears to have a close connection with its subject". I'm inclined to believe him when he says "Daniel amd Laura Curtis are no longer working together due to a breakup." given that the official website link http://www.danandlauracurtis.com is dead. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

That's a fair assessment, I was a bit liberal with my use of the term "vandalism". -- Tavix (talk) 16:27, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, I tagged that redirect with {{R from member}}. If this musician becomes independently notable after his breakup, then a separate article may be created. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Wbm1058, see MOS:DABPEOPLE, I don't understand the purpose of the redirect when MOS prescribes what I've suggested. A search takes you to the DAB first. We don't need both. When/if he does deserve his own article, we simply create it without having to deal with the redirect. Atsme 💬 📧 16:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Atsme, I don't think this is worth putting much time into, though page views are pretty small. There are no links to the title and the dab entry could be modified thusly:
...becomes...
I can delete the redirect if Steel1943 cares to put a {{db-author}} tag on the page; if not you could take it to WP:RFD. But I think it's rather harmless. Its presence doesn't prevent an editor from replacing the redirect with a new biography, as was already tried once, nor does it stop an editor from drafting a new article in draft space which an admin can move over the redirect. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:05, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I was trying to simplify not complicate or create more work for us. If it pops up again in the NPP queue, I'll consider your suggestion. Thx Atsme 💬 📧 17:36, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

MTV Europe Music Award and MTV Pilipinas Music AwardEdit

Hello Steel1943. Because you are the page mover of Talk:MTV Video Music Awards#Requested move 24 August 2020, why you don't move the MTV Europe Music Award and MTV Pilipinas Music Award into plural title? You don't realize that they are awarding ceremonies, not individual awards, same as MTV VMAs. Let you see why Doggy54321 request move the article in the Talk:MTV Europe Music Award#Requested move 9 November 2020 because you forget to move two article. 36.68.185.109 (talk) 06:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

  • Surely same Indonesia based IP as recently blocked. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:49, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Yea, I’m wondering this too. General consensus was to move the three award ceremonies, and to not move the individual awards. You moved one of the award ceremonies and that’s it. Could you please move the other two? D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 14:35, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)