Another editor (whom I've just contacted) made [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_Book&diff=prev&oldid=151866703 this change a year ago], saying "''rv until code is fixed''". It seems that the code has never been restored, so some very useful functionality, to do with [[COinS]], was lost. Would you be interested in helping to restore it? The [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pigsonthewing&diff=next&oldid=151867986 problem was discussed on my talk page], but the code wasn't mine and the original author has, I believe left. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_Journal&diff=151950399&oldid=151900215 Infobox journal was also affected]. [[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]] (User:Pigsonthewing); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Andy's talk]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]] 22:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Another editor ([[/User talk:MZMcBride#Infobox_Book & Infobox journal|whom I've just contacted]]) made [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_Book&diff=prev&oldid=151866703 this change a year ago], saying "''rv until code is fixed''". It seems that the code has never been restored, so some very useful functionality, to do with [[COinS]], was lost. Would you be interested in helping to restore it? The [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pigsonthewing&diff=next&oldid=151867986 problem was discussed on my talk page], but the code wasn't mine and the original author has, I believe left. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_Journal&diff=151950399&oldid=151900215 Infobox journal was also affected]. [[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]] (User:Pigsonthewing); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Andy's talk]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]] 22:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:In particular, we need help with template syntax. Thanks. [[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]] (User:Pigsonthewing); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Andy's talk]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]] 00:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - I obviously am a novice to this. I think that should be the appropriate response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylelbishop (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Robert Young (longevity claims researcher), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 19:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Young
Just a courtesy note to let you know that I have speedily deleted Robert Young under criteria G4 as a repost. The article may be different and have additional sources for notability but the AfD debate has been into the notability of Robert Young in detail and it was only closed five days ago. I know this is a matter of some heated debate but the policy in this speedy deletion is fairly clear. To write an article on Robert Young I think you need to get the sanction of deletion review; I will recreate the article to your userspace if you want to work on it. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion of Robert Young's block has been brought up again at the bottom of Bart Versieck's talk's page. As well as a bit on Carcharoth's talk. I recall you being involved in his own article shortly before his indefinite block. Neal (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
The difference between those is that the latter only provides a link (and prose), rather than transcludes a page named after a date. In other words, it is self-contained and doesn't rely on creating a set of pages to support it.
For a new project, I need a template that displays a scheduled link each day, and was wondering if there is any way to do this without creating date-titled pages for transclusion. I'd like to be able to create a list of links in the template itself, and have the appropriate link displayed each day.
Is that doable?
If so, could you write one? (a sample list of 5 or 6 links would do) Or explain to me how?
It would be a shame to have to create pages for transclusion that only contain a link in them.
If there's a positive side to the events of this past week, it's posts like yours. Thank you for remembering that we're doing our best here even if we disagree on some wikiphilosophies and make some honest mistakes. Best regards, DurovaCharge! 14:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see Wikipedia:Featured content/Lists. Basically uses <includeonly> tags and the like to segregate a portion of the list page for display when transcluded. --CBD 22:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's brilliant! I'll give that a try. Thank you! The Transhumanist 23:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's as much work as creating an excerpt page. Is there a way to control this from the other end? The Transhumanist 00:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is probably a way to define a frame which doesn't expand to fit the content placed within it, but that wouldn't work very well... text would get cut off in the middle of sentences, images might be cut in half, et cetera. Given the variation of list pages any 'partial content display' is pretty much going to have to be designed on a case by case basis. --CBD 23:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Odd request here... I'm going to be working on something in my sandbox over the next few days. Please keep an eye on it, as I've an idea you'll want to contribute. --Dweller (talk) 20:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ready for you now. --Dweller (talk) 12:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 17:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was interested to see this list of indef blocks you posted to the MatthewHoffman RfArb. Nice to see someone confirm the gut feeling I had about an endemic culture of indefinite blocking. How harmful do you think this practice is, and is it worth trying to move the culture back towards something less, well, indefinite? Carcharoth 19:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alot of indefinite blocks probably don't do much harm... they hit vandals who likely would never have contributed anything but vandalism. However, there are also alot of indefinite blocks placed on people who just made newbie mistakes or disagreed with an admin. Those help to populate sites like Wikipedia Review and generate anger against Wikipedia in the general population. The problem is that the deck is currently stacked against opposing these blocks... discussion and consensus is required to overturn ANY block, but not to place even an indefinite one. The people who get them often don't know what they are doing and/or are argumentative... so 'taking responsibility' for them, as anyone overturning a block is expected to do, can be a very difficult and time consuming process - especially because blocking admins are often more than happy to goad people with persistent incivility and/or badgering until they make the slightest slip-up (or something which can be mis-cast as a slip-up, one admin actually called a citation of Occam's razor a 'death threat')... and then reblock secure in the knowledge that they were 'right about that troll all along'. The only way I see this trend reversing would be if there were more clearly defined limitations on blocking and the ability to overturn violations thereof without fear of it being labeled 'wheel warring'. --CBD 20:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds about right. What did you think of my proposal at the RfArb that indefinite blocks should only be temporary until discussion decides on the right length for a block (or indeed decides on an unblock)? And the additional bit that an indefinite block should be for a persistent (after several blocks) pattern of behaviour. I think a lot of this could be dealt with by getting people to impose blocks of a definite length until a persistent pattern emerges. Vandals and throwaway accounts won't come back anyway once a block has expired, and if they do, they can be blocked again. Part of the problem seems to be admins worrying that if they don't indefinite block, the nasty POV-warrior or vandal will be back again. Well, they are more likely to return with a new account anyway, but even if they return after the block expires, well, other admins will be around to deal with it. There is no need to pass final judgment immediately. Anyway, I'm currently adding evidence to the case. Will you be doing that as well? Carcharoth 21:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely think that starting out with 'fixed duration' blocks, as used to be the required standard, would be alot better. Indeed, I think that still would be the standard except that there were never any penalties for ignoring it. As to discussion of indefinite blocks, I'd rather do that before placing the indef block rather than after doing so. As to the case itself, I'm just reading up on it now... so I'll leave that to the people involved. I may add evidence of the common usage of blocks like this though. --CBD 22:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further to your suggestion that you may do so, I welcome your co-nom. --Dweller 10:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Godsmack
Hi, would you please talk some sense into User:Demantos. He is trying to merge Godsmack discography with Godsmack. Godsmack has enough music to warrent a seperate article for discography, and any substantially successful band has one on wikipedia. Please comment on his talk page, and comment here.
Diverging ideas of admin actions and when to block
I agree. I think it all boils down to people rushing and not taking time to carefully review their actions. See this warning and advice I posted. I suspect some people would have just slapped an indefinite block on, but I think my edit summary demonstrates why I didn't. Would you agree? Carcharoth (talk) 12:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems about right. The comments to Durova were totally unacceptable and aggravated by the general drubbing she has taken lately. If he had more contributions and/or hadn't previously cursed out Mel in similar fashion I'd probably just have told him about the need for civility. With the repeat problem on that the block warning was appropriate. He also has two deleted edits to what looks like a COI/low notability article (one a vandalism revert) and the one typo correction. Overall looks like a random person who doesn't really know or understand much about Wikipedia, made a few mistakes, and behaved badly. In general he just doesn't edit enough for much of anything to need to be done now... explain to him why his actions were problems, point him towards useful info, and hope that if he ever becomes an active contributor he takes some of that stuff to heart. If he were posting messages like the one to Durova regularly and refused to stop after a few warnings and temporary blocks then an indef block would be needed. Going straight to indef now serves little purpose... there is no significant disruption to 'stop'. --CBD 13:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK I saw this as I was about to tell Carcharoth they were right in every respect (which I will do here! thanks) - but - keeping to my hockey analogy, who is the tough guy sitting on our bench watching, ready to go out there the next time this happens, and even up the score? Was this really just an editing mistake or is it a seldom-used dirty player who the other team can send out to throw an elbow and take the suspension? The history is there, but it can be buried easily and hidden from superficial examination. So to the point, is there any way for you guys to watch a specific user's contribs and act immediately the next time? Franamax (talk) 13:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, we can't watch every user who ever did anything questionable every minute of every day... but why would we want to? Looking at this guy there are really only three possibilities;
He never comes back - doesn't matter whether he is blocked or not.
He comes back and acts disruptively - This is actually made more likely by a block, though of course he'd have to use a different account name if it was an indef block. In any case, if future disruption is significant... someone will block him. If it's a random 'hit and run' insult... do we really care? This isn't a hockey game. We don't have to call every 'penalty' to make sure the game is 'fair' to both teams. We actually lose ground if we 'escalate' minor problems.
He comes back and contributes positively - Granted, this is probably the least likely outcome... but why prevent it when doing so doesn't really gain us anything? --CBD 14:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(after edit conflict - and thinking CBD has put it so much better!) Watchlisting a particular user's contributions? Not that I'm aware of. Just a minor correction to CBD's analysis, which is that the vandalism revert was blanking an inappropriate comment on the article talk page. I agree totally with "he just doesn't edit enough for much of anything to need to be done". It really isn't worth the time. Best to respond with a warning and advice (as I did), and then wait and see. Part of the (faulty) reasoning behind indefinite blocks, in my opinion, is that "it's not worth the time, just indef block now and be done with it, as that stops time being wasted later". Which misses the point, and pre-judges on supposed future behaviour. Judging on past behaviour is better, and as CBD said, there is not a lot to judge on here. As for whether people amass an array of sock-puppets to make nasty comments on other editors at opportune moments, it seems unlikely in this case. If you do suspect a puppet-master behind this (masquerading as a typical new editor), you could file a request for checkuser, but you will need a fair amount of evidence for such a request, and you could be wrong. It's just not worth the hassle unless you happen to see a pattern somewhere. Going looking for patterns can lead to seeing patterns where none exist. It is a dangerous thing to do, as the Durova incident has shown. As for "even up the score". The hockey analogy can only be taken so far: Wikipedia is not a battleground. Carcharoth (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, "Wikipedia is not a game/sport" would be better here. In the sense of a MMORPG. Carcharoth (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also relevant here is the following from WP:BLOCK:
"Before a block is imposed, efforts should be made to educate the user about our policies and guidelines, and to warn them when their behaviour conflicts with our policies and guidelines. A variety of template messages exist for convenience, although purpose-written messages are often preferable. Warning is not a prerequisite for blocking (particularly with respect to blocks for protection) but administrators should generally ensure that users are aware of policies, and give them reasonable opportunity to adjust their behaviour accordingly, before blocking. Users who have been made aware of a policy and have had such an opportunity, and accounts whose main or only use is forbidden activity (sock-puppetry, obvious vandalism, personal attack, and so on) may not require further warning."
This what prompted me to step back from a block in this case. Carcharoth (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CBD, see here for me quoting what you just said. What do you think of the idea that deleted contributions don't count? I find that a strange idea. Carcharoth (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK all I'm going to do is put in what my e/c contrib would have been. You guys are both very sensible, plus I get scared when the screens change unexpectedly. I'll probly just watch from now on, you've both answered pretty much everything.
Orig contrib follows
As C rightly pointed out, I am acting emotionally, I'm not talking about hooking and tripping, there are words I use but would never put in print directed to someone else, that's where my team would just start throwing punches. Stand up for the team. I'll drop the analogy now :)
My further concern is that this account is still available for one-time disruption. Would I be correct then to assume that there is no way to put user-contribs onto a watchlist, for either editors or admins? I can watch articles, in this case for a low-usage account, I would be happy to watchlist the account contribs. If they became productive I would just de-list. Obviously there is some stalking potential. But here we have an account of demonstrated negativity, is the only solution to warn and walk away? Franamax (talk) 14:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orig contrib ends
Carcharoth, yeah I don't see how it makes sense to exclude deleted contributions. By that logic some of the worst trolls out there should be unblocked... because they don't have any contributions at all once you exclude the deleted stuff. You look at everything the person has done and try to get a sense of their intentions. If they have steadily been making edits which turn out to be subtly incorrect (see this guy for instance) then they seem intent on causing problems. The user in the case above (and the RFA hypothetical) wanted to put up an article which turned out to short of our general notability standards... that's not evidence of bad intent. Acting out abusively when the article is deleted also isn't really indicative of bad intent, just bad behaviour, which might be correctable. --CBD 17:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Franamax, no there isn't really a simple way to get a list of 'recent contributions by this list of users'. If you watchlist their user pages then you'll see any time they get comments on their user talk... which, in the case of vandals, usually lets you know when they have become active again and someone else has warned them about it... but not when they make edits that no one comments on. You could open up your watchlist and click on each to check contribs, but that could take a while. Other than that it would take a bot or at least javascript of some kind. I'm not aware of any which do so currently. --CBD 17:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move requests
Would you move a couple of protected pages please?
Now that Wikipedia:Contents is Portal:Contents, those of us in the contents pages project are naming all the members of that set of pages to be subpages of that portal. One of the subsets is:
I don't understand all the details of the localization work [1], but the text of the link in the sidebar is supposed to be "Main page" not "Main Page" per the redesign proposal from a year ago (or some such). Please find a way to fix the localization that does not interfere with the agreed upon display format. Dragons flight (talk) 23:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For your statement about fictional articles on ANI. You said pretty much everything I feel about the core issue. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 12:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A dozen editors
A few dozen editors do the vast majority of the work against hundreds of people that perform any kind of vandalism, whether it be inserting obscenities, racial slurs, or creating fan-site articles.Kww (talk) 17:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Slideshow
WP
VPP:Low priority
... aren't commenting here... which I think is a language to browser thing. Can you weigh in on this, which seems to be a meritorious proposal to me, since would really help on some cluttered pages. Don't know squat about javascript's capabilities, only that it looks a lot like C/C++ which I do fake knowing fairly well and can hum a few bars! // FrankB 05:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
O,btw-- I put the template into a test bed here: Maquis du Vercors. // FrankB 05:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New Years Party/Reunion
I don't know how available I'll be at the time, but I thought I'd pass this AFT/RABT online "reunion" invitation along to you. If you can track down anyone else, pass it along:
AFT/RABT? Never heard of it. :-) You and Steuard might be interested in this, which includes some regulars (and some people who aren't regulars at all or even remotely connected - as far as I know). And no, I'm not on that list though maybe I should be. It only includes people who use the same name in both locations. Carcharoth (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've seen a few other newsgroup folks around here. I'll try to let people know. --CBD 18:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Collision in cats
Hey! Think you're gonna miss the blizzards headed my way! Sunday's Football game looks to be "interesting times"
(Very low priority... I was just 'rediscovering' these two 'gallery templates' dating from before my long wikibreak last summer. Some discussions on the commons reminded me of them... and since here, they're only used on a few pages despite the villagepump "advert" last spring, you can back burner the "quasi-problem".)
I won't have time to systematically employ these or restart and continue linking with the Commonscats templates until into the new year, so take your time.
Can you take a look at the older of these two placement choices, and advise if there be anything that could make the order irrelevant. diff. That is, ideally, w/o using a forcing two by table externally, would be nice if would float to same relative "top" line of position.
A similar issue... thought the "inhibit" option on this template would make the elements place on same line... not so: {{Commons-gallery}}, see the middle cases in the usage "examples "1a, 1b, 1c", iirc.
If forcing is needed, do you know of any templates in place that make a row of two by, three-by, four-by table cells already around? Cheers! // FrankB 15:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Me-ref and Me-cite
Hi there. I noticed some requests by Surendil at Template talk:ME-ref and Template talk:ME-cite. I agree with some (not all) of those changes, but not sure how to handle them. Would you be able to deal? Carcharoth (talk) 12:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you the guy who runs WP:FC? I am experimenting with an electoral WP:LOTD. What would you say about posting the winnners on your page? Feel free to come by and vote if you get a chance.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I set up and do most of the maintenance on WP:FC, but anyone can edit it. If you set up featured list pages in some sort of consistent retrievable format (by date for instance) then they could certainly be worked into the featured list section of the page. --CBD 23:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will get back to you in a few days with more details. I will have a list for you some time after the 20th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would probably like to have the list name appear without a required clickthrough to identify it if that is possible. I would also like to add the 500 character blurb that people used in the nomination. Do you know how to do a parser function with both linked and unlinked terms? I was going to work on that tomorrow or Saturday.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean something like generating both, 'June 20' and 'June 20'... I tweaked {{ListoftheDay}} and {{ListoftheMonth}} to allow that. Your header page still displays the same text. Can also now do things like [[{{ListoftheDay|011508}}]] to get List of islands of Scotland. The blurbs (and accompanying pictures) could be displayed on WP:FC if they were put onto individual pages - preferably with the same date stamp used in the list templates. --CBD 01:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For now, I used the format you put together for the header -> [2]. --CBD 21:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the proper thing to do is to somehow note that my userpage experiment has not picked up enough steam to be an official policy. We should put the words experiment somewhere so that it is clear this is one of the few things at WP:FC that is not an official policy.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody apparently used "sport agility" as a poor substitute for "agility", because the latter title was already taken - it was a disambiguation page, which I've just moved to "agility (disambiguation)". The Transhumanist 11:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[reply]
Thank you for the assist. By the way, I'm pretty sure that moving over redirects only works when the redirect on the target page points to the page being moved there (and there are no other edits). I just tried a test, to move my Sandbox22 to Sandbox20 where Sandbox20's only edit was a redirect to Sandbox21. The move failed. The Transhumanist 06:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bullet proofing issue on failure
Archived here... failure mode conversations / analysis for near identical template calls in family of such. FrankB 15:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm really hoping you can help me. I saw your interest in Template talk:Infobox Conditionals and, with a little research into your template background, decided to pin my hopes on you. No pressure.
I want to be able to develop a series of templates that work conditionally, similar to Template:Infobox Ship Class, wherein -if I do not add data to the line item- the line item doesn't appear in that article's infobox. For example, using the style of infoboxes found at BattleTechWiki, specifically the code for the {{InfoBoxBattleMech}} template, the author of the particular #if statements shown has them adding in other data, if that data is present [see Speed]:
{| class="infobox"
|colspan="2"|{{#if:{{{image|}}}|[[Image:{{{image}}}|191px]]|}}
|-
!colspan="2" class="infoboxname"|{{{name|name}}}
|-
!colspan="2" class="infoboxheading"|Production information
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Manufacturer||{{{manufacturer|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Model||{{{model|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Class||{{{class|}}}
|-
!colspan="2" class="infoboxheading"|Technical specifications
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Mass||{{{mass|}}} tons
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Chassis||{{{chassis|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Armor||{{{armor|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Engine||{{{engine|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Speed||{{{speed|}}} km/h {{#if:{{{speed with MASC|}}}|({{{speed with MASC}}} km/h with [[MASC]])|}} {{#if:{{{speed with TSM|}}}|({{{speed with TSM}}} km/h with [[TSM]])|}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Jump Jets||{{{jumpjets|None}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|Armament
|
{{{armament|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|BV (1.0)||{{{BV (1.0)|}}}
|- class="infoboxrow"
|BV (2.0)||{{{BV (2.0)|}}}
|}
In order to develop my 'mad skilz,' I've been trying to develop an #if statement for the 'chassis' data that would state the line would not be shown if no data was provided for that line. The line I've been trying to adapt was:
However, every effort I make tends to move that data, when it is there, above the actual box and, when the data is not there, retains the line anyways.
Do you see a method, with example code for 'chassis,' that would work in this instance?
Very much appreciate any help you can provide. Thanks. --LeyteWolfer (talk) 06:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. For whatever reason that Wiki doesn't seem to handle HTML table markup (the <td> and <tr> stuff) very well. I added a copy of Template:! there and then used that to make the change you were asking about. Basically, by replacing '|' characters from the wiki table markup (e.g. |- and the like) with {{!}} you can have the logic insert the '|' after the #if parserfunction has completed evaluation... so the table markup can be enclosed inside the #if condition without the extra | characters being mistaken for #if syntax. --CBD 15:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. That does work quite well. I really appreciate the help. --LeyteWolfer (talk) 19:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Followup question: I've grabbed the code you provided and have adapted it very nicely to every relevant line item in the inforboxes I'm building, and it is working beautifully. However, since some sections of the infobox end up not having any lines displayed (in some cases), I can get two or more section titles grouped up, for no purpose. Is there a way to provide a similar #if statement for title sections, so that if no lines under that section are being used, the title itself is hidden? (I'd be more than happy to see your code demo here, on your talk page.) Thanks again, for any assistance you can provide. --LeyteWolfer (talk) 18:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can use multiple parameters in a #if condition check. Thus, if you wanted to make the 'Production information' header from the example above only display when one of the items under that header were set you could use;
{{#if: {{{manufacturer|}}}{{{model|}}}{{{class|}}}|
{{!}}-
! colspan="2" class="infoboxheading" {{!}} Production information}}
Of course, if you add more rows to the section then you need to add those conditions to the header check as well. Sometimes you can identify one parameter which always has to be populated if the section appears at all (or arrange the sections that way) and then use that parameter as the condition for the header also. Otherwise you need to do something like this list approach. --CBD 21:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As you speakth, so shall it happen. Thanks. As for the conditional that always must be populated, how would I state it?. --LeyteWolfer (talk) 00:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be dependent on the specific template. For instance, let's say you had a template for episodes of a television show. The 'Third season' heading might have multiple conditional rows for the name of episode 1, episode 2, episode 3, et cetera. You'd only want to show the rows of the episodes which had actually aired so far and you'd only want to show the 'Third season' header if at least one row in that section would be set... but you can always count on 'episode 1' being set if any of them are. You can't have an episode 2 or 3 without an 'episode 1' first. Thus, the heading could be conditioned by just checking episode 1;
So, I was just saying that sometimes you can have the heading displayed based on just one parameter rather than needing to list all of the parameters used for conditional rows in that section... if the template is such that one parameter always has to be set for that section. --CBD 01:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the two examples you've provided already, I grasp what you're saying. I'll mess around with it and see what that can do. Thanks! --LeyteWolfer (talk) 04:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Editprotect Merge Templates
Sigh, Can you install an "ORed with Arg-2" 'discuss link parameter'... {{{discuss|{{{2|... }}} params in protected templates Merge and mergeto, (See Mergefrom if you need "Help" or further clues!<BSEG> LOL)... this to standardize with logic of some of the split templates, and so forth, following the notations in common usage page, as well. Thanks. // FrankB 20:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
BTW- who, if anyone, patrols these, checks for stale templates, stalled discussions, and so forth. I want to propose a "category: Merge discussion section talk not linked", or something like. Got a contact you can suggest? // FrankB 20:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made changes to the 'merge' and 'mergeto' templates. There isn't any centralized organization for merge discussions. You might try suggesting the new category on Template talk:Merge. --CBD 22:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas, BTW!
re: [3]... Is there anyway to float the bulleted column up AND keep the bullets? // FrankB 21:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Frank. Merry Christmas. Is this what you are looking for on the bulleted list? I'll look at the merge thing. --CBD 21:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Yeah, and NO! Darn it! <g> I was looking for a more global solution vice the wikimarkup <tr style="..."> equivalent... but I guess that thar shoulda tole me from the "git-go" there weren't none to be had no-ways, anyhow! (Sorry... been in Hill Billy edit mode! <G> Do you need a translator? <G> ...Just got back from a holiday visit home, youse know!??) Anyhow, I have another template in mind that might be more energetic with variations in content, as it were, and being able to "command a column alignment style" would likely come in handy. Having a HTML style type "This column alignment" was more my thought and thinking. But NBD, as I infer thar ain't no such critter. Thanks on the merge fixup. Also Big Thanks for the grunt work fix too though! Much appreciated too! Happy New Year! // FrankB 23:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.
But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.
I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.
But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.
Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version.
Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.
I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes.
Larry Pieniazek
NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with, today it's the turn of the "B"s and "C"s! I'm hoping at least one of you chaps will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but scary! :) ++Lar: t/c 17:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{S5}} (and family} use a mode of displaying a message which when puts the tool tip over the link, one sees a message...
I'm desirous of having the latter (template) display as a tall narrow template, but hide the three current right columns unless wanted... so that mode comes to mind.
Given the publication dates matrix as the input for the tooltip option, AND given, say, using the template abbreviations for the "displayed links to articles" (GG01, GG02, 34TRR, 35TCL, etc.), the question becomes where and how the tooltip activated data would display and show the dates.
The best I can figure, that should be the Ebook order field. Would you agree such can be done. I'm figuring it would then be sensible to move the print publication order field after the shortened links to the book, or perhaps leave that at left, and move the overall order (e-order) to the far right. Thoughts? The snag if any, I would anticipate is in that the three pub date fields are relatively dynamic... only the e-book date will be a constant. But that is the nature of the best. I think Flint is reinventing an industry! // FrankB 17:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense to me. The tooltip is just defined by a 'title' attribute like <span title="Whatever">. You can put that around any text (link or not) to get the pop-up (the word 'text' there for instance has one). The 'whatever' could be a parameter to account for the dates that change. --CBD 01:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(I think I'm "Footballed out" as well!--too many bowl games these days!) G'night!// FrankB 05:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cancel my 32stories request... Specialexpandtemplates did point the way! Needed a newline before calling the {{Mid}} template. // FrankB 17:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ISCA logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:ISCA logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
Heh. I don't know that it'll be judged kosher, but figured it was worth a shot. --CBD 22:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, heh, heh! Not too shabbby! BTW--speaking of finesse... Is there any elegentish HTML way to float this edit link other than my brute force approach. // FrankB 01:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are various {{edit}} templates which create links like this. I put one in on the page. --CBD 10:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Need your help
Hey bud, I need to see if we can get your help on an issue. We are trying to get the article about the Grammy awards in shape and myself and another editor are trying to decide if we should keep or get rid of the "records" section of the article. It is true that the section does not have a lot of focus. As you can see here [4] the other editor is in favor of deleting it from the page. I myself feel that the section needs to remain. I feel that if people want to look up the information, they can go to the Grammy website and look up the information and confirm it with what we have included. Hypo feels that it seems more like original research. I feel that we both have merit, but we feel it would be best for us to have a third opinion. Can you ring in on this? I have always appreciated the way you look at thiese issues with fairness. Junebug52 03:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Short answer... Yes, they need to make cites... <g> [It must be bedtime, I'm getting punchy!] with all the jawing they did, looks like they might have googled up about half of them... but aside from such mundane problems with ugly looking lists, I wanted to re-nudge you on multicolumn TOCs... have you given that any more thought? // FrankB 06:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
idea that grew from your own suggestions, re Beta's image tagging
The nesting of the magic words seems to be malfunctioning in an unanticipated way... I'm getting a subst: when I thought I'd see a subst'd value. Can you take a peek? The template has an lts edit link there in that section. This is a similar technique in long use now in my {{DATE}} template... sigh.
The bad news, I'd already posted two edits to advertise the bugger. Just call me overconfident! // FrankB 17:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Managed to get "the problem" (Template:Adt( talk links history)) working but without full capability. I had to trim out the optional (backdating) parameters: {{{1}}} and {{{2}}}. When you have the time, can you see the diffs and figure if there's anything that can be done to put them back. There seemed to be an issue with the subst's and placement of {{{1|... and }}}; and the last thing wanted is a parserfunction since it be subst'd by design. Perhaps moving the magic words inside those??? ... Otherwise, I need to change the usage. Unfortunately, I'm entirely likely to research one night and record things off line on my HDD, and then edit later, so the option would be nice!
Pre-expand include size: 2,047,807/2,048,000 bytes
Post-expand include size: 263,935/2,048,000 bytes
Template argument size: 538,330/2,048,000 bytes
which belies the point the bottom half-dozen templates aren't expanding,... and which includes the cites templates, which have barely begun to be added.
I'm thinking end run(s)... (A) coming up with a subst'able template "GG", which is fed {{{1}}}==roman numeral, assumes {{{2}}} is the section (story) title, and so forth, then when subst'd builds a plain wikilink and suffixed text [which can be moved around later if necessary] in a (B) non-{{32stories}} table... work around or look alike, (C) "NotGG" which would be used non-subst'd for the two ROF's and 34TRR lines, again returning a single line for the table. (D) It may be worthwhile to come up with a subst'able {{GG1|IX}} & {{GG2|XIV|story}} just to tighten things up with a plain wikilink when and where appropriate.
That line of thought is to also eliminate the overhead of the normal linking templates entirely in the {{32stories}} type tables... which will also need rethought and redesigned... one arg per line I guess, which means just using the column tables, Top, Mid, and such.
I don't think I'd want to look at the "mess" substing 32stories might give. // FrankB 05:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with Adt is an inherent flaw in template substitution. If a parameter in a subst'd template is unset then it substitutes as text rather than evaluating to the default value... {{{1|Frog}}} is treated as that full text (brackets and all) rather than 'Frog'. Thus, substituted templates should only include parameters which are always set to something. There is a convoluted way around this for named parameters;
If the 'day' parameter is unset then the #ifeq: would evaluate to {{{day|}}}... which would then be capitalized by the uc: statement and match the 'DAY' parameter... and therefor print 'CURRENTDAY2'. If 'day' were set then it would NOT match 'DAY' (assuming that is never set) and the ifeq: would evaluate to the contents of 'day'.
As I said, a convoluted way around an inherent flaw in the way subst handles unset parameters... but it relies on capitalization of the parameter name, which won't work on a numeric parameter like {{{1}}}. There might be some other trick which could be worked out for numeric parameters, but I haven't done so before and can't think of any offhand. --CBD 01:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the 1632 writers page I think part of the problem is that there are just so MANY templates... somewhere around 100. Alot of those seem like article formatting things. For instance, {{ROF-2}} may take up slightly less space in the page source than [[Ring of Fire II]], but it takes up much much more in transclusion size for the same result. People are also just more familiar with the normal '[[' wikilink markup. --CBD 01:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Follow on to email
Thanks on the above... I'll need to digest the {Adt} answer better when fresher... but I think I followed along. (I just spent the last few hours weeding all the accumulated emails. What's 842 messages over six months! [ans: Seeing blurry right now!] Even visited and permanently cleaned out some old wikipedia emails going back to May 2005 when I was mediating a flame war... surprisingly brought a few smiles to me face! ..but that was taking a break, there's still a boat load of emails I haven't gone through.)
On 1632 writers issues... The sequence above: (A) coming up with a subst'able template "GG", which is fed {{{1}}}==roman numeral, assumes {{{2}}} is the section (story) title, and so forth, then when subst'd builds a plain wikilink and suffixed text [which can be moved around later if necessary] in a (B) non-{{32stories}} table... work around or look alike, (C) "NotGG" which would be used non-subst'd for the two ROF's and 34TRR lines, again returning a single line for the table. (D) It may be worthwhile to come up with a subst'able {{GG1|IX}} & {{GG2|XIV|story}} just to tighten things up with a plain wikilink when and where appropriate. is because of the same kind of thinking as your comment about the numbers of templates. Unexpected use of template {{2}} - see Template:2 for details.The emphasis being on I put myself in a corner, so I too asking: "what's the easiest way to extract my butt." <g> The problem is the story links using the s= defines to section link, when you come right down to cases by numbers and needs (p= is hardly ever used, and the simple switch commands 'i', 'o', etc. on that page are rare as well, but also susceptible to a GSAR)... so the subst'able hypothesized "GGnn templates" should allow a GSAR, and subst clean up in a one to three edit pass "fix". That is of course along the same lines as the '32Stories'/'32LS' subst-able pair per the email, and the below... which will clean up pre-expand resources in big chunks. (used to be every iterative call was calling comsubtemp and comoutput, plus the overhead content of 32L for each output in the table. I'm not sure the conversion to direct plain wikilinks has saved anything sizewise in the aggregate (under the field conditions of real world needs like DeMarce's contributions) given my initial subst results on /tmp1 (see this section and ). However, subst'd the plain wikilinks are plain wikilinks and the pre-expansion overhead goes away... leaving a much less maintainable inline table.
speaking of which, when I closed the email and uncovered the browser again I was looking at /tmp1 and peeked at the subst'd results in the sections... see one...
Is there any way to subst so the "#if tree" goes away too, or is this the best I can hope for? At least the plain links are extractable with hand edits thereafter.
You should be able to follow my "notes as section titles" annotations through the whole page... I was pretty linear! <g> (Is following a straight line any guarantee of being straight-laced? And if so, is it really a compliment? <BSEG>)
In any event, I'm pretty sure with the ongoing thought in subst'ble and GSAR versions I can come out on top of 1632 writers fairly soon.
If you can come up with anthing more elegant, that would make maintenance going forward easier, particularly in place of 32stories, or a subst'd equivalent, I will of course be duly grateful and glad to use it! Thanks // FrankB 06:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, That was a major league ramble! Sorry. Got to cut out that late night non-thinking. OTOH, an answer on "3" above would be good. Should be back on 'that treadmill' in the next day or three and would like to know which why to jump. Thanks. // FrankB 18:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
counting chickens
There's a saying that you shouldn't count your chickens until they are hatched. With 3 days to go, anything can happen. I've seen your username before. You seem to be a low keyed admin who occasionally makes some wise policy statements. I must have read something that you wrote months ago and your name stuck. Any advice on being an admin, particularly starting out? Archtransit (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Archtransit. Congrats on the unhatched chickens. My best advice is to change as little as possible. The skills and methods which served you as an editor are the same that you need as an admin. Read up on how the extra buttons work and all that (see WP:ARL) of course, but just go about your business as you have been. Make deletions, protections, blocks, et cetera as they come up naturally in the course of your normal work. Maybe look around for some new 'admin only' tasks to add to your other activities as time goes by. Best of luck. --CBD 02:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Need an expert, I was told you are the one.
Hi, I was directed to you because of your expertise. I need some help with a template infobox. Here is the problem; the header name needs to change when the deathdate field is used. I have it working. But I need it to be backwards compatible with previous entries.
The original parameter name was death_date, I changed it to deathdate. Now I want to make sure that if either datedeath or date_death is used that the background color gets changed from the default to silver. Can you help?
See User:Jeanenawhitney/sandbox4 and feel free to make any changes.
Jeanenawhitney (talk) 01:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. See a change for this here. The edit summary explains why it works. --CBD 01:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, once I saw what you did and explained it, I just wondered why I could not figure this out. I have only been learning this for about two weeks now. And what you did opened my eyes. Thanks! --Jeanenawhitney (talk) 10:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey CBD, thanks for helping out on the Grammy award page. I am asking if you would help me in getting the "Requests for rollback"? It says I have to contact an admin to achieve this.[5] I am working on the articles dealing with male pornography and have to deal with vandalism. Do you think that would be something you could help me with. Sooner or later I would like to apply to be an admin myself, but until such time, I have to rely on others LOL. Thanks bud Junebug52 19:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a HTML/Common.css class or whatever to suppress printing of a range? I want to take some hardcopies for comparison and standardization (guess where! <g>) but bypass things like synopses, {{[[Template:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}}</noinclude>).
A tag has been placed on Template:CalendarSelAnniv requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned 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 intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
You helped me immensely a few months ago creating conditional infoboxes that I've found /very/ helpful in my private wiki. I'm hoping you might have some guidance on a related issue.
I've installed a wiki for a friend, where infoboxes are critical to the purpose of the site. I have conditional infoboxes working just fine on my private wiki, so I did a fresh install of MediaWiki for my friend and then copied & pasted code from my wiki (including MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:Monobook.css). I figured that I could set up the 2nd wiki to be near identical to mine, for the most part, and then go from there.
However, on the second site, the infoboxes get heavily distorted. I narrowed it down to the conditional fields, because it accepts just fine an entry that includes the name of the starship class being focused upon (as shown here where only the standard field is used).
To me, this means it relates to some change I made to the server-bound files on the original wiki at some point, and were not yet made to the new install. Someone at mwusers.com thought I needed to define the class "infoboxrow", but since MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:Monobook.css are a direct copy from the original site, I don't think that is the problem.
The original site is using MediaWiki: 1.11.0, while the new one is using 1.11.1 (I don't want to update the original, if screwed up infoboxes might be the result).
Any help/suggestions would be much appreciated, Conrad! --LeyteWolfer (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Conrad, the wizards at Bugzilla were able to solve my problem. I hope you get back to 'pedi-ing soon. See ya out there. --LeyteWolfer (talk) 18:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Merge
I just noticed a change you made to the Merge template back in December broke one of the links on it. I would fix it myself (it's a very simple fix), but I don't have admin powers. — NRen2k5(TALK), 23:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Okidi Peter requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. CoJaBo (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, it's nice to see you around again. :-) the wub"?!" 10:19, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello wub. Thanks for the welcome. --CBD 12:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(Request re:Boy2Boy thread on AN)
can you please ratchet the heat back a few notches on your posts in AN, please? It's a delicate enough situation that making inflammatory posts regarding what you consider to be other people's motives is actively unhelpful. Poor analogies like the Kitten comment, aimed at another user, doesn't make things any better. SirFozzie (talk) 21:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In what way was it a "poor" analogy? Did it not exactly parallel the position it was disputing? As to the rest, I didn't say anything (inflammatory or otherwise) about "other people's motives". I noted that the position taken was illogical. Beamathan was arguing that someone should be indefinitely blocked to prevent a situation which even he acknowledged there was no evidence might occur. I was hoping that demonstration of how "ludicrous" that was, via analogy, would get him to reconsider. Hardly inflammatory, especially in comparison to the rest of that discussion. --CBD 21:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Template conversions
On some of the abs/etc conversions, you'll probably need to watch out for precedence issues (i.e., wrap the argument in parentheses). --- RockMFR 02:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. It probably shouldn't matter since they only take one parameter, but I have been adding parens on some of the more convoluted cases. --CBD 02:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Main Page template timers
Template:DYK-Refresh and Template:ITN-Update currently state that 0 hours have passed since they were last updated. Do your think your edits have done something unexpected? - BanyanTree 04:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted and the template appear to be functioning normally now. - BanyanTree 05:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I needed to set the formula to multiply by 24 before taking the 'floor'. --CBD 11:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FYI
I wasn't aware Jimbo was stepping in when I posted. I've mostly been restoring a historic photograph for FPC this morning and just found out a moment ago. So I've followed up at ANI with a request for courtesy deletion on the page in user space. Best regards, DurovaCharge! 16:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I figured the timeline was out of whack somewhere... given what had gone earlier I was surprised that he would go back to making useful contributions after being de-adminned, but checking his contribs it looks like you were talking about work he was doing prior to that. S'all good. --CBD 16:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I wasn't aware was all. Thanks. As you probably know, I never do IRC. So the grapevine hadn't wound around to me yet. DurovaCharge! 16:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb pages
Just curious as to the reason for your recent creation of /Blurb sub-pages? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 14:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated this article for speedy deletion because at is obviously a self-promoting advert, however the author keeps removing the speedy deletion tag without giving an explanation. Could you look into this please? Thanks! Chem-MTFC (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
__NOINDEX__ live?
__NOINDEX__ thingies are live on en.wiki now? I'm asking because last time I checked they weren't, but the one you just added to {{db-g11}} seems to work fine (as a side note, I've <includeonly></includeonly>'d it, as I can't see any reason not to index the template itself), and I've wanted to make sure they get added to all the DRV log pages. Drop me a {{talkback}} or reply at my talk page so I'll see it sooner, please. Thanks, cheers, and happy editing! lifebaka++ 13:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, it went live about two weeks ago. See the revision notes or this week's BRION report. The inclusion tags are fine, though I think we may 'noindex' the entire template namespace already. --CBD 13:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please delete the page you had authored in 2005 entitled "Grubb"... if this page is deleted it will allow users to search for people w/ last name "Grubb"... currently it is a forced redirect to "Hobbit families" which is cute but not quite what most users will likely expect. Thanks.! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.139.60 (talk) 18:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Andy. Welcome back. --CBD 11:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on plagiarism
I saw your comment on Jimbo's talk page about plagiarism and copyleft. Would you have time to have a look at Wikipedia:Plagiarism and Wikipedia talk:Plagiarism (where most of the discussion has taken place)? Carcharoth (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That mostly looked like a discussion of issues of plagiarism ON Wikipedia, whereas I was actually commenting on a case of plagiarism FROM Wikipedia. Principles are largely the same, but I think the wiki format makes it difficult to sustain any case for extensive paraphrasing - even with proper credit to the source. Commented on the talk page there. --CBD 12:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. What do you think about the situation (somewhere on that talk page) of copying in large chunks from PD texts (eg. NASA pages, Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 edition, Catholic Encyclopedia, and so on)? That suffers the same problems with evolution of the text but is: (a) very widespread; and (b) some people are insistent that copying PD-text verbatim and incrementally rewriting it is OK. I'm obviously not so sure, as one rewritten, it becomes unclear what came from where, especially when trying to check things and/or update old sources. Carcharoth (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is a disconnect between the traditional academic view of avoiding plagiarism and the fundamental nature of wikis. Traditionally, anything you write which derives from the work of one or more others must specifically state what was reused and from which source(s)... to not do so is plagiarism, academic theft, and highly unethical. On Wikipedia, and wikis in general, that concept is completely foreign. When someone edits an article to reword a paragraph they don't worry about differentiating which parts are their own original work and which parts were taken from text previously written by one or more others. Trying to keep track of and reference all the people who contributed to the finished product would be insanely complicated and require a reference document longer than the article itself. What we have instead is the page history. Every single contribution is tracked there and thus 'attributed' to the author. There is no 'plagiarism' involved in editing the previous work of others because it is all documented in the page history. I believe the same would apply in the 'copied PD document' cases... I'd even argue that the original poster including an edit summary along the lines of, 'Text copied from 1911 Britannica', would be sufficient. Thereafter all the changes can be tracked through the history. Where it runs into trouble is when we say in the article itself that the page or a section thereof is from another source... and then the 'other source' text gets changed. Rather than trying to track what comes from the original PD source and what from Wikipedians we should just remove any 'in article' reference to the prior source. If it isn't credited in an edit summary then a footnote template along the lines of {{1911}} can cover it... though I'd think that would be better if it said something like 'this article was developed using material from' and linked to the edit(s) when the PD material was added. That continues to give due credit to the PD source, even if all its text has been replaced, like any other 'contributor' who would normally be tracked in the page history. --CBD 16:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem with that, in my view, is that "merciless editing" is OK for text that someone knowingly submitted to a wiki., knowing that it would be mercilessly edited. But text that others wrote, even if PD, should not be placed in the mincing machine that is a wiki without better safeguards. In other words, there is a difference between saying "I wrote this, here you are, edit away" and saying "someone else wrote this, it is PD and I'm copying it in here, edit away". I realise that is part of what PD is about, but I don't think PD was even meant to apply to incremental editing of the sort we see here. One of the points being that a vague "some parts of this might be from the original PD text that started the article, but we aren't sure" is not really sufficient. We should have the integrity to want to identify what Wikipedia editors wrote and what was copied in. But not everyone agrees with that, if you read the talk page of the proposed plagiarism guideline. Unfortunately, this bust-up over how to treat PD-texts has obscured the real aim of the proposal, which was to increase awareness of the ordinary type of plagiarism of contemporary sources, such as insufficent rewriting or close paraphrasing. In some areas, there is a fine line to tread between stating unambiguous facts that can be obtained from many sources (and sometimes only stated in a standard way - eg. biographical information) and avoiding the copying of turns of phrases unique to a particular book or author. Would you have any idea how to get Wikipedia:Plagiarism moving again? Start from scratch, slim it down, start by adding stuff to other policy and guideline pages (as some have suggested)? Carcharoth (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Was [6] discussed somewhere? I understand the concern behind it but it seems a little drastic to NOINDEX the whole user talk page without informing the user. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Intention was to make the Article not indexed while it was tagged as 'non notable'. I agree that this isn't right for a user warning. I removed the tag. --CBD 11:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I wonder whether the already placed occurrences should be searched and removed. I guess a bot could be programmed to do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I'll take care of it. --CBD 12:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I hope you found a way to do it without too much manual work. It doesn't seem important whether you should miss a few cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In particular, we need help with template syntax. Thanks. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]