Happy First Edit Day!
![]() |
Happy First Edit Day, Anomie, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 13:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC) |
Deprecated tag fixing
Hey! Do you think you could edit or request an edit to your User talk:Anomie/Archives/2009 page? The page currently uses deprecated source tags. Replacing these tags with <syntaxhighlight>
tags will fix any issues with it. The page is fully protected, and I've been advised to inform the archive owner of this instead of requesting an edit myself. Don't worry - the page will have no visible effect, this is just a maintenance thing. Thanks! Aidan9382 (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Up and down
Those arrows are stationary at the bottom of the page. One simply clicks to get to the top and clicks to get the bottom - why did you remove them? Having to scroll that page is a far bigger problem than the feature I added. I've got too many other things to do than spend time scrolling. Please put it back. Atsme 💬 📧 18:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Having to scroll the page is a non-issue, IMO, while having large floating boxes obscuring part of the content can easily get annoying. If you're not on a phone you can use the Home and End keys on your keyboard. If you are on mobile, and flick-scrolling doesn't work well enough for you, you'd be better served by a user script that put the arrows on every page. Anomie⚔ 20:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
"Huh, weird"
I mean, the bot's edit makes total sense, given that I gave two different keywords in the same sentence. Didn't realise it would check through the whole phrase and not just the first template of a line. The more you know! Primefac (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- More specifically, it was complaining because the close was Category:Expired Wikipedia bot requests for approval but {{BotDenied}} was also transcluded in the page. That's not the weird part to me, my "Huh, weird" was about the bot setting the status field to {{BRFA}} to include the "Inconsistent categories/tags!" bit which breaks that template. I just pushed a fix for the bot so it won't do that anymore. Anomie⚔ 12:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Rescuing orphaned refs is not always a good idea
As of February 15, 2022 all 156 national parks mentioned in "List of national parks of Thailand" have links to DNP webpages and RTGG resources.
So this references in "List of Protected Areas Regional Offices of Thailand" are no longer necessary, can be ommitted.
Rescuing DNP-EBook web pages in this list seems to me unneccessary.
SietsL (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @SietsL: The bot seems to be rescuing the citations because its still being referenced. If you leave the referencing to them (E.g.
<ref name=DNP-EBookN/>
) without defining them in any place, it creates an error . If the references arent needed, remove them. Otherwise, dont just leave it as an undefined named reference, or this creates an error. Aidan9382 (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Barnstar
![]() |
The da Vinci Barnstar | |
I very much appreciate AnomieBOT. I just spent some time figuring out what went wrong with a cite orphaned by Refill only to find that AnomieBOT had beaten me to figuring this out and fixing it. I've had similar previous experiences, and have appreciated every one of them. Thanks and Kudos. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:26, 21 July 2022 (UTC) |