Jump to content

User talk:Bgwhite/Archive 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27→Archive 30

Bot edits in Group structure and the axiom of choice

A bot edit Punctuation goes before References has been made (and reverted by me) me a couple of times now. There is a sentence with three references. Two of them refer to keywords in the sentence, and one of them to the whole sentence. Only the last reference (the one applying to the complete sentence) should go after the punctuation mark. The article is correct (in this regard) as it stands now. YohanN7 (talk) 01:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

YohanN7 Um, no. That is not how it is done. Nobody else will know what you are trying to do either. If a reference applies to the entire sentence, the punctuation still goes before the reference. If the reference covers only part of the sentence, the punctuation still goes before the reference. This is done according to Wikipedia:REFPUNC. There are no exceptions listed for what you are trying to do. Bgwhite (talk) 02:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Then your bot still doesn't get it right since it leaves one reference in the middle of the sentence. As for the Nobody else will know what you are trying to do either, well, your'e wrong - and Wikipedia:REFPUNC is ambiguous. Placing all references after the punctuation mark would be, in the present case, misleading. As it stands now, it's perfectly clear to the reader to what the references refer. YohanN7 (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
There is an example,
Flightless birds have a reduced keel[10] and smaller wing bones than flying birds of similar size.[11][12],
where there is a footnote to keyword keel immediately following it. Logically, the same applies even if the keyword happens to be the last in a sentence. Note: "The text to which the footnote applies" need not be a complete sentence, and it isn't a complete sentence in the case at hand. YohanN7 (talk) 04:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
YohanN7, keel example is correct. The bot did the correct thing in leaving the ref in the middle of the sentence. These are examples given in Wikipedia:REFPUNC. However, this is irrelevant as no punctuation is next to those reference. If the reference comes next to punctuation, punctuation MUST come before the reference, not after it. This clearly stated in REFPUNC. REFPUNC is not ambiguous.
"The ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, including any punctuation..." (emphasis mine).
Only dashes and parenthesis are the only given exemptions.
Jonsey95 has since edited the article to do the exact same thing. The edit summary is "ref error". It is a ref error. Bgwhite (talk) 08:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I'll give up. But, the rules are flawed because they render the text ambiguous. And, REFPUNC is ambiguous. The example should read
Flightless birds have a reduced keel and smaller wing bones than flying birds of similar size.[10][11][12]
if the rules are to be followed. Note that "The ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, including any punctuation..." doesn't talk about where the punctuation mark happens to be. You should have these rules rewritten (preferably changed to non-US standard) and clearly stated. I also don't agree with your screaming "MUST come before". You seem to feel that "following rules" (however bad they are) is more important than writing good articles with unambiguous footnotes. Rules exist for the purpose of making life a little smoother. When rules are bad or contradict themselves, they should be scrapped ASAP. I'm sure you wouldn't agree. YohanN7 (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Egyptian Revolution of 2013 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Egyptian Revolution of 2013 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/Egyptian Revolution of 2013 until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. GreyShark (dibra) 19:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Hero (2014 film)

Hello Bgwhite, please move User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox5 to Hero (2014 film). The filming has begun, given sources confirmed. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Assassin Done Bgwhite (talk) 20:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:34, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Kitt article question

Hi Bgwhite. Since I agreed not to edit the Twins' page, I've decided to edit more melodic and relaxing music pages, such as Slayer. Anyway, I was just wondering if an exception can be made in the case of clear vandalism, supposing that you or GoingBatty are not around at the time. There was a recent edit by an anonymous user, and it was a good one, but at first I feared possible vandalism. So please let me know if in an indisputable case of vandalism I can directly edit the Kitt page, as the only exception to the agreement. Thank you as always for your time. Dontreader (talk) 07:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Dontreader, thank you for the laugh. I guess Slayer is more relaxing than your favorite band GWAR. I saw the same edit as I keep the article on my watchlist. Go ahead and revert any clear vandalism. Bgwhite (talk) 07:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, it's true that I love GWAR more than anything else in the world, but eventually I was forced to spend a ton of money travelling to Rome for multiple exorcisms, so now I'm extremely cautious and I listen to black metal instead. Thanks for keeping the Kitt article on your watchlist, and for letting me revert any obvious vandalism. I feel the need to protect them. They have such big hearts, you know. Dontreader (talk) 08:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Please clarify

Sir, I once again thank you for the edits in Padmapur. But sir, don't you think that the images of personalities like Comrade Nagabhushana Patnaik (Who is born in Padmapur) and Sadguru Arjuna (Who is born near a village padmapur) have glorified India by their selfless deeds and as such their images should be displayed in the page Padmapur . I still admit that the problems ,if any, regarding copyright, should be considered leniently. Hpsatapathy (talk) 04:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hpsatapathy, howdy again. Thank you for the kind email. Couple of things...
  1. You had a link from Nagabhushana Patnaik to your own user space. There can't be any links to anyone's user space.
  2. I don't think the "Extension of Buddhism" image should be in the article. It doesn't serve a purpose.
  3. The other two images of Comrade Patnaik and Arjuna, should be in there, but they should be lower down in the article. At the spot you had placed them, any reader would not know who they are or their relation to Padmapur because there hadn't been any text about them yet. Images should be place near where the subject is being mentioned.
Bgwhite (talk) 07:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Sir, Many many thanks for the brilliant email.You are really justified.

With regards: hpsatapathy 117.214.93.4 (talk) 08:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Texistepec Language

Hello Bgwhite - I am new to editing Wikipedias so I apologize if I'm not accomplishing things in the correct way. I'm writing in regards to the recent reversions on the edits I made to the page for the Texistepec Language. I have already written to Materialscientist in hopes of addressing what I did wrong so I can ensure my edits are correct in information and formatting. I am a linguistics student with a semester long project of updating a Wikipage for my chosen Indigenous American language every week on a different aspect of the language. All of my sources are from peer-reviewed articles and books authored by experts recognized in their field. I realized I failed to make a citation and tried to go back and correct it but that was also reverted. What I am having trouble understanding is why my initial edits to the page were left intact (after they were edited by you for formatting, thank you very much) but my second attempt on 15 Feb. 2014 was completely erased. My sources are peer-reviewed and cited in the edits, and I found my sources as a result of the Reference sections in the back of other books in this field. I'm not writing anything opinion based, I am not even trying to put my own spin on any of the information. I am taking information out of physical texts and copying it onto the Wiki. I know my Professor's hopes in this assignment was that we could have useful homework that would give back to the community at large, I'm finding this more difficult to accomplish than I'd expected since the info is being deleted and I have no idea why. I have been using Microsoft Front Page to code my entries because I don't know how to code. If this is not acceptable please let me know what I can do better so the information is allowed to remain on the page. I'm not trying to start any editing 'wars', I don't even know how I'd do that, but I do have to update this on a weekly basis. Please help me so I can pass the information along to the rest of my classmates, who are encountering the same problems, so we can contribute something useful to the world instead of just frustration to the tireless Wiki editors such as yourself. Thanks in advance for any assistance you can give me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.149.83 (talk) 18:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

8.165.149.83, a few things. You didn't add any references to your last big edit. There needs to be a reference for each table. The Microsoft Front Page is creating tables waaaaay differently than Wikitables. When I edited your first tables, I reduced the size of the file by 1/2. They code for the Front Page table is very complicated. Anyone trying to edit it later on will have a hard time. Wikitables also load faster. Here is your code for the first tables. Here was my revision of the tables.
If you can't make out what is happening from the above revisions, Help:Table contains more information. You can edit in a "sandbox" where no edits you make will show up on Wikipedia. So, it is a good place to play around. Your sandbox is here. If you need any help, give me yell. Bgwhite (talk) 07:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Bgwhite. Most of my info was from the stuff already referenced, but now I see which citations I forgot to include. Thanks for the information on the formatting. I will avoid MFP in the future and try to code it by hand using the tutorials on wiki tables. Thank you for your assistance and I will take some more time to practice my tables on the "sandbox" before I try to edit the page again. Thank you. -AzLinguist (I don't have a username so I thought I'd try that one out) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.149.83 (talk) 16:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Website/Storage

Do you have any website of your own with some storage to host some HTML/javascript code? We have this page. I uploaded it at my3gb, because it is free and you don't need to sign in in every few weeks to keep the account active. But the site my3gb itself, not my account, has some bad impression. The code itself is very simple. If you have some host, and it is not going to ber terminated soon, could you host the code at your site? It'll take only 10 kb. Tito☸Dutta 09:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Tito, I no longer have any websites that I manage. I do use something called Sark. I do all my illegal activities on there. :)
You could use Google Drive and it is free. See [1] and [2] Bgwhite (talk) 18:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Alexanderalgrim

Hi there BG, AL "here",

don't bother talking/warning this guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alexanderalgrim#DEFAULTSORT_2 please see your message here), i've followed him extensively as he seems to dabble in Portuguese football, and thus be my compatriot, i've tried everything, speaking in Portuguese, speaking in English, other people have talked to him, offered help, warned him due to his continuing BLP violations... NOTHING works, he does not utter one word in reply to ANYONE, and he speaks English, not a very good one but he does.

Attentively, happy editing --AL (talk) 01:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

AL, I think that was the third time I've mentioned that to him. My issue is minor, but BLP violations are a different story. I don't really follow him, but if you notice any BLP violations or other serious matters, give me a yell. That is an issue that should be corrected or some blocks will be in order to get their attention.
I currently have a user that thinks that any website is not keeping track of his country's footballers correctly. He insists he is the only one who keeps accurate statistics. Any English website is biased and doesn't present the whole story. Sigh. I'll trade you. Bgwhite (talk) 07:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Wow, i guess you're far worse than i am, indeed :) And i also must clarify: maybe i should have said "his poor BLP approach", not "his BLP violations", he's by no means a vandal no sir, it's just WP:COMPETENCE could be raised in his case, but i must be extra careful with the wording lest i am wrongly accusing someone of (massive) wrongdoing.

Example: if a player plays ONE MINUTE in a minor competition (i.e. Taça da Liga) then goes months without playing anything else (and he could die/retire in the meantime for all we know), Mr.Algrim feels the subject is already worthy of a WP article, and voilà!

Also interesting is that he received a notification after i highlighted his name in my message to you, and did he feel the need to defend himself/comment here? No way! Quite a one-man show he's running there...

All in all, sorry for any misunderstanding, keep it up --AL (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

AL, he hasn't been on Wikipedia since the 13th. So don't read into anything that he hasn't commented here yet.
The rules do state if a person has played in a professional level or National team match, they become notable and get an article. If it is for one minute or 90 minutes, it doesn't matter. At least footballers have a very easy litmus test. Some American college football and basketball player discussions get, um, interesting. Bgwhite (talk) 00:30, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yep, WP:NFOOTY. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

...Waitig...more waiting...

I'm currently (impatiently) waiting for the next database scan of svwp. Could you plese update me when it hits? (I hope I'm sending to the right user, too many to keep track of in my watchlist...) :-P (t) Josve05a (c) 17:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Josve05a, the last svwiki dump was on February 6, but it didn't "finish" till the 9th. Not sure why there was a three day lag. There is a dump approx. every 15 days. Here is the queue for all the dumps. Those on bottom are next up to be dumped. Do a search for "svwiki:" and you can see svwiki's place in the queue.
I noticed on svwiki's Checkwiki page that there are 190,000 articles for error #55. You should probably turn that off. AWB handles most cases of #26 and #38, so you could clear those out. I've got some regexes for #40 that will handle a majority of articles. Bgwhite (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I ran my bot through #26. 0 pages fixed. (t) Josve05a (c) 09:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

For want of a nail - visual layout issues with "template" in this article are why the TOC placement is in the article.

Please see TOC#Floating_the_TOC for the reasons that the Poem For Want of a Nail had the table of contents moved right. The way you changed the article leaves a lot of whitespace in the center of the heading, and is poor visual formatting - which is why WP:TOC specifically allows this exception. I have reverted your edit for now, please let us take this discussion to the talk page and come to consensus with other editors on this topic. Thank you! Timmccloud (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Timmccloud People who use screen readers (the blind) will miss out on the text. There are no exceptions. See User talk:Bgwhite#Floating the TOC. Per WP:TOC, "Users of screen readers do not expect any text between the TOC and the first heading". Bgwhite (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

AfD for Willy Monfret

An article that you either edited or previously proposed for deletion has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Willy Monfret. Due to lack of discussion the article has now been relisted twice. If you have a chance could you please stop by and weigh in on the deletion debate. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 14:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

thanks for editing my edits on internet security

Thanks for editing my edits, Bgwhite, always learn from others' edits. say, do you think that needs additional citations box from 4/09 can go? I added where I could to clean up rotting links etc. true, the top of the article has very few citations, but almost all sections refer to main article full of citations. Should only admins remove these box warnings? Didnt see a thank you link behind your name so am posting this on your talk page (BTW: why do/how can some people have this and some not?). Thanks.--Wuerzele (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Wuerzele, I think the article still needs more. That is a long and complicated topic. Even though most sections do have a "main article" link, a reference for the following paragraph would still be a good idea. However, removing the needs more refs tag would be appropriate. Anyone can remove the box warnings or tags. Oy, that article could be never ending, adding DNSSEC, DNSCrypt, SQL injection, NSA.... Bgwhite (talk) 19:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
thanks Bgwhite. ok then. One last thing: Do you know why or how some users have this [username|thank you] link behind their name, and most of us not? Are these people admins typically, or are they self-programmed for gratification, or what?--Wuerzele (talk) 19:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Wuerzele, are you talking about this? Bgwhite (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Exactly. Thanks for the link; dont know how can I keep up with this sort of s....tuff.--Wuerzele (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Use the WP:Search box and follow links from one policy to another. That's how I do it. In fact that's how I found this policy to answer your question. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 21:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
All confirmed users should have them, but not unregistered users. It is possible for editors to opt out if they wish, which might explain some instances of the link not appearing. You will never see the "Thank" link behind your own name because it would be silly to let people thank themselves for editing. See this policy for more info. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I see, Bill W, thanks.--Wuerzele (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Wuerzele, don't worry. One can never remember all the stuff around here. Once you do learn something, it gets changed. After all these years, I still ask people for help and advice.
Wtwilson3, "it would be silly to let people thank themselves for editing". Huh? What narcissist wouldn't love sending thank yous to oneself. If you are like me and sooooo lonely, you send thanks to oneself to think somebody out there notices you. So, lonely.  :) Bgwhite (talk) 21:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Interwiki complete list

Interwiki Complete list is being linked to Meta Wikipedia list. How to disable it? I found nothing in interwiki table. Tito☸Dutta 13:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Tito Crap, I forgot to answer your email about meta. There is no problem with the main page. If I remove {{Main page interwiki}}, it goes away. If I add just one interwiki, it returns. So, it is somewhere in the Mediawiki preferences. Did you install meta by chance? Bgwhite (talk) 19:24, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • No, I did not install anything. {{Main page interwiki}} is imitating {{Main Page interwikis}} of Wikipedia. This is affecting only main page. It is not an interwiki table or template error. This is either a mediawiki/extension preference or a glitch. I have checked another wiki, they are also using interwiki, and old version, check in Special:Version, but not facing any error. Tito☸Dutta 23:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

ª Ac. Abhidevananda edited commons.js file and fixed it . Tito☸Dutta 07:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

List of German painters

Please show me the POLICY that prohibits redlinks. Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Lugnuts, Obviously you didn't read the entire edit summary.
WP:LISTPEOPLE is MOS. A person may be included in a list of people if ALL the following requirements are met:
The person meets the Wikipedia notability requirement.
The person's membership in the list's group is established by reliable sources.
The edit warning IN THE ARTICLE: "Every entry in this list must have an article written and reliable sources to support inclusion, else it will be removed without warning."
Policy is not to include redlinks in lists of people. Policy on this individual page is not to include redlinks. Bgwhite (talk) 08:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Drafts

Can I use the "Draft" namespace to create articles, it's better way to create future articles like upcoming novels, films, etc. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Captain Assassin!, you could, but stick with your sandbox. Sandbox is under your control. Bgwhite (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Draft will be under control, it is same like sandbox. Can I use it for biography articles? --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Why? There is no advantage. Draft space is not the same as user space when "control" is concerned. You don't "own" a draft, but you do "own" your sandbox. By "own", I mean people are hesitant to edit or delete anyone's user space articles. Draft space is meant to make it easier for newbies to work on articles. Bgwhite (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
OK, got it. Just one more thing, I've created Draft:The Jungle Book (2015 film), should a redirect of The Jungle Book (2015 film) needs to be created with saying a sentence in the history that "move the draft here"? --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 06:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm confused about the redirect. What are you trying to do? Has filming started? Bgwhite (talk) 06:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
No no, I think a redirect needs to be created, I'm trying to do is as I've created the draft for the film, so it should have a redirect to its director, which says "move the draft Draft:The Jungle Book (2015 film) here" in its edit history. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 07:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
So, what do you say about redirect The Jungle Book (2015 film) to Jon Favreau?--Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 11:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Missing lock

Hi, I just want to inform that there is no lock symbol on the article Causes of World War I which you recently marked as semi-protected. - Anonimski (talk) 14:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Anonimski, thank you for letting me know. I put a three month lock on it this time. As you have edited that page off and on for a bit, tell me if the vandalism returns again after the protection expires. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Midnight Rider (film)

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox1 and move it to Midnight Rider (film) - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 11:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Assassin, it has been moved. Ouch! Having someone killed by a train on the first day of filming is not good. Bgwhite (talk) 21:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I didn't tell them to film on train track while a third train was coming with whistle warning to them. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

TOC edits with AWB

You do realise that your edit summary is pointing to a Help page, no guideline, policy or anything someone could genuinely refer to as "how to format an article"? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The Rambling Man I linked to WP:TOC which states, "If floating the TOC, it should be placed at the end of the lead section of the text, before the first section heading. Users of screen readers do not expect any text between the TOC and the first heading".
WP:TOC also links to WP:LEAD, a MOS page and it states, " Users of screen readers expect the table of contents to follow the introductory text; they will also miss any text placed between the TOC and the first heading."
Also see User talk:Bgwhite#Floating the TOC.
When it come to right, left or adding another heading to make it "look nice", I'm winging it. Bgwhite (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your fix, much better. Hopefully you can link to a guideline or a policy, not just a help page, in future. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Are you sure what you're doing is actually improving articles? The second edit you made to the list of boxing champions was much better but several of those you've already made are much worse. Could you fix those ones as you did with the boxing list? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
The Rambling Man, for those who are using screen readers, yes it is improving the articles as they can now read "missing" text.
Again, I'm winging it and your definition of "worse" is different from mine which is different from anyone else's definition. Am I making some pages "worse", yes. Am I making some pages "better", yes. Which of the 2,500 hundred pages I've edited so far are "much worse"? I've reused the same toc template, but put in the proper location and been told I made it worse. I've changed to toc template from opposite left/right and been told I made it worse. Whatever I do, I'm in a lose-lose situation. I'm starting to think Graham87's request was an evil ploy. Bgwhite (talk) 22:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Y'know, I've never met the guy, but in my experience at forums like WP:VPT, if Graham87 says there's an accessibility problem, you can bet your ass that it's true. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
LOL, sorry, dued. :-) IMO your edits are most definitely making the articles better. Graham87 05:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I have no doubt that they're making the articles more accessible and I'm a complete advocate of that. But if the second version of the boxing list you edited is still accessible, I'd urge you to consider the readers who don't use screen readers as well. Placing a massive TOC with bags of whitespace at the top of articles is hardly a step forward for 99.9% of our readers if it can be avoided whilst catering for the remainder of the audience. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bgwhite. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 11:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tito☸Dutta 11:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Bgwhite. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Somewhere-land.
Message added 05:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tito☸Dutta 05:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Scope of bot approval, invisible change

I noticed this change by BG19bot to Coordinated Universal Time. It seems to be an invisible change, in that it would not change the appearance of the article to a reader. Also, it seems to be outside the scope of the approval of the bot, which was to add a template to certain biography talk pages. Jc3s5h (talk) 13:21, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Jc3s5h: The bot made three changes: (i) it exchanged the positions of {{Use dmy dates|date=February 2014}} and {{Redirect|UTC}} - this is permitted because hatnotes should always go at the very top, see WP:HNP and MOS:LEAD; (ii) it moved a reference {{sfn|Seidelmann|1992|p=7}} from before a comma to after it - this was in line with MOS:REFPUNC; (iii) it altered a link from [[List_of_UTC_time_offsets|List of UTC time offsets]] to [[List of UTC time offsets]] which does exactly the same thing, but is just over half the length. Only the third was purely cosmetic, the first two were in accordance with the Manual of Style. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:BOTREQUIRE, on User:BG19bot, the bot's user page, there is a listing of all approved tasks of the bot. There are eight tasks including BRFA7, WP:CHECKWIKI error fixing, that have been approved. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't know the right place to look to see all the approved tasks. Also, I didn't see the visible change; those periods are hard to see. I didn't know a guideline says hatnotes go at the top. If I get a chance, I'll see if the "Use dmy dates" template documentation is in harmony with this or not. Thanks. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

The End of the Tour (2014 film)

Please take a look at User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox5 and move it to The End of the Tour (2014 film) - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Bgwhite, don't have a minute here? --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 02:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Assassin, sorry. I don't have the greatest of memories. Bgwhite (talk) 04:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I knew that you had forgotten again. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 09:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Bot error

Hello. I was going through the short pages page when I noticed that the article Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe has been blanked by BG19bot in this edit. The edit summary for the blanking was: m (using AWB (9949)). I believed that this was in error, and I have reverted the edit. Please advise. Thanks. KJ click here 10:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Kkj11210 Wow. That goes beyond just a bot error. I'd say the bot barfed all over the page. Magioladitis, what happened? The edit was the last edit made by the bot last night. I just re-ran the bot on the article again and it worked ok. The edit summary is also different from what was being used at the time. Did AWB just barf when I clicked stop at the wrong point? Bgwhite (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this is a very rare problem that occurs most probably due to temporary internet connection loss. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Boychoir (film)

Please review this User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox5 and move it to Boychoir (film) - Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 19:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Done Bgwhite (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

TOCs

Of course there are exceptions. Per WP:TOC, "Although usually a heading after the TOC is preferable, __TOC__ can be used to avoid being forced to insert a meaningless heading just to position the TOC correctly, i.e., not too low." That's a direct quote. Yes, Point #2 in "Floating the TOC" says "If floating the TOC, it should be placed at the end of the lead section of the text, before the first section heading." but Point #5 says "The default TOC is placed before the first headline, but after any introductory text (unless changed by the page's editors). If the introductory summary is long enough that a typical user has to scroll down to see the top of the TOC, you may float the TOC so it appears closer to the top of the article. However, the floating TOC should in most cases follow at least the first paragraph of article text." This is an explicit exception, and blind reversion is uncalled for. - Dravecky (talk) 09:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Dravecky There are no exceptions. Any text between the TOC and the first headline will not be read by anyone using a screen reader. This is made perfectly clear in WP:TOC. The ability for someone to read the text trumps any design considerations. This is not a "blind revert". See User talk:Bgwhite#Floating the TOC. Bgwhite (talk) 09:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure you're acting in good faith but "no exceptions" is not what it says at WP:TOC. I just quoted chapter and verse from WP:TOC which is the actual Wikipedia consensus on this subject. An inconclusive discussion on your talk page doesn't trump the clear text that outlines the exceptions and how to implement them. - Dravecky (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Dravecky Graham87 So how a page looks trumps if someone can actually read the page? My talk page discussion proves that point. What you fail to quote is, "Users of screen readers do not expect any text between the TOC and the first heading." Accessibility trumps on how a page looks. Bgwhite (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Your opinion may differ, and that's your right, but the fact is, per WP:TOC, there are exceptions. The discussion you point to pre-supposes that persons using screen readers will take action to skip part of the article, not that the screen readers will skip the text on their own. Perhaps you would care to start a community-wide discussion on this but a brief, inconclusive chat on your talk page does not establish consensus nor does it override WP:TOC. - Dravecky (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Dravecky, but when *every other article* follows the guidelines, why would someone using a screen reader do anything different? They won't. This has been around since 2006, 2008 and mentioned Signpost Tell me your reason for denying a screen reader user from reading part of the article? This has been in place for years. You should start a discussion on when "Users of screen readers do not expect any text between the TOC and the first heading" should be ignored. Examples being page layout and page design overriding accessibility. Bgwhite (talk) 20:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

(t) Josve05a (c) 19:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

You're the one willfully ignoring the text of WP:TOC which already outlines exceptions. If you want it changed, start that process, but until then you're basing your editing on something that's not in the document you cite. - Dravecky (talk) 22:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Once again, Tell me your reason for denying a screen reader user from reading part of the article. WP:TOC clearly states this will happen, plenty of evidence is given that this will happen. Why should a group of people be denied from reading parts of an article for the sole reason that you think it looks better? Bgwhite (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, thanks Bgwhite for all your work with this. Also, the help pages are not policies or guidelines, and therefore don't have much standing at all in cases like this. Graham87 02:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Ugh, people ignore all kinds of rules. I'm for consistency and improving accessibility. BUT that doesn't mean we need a rule for everything, and if we have a rule, that doesn't mean people will read it and adhere to it. The principle is clear as far as I'm concerned. Deviating from the principle is allowed. But you better have a reason to do so. Thus I can't comment much further on this, because there is no context here on which I can judge if there is a good reason to deviate from the principle. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I've just been invited to comment here by a bot, but I'm not entirely sure what question is actually being asked so I'll just comment based on my reading of the thread (no links to background have been given). It seems to be in dispute whether accessibility concerns, particularly for people using screen readers, prohibits the placing of a TOC before the end of the first section of an article - something that is technically possible and not explicitly forbidden by the guidelines for tables of contents? If I've understood this correctly then the answer is that, yes, accessibility concerns are more important than pretty visual design. The reasoning behind this interpretation comes from pillars 1 and 3 of the five fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates:

  • "Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia". That is its fundamental purpose is to provide encyclopaedic information. Everything we do must support that, directly or indirectly. Nice design is in keeping with this only to the extent that it enhances the ability to read or otherwise consume the content.
  • "Wikipedia is free content that anyone can [...] use" (my emphasis). This means that our content must be usable by as many people as possible, and knowingly excluding people who use screen readers is a violation of this core principle.

As a final comment, this discussion really should be happening somewhere more central than a user talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Move these

Please take a look at following sandboxes and move these to required targets

Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 04:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Assassin. You need to add your new articles to disambiguous pages. For example, Labor of Love should be added to Labor of Love
I'm not going to move Mr. X yet. Only one ref says filming has begun and they got that from an actor's tweet. The other two articles come from reliable sources, but they are too gossipy for me. Find something better that says filming has begun. Bgwhite (talk) 06:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Check this out Bgwhite, its the India's top newspaper. It has also posted the image of actor from the set. Review the article again please. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 10:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Assassin, as I said above, it is a reliable source. But, it doesn't say filming has begun. Only one of the refs mention filming and their source was a tweet. I'm hoping there is something better that says filming has begun. Bgwhite (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
But all sources are saying that the filming/principal photography has begun, please check 1, 2, 3 and 4. All these sources confirmed the commencement of filming. Yes it was tweeted first by director Mahesh Bhatt but later it was confirmed by by all news. "An image from the set" means the filming has begun or underway, but in this source it says "Today", which is February 16, 2014. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
They all use the same tweet as their source. They haven't done any fact checking. I'm trying to get a more reliable reference than "according to actor's tweet". Without a better reference, the article could be challenged as "no reliable reference says filming has begun". Bgwhite (talk) 18:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
First it's not actor's tweet, it's director tweet. Secondly, the image was taken from the filming set. Thirdly it's not required for a reference to say "filming has begun" when an image from the set has been released. Please find a reliable source at google if you say so, I'm trying to find it too. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 19:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
What about this Bgwhite? --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Assassin, how about working this into the article. It does say filming has begun and adds something extra for the article. There is a bit of irony in the story. I'm presuming Hashmi took his kid to Canada because it had better care. Americans are going to India for medical care because it is cheaper. Bgwhite (talk) 19:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, looks good. Take a look at sandbox now, updated it, added some details. By the way, Hashmi is a rich man/actor, they can usually afford to get medical care in foreign :). --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 19:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

And please move this User:Captain Assassin!/sandbox5 to Untitled Warren Beatty project --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 19:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Lae PNG

thanks for your help with formatting.

Just for your information I am currently working on the Lae wikipage and including all the suburbs (listed in section called suburbs)

It is my plan to complete all suburbs then to reformat the Lae main page and submit this page for peer review.

I would appreciate any assistance in formatting prose or facts and even contributions within any of these suburbs.

thank you for your help Phenss (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

TOC can float

Hello. I believe you are mistaken in the changes you have been making, with the Edit summary "TOC must come before first headline per WP:TOC". Can you elucidate here? Thanks a bunch. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

GeorgeLouis, it is for accessibility reasons. The changes were done to accommodate those who use screen readers. Screen reader users only expect the TOC to come before the first section header. Also, any text between the TOC and section header will not be read by screen reader users. {{TOC right}} and {{TOC left}} can be used, but it has to be placed just before the first section heading. Bgwhite (talk) 07:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Can you provide a link to that policy or guideline? I would appreciate it. Yours in Wikidom, GeorgeLouis (talk) 07:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
GeorgeLouis...
From WP:TOC, "If floating the TOC, it should be placed at the end of the lead section of the text, before the first section heading. Users of screen readers do not expect any text between the TOC and the first heading, and having no text above the TOC is confusing. See the last line in the information about elements of the lead section."
From WP:LEAD, "The table of contents (TOC) automatically appears on pages with more than three headings. Avoid floating the table of contents if possible, as it breaks the standard look of pages. If you must use a floated TOC, put it below the lead section in the wiki markup for consistency. Users of screen readers expect the table of contents to follow the introductory text; they will also miss any text placed between the TOC and the first heading." Bgwhite (talk) 07:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Failed attempt to fix TOC

see this edit which put most of the page into a blue background. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Redrose for catching it. I wish I could say it was a simple copy/paste error in which I added what I copied from the previous article. Instead it was something shiny and new... as the dog in Up! says, "Squirrel". There was a </br/> tag that I hadn't seen before and Checkwiki doesn't catch.

Reference Errors on 27 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

General fixes and cleanup UPPERCASE and [/small]

Hi, Evidently your error #97 project will hit many Bridge world competitions pages that I updated a few years ago, because I(we) commonly floated {TOC right} after the lead paragraph, in multi-paragraph lead sections. Probably I will revisit them all at once, maybe next month.

These notes and questions concern the "general fixes and cleanup" in one world competition page on my watchlist today (Bgwhite diffs). If you have answers or other comments, I prefer this location. Anyway I'll post summary with link(s) on the WP:WPCB project talk page.

  • closing all [small] lines with [/small]. About 60 cases instances evidently make this page about 480 characters larger. (We'll see this one for all championships considered important enough to name players on winning teams.)
    • Is the closing tag necessary or even useful?
    • The closing tag is misplaced just above line 97. Perhaps because the line ends with a comment?
  • downcasing all UPPERCASE listings. (We'll see this for all family names in listings copied from the official source.)
    • Just after line 180 there are some errors-- SCHALTZ => Schalts NOWOSADZKI => NowosadzkiO --which confound my expectation that this task is automatic and routine.
    • Entire paragraphs seem to be downcased as necessary (line 180 and thereafter) or passed over (line 292 and thereafter) in no pattern obvious to me.
    • Do you know whether this task alone can be called by some template after a page is updated (or created) with half-uppercase player names? (I have seen that for some automated tasks, don't recall where.)

Thanks in advance. --P64 (talk) 01:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

P64, learning how to play bridge is on my bucket list. I grew up playing Canasta with my grandparents and their brothers and sisters.
I saw the message about ToC on the bridge talk page. If anyone asks, moving the ToC is being done for accessibility reasons. People who use screen readers will miss out on text. The ToC is also being moved by hand. I try to place it where it "looks good", but I will not get it "right" all the time.
small tags.
In most cases, the Mediawiki software will add the closing small tags when serving up the page. So, making the page larger is a moot point. I've seen closing small tags missing which has caused large swaths of text being small. I also come from a programming background and made my first web page back in 1994. So, I'm "weird" about opening and closing tags.
"The closing tag is misplaced just above line 97". Yes it is. I did that manually, so I screwed up.
UPPERCASE names.
This was also manually done. After a bit, I got tired of converting. I noticed some sections were lowercase and other sections were uppercase. So I started converting to lowercase for consistency sake as the page had started out using lowercase. I'm not aware of any policy on uppercase/lowercase. What sources use isn't a factor on if to uppercase/lowercase on Wikipedia. Alot of reference use all uppercase for the title, but using all upercase which is wrong for ref parameters. I'm not aware of any script or template to automagically do this.
Bgwhite (talk) 06:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, I agree that we, not only EN.wikipedia but WPCB in bridge competitions tables, should generally avoid uppercase surnames. While the opening [small] tag is a style established by other editors last decade, the uppercase surnames were mainly or wholly introduced when I updated all the major competitions articles (and created a few) in 2011. Some were 2-3 years past due. I created the lists of team members by copy and paste from the official database displays. After downcasing those rosters on a few pages, I realized how many there must be and reverted to minimal editing. In the future I'll add closing [/small] tags, since you say it will eventually be done automatically if not manually.
So I quit downcasing at some point and spent the conversion time on diacritic and other special characters where appropriate, as for Polish bridge players. And on wikilinks for the few.
Beside the daunting task, another reason to quit downcasing was understanding that the UPPERCASE family names preserve information regarding Chinese names and some others which we might otherwise lose. Further, I didn't know whether we should invert those names (family name first) as we downcase. The latest roster that you converted is one example (see line 456).
I met a Chinese American bridge player here and took one step to recruit him or her for WPCB. But I didn't take a step, altho s/he lives only a couple of miles away. User talk:P64#Name of Chinese bridge players.
It occurs to me now that if/when we downcase all the surnames, we should simply place a comment at the end of the China and other rosters, stating that the names are family name first, or not. --P64 (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
--P64 (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for teaching me a lesson Sda030 (talk) 22:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Sda030, thank you for the barnstar and you are welcome, I think. I hope it wasn't lesson that my wife "teaches" me... "Dear, I'm going to teach you lesson. Bad #($*)@ dog." Rather as a teacher teaching a lesson. Bgwhite (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

scan

since you seem to be good at generating lists :) how about a search for either moz-column-count or column-count? possibly restricted to inside div tags if there are too many false positives. these should always be swapped for {{colbegin}}/{{colend}} or {{columns-list}} or {{refbegin}}/{{refend}} or {{reflist}}. of course, the "always" may be a strong statement, but I have never seen a case to the contrary. Frietjes (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Frietjes, shall do. Should I look for webkit-column-count too? Bgwhite (talk) 23:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
sure, anything that could be used to generate multi-columns in a browser. the most common ones that I have seen are the two that I mentioned. Frietjes (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Frietjes, the list for moz-column-count is at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox1. After the depression recedes and after the 10 years it takes to do the list, I'll make more lists for you. On the bright side, the few articles I looked at also contained moz-column-count or webkit-column-count Bgwhite (talk) 00:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
awesome, now we just need to do this, which will most likely cover over half of them. I will copy the list in a moment. Frietjes (talk) 00:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bgwhite/Archive_25&oldid=1078023726"