Jump to content

User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 66

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 60←Archive 64Archive 65Archive 66Archive 67Archive 68→Archive 70

Hispanic / Latino article

I've been contributing to this article for years. A lot of the old editors work have been taken down, with valid references. Someone seems to be trolling this article, putting in dead links and references that have no relevance what so ever and do not back up their assertions. Also you state that I used improper formatting somewhere in the article. Please don't revert because it is also reverting more of my edits at the same time. Let me know where the formatting is that needs work and I will fix it. Also however I'm working on the different lineages of Puerto Ricans with official links, that verify my assertions, Someone keeps reverting this with dead links or irrelevant links that do not back their assertions.... Thanks so much....Tierraman (talk) 14:28, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

Your input is appreciated

I have mentioned you at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Jersey#Standardization of New Jersey city/town articles. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

GRE disambiguation etc

Copied to Talk:GRE (disambiguation)
Just letting you know I replied there. Thanks. 82.69.229.22 (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Request for mediation/United States

I've accepted to mediate this case and we are ready to begin. Please join on the case talk page Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/United States. Sunray (talk) 23:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Woodie

Woodie is the primary topic on YouTube, Google, AllMusic and other sources. Please see the discussion at Talk:Woodie.. 24.179.184.46 (talk) 20:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I have already, and the evidence is not convincing. In any case, you should never move a page by copying and pasting the contents. older ≠ wiser 20:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Please provide your own evidence in that case. It can still be done by adding a template to the top (see Wikipedia:How to fix cut-and-paste moves). 24.179.184.46 (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
You should not do such moves that require admins to waste their time fixing such messes in the first place. older ≠ wiser 02:41, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. However, sometimes when you can't change certain rules you have to WP:IGNORE them to make improvements (or additions) to the encyclopedia. 24.179.184.46 (talk) 14:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
But there's no reason to ignore rules when you don't have to. older ≠ wiser 14:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

January 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Galleria may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • *[[Allen Lambert Galleria]], Toronto, Ontario]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:02, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, friend

I was peaking at who started the article on "The Peppermint King" and it was you back in 2005. I thought you might want to see how the piece looks today. Keep up the good work, it's nice to see a content person still going strong after all these years... —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR /// Carrite (talk) 20:49, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Move Review

There is currently a discussion at WP:MR to which you may be associated with. The thread can be found here. Thanks. -- Calidum 03:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Anon

(restore normal lead format for non-primary dab and rm entry with no mention of the usage)

Hello – is the above a convoluted way of (not) saying that you reverted the edit..?

You don't think it's encyclopedic to mention that "anon" also exists as a word with an unrelated meaning..?

Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Wiktionary exists for definitions. WP:MOSDAB provides guidance for how disambiguation pages should be structured. older ≠ wiser 02:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Crown page reverts

Dear User:Bkonrad. Why TOC right? Why piping? Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 05:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

For TOC right, see WP:MOSDAB#Organizing long lists by subject sections: On longer lists, {{TOC right}} may be used to move the table of contents to the right hand side of the page. This reduces the amount of white space and may improve the readability of the page.
For piping, see WP:MOSDAB#Where piping may be appropriate: When a disambiguation page is linking to a specific section of an article, rather than an entire article, piping may be used for linking to that section via anchor points or section linking. and When piping is used on a disambiguation page to link to an article section, the link should be in the description, and should avoid surprising the reader. There is also some relevant guidance under WP:MOSDAB#Items appearing within other articles: It is often useful to link to the relevant section of the target page using anchors and conceal that by making it a piped link. older ≠ wiser 12:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

Kresge (disambiguation)

Um, how exactly is the S.S. Kresge company "not primary" for Kresge (disambiguation)? Most of the other items on that page, such as Kresge building and Kresge foundation, are clearly derivative with Kresge department store the only obvious main entry now that Kresge (surname) has been split out to its own disambig page. K7L (talk) 19:47, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

By definition of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The disambiguation page is titled "Kresge" not "Kresge (disambiguation)". And the foundation and many of the named buildings are derivative of Sebastian S. Kresge, rather than of the company. older ≠ wiser 20:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Without the company, Kresge would not be notable and would have no money for foundations, buildings or much of anything else here... and the buildings housed the company. K7L (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
If you think the company should be the primary topic, then initiate a move discussion to determine if there is consensus for that. older ≠ wiser 20:35, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

Peacham

I was in the process of closing the merge dicussion. It seems that the best move would be Peacham moves to Peacham (disambiguation) and then Peacham redirects to Peacham, Vermont. --Aidan721 (talk) 02:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

We could make a disambiguation page named Henry Peacham, that would consist of the two men named Henry Peacham. A see also section linking to Peacham, Vermont could be added. Let me know your thoughts on either suggestion. --Aidan721 (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't particularly care that much about where the disambiguation page resides. But it is poor form to close a requested move discussion that you initiated. Best to leave closing to an uninvolved editor. older ≠ wiser 03:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. --Aidan721 (talk) 03:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

VOSJ

Hi Bkonrad: thanks for your recent helpful intervention which certainly improved matters but doesn't solve the main issue of Ven. or Most Ven. qv: Boven etc... why, if the Order must be prefixed Venerable, should it not be properly styled Most Venerable? Unfortunately it would appear to be leading to much copy-cat misnaming on the internet - what do you think? M Mabelina (talk) 04:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

NSL

Hello,

I've seen your revision in the disambiguation page for the term "NSL". The term is used on some of the engineering literature to describe Newton's Second Law, see for example GILLESPIE, T.D. Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics, page 250, as in the link below:

ftp://ftp.demec.ufpr.br/disciplinas/TM024/Prof.Jorge_Erthal/referencia/GILLESPIE%20Fundamentals%20of%20Vehicle%20Dynamics.pdf (page 160 of the pdf document)

The article Newton's Laws of Motion is not editable, hence mention of the abbreviation is not possible. Please allow the meaning "Newton's second law" to be included in the fore mentioned page. Thank you.

Best regards,

bob.rb1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bob.rb1 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The rules for disambiguation pages require that the term be mentioned in the linked article. older ≠ wiser 12:07, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bkonrad/Archive_66&oldid=1125488352"