User talk:MSGJ/2020

Active discussions


Acknoledgement

  Thank you so much for your help with Template:S-rail/lines. I've taken care of updating the documentation page. Best regards, Yak79 2.0 (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

RE: Declined notice, "stop trying to add content without reliable sources"

To that instruction and to the "reliable sources" policy as a whole, my response is an emphatic NO. Your policy is fundamentally, hideously broken, and I will continue correct vandalism and blatant removal of infromation that uses it as an excuse. Googinber1234 (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Template:@ITNA

If you are willing, please add yourself to this template. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Yuba Raj Khatiwada

 

The article Yuba Raj Khatiwada has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 18:36, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Russian Govt resignation

Hi MSGJ, I would like to get this posted. I saw your comment that you are waiting for updates. Can he point what is missing, so that I can fix it. I did update Putin, before posting here. regards.--DBigXray 15:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Added some more content at these on these related articles. DBigXray 15:42, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Wiki-Turkey

MSGJ: Per your comment, I struck my previous support as nom. is now stale. – Sca (talk) 13:58, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...
 
angel of the north
... you were recipient
no. 2126 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

items re template

Hi. I wrote back to you, at Template_talk:WikiProject_History. I think I got the items set up there now. I really appreciate your great technical help there. Feel free to take a look. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

On my way ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

"no valid reason for deletion?"

Hello,

File:UK location in the EU 2016.jpg is a local upload of a Commons image, modified (in multiple respects) specifically for use as a thumbnail on the main page. I accidentally uploaded an incorrect version, which I deleted after replacing it with the correct one about 18 minutes later. (In my experience with main page images, every additional bit of clutter increases the likelihood of confusion, leading to some sort of issue on the main page or a related page.)

I apologize if my citation of CSD G6 was insufficiently specific. To elaborate, I'm quite certain that the first version was created in error, given that I did so myself. (Perhaps I should have cited CSD G7.) —David Levy 18:53, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

new edits done

Hi. I made some new edits to Template:WikiProject History. are there further steps to be done? thanks for all your help!! --Sm8900 (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WPTO

 Template:WPTO has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Archiving

Thanks for that. Rosser Gruffydd 10:36, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:ERRORS

This. Tell me more ... does it lead to problems when someone says "Recusing"? - Dank (push to talk) 16:24, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Dank: This is usually caused by an undetected edit conflict. You should probably feel free to restore good faith comments of this sort. --Izno (talk) 16:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Please help

Hello MSGJ. The protection template you added here is causing a couple pages to show up in the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Those pages are transcluded to the sandbox so all that is needed is for you to put the pp template inside a set of <noinclude></noinclude> tags. If you would perform the necessary edit at your convenience it would be appreciated. Cheers and have a nice weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 20:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. It has been a couple weeks since I posted this request. It would be a help if you could add the noinclude to the protection template. If there is some problem please let me know. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 20:04, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, done now — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
No worries and thanks for the cleanup. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Jan Howard

Hello. This fantastic news! I have never had an article that I rewrote be featured on the main page. Thank you so much! ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

April 12 TFA

Pinging Sca. Hi guys. I'm here to talk about this. I'm on a TFA sabbatical and not watchlisting ERRORS or TFA, but I'm checking at the end of the month. Everything from April looks fine (and thanks for collectively keeping an eye on TFA), except for this. Our article is titled "Late Cretaceous", not "Late Cretaceous period". It wasn't a period, and if we say it was, then readers may assume that we don't know the difference between a period and an epoch. I'm aware that practice in articles on this point is all over the place, but TFA has been consistent on this point for years. It wouldn't bother me if you guys want to start a discussion to change the practice, but don't change it without a discussion please. - Dank (push to talk) 20:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC) P.S. I want to make sure you know that I appreciate and have always appreciated your work on the Main Page, I know it's a mostly underappreciated job ... this is just one of those fingernails-on-chalkboard issues for me. Also ... I'm not gone, I'm just not watching while I try to get up to speed on a botany project. Please feel free to ping me any time if I can help with something. - Dank (push to talk) 12:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

In general English usage, Cretaceous is an adjective, not a noun, and grammatically requires some noun – whether period, era, epoch – to modify. Per Oxford:
Cretaceous
adjective
Geology
Relating to or denoting the last period of the Mesozoic era, between the Jurassic and Tertiary periods.
'the lizard was believed to have lived during the Cretaceous period'
It may be that in academic jargon Cretaceous is used as if it were a noun, but most of our readers are not academics, and the morphology (eous, as in gaseous) is that of an adjective. – Sca (talk) 12:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Okay, next time I'll try just giving the years without the epoch and see if that works. - Dank (push to talk) 13:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
I think we should give the geological age instead of just years, it provides better context (some layreaders may know what other animals lived during the Cretaceous, but few would know what was going on exactly 72 million years ago). So just "Late Cretaceous epoch" would do the trick? FunkMonk (talk) 13:53, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Works for me, but TFA doesn't work well as a battleground, for anything. I've seen Victoria's list for May (though she's late getting her scheduling done this month), and the only one coming up with this issue is Catopsbaatar on May 3 ... I'll watchlist it. If it gets reverted or even if it starts an argument, then we'll have to come up with something else. - Dank (push to talk) 13:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
When you say "this issue", do you mean how to mention geological age? I don't think it has been a problem before. I think the problem is that Cretaceous itself a period, but the Late Cretaceous is specifically an epoch. So it could just be changed in the article too. FunkMonk (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Willing to try anything ... I made the change to the article lead, let's see if that works. - Dank (push to talk) 14:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Just to note that I accepted this suggestion by Sca, mainly because in the first sentence of the article it mentions the "Cretaceous period" so I judged that this was the appropriate word to use in the context. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

It did work, in the sense that no one reverted "epoch". Also, FWIW, I'm back from my TFA sabbatical. - Dank (push to talk) 15:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Please help

I'm about ready to quit Wikipedia after 17 years, because I feel bullied and railroaded by the whole process at Template talk:Infobox mountain. Please help resolve. Let me know if I'm being a butthead. :-( — hike395 (talk) 07:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I think you are both trying to do what you feel is best for Wikipedia, but neither of you are really willing to compromise/yield. I don't think there is any bullying going on, but if you still feel that way I will talk to Rehman. The things over which you are in disagreement are quite minor I feel. I have stopped visiting that page for a while because I was getting inundated with notifications, but you need a few more editors to give their opinions, otherwise the whole process may stall due to lack of consensus. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
First off, thank you for putting a few Wikidata fields into the infobox back in 2016! Your participation in the current discussion has been helpful, I think.
Second: I'm truly sorry for pinging you too many times. I've now learned that pinging is intimidating/off-putting, not welcoming. I'll crank back on my use of it.
Third, I hear your advice on trying to compromise. I thought I was trying (e.g., I wrote Module:Compact list as a possible compromise), but I'll try harder. I have an idea to break the deadlock on the list parameters: I hope that works.
Fourth, re more editors: I totally agree, and I feel like the current discussion structure is very unfriendly to participation. I've tried to change it, to no avail. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is a vetocracy that has gotten less flexible over the last few years, as fewer editors participate. So people feel like they have to get more aggressive to get their ideas implemented. In this case, I feel like every time I explain a feature in the current infobox, it spawns a discussion to remove the feature. Between that, and not having a neutral third party available to close discussions fairly and deliberately, I feel completely besieged.
Thanks again for your help --- I'll not pester you further. — hike395 (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed

Hello Msgj! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MusikBot II talk 17:07, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Continuation of a dispute where you commented before

Seems to be a question of mistaken template changes by this editor. Please see WP:AN#User:Illegitimate Barrister no response to ANI disruptive editing. This is a follow-up to an ANI from early May where you indicated that Illegitimate Barrister ought to go ahead and revert the template changes in question. The editor seems to have removed all the notices left on their talk page with no reply, so I am recommending some admin follow-up. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

North Macedonian passport move

Just wanted to say well done on the close – never easy when it looks like the decision will provoke a minor shitstorm on your userpage from the disappointed parties. Fingers crossed you won't suffer too much. Number 57 16:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Ha - never imagined that an "n" could cause such controversy! When I clicked the link from the RM backlog I thought it would be an easy close. But the page just kept on scrolling down :) Thanks for the note — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Special:WantedTemplates

Hi MSGJ, I have been cleaning up Special:WantedTemplates, mostly concentrating on article-space, but the list (which is generated once per month) is capped at 5000, so right now we are missing anything that comes after "BibleTranslation‏‎" alphabetically with 1 link. A large number of these come from .js pages, which I do not have the permission to edit. I should be able to take care of many of these, like Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Country_data_$1Korea$2, by asking the page owner. But some are on .js pages where the author has not contributed in a long time. So, my long-winded question is if you would be willing to help. Basically, this should involve edits to the pages for templates like this one (usually have a + or " or ' in the title) and adding //<source lang=javascript> at the top of the page which doesn't impact how the javascript functions, since it's in a comment, but does prevent the code below from being parsed as wikitext by the "Special:WhatLinksHere". See, for example, the top line of Wikipedia:AutoEd/htmltowikitext.js. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Ideally, you would add //<syntaxhighlight lang=javascript> rather than //<source lang=javascript> to avoid adding more pages to Category:Pages using deprecated source tags. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I didn't know that one was deprecated. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:14, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes of course - happy to help — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Returning your trout

  Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

I believe this to be yours   you made me giggle, thanks! Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 15:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:NA-impact Wikipedia essays

 

A tag has been placed on Category:NA-impact Wikipedia essays requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 14:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:NA-importance Netherlands Antilles articles

 

A tag has been placed on Category:NA-importance Netherlands Antilles articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 19:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:Oppose

Hi MSGJ. Just letting you know I have re-deleted Template:Oppose. It was previously deleted via TfD, and shouldn't be restored without a discussion at DRV. Regards, FASTILY 23:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:DYKqueuenav

MSGJ, you updated the formatting for this template back in late April. I was wondering whether you would be interested in adding a new Prep, and eventually, a new Queue, to the template.

I have just added Prep 7 to the preps and queues, and it has gone live on the Preps and Queues page. So it would help if that could be added today.

Because Queue 7 has to wait a cycle before it can go live—the earliest would be Friday, 7 June 2020 after the main page update at 12:00 UTC, but it might have to be delayed by 12 hours or more—we wouldn't want to add it to the template before that time.

I can always try to find another admin if this isn't a good time for you, but I thought I should ask you first. If you're willing, please do Prep 7 as soon as possible; I'll let you know when we're ready for Queue 7 to go live.

Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem. Added prep 7 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:00, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Many thanks. I'll be in touch when it's time to add Queue 7. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:47, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Martin, thanks again for yesterday. It's now time to add Queue 7 to the template, since I've just added it to the Queues page. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Great! We're all set now. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Ancillary templates

Martin, it looks like I spoke too soon. The change in the number of queues will affect {{DYK-AdminBacklog}} and subsidiary templates, including {{Emptyqueueexpr}}. Can you please update them now that we have seven queues rather than six? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Taking a look: can you set this so it displays the warning message if there are five or more empty queues even with a total of seven? Now that we have seven queues, having five or more empty is excessive; we don't want there to have to be six empty. Right now, there are five of seven empty, but the warning message is not displaying. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
There is a whole myriad of templates that work together. It's going to take me a while to get my head around what does what. Leave it with me! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:48, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I think I've updated those templates. Would you mind having a look to see if everything looks okay? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Martin, thank you so much. I'll keep an eye out for when the number of queues gets down to two, to see whether the backlog message displays. (I'm hoping that some preps will be moved to queues over the course of the afternoon, but if not we'll be down to two queues at midnight UTC, under seven hours from now.) Right now, the non-backlog message is displaying, but it's no longer centered the way it once was, in the manner than the message below it is (icon left, message centered). Also, the two message boxes at the top—the backlog (broom icon) and the info box below it—are not quite centered over each other, and it would be great if they aligned as well. Might that be possible? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
I think the icons are aligned, but yes I tweaked the alignment of the backlog message. I just adjusted the other to match but if you prefer the centred, I can revert! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. It may be a browser thing (I use Safari), but on my screen the empty queues box is about an "n" width further left (at beginning and end) than the identically wide info box below it. (It's not aligning the icons so much as their boxes.) Then again, the queues box has the shortcut box on the same line at the right edge of the page, which may or may not affect the centering of the queues box. As for the queues box, it's going to be another 36 hours at least before we can check it to see whether it changes to reflect the five empty queues (of seven) or not: three more queues were filled since I last posted here, bringing it up to six, and one will just have been promoted, putting us back down to five. If we're unlucky (though lucky for keeping the queues filled), it may be several days (or even weeks) before the queues drop down low enough to see whether two queues turns the message on. Or perhaps we'll want to encourage admins to promote more queues, and adjust the number to four empty queues rather than five. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Martin, having thought about it overnight, I would appreciate it if you would adjust the number to four empty queues rather than five. That's more than half empty, and we've been getting posts requesting prep to queue promotions at that level lately—I think it's better to have the automated backlog notice be running so admins can tell at a glance that more promotions are needed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Template error?

Martin, we just had a situation where all the queues were full. In that case, {{DYK queue/next empty}} (formerly {{emptyqueue}}) is supposed to return a 0, but it's instead returning the number of the actual next queue, currently 4. This broke {{Did you know/Queue/LocalUpdateTimes}}, which after displaying all the queues checks to see if there are any empty queues, and if not (a 0 is returned), displays all the preps. With a 4 returned instead, it didn't display the preps, though the queues all displayed, so it wasn't a dire problem.

I have fixed matters by using {{DYK queue/number of empty}} for the check, and we're now seeing all queues and preps, at least until the next queue promotion a few minutes from now. You will want to adjust DYK queue/next empty so it returns a 0 if there are no empty ones, and the number of the next empty queue when there is one. Please let me know when that's set. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:56, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Martin: there's another template error, and until it's fixed I cannot move my code out to expand the {{Did you know/Queue/LocalUpdateTimes}} template. It's {{DYK queue/is empty?}} that's giving the problem. Currently, {{Did you know/Queue/Next}} is 7 (Queue 7), and Queues 7 and 1 through 4 are full, while Queues 5 and 6 are empty. You would expect is empty? to return a 0 for the filled queues 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7, and a 1 for empty queues 5 and 6. Instead, it's returning 0 for queues 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7, and 1 for queues 4 and 5. (When 6 had been Queue/Next and 5 had been the only empty one, {{DYK queue/is empty?}} had displayed everything correctly, so it presumably returned a 0 for all queues except for empty 5, which returned a 1.
Please let me know if you have any further questions, and also when you've got if fixed. My code is at User:BlueMoonset/sandbox2, with a list of test results for {{DYK queue/is empty?}} at the end, if that would help you. Note that the "resulting queue" number is the parameter being passed to the is empty? template. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Or maybe it isn't a template error, maybe it's that the template doesn't do what I think it does based on its name. I thought that if I gave it a queue number, it would give me a 1 if that queue was empty, and a 0 if it was not empty. If that isn't what it does, and you need it as is for another template (number of empty, I think), then I'll make one for myself. Please let me know what you recommend. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset - it's a complicated/clever template. When you type {{DYK queue/is empty?|3}} it is telling you whether the 3rd queue after the next queue is empty or not. I've created some documentation. I'll take a look at the "all full" error later today. Cheers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
I've fixed the error when all queues are full. Question: is prep n always loaded into queue n? If not, would it be helpful if the next empty queue was displayed on the navigation template? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:37, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Temple Memorial Park

 On 13 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Temple Memorial Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Temple Memorial Park, named after Archbishop of Canterbury William Temple, was given to the people of South Shields in recognition of their military contributions at sea in World War II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Temple Memorial Park. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Temple Memorial Park), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Movie deletions

Hello MSGJ, I wanted to ask you about recent deletions regarding my film studio’s movie articles relating to my employer Ave Fenix Pictures. Note, I have declared my connection as part of the studio and fulfilled Wikipedia's requirements for editors with COI.

An editor proposed the deletion of all the studio’s movies and the actual Ave Fenix Pictures film studio page. On May 11th concurrently Ave Fenix Pictures, Arise from Darkness, Black Ruby, La Raza filmmaking and Adios Vaya Con Dios (several days later) were all deleted by the same editor.

I suspect intentional reprisal due to the fact that two days prior to the synchronized deletion an email was sent to our film studio demanding precise wordage to be removed from several of our Wikipedia articles in relationship to a specific film. Within 48 hours our studio and movie pages were proposed to deletion, claiming that none of the references used were acceptable (reviewers checked and published the articles over a year ago, with those same references). It is difficult to imagine the timing of this is a coincidence.

The editor who proposed the deletion starts from the premise that all the references we used are the result of a press move and derived from press releases, "arranged" interviews, etc. .... But it is logical that a movie, when it is released, warns the media about the premiere, and those media will echo the movie, if they are interested.

If a group of references was enough for the approval of an article, and if for a long time no one discussed it, it does not seem normal for an editor to launch a deletion campaign against a group of articles claiming that no reference is useful. It would be understandable if some references are discussed, or if he had placed a banner on the articles, asking for better references, but it seems very rare to say that no reference works.

I am in the process of retrieving some of the articles (drafts), as some were soft-deletes. Arise from Darkness was re-published by another editor and 3 hour later the same editor who lead the simultaneous deletions put a deletion banner over the film. I can only work on the drafts to improve them and re-submit them for review, as I cannot publish them myself. I’m hoping you may look into this matter for me as I suspect suspicious conduct and if there is in fact a way to make reversals based on substantiation. Thank you.--Michael.j.schwartz (talk) 21:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why you've come to me? But the notability guideline for films is here: Wikipedia:Notability (films). If you think this film meets the criteria, then please make your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arise from Darkness (2nd nomination) and it will decided by consensus. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:09, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi MSGJ, I came to you because you are one of the Administrators listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Participants#Admins and I thought you can give me an opinion on the film, and also a tip on how to proceed with the editor's actions. My thought process was if someone can execute a massive simultaneous deletion they would have a special interest in the subject, which I believe should be defined. Also, in brining up the fact that this appears to be personalized due to two days prior a film organization asking my studio to remove specific Wikipedia wordage and than two days after all our articles become deleted, to whom do I bring this information forward? It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the deletions were a coincidence and the same editor went through all the references of five articles, within 48 hours and found zero useful, but it is highly unlikely. It's more evident that someone didn't like descriptions of the studio's articles and when we did not oblige (via corporate) they took it upon themselves to seek the means to make us obsolete through reprisal. I do not know anyone else to ask for advice in receiving a sincere inquiry.--Michael.j.schwartz (talk) 07:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Taskforces supported by multiple WikiProjects

Sorry for picking on you, I really don't know anyone else who works on WPBannerMeta, and I'm too short on time at present to go hunting through all the documentation on my own.

As background there's an open discussion at WikiProject Former countries on converting WikiProject Ottoman Empire to be a taskforce. I don't intend to prejudge the outcome but on a quick perusal I couldn't help but noticing that the Austria-Hungary task force, the Holy Roman Empire task force, and WikiProject Prussia were being supported on multiple banners, namely WikiProject Germany and WikiProject Austria. Is this kind of arrangement considered best practice? If so in case of conflict which one's assessment will populate the tracking categories and why?

At the very least I think these would be good things to know before going to work in the sandbox.

I don't know when I'll pop in next but I'm going to try to set aside some time before the 3rd so hopefully you should hear ack from me by then; thanks for your time.

𝒬𝔔 23:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

"Krazyfest" listed at Redirects for discussion

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Krazyfest. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 28#Krazyfest until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

temporary css hacks

Hi MSGJ, regarding these workarounds - can you provide related phab ticket numbers that are pending for the long term fix? — xaosflux Talk 13:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: sorry for the late reply. There is T255381 which is related, but this was closed as invalid and I'm not sure if subsequent requests were filed or not. Yair rand may be able to comment — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

RD ITN David Cook (published on 21 Sept 2020)

Hi Martin. Thank you for posting the above which I nominated on ITN/RD, would you mind giving me the credits for nomination. Keep safe JW 1961 Talk 23:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Certainly will - thanks for the reminder — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:High-use/num

 Template:High-use/num has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:High-use/text

 Template:High-use/text has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Two things to note

Hell MSGJ. Two things about this edit. First, it isn't a bare url. As you can see the url is in a cite template. It is missing a title and a couple other fields which anyone can add. Second as the page is fully protected I can't add them. If you are so inclined you can go in and add - |title=Why I dropped ‘conservative’ from my Twitter profile |last= Rubin|first=Jennifer |date= September 17, 2020|website=www.washingtonpost.com|access-date=2020-10-05 - to the cite template and that should take care of things. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 20:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:42, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Cool beans many thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 20:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Dealing with spam

Just FYI Wikipedia:Spam#Dealing with spam.--Moxy 🍁 22:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lists of mathematics articles

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of mathematics articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 14:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Liz: this category was populated yesterday! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Please could you un-nominate this, as I am in discussion with the bot operator that emptied this category? Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
The category should be renamed so that it is clear that it is a WikiProject category and not a mainspace category. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I am happy to consider alternatives. Shall we take this to CfD so that the wider community can comment? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I disagree with moving it under Category:WikiProject Mathematics articles. If you look carefully you will see that all pages in that category are talk pages. I don't think it is sensible to mix a different namespace into this categorisation. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:43, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I understand your reasoning, so, yeah, I don't mind. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 22:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lists of mathematics articles

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of mathematics articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 15:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

@Liz:: can you stop doing please? I already asked you above — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Lists of mathematics articles

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Lists of mathematics articles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Category:Draft-Class mathematics articles

I notice that both Category:Draft-Class mathematics articles and Category:Draft-Class mathematics pages are listed for speedy deletion. I'm presuming we want one or the other. The former is automatically populated. Just checking this is intentional. --Salix alba (talk): 18:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Some editor tagged the former with {{db-move}} because they thought the latter should be moved. I couldn't really see the benefit as there is no significant history in either. But I don't really mind either way. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
There are a few other categories in the same situation currently! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Vijayalakshmi Ramanan

Ha, looks like we just edit-conflicted posting this. I've posted it with 21 October, as the news stories of the death bear that date. Black Kite (talk) 22:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I beat you by a few seconds I think. No problem. Is that the standard practice now? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, the date the death was first publicised goes in the template. Obviously that's usually for deaths where their announcement is delayed by a few days, although I think we've had some recently where there was quite a gap - Florian Schneider for example died on 21 April but was only announced on 7 May. Black Kite (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Would you be willing to shadow my template editing?

I don't mean full time, but if in the course of your normal Wikipedia work, you happen to notice I've edited a template and have made mistakes someone with template-editor rights shouldn't be making, please let me know.

I'm asking, because once I gain more confidence in modules, I plan on doing more "semi protected edit requests" of templates and modules. After I'm sure I've got things down to a science, I will be asking for template editor rights so I can do those chores too.

Thanks again for picking up the mop - or is it the template-editing scissors-and-glue? - and doing that little chore for me earlier today.[1] davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:40, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Davidwr: of course, anytime I can help - just ask. Probably more likely with templates than modules though! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
@MSGJ: I did some major work on the sandbox of {{interlanguage link}}. The background and other details are on the talk page at Template talk:interlanguage link#Forcing redlink on redirect pages. If you have time, feedback is welcome. If you don't, that's okay, I expect those already participating in that thread will also give it a serious look. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I'll take a look, but that might take me a while to look over because I am not familiar with that template. It looks like you are trying to implement something like I did at Template:Wikidata red link which is designed to use the information on Wikidata to make a red link but has some logic for supressing redirects, etc. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
{{interlanguage link}} has been around awhile. I didn't write it, but I did change it a couple months ago to make the expensive parser function call go away if |display= is used. I did it for the specific reason that List of villages in Rivne Oblast was way over the limit. Earlier today, I saw that someone wanted a way to have "circular redirects" not be linked normally. What I cobbled together today is a compromise solution. Since then, I've realized that the user's request probably CAN be fulfilled, at least in principle. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "MSGJ/2020".