Jump to content

User talk:MSGJ/2016: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) from User talk:MSGJ) (bot
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) from User talk:MSGJ) (bot
Line 59: Line 59:


It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 11:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

== [[:Template:Cleanup section]] ==

Hi, I thought the norm was to have them as a banner, not a small container.<br>
Such as the following:<br>
[[:Template:Refimprove section]]<br>
[[:Template:Advert section]]<br>
[[:Template:Weasel section]]<br>
[[:Template:Rewrite section]]<br>
[[:Template:BLP sources section]]<br>
[[:Template:Fringe-section]]<br>
[[:Template:Importance-section]]<br>
[[:Template:Summarize section]]<br>
[[:Template:Specific-section]]<br>
[[:Template:Repetition section]]<br>
[[:Template:POV-title-section]]<br>

I found some that are similar to the current state of the cleanup template, but there's easily a smaller amount:<br>
[[:Template:Expand section]]<br>
[[:Template:Empty section]]<br>
[[:Template:News release section]]<br>

There are more for both sections, I assume. As you can see there are a lot more with banners than small box-like designs. '''<font face="Papyrus">[[User:Anarchyte|<font color="#35BA22">Anarchyte</font>]] <font color="#1b2eac"><small>([[Special:Contributions/Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">work</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">talk</font>]])</small></font></font>''' 09:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
:I agree that consistency would be good, and it might be an idea to gauge consensus on which design is preferred. For background, the small design arose after a long discussion (see [[Template talk:Expand section/Archive 1#More subtle style]]) but this was quite a long time ago and a revisit might be in order. Perhaps a first step might be some further research into how many of each type are used. I'll see what I can come up with. Regards &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 10:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
::Would it be against the rules to be bold and just change them all? Or is consensus required; if so, where would the discussion be placed? '''<font face="Papyrus">[[User:Anarchyte|<font color="#35BA22">Anarchyte</font>]] <font color="#1b2eac"><small>([[Special:Contributions/Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">work</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">talk</font>]])</small></font></font>''' 00:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
:::No, please don't be bold, there has been a ''lot'' of debate on this over the years, and you would annoy a lot of people. Check out the talk pages for each of the templates that you list above, and also those of their non-section versions; in several cases there are threads on this exact matter, sometimes two or more - one asking to make it small, another asking to make it big. Check the archives too, such as [[Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 12]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 09:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
I've created a tracking category [[:Category:Articles using small message boxes]] to see how many articles are using these small boxes. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 23:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

===Followup===
{{ping|MSGJ|Redrose64}} I've created a discussion at the Village pump '''[[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Make_all_the_.22section_templates.22_the_same_size|here]]'''. '''<font face="Papyrus">[[User:Anarchyte|<font color="#35BA22">Anarchyte</font>]] <font color="#1b2eac"><small>([[Special:Contributions/Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">work</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:Anarchyte|<font color="#2D8C1F">talk</font>]])</small></font></font>''' 10:20, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
:I'll make a comment shortly &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

== Redirect categorization ==

Hi Martin! You've been interested in redirect categorization and the ''This is a redirect'' template in the past, so I wanted to let you know that there is a discussion at [[Template talk:This is a redirect#One parameter]] that might interest you. &nbsp;''Good&nbsp;faith!''&nbsp;'''''[[User talk:Paine Ellsworth|<span style="font-size:85%;color:darkblue;font-family:Segoe Script">Paine</span>]]'''''&nbsp;&nbsp;<small>20:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)</small>

Revision as of 00:47, 19 March 2016


In 2010 you fully-protected this page.

Please consider reducing the protection to pending-changes or semi-protection (or both) and putting an expiration date on it (I suggest 1 year - if there is no attempted abuse during that time then let it expire). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't see exactly why this page was protected, although it has been deleted multiple times before. So I reduced to semi protection. Best regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:29, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

There have been reverts, including this month. Renew PC? --George Ho (talk) 05:04, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Renewed for 6 months, it seems to be working. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Under MOS:DASH, I believe Kurdish–Turkish conflict (1978-present) should actually be at Kurdish–Turkish conflict (1978–present). I would move the article there myself, but... Anyway, as the admin who move-protected the article I thought I'd let you know... Thanks! --IJBall (contribstalk) 08:51, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I see you couldn't wait for my reply and asked somewhere else. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:US patent reference - Espacenet database problem. Can you help?

I made some recent edits to an inventor's page and tried to use the template Template:US patent reference. On doing so, it created a URL for the Espacenet database, but it appears that the patent is not in there. Specifically, it's a 1937 patent that appears in Google's database, but searches for the patent number come up blank just like the URL from the template. For now I'm using both the template with the bad URL and the Google URL as a separate reference.

In the template's talk page, there is a discussion between you and User:Cxw way back in 2010, but since she/he is on hiatus I'm hoping you can direct me towards someone who can help.

Do you know who could give me advice on this? Assuming there's no way to fix the database, what template should I use?

Thanks in advance, KNHaw (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

You dope!

You dope, I sent a POTSTICKER!
Thank you for editing the page (should be marijuana dispensary) cannabis dispensary. Potguru (talk) 16:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Ism schism edit warring

Hi, I see you have dealt with User:Ism schism before, who seems to have an extensive history with edit warring (and block log to match). The user is adding one-sided biased material to controversial articles (that often are under 1RR) like Bashar al-Assad and Sectarianism and minorities in the Syrian Civil War, deleting huge chunks of referenced material that they apparently disagree with, making accusatory edit summaries, and making reference to non-existent talk page discussions to justify their edits. I really don't want to deal with this as I am hardly active on Wikipedia anymore, but this is becoming an issue as they are spreading their pattern of dogmatic edit warring to more and more articles. Nulla Taciti (talk) 15:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any major problems. It doesn't look like 1RR has been breached. He/she has been contributing to some discussion on talk pages, but I can't see that you are engaging in any discussion - your last edit to the talk namespace was June 2015. I suggest you start posting on the article talk pages and work this out with him/her. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:30, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:America: Imagine the World Without Her, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:America: Imagine the World Without Her and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:America: Imagine the World Without Her during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 03:29, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Short pages monitor

You may be interested in the discussion at Template talk:Short pages monitor#Need to define and possibly rethink this template. —Anomalocaris (talk) 23:45, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Talkpage

Hi MSGJ. Thanks for the note. I'll happily stay away from the user's talkpage concerned (I guess a self-imposed IBAN). Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

How about undertaking not to call editors trolls when you disagree with them? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:15, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nsala soup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I thought the norm was to have them as a banner, not a small container.
Such as the following:
Template:Refimprove section
Template:Advert section
Template:Weasel section
Template:Rewrite section
Template:BLP sources section
Template:Fringe-section
Template:Importance-section
Template:Summarize section
Template:Specific-section
Template:Repetition section
Template:POV-title-section

I found some that are similar to the current state of the cleanup template, but there's easily a smaller amount:
Template:Expand section
Template:Empty section
Template:News release section

There are more for both sections, I assume. As you can see there are a lot more with banners than small box-like designs. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree that consistency would be good, and it might be an idea to gauge consensus on which design is preferred. For background, the small design arose after a long discussion (see Template talk:Expand section/Archive 1#More subtle style) but this was quite a long time ago and a revisit might be in order. Perhaps a first step might be some further research into how many of each type are used. I'll see what I can come up with. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Would it be against the rules to be bold and just change them all? Or is consensus required; if so, where would the discussion be placed? Anarchyte (work | talk) 00:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
No, please don't be bold, there has been a lot of debate on this over the years, and you would annoy a lot of people. Check out the talk pages for each of the templates that you list above, and also those of their non-section versions; in several cases there are threads on this exact matter, sometimes two or more - one asking to make it small, another asking to make it big. Check the archives too, such as Template talk:Unreferenced/Archive 12. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I've created a tracking category Category:Articles using small message boxes to see how many articles are using these small boxes. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Followup

@MSGJ and Redrose64: I've created a discussion at the Village pump here. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:20, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll make a comment shortly — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Redirect categorization

Hi Martin! You've been interested in redirect categorization and the This is a redirect template in the past, so I wanted to let you know that there is a discussion at Template talk:This is a redirect#One parameter that might interest you.  Good faith! Paine  20:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)