User talk:Lepricavark/Archive 6: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:22, 28 February 2020

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Lepricavark. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

←

→

May I ask why you are indiscriminately adding {{Annual readership}} to a bunch of articles? You added it to Talk:Dan Jilek, which had zero (0) page views over the last month, with his actual article only receiving 97 views over the last month. Who is this helping and what is the point of adding the template to the talk page? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: The readership information is interesting and helpful in giving us guidance as to which articles are of greater interest to readers. Some editors may choose to devote more of their efforts to improving articles that receive higher page counts. I see no harm, and some utility, in adding the readership data to an articles talk page. Do you see any harm in it? Cbl62 (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

My thinking is similar to Cbl62's. I actually observed him adding the template to pages and asked him about it before doing it myself. Lepricavark (talk) 13:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

The indiscriminate addition of any template to talk pages without prior consensus can be viewed as disruptive. Similar to {{Talk header}}, {{Annual readership}} should only be added where it can be useful (i.e. highly edited articles). It should not be added to every article in a category/list, which is what it appears you, Lepricavark, were doing. In all of 2019, Talk:Dan Jilek received 5 page views! I understand it being added to articles like Talk:Abraham Lincoln, but who is it helping by being added to Talk:Dan Jilek? I am going to edit {{Annual readership}} documentation page with language matching {{Talk header}} to make this clearer. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:49, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

After reading my comment above, I wanted to make it clear that I'm not saying what you were doing was disruptive, Lepricavark. My purpose was to inquire as to why you were adding the template to articles that had minimal or no viewership. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:59, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

That's reasonable. I'll try to restrict my future addition of the template to articles that are likely to have significant readership. Lepricavark (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Lepricavark. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

If you aren't aware, there is a pageview tool that you can use to better analyze pageviews of any article on Wikipedia here. You can also turn on a Gadget that adds a link to this tool under the title of every article on Wikipedia (Preferences >> Gadgets >> Appearance >> XTools). Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:19, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

See User:Cbl62/Most viewed Michigan Wolverines football articles in 2019. It would be great to find a way to automate a list like this. I prepared it manually. Feel free to add anyone (or anything) who you think I may have missed (my criteria was > 10,000 page views). Cbl62 (talk) 22:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. I worked my way through most of that list yesterday and will try to take care of the balance over the weekend. Lepricavark (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Your input is requested

at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:20, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Even more tedious tasks!

Lepricavark, I've asked User:Primefac to run a bot to correct the #-signs on the college football standings templates. He thinks it's doable, so I would hold off on correcting any more of those manually. However, I have plenty of other less-botable tasks related to college football standings templates. Let me know if you are game to help some more. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 02:35, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads' up. You can share more tasks if you like, but I can't promise anything as I've been reducing my overall time spent on Wikipedia. Lepricavark (talk) 03:22, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

I renamed a a few hundred standings templates to make them more consistent, replacing acronyms and abbreviated names with the full name of the conference. These templates need some associated cleanup. See my last edit at Template:1956 Southeastern Conference football standings for an example. First off, the first field in CFB Standings Start need to match the template name. Second, in CFB Standings End, "non-BCS-champ=yes" should be replaced with "conf-champ=yes". Lastly, the categories need some cleaning up. I'm trying to get the categories for these templates all ordered and with the category sort keys as you seem them in the 1956 SEC example. I've already done the Big Ten and I'm working on the SEC, but there are few more conferences that need this sort of cleanup:

Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 19:13, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up and thanks for calling attention once again to the pernicious nonsense that goes on in that article. Chisme (talk) 20:24, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

No problem. The nonsense never ends. Lepricavark (talk) 20:58, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

PunjabCinema threatened me on my Talk page. What should I do about this? Chisme (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Just mention it in the thread at ANI. Punjab just signed their own indef-warrant, so to speak. I've been subject to similar comments from prior Chahal whitewashers and I'm fairly confident that these threats are meaningless. Lepricavark (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

They blocked him indefinitely. I am mystified why so many come here to white-wash the Gurbaksh Chahal article. If you were to make a list of blocked Wiki editors who crashed and burned in the name of burnishing Chahal's reputation, the list would probably come to two-dozen names. Yet the man is a batterer, a domestic abuser, a beater of women. He was lucky in 2013 that the video tape of him beating his girlfriend 117 times in a half-hour was deemed inadmissible in court (the cops wrongly seized the tape). Why do they flock to his article to try to white-wash it? I don't think all of them are paid. I should make a list of editors banned for making nonsense at the Gurbaksh Chahal article and post it on the article's Talk page as a warning. Anyhow, thanks as usual for your help and encouragement. Chisme (talk) 00:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

My theory is money. And I think somebody has quite a temper. If there is anymore bullying, I recommend contacting T&S.-- Deep fried okra 17:42, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

How 'bout the ones that gave up after one or two edits?-- Deep fried okra 17:56, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

This tweet may be of interest to you. It's ironic: The man who paid his PR firm to doctor his Wikipedia page is "happy to share proof of paid trolls and the Wikipedia pages they targeted." Chisme (talk) 01:31, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Color me shocked that an abuser would resort to open dishonesty. Then again, once a man has lost his reputation, what else does he have to lose? Lepricavark (talk) 02:17, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

re -TBC:WT:MLB

Hello: I have been doing these (-TBC links) but Yankees10 is putting them back in by reverting. Any input you would have regarding this subject and could respond to in the discussion on their talk page would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. —Doug Jimmiefoxx (talk) 22:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I weighed in at his talk page. FWIW, you don't necessarily need to remove the leftover TBC links since they aren't actually visible within the articles. Lepricavark (talk) 22:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Understood. Many thanks!! Jimmiefoxx (talk) 20:54, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@@ Line 74: / Line 74: @@
 *[https://twitter.com/gchahal/status/1222023246440091649 This tweet] may be of interest to you. It's ironic: [http://sfappeal.com/2014/04/as-a-sf-internet-tycoon-admits-to-domestic-violence-a-battle-continues-on-his-wikipedia-page/ The man who paid his PR firm] to doctor his Wikipedia page is "happy to share proof of paid trolls and the Wikipedia pages they targeted." [[User:Chisme|Chisme]] ([[User talk:Chisme|talk]]) 01:31, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 :*Color me shocked that an abuser would resort to open dishonesty. Then again, once a man has lost his reputation, what else does he have to lose? [[User:Lepricavark|Lepricavark]] ([[User talk:Lepricavark#top|talk]]) 02:17, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
+== re -TBC:WT:MLB ==
+Hello:
+I have been doing these (-TBC links) but Yankees10 is putting them back in by reverting.
+Any input you would have regarding this subject and could respond to in the discussion on their talk page would be greatly appreciated.
+Thank you.
+—Doug [[User:Jimmiefoxx|Jimmiefoxx]] ([[User talk:Jimmiefoxx|talk]]) 22:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
+:I weighed in at his talk page. FWIW, you don't necessarily need to remove the leftover TBC links since they aren't actually visible within the articles. [[User:Lepricavark|Lepricavark]] ([[User talk:Lepricavark#top|talk]]) 22:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
+Understood. Many thanks!! [[User:Jimmiefoxx|Jimmiefoxx]] ([[User talk:Jimmiefoxx|talk]]) 20:54, 17 February 2020 (UTC)