Jump to content

User talk:OccultZone/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Some sources about LGBT attitudes in the Middle East

OccultZone,

I found some sources about LGBT attitudes in the Middle East:

They talk about how anti-LGBT attitudes were not always the norm (previously Europe was homophobic and Europeans went to the Middle East and had homosexual experiences there), but that the anti-LGBT attitudes came to the Middle East when "gays/homosexuals" were made into an identity group.

It would be helpful if they were used as sources on the Arabic Wikipedia WhisperToMe (talk) 16:32, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Nice! What would be the title? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Since LGBT in the United States exists, maybe LGBT in the Middle East would be a good idea. The article can be written in English and translated into Arabic WhisperToMe (talk) 16:38, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I will probably start LGBT in the Middle East on sandbox. Once it is completed, it will be easy to translate. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you so much! This will be a very important article for so many people in the world. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

BTW I found another one:

  • Habib, Samar. Female Homosexuality in the Middle East: Histories and Representations. Routledge, July 18, 2007. ISBN 0415956730, 9780415956734.

There is a copy on Google Books. There is also a specific article on Saudi Arabia (it also talks about the different Middle Eastern style of sexuaity

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Nice finding, once you are into google books you can probably discover the thousands of years old events. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I started a small stub at LGBT in the Middle East and got even more sources. When you are ready you can replace this stub with your well-developed article. I may also write Wikipedia articles about the books themselves (using book reviews). I also am seeking German versions of the Klauda article so people who write versions in other languages have the original German text to work with WhisperToMe (talk) 23:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Great! Edited, article is not stub anymore. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I Have Two Questions

Thanks. I have two questions: do I have to write an article? How do I patrol recent changes here? IWorkSoMuch (talk) 02:22, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

@IWorkSoMuch: You can write article if you want, it is not necessary that you have to. For patrolling recent changes, you can follow this link Special:RecentChanges. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the barnstar! Long live The Supreme and Holy Order of WP:VERIFY.--Atlantictire (talk) 02:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Patrolling Recent Changes

That page you linked to me is where I can see the most recent changes to patrol, but how do I do it? IWorkSoMuch (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

There is no other way.. For Patrolling newly created pages you can go to Special:NewPagesFeed. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:07, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Why?

Why are in the world are you removing useful links like you did here?--Yankees10 07:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Sublocation has been provided and linked, so you can remove extra links per linking guidelines. It is also obvious that subject is related to baseball, so there is nothing necessary about linking "baseball". OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
And yet we do it on every single other baseball article.--Yankees10 08:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Sublocations alone are not a reason to unlink the origin of the subject in the lede. All bios I've seen so far link to the place of origin. In the case of bios of politicians from New York, they are described as "American politician from New York". You see that American is not linked, but "New York" provides a useful link, establishing context where the politician acted (member of state legislature etc.) the link to his hometown, if mentioned, is IMO not enough. I suggest you refrain from further unlinking the state name in the lede. Kraxler (talk) 15:46, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
@Kraxler: You can link if you want but it should be related with the subject, unless you are in need of links so that page cannot be considered to be "Underlinked", but anyone else is allowed to remove over amount of links. Per WP:OVERLINKING:-
"In particular, unless they are particularly relevant to the topic of the article, the following are not usually linked:
the names of major geographic features and locations; languages; religions; common occupations; and pre- and post-nominals;"(2nd point)
So once again, you can remove the links of locations, if you have already provided the link to sublocation, it is even better! But then again, if location has to do nothing with the significance of the subject, then certainly it is not needed and it can be removed. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:30, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
The location has very much to do with the person, as I pointed out above. Not every New York politician was born in New York state, or died there. Anyway, thanks for reverting while a discussion of the issue is ongoing. Anybody else would be tempted to start an edit-war over this, but I'm too old to haggle over irrelevancies. Kraxler (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
It is an opinion. I would've reverted on all pages, but I haven't, nor it is needed, you can have the rest. I was just trying to say that my changes were supported by the guidelines. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

My Talk Page

Social
Tdiction (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello whats going on today? Tdiction (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

@Tdiction: Working on some biographical articles. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:57, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Potential superpowers

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Potential superpowers you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tezero -- Tezero (talk) 12:41, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

How do you do it?

Hi, I have seen you make lots of edits assessing the talk pages.....how do you do it? Any script? or manual? ƬheStrikeΣagle 07:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Strike Eagle, his name is the clue. Throw into a bowl of chicken soup, 3-4 eyes of newt, four hairs off of a frog, and two witch's moles (I supply him the moles via my wife). Face the pentagram (not the star, but the W. It has five points) and say praise be unto Jimbo. Eat soup and say again praise be unto Jimbo. Bgwhite (talk) 07:40, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
LOL that is so true!! I remember him in 2013 trying to finding the ropes and making nice good-faith edits....now he's at 100k edits and I'm still 11k.....He's doing a good job though...assessing is something many people usually ignore! I suffer from minor edit-countitis! Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle 07:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Strike Eagle, What!! Only 11k edits. I usually don't talk to people with such a low edit count. You people disgust me. I'm #24 on list of Wikipedians by number of edits with 349,526 edits. Nah Nah Nah!!! Bgwhite (talk) 07:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
@Strike Eagle: See section #34 of this talk page. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:01, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Resolved

Hi, I'm Carriearchdale. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, 1704 in Spain, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Carriearchdale (talk) 09:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

@Carriearchdale: But what is your rationale? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
fyi...a quote from wikipedia [[1]]

ciao!!! Carriearchdale (talk) 11:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Honor Killing

Resolved

Hi. I see you reverted my edit. But what I was doing was putting back Afghanistan in the South Asia section, after it was moved by 108.230.153.63 to the Middle East section. Now it is in both sections. It should be only in the South Asia one.2A02:2F0A:506F:FFFF:0:0:BC19:AE61 (talk) 10:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

From next time consider providing edit summaries. Thanks for the right placement. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Many reviews needed

Uppada Beach, Mypadu Beach, Vodarevu Beach -- Vin09 (talk) 12:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

All done. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Need info

Resolved

Is it ok to place the tags by a user or should be placed by an expert or admin? page1, page2, page3, page4--Vin09 (talk) 15:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Anyone can, but they should be correct. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Galleries

Are galleries important for a wiki page, I have read they should be placed in wikimedia commons but not like a repository in en.wiki page, only the prescribed images should be placed. Is it correct?--Vin09 (talk) 03:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Not important, they can be removed if article passes the start class. Sometimes galleries are inserted so that people can have the idea about the subject, because of the shortage of content. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:38, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Vin09, I've had to add this to edit summaries 6 times today.... WP:Gallery. Bgwhite (talk) 05:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, can you give me the edit revision page url, so that it will be helpful for me.--Vin09 (talk) 07:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Vin09, see [2] Bgwhite (talk) 07:21, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Review needed

Natural vegetation and Wildlife of Andhra Pradesh, Yarada Beach--Vin09 (talk) 04:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:43, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Berna Yeniçeri Stub→Start

Hi! I see that you've changed the assessment of Berna Yeniçeri from stub to start. I was in belief that articles with less than 1,500 chars of prosa are considered as stub. Is there something, which makes this article exceptional? --CeeGee 07:06, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@CeeGee: Check WP:STUB#How_big_is_too_big.3F, Anything that exceeds 250 characters is start. 1500 is for DYK. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 July

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) 01:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

My AWB linking module

This is to inform you that my AWB linking module has been updated with regexes taken from my current unlinking script. I have not yet tested it through want of a Windoze PC. Let me know if it doesn't work. Also, if you watchlist the page, you will see whenever the code gets updated. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 01:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Watchlisted, . I will review soon. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Trio, Air Lane

Resolved

Hi OccultZone, thanks for your attention to this article. However, I'm rather confused as to why you placed a "listas' as "Trio, Air Lane" ([3]). "Trio" is not their last name, and every reference book and discussion I've seen references them as "Air Lane Trio" or "The Air Lane Trio". It might be possible to do a listas as "Air Lane Trio, The", but I've never looked them up under "T", only "A". What is the reason for this, to me, odd configuration? Thanks! 78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 12:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

HWV As long as there is some kind of "biography" wikiproject added to the article, you have to add and fill the listas parameter. You know that I had doubt about this particular parameter, I had asked another editor about it, check [4], it was few hours ago. Hopefully he will respond anytime soon. So you can consider that I am not done yet with that page. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:33, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
HWV You may want to check the guideline about Listas parameter, it says:-

"Listas is a parameter found in the coding of the WikiProject Biography box which operates like {{DEFAULTSORT}}. It is a sortkey for the article talk page (for example, for Elvis Presley, |listas=Presley, Elvis, so that the talk page will show up in the P's and not the E's of the various assessment and administrative categories). More about listas is at this category's talk page."

OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:38, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Agree paramater should be added, and I am grateful you have taken the time to do so. However, it should be as "Air Lane Trio". You wouldn't listas "Seasons, Four" or "Stones, Rolling" or "Brothers, Blackwood". Thanks! 78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 12:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
(and ha! it looks like I need to change my signature, which was just meant to be a play on the old Victor Records slogan for my signature, if people call me HWV instead of 78.26 or just 78, it would appear to be the worst case of WP:OWN I've ever seen!) 78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 12:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks HWV and "Rolling Stones" is not the right name per Wikipedia standard, it is "The Rolling Stones", their listas parameter reads "Rolling Stones, The". Let's wait, like I said that I had asked about it from other editor, waiting for his input as he used to repair these parameters with bot, years ago. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

The correct is "Air Lane Trio". "Air" is not a prefix like "The". -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

  • I am now totally confused. First you set the listas for Lee M. Hollander as Hollander, Lee M. - that's identical to the defaultsort. Then you reset it as Lee, Hollander M. Why? That's completely inside out and backwards. I tried to check the WikiProject:Biography list of unassessed articles to see how it works, but I don't have all day to guess my way through hundreds of screens to figure it out. How does listas work? If it's like defaultsort, use that! Hollander, Lee M. Otherwise ... can you explain how it works??? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
@Yngvadottir:, I had, but Zanhe suggested me that "in most of East Asia, surnames precede given names," he was referring to those names. I found it to be correct, so I would repair them, a good example would be Lee Chung-yong, [5](see listas & defaultsort). Yes "listas" and "defaultsort" are same and some of these defaultsorts have been written incorrectly. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
But Lee M. Hollander was a German-American! Lee was his given name. Does Hollander look East Asian to you? So in other words it's just like defaultsort - why don't you just copy the defaultsort, at least for individual people? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
@Yngvadottir: Sounds better than before. It is probably right that defaultsort shall be directly transferred without any doubts. After a while I was doing so, had no more errors. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Review request

Hi, I wanted to ask if you might review the article, Daniel R. Gernatt, Jr., if you have a moment. Thanks, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 15:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Listas

Resolved

I don't know what system you use to generate your "listas", but it doesn't seem to get enough manual attention. this one is obviously wrong. Double surnames, like in Spanish names, also present problems; e.g. this one is sorted differently on the talk page and on the article page, which is strange. Does "listas" support diacritics and the like? I also don't think that a listas which is identical to the article name is needed, as that is the default situation (e.g. [6][7]. Adding typos in such a listas makes it even worse [8]. Fram (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I see that similar issues have been raised above, see e.g. also the incorrect listas you added to [9]. Please stop these listas additions until it is clear how it should be done (and when it shouldn't be done), it makes little sense to add too many incorrect ones among the correct ones, or to add some with a potentially unsupported format (diacritics). Fram (talk) 16:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

@Fram: I corrected the first one[10], although I am unsure about Talk:American Authors and Talk:Allalou since you have doubted. I will confirm this one, and let you know here. Thanks for correcting Talk:Alex & Sierra. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:27, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
@Fram: Looks like, if the name is based on a single word it can be added to listas, they have added "Akon" to Akon's listas parameter. "American Authors" is probably correct listas for American Authors, because it is a music band. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:32, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Confirmed:-
diacritic should be rid from listas.[11]
band name should be exactly inserted to listas.[12]
if the subject is known by a single name, it will be listas.[13]
"Ambrosius Francken II" should be "Francken, Ambrosius II". [14]

That bot can be treated as example.

OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Agree with all except the "single name is listas". I think the only reason the bot did this in your example, was because there already was a listas, and it corrected it (but should perhaps have simply removed it). "Single name is listas" isn't a wrong edit, but a useless one, as the default is always that something listed exactly like the article title, and only the exceptions should be noted. Fram (talk) 19:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I see that you corrected this by removing the diacritics. However, the page is still sorted differently from the article. "Gomez Sanchez" is a double family name, as is often the case with Spanish language names. It should be sorted at Gomez, not at Sanchez. The article has it right. In general, the talk page should follow the article. Fram (talk) 19:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

In general, I agree with Fram. The only difference is that listas has always to be set as a sign that the page was checked and to delist it from the tracking category. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

If the general rule is to add listas even when it isn't necessary, then I won't object if OccultZone does the same of course. It was, as indicated, the least of my worries. Fram (talk) 21:57, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

AWB's KingbtoK plugin adds listas, in manual mode only, in an almost nice way. It still needs user attention for double surnames, double names, band names, etc. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:44, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Fram and Magioladitis for rectification. I would note that I was going through the category of listas, but now I have made a list. 1 out of every 20-50 is tricky. Will save them in separate file, I can later decide what to do about them. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

You also added wrong listas in many Chinese and Korean biographical articles, including here and here. Please note that in most of East Asia, surnames precede given names. -Zanhe (talk) 06:59, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Zanhe: Are you sure that "Lee" should come after the Second(given) name? I.e. "Lee Sun" should be "Lee, Sun"? Confirm ASAP, so I can correct other 80 where others have added same way I had added those 3 that you've mentioned. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean by "after"? "Lee Sun" should be "Lee, Sun" for most East Asian names, except for people who live in the West and spell their name in the Western order. Japanese names may also go either way. You need to be very careful with those. Check the article if you're unsure. -Zanhe (talk) 07:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I said "second name" because you had written "surnames precede given names". Many of these pages, like this one[15] lack the "DefaultSort" and "persondata" so it becomes hard to bring the real data. @Zanhe: Check my last 70 contributions(repaired 'lee' related parameters) and let me know if they are correct. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:37, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, your corrections look correct. -Zanhe (talk) 07:44, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Lee_Hwi-jae should be sorted Lee, Hwi-jae. Note, not all Korean given names have a dash. You will see Lee Hwi-jae as Lee Hwi Jae, especially in the west.
You should keep with the easy Western names unless you really know what you are doing. It can become a mess. WP:NAMESORT is the reference for the majority of names. As Zanhe said, *most* East Asian names have surnames first. Majority of Mongolian, Burmese and Malaysian names are patronymic. Thai usually goes by western standards. Japanese names in the Western press are western standard for names after ~1885, except for sumo wrestlers, kabuki actors and some other people in the arts. It can spiral out of control. I wrote the majority of NAMESORT, so if you have questions, give a yell, though I get confused too. Bgwhite (talk) 07:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I just read about the japanese, korean and chinese surnames, they are not really tricky just needed to know about their style. And absolutely, wouldn't be that hard. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Don't forget the Vietnamese. -09:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thank you for reviewing and rating two articles that I created. I appreciate it! :-) Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 19:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Your closure on ANI

Your this non-admin closure on ANI is interference in remedial procedure of users who use ANI to report violations of admin privileges. Also allegations of lie, POV editing in threatning tone is not content dispute. I request you to revert your closure. Thanks. Abhi (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Abhi: Why? It can be only reverted back if you have enough evidence of Bgwhite abusing his editing privileges. In fact there was no question right after Magioladitis had shown the diffs where you removed content and added PROD tag. Just like your report to ANI, that tag wasn't needed at all. I don't see any discussion on the talk page, or heavy editing on these articles that you would need to rush. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Your comments are welcome, non-admin closure is not. A user is seeking admin help. User talk pages are not proper places to report and discuss admin rights abuse. Pls try to understand and revert your closure. Thanks. Abhi (talk) 17:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Page protection templates

Hi, please don't add {{pp-sock}} to a page that is not protected. You've done this at 2011 census of India twice in two days: it does not protect the page - all that happens is that the page is placed into Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates - if you want the page protecting, please file a request at WP:RFPP. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64: My main motive was to revert sock's edit, I never specifically added {{pp-sock}}. But thanks for pointing. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:25, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

why you delete aninidita nayar

i created my account only for anindita nayar as i am fan of her. i am new to wikipedia? and what is this sockpuppetry? --Scottbrew (talk) 20:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

No it is impossible that I would delete pages. Check Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nitishkumartn. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 20:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Request

Hi again, I am keeping you busy with another request.  :-) When you have a moment, I would like to ask if you could review Flavia C. Gernatt. Thank you, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 04:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah soon. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:40, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, you are awesome! After this one, Dan Gernatt Farms, I'll be done for awhile. I thank you to review it at your convenience. :-) Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 18:51, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast - you are amazing! Thanks, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 18:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Article

The article South Coastal Railway Zone is an assumptative, please see this for any corrections.--Vin09 (talk) 10:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

@Vin09: Try Afd. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 Done--Vin09 (talk) 11:18, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Skogssamer

Could you please take a look at the Skogssamer article. It was in need for copyediting for Standard English according to the DYK nom reviewer. It would be appreciated. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thank you, again, for your hard work in reviewing my recent article contribtuions! :-) Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 19:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Carriearchdale. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Flavia C. Gernatt, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Carriearchdale (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

OccultZone, I will appreciate if you would add your opinion regarding this article on the deletion nomination by the above-referenced editor. The article, Flavia C. Gernatt includes relevant sources that are according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, including widely reliable sources such as The Buffalo News, a nationally-recognized newspaper, and the widely-dispersed journal, Pit & Quarry. The article should remain as an individual article, and not merged or deleted. This article meets relevant guidelines and policies to be an independent Wikipedia article. Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 22:27, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I will agree that your article is valid and until now Carriearchdale doesn't seem to be capable enough to write one article like that. These measures are part of her WP:BATTLEGROUND. If you still don't understand, just check User talk:Fram#1704 in Spain. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 00:42, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply; I'll take a look at the Battleground link you provided. When you have a moment, I would like to ask if you would take a look at this [16] and give me some suggestions on how to proceed regarding the editor's unfounded and untrue accusations. Thanks, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 20:37, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
User basically ignores my messages or notifications, anywhere. Article needs no serious improvement for now, you can wait till AfD is over. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, User:OccultZone. I really appreciate your efforts regarding this as it was just getting too upsetting for me, and I have taken a couple days away from Wikipedia. I see that she/he interacts in this type of manner with several editors, including you and I. Thanks for your suggestions and diligence, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 16:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

@Daniellagreen: You can simply write down where the user is being disruptive for others. You can later report about that if it continues. But even for that you will have to remain active, your choice what you have to do. But I usually don't recommend break because of people. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. The user has appeared to me to have behaved disrespectfully, also to User:Piguy101 and User:Pink Bull. So, that makes four of us. That someone has so much energy to put into that is beyond me. Thanks for your comments and suggestions, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 17:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

disambiguation

Now the tool server is not working, how to repair disambiguation?--Vin09 (talk) 04:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Vin09, tool server was finally turned off and is never coming back. Hallelujah and hallelujah for for spell check, otherwise I'd never spell hallelujah right. WMFLabs has replaced labs. Is this the tool you are looking for? https://tools.wmflabs.org/dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py Bgwhite (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
WP:WikiProject Disambiguation#Resources and User:Qwertyytrewqqwerty/DisamAssist. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Sure... show me up by how smart you are :) Thanks to your recent vandal, I had to remove the same message from alot of new editor's talk pages. Keep your vandals to yourself would you. Bgwhite (talk) 08:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Sometimes I let others do ;-) OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Impersonator

Hey! Did you seen OcultZone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki)? Got scared and thought it was you. He was later blocked. ///EuroCarGT 15:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Interesting. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Review

Minor Barnstar award

The Minor Barnstar
For your continuing minor common fixes on civil war biographies you get this Minor Barnstar and my thanks ... GELongstreet (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

A very minor quibble

Thanks for the fixes to George, Count Joannes. I have reversed one because the "th" you expunged ("March 16th") was part of the title of a work by him, and therefore is exempt from the mighty force of Wikipedia style guidelines. Brianyoumans (talk) 02:02, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

@Brianyoumans: Title of the book, yes absolutely. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:16, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jammu and Kashmir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pashto. 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) 08:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Only reverted sock. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Please have a glance

Resolved

this page is a duplicate of an existing page List of airports in Andhra Pradesh, is it right to propose it for speedy deletion.--Vin09 (talk) 15:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, you can PROD it. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) If it's a duplicate, PROD is not a good move - there's a seven-day wait; and it might get contested, resulting in at least seven more days at AFD. Try WP:A10. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleted at 15:38 (UTC). Though there is still a huge backlog, still some prods are quickly investigated. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, OccultZone, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Faizan 07:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Review

Sports in Andhra Pradesh, Aurangabad railway station--Vin09 (talk) 15:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Done. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Technical question about AWB

Hi, I noticed your AWB edits to Martin John Spalding. I was wondering what aspect of AWB does that, and how to set it up for doing so. I have been using AWB for a little while, but I don't see how to make it do what you did. Thanks for any advice. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stevietheman: You can use it the way you want, as long as it is not going to damage or violate the rules of both AWB and en.wiki. There are certain features like Options > Find and replace, Tools > Make module, where you can add your own phrases. It can be also used for solving disambiguations. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:45, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the info! Much appreciated. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Potential superpowers

Resolved

There's more than something wrong in this article that was well written with only EU,China and India( I doubt reading some academics sources even about India). Some people changed it and made it worse to make happy some people and without using sufficient and high level sources.Please explain me what does it mean "other contenders"....or they a or they aren't.In fact they aren't.Rubbish this article.After the DISASTER all people disappeared....wow what a very scientific article!151.40.45.125 (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Keeping in touch with the current affairs. I know it may seem funny to some. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually article it's a DISASTER or RUBBISH..nothing else)151.40.100.219 (talk) 12:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I've made more than 94 edits to that article, so please don't say like that Soon it will be a good article OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I hope so).But this isn't the good way.Antiocus the great is the most prepared.I think India should be deleted,but this is just my opinion based on my knowledge.I'm in costant contact with OECD so it's difficult to tell me tales.151.40.65.156 (talk) 17:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Once there were hopes that Japan will become superpower, but things didn't went as good as it was expected. I highly doubt about China because they got no support from any nation on Japan's Senkaku Island dispute. Due to censorship and suppression, one should visit China or truly consult those who have recently visited China, if they want to know about the situation of China. Just like James Fallows had said. We all know how great European Union is doing too. So who's left now? None.
All these potential superpowers, Brazil, China, EU, India, Russia have no military influence like USA. These countries don't have as many military bases in the world, they haven't fought as many wars either. So you if you think wider, you may find these all assumptions to be incomplete after all. These predictions are not final but an idea. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


EU and China have strong military .All have nukes to cancel life on Earth (2 french submarines class Le Triomphant are more than sufficient to cancel life on Earth like the 40 nukes managed by Italy in Ghedi) ,but only Usa ,EU and China have a conventional military system really huge.They are the only runners.Economically only EU and USA as GDP and NET WEALTH are really superpowers.Brazil ,Russia and even India can't be compared to the USA,EU and China.I see a lot of ignoranance.I just posted 3 new citations against Russia on the Talk.If you like i can post more.There are many of them.Same i could do for Brazil.I wrote to Sergecross73 too..i want to realize if he is partial.Many people too are supporting Russia-Brazil deletion.Time to do it.Thanks).151.40.12.61 (talk) 18:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks like you don't have enough information about these matters.
Nuclear weapon is worthless if opponent has got shield, one by one it is being developed too,[17] neither a nuclear weapon is capable enough to damage a whole country, you may want to mention location or the range itself.
First of all I didn't talked about military population, because there are few countries whose military exceeds China and European union in terms of both power and population.
How can we rely on the military of China when it has huge history of defection? When did China war last time? 1967 and 1979? They left the battlefield both times.
Usually, Chinese rockets or missiles don't seem to be working that really, they fail to inflict even nominal damage. Just check their performance whenever Palestine wars with Israel, or even during a minor conflict. Those rockets or missiles can't even damage a commercial ship, just forget about the real warship.
If you want to talk about "net wealthy" and anything else, just read List of countries by external debt once and compare it with the actual GDP. Even China has 3 trillion debt now. Brazil, India and Russia are not even dictatorial, they are usually considered more of an example for a nation than China is. Human right reports are self explanatory. Brazil, India, Russia have more sources than Europe. You should also have a satellite view, may reveal that mountains are beyond the desert that have got lights.
If we want to base our opinion, we can, but recognize established facts. Alright? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

So go to read the 3 new sources against Russia.I know well weapons and i even wrote some articles on them.Same for economy.Brazil and Russia are insignificant at the economic- financial level.EU and USA have a GDP 8 times the russian oneand 60 times the net wealth.What do we comnpare?They have a net wealth that can be insignificant.Please read Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report Databook or the Allianz One.Now it's time to delete Russia and Brazil.If you need i can post to smash these 2 reports.151.40.12.61 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

What about the daily expenditure and debt? It is much higher than you believe.
I didn't got what you mean from "insignificant" because Brazil and Russia are one of the most important trading partner of other 3 economical groups. They are part of BRICS as well.
You can remove whatever you want to. I probably agree with the current version. But if you have reached to consensus, let me know. You should also make a account, like other IP did. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:17, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Impossible to talk to people that don't know economy.About account the russian chief (173...) that is well listen by Sergiocross73 nobody cares,but he act heavily all times.Effervency as wrote in talk would have added even Turkey supported by a rubbish source to JUSTIFY Brazil and Russia too in the article.Now i've the consensus of the majority of the writers in the talk .So?151.40.12.61 (talk) 19:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Reports about wealth distribution are not really relevant here. They measure 100 families. If Effervescency‎ mentions turkey, it wouldn't matter until he adds. But it is not going to happen. You've been told that if there are reliable sources about Turkey or even Nicaragua they can be added to the list. Because of WP:VERIFY. Who's Sergiocross73? Also the discussion is ongoing on talk of potential superpowers. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

He said to be an Administrator.He helped a lot pro russians.I like real things not pro-people.You seem by the writing irish.I've long eyes.Soon this article must be restored as Antiocus the Great did.Can i act in this sense with majority of consensus between writers in talks?151.40.12.61 (talk) 19:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Mistake in Russia nominal GDP

All countries nominal gdps are ranked according to IMF 2014 April estimates.According to them Russia with 2,092 is 9th behind Italy that is 8th with 2,171.I 've already posted it on the talk of Russia article.Will somebody correct this huge mistake?Russians as often manipualte for propaganda.Time to correct article Russia.151.40.12.61 (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry 151.40.12.61 your wrong, Russia is the 5th largest economy now and will be number 4 in 2016 and is the biggest in Europe[18].
Here's the facts http://rt.com/business/russia-gdp-5th-largest-158/
http://thebricspost.com/russia-ranked-5th-largest-economy-world-bank/#.U7x7oE1OXnM
http://en.ria.ru/business/20130715/182248723/Medvedev-Lauds-Russias-5th-Place-in-World-Banks-GDP-Rating.html
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-takes-5th-place-in-world-gdp-rankings/483190.html
http://www.bne.eu/content/moscow-blog-russia-overtakes-germany-become-5th-largest-economy
http://www.fundweb.co.uk/emerging/russia-now-worlds-fifth-largest-economy-in-gdp-terms/1075160.article
http://rbth.com/business/2013/07/17/russian_economy_becomes_biggest_in_europe_28149.html
--204.15.111.27 (talk) 23:26, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
High amount of resources too. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I checked all 204.... writings.Yes a lot of data but about gdp ppp and not nominal gdp.Italy is 8th and Russia 9th according to IMF in 2014.Time to delete 8th on Russia page ange and add 9th.Italy in its page with 2,171 trillions is 8th and Russia with 2,092 trillions is is 9th.Check Italy and Russia articles to SEE the HUGE MISTAKE in ranking Russia that is 9th.May be other italians will write.It's ridiculous.87.9.30.140 (talk) 10:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm totally right..other people what i wrote and more will arrive.Check Italy and Russia ,easy to realize by their 2 articles that Russia with 2,092 as nominal gdp is only 9th behind Italy that has 2,171 8th.Italy is the true 8th and Russia is 9th.151.40.74.108 (talk) 16:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

One more

Hi, it's me again. During the Independence Day weekend, I had the time and created several articles that you very kindly reviewed, and which I very much appreciate, especially considering all of the drama with Carriearchdale. There is another article that I created, that was kindly reviewed by another editor, and then unreviewed again by you know who. I wondered if, when you have another moment, you might review Gallo Blue Chip. I'm sure that I'm just inviting more drama from her/him, though this is really the last article I'm creating for awhile now, and my last review request of you for awhile, too. Thanks so much again, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 01:35, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Reviewed. I would've advised you to bring this issue to WP:ANI but you have basically reported it to Fram. Let's wait for him. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, again. It looks like Carriearchdale reported on me, so the issue is now in other editors' hands. I have responded to the proposal in support of an indefinite block on her/him. I appreciate ALL of your professionalism, kindness, and support; it has certainly made all of this easier to handle, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 17:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Basket Brescia Leonessa 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:
  • eurobasket.com/team/Italy/Centrale_del_Latte_Brescia/2064 Team Profile] at Eurobasket.com]</ref> It was founded in 2009. The team currently plays in the [[Divisione Nazionale A Gold Basket]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

You should probably see this

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OccultZone. I'm sure you will be able to guess who's behind it... AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I was going to notify as the user failed to do so, thanks. This seems frivolous at best. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪ ߷ ♀ 投稿 ♀ 06:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
So today is OccultZone's day to get dumped on. I'm starting to meet you everywhere Solarra. I'd love you to stalk me because OccultZone is starting to get creepy, so I'm putting a restraining order on him/her (real name Jim or Daniella?). Bgwhite (talk) 06:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
SPI got backlog, so you cannot say that it will be 'today'. I wish Callanecc will save me ;-) Just like Carrierarchdale, Bgwhite had dug his own grave today, I will show this message "I'd love you to stalk me" to the wife of Bgwhite. Bgwhite can contact oversighter, but it won't save, I have saved this already, vidded too! OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Good Lord. I wish I could NAC the shit out of that request. I believe this is two times you've been called a sock this week, yes? Ishdarian 06:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I've PRODed as G3, refers to Hoax or Vandalism. Just like it was done with the SPI of Sean.hoyland.[19] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I went ahead and formalized the proposed community ban, that SPI nonsense was just over the top. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪ ߷ ♀ 投稿 ♀ 20:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Lets see. Right now going as good as you expected. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 20:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Imply changes using AWB

I've noticed that you've made changes to a number of articles on my watchlist with the cryptic comment "Imply changes using AWB". Most of these changes seem to be related to delinking geographical districts. Can you elaborate on what your edit comment means, and the purpose of the changes? Pburka (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@Pburka: Surely. I had a bit of doubt with different types of pages. I cannot say that I am delinking even if I haven't delinked anything. But now I have imported the list where delinking is one of the aspect. Now you can check. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Can you clarify that? What list are you talking about? What can I check? What does "imply changes" mean? Pburka (talk) 18:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
List that I've made for my own convenience about the pages that I have to edit. These changes includes the addition of infobox, persondata, defaultsort and removal of overbolding, overlinking, double hyperlinks, etc. When I had made above message, I was still on AWB. Anyways, you know now, and I specifically mentioned "delinking" in later summaries. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:21, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
"Imply changes" means absolutely nothing -- you need to stop using it in edit summaries. Also, your delinking is a bit overbaord. The first instance of a geographical place in an article, typically in the lede section, can be linked. Let's not unnecessarily inconvenience our readers. Thanks, BMK (talk) 21:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken: "clean up" shall sound better. You can link sublocation and only once, but not anything else. There is consensus to remove all geo locations for about 5 years now. You have just to go through the archives of WT:LINK. Even the recent proposal crashed big time [20]. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I see two issues: the edit summary, and the content. Whilst I would agree that "Imply changes using AWB" is meaningless and could be improved, it's not easy to make edit summaries apply to hundreds of articles. It's taken quite a long time for me to develop my own edit summaries and I know it's not simple or always wise to use generic description when each article may have a different problematic.
Excessive linking devalues or dilute other links in the article, and distract the reader from direct and more pertinent targets. You do not give diffs of the unlinking that bothers you. But generally, chain-linking is considered undesirable, as are a series of successive links such as "Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany"; "Wan Chai, Hong Kong"; "Hills District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia" or "Hollywood, Los Angeles, California". These cascades are examples of potential for safe reduction in link density because the first and most specific link will contain a link to the second or successive ones. The lede is often the most densely linked part of the screen real estate, and many people find the density detracts from the reading experience as well as potentially sending the reader away to other articles when they have not yet even read the lead in its entirety. These would be much better linked as "Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany"; "Wan Chai, Hong Kong"; "Hills District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia" and "Hollywood, Los Angeles, California" respectively. Furthermore, countries and world cities are deemed "major geographical features" and their linking is not usually necessary by consensus inherent in the guidelines. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 03:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I use my previous edit summaries. Just thought of variation but probably it wasn't as good. There were a number of pages where company name was based on some geolocation and the location was linked, for example "The New York Center", it would be linked as "The New York Center", that is completely irrelevant. Agreed. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:47, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
None of that unlinks that I undid were anything like that, they were things like the first occurence of "New York City" in the article body. Try to think a bit less about bureaucratic rules and a bit more about what is most helpful and convenient to our readers -- to me, that's the key. BMK (talk) 06:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
That megopolis and world city... When I've come across it, New York City can be unlinked 98 cases out of 100 without detracting from the story; instead it would generally be beneficial. -- Ohc ¡digame! 11:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I actually agree - there's no reason that NYC needs to be linked multiple times in an article, but, as a service to our readers (who, after all, we are here to serve), the first link in the article, which almost invariably occurs in the lede, should be linked. It was these types of unlinkings made by OccultZone that I undid. (Incidentally, FYI, it's "megalopolis", not "megopolis".) BMK (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Megalopolis was unlinked? Consider re-edit because it is a disambiguation. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 23:48, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The script isn't set up to remove that word, disambiguated or not, correctly spelt or not. We were both referring to NYC all along. -- Ohc ¡digame! 02:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I doubted too. People often confuses with the "1 link" with all links. The "1 link" has to do nothing with the geolocations. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Review

Dugarajapatnam Port--Vin09 (talk) 18:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Follow-up

Hi, I wanted to follow-up with you regarding the report against me that was filed by Carriearchdale, and in which I have mentioned you. Thank you for all of your support, and comments regarding this. The link, as you know, is at: [21]. For the record, I would like to state that the user's accusations are completely unfounded. Thank you, again, for your support, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 21:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I am in touch and you are welcome. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Review

Gandhi Hill, Vijayawada--Vin09 (talk) 09:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Adding living parameter to WPBIO

Hi OccultZone! I saw the conversation at Bots/Requests for approval. I agree that adding a blank parameter is not a good primary purpose for a bot, but could be done while the bot is doing other things that are visible to the reader. Could you think of a line of code that could be added to the bottom of Magioladitis' WikiProjects custom module for AWB that could detect if the parameter is missing and then add it? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

No because of different codings of WP, WikiProject, and sometimes it is simply WPBIO. Makes it harder, recently someone has objected the use of AfD template being transferred at the top of wikiproject. It may take a while, but if these issues haven't been resolved, I would say that it can be done as greatly without AWB as well, I think whenever I will be adding wikiprojects to these 10,000 articles that I've collected. Will let you know. About listas I will be doing that on my other account, until now there were no objections too. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
OccultZone still it would be better if GoingBatty was doing them using their bot and if WikiProject was noticed first. I am not convinced that adding a blank parameter is a good idea. Adding a blank parameters sets a value to null. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I will probably get back to it, but after I have approval for the wikiprojects. I agree that multiple changes shall be made. You were right about the list as well, I am finally creating for each. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:44, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
OccultZone - I don't understand why you chose to edit my initial post here. I should have explained that one of the things Magioladitis' custom module does is to convert {{WP Biography}}, {{WPBIO}}, and the other redirects to {{WikiProject Biography}}.
I noticed that using {{blps}} will add {{WikiProject Biography}} without the listas parameter. I wonder if the template should also add the blank listas parameter, to help people remember that the parameter value should be added.
As always, please remember to follow Wikipedia:AWB#Rules of use, or eventually some non-AWB user will complain. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
True, but for that, I use 'find and replace', not module. Cannot be done with module anymore because many projects have been assessed, and some of have the parameters about groups, profession before 'class', 'importance'. About rules, the last complaint about AWB usage that I had goes back to the period when I had about 64,000(or less) edits. I know people (like Lugnuts) are always around :-) OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:54, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I mentioned you

Hi, this is just a courtesy to let you know that I have mentioned you on the following page that another editor has just requested for deletion at [22]. Thanks, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 17:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes I saw. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for all of your resilience, professionalism, and support regarding some recent issues. I very much appreciate your support; thank you. Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 23:37, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For all of your support and professionalism toward me, you definitely deserve to receive another one of these. Thank you, again, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 00:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, OccultZone. You have new messages at Passengerpigeon's talk page.
Message added 01:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Passengerpigeon (talk) 01:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Garcia-Sola

The copyright text had been removed, deleted as spam instead, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Again...

Why did you unlink "Bavaria" from the lede sentence in Anna Ottendorfer? BMK (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Because it is the name of the state, not the city, sub-location was already linked. The "one link" you talk about is other way around. It doesn't support the linking of multiple locations but linking of anything else that is important for the article. For example you cannot link "George Bush" multiple times on any article just like you cannot link "Bavaria" in biographical articles such as above one. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
It was the first link in the article. Please rethink your de-linking proghram before it becomes a behvaioral issue. BMK (talk) 18:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken: Again who says that you can link the location of state when you have linked the city? Check any or most of the FA articles, state is never linked, or at least they don't require changes with locations, professions, or any other links that are not important to add. Just check Audie Murphy, John Francis Jackson, Frank Bladin for a few names. I am sure that these pages were flooded with wikilinks of geolocations, dates, professions but now they don't seem to be. Remember that if some useless link was removed it is still improvement. @Ohconfucius: What you think? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Islam is the name of the religion. Muslim is the name of its devotees.

"Özdemir is a secular Muslim<ref name="Spiegel_2008">''[[Spiegel online]]'', 15. October 2008: [http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,584300,00.html A Turk at the Top].</ref>". Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

But when you name the religion, the word has to be Islam. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Amusing

So they did! It wouldn't be the first time either - not long after I became more active in 2012 (having been here since late 2011), my name was reported and we had a lovely chat in which it was decided it wasn't egregious enough of an offense. (It's in my first talk page archive if you're interested.) I also was not notified my name had been reported before you brought it to my attention, so thank you! Fortunately, the report was declined after all, I hope the user will not press the issue further... LazyBastardGuy 17:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Persondata delinking

Since Persondata maybe used outside Wikipedia too, why you unlink the places? I am not in favour of links in Persondata but since WP:Persondata allows this option, why do you unlink them? Is this covered by some guideline? -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:OVERLINKING you cannot link anything that is:-
  • everyday words understood by most readers in context;
  • the names of major geographic features and locations; languages; religions; common occupations; and pre- and post-nominals;
  • common units of measurement, e.g. relating to area, currency, length, temperature, time, or volume (if both non-metric and metric equivalents are provided, as in 18 °C (64 °F), usually neither unit need be linked because almost all readers will understand at least one or the other unit);
  • dates.

You can run any of these delinking scripts or program on most of the FA articles and you won't find any links that can be de-linked, because they have followed these guidelines. In short words, removing a unnecessary link is still improvement. Furthermore, even if link is important, it shouldn't be linked 2nd time. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

OccultZone Persondata is not visible on page and may also used by external programs and off-site viewers. Nothing of WP:OVERLINKING applies in this case. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:21, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:Persondata reads that the data "can be extracted automatically and processed by cataloging tools and then used for a variety of purposes, such as providing advanced search capabilities, statistical analysis, automated categorization, and birthday lists." -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Off-site viewers are capable of keeping the wikilink? Or whenever they would copy-paste data, they will have to remove bracket? I.e. "Spain" → "Spain". The given example of Persondata is not supportive of any wikilinks, also per WP:Persondata#Parameters. It says "currently it isn't necessary to provide wikilinks in them", rest is just matter of doubt. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:36, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
But it clearly says "however, these might be useful in some future application". We can't just removed them because they are not used now! The entire Persondata is not used now by any cataloging tools as far as I know. This does not mean that we should go and remove it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
So if someone has overlinked professions, geolocations in persondata, it must be kept? If you know anyway to ignore persondata you can let me know. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the script must hide Persondata IMO. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I am talking about the Module of AWB, you know any language/coding related with that. Check this edit for an example[23], de-links location on Persondata. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:49, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
script = module. You 'll have to make a tweak or ask the guy who created this. I think this was created long before Persondata appears. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
The geolocation links are removed by the AWB module along the same principles as for my removing wikilinks in general – major geographical features, world cities, states where these are followed by cities that are already linked. Except for 6 countries whose links are removed almost universally, country links are removed only when they are preceded by another wikilink and when the linked country is followed by a line feed. That's why countries are removed in personendata templates.
Chances are, if another site uses personendata, they won't have the same conventions as us, and our linking syntax is irrelevant to them; a link that exists nowhere else except in persondata pollutes our own wikilinking data and gives misleading results for [what links here] functions. Also, even if linking within personendata was necessary, I've never worked out how to make a script module avoid the template and its contents. But if it's upsetting people so much, I'm prepared to disable the country unlinking, but that would perpetuate the overlinking that exists throughout the encyclopaedia. -- Ohc ¡digame! 11:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Ohconfucius is there no way that you disable fixing inside Persondata? I know that the entire conversion is bases on assumptions. So you could also just open a discussion on Persondata's talk page.? -- Magioladitis (talk)
It's binary, all or nothing, because I'm no programmer and simply don't know how to do that for AWB. This unlinking has never been an issue until now, and if persondata is stopping, unlinkiing of their contents would surely be of no consequence. I can certainly open a discussion there.  Ohc ¡digame! 15:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ohconfucius: I think we can, because most of the pages that have persondata, they haven't linked to geolocations, professions, etc. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:17, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Do not assume that all the tools/scripts/modules you find and use work fine because this is what I think you do. It looks like you use semi-automated scripts indiscriminately. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:22, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes and it is pretty clear that I haven't delinked overlinking on persondata since the above post, I will shortly inform you once I will resolve. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I do not have any strong feelings about how data should be in Persondata since I believe soon Persondata will get deleted and the information can be obtained directly via the infoboxes but since then let's stick to the agreed rules. The guys working with Persondata certainly know more about it. Thanks for contacting the script creator. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
@Magioladitis: Check Wikipedia talk:Persondata#Overlinking in Persondata. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Dogs

Since till now WikiProject Dogs had only 3 files tagged for their project, did you contact and you are sure that they want files to be tagged for their project? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

There were few files for military, I tagged 100s after contacting. It is not really formal. I think you can tag any file that is related with the project just like you can create any article related with the project. I've been through and previously you had to tag as 'class=file' but now it is automatically done. I created a article related with dogs today, since there is no category for the pictures only project may help. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Today is my day of funny questions, isn't it? Not all WikiProjects are interested on every possible page. So not all projects want files to be tagged as not all projects have class=C, etc. WikiProject Greece, for instance, is only interested in a very limited amount of redirects. While Wikiproject US in the past was tagging pages indiscriminately. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:59, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Just to make clear: My motivation is to improve your editing style! :) Keep editing. Just be more careful that what you do is not controversial. Take pre-cautions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I know it has always been :-) OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 20:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Do not add quality assessments to WikiProjects not supporting them

Why did you assess for the WikiProject The Bill? -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Removed it too, per overtagging. Hardly half-sentence. Informed the wikiproject. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
The WikiProject chose not to add importance/class the same way WikiProject Songs, one of the largest WikiProject, does not add importance. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
For a WikiProject that has less than 300 articles I think it's normal not to be interested for class/importance. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Correct and I don't classify the importance of those wikiproject. But if someone had added importance, the reason would remain unknown until the editor clarifies. Sometimes they do it on purpose. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:30, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

And WikiProject Chicago does not have the same criteria as WikiProject Biography this is the reason that when my bot ran it did not classes for WP Chicago to let the WP Chicago community decide about the class. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I assessed them and informed tonythetiger once about the article and its issues. He had no problem. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

In order to help the WikiProjects you should first check what they do. Blind tagging won't be any good. I also do not like the fact that you decide importance rating without being a member of the projects and without checking what the wikiprojects do because there is a chance the that the projects have a different approach in some things. WikiProjects do not have the same criteria and priorities otherwise we would not have to add classes and importance separately. Moreover, some projects choose not to have specific classes or not to have importance. And perhaps there is more. -- Magioladitis (talk)

I usually decide importance of only those subjects about which I know. I've rated the articles of WP:France because I had the idea of the importance. Any article that has been added to WikiProject:Biography don't require any importance. Class is usually same for all articles and 95% of these articles have to be stub or start. Probably that's why even after 10,0000s of such edits I've seen no revert of my edit, one more reason is that I usually read about the particular wikiproject before I would start assessing multiple articles. If you join the wikiproject, next question will be "For how long you've been a member?", "What you've done", then "How many you've invited", it is a lot about the accuracy and knowledge that can be implemented even without joining a wikiproject or dedicating. There are no restriction or at least the last 3(biography, France, football) that I assessed had none. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

The projects with quality assessment can be found here: Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment. Not all projects have quality assessment. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes and it is about 197. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:43, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
A small minority but still. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Alt account

I keep going with my remarks: Since you edit a lot and you are willing to help you should be more careful with the rules. Please do not use your alternative account for commenting. All commenting should be done by your main account. I understand that only comment that you did most probably was by mistake, I am just giving you an advice for future reference. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 07:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Are you are sure? Before I would create another account I had asked King of hearts(SPI clerk) about using talk page with 2 accs, he said "If it is disclosed, then pretty much everything is OK given that we treat the two accounts as one person (so you can't still can't make four reverts in 24 hours)." I still signed like it is my main account so that people won't confuse. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Same reason we don't use our bot accounts on talk pages. It's best to only use your main account to not confuse people. Bgwhite (talk) 07:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Bot account and alternative account are different. Bot can be used only for what it was assigned. No such rule applies on alternative account. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
It makes it more difficult to follow edits and discussions if they are split in multiple accounts. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
It may and such difficulty can be sorted in a few seconds. Hopefully you know now that it is allowed and nothing can be done against that since the owner is treating them as one person. This treatment is not just limited with the owner but also with others, suppose if main account is blocked, alternate account will be blocked too. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Commenting from a second account serves none of the purposes described at WP:DOPPELGANGER unless I miss something. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:03, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Really? You are arguing over making it harder, not easier, for people to follow. I think you are starting to take things too personally. Calm down. We aren't attacking you, just giving advice to make it easier for others. Bgwhite (talk) 08:10, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
WP:DOPPELGANGER? It is an essay that doesn't say anything about accounts that I've created. See this way, "occults" and "occultzone" have different meaning, it had to be "0ccults" for "Occults" or "0ccultZ0ne" for "OccultZone", then surely. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Wrong link. I should have used WP:VALIDALT. I refer to the entire paragraph. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:17, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
And what I wrote it was supposed to be an advice to help other editors. It's not a warning or something. If there is not a serious reason to use alt account better stick to the main account. To help talk page stalkers, edit counters, etc. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@Magioladitis: Alright then. Let's talk about Bgwhite. If it is all about "laugh and cry" then above messages are self-explanatory, he has made us laugh so many times but he has also made others cry.[24],[25] What can be done about him? You have got a higher level account in this MMORPG so you can inform. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:57, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Nobody was aggressive with you. You edit a lot so it's normal that you get a lot of remarks and hints. Moreover, please do not address personal attacks against anyone. I fail to see why you react like that. IMO, you edit a lot without considering all the parameters and we try to help each other. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
You actually took that seriously? It was meant to be humorous. You said it before and I considered. Although, this one is pretty unclear, "please do not address personal attacks against anyone", you aren't allowed? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Lol. Then i guess i can keep bugging you for every mistake you do to help you improve. :) --Magioladitis (talk) 20:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


In Use

Re this edit, and several further edits to the same page.

There is a big banner message saying "This article is actively undergoing a major edit for a short while. To help avoid edit conflicts, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed."

Which part of that was unclear to you? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Nothing really, just that error was something new to me. I will look forward to it, in a few hours. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
@BrownHairedGirl: I just saw you've fixed after moving the page. It is alright now. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
(ec) No it's not "fixed". It';s just that the error messages don't show up in userpsace.
Using that style of refs means that until they are used in the body of the article, an error message pops up. As they get used, the error messages disappear. Simple.
The page had a very clear message saying don't edit, to avoid edit conflicts. Your first edit had exactly the same timestamp as my most recent edit, so you must have edited it within 60 seconds of my edit.
That did cause an edit conflict, and involved a lot of time-wasting for me while I saved my revisions to an offline text file, undid the damage you had done by messing up the referencing system, and then reinstated my edit.
If you don't want to engage in content creation, that's fine; there is a lot of valuable gnoming to be done. But please have the courtesy not to wade into the middle of a content-creator's editing session and bugger up their work, despite a very claer notice telling you not to do so.
If you are unfamiliar with the refrencing scheme, go create a few articles and figure out how it works ... but don't jump going undoing an other editor's work-in-progress.
Another editor dd this a few weeks ago, and defended their meddling because there was no {{inuse}} tag. I know use {{inuse}} all the time, and hoped that it would be enough to deter disruptive meddling, but sadly not. Since I am the only substantive contributor, I have moved the article to my own userpsace ... but at this point I wonder whether even that will be enough to deter somebody from undoing my work as I create it :(
Yours, a rather pissed-off BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I understand and it is alright. Having a wider view, hopefully no one would still edit until there is an error on main space page. If you leave errors even on userpage there will be someone to edit it. Then we(not me, but it has happened) often receive messages like "I don't think you are even allowed to edit my userpage." Not really mattered. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 14:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
From [26]

@OccultZone: I was sorry to see that you simply deleted the discussion on your userpage, without archiving it.

My point still stands. You edited a page which was clearly tagged as {{inuse}}, within 60 seconds of the last edit by its creator and sole editor, to "fix" an error message generated because it was a work-in-progress. Any work-in-progress will have many glitches: grammatical, semantic, typographical, gaps in coverage, and possibly some technical glitches such as broken refs or malformed template usage. These are all things which should be cleaned up -- but the whole point of an {{inuse}} is to indicate that an editor is already actively at work on them. Once the inuse notice is stale or removed, by all means be WP:SOFIXIT, but not while the inuse notice is merely 60 seconds old.

Your final reply to me before you deleted our conversation shows no understanding of how your impatience to remove an error message disrupted aative content creation, let alone any sign of an intent to desist from that sort of disruption in future.

That's a decidedly uncollaborative approach, which impedes the creation and development of content, in pursuit of what?

I had hoped that your response might be to acknowledge that you had learnt from a good faith error, but instead it seems to be a determination to both continue this form of disruption, and remove the evidence of it from your talk page. Sooner or later, that sort of conduct will be challenged more firmly than I have done on this occasion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:14, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

I was only telling what I had experienced before. I archive conversations but later. I know I had bothered and it was not my intention, I really had no idea about the consequence, so I am sorry for that and I won't do it again with just anyone. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, OccultZone. That's very reassuring, and helps ease my feeling that content creation was being made into an obstacle course. Matter resolved :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I feel like I've learned a lot today. Thanks too. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Please take a look at Elsa Collin when you got time for it. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@BabbaQ: done. Avoid linking to profession, geolocation. Any link shouldn't be linked more than once, read WP:OVERLINKING and happy editing. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:56, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Promotional userpage

First, mark the page for speedy deletion with {{db-g11}}. Then report the user to WP:WPSPAM (although I might wait and see if they try to recreate it. Most spammers and promo accounts won't come back after we take action). Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Marked both, lets watch. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi again

Thanks for you assistance earlier and for the good advice. Just take a look at Brita von Horn as well. Thanks again. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Done and you are welcome. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 20:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Did you use Reflinks to create the citation templates? There were several mistakes in the citation templates, which I fixed in this edit. Please be sure you check the templates before you add them. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Cite4wiki's older version. I don't use reflinks, because of its "autogenerated1", and it messes up the current version. If it was reflinks it would've done same with every reference, I had checked a few when I was copying, I can't understand the words in Swedish that well so there is some potential in dating, I didn't thought of erasing. There is one URL I couldn't access so I added nothing other than the URL. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The Shapies hoax

Hi OccultZone; the tag doesn't refer to the existence of a show called The Shapies, rather the claim that there has been 250 new episodes and over ten years worth of production in the space of the last six months. The producer says not. If you want to take over the resolution, feel free. MartinSFSA (talk) 07:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

@MartinSFSA: It has to refer to the existence or else it is incorrect. If you have doubts about the content, you can just remove it. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, no thank you. The user has been warned, the content removed and replaced. Again, feel free to resolve it. MartinSFSA (talk) 07:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hoax has been removed. MartinSFSA (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


Have you seen the Shapies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArthurRead1234 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

noinclude

If you do an edit such as this, please remember to bracket the speedy tag with <noinclude>…</noinclude>. Otherwise it will cause all the transcluded pages to be put into CAT:CSD. But in this case it would have been better to leave the AfD nomination in place and close it yourself as withdrawn. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure and thanks for deleting. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Great Jones Street (novel) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:
  • | caption = "Great Jones Street" by Don DeLillo.]]<!--prefer 1st edition-->

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Great Soviet Encyclopedia may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:
  • |alt=Title page of the 3rd ed. (in Russian), 1st vol.]]
  • issued in 1981). Volume 24 is in two books, one of them being a full-sized book about the USSR) – all with about 21 million words,<ref>Kister, p. 365</ref> and the chief editor being [[Alexander

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Guess How Much I Love You may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:
  • |alt=Cover artwork of the original ''Guess How Much I Love You'']]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Revoked. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I think these links were intended to be there. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I can't recall the current consensus on this one. You may be right, you may be not. Is this covered by OVERLINKING? -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Any link, already existing in template is duplicate link. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Changing casing inside DEFAULTSORT

Morning. Defaultsort is case-insensitive. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

You may be using an older version of AWB or the module used is out-dated. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I am on comp, it has older version, can't update on laptop or run anymore like I had told on WT:AWB OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

This is a minor problem. Just check the script and see if you can fix it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Removing EngvarB and Use dmy dates

Last question for now! What is the reason of removing EngvarB and Use dmy dates in here and in other places? As far as I know the latter says "do not remove the template without valid reason, such as a determination the article uses or should use a different date format." Maybe I am missing something? -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

EngvarB and Use dmy dates never get outdated. There are there to stay forever. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

This is how bots and editor know which date format to use. Otherwise, editor woud be able to use American date format in UK-related pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Magioladitis: I did it only for certain pages, not all. I have removed it from the code and replaced[27] back. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks.-- Magioladitis (talk) 09:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

What kind of script/module is this that changes DEFAULTSORT in such a trivial way? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

On the original problem: When bots ran on unlinking dates were instructed not to remove links to xxxx year in yyyy. So please do not do it neither. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Added dash and repaired the default sort, there was multiple effect. You cannot capitalize a letter that is meant to remain uncaptalized in defaultsort. Pretty common though. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:45, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Date formats and AWB

revoked OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please do not change date formats with AWB, as you did at Sie Po Giok. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style: Retaining the existing variety and WP:DATERET, we should not change the date format unless there is a consensus for it. To do so wholesale using AWB violates Rules of use #2 and may end with AWB privileges being revoked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492: No idea about that, I had written the dates per WP:MOSNUM. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492: I just checked, the rule #2 has been discussed before too. It usually applies on those changes that are effecting text of the article, like BCE/BC or AD/CE. Since most of the articles follow the similar style of number and dates, many others have messed up with '25-5-2014', like that. You can revert if you see any change against the consensus, it shouldn't be repeated. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:05, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

This is not done by AWB's general fixes. AWB has routines to check British/American/International date variations. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:36, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes they aren't, they are done by users. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
This was done by you. You changed a date format in an Australian book in US date format. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Editors doing this should stop. If you see any others doing it please leave them messages. This is the English Wikipedia not the British nor the American Wikipedia. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Doing what ? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Date format should not change from dmy to mdy randomly. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:MOSNUM comma should be there. Problem was on the order of months and days. Restored. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Check WP:STRONGNAT. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

stop I came here after spotting this edit to Edward Wells (MP), in which you changed the dates to US format.

Per WP:STRONGNAT, that change was completely inappropriate to an article on a UK politician. It was also wrong per WP:DATERET and MOS:RETAIN. I noticed it only after I had done some changes of my own, which I had to revert when I reverted your edit, and then reinstate my edit.

I came to notify you of thus, and then found that other editors had already warned you about it.

This would be bad enough as a one-off change, but it is much worse to see it being done with AWB. WP:AWB#Rules_of_use instructs users to:

2. Abide by all Wikipedia guidelines, policies and common practices
3. Do not make controversial edits with it. Seek consensus for changes that could be controversial at the appropriate venue; village pump, WikiProject, etc. "Being bold" is not a justification for mass editing lacking demonstrable consensus. If challenged, the onus is on the AWB operator to demonstrate or achieve consensus for changes they wish to make on a large scale.
4. Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits

Thus edit broke all three of those rules. From the discussion above, it it is clear that this is not an isolated incident.

Since you are clearly breaching the terms of use of AWB, and have not given satisfactory responses to the requests by Magioladitis above. Please can you promptly confirms that you will:

A. Stop using AWB to change date formats
B. Refrain from any further use of AWB until you have reverted all the edits is which you have done this change

If you do even one more AWB edit without having given those two assurances, I will ask for admin action to block you until your AWB access is removed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Page didn't had engvar tag and I assured not doing it. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:10, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
The article didn't have a {{use dmy dates}} tag, but it shouldn't need one since the article is about a UK person. GoingBatty (talk) 02:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Stop using AWB

You deleted this the first time. It is meant to be up for discussion. If you do not want to discuss, then I'll remove the AWB bit. I want to hear from others. I want to improve your use of AWB so you can continue using it and use it better. Bgwhite (talk) 09:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I had got that, better not too late. Now after a huge discussion, this post can be used if there are any concern about delinking. With just anyone. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log)

I have to ask you to please stop using AWB until some problems are rectified.

  1. You are editing waaaay to fast. Today, there have been 8 edits a minute with upto 17 edits in one minute (~July 20 19:20z) the past few days. This is entirely too fast. It almost feels like you are doing a bot because AWB bots run at 7-8 edits a minute. At 8 edits a minute, there is no way you are looking at the article for mistakes done by AWB. At 17 edits a minute, you have to be using a bot or two different AWBs and just pressing save.
  2. You are doing way too much trivial stuff. [28], [29], [30] and [31] I've asked you many times not to do trivial edits.
  3. The above also removes the first instance of a wikilink. BMK has also mentioned this. There is no rule that wikilinks should be removed from ledes. In fact, ledes are one area specifically mentioned that should have wikilinks (WP:BUILD). This also goes against AWB rule #3
  4. You are being warned too many times of things going wrong. Crisco 1492's mention on dates. Magioladitis on many things. So, please stop using AWB for the time being. I'm about togo to bed and will let others talk. Bgwhite (talk) 08:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I never made 17 edits in one minute. But I've read before and it was under ARBcom that you are allowed to make as many edits you want to, there is no guidelines or rules against that. While you create wikiprojects you may even exceed 23 edits a minute. The editing restrictions include cosmetic changes or those edits that break things(templates, sentences, categories), both I haven't done. You can get bot only for a assigned task, it cannot be used for many tasks that quickly only your account can be used for that. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
1) @Crisco 1492: Bgwhite hasn't checked the edits he is talking about, check this edit, that he considered as 'trivial', which was full of blank fields and a wikilink to Penguin bird when it was the name of book publisher. Same with every other edit. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
2) Just like others this edit is not trivial, apart from dozens of blank fields, previous version of the page linked Penguin bird for a book publisher. [32] is correction of a wrong default sort. Haven't checked others but surely they have effect as I have even minor fixes disabled. [33] is not trivial either, it has effect on the page. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
3) Some people don't have idea about the linking, but if they know once that no FA or most of the GA links to unnecessary amount of professions, geolocations etc, removing them is improvement and done after numerous consensus on linking guidelines. A link should not be overlinked from start. So if they are not aware about the linking, and every single profession or location has been linked, what should be done? Maybe they can advise "don't do it", but usually that is same as saying "don't remove unreliable source". You read WP:LINKSTYLE? The last point, it discourages the overlinking. I don't revert back where editor still wants the links to profession, geolocations, but always done by someone else who is using any similar script. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
4) Magioladitis said not to remove dmy date or engvar tag, I have disabled that and date changes. But issue ends there, not sure what has to be done about it when the step has been already taken. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Defaultsort is case-insensitive, so edits such as this are not necessary. You may also want to use a more specific edit summary, and consider using the Find & Replace option to add replacements to the edit summary. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't think Occult Zone sees what is wrong with his/her editing... that's worrisome. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I think the main problem is the change of date style and removal of valid templates without giving a warning in edit summary and editing too fast not giving the chance for people to check why these mass changes happened. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Rectified too, disabled the template setting. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 09:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. There are 3-4 problems in question. It's good that you keep improving. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes I get the feeling you experiment with scripts/modules dine by other which in many cases could be outdated. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

One is with dating. If you are using the basic format of dates, like noted above that there are 2 types, per WP:TIES, dating is often hard to determine.
2nd is underlinking. Already addressed that, you can remove the link of those subjects that are easy to understand and anything else that is used in daily life.(knife, novel, book, etc) Same applies on infoboxes. Although I didn't knew about persondata, nor I have found any so I had opened a discussion on persondata today.
3rd is trivial edits, if you correct a default sort along with the dash, and if you remove blank fields and a link to Penguin for book publisher it is not considered as trivial change but a move to rectify a funny change. 80% of my edits have crossed 25 bytes and 99% crosses 10 bytes. None of them are cosmetic. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Sometimes it's a mixture of trivial edits and controversial edits. If I had to choose I would prefer if you did cosmetic changes using AWB's genfixes instead of changing dates, doing controversial unlinking etc. I think the main concern is that you may need to slow down since I discovered there was a problem after 750 edits. the problem with Persondata is not that big since there is no strict rule. But the problem with dates? It's a big no no. The problem is unlinking the lead section is also a problem. Not as serious as the dates one though. Why you have all this rush to edit so fast? Yesterday, you did a series of good edits. You have 100k edits. No reason to experiment with scripts written in 2009. I hope you take these as friendly advice. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Take under consideration that some scripts may have been used for very specific tasks and for very specific list of pages and not for general use. Sometimes it's also good asking the person who created the script before using it. They may have some advice for you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I fully agree, I am trying to make a code so that Engvar and Dmy can be applied on those that use American ones, until then I can stop changing dates. If anything is objectionable, it might be dmy, but not anything else really. I did few thousands of unlinking and I had complaint from only 1-2 on 2-3 pages. But I was actually correct about unlinking. Right now, on WT:LINK a person tried to get consensus for making multiple links of same thing as well as linking the useless links at least once, it is failing though, if you go through the archives, it has been established for years that you can unlink a useless link. If you run those script or manually check FA articles or half of the GA articles, you will find nothing to underlink. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
In unlinking the truth is somewhere in the middle. The script you use removes too much. It removed links in xxxx year in yyyy which as far as I recall it should not be removed from infoboxes. Moreover, mass unlinking the lead summary is not a good idea. There is not rule say do it. Getting a few complains also means nothing because nowhere mass unlinking of common terms was authorised. On the other hand mass unlinking of dates has consensus and was done by bot. Unlinking of terms without checking of edits does not sound safe. By editing that fast it's a sign that you do not really check your edits. This was remarked in many cases. You spend much time in Wikipedia. Make it worth! -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
WP:LINKSTYLE the last point. I might be repeating the previous suggestion, but you cannot link any link that has been provided on See also and template. You can ask John, these articles are not even B class, it is obvious that they have got issues. Many of them are badly written per WP:OPENPARA as well, but I have separate list for that. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Sometimes, if a page is linked in lead section then there is no need to be in see also section. And "cleanup" is not the best edit summary when doing something controversial and non-trivial. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
True and see also is only for those links that appears to fit nowhere but they have still got importance. But one of these pages had link like "he was an [[Irish|Irish]] an [[King|King]] who [[List of Irish kings|reigned]] during XXXX - XXXX" Though the link "List of Irish kings" was mentioned on see also. Such leads are not only contrary to linking guideline, but also for disambiguation. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Here's another example, on Five Plays, John had delinked multiple overlinks[34], but issue was still not resolved, I just made one.[35] Wouldn't doubt if overlinking may be observed even after multiple attempts. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
John said "If people challenge you, you should refer them to WP:OVERLINK which recommends not making such links."[36] Let us have a wider view. You see that it was incorrect to overlink since the policy of WP:Link, if some editor has incorrectly edited and added too many links, it must be rectified. If you have any opinion against it, please join the current discussion.[37] If passed, you cannot remove double links. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

It is interesting that this discussion started in May... -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

From my point of view, this means that bot and bot-like edits in either direction should be prohibited until there is a clear consensus. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Should've done under 1 week, but one person is trying hard to make WP:POINT on that section. How come those edits have to be prohibited? They are always ongoing as long as they are constructive in real sense. People do object but only the policy change can help.
Lets get this together. Since even Crisco 1492 had agreed that I wasn't wrong with the MOS:NUM, but he addressed that was no consensus and the page' style remained for ages. I wouldn't be correcting or changing on such pages. But as for overlinking, I've made over thousands of such changes, none of them have been reverted and there are only 2 people(including Bgwhite) who disagree, I am waiting on Bgwhite or anyone else who have been linked. But clearly the consensus is against the overlinking, like it has been re-informed above. Even AWB warns against the double linking, you can clear each of them, because even important subject has to be linked only once. Persondata was questioned by you, but I haven't touched that for almost 3 days now, apparently the consensus is to never link anything on persondata, lets look forward to it, discussion yet to be completed on WT:Persondata OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The opposite of overlinking is not unlinking all double links and all common terms. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I've highlighted the edits that I've made. If it is specific for readers it might double linked, but what? It can be predecessor, successor, etc. I never unlinked them. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
It was only a general comment. I am not in favour of overlinking but also not in favour or mass unlinking. Mass unlinking of years has been discussed and decided by the community. Then a bot was created. There was no POV pushing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I had discussed about Lightbot and other delinkers with a ARBcom member, they told about Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking#Remedies, included many restrictions then, but finally the policy had to be in favor of delinking after months. How many of these people are still working on delinking? Few. It is obvious that you wouldn't see any "block till assurance", because current policy contradicts the former rules. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

FindaGrave

Almost every type of possible discussion has been, at least for a user talk page. Consider having a input on WP:ELN#findagrave. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Could you explain why your bot deletes links to Find a Grave? They seem to have been acceptable so far. Kraxler (talk) 15:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

@Kraxler: It has been considered many times [38], [39] there were 10,000 links in 2010 and even now there are 10,000 links. I agree that many removed and many added, but they are contradictory to external links. Last time writing for a GA, it was told that findagrave must be removed. Don't look at small articles, try looking at the bigger ones such as Elvis Presley, Maya Angelou or even Frank Sinatra. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Still sounds odd to hear, especially from a user who has reviewer right on en.wiki. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492, OccultZone: AWB does not automatically remove FindAGrave. Can I see some diffs? OccultZone, did you massively remove links from pages? -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Rather hard to dig up diffs, even from a couple days ago, when there are 1500 edits a day. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Magiladitis, you know that fundamental settings of AWB won't even remove a blacklisted link. Yes I manually removed findagrave from those articles where you can find a linfarm or already 2-3 external links, checked them too, link only shows the picture of a grave and "Name(18xx-19xx)", but nothing more than that. I do that by hands too, many times I remove+replace wordpress sources too. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492 I already left him messages for date format and defaultsort. I have not noticed the FindAgrave thing. For blacklisted urls: AWB won;t let you save the page if there is a blacklisted url. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Added above. Be it 2010 or 2014(today), there are 10,000 links to findagrave and only the wikiproject of findagrave spammed those links, most of them. So you cannot find even a few links. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @Magioladitis: Short of having a tool which can search all of Occult's contributions quickly, I can't provide diffs, but I would be surprised if it wasn't done while browsing with AWB (likely with a script). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes you can create and add script to AWB's module' feature or just press Ctrl+M. It can be also done for talk pages. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Crisco 1492 I agree. It's clear that AWB combined with a script is used. As I instructed above third-party modules/scripts maybe outdated and/or working for a limited scope. I adviced OccultZone not to edit that fast and not use third party tools without first instructing their creator. I am also unable to review that many edits every day. Today I spent my day commenting here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Re Magioladitis - Well, AWB is not exactly a bot, but since the question was asked above whether OccultZone just presses "save" without checking, you may permit me a bit of poetic license.
If not 'exactly' then you probably meant to say that AWB is approximately a bot? Still wrong. Sorry but findagrave has been thoroughly checked by number of senior editors and it is better for a encyclopedia to remove spam links. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Re OccultZone: The abovementioned discussions have not arrived at any consensus. Find a Grave is certainly not a reliable source, and should not be used as an inline citation. However it is a source, and has been generally accepted to be added as an external link. The reliability can be judged by a photo of the tombstone, the mention of the burial plot, or images and original newspaper clippings appended to the entry there. That such a link may be unnecessary for a GA (because there are better sources for the same info), does not warrant deletion from short bios of not so well known people where info is hard to come by. To say "This or that is not good for X, so we will remove it from Y" contradicts the rationale explained in Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Every single article should be considered on its own merits. I'll re-instate the Find a Grave link to any of the several thousand pages on my watchlist where you delete it, if I think the link is appropriate. Kraxler (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Kraxler: Findagrave should not be added to any external links. WP:Other stuff exists is an essay and it doesn't apply here, you cannot add spam link to just any article. I suggest you to open a conversation on WT:External links before you reinstate the links that were solely added by the members from the same project. You can consider replacing, but I hope it has more than just one picture of grave and a one liner. I will probably open new discussion on external links. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:36, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
OccultZone deleted it, and I re-instated it, at Francis B. Spinola and Robert B. Van Valkenburgh, giving edit summary AWB delinking. Please show me a link to a guideline ot the MoS that says "Find a Grave should not be added to external links" verbatim or at least very similar. Kraxler (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I can't show you "a link to a guideline ot the MoS that" forbids wordpress links either. But again you can remove that link as improvement and there won't be any objection, because we've been through that many times. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Please do not mix up apples and oranges. I asked you to show me a link to a guideline ot the MoS that says "Find a Grave should not be added to external links, and just don't change the subject. I'd accept consensus, but your personal opinion is as irrelevant as my own here. I warn you not to edit war. You can start a new discussion (which will end without consensus) if you like. By the way, the links were manually added by the creators of the articles, not by any Find a Grave spammers. I've added many myself, for the abovementioned reason, and I've never edited Find a Grave. Kraxler (talk) 16:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Kraxler: Some more archives for you,[40], [41], discarded as spam link and fansite. Dougweller asked that the link should be blacklisted. So I advise you to just want to remove findagrave.com link or just replace with other appropriate link. You can probably find many better than this website. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Your archives mentioned above are just short statements of opinion, not even a discussion of the merits of the links. The question is: Has the link been blacklisted? A simple yes or no would suffice, if yes show me a link. Kraxler (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Those archives are enough for affirming that this link must not be used. So you will wait till blacklisting? It is not necessary that only those links should be avoid that are blacklisted. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Those archives are not enough for affirming that this link must not be used. Those archives fall even short of a discussion of the subject. I take it, your answer means that it is currently not blacklisted, ergo its use is free for anybody who deems it appropriate. Come back when consensus has been established otherwise. In the meanwhile I urge you to refrain from edit-warring. By the way, please show me links to the many better sites that could substitute Find a Grave, that would be a real help. Kraxler (talk) 17:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Kraxler: Maybe not enough for you but still enough for those who don't keep them even on new stub articles, you've been told enough times now. 1 edit is not edit warring, read WP:EW properly. You can wait, whenever there will be concerning discussion about this website I will surely inform you first. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Please refrain from considering something for you or for me or for those. Policy and guidelines, after consensus has been reached, is binding for everybody. Please read WP:Consensus to get to know how consensus is achieved. Kraxler (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I know about that so you can less worry about it and think more about the credibility of a spam link, if there is any. Consider reading WP:ELPEREN#Find-a-Grave, WP:ELNO#EL1. Thanks. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Kraxler Find a grave is not on the spam blacklist. Links can be deleted from the blacklist and be fine to use. Find A Grave is an acceptable external link, but I wouldn't use it as a reference. Blogs and forums can be used as external links too. Removing Find a Grave links is not being done per any rule or consensus. Continuing to remove the links while discussing can be viewed as edit warring. Bgwhite (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
You've actually repeated what he was saying. Although I've referred to WP:ELPEREN#Find-a-Grave, WP:ELNO#EL1 which is probably enough to acknowledge that it shouldn't be used as external link, but if someone still wants to, I will look for consensus on appropriate noticeboard. Later. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:39, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@Kraxler:. No. WP:ELPEREN#Find-a-Grave says "rarely" not never. A link showing the headstone and the exact location where a person is buried would be one of those rare cases. WP:ELPEREN#Find-a-Grave even says "...such as valuable images and location information of graves." There is no way to arbitrarily delete any find-a-grave without knowing the context and what the link consists of. You are arbitrarily deleting the link. Same thing goes for IMDb. One cannot arbitrarily delete IMDb refs even though WP:ELPEREN says "Generally no"
Arbitrarily deleting is the point of my comments. There is absolutely no way you can know if this is or isn't an acceptable case while doing 8 edits a minute. You cannot say all Find a Grave sites must be removed. Bgwhite (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree about arbitarily deleting, but all webpages don't have it. Only some have. The diffs Kraxler had linked were before 24 hours. What if you can check all pages first and then edit them? Or specifically target those who have used a spam link. IMDB is highly accepted for a external link because it is not a non-affiliated spam link. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
You may be interested in the documentation at Template:Find a Grave. The template has over 17,000 transclusions. GoingBatty (talk) 01:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Already mentioned it twice. Yes it was spammed by a number of members of findagrave wikiproject. Even if one may disagree with its removal, it doesn't change that you are usually told to remove this link, after a while. Find me one FA or even GA that use this link. You never will because it is discarded as fansite and spam link. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I must be blind. I reread this section twice and don't see any reference to the documentation at Template:Find a Grave. GoingBatty (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
2nd comment, "there were 10,000 links in 2010 and even now there are 10,000 links." OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Urdu issue

Resolved. Urdu or any other concerning language can be added but it would better to backup with a reliable source.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Disruptive editing on Andhra Pradesh page, see this edit1, edit2--Vin09 (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Urdu has no connection with Andhra Pradesh, maybe before 1948 there was. But no more. It is not really disruptive. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
6 districts of AP are having considerable amout of muslim population and it states it as a second official language. Read 3. Urdu as a Second Official Language reference--Vin09 (talk) 17:33, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Written by a few people who have entitled themselves with a 'p.h.d' degree but it is not really impressive. Cannot be verified. It is a fansite link and not a reliable source. You should avoid using it and if you have found that link somewhere on en.wiki's article space you should remove immediately.
Even if there are 6 districts, it may make some point. But my main motive was to suggest you that those edits are not really disruptive. As per the government site, no official documents are translated to Urdu. Only Telugu or Hindi. If you want to add Urdu you can, but please arrange better source. I am not saying that it is going to be challenged right now but it is a lot better to add now.OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
not a disruptive, hence changed the section title, but why I added is I haven't added it, it existed from long time, after bifurcation, people started removing considering the majority urdu speakers in Hyderabad. It is not newly added, it existed from many months. I'll not add unless a proper reference is found.--Vin09 (talk) 17:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Sounds better. If you want any more help just post on WT:INB, pretty much you won't need a WP:DR after that. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reviewing Interior reconstruction

I am helping to encourage editors to improve articles to which they have edited or created recently. In regard to the article: Interior reconstruction, the following assessment has been placed on the page:

*{{multiple issues}}
*{{copy edit|date=June 2014}}
*{{technical|date=June 2014}}
*{{lead missing|date=June 2014}}
*{{Orphan|date=June 2014}} }}

Feel free to remove this post from this talk page if you would like. Since you have shown an interest in this article's improvement I thought you might like to have this information.

Regards,

bpage (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I will and don't add page issue templates anywhere other than the article space. The page sends itself to protected categories and it can be harmful for those who use category. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

AWB

Revoked. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I put up an ANI message. Bgwhite (talk) 07:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Replied. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requesting AWB access in future

Per [42] it has been agreed that you should start a discussion at WP:AN when you wish to request access back to AWB. I would suggest you should ask an uninvolved editor familiar with AWB for advice on when you should consider placing your request. Any request will involve you demonstrating you have learned lessons from today's regrettable incident and will expect you to show clear evidence of understanding and knowledge moving forward, so I would encourage you to read and re-read AWB and other relevant, applicable policies and guidelines. Nick (talk) 18:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see that this happened to you, OccultZone. I have been following your edits, and adding the Books and Novels wikiproject tags to the articles you edit (you would be surprised how many of them were not in a wikiproject). I will admit that it was hard to keep up with you sometimes (especially yesterday!) but it was worthwhile to do because I think it is worthwhile to include articles to the appropriate wikiprojects, and you have been making it easy for me to find them. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 20:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Last time when I had checked there were more than 180,000 articles without wikiproject. Some of them have got a talkheader but no discussion. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 22:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
You have a potentially good article here on Gehoon kheri, keep up the good work. bpage (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
You have a potentially good article here on Gehoon kheri, keep up the good work. bpage (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For your constant work on fixing image parameter in book pages. Magioladitis (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Carriearchdale_abusing_her_talk_page_while_blocked.. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 02:02, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Moved your comments

FYI I moved your comments at AN/I (see here) because they seemed to apply to the main section and not the subordinate one and I didn't want them getting lost if that is resolved/hatted independently. Revert it or let me know if I messed up in doing so. Protonk (talk) 03:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

@Protonk: Looks better now and thanks for notifying me. ;-) OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Elsa Collin

Gatoclass (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Your comment

Pls have a glance at this page Vin09 12:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Commented there. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

AFD closure

Hiya OccultZone,
I wanted to apologize for closing your AFDs, I didn't assume bad faith with you whatsoever I simply assumed "every afd should be policy-based", I admit I was wrong and I apologize,
Anyway have a nice day,
Regards, –Davey2010 • (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

@Davey2010: It is all good  :-) OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Visakhapatnam City Bus Routes

Visakhapatnam City Bus Routes, is this article needed?--Vin09 (talk) 15:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Not really, it can be merged to Visakhapatnam. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Brita von Horn

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

WPBIO fixes

Maybe you are interested for this page: User:Magioladitis/WPBiography. Especially, Category:Biography articles without listas parameter has a huge backlog. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:42, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Nice collection! I am currently involved in 3 backlogs including Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, some 200 entries are added every day to this category. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

ArthurRead1234 => Marshall1234

Hi. An investigation into sockpuppetry by ArthurRead1234 has been opened at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ArthurRead1234. MartinSFSA (talk) 11:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@MartinSFSA: Makes sense, names are same. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 12:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to make of it -- the vandalism was very akin to fan fiction, which is the new account's other article of interest. MartinSFSA (talk) 12:08, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Minor barnstar
Thanks for checking talk pages for innappropriate class ratings, then politely pinging somebody about them. Folklore1 (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Robban Andersson

The DYK project (nominate) 21:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Nicknames

Some towns and cities are having nicknames coined by some users, do they really need to be officially recognized like famous names - twin cities for Hyderabad-Secunderabad, pink city-Jaipur etc. Users are adding their own creative names.--Vin09 (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

They don't have to be recognized. Per WP:V, every nick name will require a reliable source. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

M Tracy Hunter

M Tracy Hunter use two id's User_talk:Hkswatts so what about that bro? --Rajvir Singh RandhawatalkIlovethewikis — Preceding undated comment added 06:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

What is the issue? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Review

On Kolakaluru page.--Vin09 (talk) 15:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 16:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Älgen Stolta

Please take a look at that article. Thanks :)--BabbaQ (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Merge view

On this page.--Vin09 (talk) 18:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Infobox help

Please help in defining the correct meaning for Settlement type option in Infobox. Some write it as Municipality, Corporation and some mention it as City, Town or Metro. Which is correct? What is the exact definition?--Vin09 (talk) 19:21, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

On which page you are going to add, you got the link? OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 02:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Flavio Chigi (1631-1693)

Sorry! Meant to tap "thank" but was on the iPad and my fat little finger tapped "rollback" instead! I think I've done that to you before, too! Anyway, "thanks". Ha ha. St★lwart111 07:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment

About settlement type On talk pages of Talk:Delhi, Talk:Mumbai, Talk:Kolkata.--Vin09 (talk)

Review

Tenali mandal.--Vin09 (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 18:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Mastan Vali

Mastan Vali, is about a living person, place an appropriate tag if necessary.--Vin09 (talk) 09:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Technically it has got BLP parameter, enough for now. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

infobox standard

Why did you revert my !vote? And why is it a warning? I clearly specified why I thought the merger was a good idea. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I had agreed before this message. Check again. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:16, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, thanks. I got that orange bubble, and responded here. I didn't get a new orange bubble as I was checking things. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Page view

List of theaters in Hyderabad, India, is this page meets wiki standards?--Vin09 (talk) 10:44, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

It has some notability, other similar articles include List of theaters in Ponce, Puerto Rico. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Villages

Indian villages are classified into country->district->mandals. For writing mandal name, do we need to use parts_type or sub_division3 in infobox for writing them?--Vin09 (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

| subdivision_type =
| subdivision_name =
| subdivision_type1 =
| subdivision_name1 =
| subdivision_type2 =
| subdivision_name2 =
Those can be used. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:28, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:OccultZone/Archive_5&oldid=1208805572"