User talk:MSGJ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
2004-7 2008 2009

Contents 1 ANI 2 Automatic signing 3 Re: {{stub/doc}} 3.1 Stubs again 4 AfC statistics bot 5 move request 6 Help, please 7 Question 8 Block 9 Hey 10 AfC 11 Your Userbox edit 12 SLJCOAAATR 4 6 8 15 16 23 42 108 305 316 13 Johan Robeck listed as a Stub 14 Re: Custom importance 15 Regina Rheda entry 16 WPBannerMeta substcheck 17 Rheda reply three, prize data 18 Rheda verification 4 19 Template:WikiProject Turkey 20 Dates section at MOSNUM 21 Rheda 6 22 Having fun 23 Infobox/row 24 rheda verification 7 25 AfD nomination of DreamHost 26 Colours 27 Talkback 28 Cats for WP 29 WikiProject Arab World tags 30 Shells (On your Talk Page for a while) 31 Error when using your "New Message" at the template at the top of this page 32 cat class 33 Re: Go on 34 {{asbox}} 35 Featured stubs 36 Jackson 37 Template:WikiProject Citizendium Porting 38 Talkback 39 Your note 40 S-new 41 Alaibot 42 German pin maps 43 Lol 44 Cat class

[edit] ANI

Hello, MSGJ. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Distruptive_editing.2C_POV_pushing_and_sockpuppetry. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddst1 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 21 March 2009

Please archive this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic signing

Hey, I just noticed your update to my user page. Thanks for that. I'm going to intentionally not sign this and see what happens. -- Keepscases —Preceding undated comment added 18:37, 2 April 2009.

Please archive this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: {{stub/doc}}

Hi Martin - I've nominated {{stub/doc}} for deletion at WP:SFD. I've done this not so much through personal feelings towards it (though I do feel that there are strong reasons for not having one), but more for procedural reasons, as the same document has been deleted in the past. It will also be a good opportunity to debate whether such a /doc page is a good idea or not. Grutness...wha? 00:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I've commented there now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Stubs again

Hi MSGJ - i've replied to your comments at WP:SFD - by the way, please don't convert templates to asbox format - it's generally hated at WP:WSS, as it makes more work for us. Several members of WP:WSS are trying to remove that format whenever it appears, so adding it isn't helping. Grutness...wha? 02:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Replied again. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfC statistics bot

Hi. Before running this by the other folks at WT:WPAFC, I want to get your opinion on this bot idea. You mentioned something similar to it here, and I added on to your general suggestion. Below is a basic summary:

The bot will function by retrieving all current pages in Category:Pending Afc requests, and do some calculations based on them. It will produce a chart listing all of the pending submissions (submissions using {{AFC submission/pending}}) that would list the submission name, creating author, time since it was created, and a few other optional things, such as size in bytes, or if it was previously declined. It would have a separate chart for submissions on hold (submissions using {{AFC submission/onhold}}), that would list the above information, as well as the reason the article is on hold, the user that put it on hold, and a note if the article was on hold for more than 48 hours (generally the threshold between allowing a submission to stay on hold, and denying it because the requested changes haven't been made). It could also compile useful statistics for declined submissions, such as the most common declining criteria (ranked in order), the percent of submissions that are accepted, and maybe even a graph of submissions over the past month. The bot would auto-run every hour by updating a page, maybe something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Statistics, and that page could be transcluded (in part, probably) to the main WPAFC page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation.

For a little more detail, I've created a collection of sample charts that the bot would compile at User:EarwigBot/Temp/AfC StatisticsBot. If you think this has any chance of being a useful bot, please tell me, and I'll post a note on WT:WPAFC so other users can weigh in on the concept and refine it. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 03:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, nice. Let me have a think about it and I'll reply properly, probably tomorrow. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, why not post it to WT:WPAFC and you'll maybe get a better and quicker response? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] move request

Hi, just wondering if you could move the Wikiproject Punk music template to WikiProject Punk music. The destination already exists so I can't do it myself. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

You should be able to, because it's a simple redirect. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. Now I need to turn that link blue, but I can't find anything relevant ... I'm sure that's the common term for a redirect with one entry in its history. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

So I can. I didn't think I could move to a page that already existed. -- WOSlinker (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Help, please

Hi, I'm not sure whether you can help me, but I would probably help me even if you just had a look. I've tried to edit Template:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/sandbox such that |bycountry = yes add the Taskforce (tf_1). However, trying it out in a lot of combinations, etc. yields nothing on User:Grandiose/sandbox. Thanks, Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Why are we keeping the article Cewen nan, I am renominating it under db-bio as no notability is established whatsoever and no sources either. Do you disagree? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

The speedy deletion was declined by User:Backslash Forwardslash. Please take it up with him/her if you like. Regards, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe I do not need to when the content is obviously unsourced and does nothing to establish notability. May I ask what in this one sentence article makes you think it is Includable? under the rationale he is notable beczause he is a professormeans I can start writing meaningles articles about my Community college professors, no? I'm not going to only illustrating that this appears to be nothing but a selfpraise page that brings nothing to wikipedia. Perhaps you disagree, buit I read backslash fowardslash reasoning, subject claims to be notable. remember wp:bold Hell in a Bucket (talk) 14:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I would agree with you: being a professor is not a claim of notability. (If it has said "a pioneering professor" or such like, then it might be a different story.) However admins should not revert other admin's actions without discussion (it's called wheel warring) and so the best place for this issue is User talk:Backslash Forwardslash. By repeatedly replacing the tag, you run the risk of being accused of edit warring, so not a good idea. Hope this helps. Oh and by the way, any editor can remove speedy deletion tags, except the author of the article. In fact you are encouraged to remove them if you think that the article does not meet the speedy deletion criteria. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, it seems we agree that the person is not notable, I did consuklt an outside party and was suggested to add the AFD tag which I hope i snot taken for edit war violition as it is not my intent only to follow the appropriate protocol advised to me. Either wway I can be wrong, it has happened mopre then once. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I would agree with you that Mr. Nan is not notable, and does not deserve a Wikipedia page. That said, the article is not speedy-able. If you read speedy criterion A7 you will see that "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source." That was the case here. The page had said that Nan was a professor at Tsinghua University. You may not take that as a claim to notability, but IMO admins should avoid IAR speedy-ing an article - particularly when dealing with a field that doesn't 'advertise' every detail about themselves on Google. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 21:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. In my opinion this fits A7 perfectly. Being a professor is not a claim of significance in my opinion, so maybe you are being slightly consevative here. Anyway, better too careful than too hasty, agreed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree people aren't required to share every detail about himself. My main interezt was that we had prrof this person existed and was notable. It will work out in the end either way I won't stress it. Still new here after all. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 21:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

it seems we do have consensus on the Afd can someone delete the page? Is that appropriate? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done. We got there in the end. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. No harm was done taking it to AfD. :) \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Block

I did but its not working —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShanRaj 10 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you can post here then you are obviously not blocked anymore :) Welcome back — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Can you check the Philippines talk page again? The bottom sections on religion and the revolution. Thanks!!--23prootie (talk) 09:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You'll need to establish a consensus before I can do that. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I found two earlier versions of the Philippines article ([[1]] and [[2]]) the show more coverage on the Philippine revolution than what is seen now on the article. Since there is no discussions on the talk page about that content, it can be nferred that such information is generally accepted as relevant. Besides the Template for the History of the Philippines clearly show the Katipunan and the Philippine Revolution there.--23prootie (talk) 03:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfC

To be perfectly honest, because I was new and didn't understand the idea of backchecking the article. Will not happen again. MacMed^talk_stalk 10:58, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no worries! Feel free to help out if you have any free time ;) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your Userbox edit

Hi, your edit to Template:Userbox apparently broke it. See my user page for an example. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Apologies, I've undone my edit for now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:32, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy action! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] SLJCOAAATR ^{4 6 8 15 16 23 42 108 305 316}

Quite alright. Feel free to have them deleted. I no longer edit here, and have no use for those anymore. SLJCOAAATR ^{4 6 8 15 16 23 42 108 305 316} 00:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Johan Robeck listed as a Stub

I have noticed your recent edits to Johan Robeck. You have added the {{stub}} template. This is fine and your contributions are appreciated. But in future, to aid in the expansion of articles, such as this one, please use a more specific stub template. A list of stub templates can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/List of stubs. Thank you. -- Patchy1^(talk) 10:39, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Custom importance

Thanks. Good to know for future reference, although in the case of {{WikiProject Video games}} I think we're leaning towards changing uses of importance=No to importance=Low. —TKD [talk][c] 10:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Regina Rheda entry

TRYING TO RESPOND TO YOUR DOUBTS. THIS ENTRYFOLLOWS PUBLIC STATEMENTS ABOUT THE AUTHOR AT AN EVENT AT BROWN UNIVERSITY, BRAZILIAN LITERATURE IN AN INTER AMERICAN CONTEXT, MAY 2009.

CATEGORY: "Creative professional WP:AUTHOR ... authors, ... filmmakers, " The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors. // PER CRITICAL RECEPTION IN BRASIL AND RECENT ATTENTION IN USA The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. / ORIGINATOR OF ANIMAL RIGHTS LIT The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews./ YES THERE IS A CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY, AS CITED

STYLE POINTS WILL BE ADDRESSED NOW TOO.

OBLIGED AGAIN.

SIGNED Charlesaperrone (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'll reply to you over at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Regina Rheda. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WPBannerMeta substcheck

There are just under 70 protected banner templates that need substcheck adding to them. Just wondering if you fancy doing it or I may have to go mad with the {{editprotected}}.

There are also about 30 protected banner templates that could do with ASSESSMENT_LINK adding. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I'll see if I can get AWB to do it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I've done all the substchecks now I think. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It looks that way. It's actually less than 30 for the ASSESSMENT_LINK, more like 20. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Gosh you're a hard task-master. Okay I'll get down to them now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Y All done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rheda reply three, prize data

Please let me know if the following is what you are seeking. I can work on the formatting after content is approved. thanks again

In English:

General information with a link to the Wikipedia Brazilian entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabuti_Award

Preface of Rheda's translated works (University of Texas Press) which mentions the Jabuti award: http://books.google.com/books?id=l7FEXHfSVdwC&pg=PR8&lpg=PR8&dq=Regina+Rheda+Jabuti+prize&source=bl&ots=y_mECK8uIx&sig=Icm7z0GY_jLac3xPkN1oVEUVieQ&hl=en&ei=mQQ0SsmcGYTEM5ij-YkK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

Another Brazilian who lives in US who won the Jabuti and (in another categry): Marcelo Gleiser SEE SECOND LINE BELOW THE TITLE "HONORS AND AWARDS": http://www.dartmouth.edu/~physics/faculty/gleiser.html

In Portuguese:

General information: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prêmio_Jabuti_de_Literatura

List of award winners of Jabuti: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Lista_de_ganhadores_do_Prêmio_Jabuti

Charlesaperrone (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, I've copied your reply to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Regina Rheda. Shall we talk there, to keep the conversation in one place? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rheda verification 4

RE: No, not really. The Wikipedia links are not what we call reliable. What we need is a reliable source which verifies that she has won this award. This could be a newspaper article, or an official website of the organisation. English is preferred, but Portguese would be fine too. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello Martin. The website for Jabuti began in 2000! and does not backsell. In Portuguese, I have a book of the history of the prize which I can cite to you, or even SCAN the relevant page. Also I can scan some news from infancy of Internet. (I found one link of an old article but it is about a different book and only mentions nthe prize en passant). Finally, the link to UT press book in English goes to the introduction which, as the my earlier descriptor indicated, does mention the prize. That should be "reliable", no? Let me know if you can receive scans to be able to verify visually or just go with Prof. Dunn's mention. Obliged. This time I remember to sign. Charlesaperrone (talk) 21:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:WikiProject Turkey

Hi! I've uploaded a new logo for WikiProject Turkey but I couldn't add it to the template. Because it has a protection. Could you add File:WikiProject-Turkey-Logo.svg to it? Could you also add File:Nuvola Turkish flag.svg as portal image? Thanks! --Turkish Flame ^☎ 09:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Dates section at MOSNUM

Thanks for your edit and quick response. Could you remove the old template, located underneath the autoformatting section? Thanks. Also, I'm going to discuss the possibility of adding a footnote to MOSNUM that gives examples of date delinking that don't qualify as mass date delinking. If consensus is for it, there will be another edit request soon. Thanks again, Dabomb87 (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you have time, could you find a way to neatly fit a footnote into the box? Your expertise would be much appreciated. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done. I don't think there will be any problem with putting a footnote reference in the box. Do you suspect otherwise? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rheda 6

Martin- I am too on the road. Dori in your absence moved my submission from pending to rejected because of time elapsed. She referred me back to you to answer the doubts about verification in my previous message. Ill await your reply. No big rush. Happy holiday. 201.17.98.51 (talk) 19:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a look shortly. Don't worry about it being declined because you can always resubmit it when the required changes have been made. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Having fun

Glad to see your making use of the chess Quality and Importance template. Making it useable for all projects is a great idea. I look forward to when another project have it in use. I came up with the idea on wikibooks a year or so ago because there is no bot available to update the figures, so thought PAGESINCATEGORY would do just fine. SunCreator (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox/row

I'm wondering, {{#ifeq:{{{name|}}}|{{#titleparts:{{PAGENAME}}|1}}|example}}, what does this line of code?, by the way, could you get rid of all whitespaces and all other stuff. Maybe, probably the code could look like this:

Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 05:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll reply over there shortly. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:08, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, wait a minute. Why does the label parameter use a <th>, shouldn't it be a <td>? It is suposed that <th>s are limited to table headers, and the label parameter is not a header. But changing this, will put a normal font-weight to the text of the labels. So, it should have a font-weight:bolder just before the . Does this sound right to you?

--Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 19:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there anything wrong with using th there? It seems to be working correctly without any undesired side-effects. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know th is working well and also I know they have the same output, but th was desined to be used in the headers and the label of {{Infobox}} are not headers. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 23:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] rheda verification 7

Martin- My host's son has just arrived from Manchester to show off his new IMAC 24 inch screen and all. I am still striving to figure out the different channels in Wiki here. I added the Prize reference if that helps; info from previous post still stands too. Thnks. Chas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesaperrone (talk • contribs) 16:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of DreamHost

An article that you have been involved in editing, DreamHost, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DreamHost_(2nd_nomination). Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Judas278 (talk) 17:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Colours

Hi. I don't like the colours on the Australia map. Red and orange look almost identical on my monitor. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I didn't come up with the colour scheme, so I'll bring up your point with the others, who are also maintaining the maps. (Graeme Bartlett and Markhurd) See if we can decide on a new scheme. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 04:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

multichill (talk) 11:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cats for WP

I'm not sure what you mean. I clicked on the create category link and the categories were created. The instructions aren't very clear and this is the first WikiProject I've created. What exactly needs doing? Mjroots (talk) 16:52, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

If you look what I did here you should be able to work it out. Otherwise please ask again. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:55, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

OK. I think I've done them all. Mjroots (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Arab World tags

Hey MSGJ! I noticed you recently edited Template:WikiProject Arab world. I'm not sure if you made a mistake or if this problem existed before, but in any case do you know how to fix an issue that I noticed with the tag? The issue is that the project tag doesn't display the importance parameter of an article, but instead just shows the class parameter twice i.e. B-class B-class. See Talk:Izzat Darwaza, Talk:Gamal Abdel Nasser, or other articles within the project scope. Thanks. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, as far as I can tell, that template has never supported importance ratings. There are none of the categories and there is no mention of it in the documentation either. Of course, if the project decides that it wants them then it is easy to add. The lower "B" that you are seeing in the template is the B-class checklist. This was also in the template before (which was mainly copied from Military History I think!) but can be easily removed. Let me know if I can help with it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, if you could help out that would be wonderful. I think the project certainly needs importance categories (I don't know why we didn't have them in the first place, that always puzzled me). Also, if you know how to remove the B-class checklist please do, it would be very appreciated ;) Of course do this whenever you are not busy, I would hate to bother you. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the checklist. I've also enabled importance ratings on the /sandbox version. If you go to that page it shows the categories which need to be created. As soon as this is done, we can synchronise with the live version. There are also several other features which don't seem to be used:

• A-class review
• Peer review
• needs-infobox parameter
• auto parameter

I have removed these for now. They can easily be added back if necessary. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I will look at the sandbox version and apply it to the actual template. As for the other features, I don't think they are necessary, but I will ask other project members what they think. Thanks so much for all your help. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shells (On your Talk Page for a while)

I see your point about the show button and, although I never bothered to use it and will never use it again, I agree that the current {{WPB}} version is ugly. It is also counter-productive. I think the idea should be to facilitate discussion about how to improve the article and I think the uncollapsed project banners intrude on that.

If it is possible, could you change the programming of {{WPB}} so that it calls {{WPBS}} with |collapsed= set to "yes"? I think that will give us the best of all possible worlds and leave the impossible for others.

It will also allow for a discussion to be opened at the Project Council, guided by the Delphi technique in its worst incarnation, as to when each should be used. A guideline or policy should result from the discussion.

Does that make sense? If so, can the necessary changes to {{WBS}} be made quickly?

Thank you. JimCubb (talk) 05:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a sensible proposal and I would fully support it. I suggest one of us starts a thread on Template talk:WPB to make sure others are happy with it. I have one comment though. There are many instances of {{WPB}} on pages with small numbers of banners. Just one example: Talk:Harlesden has two banners on it. To me it seems excessive to fully collapse the shell when there are so few banners there. For example

This page is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WPUKgeoUK geography articles WikiProject UK geography (Rated Start-Class) United Kingdom portal v • d • e This user falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.  Start  This page has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles WikiProject London (Rated Start-Class, Mid-importance) London portal v • d • e This page is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  Start  This page has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

only takes up a couple more lines than

This page is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.

UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WPUKgeoUK geography articles WikiProject UK geography (Rated Start-Class) United Kingdom portal v • d • e This user falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.  Start  This page has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles WikiProject London (Rated Start-Class, Mid-importance) London portal v • d • e This page is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  Start  This page has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

So would you be happy to convert WPB to WPBS if there are, say, 4 or fewer banners on a page? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that the original limits were good. One or two banners don"t need a shell, three through five benners get an un-collapsed shell, six and up get a collapsed shell. However, I would not remove any existing shells, such as the one above, but I would un-collapse any like that.

I believe in cleaning up my own messes rather than rely on someone or something else to clean up after me. Once it sunk it that I was going to type the same thing over and over I just set "{{WPBS}}" in a text file that I keep open so that it can be recopied it needs be. I have found talk headers one-third of the way down the page but not recently.

I saw that you had put something on Template talk:WPB. I cannot imagine anyone not supporting it.

JimCubb (talk) 19:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Error when using your "New Message" at the template at the top of this page

I was trying to leave you a message regarding another matter and discovered the link (to post a new message) at the top doesn't work. Seems like the {{message}} template is broken, it complains about having a | in the URL and there also seem to be a couple rogue }} brackets at the end. Looks like it's a small fix that just need the | changed to a ? right after the username, and the 2 }} brackets removed at the end. I still don't know how how to do this, nor do I think I'd even have permissions to do so yet.

I added a section to the {{message}} discussion regarding this including the proposed fix I mentioned above, hopefully someone will get to it soon. MiloKral (talk) 17:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's been fixed now. Well done for spotting that. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, my real question was regarding your suggestion on the WP_Talk:User_Page:

You're right, it's a confusing mess and a lot of that could probably be trimmed. I suggest you go ahead and improve it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I see that the page is semi-protected, so I can't as of yet make my proposed changes. I'll do so if they haven't been implemented by the time I get autoconfirmed (or if I can get some kind of temporary edit permission for that page in the meantime?) --Milo | MiloKral (talk) 16:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, there's no technical way you can get autoconfirmed any quicker. I would consider lowering the protection on the page to let you work on it, but you're nearly halfway to the 4 days now so it's probably not worth it. You can always work on a copy of the page in your user area, and then synchronise it when you get autoconfirmed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] cat class

Hi there! I'm just a little confused, since cat class automatically adds the categories, and I did delete the manually added FL-Class category that was put there by someone else, wasn't the edit actually necessary? I think you may have reversed the logic in your answer, because I removed the manual cat BECAUSE the cat class template was already there and already categorizing the page, so the manually added cat was unnecessary, and should have been removed, as I did. Just wanted to clarify my point!! And yes, not only do I have a lot to learn in order to be an admin, it also must be very time-consuming. I really don't need another full-time job!! :) --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Is the sortkey added there by a bot? So the sortkey and manually added cat should be left there, or not?? Please clarify! --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll reply on your talk page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought so!! That's okay, I'll forgive you. :) --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Go on

Hi. I'm mostly concerned about spending too much time inside (again) this summer! However, if in the future you would still like to nominate me, I'll let you know when I'm ready. Thanks again for the vote of confidence. ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, sure thing. Enjoy the summer! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{asbox}}

Please stop changing stub templates to asbox. As another editor has pointed out in an edit summary reverting one of your changes, "Rv to last versiom by Grutness. WP:WSS has repeatedly ruled out the option of using metatemplates for stub template purposes. " Asbox causes far more problems for WP:WSS than it is worth, and doesn't do the required job in all circumstances anyway. this has been repeatedly debated at WP:WSS, and the suggestion of using asbox has been repeatedly turned down. Grutness...wha? 00:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I have to disagree and will continue to convert these when I come across them. WSS does not "own" these templates and despite the many editors who have tried to point out to you the advantages of using a meta-template, you have still not put forward any convincing arguments to the contrary. Furthermore it seems to be only you who has a problem with this template and not the project as a whole. I suggest you listen more to other editors and be less opposed to change. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Then you will no doubt continue to be reverted. Not just by me, but by the other stub sorters who disagree with you. It is not just me, either. I pointed out another editor's comments (and if you'd like to check their ISP you'll see they are in a different continent to me, so it is not me under another name). You may also note other editors who have pointed out in the past that asbox has major disadvantages for stub sorters. That is a fact, pure and simple. I have previously pointed out several reasons why it doesn't work, as has Alai, and as have other stub sorters. Each time we do you reply that those precise, specific examples which we have given are vague and imprecise, and continue to ignore those protests. Certainly, WSS does not own those templates - but neither do you, and changing them in the face of valid reasons why you should not, againsst the wwishes of the Wikiproject which has to deal with any problems you are needlessly creating, is disruptive in the extreme. I ask you again to stop. Grutness...wha? 10:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

(pitching in here) If you've posted several reasons why {{asbox}} doesn't work anywhere, you haven't done it on WT:WSS (at least not since you were last asked). You have ignored requests to make edits to the template which would address the category problem; you have also continued to assert that "other stub sorters" dislike the template for whatever reason, while conveniently distancing yourself from such. If these other stub sorters are prepared to engage in dialogue on WT:WSS (which several editors have been trying to negotiate for months) then there is no reason that {{asbox}} cannot be adapted to accommodate them IMO. Right now it is simply a falsehood to suggest that the current WikiProject talk has anything like consensus to "rule out the option of using metatemplates". And using edit summaries like "fixing template" (or indeed no summary at all) in reverting these changes is obviously not a good idea. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I never once suggested that I wanted to rule out the option of using metatemplates, nor have I ever suggested there is a consensus to do so. Just this particular metatemplate, which doesn't work as well as the ones we currently use. Alai for one has pointed out to you on numerous occasions that the current metatemplates do everything that asbox does and much more, with far less fuss - I see no reason why we shouldn't continue with them. Pegship has also expressed her dislike of the asbox template and has frequently been known to revert asbox in favour of the former, more effective metatemplates. Both of these editors have "engaged in dialogue" as you put it, and their comments have been repeatedly ignored by you, who instead seem to insist that your method is right irrespective of the views of those who have to use it. I have never distanced myself from either of these two editors. Almost all of the discussion on the various WP:WSS talk pages has been you attempting to ram down our throats a form of template despite several prolific stub-sorters giving you details of why it isn't as good. As to not recently psoting reasons why asbox doesn't work, why should I endlessly repeat myself? I have posted those reasons in the past, and you have ignored them. Why should I bother to post them again? You will no doubt simply ignore them again if I do. I have ignored your requests to edit the template, because there is no reason to do so - the existing method works well, so why try to create something else to do exactly the same job while simultaneously causing more work? If someone presented you with a square wheel and said "here -fix this and it'll work just as well as a round one", would you try to fix it, or would you continue to use the circular wheel? And given that I am fixing the template, which has been moved to a less effective coding, I am indeed fixing it. Grutness...wha? 11:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I see a lot of gainsaying there and very little else. Combing through it:

• Alai's only comments on the asbox issue are this invective-filled, zero-content rant, and its followup which does nothing to elaborate on the alleged "wacky image sizes, sorting and oddball categorisation" which are its sole pertinent contribution to the discussion.
• Pegship's contributions were a whole lot more contructive; she said that the asbox version was tidier, and agreed with many of the points raised. Her issues were that it wasn't easy to see how to use the template (which I resolved by rewriting its documentation) and that she "wasn't sold on" the need to migrate to it. That is hardly a damning opposition.
• You have not, in fact, repeatedly given constructive feedback on the issue. What you have done is repeatedly attempted to kill off the discussion by saying that it was unwanted, that "other editors" disagreed with it, and that you gave your reasons in the past - which isn't helpful if nobody can actually find said points to raise them.
• If you're not willing to use your admin bit to help edit the template to accommodate changes (which is, after all, what you've got it for) then I suppose I'll raise an editprotected for the changes in question.

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Echoing Chris here. If you would actually engage in a constructive discussion then I'm quite sure the concerns of the project could be satisfied. But you have never been open to compromise and have opposed these proposals outright. I am here to try to improve the encyclopedia and the templates that support it. Recently I have tried to engage with you on several (admittedly minor) problems:

• Inability of non-admins to add interwikis to protected stub templates
• Lack of concise documentation on templates
• Inconsistencies between different stub templates

In all cases I have experienced a complete opposition to any kind of change. Unless you can be more open to change and enage in discussion, I feel that Wikipedia will cause you more stress than enjoyment. Finally, this is a bit immature, isn't it? In all of our disagreements I have been entirely civil with you, and this personal attack along with the edit summary 10 minutes later are not helpful. If they continue I will have to seek action against this behaviour. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I've tried entering into a constructive discussion. Whenever I try - or whenever anyone heavily involved in stub sorting tries - it does no good, because you seem convinced that your opinion is right no matter what, and ignore all comments to the contrary. Yes, that was an immature comment I made, and I never intended to save it. I find that the easiest way of not getting angry with someone on their talk page is to type in an angry response on my own talk page then delete it without saving. Unfortunatekly on this occasion I did accidentally save it, and I apologise unreservedly for that. However, your comments are to a large extent accurate. I am getting very little enjoyment out of Wikipedia at the moment, and that is largely thanks to editors like you who don't seem to understand what discussion is. I joined Wikipedia in order to try to make a difference, feeling that cooperation between editors could build a great project. However, I find there are far too many editors who ignore the comments of other editors without trying to engage in discussion with them. This thread here is a perfect example. I ask you to stop doing a particular kind of editing, and explain that it is generally disapproved of by the most-concerned wikiproject. Rather than attempt to understand why it is disliked, you reply by unilaterally declaring that you will continue to edit in exactly the same way, and that - despite the fact that this wikiproject is heavily involved with the templates concerned, it doesn't own them. Well, that is correct, but what would happen, say, if you changed all the infoboxes relating to astronomy without checking with WikiProject Astronomy first? Would they be annoyed? Of course they would. There's no ownership, but there is serious input to be considered from involved projects. Then Chris says accuses me of not posting responses when I have posted exactly those comments previously and he has ignored them. That isn't discussion. It isn't consensus. It's single-minded disruption. You have to understand that that is not how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is a place for cooperation, not for bull-headedness. I've tried, but I can see no evidence that you currently understand the concepts of cooperation or of listening to those who have opposing opinions. There's little point, if any, of me pursuing this any further. If you ever have a change of attitude, let me know, and perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion. Grutness...wha? 11:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I accept your apology. (I would be more ready to accept the explanation as well if it wasn't for that edit summary 10 minutes later.) There are various indications that the problem lies with you rather than with other editors. Various people have tried to engage with you and the project on the meta-template issue including myself, Chris, User:TheDJ and others. Most of them have been frustrated with your uncooperative attitude. As for myself, if you look at my contributions you will find many examples of successful discussion and compromise on other pages, the latest of which concerns the WikiProject banner shells. I would ask you to consider withdrawing from some of these discussions in the future and letting other WSS members take the lead. Regards, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

If I may comment? There are others who share Grutness' assessments of the issues above; it's not just himself. I know that I limit my comments of these subjects because (a) I am not willing to spend large amounts of time on trying to convince anyone, and (b) G says it so much better than I could. Please don't think he's the only one. He's just our point man. <g> Pegship (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Featured stubs

I know you were joking when you mentioned featured stubs… But I did actually propose the idea as a replacement for the featured article system a few months back! Not entirely seriously, of course, but it would be great for article development, don't you think? :P We could even get the software to display a random stub every time someone visits the mainpage, just to get more eyes on the articles which really need improving! Physchim62 (talk) 12:53, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Jackson

Okay, fair enough. I don't agree, but I've reverted myself. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 08:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I asked on AN/I if there was a good reason we didn't want a separate page, and if not, could someone unprotect. And someone did. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 08:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay fair enough. And Redirecting is obviously the right thing to do in the long run, but better to put one discussion to bed before confusing it with another! Cheers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's where I asked about it. I wouldn't have created it through protection myself. I do think we need a separate page, because with the funeral and the investigation, the main page will be completely overwhelmed; it is already, I think, and becoming very long and hard to load. Plus, it's an FA and is probably deteriorating with all the edits. Best to direct them to a new page in my view. Just my opinion. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 08:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:WikiProject Citizendium Porting

Hi, thanks for helping out with the template. However, I had opted against using the meta template because I wanted to customize the template in a way that does not seem very easy to do with the meta template, namely add a date field to it. However, since you say the meta template is quite superior and are apparently familiar with it, I was wondering if you could offer any advice regarding how to add the date field. It looks like it would involve creating a hook, but I'm not at all sure how to go about doing that... --Cybercobra (talk) 19:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Please tell me exactly what you'd like it to do and I'll be glad to help. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. Just want to add a parameter, e.g. |date=Jun 5 2009 and display a line of text with the given date in the box, e.g. "Current with its counterpart article as of: (given date here)". --Cybercobra (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

It's easy. I've made an edit to the template. Let me know if you need any further help. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Thought it would be more complicated that than. Hm. Anyway, thanks again. --Cybercobra (talk) 20:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you again, but would you know how to get the date to show in the collapsed version like the ratings do in the other templates? --Cybercobra (talk) 23:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I've added something; you could probably tweak it a bit. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:57, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, many thanks. --Cybercobra (talk) 00:10, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

--MiloKral (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Please see my reply. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 14:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. Crum375 (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] S-new

Hi, first of all thanks for the implementation of my request. Secondly I've seen that you unbolded the results shown in the succession boxes. This causes a inconsistency to other templates like s-non or s-vac, so please would you revert it. Best wishes

Oops, that wasn't intentional. Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

... Quick action! Many thanks

~~ Phoe _talk ~~ 12:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Alaibot

You might just check and see if Alai and his bot are available to do a batch replacement. I hate that part of the job. zzzz.... ! Pegship (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] German pin maps

Hi see my proposal on the German location template talk page. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 11:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lol

Hehe. However, when I said "functionality is too different" I really meant how it's used, not how it's constructed. WPMaths uses its two banners (the plurality itself being a significant difference) in a fashion totally unlike the other projects; I honestly think they quite like their distinctiveness (and really, there's nothing wrong with doing so). I notice they've incorporated most of the more important upgrades that WPBM offers (like tmbox, etc), like MilHist, they seem to be pretty on-the-ball about keeping it up-to-date. Happy‑melon 21:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cat class

I've made another change to the sandboxed template and left a reply on the talk page. Can you do me a favour and check out the following categories, which do not appear to be supported by their respective projects:

• Cat:C-Class mathematics articles
• Cat:FL-Class Firearms articles
• Cat:List-Class Firearms articles

I'm less sure about the firearms ones because although they are both empty and not included in the projects quality scale, the project does appear to use C-Class which is also omitted from their quality scale. Cheers! PC78 (talk) 12:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)