Your help requested
Thank you for your suggestions on Military production during World War II. Today Bender235 deleted over 3 months and 300 hours of my work and that of others, 40,000 characters of edits, and hundreds of constructive additions to the page. I am in the midst of uploading an enormous amount of PRIMARY SOURCE DATA and he deleted everything done so far as "wikipedia can not be a source for itself". I am enraged. There was not one comment, warning, question, request, or suggestion from this "editor". Can you please help me reverse all the deletions and keep this guy off the page. There are ongoing constructive edits from several other individuals watching this site. Please help resolve this. --Brukner (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- Brukner, I would (quite strongly) recommend raising the matter at WT:MILHIST. The Military History project is probably the best organised on the whole of Wikipedia, and will have a large number of knowledgeable people better placed than me to advise. Mogism (talk) 18:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- Mogism Thank you! I have done so on their discussion page. I just do not understand this action. It is so retrograde and harmful to the Wikipedia community. If you would like to chirp in at WT:MILHIST or Military production during World War II please do so. yours --Brukner (talk) 19:05, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the thought, although I do do other things as well as typo fixing! Mogism (talk) 18:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, on looking more closely. I just came did it as part of a mass cleanup of articles (a deliberately off-beat mix of railway infrastructure, monster movies, cricketers and English geography - I do it this way deliberately, to avoid focusing too much on a single area at once and irritating people when my name pops up fifteen times in their watchlist at once). When I get the chance I'll have a look over it more closely, although from south-west England I'm not sure how useful I'll be. (Longford Railway Bridge is the article in question, if any of the "history of engineering" people still watching my talk from when I was writing Bal maiden want to have a look.) Mogism (talk) 20:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not going to revert your edit at Hammersmith Hospital, as I don't mind you switching from useable to usable. However, I feel I should point out that it was not a "typo" as described in your edit summary. In British English the spellings "usable" and "useable" are entirely interchangeable (see the Oxford English Dictionary for clarification), and as Hammersmith Hospital is located in Great Britain, WP:ENGVAR means that the original spelling was correct, and not a typo. I know that American English is different, and favours "usable". Timothy Titus Talk To TT 20:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- The OED entry for "usable" (there is no entry for "useable") reads in full as:
- usable, adj.
- Brit. /ˈjuːzəbl/ , U.S. /ˈjuzəb(ə)l/
- Forms: ME vsable, ME 16 vseable, 15 vsuable, 16– usable, 18– useable.
- Etymology: Either < Middle French usable (1254 in Old French; < user use v. + -able -able suffix), or < use v. + -able suffix. Compare Old Occitan uzable, Catalan usable (14th cent.), Spanish usable (c1250), Italian usabile (1729).
- That can be used; that can be readily put to practical use.
- It has no 'clarification' of any sort, so I don't know what you mean by that - "useable" only crops up at the tail-end of the list of historic variants, after "vsable", "vsuable" etc. Since it is a recognised variant spelling, it's certainly not something I'd lose sleep over if you want to change it back. (Yes, I know this is technically a copyright violation, but I'm sure the OED aren't going to sue over a 1-sentence entry.) Mogism (talk) 20:23, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Visionary heads (William Blake illustration)
I noticed your edit here on the Visionary Heads article where you corrected the misspelled Connecticut. I have been searching high and low for the place called Stainford which is part of the file description containing "Conneticut" with no success. Do you know if there is a Stainford or whether, perhaps, it should be Stamford, which certainly is a city in Connecticut. I'm also sending a note to Dmitrismirnov who I just discovered uploaded the pic concerned. Jodosma (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- I suspect it's going to be Stamford. That's a wealthy town, and home to the University of Connecticut - thus just the sort of place one would expect to find private art collections. Mogism (talk) 19:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar|
|I award you this barnstar for letting me know about those errors and thank you for being so helpful. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 18:32, 18 September 2014 (UTC)|
Thanks for your contributions.
- No, I'm using the vanilla version. I dislike using nonstandard or custom software, as it means not knowing what other users are experiencing. I spend a fair amount of time warning people for being sloppy with AWB – generally users who machine-gun the "save" button to try to boost their edit count, without noting that the "typos" they're fixing are either false positives or insignificant changes which it's not appropriate to 'fix', or users who don't bother to actually read the diff window to see the context of the fix and fail to notice that they're "correcting" the spelling of a piece of obvious vandalism.
- When I'm telling someone off for misusing AWB, it's important I know that the error they're making is a competence issue, and not a result of a problem with the software – AWB has a lot of oddities which result in people in absolute good faith making edits that are of no benefit to the project, annoy the article writers, and clog watchlists unnecessarily. (Changing "etc" to "etc." is a particular pet peeve, and just because one user unilaterally inserted American rules for punctuation into the MOS even though every UK style guide I've ever seen says "etc" should never be punctuated in Br Eng, even traditionally conservative ones like the Guardian and Observer Style Guide, and nobody wants the argument that would ensue from reverting it, doesn't mean I think it's appropriate that users use AWB to mass-change articles from British to American punctuation. The supposed "fix" of removing double-spaces, as here for example, is also one that causes a lot of bad blood, as a number of editors intentionally use double-spacing within the wikitext for ease of editing.) Mogism (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Original Barnstar|
|thx for spelling correction, Mogism Metalibertarian (talk) 07:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)|
Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Media Viewer RfC
Square kilometers and square miles
- Wikipedia policy is km2, cm3 etc for SI units, but sq mi, cu ft and so on for imperial units (the chapter-and-verse is "The abbreviations sq and cu may be used for US customary and imperial units but not for SI units"). I have no idea why this is how it's done but assume somebody has a reason. Mogism (talk) 19:49, 18 October 2014 (UTC)