User talk: Paine Ellsworth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Giraffa camelopardalis angolensis (head).jpg
W I K I P E D I A   R O C K S !
Make it YOURS?
Going somewhere?  Go with all your red animated beating heart!
Anything else just wastes your time, doesn't it?

Indelibly yours, Paine Ellsworth

Jimbo peeking out

old man standing on top of stepladder in library with very tall shelves

Women lead, men archive
(just kidding; I believe in no division of labor/duty).


C L I M A X
Archives
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5
6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10
11 → VE archive
12 · 13 ·
Past Poms Archive
Please do your best not to pigeonhole people!
Active Wikipedians – click to enlarge

My little corner[edit]

Flashing bulbB Work in progress...

Wikipedia[edit]

Wikipedia is a magic quilt that soars over a world of imagination without end! See also:

1721 Tales 100.jpg
Main articles: Main page and History of Wikipedia
See also Wikipedia in the media

Oh! what a tangled web we weave
Whene'er we serve as Wikipedians!

Fact is, when you have opened and closed at least a dozen browser tabs or windows while you edit this encyclopedia, then you must be doing something right!

Bouncywikilogo.gif



Follow the bouncing
encyclopædia...

You don't get no respect?[edit]

uhm, guess I got carried away... just a little bit...

Paine's Favorite Poetry[edit]

O camerado close! O you and me at last, and us two only.
O a word to clear one's path ahead endlessly!
O something ecstatic and undemonstrable! O music wild!
O now I triumph—and you shall also;
O hand in hand—O wholesome pleasure—O one more desirer and lover!
O to haste firm holding—to haste, haste on with me.

  – Walt WhitmanStarting from Paumanok, verse 19.

Paine's Own...
User talk:Paine Ellsworth/Poms
  – Paine Ellsworth

Countering systemic bias (CSB)[edit]

Flashing bulbBanimated heartbeat

WikiProject Countering systemic bias open tasks
This project creates new articles and improves neglected ones.

Review and Improve: Origin of AIDS – continue investigation!

Vandal info[edit]

Herostratus defcon maritime 2.jpg

Storm warning. (High level of vandalism.)


5.2CVS / 6.0RPM according to DefconBot19:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC) change


Talk page search code[edit]

Flashing bulbB Copy and paste the following code to your talk page edit window...

<inputbox>
bgcolor=transparent
type=fulltext
prefix=User talk:(your exact Username here)
break=yes
width=60
searchbuttonlabel=Search (your Username or a nickname here) Talk page and Archives
</inputbox>


and on your talk page that code will render...

As an example, my code looks like...

<inputbox>
bgcolor=transparent
type=fulltext
prefix=User talk:Paine Ellsworth
break=yes
width=60
searchbuttonlabel=Search the Ellsworth Talk page and Archives
</inputbox>


and up above in my Welcome box that code renders...

 Joys! Paine

The Wikipedia SignpostThe Wikipedia Signpost (ancient name)[edit]

Archives of The Signpost



VisualEditor newsletters[edit]






You're traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind; a journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's the signpost up ahead – your next stop...

THE
CLIMAX  ZONE




New messages go below this line – down to the bottom of this page, please.[edit]

Explain[edit]

I've closed the discussion at Talk:South Yemen; it didn't make sense, they are still mixing up things which don't make sense. Just because no one has seen the error before doesn't mean that error has the right to be discussed. Its still an error, and the majority of sources still don't refer to it as having a "Marxist-Leninist single-party form of government".
Either you explain them that there is a difference between ideology and forms of government, and adding random words such as "Marxist-Leninist state" is different from form of government or I give up. No sources have said that "Marxist-Leninist single-party staet" is a form of government. Just because a country has been called as a Marxist-Leninist single-party state, doesn't mean that Marxist-Leninist single-party state is a form of government. ... And at last, there is a difference between state and republic , but who cares. Is this so hard for people to understand, really? The consensus before was a "sham consensus", it was factual inaccurate, and thats been my whole point from the very beginning... And it doesn't help really that no modern sources actually talk of a form of government in the former, or present socialist republics.
Well, TIAYN, I have tried to explain the difference; however, the involved editors don't seem to want to listen. Try not to be discouraged, because at least they are talking about it. My advice to you is to let the RfC run its course and see what happens. So far, it's a little like trying to convince the people that the world isn't flat, or that the Sun doesn't really "rise" in the morning and strike a course across the sky like some ancient god. In some cases it took hundreds of years to let the truth sink in. I've found that when it comes to a subject like "politics", there will be as many opinions as there are people giving them, so the best that can be done has been done. The only thing that might help is to list each and every scholarly source that clearly shows the difference between Marxist–Leninist, the ideology, and socialist, the state and form of government. I wish you great good fortune in this, TIAYN, great good fortune. – Paine  16:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

This is a redirect, unprintworthy[edit]

Hi, Paine. We met somewhere this summer regarding redirect categories. I have lost track of the discussion altho I read some of it only last week. Do we have no default identification of redirects as printworthy and unprintworthy by category? I have supposed that all redirects from people are printworthy by default, but I looked last week and could find only that they are "with possibilities" by default (Redirects with possibilities is a hidden parent category), not printworthy.

Anyway: moments ago I tried {{Redr|alt|u}} and found what seems to be a bug. The two parameters generate this triple message: From an alternative name; From a Unicode character; From an unprintworthy page title.

But {{Redr|alt}} generates the single message: From an alternative name. So it seems that 'u' has been used as to abbreviate two different messages? --P64 (talk) 01:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Whether or not you are the author of some parameter functions, as I recall vaguely, please remind me where I should have posted this note.

--P64 (talk) 01:53, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, P64 – Since this involves the This is a redirect template, then a good, general place to ask would be the talk page of that template. Please note that there are several rcats that populate the Unprintworthy redirects category by default, and {{R from Unicode}} is one of those. The others, such as {{R caps}} and {{R from plural}}, will also populate the Unprintworthy redirects category. So don't expect the letter "u" to always mean "unprintworthy". Since {{R u}} is an alias/shortcut for the Unicode rcat, that is the categorization you get when you use it, along with its default unprintworthiness. There is a list of aliases specifically for the unprintworthy rcat, and of course, none of them are "u". Have I understood your inquiry correctly? – Paine  02:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

One last issue related to Legend disambiguation[edit]

Since you took the time to consider the issues at Talk:Legend (disambiguation)#Merger proposal, I am hoping you might help us consider a related issue at Talk:Legends (TV series)#Call for a vote on hatnote for this page.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, TonyTheTiger, for again thinking of me. I have left a comment there in regard to the ambiguous article title. Joys! – Paine  08:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to consider the issue and make your comment. I have responded. I hope my response will help you to make a decision on how to help us work toward a consensus. We are sort of on the consensus/no consensus border so each voice now is critical in determining whether there is a consensus or whether a collective voice has come to no consensus. I hope you will add your name to either the support or oppose section so that we can have a stronger consensus or a no consensus determined by adequate responses rather than a no consensus due to too few responses.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
I hope you can forgive me, TonyTheTiger, since the reason I left the comment was because I neither support nor oppose your suggested hatnote. I feel that the best solution is the one I suggested, but I am willing to go along with whatever the community of involved editors decides. Thank you again for thinking of me! – Paine  13:22, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for taking time to consider the issue and leave us feedback. Generally, a disambiguation page will never serve as the lone link in a hatnote on a disambiguated page. If you start adding lone link disambiguation hatnotes on disambiguated pages, you will get reverted by veteran disambiguators. The assumption is that once you get to a disambiguated page, you are only confused with similar disambiguations. Although it might seem that you should send them back to the disambiguation page, the MOS preference is for a detailed hatnote directing to other similar disambiguations, but if there are too many including the main dab page as a hatnote catchall at the end of a hatnote. However, the fact that you took the time to consider this is greatly appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:07, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Paine! Have a question for you...[edit]

Greetings Paine! It's been a while. Hope all is well! Anyways, so here's the point of this message: I'm trying to understand the purpose of {{R from old history}}, and the category that it populates. From how I am understanding the template, it's essentially for redirects that have contain a history of edits when it was previously an article. Is this it's intended purpose? (Basically, I'm trying to find the best "R to/from..." template that can be used for a redirect that contains an edit history from when it was previously an article.) Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

In fact, I'm looking at {{R from old history}}, and I don't think that it is the correct template for the purpose in which I'm trying to tag this example: Dragon Warrior (NES game). In fact, I'm not even sure if the redirect template or category I am looking for, in which I desire to categorize this redirect, even exists. Steel1943 (talk) 18:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Steel man! Seems like just yesterday we worked together! Yes, we are well as can be and hope you and yours are doing well, too. That rcat can be confusing. First of all, it populates Category:Redirects with old history, a category that's also populated by {{R from CamelCase}}, a separate rcat, and by {{R from subpage}}, a redirect to R with old history. The Camel Case redirects are pretty obvious, since Wikipedia had to use Camel Case in its article and other page titles because of software limitations way back when. So that should lead us to an understanding of more general titles that are also considered "old history". Then are introduced all page titles that are subpages, whether they are old history or not. It's an interesting mix, but I don't see how it would apply to your redirect, which seems to be correctly tagged with {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. In the history (from the page you renamed), it looks like there may have been a merge back in 2008 when Anthony Appleyard moved the dab page, but it's not easy to tell. If the "NES game" is historic in any way, then we would want to use either {{R from historic name}} or {{R from former name}} as appropriate. The {{R from old history}} should be reserved for page titles from back in Wikipedia's past, again, like the Camel Case redirects. – Paine  18:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Paine, that essentially answered my question, and explained a lot more. At this point, I'm thinking I need to create a new "R to/from..." template to meet my idea ... possibly a template named something like {{R from retained attributions}}, {{R from old version}}, or something of the like. But, if it were to exist, the documentation would have to include done sort of information to explain how it differs from {{R from merge}}. Does this make sense? (I'm asking you as who I consider "English Wikipedia's resident Rcat SME.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
It all makes sense (except that last part Face-smile.svg). Usually, the only redirects that have long histories are from merges or from copy/paste moves. That's why I figured that the redirect you mentioned was from a merge, since Anthony Appleyard would have fixed it if it had been a copy/paste move. How many redirects like this have you come by? (That's usually what I ask myself before I create an rcat – if there are a lot like that, then they would warrant their own category.) Now – at great risk of sounding vain, what's "SME" exactly? – Paine  19:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I've come across at least 10 or so of them, each of which are either the result of a failed merge due to parallel histories, or when the attributions at a title need to be moved so that a new set of histories can be moved there (like during the result of a move to a redirect.) Oh, yeah, I should have linked SME. :) Steel1943 (talk) 00:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
"Subject-matter expert"? – UR waay too kind, per usual. Ten redirects are definitely enough for their own cat, because we can expect the number to grow. I have to admit that I've probably come across a share of those, which I either called a "merge" (borderline) or did my best to cat them sans a merge template. So I'd call that an excellent catch on your part. We might want to consider an additional param for the {{tpr}} template for those redirects that have talk pages – something that would indicate that the page history is kept (similar to the merge param). – Paine  13:31, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Paine, would you have an idea on what to name a category for such redirects? I'm not sure what to name it if the category did exist. (My apologies for the late response; I got a bit caught up in a lot of other edits in the "world wide Wikipedia".) Steel1943 (talk) 18:15, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry back to you – my talk-page notifications don't seem to working today. If not one of the two names you suggested, then perhaps something like {{R from unmerged history}} and Category:Redirects from unmerged histories? – Paine  11:36, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Redirect template[edit]

For future reference, it's generally not a good idea to make several small edits to a highly-transcluded template in quick succession. It tends to have a negative effect on the database. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It appears that "several small edits ... in quick succession" does not accurately describe what I've done. The only edits I've made today were two minuscule edits about fifteen minutes apart, neither of which had any effect whatsoever on the template's output, and one major edit made more than four hours after that; however, thank you very much for your concern. – Paine  14:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
@Paine Ellsworth: Unfortunately, Closedmouth is right here. Any edit is an edit. There is no such thing as an edit to a template that has "[no] effect whatsoever on the template's output", as editing templates causes each page using the template to be re-parsed. Edits to templates at this scale take a quite a few days for their load on the website to finish. Your edits to this template briefly took the site down, sadly (more information to come). Please be very careful in future before editing highly-transcluded templates. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jdforrester (WMF): I'm sorry, I understand all that and I've been at it pretty steadily since before 0300 UTC. I have to wonder why I haven't had problems? Also, I've made some edits to other templates in the last 14–15 hours, and some of them could be fairly highly-transcluded – is it possible that those edits also added to the problem? I truly, deeply apologize if I am responsible for the site shutdown, and I will be more careful from now on. – Paine  16:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
PS. I've been working in the sandbox of a template that goes to nearly 20,000 redirects. I think I'll sign off now and leave that one for later – much later. Face-smile.svg PS left by – Paine 
Now I know what caused my troubles earlier today. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
@Paine Ellsworth: Don't worry too much; these things happen. Just wanted to make sure you didn't go and edit a dozen more times without being aware. :-) Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 00:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
I am truly so sorry. I have applied this template more and more to rcats, but I had not realized I had grown it to its present, highly transcluded state. Just last March I made three changes in quick succession with no apparent problem. It needs one of those document warning boxes, so this doesn't happen again. – Paine 
I just added the {{High-risk}} template to the /doc page. Seems WMF Labs confirms nearly two million transclusions. – Paine  11:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
I am also going to have to check and tag some rcats with either High-risk or High-use, e.g., {{R from other capitalisation}} is transcluded to over 400,000 pages. – Paine  12:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Redirects from Artificial languages-language terms[edit]

Category:Redirects from Artificial languages-language terms, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. - TheChampionMan1234 03:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, TheChampionMan1234, for this notification! It is hoped that my rationale for keeping and for not renaming this specifically name-formatted subcategory of Category:Redirects from non-English-language terms will meet with your approval. – Paine  19:00, 20 September 2014 (UTC)