User talk:SchreiberBike

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SchreiberBike.

If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I have it on my watch list. If you contact me here, I will respond here unless you instruct me otherwise. Thank you.  SchreiberBike talk

Ordinal "2d"[edit]

Your page says you're interested in ordinals, so might you have anything to say about the ordinal "2d" (in question at Talk:2d Stryker Cavalry Regiment#Requested move 2014)? —innotata 01:07, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@Innotata: I've weighed in on that requested move. I'm no expert in ordinals, but I suppose I do think about them quite a bit. Thanks for thinking of me. SchreiberBike talk 02:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

"Sighting" of Finsch's Rufous Thrush[edit]

Hi. I noticed that in copyediting Finsch's Rufous Thrush, you changed "record from southern Togo" to "sighting in southern Togo". The source for this, Clement's book on thrushes, is now available at Google Books and says "record". Do you have some reason to believe the record was a sighting rather than one of the other possibilities? For instance, the record could be a bird caught in a mist net, which wouldn't usually be called a sighting, or a sound recording, which definitely wouldn't be. If you don't have such a reason, I believe the word should go back to "record". Thanks. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 13:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@JerryFriedman:, Thanks for your note. I was not aware that a record could occur based on a sound or any other possibility without a sighting. I had thought it was birder jargon which meant a bird had been seen. I will change it back. SchreiberBike talk 19:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding what I was saying and making the change. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

17th Guards Rifle Division[edit]

Thanks for picking up my ambiguous designation of the AT Battalion of this division. I've made the required change. Wreck Smurfy (talk) 02:38, 17 August 2014 (UTC)Wreck Smurfy

Thanks for cleaning up after me. Usually 22th means 22nd, but it means something else often enough that I don't want to make assumptions. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike talk 04:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

If someone else hadn't already put up an Editor's Barnstar on your talk page, I would have. Thanks for identifying a source of confusion in the lists of New Hampshire historical markers, finding a good solution, and then doing all of the fixes. It's greatly appreciated! --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm almost done. I still have to do 1-25 and there are some where the text on the marker has changed since they were first put up and I'll go back and update those. I've also learned some New Hampshire history along the way. I even found one with what appears to me to be a gross error; #78 Odiorne's Point says "Thompson's son, John, was the first child born in New Hampshire" as though there were no people there before the Europeans arrived. I'm going to send an e-mail to the New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources to see what they think of that. Anyway, it hasn't been too bad a project and I'll go back to my usual stuff soon. SchreiberBike talk 21:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Great Rosefinch move[edit]

I declined your technical move request of Great Rosefinch to Great rosefinch. The pages are not consistent, because the DAB at Great Rosefinch includes as one of its entries Caucasian great rosefinch which is now a redirect to Great rosefinch. That's the target you were requesting, which is clearly not available for a DAB! Can you please look into this (if you still want to pursue the matter) and see if you can propose something that has no loose ends? It's possible that User:Pvmoutside might have an opinion because they are the editor who moved Caucasian great rosefinch. Adding further confusion, Great rosefinch now says that the Caucasian and the Spotted are 'now usually considered conspecific'! So we now have a DAB for two birds that are probably the same species. Maybe merging the articles should be considered. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:32, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @EdJohnston: for your note. I thought I had checked that, but clearly I missed it. I'm just helping out in fixing capitalization and have no real background in birds, so as you suggest, I will ask Pvmoutside for help. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike talk 02:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
SchreiberBike, thanks for the note. I looked at the pages, and they look fine. The Caucasian great rosefinch was the name of the species as it was split into that and spotted great rosefinch. When the birds were lumped again, the great rosefinch again became the species name, and the spotted great rosefinch became a subspecies to it, which is how it reads now. Links are provided on each of the pages. If someone from the project wants to merge them, I have no objection, however we do have other subspecies pages listed for other birds. We have a picture of the subspecies, but no picture of the nominate, or main species for the great rosefinch species page. For that reason, I am leery of deleting the subspecies page. I edited the Great Rosefinch page to redirect to the Great rosefinch page. I hope that helps. Let me know if I can help with any other questions about birds......03:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks @Pvmoutside:, you've cleaned it up nicely with that change. SchreiberBike talk 03:25, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Changing bird names to lower case in lists[edit]

Hi SchreiberBike, I've just noticed that you've been doing some editing of lists of birds to change the names to lower case. It's a massive chore to do this manually by hand (I know because I've done it) so I created a list to use with AWB. It means that an entire list can be done in a few minutes with just one edit. I'm happy to share it with you if you're interested? Julia\talk 21:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Julia W:, Thank you - such a thing would be wonderful. Please do share. SchreiberBike talk 21:29, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I have sent you an email. Julia\talk 22:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@Julia W:, Reply sent and I have requested access to AWB at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. It would probably make sense for me to play with AWB a little to get used to it, then start to work with the list you've made. If you would be willing to approve me for AWB, I could start on that soon. Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 03:58, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Great! I've approved your AWB request. Julia\talk 05:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
@Julia W:, I've been studying and using AWB and I think I'm pretty comfortable with it. If you'd like to look at my recent contributions, you can see what I've been doing. If you would like to send that file, I can take a look at that and see if it's clear to me. If you'd like to take another approach, that would be fine too. SchreiberBike talk 05:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- and I go to check my e-mail and see you sent the list a couple of hours ago. Never mind the struck out text above. I'll start playing with your XML file and will be careful. SchreiberBike talk 05:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Looking good! I made a few minor corrections, the only ones I spotted.  :) Julia\talk 17:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Excellent. Your approach works very well. I will check the corrections you made. A question: In your file, you didn't have the "Ignore external/interwiki links, images, nowiki, math and " under Normal settings checked. Why is that? Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 17:25, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Shamefully, no particular reason, except for that I am not au fait with AWB and didn't realise it would be A Good Thing rather than A Bad Thing. It looks like ticking that box effectively fixes the issue with images being changed. I hadn't tried it before. Well spotted, and sorry! Julia\talk 17:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Please be very careful when doing this. In this edit, a number of simple links to redirects like [[Golden Eagle]] became piped links like [[Golden eagle|Golden Eagle]], contrary to WP:NOTBROKEN. Since the visible part of the link - which is what matters for MOS:LIFE - was unchanged, and the only other changes were replacement of <br> with <br /> (which in both HTML 4 and HTML5 are exactly equivalent), there was no net effect on the appearance of the rendered page, and so the whole edit was contrary to WP:AWB#Rules of use item 4. The same applies to this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your note @Redrose64:, You are right that those edits only make a difference from a maintenance point of view. In the past Wikipedia capitalized the common names of birds but no longer does. In helping with that transition, I have been searching for and fixing links such as Golden Eagle which are generally errors. Where capitalization is appropriate, I've been piping the links so they don't show up the list of apparent errors. I can see how such edits would look like a violation of WP:AWB#Rules of use, but since they help identify real errors, they are not "insignificant or inconsequential". This is similar to deliberately linking to a disambiguation page as described at WP:INTDABLINK by linking through Greg Parke (disambiguation) to indicate that it is not intended to for a specific Greg Parke.
So, respectfully, I think what I did makes sense. In the future, I will link to User:SchreiberBike/Bird names in my edit summary to explain. If you disagree, please persuade me. SchreiberBike talk 07:38, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Lower-casing of the 2nd name for bird species[edit]

Sorry for coming on this late - I am quite patchy in terms of Wiki activity. May I know why was the lower-casing of the 2nd name for bird species taken up ? All the pages which has now been changed, refers to Clements, but Clements (and almost every other Ornithological checklist in the world) respect casing - with the 2nd name starting with upper case http://www.birds.cornell.edu/clementschecklist/download/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Birds/naming_sandbox Kindly enlighten (Paintedstork (talk) 04:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC))

Hello Paintedstork, I hope you don't mind a long answer. The guidelines for Wikipedia were once that species common names should be lower case, except for birds. About seven months ago there was a long discussion which is documented at WP:BIRDCON. As part of the discussion, we found that ornithology journals, ornithology books and ornithology websites generally capitalize bird names, but generalist encyclopedias, books, journals and newspapers did not. So people who know a lot about birds and who use ornithology sources are accustomed to capitalized names and think capitalizing looks best, while most people who are looking at the whole of Wikipedia look at all species common names and see capitalized bird names as looking odd. That became a formal request for comment and lead to a decision to have bird names follow the same rules as other species. (I'm summarizing thousands of words, so I'm simplifying.) The current guidelines for how to handle species names is at MOS:LIFE.
Since then I and other editors have been working to make Wikipedia consistent across all species, and that means lower casing bird common names.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Birds/naming_sandbox is a sandbox written by one editor in 2012. I will contact the editor who wrote it (User:SMcCandlish) and ask if he is willing to delete or blank it so that it doesn't continue to confuse people.
Enlightenment is too much to ask, but I hope that helps. Please continue the conversation if you have any questions or ideas. SchreiberBike talk 04:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much. It clarifies
(Paintedstork (talk) 09:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC))
To clarify further, MOS has said to use lower case for vernacular names of species, subspecies and other groups of animals ("primates", "great apes", etc.), since ca. 2008, and has been even more explicit about this since 2012. (If you go back to around 2007, it was utter chaos, with people rather randomly capitalizing whatever they felt like, e.g. "Mountain Lion" and "Bottle-nosed Dolphin".) What is now MOS:LIFE didn't make an exception for birds, it simply noted that there was a then-ongoing WP:LOCALCONSENSUS dispute with regard to birds. That dispute was settled (against capitalization) in the WP:BIRDCON RfC. The RfC didn't change consensus (as a site-wide matter), it effectively just reaffirmed LOCALCONSENSUS policy against wikiprojects making up their own rules against general guidelines (rather than convincing consensus to change at those guidelines, e.g. at WT:MOS in this case). I agree with SchreiberBike's summary of the main rationale behind the outcome, though there were several others. At any rate, the decapitalization work SchreiberBike and others are doing constitutes non-controversial maintenance at this point.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  12:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Ordinals in USAF units[edit]

Since you're interested in ordinals, and have participated in past discussions on nonstandard ordinals in U.S. military articles, you may be interested in the move request I started at Talk:132d Fighter Wing. —innotata 04:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @Innotata: for the heads up. I've had a similar idea on my list of future projects for a while, but I haven't started the process. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. SchreiberBike talk 01:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Schreiber, I requested an admin to give you autopatrolled rights. This means that any new page you create will be marked as patrolled and I won't have to go thru them anymore. Thanks for the top notch work, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @Oiyarbepsy:, what you said there makes sense, and I had made that proposal at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Autopatrolled&oldid=626633277, but it's not within the letter of the rules, even though it makes sense in the spirit. I do notice that almost no other editors have ever patrolled any of the redirects I have created. What happens if you just ignore redirects? Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 02:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
It seems that most new page patrollers skip redirects (which is an option in the new page patrolling software). Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Eufaula wiki[edit]

Hey bud I got the Eufaula wiki notable people section covered, can you go worry about some other pages, like species of owls or cheeze its — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olliebum09 (talkcontribs) 16:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Olliebum09, Thanks for your note. Wikipedia is a big deal and some people take it seriously. Adding someone to a list of notable people requires that they be notable. Usually that is demonstrated by the fact that they have a Wikipedia article about them or that there are external references to demonstrate notability. A good case could be made that Lawrence H Johnson, Jr. should be removed from the list too, but the line about him at least relates to him having done some important things. The text that you've put in repeatedly about Will Benton doesn't.
I just happened to have Eufaula, Alabama on my watchlist and saw that someone had added information to the article that is not encyclopedic. I have reverted it repeatedly and will continue to do so unless Will Benton is shown to be notable. SchreiberBike talk 18:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
And oyu will continue to be wrong :^) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olliebum09 (talkcontribs) 07:38, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Olliebum09, If I'm wrong, please explain why; I try to be a reasonable person. You can explain here or at Talk:Eufaula, Alabama#Will Benton which is the best place to talk about the Eufaula, Alabama article. SchreiberBike talk 17:25, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your MOS:LIFE clean up work[edit]

Hi SchreiberBike. I just wanted to say thanks for all your work on pages related to South Australian natural history. I wasn't familiar with MOS:LIFE but with your help, I now understand the use of capitalization and italics when talking biology on WP. Danimations (talk) 04:29, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey Danimations, thanks for the note. There was a change in how capitalization was supposed to be handled about six months ago and I've been implementing that change little by little. Right now I'm working on Little Penguins and I'm almost done with them. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike talk 05:05, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Lake District[edit]

Schreiberbike - I have reversed a number of changes that you made - inadvertently? - at the Lake District article involving the initial capitalisation of specific geographical locations which are proper names. Did they get caught up in the decapitalisation of species? (which is a different matter of course) There are more to undo yet.

cheers Geopersona (talk) 08:16, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@Geopersona: That was a major screw up on my part. I'm sorry. I'll work on that now and try to figure out how that happened. SchreiberBike talk 08:27, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Schreiberbike! :-) Geopersona (talk) 18:35, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you @Geopersona:, for taking the effort to find out who had made all those mistakes and letting me know. I use AutoWikiBrowser in some of my editing, and though it speeds things up, it must be used carefully. It seems that on that article I accidentally hit the save button without looking at the article; a slip of the mouse is all I can think of as a cause. I've gone over Lake District again and done some additional copy editing to make up for the damage I did to the article. If you ever need a wiki-favor, let me know - I'm especially good at boring repetitive things. SchreiberBike talk 20:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

2010–11 KML season[edit]

Hei, you pointed out that the ref link on my 2010–11 KML season article takes you to 2014–15 season results table. This is a problem I'm well aware of and it's because all league table links from basket.ee will always take you to the current/latest season and you would have to find the right one manually. You can do this by choosing the season you're looking for from the left side column, so for example in this case you'd have to go - Hooaeg: 2010/11 (season 2010/11) » G4S KML (KML league) » turniiritabel (tournament table). I understand this might be troublesome, especially for foreigners, but I decided to use basket.ee because despite all its faults it's actually is the official homepage Estonian Basketball Association. I could look for a direct link from some major sports portal or something if you think this would be better but I can assure you the stats are correct. Hope this clears it up. Tommi.1988 (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note above @Tommi.1988: responding to my question at User talk:Tommi.1988#2010–11 KML season. My confusion is that the article 2010–11 KML season has as its first line "The 2014–15 Korvpalli Meistriliiga will be the 91th...", so I'm not sure if that article is intended to be about the 2010-11 season or the 2014–15 season. There is already an article 2014–15 KML season which is described as the 90th season, so I'm pretty sure that it is the first lines of 2010–11 KML season that have an error and not the article title. Since you wrote it, I thought you would be more clear than I on that and could fix it. Thank you. SchreiberBike talk 22:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
In appreciation of your ongoing copyediting and cleaning up of articles to meet WP:MOS standards... and the good humour with which you do so. Thank you! Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Iryna for brightening my day. You are the nicest harpy I can imagine. Keep up your good work. SchreiberBike talk 04:33, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Re Nevado del Ruiz[edit]

The format I use for last eruption when there is one ongoing at a volcano as in this example May to September 2014 (ongoing) is basically saying that the eruption started in May of 2014 and has continued into the month of September of the same year so far, while just saying May 2014 (ongoing) seems rather open ended and brings into question of whether the latest eruption has been updated since it may have actually stopped. I didn't come up with this formatting using the words ongoing or continuing, someone else did, but it makes sense to me and and seemingly so for other editors. I get may eruption information source from the Global Volcanism Program's Weekly Volcanic Activity Reports http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports_weekly.cfm. Stormchaser89 (talk) 02:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@Stormchaser89: Thanks for your response to my question. It seems like that way you would have to update each relevant article each month so that next month it would have to be updated from "January 2015 (ongoing)" to "February 2015 (ongoing)", but if that's the way it's done in vulcanology, I'll roll with it. Perhaps something like "ongoing (last report January 2015)[1]" would make sense. SchreiberBike talk 04:02, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
  1. ^ Nevado del Ruiz, Smithsonian Institution Global Volcanism Program, 7 January-13 January 2015
I don't know if that is the way it is actually done in volcanology, its just the way its being done on wikipedia. However the Golobal Volcanism Program does something similar for eruptive histories of volcanoes, its not always the most up to date however compared with the weekly reports. For example most recent reported activity at Bardarbunga was between January 7-13, however the eruptive history isn't caught up on that with the current eruption listed 2014 Aug 29 for start date then 2014 Dec 9 (continuing) for the end date. Some other volcanoes like Mount Etna are way further behind even though there has been observed activity in the last week, the recent eruption in the eruptive history started 2013 Sep 3 and the stop date is 2014 Oct 16 (continuing). Wikipedia probably based their last eruption format from the Global Volcanism Program. Stormchaser89 (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Ejection fraction[edit]

Hi SchreiberBike, I've drafted a revision to Ejection fraction at User:Bakerstmd/Ejection fraction. I'd love your comments at Talk:Ejection fraction. Haven't added any citations (which it desperately needs) but rather have reorganized from a somewhat-expert perspective (I'm not a cardiologist, but do care for patients with cardiac disease quite often). Thanks! BakerStMD T|C 23:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bakerstmd:, I'm glad to see that you are working on it. The article has had a lot of changes made by an editor who doesn't seem to understand Wikipedia. I watched it closely for a while, but have not lately. I have no medical background so I can't help with content, but I'll take a look at your draft to see if I can make any helpful copy edits. Feel free to accept or reject. SchreiberBike talk 00:06, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

disambiguation, neutrality, consistence
Thank you for tireless work on the quality of the project, repairing links to disambiguation pages, improve neutrality and aiming for a consistent appearance with attention to detail, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 728th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda for the happy return of your appreciation. You brighten my life and that of many others. SchreiberBike talk 21:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
If they change the fonts again, I will come again ;) - (I thought that was April Fool, making all images not match any more ...) - Happy to announce that one of the articles you copy-edited for me will be TFA on 7 February. Keep an eye on BWV 165 which will eventually follow, as a 1715 work, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2015 (UTC)