User talk:Lourdes: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:58, 12 March 2018

Van Diemen's Land v Port Phillip, 1851 scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that Van Diemen's Land v Port Phillip, 1851 has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 February 2018. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 11, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ealdgyth. Hope you're doing well. Thank you for the note. I had already updated the proposed blurb. Will look into the article once again. Warmly, Lourdes 19:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on this! Although TFA day can sometimes be stressful; I'm never sure whether it's better to have a lot of people reading it and lots of interest, or for it to pass quietly without drama. Sarastro (talk) 23:23, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sarastro1, hello. It's always such a pleasure to see the talk page notification mention that you've left a message. How have you been doing? My love and wishes of the new year for you and your family. Thank you so much for the congratulations. But let me be absolutely honest – the day you reached out to me offering to lead this article's development and the FA lessons I learnt from you thereon, are more cherished by me than the article coming on the main page. I don't deserve these congratulations – you do, as always. Thank you once again. I'll drop in by to chat one of these days. Again, ❤️ and new year wishes. Most warmly, Lourdes 01:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sarastro1! Yay! :):):) Lourdes 04:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for "the first first-class cricket match to take place in Australia, although that is more of a quirk of history as the concept of such games is rather anachronistic. However, it was a grand occasion and the first cricket game between two colonies/states in Australia."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's for you Sarastro. Thank you Gerda, on both our behalf. Lourdes 14:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I wasn't around much for TFA day. Life is scarily busy at the moment! But it seemed to pass without too much carnage. Congratulations again, and you do deserve them. The article wouldn't have happened without you and your research. Sarastro (talk) 22:20, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) Lourdes 07:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

I was very happy to see your RfA! I had been meaning to email encouraging you to throw your hat in the ring: you’re more than capable of advanced twinkle use . Anyway, best of luck. Also, always will be good to have another SWAT member. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tony :) Lourdes 03:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All the best!

I hope your RfA would be successful this time and wish you all the very best for it. Dial911 (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Dial. I hope so too. Warmly, Lourdes 04:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

..and well done. I won't echo my supporting vote too much, but the humility and ability to accept criticism is what's going to make you a great admin - TNT^❤ 09:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks There'sNoTime, your words are too kind at the RfA. Lourdes 09:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Best of luck!

Glad to see another throw their hat in the ring! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Amorymeltzer; I hope I at least get the hat back, at the end of all this :) Good to see your question. Lourdes 13:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for the absolutely lovely words of support. Couldn't have got more or asked for more. Lourdes 13:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats. I think your hat got lost so you won't be getting it back, but perhaps your new one will suffice?

~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:51, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Amory; you're the best. Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signature code

Hi there. I noticed you use

'''[[User talk:Lourdes|Lourdes]]'''

as your signature. This seems problematic because due to the placement of the tags, the span-tag closes after the a-tag. It should actually be nested. Alternatives could be:

'''[[User talk:Lourdes|Lourdes]]''' which produces Lourdes

or

[[User talk:Lourdes|Lourdes]] which produces Lourdes

The latter is shorter but provides a stronger signature on this page because of the way the software bolds self-links. The first alternative produces the same output as your current signature but keeps the code correctly nested and within the link. Regards So Why 08:28, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SoWhy, noted and changed promptly. Thanks, Lourdes 04:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition

		The Good Heart Barnstar
		Two things I've learned are that a) Admins come in a number of varieties. There is not a one-size fits all model. b) On many issues, good editors can disagree and it doesn't make sense to turn those disagreements into fights because we're all on the same side, really. Your comment really struck me. Although I still agree with the substance of my disagreement, upon reading your comment I instantly regretted what I had said. I honestly wish you the best of luck being an admin. Wikipedia benefits from your efforts here. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:57, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

❤️ Lourdes 04:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Thank you for stepping forward to serve the project in new ways. Have a safe trip. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cullen328. Thank you for supporting too. Lourdes 07:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I got quite a laugh from that!

Shitpot Fry here to say that I laughed out loud over that, and blushed a little too! --Tryptofish (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha. You're a good sport.Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for adminship

Greetings Lourdes, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations for both your successful nomination and for your place on WP:RFX200 - an impressive feat! As always, the administrators' reading list is worth reading and the new admin help pages are most certainly available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment prior to applying them elsewhere on the project. Good luck! Acalamari 02:51, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.Sorry for the resulting drama, Lourdes

Congrats, Lourdes! First (and hopefully not only) successful RFA of 2018. Best of luck with your new tools - don't hesitate to ask me anything

GAB^gab 02:53, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your question was a killer at the RfA.I loved answering it. Thanks GAB for that and for this message. Lourdes

Indeed, welcome to SWAT. Good place to be :) Also (as above), should you need any help with advanced Twinkle, feel free to ask, but I'm sure you'll figure it out fine. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I love the SWAT acronym :)I'll surely reach out to you, GAB or other admins for assistance. Thanks Tony, Lourdes

Congrats on your promotion! Lepricavark (talk) 03:18, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting it Lepricavark. Lourdes

Yes, you'll make a great admin! Congratulations! Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 03:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When I saw a support from Jjjjjjdddddd and then immediately from Hhhhhkohhhhh, I was wondering what's up :D Thanks Jjjjjjdddddd. Lourdes

Felicitations on your passing RfA. Take it slow for the first few days while you figure out where all the new buttons are and what they do. And feel free to ask any of us for help. I think you will be a great asset to the team. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Ad Orientem, I shall surely do that. I'm thankful to you all for accepting my RfA. Thank you Ad, Lourdes

Congratulations, Lourdes! :-) Reh man 13:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Rehman. Lourdes

Congratulation for having your tools removed in record time!

Seriously though, congratulations for a well-run RfA. This place will be better because you have to tools. I'm glad you stepped up to serve. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:D 78.26, I'm not sure they're going to give it back to me. Lourdes

They probably won't unless you ask.... Please do. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I shall, after this initial phase becomes calmer:) Lourdes 02:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I join my fellow Wikipedians to congratulate you for passing the RFA. Wikipedia needs more people like you holding the mop.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:48, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jetstreamer. I appreciate your support in the RfA and your query too. Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on becoming 2018's first new admin! Linguist^un Eins ^uno 19:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As someone said on this page Linguist111, hopefully not the only one. Thank you for your query in the RfA and your subsequent support. Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missed out on the BN drama, although I thought the request was highly unusual but it was understandable after reading the explanation. My sentiment is along the lines with Beeblebrox. Congratulations, and take care. Alex Shih (talk) 05:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Alex, I hope I don't end up creating any more like that...Phew :) Lourdes 07:35, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!!!S Philbrick (Talk) 18:52, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick, it's so nice to hear again from you. Hope your travels were comfortable and the family doing well too. Congratulations again to you too for the great news. Love for the same, Lourdes 02:45, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, Lourdes! You'll make a great admin. Centibyte ^(talk) 13:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Centibyte. Warmly, Lourdes 14:12, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Congrats! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The ed17, the beer's on me! Thank you :) Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

Congratulations for your successful RfA! Its great to see new admins coming in! L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

L293D, thank you for the tasty brownie :) Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ping

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

Are you online RIGHT NOW? — xaosflux ^Talk 04:32, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See section below. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

A beer for you!

Here's a celebratory pint for you! Congratulations on your RfA passing! TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'll share the pint with you TheSandDoctor. Thanks once more. Lourdes

--TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your request at BN

I've processed the request you made at BN, when you return please start a new section on BN for re-flagging. Please note, there is a standard 24-hour hold from request to fulfillment. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 04:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Xaosflux. I'll follow that. Lourdes 03:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing

Hi,
Congrats on the A-ship!!

I've just started doing some new page reviewing; I've done only half-a-dozen or so, (I'm a bit cautious about it) but I noticed that the feed contains unreviewed pages from 10 years back, or longer. I've reviewed some but then thought there might be a reason why there are a number of ancient entries? I'm concerned I must be missing something! Case in point is Kanam which had been loitering since July 2006. It's a very short article but 'typical' of many articles about the Sub-Continent. Any observations (about that or 'generally')? Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 13:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the congrats Eagleash.

You're right; there are some ancient entries that have remained unreviewed for ages. One reason is because reviewers (for example, like me) skip articles that we're unsure of (for example, on topics that are niche), hoping someone else might review them later – and they simply remain unreviewed for long. Till last year, the page notice at the top of Special:NewPages contained the legend: "Please consider patrolling pages from the back of the unpatrolled backlog." for all editors. Since January this year, the legend is shown only to editors who have the new page reviewer right.

Over time, I've developed a detrimental habit of only checking the recent entries – I expect other reviewers might have this habit too (the pressures of raking up a good CSD rate, etc). Anyway, this is an issue that doesn't have any fix, except in the plain old way, which is to go back to the end of the list and start from there – which is what you seem to be doing nicely. Hope this provides you some basis.

Other than this, how have you been doing? Hope all is well. Warmly, Lourdes 18:14, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant to reply before this but somehow it got pushed down the list of things to do! Thanks for encouragement. So far no-one has bobbed up and said 'you're doing it all wrong'. One thing I've discovered about the very old pages is that they are sometimes the subject of a very slow, very long, edit war. They get merged or redirected, someone reverts and they end up on the review list again. (That's what happened with Kanam...there was also an ancient merge disc. at the TP which I closed...actually before I realised what had happened!) I also find myself copy-editing or fixing articles when I come to review them and I'm not sure I should be doing that at that time. All helps though I suppose.

All is not too bad at the moment but RL was a bit of a nuisance a lot of last year. I really should get back into creating actual content again sometime! Best regards, Eagleash (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's an additional information for me, about the old pages in the review. I'll keep my eye out for such articles too. My best wishes as always Eagleash. Warmly, Lourdes 01:18, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your apology. :) I harbor no grudge and wish you a successful adminship! Acalamari 19:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Acalamari. Lourdes 06:32, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Violation

Administrator Lourdes, I come to you with a question. I have recently transformed WestJet Encore, an old article that was a little longer than a stub to a 5x expansion and DYK appearing in about 30 hours. Recently, there was an edit by User:WestJet. Note that the user's name is not Westjet, but WestJet.

WP:USERNAME is a Wikipedia policy, not a suggestion or a guideline. Part of the policy, stated in a box, reads "Usernames that only contain the names of companies, organizations, websites, musical groups or bands, teams, or public internet channels or creative groups are not allowed".

I want to look the other way and ignore the violation of Wikipedia policy. What should be done? Leave it alone and only selectively enforce policy, which may be seen as unfair? Or instruct the user to change username? I sort of like the WestJet name. As you can see, I put a lot of effort into the WestJet Encore article. Can you provide guidance and take over the matter? Or should the policy be changed?

Vanguard10 (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested the username be blocked; I've warned the user to adhere to our paid editing policy and conflict of interest guidelines. If there's any further promotional edit, feel free to talk me up. Lourdes 06:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vanguard10, the account has been blocked as of right now. The user has been advised to choose a username that adheres to our username policy and to make edits only after they follow our paid editing policy and conflict of interest guidelines. Thanks, Lourdes 14:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance. I'm not a newbie but still learn things about WP. A few days ago, someone pointed out a better way or correct way to do things in DYK. I hope that even a soft block does not create anger.

One problem I see with the policy is that it makes people go into hiding. If the user was being paid (not clear cut now) but edited under the user name of Eastprop (east not west, prop not jet) or Lardes2 (not Lourdes), nobody would suspect a corporate link (if there was one). Maybe it might be better to ask people to just admit or disclose a link. Vanguard10 (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vanguard10, our paid editing policy does precisely that. But irrespective of the policy, a username that promotes the name of a business is unacceptable; and that is why the soft block instead of a hard block. A soft block allows them to change the user name; a hard block doesn't allow that. Lourdes 01:20, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vanguard10, just so you know, I'm not sour or anything (the unblocking was fairly quick) but I'd thought I'd clarify in case you couldn't see the discussion on my talk page. I don't represent WS, I am also not paid by them. According to Lourdes, I've made about six edits over a decade to WestJet related articles. Most of which were style or vandalism related (like capitalizing Westjet to WestJet). I started editing as an IP account, but realized that making a user name was better. I did this in like 2006, and I would have been like 16-17 and in high school. I don't know what WP:USERNAME was like back then, but I didn't think it would be an issue almost ten years later. I also had the WestJet username on YouTube before WestJet actually took it over. So, hopefully that helps you out a bit. MattBinYYC (talk) 02:04, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Matt, I've replied on your talk page. Thanks, Lourdes 02:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your adminship

Hello, as the person who does most of the maintaining at Wikipedia:Former administrators, could I ask when you plan to request your adminship be reinstated? I was planning not to add your adminship to the lists and wait until it was re-added to record it because (a) adding a user is work that is avoidable when adminship will be re-added again soon, and (b) I have no idea how to classify your situation. There have been some subsequent desysopped admins for activity which is why I'm asking now. If it were up to me, I'd prefer that you get your adminship reinstated as soon as possible. Thanks! Graham87 09:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Graham87, I've seen you around and admire the work you do here. I'll be requesting reinstatement at the BN at the earliest possible, but due to a combination of time-consuming RL work and some lined-up performances, I can't put a finger on which date exactly would it be. I don't know what should be the next step for you, but if you wish to add my name to the former admin list, please do so. Once more, all my admiration for your work here. Lourdes 09:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your kind words. Since I have time at this moment, and you're not certain when exactly you'll be able to request resysopping, I think I'll deal with the desysopped admins list now. I'll add you under the "resigned" section, because that would most closely match your situation. Graham87 11:09, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


I, Tony the Marine, present you, User:Lourdes with your adminship. Pilot her well!

"Despite the fact that you have the same name as my dear sister, I will support you" :D You're too good! Thanks Tony. Lourdes 03:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belated congratulations!

I've just returned from a lengthy WikiBreak so missed your RfA in its entirety - I just want to say congratulations, you've come a long way in the last year or so and I have every confidence in you as an administrator! OcarinaOfTime (talk) 20:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OcarinaOfTime, I'm grateful for your kind words. Thank you. Most warmly, Lourdes 02:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

...to you WP's newest admin. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉ 23:41, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Barbara (WVS). Appreciate your wishes, Lourdes 02:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's time for User:Lourdes/PageCuration to go into the Wikipedia namespace

Hi Lourdes! I have a few things I'd like to discuss with you regarding the PageCuration script you made. First off, it can't go without saying that it's an awesome script and it's great that you created it! My observations however, show that it's become a widely-used tool and that it's become part of the Page Curation workflow because of how it's discussed and on the guideline pages how it links users to use the tool. Because of this, I think that it's more appropriate to have this page hosted on the Wikipedia namespace now instead of your userspace - it just keeps the use of out different namespaces consistent. I wanted to ask you about it first, but I was hoping to move the page to Wikipedia:PageCuration script (or something like that) and point all of the links to the script to point to there.

On another note: while I was checking out the script in-depth, I noticed that User:Lourdes/PageCuration didn't have much of an edit history at all (just two revisions), and also found out that the full edit history is located instead at User:Lourdes/tempPageCuration as a deleted page. We need to undelete that page and merge the edit histories of this script to your live one in order to keep the histories public and in one place. Did you make a copy and paste move? Why / how did this become fragmented? Either way, this needs to be resolved and that edit history put back together ;-).

I like to ask if you'd be okay with me if I got all of this done for you, or if you had any objections to doing this and (if so), why. The script page should be moved to the Wikipedia namespace to be consistent with the others, and that edit history should not be fragmented and deleted like it is now - that we actually need to fix.

Let me know when you can; I'm thinking about fixing the edit history in the meantime just to get that done - but I'll wait for a bit just in case ;-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I forgot to tell you this earlier: Congratulations are in order for the successful RFA promotion. Your RFA did a hell of a lot better than mine did... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I hate you. :D Thanks for the congrats. It's great to see you on my talk. Hope you're doing well and all is going well in life Oshwah. With the Page Curation thing, sure, go ahead and do what you think is best – I'm okay with what you've said. Just one small note. With respect to your history merge thing, I might be wrong but I suspect you might have got the wrong page; in other words, there's the documentation page which you have linked above, but you might be interested more in the actual js page. I mean, it doesn't make much sense to hist merge the doc page – but I'll go by your discretion. If there's anything else, please do mention. Most warmly, Lourdes 06:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What can I say? You're not alone - a lot of people hate me here... just look at how often people trash my talk page ;-). Okay, perfect - thanks for the information. I'll look at the .js page, the documentation page, and take another look at the deleted history at User:Lourdes/tempPageCuration and make sure any fragments or issues are merged and fixed (if applicable). And I'll get this moved over to it's new home! Thanks for the approval - I'll get this all taken care of for you. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Great. Thanks, Lourdes 06:55, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright! It's all done! The edit history that was deleted were of the documentation page, so I restored the page, merged the edit histories, and moved it to Wikipedia:PageCuration script. The location of the actual .js javascript (User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js) won't be moved, as doing so would break the import function call that everyone is told to put in their .js pages (since they won't find anything anymore), and hence the script would stop working for everyone on Wikipedia. We just wanted to move the documentation page over so that it's in the same namespace as the others... you know... consistency, yadda yadda, and all that stuff.... ;-). Thanks for letting me fix this up - we're all set to go and everything is much better now :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds super. Thanks once more, Lourdes 07:24, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you could move the script and leave a importScript-code at the old location, so the current transclusions won't be affected. But that's a matter of preference really, many scripts still reside in userspace after all. Regards So Why 16:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 213: / Line 213: @@
 ::::Alright! It's all done! The edit history that was deleted ''were'' of the documentation page, so I restored the page, merged the edit histories, and moved it to [[Wikipedia:PageCuration script]]. The location of the actual .js javascript ([[User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js]]) won't be moved, as doing so would break the import function call that everyone is told to put in their .js pages (since they won't find anything anymore), and hence the script would stop working for everyone on Wikipedia. We just wanted to move the documentation page over so that it's in the same namespace as the others... you know... consistency, yadda yadda, and all that stuff.... ;-). Thanks for letting me fix this up - we're all set to go and everything is much better now :-) [[User:Oshwah|<b><span style="color:#C00000">~Oshwah~</span></b>]]<sup><small><b>[[User_talk:Oshwah|<span style="color:blue">(talk)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Oshwah|<span style="color:green">(contribs)</span>]]</b></small></sup>  07:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 :::::Sounds super. Thanks once more, [[User talk:Lourdes|<span style="background:aqua"><small>'''Lourdes'''</small></span>]] 07:24, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
+:::::Actually, you could move the script and leave a importScript-code at the old location, so the current transclusions won't be affected. But that's a matter of preference really, many scripts still reside in userspace after all. Regards [[User:SoWhy|<b style="color:#7A2F2F; font-variant:small-caps">So</b>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<b style="color:#474F84; font-variant:small-caps">Why</b>]] 16:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)