User talk:DePiep

Administrators' newsletter

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024). Administrator changes Pppery Interface administrator changes Pppery Oversighter changes Wugapodes CheckUser changes Courcelles GeneralNotability Guideline and policy news Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past. A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline. Arbitration Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed. Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months. The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case. Miscellaneous Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination. A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate! Discuss this newsletter Subscribe Archive

Tech News weekly

m:Tech/News/Latest Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available. Weekly highlight Editors and volunteer developers interested in data visualisation can now test the new software for charts. Its early version is available on beta Commons and beta Wikipedia. This is an important milestone before making charts available on regular wikis. You can read more about this project update and help to test the charts. Feature news Editors who use the Special:UnusedTemplates page can now filter out pages which are expected to be there permanently, such as sandboxes, test-cases, and templates that are always substituted. Editors can add the new magic word __EXPECTUNUSEDTEMPLATE__ to a template page to hide it from the listing. Thanks to Sophivorus and DannyS712 for these improvements. [1] Editors who use the New Topic tool on discussion pages, will now be reminded to add a section header, which should help reduce the quantity of newcomers who add sections without a header. You can read more about that, and 28 other community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. Last week, some Toolforge tools had occasional connection problems. The cause is still being investigated, but the problems have been resolved for now. [2] Translation administrators at multilingual wikis, when editing multiple translation units, can now easily mark which changes require updates to the translation. This is possible with the new dropdown menu. Project updates A new draft text of a policy discussing the use of Wikimedia's APIs has been published on Meta-Wiki. The draft text does not reflect a change in policy around the APIs; instead, it is an attempt to codify existing API rules. Comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome on the proposed update’s talk page until September 13 or until those discussions have concluded. Learn more To learn more about the technology behind the Wikimedia projects, you can now watch sessions from the technology track at Wikimania 2024 on Commons. This week, check out: Charts, the successor of Graphs - A secure and extensible tool for data visualization (25 mins) – about the above-mentioned Charts project. State of Language Technology and Onboarding at Wikimedia (90 mins) – about some of the language tools that support Wikimedia sites, such as Content/Section Translation, MinT, and LanguageConverter; also the current state and future of languages onboarding. [3] Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

WP:ALUM

Hi, please be aware that WP:ALUM applies only to the element, not the aluminium alloy/aluminum alloy that aircraft are constructed from. WP:ENGVAR always denotes the use of aluminum for American aircraft. If the link is just to aluminium then I would suggest changing it to aluminium alloy. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:ALUM (1) is about all the substance, not limited to the "element". All material Al is covered, alloys & and compounds &tc. (An exception might be "alimunium texture painting", ie not the material -- still, not even that is certain). And (2) MOS:ALUM explicitly states that it overrules ENGVAR. DePiep (talk) 20:10, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

The wording is These spellings should be used in all chemistry-related articles on English Wikipedia, even if they conflict with the other national spelling varieties used in the article. Aircraft articles are very clearly not chemistry related. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I came here to say this. Any changes to non-chemistry-related pages using American English should be reverted, along with any other non-chemistry-related pages not specifically using British English, per MOS:RETAIN. --Vossanova ^o< 20:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

As I said: it is about the material, so chemistry. DePiep (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

• @Nimbus, Vossanova, Epicgenius, and Revirvlkodlaku: OK, disputations make sense.

I have reverted (back into US "aluminum") when:

US/Canadian: {Use American English}, {Use Canadian English}, US/CAN company, location, ties (coins).

Kept British/IUPAC "aluminium" when

explicitly: having {{Chembox}}, {Use British English}, location or company Europe/Asia/Africa, ties, art.

otherwise (indecisive)

This implies that a small grey area still exists (interpretation; also typo-like misss). Did not research article history for ENGVAR.

Affected: initial edits: ca 200 (incidentally, articles starting 0-9, A, Z mostly; includes "aero..." ;-) ), selfreverted ca. 100. Will apply this if and when I check other articles for alum.

-DePiep (talk) 08:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation; that makes sense. I was puzzled when you changed "aluminum" to "aluminium" on the 28 Liberty Street article, since that is not at all related to chemistry. As far as I know (and similarly to the use of aluminum in aircraft), aluminum as a building material is an alloy, rather than the element aluminum. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

As you write. (I did not touch 28 LSt of course any more). My original thought: every substance aluminium is the chemical stuff. Including alloys, allotropes, material used in architecture, planes, .. But will not compete over it. {chembox} is a main indicator. DePiep (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh but unresolved: categories now named

Category:Aluminium sculptures in Indiana

Category:Aluminum sculptures in Indiana

Category:Aluminum smelters

Category:Aluminium smelters (international, so no engvar applies)

DePiep (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Your recent contributions to Template:X32

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Template:X32, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Min-Seo O'Connor (talk) 11:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Litre symbol

FWIW, a "script small l" is an allograph of ⟨l⟩ that just happens to have its own code-point (U+2113 ℓ SCRIPT SMALL L) but it could be an element of some arbitrary script-style typeface and be encoded as U+006C l LATIN SMALL LETTER L. So I declare that it complies with the SI spec. Or are you telling me that I can't use this l (because it has a curved foot)?

Yes, I know, far too pedantic a point to add to the main discussion, but just saying. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I know, but it's just not in SI so not in sight. Luckily it is not prescribed in countries either. You know Talk:Convert for problems already existing. Hard enough to get a useful MOS result. -DePiep (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Template talk:Punctuation marks#Scope creep

I have opened a discussion at Template talk:Punctuation marks#Scope creep. You might want to comment.

(BTW, how/when did it get back to being a side-bar rather than a nav-bar?) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.10mmsocket (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

DeP, I realise it will be difficult but I strongly advise that you don't rise to this bait. It reads to me as an attempt to provoke you into an uncivil response, which will get you blocked. I really can't see this complaint being taken seriously. Let it ride for 24 hours. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks JMF. Good to hear from people who can keep a cool head. Re the bait: yes I noticed that. But maybe some errors there need fixing & clarification, lest the ANI process bolts. You are welcome to add further thoughts here. DePiep (talk) 08:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

April 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, could you explain why you have cut short my window to reply? For example, I note that you invoke ground here that was not even mentioned. -DePiep (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Because as an uninvolved administrator I determined that you violated your editing restriction. As to your second sentence, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:24, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Why not allowing the discussion to complete? re #2: Here you say "disruptive edits", which was not brought forward. DePiep (talk) 13:29, 28 April 2023 (UTC)