User talk:MSGJ

AFC Backlog

Articles for Creation urgently needs YOUR help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2569 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script at User:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js which helps in reviewing in just few edits easily! We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 2 or 3 reviews, it would be extremely beneficial. On behalf of the Articles for Creation project, TheSpecialUser TSU

Template talk:Ambox

The issue / fix change really helps focus the text of the box. I added another request at Template talk:Ambox. Would you mind taking a look at it Template_talk:Ambox#Multi-fix_edit here. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, MSGJ, for your helpful quick response at Template_talk:Article_history#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors. Much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 15:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:Japanese script needed

While I agree that the name is now a better fit with the category, I can't find where the docs (in the blue box) have gone, and there isn't an example of how to use the template: (add {{Japanese}}) or what it does (adds article to Category:Articles needing Japanese script or text). If I look at a before/after diff of your changes, I can see the script as it was, but I can no longer find the script in the current page. Also it looks very much as if the template still appears in some categories as Template:Japanese rather than its current name, suggesting that a double-redirect problem is the reason for not being able to find stuff. LittleBen (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello LittleBen, when I look at Template:Japanese script needed I can see the blue documentation box below and it does say how to use it (although I just tried to make it a bit clearer) and under the heading Categorisation it says what category is added. The difference is that this information is now constructed centrally rather than being held on the /doc page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Martin, if I click the edit box on Template:Japanese script needed, I can see only three lines. If I go back in the history to before your changes, I can see how the template is constructed and deduce what it does. Now I can't even guess where the documentation is coming from. (My understanding is/was that the convention is that template documentation is (supposed to be) in /doc). I see that you've added a description of how to use it: "add {{Japanese script needed}} to article", but if I look at Category:Articles needing Japanese script or text, near the top it says to use {{Japanese}}. (Similar comments apply to Template:Korean script needed and its associated category). (Separate unrelated issue: The template links at the top of Category:Articles needing Chinese script or text, which is used by Template:Chinese script needed are also broken). :-(   LittleBen (talk) 15:17, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

In order to answer your question as best I can, it might help if you could explain what you are trying to achieve. If this is a general query about the benefits of using meta-templates on Wikipedia then I can try to explain that. Or if there is something amiss with this particular template that you are trying to fix, then I can help you with that as well. But as far as I can tell everything is currently working well and as intended. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Sister templates

Hi Martin. Thanks for attempting to update the sister templates. I have responded to your request at Template_talk:Sister#Addition_of_Wikivoyage_and_Wikidata and Template_talk:Sister-inline#Addition_of_Wikivoyage_and_Wikidata. Cheers, JamesA ^>talk 01:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

All updated hopefully now! Cheers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:44, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

It works perfectly. Thanks! JamesA ^>talk 10:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Smiling at you

		The Invisible Barnstar
		for not simply creating an editnotice, but for going the extra mile and making a template for potential future use. Background work like this seldom receives recognition Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:12, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Template typo

Hi MSGJ! Sorry to say that I have another typo in the template "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Period_color". The stage "Darriwilian" is spelled with only one "r". Thank you for your help with this! --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

.  Fixed :) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Jab Tak Hai Jaan

Hello sir,You may not know about that but for boxoffice section regarding bollywood films ,there is a consensus that we use only boxofficeindia.com not boxofficeindia.co.in(or other websites) as a reliable source.Then please change it with earlier figures.For example,you make check other complete articles related to bollywood films.Thanx---zeeyanketu ^{talk to me} 18:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into it when I get a chance. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Bitcoin as a Ponzi Scheme

Hi there. Please be advised proposals are being solicited for replacement text for the discussion you entered at Talk:Bitcoin#Fundamentals. prat (talk) 23:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

VTE edit link

Hold on, I'm making changes there for a reason. Lets discuss stuff here first or on my sandbox. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 06:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I've now given you two different methods to solve the problem, and I've described why your current approach is not sensible. And now you are starting to edit war with me, so I am going to disengage. Not sure why I bothered trying to help. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Well you see, I respect your opinion, but you need to understand that it's just that: your opinion. You beleive it's not sensible but I beleive that it makes perfect sense, else we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Perhaps I should explain you the issue so that you can understand what I'm trying to accomplish?

By allowing to specify the target, the editor has the option to separate the transcluded content from the template. The problem is that the template includes additional text that goes against what the user is trying to do. The user is trying to edit a list of links but when he clicks 'edit' he finds a bunch of wiki text in addition to the list of links. My feature fixes that problem.

You need to realize that VTE is not part of the MediaWiki software, it's a user created template. It's not solely for templates, it can be used for anything. I'm just adding more features to it.

Since you are an Administrator and I'm not, you have the authority to veto my request, but I, as an editor, have the ability to create a different template that incorporates the features I want. This is exactly how Wikipedia is intended to work. Leave the template where it's right now, we need to explore new horizons and take risks to progress.

I appreciate your good faith, but stuff like this is expected to happen in crowdsourced platforms, don't get frustrated.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 07:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

You've got it all wrong. I certainly have no right to veto. I act based on consensus, and if your proposed edit was supported by consensus I would apply it. Conversely, you have no automatic right to keep separate versions of templates on the project, because the existence of every page is subject to community approval. As you have reverted my redirect, I intend to take it to WP:TFD in due course. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:13, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't understand. WP:IAR stands above all else, even above WP:CONSENSUS. WP:IAR is an official rule, WP:CONSENSUS is just a policy. There is a difference between the two. I strongly advise you to not escalate this further as doing so would be a disruption per WP:DISRUPTPOINT, WP:GAMING, and WP:WINNER. It seems to be a groundstand on WP:DELETIONISM. I have finished editing the template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Puerto Rico/Requested articles which clearly shows the need for this feature. It seems you are not even trying to understand my point and want to embark on a crusade to prove that "I was right and you were wrong". WP:LETITGO —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 19:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Sheryl Crow

Hi It has been a really long time since I worked on any pages. I recently came back to work on pages for Caron Wheeler and saw your note about moving Sheryl Crow page. I just wanted to say thank you, even if it is almost a year late.

Aenkiel (Elijah)