User talk:PC-XT

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

To get my attention on other talk pages, you can also try WP:Notifications, though I don't always seem to receive them, so please {{talkback}} to me if I keep editing and haven't responded. Thanks!

Hello, PC-XT, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for registering an account. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.   Introduction  5   The five pillars of Wikipedia   How to edit a page   Help   Tips   How to write a great article   Manual of Style   Be Bold   Assume Good faith   Get adopted

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or get instant online help at IRC. You can also place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come shortly to answer your questions.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Barcelona football seasons (early 20th century)

I looked at the Barcelona football seasons for which you added {{Futbol box plegable}} (and some other seasons after). They could do with {{cleanup-translation|ca|listed=no}}, really. (I don't think it's worth listing at WP:PNT, but this should put them in view of {{WikiProject Catalonia}} one way or another, or if not that could be added to their talk pages). I don't want to do it myself (a) because I am lazy and (b) because I know nothing about football and would probably make translation mistakes. Si Trew (talk) 05:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Si Trew, I expect you are right. (I've only looked at two, so far, and both were still being edited. There was only one when I came onto the scene, and I changed it to use the English name. The others were created soon after.) I'll try to tag them, soon, assuming they don't improve before then. —PC-XT+ 06:29, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Fair play. I wouldn't bother tagging them if they are under construction, either: I can't imagine the'll ever get an enormous number of hits, but they are useful additions. (But then, I just translated a stub at Le Petit Quotidien yesterday, and I imagine that will be in the top five within the week - or not!) Si Trew (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

PS I don't know Catalan but I know Spanish and French so for the purposes of these kind of "technical" articles I can usually get by. Si Trew (talk) 06:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Precious

letter gnome
Thank you, user who has fun here, juggling letters in many coding languages, for welcoming new users, for redirects and disambiguations including 4-letter-radio stations, for creating templates, discussing their clean-up and merging, for support and KIS, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! This is an honor! I appreciate it! —PC-XT+ 07:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

{{Talkback|PC-XT)Erica Blatt Harkins Thank you. Now all we have to do is wait! Again thank you for all your support. (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 06:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC))

Where's that trout?

Oh dear me! Seriously, I don't get pleasure pointing out the bleeding obvious, but really: "Merge seems sensible to me, as these are very close to each other" COMPLETELY misses the major issues (plural). Yes, they are "similar", but they are (again, here comes the block caps) COMPLETELY different and in most ways tangential. It's too late at night (here where I am) to go into detail now, but if you wish me to, please ask. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I'd like more information, when it's convenient. I posted my reasons for saying that in the TfD. —PC-XT+ 13:55, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Expletive deleted! Sorry, I forgot to reply. I guess I'll also do so at the TfD. (Profuse apologies!) Pdfpdf (talk) 10:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

TfD collapse

PC-XT, I just saw your collapse of the "road map." We need links to the three separate TfD discussions (four including the DRV), so that new participants and returning participants can understand how we arrived at the present re-opened/re-listed discussion. Contrary to Andy's rather bizarre and unnecessary digression, my words were carefully chosen and there is nothing factually inaccurate about the recitation of the history or the links. I urge you to remove the collapse. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Dirtlawyer1 in this. I propose to keep the roadmap in sight, but then collapse the subthreads (from digression by Andy), because these are off-topic. -DePiep (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

• @DePiep:, don't do it: Andy will likely revert the collapse, as he often does with any collapse in a TfD discussion that he did not implement himself. It's not worth the resulting fuss.

(edit conflict)I think it's too much of a matter of contention for any of us to collapse. It would probably require an uninvolved party. —PC-XT+ 14:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Dirtlawyer1 I was debating replacing the roadmap, but uncollapsed it since I haven't had time to do so. It's not my intention for editors to be uninformed, but it is a bit confusing this way. There are 4 separate discussions, but two, the DRV and the collapsed discussion, are mostly irrelevant, discussing procedure rather than the templates. I had linked to the previous discussion above, before the DRV, but it gets lost in text. I didn't find a template or procedure to provide a link to the DRV in the relisted discussion. (I am not sure it is commonly found relevant to the discussion, but I have no objection to providing it.) There was one part removed from the relisted discussion as apparently irrelevant that is still at the previous log page, but everything else should be the same. (I don't oppose linking to it, as long as readers aren't lead to believe it is a separate discussion.) The 4th discussion is on the same page, and could use a section link, but I'm not sure it is relevant, either. —PC-XT+ 14:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

• PC-XT, thank you for removing the collapse. I also ask that you strike, revise or replace your comment regarding the "road map"; there is nothing "incorrect," inaccurate or misleading about it, and it is neutrally worded to provide links to the other three related TfD and DRV discussions since November 29th. If there is some particular problem with my phrasing which I have missed, please let me know, and I will change it to accommodate your concern. I am constantly surprised by how something as non-controversial as linked history can become a bone of contention, but that is part of the modus operandi of this particular nominator. You and I have no interaction history prior to this discussion (at least that I can recall), but I have little doubt that we will agree and work together on other TfD discussions. While we disagree in this particular TfD, I sincerely appreciate your polite and respectful approach to the discussion -- that's how these discussions are supposed to work. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Dirtlawyer1, I know you were acting in good faith in this, and have nothing against you. I find you reasonable, and I think I understand your concerns regarding the templates in question. This is a side issue. I don't have a problem with a road map, either, and feel the links, themselves, are helpful. They are a bit confusing, but that is due to such things as the discussion being relisted, but still at the old log page, with part removed in the relisting, and a collapsed discussion on the same page, rather than anything you did. I could see your wording was chosen to be neutral, and I don't think you did anything wrong. I only feel a bit more context would be helpful in clarification. Regrettably, I don't really have time to discuss this, at the moment, but I don't think this is a huge deal. —PC-XT+ 15:21, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

New message here

Hello, PC-XT. You have new messages at PC-XT's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erica Blatt Harkins

Hi, I know that I should not write the above when I am on your talk page, but I am doing it anyway by precaution. I know that it is silly! The good new is that yesterday I received an Email from "Permissions" telling me that the Marta Scheiner from the bio of Nicolae Blatt was accepted and taken care. Probably the others will also be accepted gradually. Thank you for your continous help. (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 08:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC))

Bumpy ride

Thank you for your kind note. Well, guess what? I just found out yesterday that the bumpy ride is not over yet! After I received the positive note from "Permission" somebody else deleted that picture. After I explained again a lot it was reinstated today. However, meanwhile I received other warnings that other files will be deleted; while at the same time I was receiving Emails from "Permissions" that they have taken care of those pictures! Apparently the warnings happened because of "redundancy", and I think that happened when I sent to "permission" the forms they requested. I again explained a lot and I hope those other 3 pictures will not be deleted. I will know tomorrow morning. Thank you again, and please keep in touch. (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 05:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC))

New Message

I left you a new message on my talk page. Thanks! (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 06:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC))

Thank you------

Thank you very, very much! You are a wonderful sport. Regarding the picture: Nicolae Blatt in WWII, I did not put a tag on it because it seems to me that it was accepted from the very beginning, and also I received a message from "Permissions" that they took care of it. Should I have also tagged it? Thank you (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 07:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC))

New message , No message

I left you a message on my talk page. (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 04:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC))

8TeamBracket-Tennis3-v2 broken

You broke the template 8TeamBracket-Tennis3-v2. You could see how the seeds for the first round were all messed up here: 2015 Australian Open – Men's Singles Qualifying

I reverted it to the 30 January 2015‎ version for the time being

Rubyaxles (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for reverting, Rubyaxles. I had accidentally messed up the testcases without realizing it. —PC-XT+ 12:04, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Rubyaxles, your revert fixed the testcases, and I corrected the sandbox. Just to be sure, if you could also check that each section of Template:8TeamBracket-Tennis3-v2/testcases has 2 identical copies, I'd appreciate it. This is a lesson learned: I need to make sure the testcases are accurate before I do the comparison. —PC-XT+ 12:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

i saw many words that is all are mechuka but its wrong in reality its MENCHUKHA....