User:BD2412/Archive 026

It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.

(Thanks to Alan Liefting, via BMK)

Status: Active. bd2412 T

Archives

By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):

Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th

Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism

---

Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):

001-002-003-004-005-006-007-008-009-010-011-012-013-014-015

016-017-018-019-020-021-022-023-024-025-026-027-028-029-030

031-032-033-034-035-036-037-038-039-040-041-042-043-044-045

046-047-048-049-050-051-052-053-054-055-056-057-058-059

Dispute resolution clause: By posting on my user talk page, you agree to resolve all disputes that may arise from your interactions with me through the dispute resolution processes offered within the Wikipedia Community. BD2412

Assyria/Assyrian confusion

Assyria-n & Assyrian do not go to the same place, and your edit turned the right link wrong. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

• Assyrian is a disambiguation page, and nothing should go to it at all. Please find an appropriate link target. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Don't be even more of a twat. The link went to Assyria, and YOU changed it to go to Assyrian. Johnbod (talk) 14:26, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

I believe you can see that your edit clearly changed it from my fix, "Assyria" to the disambiguation page "Assyrian"; perhaps you were confused? bd2412 T 14:30, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok, apologies, but you do realize that this page was archived 3 months ago? Johnbod (talk) 14:31, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

I am aware of that, but in trying to clean up incoming links to Assyrian, it still shows up as a link. There is no way to distinguish which pages are archived on the "What links here" page, so it merely presents another link to be checked every single time disambiguators work on incoming links to that page. Typically, disambiguation links in templates are a huge problem, because they can transclude to dozens of other pages, causing those to show up in our reports as containing a disambiguation link which can not be found when the page itself is checked. Although that is not the case here, it is the basis for our very intense efforts to keep disambiguation links out of template space as much as possible. Given the importance of this cleanup to the project, I would appreciate if you would fix this particular link. Sooner or later, other disambiguators will come across the same link and try to fix it anyway. bd2412 T 14:35, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

@Johnbod: I accidentally overwrote your last comment in writing my response to it. I would still appreciate if you would implement an appropriate fix to the current disambiguation link, for the reasons outlined in my previous paragraph. Otherwise, I hope you will not object if I implement such a fix. bd2412 T 19:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

It's done. Johnbod (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. bd2412 T 03:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Pending Changes error?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=F%C3%A1tima_Ptacek&diff=cur&oldid=771503493

for some reason, that was held under PC... is it because you're using AWB? i was under the impression that all sysops were autoconfirmed, at the least, and the edit should have be auto-accepted. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:36, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

I am autoconfirmed - I can think of no good reason why pending changes should be invoked. I make dozens of AWB edits per day, and this is the first I'm hearing of an issue. bd2412 T 23:48, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

William M. Bugbee

Thank you for your continued efforts at New York. User:William M. Bugbee regrets that he will be unable to join us, as his strings have been cut. Certes (talk) 23:57, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

• I guess next time I invite someone to a discussion, I should vet them better first! bd2412 T 00:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

The Riccardo Silva Stadium

Thank you for your update and advice on this. I will proceed through the proper channels. --Njm 78 (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm depressed

Are there no admins that put weight on guidelines any more? Dicklyon (talk) 02:03, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

• There's a reason they're called "guidelines" you know. WP:NO CONSENSUS, however, is not a guideline. bd2412 T 02:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  By default, guidelines should be considered "tie breakers" when consensus is not otherwise obvious. Or so I've always thought, based on discussions of how to determine consensus. Dicklyon (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  If the opinion here was divided, say, 7 to 4, that would be a case for a tiebreaker. Here there is a clear absence of consensus. bd2412 T 03:13, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  5–5 is not a tie? 5 wanting to follow guidelines (and sources) and 5 wanting to ignore all that... Dicklyon (talk) 05:47, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  I'm sure you know that in the context of establishing consensus, we always look for something much more than a 51%-49% split. bd2412 T 10:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  The consensus to only cap proper names is very well established. Opposers here acknowledge (some of them) that this is not one, and we should just ignore and change that longstanding consensus. This is nuts. Dicklyon (talk) 15:12, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  Where were those people in this discussion, then? bd2412 T 22:30, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

  Exactly. And that's why I'm depressed. Not just admins, but other editors, don't seem to care to respect such consensus any more. Dicklyon (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

  Consensus can change. Perhaps it has. If you disagree with the close, you know the procedure to address that. bd2412 T 01:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

DPL

I am pestering you again, because you have been on Wiki a lot longer than I have.

H, who we discussed recently, seems to have their head screwed on.

So does Q, who has this month fixed a remarkable number of links. I've looked at several of their fixes, and they seemed to me sound enough. You might care to take a look also, in case I'm wrong. DPL may have another new recruit, and a long-time user at that.

As for me, I'm just going to keep plugging away in the depths of the Bonus List. I've just reached "Se-"; so, less than 4,000 to go to the end, now. When I've done what I can with that lot, I plan to start again from the top for the new stuff which has appeared behind me. Narky Blert (talk) 03:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Not pestering at all - I am glad to have the updates! bd2412 T 10:58, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Another heads-up. EoW is another dab-fixer who seems recently to have come out of nowhere. I haven't sampled any of their fixes, but have fixed a lot of their {{dn}} tags. I've found a lot of them easy - but have no criticism of that, for obvious reasons. I've just had a look at EoW's Talk Page - where another editor has recently complained about EoW adding {{dn}} tags rather than making the "obvious fixes" <sigh />. So, I posted a message of encouragement and an invitation to contact me. Narky Blert (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree, {{dn}} tags are better than an untagged disambiguation link. If it's an easy fix, at least the tag will alert someone to make the easy fix. EoW has been around a while, and seems to know what they are doing. bd2412 T 13:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

History of swimwear

Hi there.

Just letting you know that in this edit you added a spurious gallery to the 1940's section. The only reason I'm bringing it up is because from the edit summary it looks as though you used an automated tool to perform the edit - did you intend to add the gallery, or is the tool malfunctioning? Chaheel Riens (talk) 06:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

• Actually, this is the edit that added that gallery. All I did was to fix the disambiguation link "Japanese". bd2412 T 11:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Huh, you're right (of course). I think I must have compared a range of diffs by mistake. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:08, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

No problem at all. It happens. bd2412 T 11:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Redirect template updates

Greetings BD2412. You recently replaced a bunch of redirect templates, but results are wrong. For example:

Industry, California

• You replaced {{This is a redirect|from move}} with {{Redirect category shell|from move}} which displays "This page is a redirect: from move". The correct syntax would be:

{{Redirect category shell |
  {{R from move}}
}}

The Donald

• You replaced {{This is a redirect|from nickname|upw}} with {{Redirect category shell|from nickname|upw}} which displays "This page is a redirect: upw". The correct syntax would be:

{{Redirect category shell |
  {{R from nickname}}
  {{R unprintworthy}}
}}

I fixed those two example cases, the latter being actually a {{Redirect from misspelling}}. I let you figure out how to fix all your changes. Note that it is recommended to leave two newlines before the {{Redirect category shell}}, whereas a lot of redirect pages have the {{redr}} template directly behind the redirect code; you might want to fix that too. Best of luck! — JFG ^talk 03:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

For the time being, I have set my bot to revert all the changes. I'll figure out the complete fix this weekend, if no one else does so first. bd2412 T 03:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a bot request discussion open related to this (see Wikipedia:Bot requests#Convert Template:This is a redirect to Template:Redirect category shell. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 13:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Looks like your new version does the job, thanks! — JFG ^talk 13:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I think there are large swaths of this task that will have to be done manually. bd2412 T 22:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Why? Ran into trouble? — JFG ^talk 22:39, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Just occasional instances of unique formulations that are not easily amenable to an automated scheme of correction. Things like ΦΛX look particularly vexing. There is also some tendency for additional templates to appear outside of the "This is a redirect" template, so that they would still fall outside the shell once generated. Technically, that isn't wrong, but they still shouldn't be that way. bd2412 T 22:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I see. — JFG ^talk 06:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

SyFy

Hi, by moving {{pp-move-indef}} to the top, you broke the redirect. For a redirect to work, it must be at the very start of the page's code. You can preview a redirect before you save: if what you have is a working redirect then it will display as a bent arrow followed by a link to the target page. — Smjg (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

• That should not have happened. I will make sure it does not, going forward. bd2412 T 11:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Replacing depreciated template {{This is a redirect}}

Hello BD2412. I noticed some recent edits of yours using AWB to replace the depreciated {{This is a redirect}} and it seems you are not achieving your goal. For example, when you arrived at Augustus Kenan, the page had the following content:

#REDIRECT [[Augustus Holmes Kenan]]
 
{{Redr|from personal name|from short name}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Kenan, Augustus}}

After your edit, the page is arranged with the following content, as shown:

#REDIRECT [[Augustus Holmes Kenan]]


{{This is a redirect|from personal name|from short name}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Kenan, Augustus}}

You are adding an extra new line between #REDIRECT [[Augustus Holmes Kenan]] and the {{Rcat}}s and furthermore when you replace {{Redr}} with {{This is a redirect}} you are still using the depreciated template; merely replacing a shortcut with its target. I'm not entirely sure why your edit summary describes this as a multi step process either as it is certainly achievable in one step. The end result for the example here should be either:

#REDIRECT [[Augustus Holmes Kenan]]
 
{{Redirect category shell|{{R from personal name}}{{R from short name}} }}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Kenan, Augustus}}

or

#REDIRECT [[Augustus Holmes Kenan]]
 
{{Redirect category shell|
{{R from personal name}}
{{R from short name}}
}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Kenan, Augustus}}

Best regards.--John Cline (talk) 05:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

That is why it is a multi-step process. I have a script to replace certain specific combinations, but they all start with {{This is a redirect| so I don't have to do everything twice (once with {{This is a redirect| and once with {{redr|); however, to capture the broadest swath, I first replace {{redr| everywhere. That way, I will capture the most common simple uses first, and make everything else uniform so that it is easier to implement the more complex uses later. bd2412 T 10:59, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for that reply. I understand. And thank you for helping clean-up these redirects, it is well appreciated.--John Cline (talk) 11:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Just as an additional note, {{this is a redirect}} is now on the auto-subst list, so you don't need to be performing bot-like edits at bot-like speed, especially when those edits fail WP:COSMETICBOT. Primefac (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't see how auto-substing can possibly work when there are so many pages with unrecognized parameter issues. This is the case for enormous numbers of R from modification templates. bd2412 T 18:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Examples please? I'm not sure what you mean by "unrecognized parameters". Primefac (talk) 18:37, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

For example, Bus. Day (South Africa). The e0 parameter (specifically "e0=Suggest using this redirect in referring to this publication in citations") ceases to be visible on the page when "This is a redirect" is switched to "Redirect category shell". bd2412 T 18:40, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Um... looks like it works fine to me. It actually looks like your replacements aren't working properly, not the autosubst. Trust me, this wrapper/replacement was cleared by a few people. I know what I'm doing. Primefac (talk) 18:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you give me an example of a replacement of mine not working properly? By the way, my current task is just removing excess new lines added during my initial experimental run. Another editor has asked me to do this, so I am accommodating. bd2412 T 18:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah, interesting, I misread the template you were shifting around. My apologies. However, doing massive AWB runs that only alter whitespace are generally not permitted per COSMETICBOT. So I highly suggest that even if a #REDIRECT doesn't have a space between it and the {{redr}} you should leave it be. Primefac (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

The thing is, I added this whitespace during my test run of fixing the redirect shells. This addition has drawn a stern objection, so I am removing it. I will be done within a few hours. I suppose I could do so without using AWB, but that would take years. bd2412 T 19:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Either way, a few spaces are immaterial. If you had broken something on your first AWB run, then by all means you should fix it. But accidentally adding in an extra hard return doesn't break anything. Primefac (talk) 19:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Spacing fix

We don't need these edits [1], do we? See Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules_of_use #3, #4. Materialscientist (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

The issue was that I added extra line breaks while experimenting with a good pattern to replace a deprecated template. Another editor complained that they are "undesirable", so I was just cleaning up after myself. I was also using the run as an opportunity to find an fix a real error, the replication of a "p1" parameter tag that was used in the deprecated template but did not have the intended effect in the successor template. bd2412 T 00:23, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Right, but see Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules_of_use #3, #4, and please stop. All you you've been doing recently could and should be done by a bot. Then your edits could be filtered out in watchlists. Materialscientist (talk) 00:28, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I completed this course of edits quite a while ago—last month, UTC, actually—and have since moved on to other things. I don't understand why you are addressing the matter as if I were still in the midst of actively doing this. bd2412 T 00:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Negative. The linked edit is recent [2], and it is just a random selection out of hundreds (or thousands). "Last month" is correct and irrelevant - May has started hours ago. Materialscientist (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

My point is that the task is completed. It's over. Done. Finished. Kaput. Hence the past tense in my initial response. bd2412 T 01:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

It seems relevant, given that six hours ago I was the one asking you not to continue making such edits. Apparently it takes multiple admins requesting something before you do it? But, as you say, you're done and finished, so hopefully there won't be a "next time". Primefac (talk) 01:48, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, consider me admonished. I'll just get back to disambiguation link fixing. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Mind control?

Thanks for correcting my mistake of redirecting Mind control to its disambiguation page. However I still see a problem and I'm not sure what to do. As you said, consensus says that brainwashing should be called brainwashing, not called mind control. But that's what the redirect does now, redirects mind control to brainwashing. BigJim707 (talk) 12:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

That is not a problem at all, per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. bd2412 T 22:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I see what you are saying. Someone put a link to the mind control disambiguation page on Brainwashing and that takes care of what I was seeing was a problem. BigJim707 (talk) 02:51, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thank you for all the check wiki and other cleanups you perform on a mostly daily basis, without you we would probably have nothing but check wiki errors on every page on Wikipedia. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 20:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but I am hardly the only person doing this, or the most productive editor in this area. bd2412 T 20:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2016 Cure Award

In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks again to you too! bd2412 T 23:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Romanov (disambiguation)

rename and Romanov (disambiguation) only Romanov --MilanKovacevic (talk) 13:18, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Romanov. Since you had some involvement with the Romanov redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, I have weighed in. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Springs, Alexander

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Springs, Alexander requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 03:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

•  Done - Cheers! bd2412 T 03:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi

An editor appears to claim that the removed entry violated wp:DABDIC. Is that correct? 92.6.179.137 (talk) 09:33, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

• I don't see the basis of removal stated. You could ask the editor who removed the line. bd2412 T 10:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

5th editor to break the million barrier

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Congratulations on your millionth edit! ϢereSpielChequers 10:46, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! It's been quite a decade! bd2412 T 10:59, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Samuel F. Rice

Hello. I'm working on Samuel Farrow Rice. I didn't realize you had a draft for it. I suggest you delete it? And maybe we could just add your succession box.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

No problem. I've made it a redirect. Note that we have bare-bones drafts initiated for all missing Alabama Supreme Court Justices. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:06, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Are you able to find/upload his picture please?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I have looked. So far I have found nothing. bd2412 T 21:57, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected Edit Template on Jesus Christ

On WP:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Jesus_Christ There's an ongoing discussion regarding the template you used to semi-protect our article Jesus Christ. I had to use the bracketed version because someone placed a redirect to our article Jesus on it. Which works, and should seem to remove any NPOV concerns regarding Jesus Christ, but Hijiri 88 is wishing to change the template from your wording to a less-restrictive version. Since you're still an active editor, I think your reasoning for the existing template would contribute considerably to the disucssion. Please consider adding it to that discussion. Thank you in advance loupgarous (talk) 04:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

• My edit was strictly for purposes of replacing the deprecated {{This is a redirect}} category shell with the new {{Redirect category shell}} category shell. I have no preference for what specific categories are listed therein. bd2412 T 04:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump rape case listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Donald Trump rape case. Since you had some involvement with the Donald Trump rape case redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — JFG ^talk 04:15, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Nice work on that article! Plus... a request

Hello BD2412,

You have really cleaned up the Nolan BLP nicely! I doubt that it will stay that way for long, but it is in much better condition than before. You managed to include all the relevant content while remaining truthful but avoiding anything scurrilous that has not yet been established in a court of law.

The real reason that I am here is because I would like to know how you added the two very large bouncing Wikipedia balls to your user page. I have a small discrete one at the bottom of mine, but I like yours better. I don't want to open your user page for editing and go poking around to figure it out, so I will just ask you directly. Another positive about your version: Your bouncing Wikipedia even shows up on hover-over! I want mine to too!

Thank you for considering my request.--FeralOink (talk) 03:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Greetings! The code for the top and bottom bouncing Wiki-balls is:

<div style="position: fixed; left:0; top:0; display:block; height:{{{1|150}}}px; width:{{{1|150}}}px;"><div style="position: relative; width: {{{1|150}}}px; height: {{{1|150}}}px; overflow: lolz">

<div style="position: absolute; top: 0px; left: 0px; z-index: 2">[[File:New-Bouncywikilogo.gif|200px]]</div></div></div>

<!-- Foo -->

<div style="position: fixed; left: 0; bottom: 0; display: block">[[File:Bouncywikilogo.gif]]</div>

To be honest, the top one is a little bit of a pain, because the image overlaps the top of the sidebar menu, so I can't click on the main page link from my user page. I keep it around anyway. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I am going to give it a try right now :o) --FeralOink (talk) 06:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Politics

Dear BD2412,

We are a team of social scientists conducting research on collaboration among Wikipedians and would love your input. We have prepared a very short survey (it takes just a few seconds to a few minutes) that asks about your political preferences and if you had any experiences collaborating with editors with similar or different preferences. Please fill it out here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSftvvCdGGY07VL1R1O4JhwnOTHl8CyiFnn17gC6EeWgJj-2Bg/viewform?usp=pp_url&entry.587409359=BD2412

You can find out more about our research project here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics

Thank you

WikiResearcher (talk)