User talk:Dicklyon: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 17:16, 16 June 2019

A random style tip:

Another styletip ...

Dashes in article titles

When naming an article, don't use a hyphen as a substitute for an en dash that properly belongs in the title, for example in Eye–hand span. To aid searching and linking, provide a redirect from the corresponding article title with hyphens in place of en dashes, as in Eye-hand span.

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mary Kay Letourneau. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

f-number

Hi, Dick. I wonder what you mean by this: "Most twentieth-century cameras had a continuously variable aperture, using an iris diaphragm, with each full stop marked. Click-stopped aperture came into common use in the 1960s; the aperture scale usually had a click stop at every whole and half stop." I had taken "continuously variable" to mean the aperture does not have click stops - what we call a clickless aperture today. I took the article to mean that apertures were clickless until the 1960s, and then mostly clicked. "Most twentieth-centry cameras" is confusing to me, because I figure there are more cameras from the 1960s to the 1990 than before. What did you mean? BTW, thanks for your tireless edits on the F-number page. It's difficult to keep things there straight against editors who don't understand things. Balazer (talk) 08:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Balazer: I don't think "mostly clicked" since the 1960s is correct, but not sure; and even with clicks they're continuously variable. My point of saying "20th century" instead of "old" was to leave behind the discrete stops such as Waterhouse stops. We could potentially change to something like "Cameras through most of the twentieth century"; or seek sources that actually say something about this. Dicklyon (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

116

Probably less confusing to others to discuss here. I have plenty of VP116 now, and I think two rolls of C116, the latter in the refrigerator. I believe I was told it was refrigerated before I bought it, too. And I have a Nikor 116 tank, too. I even have a few rolls of VP122, but no tank to develop that. I tray developed one roll of 122, as I hear was done in the old days, making a U shape and see-saw it though the tray of chemicals. When I was younger, I had a Kodak tank with 116 apron, the only time I ever used one. My first tank was a Yankee II, which I don't have anymore, but I bought one on eBay a few years ago, which seems unused. I bought that for 110, because none of my other tanks do 110. Gah4 (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My tank is an FR Special model 2. I also took two of those and cut the bottom off one and the top off the other and glued them together to make a tank for 5.25" aerial film, circa 1968, for my big panoramic camera. I'm sure I have that one around here some place. Do you frequent the Photofair or such for your film and cameras, or what? A comment on your user page suggests you may have a Bendix G-15 computer; you into that stuff, too? Are you in the Silicon Valley area by chance? Dicklyon (talk) 18:43, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:GreenBayCathedral blur test.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:GreenBayCathedral blur test.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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 deleted 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. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know if I would have contested it, as it went away so fast. I don't remember what this was. Dicklyon (talk) 20:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of eponymous adjectives in English

Hi,

Regarding my edit to the above-referenced article, I did not find "Titchy" in an online dictionary, but I did find "Titch," so I corrected that. I didn't notice it was a list of adjectives; I wanted to acknowledge the original contributor's intention in adding "titchy" by just changing it to a word that did exist. However, I have since looked for "titchy" again and found it in en.oxforddictionaries.com. I changed "Titian"to "titian" as that is how it is spelled in dictionaries when it is an adjective. I suggest changing both "Titchy" and "Titian" to lower-case to make them match dictionary spellings. DBlomgren (talk) 16:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but take a look at more and see if the case pattern there is actually approaching consistency in the way you suggest (as opposed to the alternative of all entries using sentence case). Dicklyon (talk) 20:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DBlomgren: I would think titchy is just a variant of tetchy (especially since that was originally teachie in Early Modern English, and had numerous variants in Middle English, according to Wiktionary). Even touchy in this sense is a variation of the same word, and unrelated to touch. On upper-casing, we already have an MoS bit about this: lower-case eponyms when (yes) most dictionaries do so, but it can vary by context: when directly tied to namesake's context, it's capitalized, but not when it's not (Platonic ideals, but a platonic relationship; and the Draconian legal system in Athens, but a company policy criticized by former employees as "draconian". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 17:50, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ralph Northam

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ralph Northam. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:R Stanton Avery.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:R Stanton Avery.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Conflict

Its fixed I guess... I actually didn't know what I did there. ITSQUIETUPTOWN talk • contribs 04:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:WikiLeaks

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:WikiLeaks. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

North West England

Hi, Dick. I was a bit surprised by your edit; I've long thought that the MoS says that numerical ranks (e.g. third largest, second highest grossing, etc.) should not be hyphenated. I suppose you know the MoS better than I, so I have self-reverted for the time being. Am I wrong about this prescription? Joefromrandb (talk) 21:20, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) If you're going to be really pedantic about it, shouldn't it be "third-most-populated region"? It is not a populated region which is third-most, after all! — Amakuru (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that it should either have 2 hyphens or none. Joefromrandb (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not sure on this. Can you link the relevant MOS section? I put the hyphen back mainly because your edit summary didn't give a reason for removing it, and it seemed sensible. Two hyphens might be OK, too. Apparently I'm not the only one who is uncertain. Dicklyon (talk) 06:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure either. If my fuzzy mind recalls correctly, I believe I took at face-value the word of an MoS prescriptivist who reverted me long ago. MOS:HYPHEN doesn't seem to offer any specific guidance. I wonder if Tony might weigh in here. Joefromrandb (talk) 12:45, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The hyphen(s) are necessary. In the case of triple items I usually try to reword; but we're all used to 12-year-old girl, in the US and outside. I guess helps that it's short. So: highest-grossing film; second-highest-grossing film (or the film that produced the second-highest revenue in 2018). Tony (talk) 02:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input, Tony. As I've no doubt that you also know far more than I about this, I will happily stand corrected. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Delta-sigma modulation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flip-flop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Italian supercentenarians

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Italian supercentenarians. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In former Soviet Union, God trusts us

Hi. No matter how the RM turns out, it's resulted in some pretty good edits to both the article and related templates. That's one of the things a good RM often accomplishes for its targeted article. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:34, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Richard B. Spencer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Richard B. Spencer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:SRGB Gamma.png

The file File:SRGB Gamma.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canada–United States border, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cornwall Island (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Danny Baker

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Danny Baker. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:GreenBayCathedral unblur test.jpg

The file File:GreenBayCathedral unblur test.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Described by uploader as a test image; not used, and doesn't appear useful.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wikiacc (¶) 01:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of German supercentenarians

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of German supercentenarians. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:SRGB Gamma2.png

The file File:SRGB Gamma2.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Creek latitudes

The creek latitudes and elevations I added to List of watercourses in the San Francisco Bay Area back in 2008 were taken from the USGS GNIS database. The 6- and 7-digit ID numbers identify particular records in that database.

I hope you're not in the habit of deleting comments you don't understand. Why would you do such a thing? —Stepheng3 (talk) 15:53, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Stepheng3: Not a habit, but I didn't want to leave the comments if the result was to sort the creeks out of order. They should be ordered by where their mouths are along the bay; were these latitudes perhaps some other part of the creek that put them out of order? Dicklyon (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Based on comparing on Google Maps, I think Easton Creek and Sanchez Creek have their latitudes swapped in the GNIS (pretty nearly per their mouths, which may have moved a little). Given the path along Easton Drive, I don't think Google has that one wrong. Is there a way to ask them to check or update their data? Dicklyon (talk) 17:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite possible. Another possibility is that Google and/or local authorities swapped the names of the creeks. The USGS website's contact form has a topic for "Report a Problem". I've not tried it, but it seems worth a try.--Stepheng3 (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Calvin Cheng

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Calvin Cheng. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Air lock diving-bell plant

May I ask why you just made that change on Air Lock Diving-Bell Plant without doing it on the talk page. What policy did you invoke for this change. In the narratives of the various sources I agree it is very often in lowercase, but it is also in "all caps". I chose to name the title from an amalgam of the sources, it could easily have been Caisoon Diving-bell" .... The way I titled it (caps and small) was the same as countless numbers of Engineering drawings I've witnessed in the past. Thats the convention I used. Broichmore (talk) 09:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:CAPS and WP:LOWERCASE, we avoid unnecessary caps and all-caps. Title-case uses such as titles of drawings are not relevant. Dicklyon (talk) 09:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see your justification applies here, if that were the case then Village Pump, should be changed to Village pump. What about WP:Manual of Style/Trademarks. This was a title, not general text. Therefore title case was the way to go, and every word here is a noun, so I was correct. MOS:THECAPS. Your precipitous action also destroyed the link on the pageviews statistics page, wiping out the stats for all views prior to this change. Damaging in this case, as it was in the dying hours of a DYK day. Broichmore (talk) 10:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The style and title guidelines apply to article space, not WP space. Wikipedia does not use title case for article titles; see WP:NCCAPS; also no title case for other heading levels in articles (in project pages, pretty much anything goes, as they're not part of the encyclopedia). I'm not sure what the statistics issue is; what is damaged? Dicklyon (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed at first that the article got 710 hits, which is obviously disappointing. Turned out that it already had 22,789 hits, a disconnect on the scoring reportage was caused by an your changing the title late in the day from Air Lock Diving-Bell Plant to Air lock diving-bell plant. The score does not move with a title change.

This says the opposite to what your saying: Quote: MOS:THECAPS Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Titles of works In English-language titles, every word is capitalized, except for articles, short coordinating conjunctions, and short prepositions. First and last words within a title, including a subtitle, are capitalized regardless of grammatical use. This is known as title case. Capitalization of non-English titles varies by language.

WP:Please discuss and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#How to use article talk pages#Make proposals: WP:TALK#DISCUSS states Proposals might include ... page moves which would have been appropriate here in the middle of a DYK.

As usual rules by their nature, prescribed rules can be and are contradictory. I feel aggrieved that such a minor thing as a difference of opinion on style has caused such havoc. After all many editors have inspected this article before releasing it for DYK. This was a change that should not have happened. Many fine editors have been pissed off the project in the past by such. Broichmore (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

B, I'm sorry you're feeling bummed about this, but you're not reading the guidelines correctly. The thing about title case that you're quoting is for titles of works (e.g. books, musical compositions), not titles of WP articles on random things, which use sentence case, not title case; the guidelines have no contradiction about this. As for the stats, I don't understand how that's a problem for anyone; the redirect page at the old title is still counting all the hits through the DYK link on the main page. Dicklyon (talk) 22:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Re:"Many fine editors have been pissed off the project in the past by such", this, if true, is the height of childishness. To use it as a justification for not editing to meet site-wide style guidelines is really not a good look. Primergrey (talk) 00:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 235: / Line 235: @@
 :{{ping|Stepheng3}} Not a habit, but I didn't want to leave the comments if the result was to sort the creeks out of order.  They should be ordered by where their mouths are along the bay; were these latitudes perhaps some other part of the creek that put them out of order? [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon#top|talk]]) 16:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 :Based on comparing on Google Maps, I think Easton Creek and Sanchez Creek have their latitudes swapped in the GNIS (pretty nearly per their mouths, which may have moved a little).  Given the path along Easton Drive, I don't think Google has that one wrong.  Is there a way to ask them to check or update their data? [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon#top|talk]]) 17:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
+::That's quite possible. Another possibility is that Google and/or local authorities swapped the names of the creeks. The [https://answers.usgs.gov/ USGS website's contact form] has a topic for "Report a Problem".  I've not tried it, but it seems worth a try.--[[User:Stepheng3|Stepheng3]] ([[User talk:Stepheng3|talk]]) 17:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 == Please comment on [[Talk:Calvin Cheng#rfc_C2438F1|Talk:Calvin Cheng]] ==

		The Original Barnstar
		I'm not sure why you haven't picked up a bevy of these already, but thanks for all your effort, particularly in tracking down good sources with diagrams, etc., on the photography- and color-related articles (not to mention fighting vandalism). Those areas of Wikipedia are much richer for your work. Cheers! —jacobolus (t) 02:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		To Dicklyon on the occasion of your photograph of Ivan Sutherland and his birthday! What a great gift. -User:SusanLesch 04:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		For your hard work in improving and watching over the Ohm's law article SpinningSpark 00:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your improvements to the Centrifugal force articles. Your common sense approach of creating a summary-style article at the simplified title, explaining the broad concepts in a way that is accessible to the general reader and linking to the disambiguated articles, has provided Wikipedia's readership with a desperately needed place to explain in simple terms the basic concepts involved in understanding these related phenomena. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]