User talk:Gimmetrow

See User:Gimmetrow for the userpage. (Warning: may contain test scripting)
Permalink 2006-08-14
Permalink 2006-10-18

Ref fixer

I left one for you to check: at Melanoma, in the Staging section, there was a ref followed by a colon which the fixer didn't pick up. Sandy 23:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The script doesn't do anything with colons. Gimmetrow 00:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmetrow, the script has been such a hit, I don't what we did without it. I've been fixing refs all over the place: no complaints so far (no thanks either :-) You/I received a compliment on my FAC for perfect ref placement LOL ! Sandy (Talk) 22:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By refresh, you mean ctrl-F5 on my monobook, right? That's what I did. The good news will be if we "put ourselves out of business" as people begin to catch on. Thanks! Sandy (Talk) 00:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I spoke too soon: I just got a nice note of thanks for ref fixing :-) Sandy (Talk) 04:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put an extremely POV article on AFD

Hello! I like to hear your opinion on the article Policide on the Israeli-Arab conflict which I put on AFD. I.m.o., this is an article written with a clear agenda and this is POV beyond repair (make it NPOV and then it would no longer be on the topic that it was intended for). Count Iblis 13:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref fixer 2

SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) pointed me to your ref fixer bot. I was hoping you could install it for me (I'm sort of scared of editing my monobook.js and causing irreparable damage to something :D ) Thanks in advance, Fvasconcellos 22:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Didn't know that (about editing someone else's monobook.js) – learn something new every day... Fvasconcellos 23:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Call me stupid – I must have done something wrong, I've got nothing. Copied

{{subst:js|User:Gimmetrow/replace.js}}, pasted to my monobook.js, saved, Shift-Ctrl-R, went on my merry way – and I've noticed absolutely no change to anything. What can I do? Fvasconcellos 14:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FV, edit an article, and when you're in edit mode, you should see new tabs at the top of the article - you click on the tab to fix the refs, then save the article.  Sandy (Talk) 14:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's it exactly; no new tabs, no difference from pre-installation appearance of edit mode. Fvasconcellos 16:44, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even when you're editing an article?  Sandy (Talk) 16:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Fvasconcellos 16:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is your browser?  I use IE6, hit ctrl-F5 after loading script into monobook, and have a tab that says "fix refs".  Sandy (Talk) 16:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firefox 1.5.0.7, Win XP. I did Shift-Ctrl-R, then cleared my cache when I first noticed no changes. Fvasconcellos 17:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm stumped :-)  While you're waiting to hear from Gimmetrow, let me know if there's an article you want me to fix.  You can always try to the old cold boot ?? Sandy (Talk) 17:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Hi, this page came up on my watchlist, thought I'd have a go and see if it worked for me. It didn't, neither in IE or Firefox 1.5.0.6. After a little investigating I discovered the reason is that replace.js is using a function addLink to actually display the tabs. This function is defined in User:Omegatron/monobook.js/addlink.js. An 'inc' in Gimmetrow's monobook.js includes this already, and the automated peer review script in Sandy's monobook.js also has a call to addlink hidden in there, which is why it works for them. If you add {{subst:js|User:Omegatron/monobook.js/addlink.js}} to your monobook.js before the corresponding call for replace.js (and then clear the cache) it should work! --Dr pda 20:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It worked! Thank-yous all around to Gimmetrow, Sandy and Dr pda. Just more proof Wikipedia works... Fvasconcellos 21:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

amanda dowler article

What did you actually change in your last edit of the article?--Lucy-marie 16:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Techno jargon

Support, though some techical jargon is a little difficult to follow. I noticed that "comorbid" is wikilinked quite a few times early on (twice in one paragraph) but not again in later sections. I wasn't sure what it referred to when reading the section on "Social impact".  Gimmetrow 00:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gimmetrow, if you'll leave me a message about any techno-jargon of concern, I'll work on it - it could be that I'm overly familiar with the language, and don't realize when it veers too technical.  I have a hard time reading many of the medical articles for that reason, and had hoped I had pitched the article to laypersons - would love to fix any problems you see.  Thanks!  Sandy (Talk) 02:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TS et alia

Most of the jargon is wikilinked, but for the sake of those who read non-linearly some could be wikilinked later too. I already did that with "comorbid" - another one is "epidemiological" in the "Research" section. BTW, two consecutive sentences there begin "Controversy remains...". Also this sentence seems repetitive in a puzzling way: "One of the most controversial presumed causes, the PANDAS hypothesis, remains contentious."

Thanks (someone else just removed your additional links to comorbid, which I agreed were helpful, so I'm stuck there.)  I'll look at those other two issues.  I added a definition to comorbid earlier on.  I've discovered that one of the joys of FAC is that you have to please competing and contradictory statements :-) It's good to be on this side of it; should make me a better and kinder reviewer.  Sandy (Talk) 04:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw someone objected about access dates for urls. I don't really see why access dates are so critical. If the source is a journal, the author/name is the citation, the url is just convenience. For other online sources, if the original link goes dead the url should be sufficient to find it in archives, especially with the page title.

Completely agree, thought what I had was more than adequate since they were journal articles and the full-text URLs were courtesty links, but know that it's best to just go with the flow on FAC sometimes.  Sandy (Talk) 04:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see a few people are using the ref fixer now. Next time I edit the docs I'll add that it uses addLink. Gimmetrow 04:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.
The anonymous Gundagai editor is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Gundagai editors#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.
For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 18:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sean Combs

OK.

References in Templates

Greetings Gimmetrow, sorry to disturb you but I'm curious to know what became of your bug report about references in Templates? I'm encountering this very problem now... see Template:Armenian ethnicity. Is there a decent workaround for this bug? Thanks. (→Netscott) 00:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref fixer

Check this one out - commas between strings of refs, can't be fixed with the fixer.  Macedonia (terminology)  Sandy (Talk) 03:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's because the commas are between sup tags, so it's not just a comma. I've seen this before. Handing this (or html comments) would take extra coding. Gimmetrow 03:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
edit conflict - I was just coming to say the same thing.  Weird.  Thanks!  Sandy (Talk) 03:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gimmetrow. Great script! I have a couple of questions about it, though:

Could you make the second regexp tab optional (configurable)? I recently removed most of the scripts on my monobook.js because my tabs were extending way off the screen.
Would you mind if I incorporated the script into the peer reviewing script?

Thanks, AZ _t 01:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOGRTAC Editorials delisting - please vote in poll

Hi Gimmetrow, 

Right now there's a major change that's been edited into the List of groups referred to as cults rules, that if a slippery slope, could cause ripples across the encyclopedia and beyond. The five-some logical reasons against the change are bad enough, but #6, motivation, is the angle that could make the internet news. A member of the Wikipedia cult is acting just like other cults in trying to get WP delisted. It would be funny if it didn't make WP lose NPOV PR. 
 
If you are still interested in LOGRTAC please vote in the poll. Milo 14:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CFD error

Well, thank you for correcting my obvious error.  I had previously understood or been told that cats weren't necessarily appreciated in redirects; thus, the removals.  I shall sit in my corner quietly and ponder the err of my ways :)  -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 15:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Hill (mobster)

Oops. Sorry about that. It sometimes get tricky to tell which edits are quite correct, especially when I am not expert about the subject or it is part of a controversy. V. Joe 19:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Template:Ent

Hi Gimmetrow, I've replied  on my talk page. Paul August ☎ 06:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monsignori

Sorry, I cannot help more. The rules about age and priesthood qualifications were communicated by the Secretariat of State in 2001, but I know of no printed or electronic source where they were published.  The rest of what I wrote (including, I think, the exception from the 45-year-old rule for vicars general, and very definitely the statement that vicars general hold "the rank of Protonotary Apostolic Supernumerary" - the reason given to justify the other statements) is based on a note I made about the same time, from some not excessively earlier source(s) of which I no longer have any memory.  The content of that note is what I first posted; much of it is no longer in the article.
If the Pius X legislation no longer holds, on what basis are vicars general classified as Monsignors?  Ten or more years ago, I enquired from the Congregation for Divine Worship whether priests were still authorized to celebrate three Masses on 2 November.  The Roman Missal of that time mentioned only Christmas Day as a day on which this was permitted.  Consequently, at least one Ordo (the Australian) stated that it was no longer permitted on 2 November.  At least one other Ordo said the opposite.  The Congregation answered me, saying that the privilege granted by Benedict XV had not been withdrawn.  (The 2002 Roman Missal has now explicitly added 2 November.)  I presume it is the same for vicars general.
Apart from the Wikipedia article, I never came across the expression "black protonotaries"; but I am not questioning it.
From this point on, do what you like with the article.  I can give no more help, except to suggest that you omit anything that you consider - what's the phrase? - original research?  But that neither should you put in, without clear evidence, denials of what I have written, since (rightly or wrongly) I am confident of its exactitude.
The article is not on my watchlist.  It was more or less by chance that I looked at it yesterday or the day before.  And I looked at it again today only because of a typical HarvardOxon message sent to me about my edit.  In fact I replied to his message hours before the thought came to me to have another look at the article.  Lima 20:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{Ent}} & {{Rf}}

Templates have been changed to semiprotection so you can perform your magic. When finished, please leave a note on my talkpage. Thanks. ~Kylu (u|t)  05:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmmm

Task Force would be a nice idea yeah. 
There's a Wiki that's kinda un-updated in existence that has most of this on it at Mything.org so we could just work there instead. I see your point about 3rd party though (The Elfoid 21:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)).[reply]
Mything.org's set up and half started, it just needs updating and I've not had motivation yet. If this is gonna go, we can get to it. VR'll set you up an account if I ask (The Elfoid 22:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GRBerry

Your neutral opinion invites a response.  I'm choosing to make it here, but you can move it to the RfA if you so choose.  
I did not see the YouTube link as a convenience link.  My understanding of a convenience link is a link to a readily available (thus convenient) copy of a source, when the editor has actually used a different source which is cited.  In this case, that would have been someone who could say I've seen the original, here is a copy.  This definition comes from one of the bullet points in Wikipedia:Citing sources#What to do when a reference link "goes dead".
Had it been a convenience link, at the very least, the provider would have said when and where the interview ran on TV.  Looking at the YouTube link again, I see today that Renetto only claimed that it ran on his local affiliate, not on the network.  Nobody mentioned this in the DRV discussion, so I don't know if anyone else noticed that; I certainly didn't, and I generally think people were assuming it was the network, because local news coverage often gets deprecated for being local.
You can see an example of times I've used online copies of hard copy originals in the Zayat article that I mention in response to question two.  Three of the seven sources are from Google Books. GRBerry 20:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your slanderous comments on my talk page

Please stop reverting my edits and ascribing false motives to them.  The Weiner, Arkansas edit is fully sourced, as have prior edits to Danielle Fishel.  The last thing Wikipedia needs is another editor with too much ego and too little knowledge about the articles they oversee. 76.2.102.73 01:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

replace.js

I can't say how much I'm grateful for replace.js! Thank you so much! Just a note, it'd be very helpful for new editors to include line about how to edit monobook.js (to go to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Name/monobook.js) in User_talk:Gimmetrow/replace.js article. I figured it out but it took me a while.--Pethr 05:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. And no, i don't think we'll see Mac OS X at WP:FAC anytime soon. Unfortunately it needs much more than replace.js. I was so excited about this script that I had to try it somewhere remembering that I put Mac OS X article aside because it would be too hard to correct it the old way. Your script will save me so much time!--Pethr 05:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gimmetrow, what is replace.js?  Pethr just thanked me on an FAC, and I didn't know what s/he was talking about ?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pethr just clued me in, that your "marvelous ref-fixing script" is called replace.js - I still amaze myself sometimes :-)  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote editing

When considering editing of footnotes, keep in mind the possibilities in Bug 2745: Have References text edit window on Edit pages. (SEWilco 06:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Jessica Alba

Didn't you know that she's still growing??? Balloonman 08:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prose size script in edit mode

The reason the script could still be called in edit mode was that I hadn't bothered to exclude the possibility; I have done so now, and also switched to the newer version of your ref fixer. Thanks for updating the selected article on the Heraldry & Vexillology Portal btw. Dr pda 19:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prose size issue has been raised on the talk page at WP:FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gimmetrow, Thanks for your feedback. I've modified the script so it doesn't try to use the search function to get the wikitext size when the url is of the form /w/index.php... The alert box was starting to annoy me, so I've changed it to just display 'Problem with search' in place of the number of KB in the event of something going wrong. I've also fixed the script so it handles redirects properly, i.e. gives the size of wikitext for the page redirected to, not the redirect itself. Dr pda 00:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The EVERYTHING Barnstar







The Working Man's Barnstar


To Gimmetrow, they haven't yet invented the barnstar that covers all that you do for Wikipedia.  Whenever I've had a problem - whether technical, policy, copyright, editing, or just straightening out a mess - you're always on the problem, usually before I even know about it.  Your ref fixer and adjustments to FAC templates are life savers.  You're the best! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Queribus and Château_de_Quéribus

Sorry about that.  I didn't realise the implications, but thought that by not deleting the original page its History would stay there, and I put a note in the Edit of the new page saying where it had come from and why.  I didn't understand 'Move', but having looked into it will obviously use it in future.  Thanks for putting me on the right track.  Emeraude 09:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ref fixer

Here's a weird one the ref fixer didn't get:[1].  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Hey Gimmetrow - Thanks for the support on getting List of Formula One fatal accidents up to featured status...much appreciated.--Skully Collins ^Edits 13:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Myth Tournaments

I need to ask VR for my password (again) on his Mything.org Wiki and I'll ask if we can set you up an account. I'd say its much much easier to do it there. A Wiki runs a little differently but it shouldn't be too hard to get used to...and we can do what we want. We can include a link on our pages to that.
(The Elfoid 14:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'll set up a login on mything.org some other time. Do you have the content here saved so it can be transferred  there? In the last AfD, you weren't really enthusiastic about keeping the SB tournaments article. I would like to get this resolved so the articles here can be cleaned up. Could this go to AfD #2 in a couple weeks? Gimmetrow 15:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't enthusiastic because I wanted to keep what we could on here.
I don't have it saved no. The page has most of it but its severely out of date and notes from some people aren't on it. However all material we edited out already are in the archives here - if we check back before all the things we made to streamline it (if we're doing it on our own Myth Wiki we can use all useful info we like). I will do that when I have the chance.

Template:Catholic-link

A deletion discussion in which you voted, that of Template:Catholic-link, is up for deletion review, where the template may be deleted or retained depending upon the review discussion. You are welcome to comment and/or vote at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Template:Catholic-link. The key point of this discussion is whether the "default keep by no consensus" result was correct; discussion of the template itself is secondary (but may still be important). — coelacan talk — 04:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the "precedent for templates suggesting some text could be used to improve an article"? I have seen no such thing besides the CE template. I need to see other examples so that I can understand what you're talking about. — coelacan talk — 07:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please also see this: User_talk:Coelacan#Catholic_link_DRV — coelacan talk — 07:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmebot missed peer reviews

Example Raul654 18:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't miss them - it's not even looking for them. Gimmetrow 18:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it looking at anything besides the FAC archive? Raul654 19:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of United States Navy ratings

Hello, regarding your comment on the FLC page about the two sentences I don't really understand what you mean. Your sentence "This suggests that the current ratings not titles of jobs that individuals actually perform" doesn't make much sense. I think you mean that a reader could infer that none of the current ratings refer to actual jobs and that they all refer to job types and therefore each rating would have a job title under it. Now that being said I don't see a way to revise these two sentences to relay that information other than just spelling it out into three or four more sentences.— WilsBadKarma ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 00:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Byzantine Empire

WHy did youremove the FAC page from the template The Placebo Effect 15:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it wasn't a FAC. It did not go through the FAC process in December. However, that caused another problem to appear, so I put it back for now. Gimmetrow 15:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor change to Template:Fa top

Hi! This is just to let you know that I've made a minor change to Template:Fa top. I doubt it will affect your bot. —Remember the dot (t) 17:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmebot on facfailed

Gimmetrow, Jeffpw (talk · contribs) took over from me the chore of tagging article talk pages with facfailed.  Now that the bot is running, should he stop doing that?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:John Brooke-Little with Earl Marshal.jpg

This really had no source -- nothing at all.  The uploader used {{newspapercover}}, which might have been an attempt to communicate that the photograph was once used by some newspaper somewhere.  The uploader was notified of the problem, and the image was eventually deleted by Makemi.  81.193.153.237 may have failed to place the deletion notification templates in the captions of the articles using this image, but this was really more or less a blatant copyvio that should have been deleted on sight.  All of that said, deleting admins do need to check the history, but even that is sometimes not enough.  Blanking of a fair use tag by an anon is sometimes the copyright holder objecting to a spurious fair use claim, for instance.  A lot of judgement has to be used with image deletion, but there is only a handful of admins doing it and there are hundreds of images to be deleted every day.  More automation might very well be helpful.  Jkelly 01:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]