Jump to content

User talk:Auntof6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tim Capehart (talk | contribs) at 17:22, 12 May 2010 (→‎Thanks for fixing my error: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mary Moody Northen

I thought I would let you know that I've begun work on an entry for Mary Moody Northen, William Lewis Moody, Jr.'s daughter. Right now its pretty bare bones, but as time allows in the next few days, I will build upon it. Feel free to join in, if you have any interest and/or time. Cheers! --Nsaum75 (talk) 04:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! I'll take a look when I have time, but for now I'm sure it's in good hands. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Brace, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Autographs Contribs 22:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why you think the edits were vandalism. The first removed an entry that I considered to be a dictionary definition; the term isn't even mentioned in the linked Association football article. The second brought two entries into compliance with disambiguation page rules. In addition, I see that you later reverted your reversion of my edits; that being the case, I don't appreciate having the vandalism notice on my user page, or an edit summary indicating that my edits were vandalism. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My fault completely. I forgot to turn Coprolalia off, an add-on for adding blunt words to webpages and I thought you had inserted "For the fucking surname, see..." - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/images/p/36892/1252920966

How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Autographs Contribs 01:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are also working on red link recovery. And I saw your exchange with EmanWilm. I have a bit of ADD so I tend to bounce about between pages. I do try to check whether someone has recently edited and leave that page alone for a while. I also try to do an entire section at a time. Anyway, feel free to drop me a line if I am getting in your way on a page.--Open2universe (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. I was more or less offering to stay out of EmanWilm's way, rather than the reverse, but I guess that wasn't understood. I certainly wasn't commenting on his/her work. I also tend to bounce around, so I know what you mean! --Auntof6 (talk) 17:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent changes!

Thanks for your recent edits!! - People like you help to build the sum f all human knowledge. 189.217.171.135 (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: {{all pages}} template

This new template looks useful, but could we have some documentation for it, please? For example, is there a way to have it ignore the "(disambiguation)" part of a dab page title, or even the parenthetical part of any title? Thanks!--Auntof6 (talk) 20:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on that as we speak. My plan actually is to make it so if you enter {{all page|desired start name}}, it'll link to all pages starting with the desired start name, while if you leave that out, it'll default to the page name. I have never created a template like this before, and I am still experimenting. Hellno2 (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate for fixing the link at UCB-Bahrain.

Twin towns or Sister cities?

Hi Auntof6, There is a current discussion open on the proposed name modification here if you wish to add your comments -- Marek.69 talk 01:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Auntof6! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 697 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Tony Spinosa (coach) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are simple bio-facts; you cannot copyright a job title, for example - besides the original university profile from which the linkedin one is copied is properly cited in this bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowfinjp (talk • contribs) 11:46, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2nd AfD nomination for article

I see you created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maged N. Kamel Boulos (2nd nomination). However, I can't find any first nomination anywhere. Can you give a link to it? Or is this a mistake? JamesBWatson (talk) 12:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I look at it, it was nominated twice before, making this the third time. The records of those previous nominations are here and here, on earlier versions of the article page. Those were removed without being addressed. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Aah! Now I understand. Those were speedy deletion nominations. There had not previously been an "Article for Deletion" discussion, so this should not have been labelled as a second nomination. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Sorry. Should I remove the reference to this being a second nomination? --Auntof6 (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably better to have it cleaned up to avoid confusion, so I have done it. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 13:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have just set a record for the number of consecutive posts to my talk page which are all "talkbacks" from the same editor. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Angarrack viaduct

Hi Auntof6, I have removed the orphan tag you placed on the new article Angarrack viaduct because five or six articles now link to it – that seems a reasonable number for an article of its length and nature. Andy F (talk) 11:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. That was placed by the AWB tool I was using. Did those other articles link to it when the tag was placed? If so, I'll report that AWB is placing orphan tags when it shouldn't. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Auntof6, IIRC I put either one or two Wikilinks to Angarrack viaduct when I created it. Then I established the other links after I saw the orphan tag. So I doubt if Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser is misbehaving – it encouraged me to put in the links so it was fulfilling one of its functions. Inevitably, however, some articles will by their nature have few links to them. Best wishes, Andy F (talk) 07:27, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Walter Hungerford of Farleigh

Please explain this edit. Have you had read the article and seen the attribution and notice in the references section? If so have you read wikipedia:plagiarism? -- PBS (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also why did you put of Farleigh into bold? -- PBS (talk) 11:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I wasn't familiar with attribution and sources that can be quoted verbatim. I will definitely read up on that. I put "of Farleigh" in bold because my understanding is that the article title should be bold the first time it's mentioned. I appreciate the education. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Hungerford of Rowden

this edit again have you read WP:Plagiarism? and have you any idea if the DNB is in copyright?

Also note as this is the second example that I have seen you do it the line bold line "Attribution" should NOT be a section heading.

-- PBS (talk) 12:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI the text was not copied from where you though it might be. The project has its own source for this text please see wikisource:Wikisource:WikiProject DNB and more specifically wikisource:Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 28.djvu/263. Any help in proofreading those pages will be appreciated. -- PBS (talk) 12:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My bad again. I'll be more careful with this, and will read up on these issues. Thanks for pointing them out. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Budapest String Quartet

Hi Auntof6--

I notice you undid the links I had placed in the section titles for HMV/Victor and for Columbia - is this because links in section titles are considered bad form? I think it would be a good idea to put those links in somewhere - most people will know Columbia, but His Majesty's Voice might be a problem. And Victor was the US subsidiary of HMV. I didn't post any of the History section (and haven't even read it), but even if HMV or Victor are discussed there, and possibly linked, I suspect no one jumping down to Recordings will ever see it.

I'm not sure it was there already when you went through but you'll notice I have a ref footnote attached to the main Recordings section title. It sort of sticks out at you because I couldn't make it work other than in the same larger size print. But it pertains to both the HMV/Victor and the Columbia subsections, and it's pretty necessary information.

BTW I'm still working my way through adding to the Columbias, so there may be a bunch more added. It wasn't I who set up the page formatting, but I'm trying to stay as consistent as possible. I thought it was important to put in the italicized "(see HMV/Victor, above)" for the few Beethoven quartets done in England, because it's well known that the group made three complete sets of the Beethoven, and the HMVs missing from the Columbia section seemed strange and wrong. There won't be any more like that to be added.

Please let me know if you have any suggestions on either page or entry layout. Thanks for your help. Milkunderwood (talk) 08:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking around now, I find this in the style manual: "Section names should not normally contain links, especially ones that link only part of the heading; they will cause accessibility problems." But "normally" implies exceptions may be made, and I don't know of a better place to put those two links for HMV/Victor and Columbia. (I'm not sure how they might cause an accessibility problem.) Suggestions? Milkunderwood (talk) 08:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Yes, my changes were because of that practice. The tool I use, AutoWikiBrowser (AWB), automatically makes that kind of change. The reason I edited that article was that it was flagged has having headings that ended with colons, but I use AWB's ability to make "general fixes" as well, and that's why the links were removed. I see those links in the introductory paragraph; maybe that's sufficient, since there's also a guideline that any given item is usually linked only once in an article. I'm not sure exactly how links in headings cause accessibility problems, either: maybe it doesn't render properly in some browsers.
Yes, I looked at the AWB and saw that's what happened while you were taking out the colons. The links are indeed in the intro, but I'm thinking that people specifically interested in the recordings will just skip over all that and then be puzzled by "what can HMV/Victor possibly be?--never heard of it." The basic problem here is that someone interested in recordings just isn't going to bother with looking at anything else on the page, so it's a somewhat different situation from most WP articles. And that's why I inquired about the possibility of an exception. I thought about adding a line of text beneath the subsection heads, but that info is already up in the intro, and would be duplicated--far worse than just duplicating a link. So really, I'd prefer to put those two links back in.
As for the ref footnote, maybe you could just put it as a paragraph right below the heading it's attached to. Otherwise, it seems OK to me as it is, even though it looks a little funny.
I thought about that, and actually it's probably a better idea to put it directly under the main Recordings section head, so people will presumably know right away what the asterisks mean without having to look down at a footnote--which they won't anyway, just on principle. I'll work on trying to do something presentable with it. But my problem here is that I'm not being "neutral", because the Sony discography I'm working with is a real POS. I was hoping I could get away with guessing at their rationale in a footnote, but that's not going to work in the main text I shouldn't think. I'll work on it some more--maybe put the caution & explanation of "*" up under the head, and my speculations in a footnote? Not sure how to word it so that it's helpful but will also pass muster. And I need to make sure the book's author isn't blamed for Sony's many errors.
Question: "HMV" is "His Majesty's Voice" to you? I've always thought it was "His Master's Voice". It would be interesting if it were different in different countries.
:-) You're right of course! No idea what I was thinking, other than being up way too late. Milkunderwood (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! --Auntof6 (talk) 10:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think I've got the explanation and footnote fixed pretty well now. I did go back and reinstate the two links that I think are necessary. Thanks for your suggestions. Milkunderwood (talk) 23:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 23:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

URGENT PLEASE HELP

Hi Auntof6 I was wondering if you could help mediate a dispute between myself and a user called Anonymous on the "Institute for Policy Studies" Wikipage. He is blanking out all the contributions I am making on that site on the grounds that the sources are "from a blog" or "from biased sources" even you these "biased sources" come in the form of government websites, memorandums and established newspaper outlets. Fellytone (talk) 01:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I might, but why are you asking me? I'm not an administrator. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:50, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Henri Bertini: needs translating?

Hi Auntof6, I think maybe in your enthusiasm to keep our encyclopedia clean, you might have been a bit quick to tag this section as needing translating. The items in French are a list of Henri Bertini's works, and are the titles of his compositions. ASFAIK there is no policy requiring such titles to be translated. If I am wrong, please point me in the right MOS direction; However, if in doubt over such tagging and you are able to recognise the language, it often helps to first confer with a registered Wikipedia translator. I have removed the tags in case some trigger happy deletionist just delete the section when the tag's time limit expires. --Kudpung (talk) 06:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might be right about what the text is. Parts of it just looked more like narrative than titles, maybe because of the formatting (and I do speak French). I don't know, either, of any policy about translating titles. Go ahead and take the tags off if you want: they're still there in the sections I thought needed work. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 07:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've translated what I think needed translating, and removed the tags. I am a native bilingual French-English, and a musician, but I don't know this composer. Perhaps you could just nevertheless cast your eye over them for me. The article also urgently needs references if you can help there. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 07:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your rollback request

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your note more or less confirming my observations. Similar to your recent situation, it's good to know that it's not just me. As for the Summary, I'm curious. Did you try going to the Options tab and pointing to or checking/unchecking some of the options, then returning to the Start tab and hovering around the border of the Summary field or on the Summary dropdown button? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Yes, I tried that and couldn't reproduce the "flickering" you described. If they ask, I'll post my settings file for them to look at. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Simeon Simev

Hello Auntof6. I improved the article of Simeon Simev with new additional sources and at this moment several pages link to it. Do you think that the orphan tag should be removed? Best regards.--Relativefrequency (talk) 22:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the orphan tag could be removed. I use the AWB function that automatically tags articles as orphans if they have under a certain number of pages linking to them: I don't remember offhand what that number is but, in my opinion, this article now has enough. It would be better if they weren't all list articles (List of poets, List of essayists, etc.), but looking at just the number I think it's enough.
One other thing you might do: for any of the external links or references that aren't in English, indicate what language they're in. It would be better if they were in English, but it would be nice to indicate those that aren't. (Some editors think non-English references shouldn't be used at all.) For example, if one of them is in Macedonian, put "{{mk icon}} at the end of it. If you need any other languages, you can find them at List of ISO 639-1 codes -- use the code in the column marked "639-1". If you want, I can mark one of them for you as an example, if you tell me the language (I'm only guessing about the Macedonian!). You can see an example of what it looks like in the article President of the Republic of Macedonia if you look at the 3rd and 5th references at the bottom of the page.
That help? --Auntof6 (talk) 08:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the informative explanation - it was very helpful. I also removed the orphan tag and, as you suggested, I indicated the language used in the external links and references using the List of ISO 639-1 codes. I will be glad to work with you on improving the Wikipedia. Regards.--Relativefrequency (talk) 10:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clan Moutray

Hi ,

thanks for your offer of help .

Id appreciate it , as i am new to wikipedia , and not up to speed with it .

i submitted some info , but its been deleted twice , under speedy deletion

any advice you can give is appreciated .

I thought the information would have been of interest to Scottish Clans and Scottish History .

ive just recieved a family tree that links back to robert the bruce , so i thought it may have been of interest to others involved in genealogical research .

Other family members were mentioned in association with mary queen of scots , and at other times , as friends of Nelson in Antigua .

thanks regards Paul


HI , thanks for your message .

I was able to see your advice on teh discussion page of the 'Clan Moutray' entry .

I clicked talk , and add new message , which has left the message on this main discussino page .(is this the right way , in future , or do you prefer to email ? it seems a bit confusing to me , as there are many different replies , about many different articles, but i can just reply like this in future if you prefer .. or do i reply on teh discussion board under ?Clan Moutray'? .. how do i do that? if i write on the discussion board , for "Moutray" , do you get notified abou it , to reply to ?

I have a few ideas on layout , content etc . we could discuss if you like

Thanks regards paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moutray2010 (talk • contribs) 11:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lille Bror Söderlundh

thanks. Decora (talk) 04:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Swiss Mountain Dog article

Thank you soooooo much for helping to clean up this article. I've spent the past couple of weeks revamping the existing article and feel I'm pretty much done, except for finishing the info box. Previous authors did the info box; I've never done one, so I need to research how to do one properly. I doubt I would have ever caught the errors you did. I truly appreciate the help in making this a better article!!! PS I haven't looked this up, but what is DMOZ - the info box at the beginning of the article?Bettymnz4 (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, but I can't take all the credit. I use an editing tool called AutoWikiBrowser (AWB), and that tool found and fixed most of the errors for me. I found the article on a list of articles that have a category specified more than once. I edited the article with AWB to fix that, and AWB does other fixes at the same time.
I don't know exactly what DMOZ is, but it has something to do with the Open Directory Project (which I'm also unfamiliar with). You can read about that template at its documentation page.
HTH! --Auntof6 (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the good clean-up and editing. Two heads and eyes are better than one! However as for the citation that you suggested on the TV early mornings show, I don't really know how to chase that info. All I can say is I have seen it numeorus times. If you know how please let me know. Thanks. Lordarchitect —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordarchitect (talk • contribs) 04:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read also a warning on cut and paste. I never copy or plagiarize. What I do is save on edit by writing off line. If I copy, it is mine. I am still learning the ropes though on WIKI formats, etc. Lordarchitect (talk) 05:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC) Lordarchitect[reply]

Ernesto Inarkiev‎‎

I don't understand your reason for this edit. Quale (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That category was in there twice. I removed one, but it was still there because of the duplication. Now that you've put it back, it's in there twice again, and will show up again in the scan for errors. I could make the edit summary clearer, if you think that would help. Cheers! --Auntof6 (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dang, I'm acting as if I'm blind. Your edit summary was fine. I failed to see the duplication that was in front of me. I think I'm the one who added the duplicate to begin with. Thanks. Quale (talk) 02:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Heehee, no problem, I'm sure I've done things like that myself! --Auntof6 (talk) 02:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my error

On the Michael McDowell (author) page. I wanted to add the reference, but I just couldn't figure out how. It looks perfect now. Thank you!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Auntof6&oldid=361714801"