Jump to content

User talk:Redrose64

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MusikAnimal (talk | contribs) at 00:37, 22 November 2015 (→Protection templates: starting with development). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Invasion of Time edits

Moved to Talk:The Invasion of Time § Variant theme music

Sorry I'm bad at using wikipedia and messed up adding the cite, I asked Northern the other day about Bolton's Platform 2 and they replied to me https://twitter.com/northernrailorg/status/291975325221535745?uid=17412258&iid=am-34365388813588638626255904&nid=56+427

Reading

Moved to m:Talk:Meetup/Reading/4#Shall we continue?

Seasons Greeting to you and yours

MarnetteD | Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec11}} to your friends' talk pages.

To you

Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

The Monk

I was sitting with a high steward, discussing Anglo-Saxon monks. The name we couldn't remember was Nennius. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 04:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC).

Enjoy!

Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

Happy New Year!

Dear Redrose64,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--FWiW Bzuk (talk)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Template talk:WikiProject Biography

Hi Redrose64, quick message. On Template talk:WikiProject Biography, I removed the category not because I had been lazy and just not fixed the issue, I just hadn't realised that it might have been there because someone had posted a link to it in the talk. I had assumed it was just a one-time problem with the actual template itself at the top of the talk page, and so I could fix that by removing the category. I used hot cat, so didn't actually see what I had deleted. I should have checked changes before pressing to save my edit. I apologise, I just wanted to clear any misunderstanding. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk)

Sailing from Holyhead?

Where can you sail to by Stena Line? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkbenFrank (talk • contribs) 20:08, 27 April 2015

Problem solved before I could even ask the question

Hello R. I was wondering why there were so many football teams were in the "incorrect protection template" category today. Then I saw your edit summary here and everything became clear. Thank goodness because the question was going to be a long winded one and I couldn't figure out how to shorten it. I hope that you have a pleasant week. MarnetteD|Talk 23:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your expertise is needed

Hi R. Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates has a large number of archived talk pages on it today. I did some searching but couldn't find the common factor as to why this happened. I am also wondering why the protection on this page Jat people is showing up on the list. Anything that you can do to fix these will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 15:29, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MarnetteD: When you come across something like Jat people, where Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates wasn't listed in the hidden cats at the bottom, give it a WP:NULLEDIT and reload the cat page; Jat people should then disappear.
As for the archives (and some others), they were due to this edit by EurovisionNim (talk · contribs) who apparently didn't notice that (a) the page already had a {{pp-move-indef}}; and (b) since the page is transcluded, any prot icon templates must be inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>. Perhaps I should WP:TROUT them for that. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:30, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had a tiny suspicion that it might be that template but there were a couple others that were on the few pages I looked at. I was in a hurry to go and spend the afternoon with friends who are leaving for Hong Kong on Wednesday so I do thank you for dealing with these. MarnetteD|Talk 22:35, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here is new one R Template:So Fresh albums. I tried placing the "noinclude" template in different places but they did not remove the articles that the navbox is used on from the list. So I will let you take care of what needs to be done. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 18:53, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@MusikAnimal: This is in relation to this edit - when protected pages (not just templates) might be transcluded, it is imperative that any protection template that is inside them not be transcluded along with the "real" content. So care needs to be taken when protecting a template and adding a prot icon template to it. Generally speaking, if the newly-protected template already has a {{documentation}} or a {{collapsible option}}, that will display any appropriate icon, so leave the newly-protected page alone (this is not the case here). Otherwise, if it does not already have a <noinclude>...</noinclude> section, create one; put the protection icon template inside the <noinclude>...</noinclude> section (which you may have just added). So this is the appropriate fix. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. Sorry about that!! I guess I knew this much but haven't gotten into the habit of checking "wrap in noinclude" when protecting templates using Twinkle. I think I could update Twinkle to do this automatically... I will look into it! Aside from being in the template space, is there any other scenario where the script could look for something on the page to reliably know if the protection template should be wrapped in <noinclude>...</noinclude>? — MusikAnimal talk 19:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Non-zero transclusion count. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bam, now Twinkle will always default-enable the wrapping of <noinclude>...</noinclude> when applying any kind of protection to pages in the template space. Is it a big deal that it uses its own noinclude tags as opposed to putting it in existing noinclude tags within the page source?

I was also informed about this issue... is that still a problem? I take it there's some Lua magic that show/hides the right padlock based on the current protection? If that is true, it begs the question, is there not someway we could incorporate that Lua magic on all pages? Maybe there's a MediaWiki-namespaced page where we could put that code, not sure. — MusikAnimal talk 23:26, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MusikAnimal: If it uses its own noinclude tags, where are they - at the top or at the bottom? Are they added as an extra line?
yes, it is still a problem - hence this revert from just two days ago. But it's not Lua magic - any template which has {{documentation}} will have been displaying the appropriate protection icon since this edit in January 2010, some years before Lua was available ({{documentation}} was converted to Lua in January 2014). Without Lua, it is done by means of the {{PROTECTIONLEVEL:}} parser function, which first became available with MediaWiki 1.15, in 2009. This is how {{collapsible option}} still does it. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info! I can look into making it check for {{documentation}} or {{collapsible option}} and if present, prevent the adding of the protection template. Best — MusikAnimal talk 14:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again R. When you have a moment would you take a look at the two new pages labeled "User:Basalisk/Dashboard" and "User:Keeper76/dashboard" that showed up today. The first one seems to have been indef protected two and a half years ago so it seems odd that it would be on the list at all. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 15:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@MarnetteD: Dashboard pages occasionally pop up, it always means that one of the transcluded pages like {{admin dashboard/aiv}} (remember that transclusions can go deep) has had a prot icon template added outside the noinclude. Again. In this case, WP:NULLEDITs sorted both. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good deal. As they were protected so that only admins could edit them I appreciate your taking care of the necessaries. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:01, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment

Hello R. Would you please take a look at the remaining items at Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates when you get a chance. In particular the Person article. I tried the null edit and adding in the time but it still is on the list. Maybe this edit summary has something to do with it. The BD2412HC page and the Vigil/Draft article are also baffling me. As ever thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 20:13, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here you are --Redrose64 (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks! MarnetteD|Talk 21:12, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a new one that needs your skills. Saúl Álvarez is now on the list. I tried removing that template but a bot put it back. From what I can find the page has been moved several time so that might be part of the problem. I check the redirects but wasn't able to find anything. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 02:52, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think that {{pp-pc1}} is not applicable here? --Redrose64 (talk) 11:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since the bot put that protection back it obviously is applicable. That is why I did not remove it a second time. The article is still showing up in the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. I was just hoping that you would be able to find out why. MarnetteD|Talk 13:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Same remedy as Jat people at #Your expertise is needed. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that I had tried that but obviously not. Thanks. BTW I finally picked up this book that we discussed several months ago. If you combine it with this one you can pretty much follow the history of every stories fate on tape, film, etc after to its initial broadcast. Paul Smith mentions that the technology which allowed for restoring to colour the Pertwee episodes that only existed in black & white is "staggering." I have to agree. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to say that it is well researched and interesting. The only flaw I have found is that it doesn't mention the Marco Polo reconstruction that is part of The Beginning boxed set in any detail. MarnetteD|Talk 14:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A new one has started within the last few hours. Article talk pages are starting to show up in the category and the one thing they have in common is this template Template:WikiProject Burma (Myanmar). I tried the null edit and that did not change anything. While it is protected I could not find a page protection template in it to move into the "noinclude" command. As it is used in so many article talk pages I thought I should let you fix whatever needs fixing. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 23:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: look in the hidden cats section of the category box at the bottom of the offending page. If Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates is not listed, it's almost certainly in need of WP:NULLEDIT - doing this fixed all of the talk and category talk pages. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip. I did try the nulledit - especially since I had forgotten it on my request for help just before this one. Not sure why it didn't work but I will certainly keep trying it in the future. It was interesting to observe how many new talk pages were showing up on the list each time I went back to check it. It would be up to 20 or 30 by now if you hadn't fixed things. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 15:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Today I noticed that several AFD related pages have shown up on the list. I tried to find an article or template that were common to all of them but was unsuccessful. I'm hoping that you will be able to find what needs fixing. MarnetteD|Talk 14:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
These are all built up from transclusions, ultimately of pages like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johan Matton (3rd nomination). These AfD pages are sometimes protected, so you need to identify the protected one, and <noinclude>...</noinclude> the prot icon template, like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a new one

Hello R. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/All current discussions showed up on the list yesterday. I tried a null edit. I also looked at the templates used on the page. Next I checked the discussions added yesterday in case one of them was causing the problem but came up empty. It is probably something simple but if you could take a look when you have a moment it will be appreciated. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:02, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This fixes it. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As ever many thanks. I'll remember that the search may need to go back more than just one day. MarnetteD|Talk 18:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This one was protected due to socking. XFD discussions typically run for at least seven days, so if the socks arrive after two or three days, it might not be straight away that a prot is applied. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the followup explanation. There are several items in the list now and as I search through them there may be two unrelated templates that I cannot find. The first is this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 August 31 which is like the one you fixed but it hasn't had a protection applied. I think this is why there are three deletion sorting projects in the "W" section. Then there are two Biosthmors user pages and one Draecko/Desk page. All three of them have an edit like this where a category was added but no protection has been applied. I know the link is already on your talk page but I will add it again Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates so you don't have to scroll up to find it. Thanks ahead of time. MarnetteD|Talk 04:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ack - I checked one more time before heading off to sleep and a dozen new pages, all related to AFD, have shown up so you may find a page full when you get to this. I hope that it isn't too difficult to track down. MarnetteD|Talk 05:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike most of the other XFD pages, the daily AFD pages are themselves built up from transclusions - one per article, so it's highly unlikely that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 August 31 was itself protected, but one of the specific AfD pages.
When you get a bunch of pages showing up together that are vaguely related (in this case, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 August 31, User:Biosthmors/Bugs, User:Biosthmors/Things, User:Draeco/Desk, Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Deletion sorting, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Medicine, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America), look for something in common - a transclusion that they all share. The transclusion list is shown at the very bottom when editing the whole page (not when section editing), below the Save page etc. buttons, in the collapsible section "Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page". Compare these lists, see if there's one page that is listed on all of them.
Remember that our original problem was with a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/... daily page, so in this case we're looking for a specific AfD, so needn't check the other transcluded pages for commonality. There are only two AfDs transcluded on all of them: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Boxer Wachler (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy Harlan, and only the first of these has a prot icon template, so the fix is to do this. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As for the "dozen new pages, all related to AFD", they were fixed with this edit. Somewhat easier, as one of the pages listed at Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates was Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Egypt, which has only two transcluded AfDs so a first guess from those was bound to have a 50% chance. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to clue me in on all of the things to look for. I know that I have seen the transclusion list before but I had no idea what it was for. Your info will help to track down these items in the future. Only a couple more weeks to go until the Rugby World Cup. Exciting times! MarnetteD|Talk 13:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again R. A batch of "convert" templates showed up on the list today. As I checked through the transclusions it looks like they all share the same ones and those are all protected so that only admins can edit them. If you can fix this when you have a moment that will be most appreciated. Nest regards. MarnetteD|Talk 16:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Paul Barlow is on the list as well. Looks like it needs a null edit but as it has been fully protected I cannot perform that. Thanks MarnetteD|Talk 16:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
None of the convert templates were protected. They were showing in the cat because WOSlinker (talk · contribs) had unprotected them but had not removed the {{pp-template}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Paul Barlow was showing because Yunshui (talk · contribs) had altered the protection expiry from 19:19, 14 August 2015 to indef, but had not amended the {{pp-protected}} to suit. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking care of them. MarnetteD|Talk 02:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't there used to be a bot that would take care of the protection templates? -- WOSlinker (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@WOSlinker: Yes, see #Removing protection icons above. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment

Hello R. The Homo naledi article showed up in the category today. As it is fully protected I can't edit it to fix things so if you could take care of it that will be much appreciated. I hope you are enjoying both the rugby and the new episodes of Dr Who. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 19:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A new one

Hi again. Tony Kornheiser is fully protected so I can't edit it to get it off the list. I thought the CGI recreation of Ray Cusick's Dalek City model was well done. Cheers and have a great week. MarnetteD|Talk 18:15, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that one did need admin rights to fix. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:18, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When you get a chance please check on Foreign Affairs. I tried the null edit and a couple other things but none of them worked. I am guessing that it has something to do with one protection being applied and then changed a few hours later as can be seen here. As ever thanks for your time and help. MarnetteD|Talk 13:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The {{pp-move}} template is for pages with full move protection; but at 18:14, 12 October 2015 Samir (talk · contribs) reduced the full move protection to semi. This action is pointless, since users need to be confirmed in order to move pages, so I reduced it all the way to unprot and also removed the {{pp-move}} --Redrose64 (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is good to know. Thanks for taking care of things. MarnetteD|Talk 19:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here Talk:List of billionaires (2004)/attribution is another one that is fully protected R. It looks like the edit history of a deleted article was copied to the talk page and I don't think I've ever seen that before. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the problem. It's a page that was deleted and restored: deletion removes all protections, but a restored page has no protection of any kind regardless of any prots it may have had at the time of deletion. This particular page had been fully protected, and correctly bore a {{pp-protected}} - in that state it was deleted at 21:00, 29 November 2011 by Fastily (talk · contribs). Graham87 (talk · contribs) restored the page as it previously stood at 12:23, 19 October 2015, and later restored the previous protection level, at 13:48, 19 October 2015. If a page has a protection icon template and the protection is changed, an edit of some sort - even a null edit - is normally necessary for the protection icon template to emit the correct categories. This I have done. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a bunch. I can't edit these pages that are fully protected so I always appreciate you taking care of what needs to be done. MarnetteD|Talk 23:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I need your help yet again

As I type this two "Arbitration requests..." reports have shown up in the cat. I tried null edits and then I tracked this item that was created today Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notice. I tried a null edit on it and then tried adding the noinclude but neither of those worked. The two items do have this template Template:Casenav in common but it's protection hasn't been changed since last November. Your help in figuring this out will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 03:23, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you added the wrong tags, fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good grief. I don't remember ever seeing (er "paying attention to" is probably a better term) that one before. At least now I know about it. Thanks for cleaning up my mess on aisle two. MarnetteD|Talk 14:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again R. This redirect was fully protected long ago but it showed up on the list today. I can't apply a null edit - or anything else if it needs more than that. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 00:24, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just found this redirect on the list as well. If this is part of the work that you and Paine Ellsworth are performing then please disregard these messages. MarnetteD|Talk 00:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, MarnetteD – actually any redirects that appear now will be the result of deployment of the improvements to the R protection templates. I have submitted edit requests on the talk pages of the targets of the two that are in there now. Pleasant pathways, Painius  00:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Paine Ellsworth. I know R won't see this for several hours. Should I let you and/or R know about these if any more pop up? MarnetteD|Talk 00:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, MarnetteD! I shall continue to monitor the category for any redirects that appear and either edit them or make edit requests as needed.  Paine  00:50, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good Paine. Best and spookiest wishes for a fun Halloween to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 00:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC) [reply]

My favorite holiday!  Paine 

Here is a tricky one

Tonight I found two "Portal animation" items and a list in AussieLegend's works space in the category. The one thing they had in common was copies from The Simpsons articles on the page. I did some digging and couldn't find a protection template that would cause this problem. As I worked on other pages that were in the incorrect PP cat this essay Wikipedia:Fancruft was also listed but its last protection was almost a decade ago. I then found a big red warning message near the bottom of the page that mentions The Simpsons. Is this red warning connected to the other pages being on the list somehow? Pinging Paine as well in hopes that either or both of you can figure out what is going on. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 04:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It concerns {{The Simpsons episode count}}, attempts to orphan that and hence give an excuse to delete it, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 24#Template:The Simpsons episode count. In my view, transcluding an entire article (The Simpsons) by means of the markup {{:The Simpsons}} just to extract one figure is hugely inefficient. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks R. I am glad that you were able to track down what was happening. MarnetteD|Talk 16:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coventry Arena station

  • Hi there, I've put my rationale for the change on the talk page. The reference does say (to me anyway) that the station isn't useful for the stadium. I've quoted the part of the article there. Cls14 (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need part of a photo

Am I remembering correctly that you were able to help me with this? If so, I need the upper right portion of this photo for the infobox here. True, a better photo should most certainly be found, but it's all I have right now.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of File:Mint Museum in uptown Charlotte, North Carolina crop.jpg? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:24, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Thank you. Can you help me with the other photo?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you need something done, ask someone who's bussy!

Once again, I come to ask for help! Mutations happen in Welsh, where constanants soften after feminine words / numerals. cy:Nodyn:Years_or_months_ago needs to be amended. The mutations/exeptions are few, mainly 1 - 10, which I've noted on the Talk page. Can you take a look, and amend so that the words are produced on screen, rather than the default 'xx blwyddyn' (year). PS the nouns that follow a numeral in Welsh are always singular (which really does make sense!) eg 21 table, not 21 tables; 15 year, not 15 years. I've also created a test page (ready for our 'On this day...' feature here). Many thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 05:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will have a look, can't promise a solution. I've come across mutations before, when I was small I didn't appreciate that goch and coch were the same colour. The concept is clearly so important that it's introduced as early as chapter 2 in
  • Jones, Christine (2007). Welsh Grammar. Teach Yourself. London: Hodder Headline. ISBN 978-0-340-88786-8.
Apparently it can help to distinguish nouns that are spelt similarly in Welsh but have different English meanings - rhos goch and rhos coch are not the same. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks; copied onto the actual page, as we have only a few articles sucking it in. With all numbers (other than the exceptions 'blynedd' is used). I've listed the exceptions here, so we need a code for each one, which changes the default to the one in the list. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Learning wikipedia ropes

Redrose64 - I'm having to address some pages in wikipedia because of their use in sites such as facebook. 'Weston Subedge' and a few other places were causing problems and so I sat down to correct the underlying stuff, such as miss spellings. I've no doubt 'Weston-sub-Edge' is what the current parish council would like to use, but it would seem we have no OFFICIAL minute to support that so other official bodies have not made the change. NOW I'm trying to learn all the extras when all I wanted to do was change a name. We have several hundred mistakes logged on facebook places and many of them are down to miss use of wikipedia so it looks as if I need to learn all of the quirks of citing documents :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsces (talk • contribs) 11:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lsces: We have so many policies and guidelines that I don't think that anybody knows them all (indeed, most decisions on cases handled by the Arbitration Committee start off by quoting extracts from relevant policies, so that everybody involved is aware of what the agreed policies actually say). But we have some core content policies that everybody needs to be aware of, and should follow as far as possible. These are: Verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view. So if, for example, you want to move an article about a railway station to a different title, that title must be verifiable. We use the station name that was used by the railway company, rather than the name of the locality in which the station lies, for two main reasons: first, it's easy to find out (there are dozens of books on railway topics from reliable publishers that name stations, and often show photos of their nameboards); second, it avoids the confusion that would ensue if we invented names - did you know that Clapham Junction railway station is not in Clapham? It's actually in Battersea, so if we were to name that article Battersea Junction railway station, there would be many puzzled people. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: The saga of Weston Subedge is ongoing, and for the railway station then yes when looking for it on timetables Weston-Sub-Edge is the right spelling, but all of my own data about the station is map and property based identifies it as 'Weson Subedge Station' so I think the point here is that one needs to know all the names and where they are used. I'm going to add my recent research to the talk page of both articles and take it from there ... Lsces (talk) 07:00, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Lsces: I must again draw your attention to the core content policy on no original research. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:01, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Lsces: What's important is how the railway company actually called the station, not how it was considered by Ordnance Survey or local authorities. If you have a look at this timetable, you will see the station as it is currently spelt in the article title. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Lamberhurst: - see Talk:Weston-sub-Edge railway station. But Lsces has been working mainly on Weston-Sub-Edge, which is the one with the most WP:NOR issues. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:34, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Lamberhurst: I've now got a bit more evidence on just what has gone on over time, but I'm not sure if it's 'original research'. I've posted a small part on Talk:Weston-Sub-Edge and the current situation is that both names are being used actively today. Re the Station, if one looks at railway documents, the hyphenated version is used, but all of the legal stuff such as planning used the Weston Subedge spelling, so both are relevant depending on what you are looking for. Lsces (talk) 22:40, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Lsces: For the names of railway station articles, we use the name that is or was shown on station signs and in timetables; not the locality, not the name shown on maps; but the name that was actually used by the railway company. If that differs from the name of the town/village/whatever, then Wikipedia is not the place to Right Great Wrongs. If the station is still open, take it up with the railway company. If it's closed - tough. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:51, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: I'm quite happy with the station page now ... as I said originally it was and actually still is recorded as it appears on the maps in my archive so I was not aware of the difference. My problem is only with the village page which needs better explanation as to why both spellings are currently correct. Not Right Great Wrongs but simply documenting the current verifiable diversity. Lsces (talk) 23:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary usage

Hi Redrose64. Been a while since we bumped into each other. I was just looking at the Weston-Sub-Edge article and your recent changes and was hoping to have a little chat about your edit summaries as it's a little bug-bear of mine. Edit summaries are meant as a summary of the edit or perhaps a way of expressing your motive behind making an edit. Unfortunately, they are sometimes used as a method of general communication by some wikipedia users, which has a number of issues.

  • As there is a limited character count, notes can often appear curt.
  • There is no way of altering statements made if inaccurate
  • The statements are not searchable.

In the case of Weston-Sub-Edge, the curt statements, especially this one can come across as rather bitey from my perspective, as we're looking at a new editor who appears to be doing a pretty good job. I don't think there's a massive issue, but I do think it's something to keep in mind. A guiding hand in a situation like this can go a long way. WormTT(talk) 13:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Worm That Turned: I came to that page - and that section in particular - because Lsces (talk · contribs) had previously renamed Weston-sub-Edge railway station to Weston Subedge railway station, a name not actually used by the railways (I moved it back, per WP:NCUKSTATIONS, because photos of the station nameboards (and indeed all reliable published sources) show the name hyphenated in that manner). At the section as I found it, I noticed that it had been written not so much as a summary of different spellings and hyphenations through history, but more as an attempt to assert what is "right" and discredit some sources. When I tried the four references within that section, I found that none of the first three supported the preceding text, and all four of them led to pages whose titles were significantly different from the link title that had been used. One was not a web page as such, but a search results page; and it is known that search results pages are not reliable sources, since their content is unstable. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need help about a script: stubtagtab.js

Hi, Redrose64! I found your activity on this talk page and that is why I'm writing you here. I am mostly active on bh.wikipedia and wanted to use the above mentioned script for stub shorting. But, I am stuck at the very initial point and need some help because I know very little programming stuff. Would you please give some of your valuable time to help me??

I have copied this script on bh.wiki here and using it through globle.js and calling user:सत्यम् मिश्र/tagtest/Geography to get stubs for testing ! when I use this on en.wiki stub templates links load properly but on bh.wiki they are not loading as links. That is my problem. --Satyam Mishra --talk-- 14:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@सत्यम् मिश्र: All I did was copy the whole of User:MC10/stubtagtab.js to User:Ais523/stubtagtab2.js. I don't know how it works. Have you tried asking MC10 (talk · contribs)? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:16, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I visited his talk page and found no recent activity, thus, thought he is not active these days. I have asked him now! Thank you for such a quick response! I will try to find solution.--Satyam Mishra --talk-- 01:39, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my failing to remove that stray " from the Survey section. Thank you for cleaning it up! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 09:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Query: Correct redirecting

Hi User:Redrose64 - I noticed that you had deleted my request to delete the redirect that is present on the Susan Foreman article and I was hoping for some advice. Currently a search for 'Susan Campbell' redirects to Susan Foreman, which I think is incorrect, as there is no obvious link to Susan Foreman. There is another article on Susan M. Campbell, which I think should be what shows up when one searches 'Susan Campbell'. Obviously I've gone about this in the wrong way, but would appreciate any guidance on how to do it properly. Thanks in advance Fbell74 (talk) 06:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fbell74: With this edit, you put the {{db-g6}} on the article Susan Foreman, not on a redirect; it was therefore a request to delete that article under WP:CSD#G6, which does not apply in any way.
If your intention was to get a redirect deleted, criteria specific to redirs are listed at WP:CSD#Redirects, but one or more of the general CSD criteria might apply. Try to avoid using G6 - when no other criteria fit, some people try to use this as a catch-all wildcard criterion, which it isn't. {{db-move}} is a case within G6, but it's best to use that as a follow-up to a successful discussion, such as a WP:RM. I assume that you are thinking of the redirect Susan Campbell - this is a long-established redirect (8+1⁄2 years since it was created), so it would be difficult to get any CSD criterion to stick without prior discussion. I would say that your best bet is to take it to WP:RFD. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're right - I put the note in the wrong area. I wasn't looking to have the 'Susan Foreman' article deleted at all, only the redirect from 'Susan Campbell', which takes visitors to the 'Susan Foreman' article. I'm unsure why it was set up like that in the first place but maybe there was a reason at the time. I'll follow your suggestion and see how it goes. Thanks for taking the time to respond Fbell74 (talk) 02:19, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Redrose64 - I saw that you had closed off the request I raised because I'd submitted it in the wrong area. I couldn't reply on that page because that query is closed now, but sorry about that. I've resubmitted the request, but this time in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, as well as on the Talkpage of the actual page containing the redirect. Hopefully I've done it properly now. Thank you for your help with this.Fbell74 (talk) 02:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't do it properly. This is what you did: notice how the rendered page now shows
{{subst:rfd|content=#REDIRECT Susan Campbell
at the top - that "{{subst:" is a dead giveaway that something wasn't right; you also added an unwarranted {{R from move}} template which wasn't there before - the redirect wasn't created as a page move so that template should not have been added at all. If you had done it properly, it would look like 2018 NHL Entry Draft - notice how that has a box at the top explaining that the redirect is at RFD, that box also contains a link to the RFD discussion page. Yours did not.
The whole matter seems to have been resolved by Tavix (talk · contribs) who merely converted the redirect to a dab page, the sum of the edits being this. There was no need for any deletion. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I really didn't do it properly at all. The end result looks quite clean and makes sense in terms of directing users to the various pages they might be looking for with a search on 'Susan Campbell' Fbell74 (talk) 06:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

No doubt you will all be devastated to hear that I won't be able to make it to Oxford tomorrow, so sorry about that. Anyway, I just wanted to say hi, and cheers for helping out so much. Thanks, Rubbish computer 00:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC) Rubbish computer 00:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rubbish computer: Hi, yes, we had myself, Maproom (talk · contribs), Geni (talk · contribs), MinorProphet (talk · contribs), Thryduulf (talk · contribs), and Rich Farmbrough (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 (talk) 11:34, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff. --Rubbish computer 12:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help us improve wikimeets by filling in the UK Wikimeet survey!

Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJMNVVD

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 18:44, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You missed it!

While you were away yesterday, you missed all the drama over the Great Western Railway (train operating company) article. At least I was proved correct when I wrote this though. Mjroots (talk) 13:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

if we want a location map, it would be far better to add it to the code inside Template:Infobox GB station

You say "if we want a location map, it would be far better to add it to the code inside Template:Infobox GB station". You haven't done this, so why revert when it will do for now? Why get rid of progress? Why be such a rampant reverter and not even come to discuss it? Rcsprinter123 (prattle) 19:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are some 2000 railway stations in the UK, and that's not counting Underground, Metrolink and so on. Why waste time hand-crafting a location map for each one of those, when all you should need to do is set one parameter (perhaps two) on each article? Have you forgotten what happened back in January 2011, when edits like this meant that several of us than had to go around cleaning up after you?
As with those edits in 2011, you are making a lot of pointless edits, each of which adds a lot of markup to the infobox, most of which simply does not need to be there at all. You are also adding redundant information: the {{Infobox GB station}} template already has parameters for latitude and longitude, so there should be no need to duplicate those.
Before adding location maps to articles, you should have initiated a discussion, at (say) WT:UKRAIL; if there was consensus, somebody (not necessarily myself) would have suggested incorporating location map code directly into {{Infobox GB station}} in such a way that article editing would have been kept to a minimum.
Templates like {{Infobox London station}} generate a location map using the |latitude= and |longitude= parameters as a minimum requirement; two further optional parameters (|map_type= and |label_position=) exist, but in no case is it necessary to have a whole {{location map}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You do make a few good points. I was did think about putting a parameter for it straight into Temokate:Infobox GB station beforehand, but I only have a base map for Greater Manchester, which is only a chunk of the whole network, so I thought it would be easier to addition manually. Do you support, in principle, adding maps to station infoboxes? Rcsprinter123 (pronounce) 22:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In principle, yes (see for example this edit to Dartford railway station); but with caution. A location map will add height to the infobox, and in some railway station articles (e.g. Hattersley, Godley, Flowery Field) the infobox is already so tall that it causes a large blank space at the bottom, in the "External links" section. So maps should only be added if they will not cause further imbalance and so give ammunition to the anti-infobox brigade.
But before general addition of maps commences, a central discussion should be held - either at WT:UKRAIL or at Template talk:Infobox GB station as to whether it's desirable. See for example Template talk:Infobox Manchester Metrolink station#Rewrite, plus new features. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Promptsecretariat

Promptsecretariat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · SPI · cuwiki) Can you as an admin do something about this new user? All edits so far are racist vandalism. Admits to being anti-Jewish on user page. -- Alarics (talk) 10:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Alarics: Surely it's better to report such matters on a noticeboard, rather than the user talk page of one admin? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I feared you might say that. I did have a look but it's not very clear to the uninitiated which noticeboard or what exactly one is supposed to do. I asked you because I know you are familiar with these things and you have helped me out before. Do you at least agree that some action is required in this case? -- Alarics (talk) 11:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Edits to three articles, all reverted. You could inform WP:NPOVN. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on warning users for unconstructive edits

Do you think the warning I gave to the user for his unconstructive edit on Radiochemistry was suitable? Thanks. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Leeds United FC fan: Yes, except that you used {{Uw-vandalism1|Radiochemistry}} where you should have used {{subst:Uw-vandalism1|Radiochemistry}} --Redrose64 (talk) 20:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll remember to use the substitution template in future. Leeds United FC fan (talk) 20:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Llanpumpsaint station on the Carmarthen to Aberystwyth line template/ line diagram

Many thanks indeed for your speedy reversion to Llanpumpsaint. Had the other name of Llanpumsaint ever appeared on that particular line diagram (which is mostly repeated on that of the Manchester and Milford Railway one) or ever appeared on any previous editions of it? I am sure that I saw the name somewhere, but now cannot recall where.

Paul Sidorczuk (talk) 07:55, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Paul Sidorczuk: The locality is Llanpumsaint with one "p" but the station was always Llanpumpsaint with an extra "p". I don't have any books specifically dealing with the Carmarthen and Cardigan Railway. But see for example
For the names of railway station articles, we don't use the name of the locality but the name that was actually used by the railway company, and shown on station signs and in timetables. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations). --Redrose64 (talk) 08:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Contractions are common in placenames. It's surprising that the explanation of the name in the Llanpumsaint article doesn't simply say that pump is the Welsh word for five, even though it does mention the five saints. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Paul Sidorczuk: There should be a photo of the station, including its signage, in
  • Mitchell, Victor E.; Smith, Keith (February 2011). Aberystwyth to Carmarthen. Western Main Lines. Midhurst: Middleton Press. figures 57-58. ISBN 978-1-906008-90-1.
unfortunately I don't have a copy. It's available here.
@Martinevans123: Railway companies that were ostensibly Welsh often had English shareholders, directors and management. Ignorant of the Welsh language they would anglicise Welsh place names - or simply mis-spell them - without understanding the words and syllables, or the significant change in meaning that a subtle alteration - like adding one letter - can make. As Price notes in The Lampeter, Aberayron and New Quay Light Railway (p. 37) concerning the halt close to Neuaddlwyd, "Never very sensitive towards either the Welsh language or Welsh spellings, the authorities at Paddington disregarded local objections and called the new platform 'Llanerch Ayron'." It was located at 52°13′04″N 4°13′59″W / 52.2178°N 4.2331°W / 52.2178; -4.2331, and there is a nearby village Llanerchaeron. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, how things have changed! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extra 'via' stations on Horsham station

I've just been looking at recent edits made to Horsham station by Railway56 and notice that when previous almost identical edits were being made by a user called Towns21 (who incidentally stopped editing at the same time as Railway56 started) they were reverted. Since you were involved then, are you able to help me work out if these need reverting again now? Thanks. - Shrewdoliver (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Shrewdoliver: Railway56 (talk · contribs) has done this before. When reverted, they WP:EW and include the phrase "but not excessive" in the edit summary. They simply won't be told. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Anna Bråkenhielm

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC) [reply]

@Crisco 1492: How do I qualify? All I did was two edits: add DEFAULTSORT and fix a link. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Plots

You recemtly sent the following message to me. "Please see WP:TVPLOT "As a rough guide, summaries for episode articles should be about 200 to 500 words." Therefore, please only remove {{plot}} if it is shorter than 500 words".

First, the suggested summary length quoted is only a rough guide and not prescriptive. Second, the articles I have removed {{plot}} from are not episode articles, they are serial articles covering multiple episodes. Third, I am using WP:WikiProject Doctor Who/Manual of style as my guide. The section 'Episode pages/Plot/Synopsis' states: “A concise but legible summary of the episode written from the real-life perspective. A common length is approximately ten words per minute, however this can be lengthened in the case of a complicated plot”. So, for The Daleks' Master Plan, for instance, that’s 12 episides at 25 minutes each = 300 minutes x 10 words/minute = 3000 words. At the time of writing the plot summary for this article contains 1301 words. So on that basis it’s well within bounds, the use of {{plot}} is unjustified and that's why it has been removed from the article and others like it where similar circumstances prevail. 86.174.107.13 (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Gutenberg author

Hi Redrose. I have rewritten the template in WP:Lua, seen at Module:Gutenberg - it adds a new feature, the ID can be either a name or a number (the later goes direct to the author page bypassing the search result page). The testcases page is Template:Gutenberg author/testcases where it verifies. This is a simple template with no options besides "id" and "name" so it won't break existing instances. The template is protected and I don't have permissions to edit. Since you have helped in the past, would you be able to change the template to what is currently at Template:Gutenberg author/sandbox? Replace this line:

  • [//www.gutenberg.org/author/{{{1|{{{id|{{PAGENAMEE}}}}}}}} Works by {{{2|{{{name|{{PAGENAMEBASE}}}}}}}}] at [[Project Gutenberg]]

With this line:

  • <includeonly>{{#invoke:Gutenberg|author}}</includeonly>

-- GreenC 19:04, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Green Cardamom: Sorry, but I cannot assist in converting a template from a form which I do understand to one that I don't. As a computer programmer I feel that those who write or amend code should be responsible for its maintenance: if I carry out that edit I will be placing myself in the position of being unable to assist should any problem arise. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Umm... can you remove the protection so I can do it? Or give me the perms? I'm an experienced programmer and have written other templates. -- GreenC 23:55, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I opened an edit request. Since you answered the other edit request, can you help again? You are not responsible for the code, the code is my responsibility. If there is a problem with the code it is with the Lua module which I will take care of. The template page is basically just a redirect to the Lua Module:Gutenberg. But believe me, there is no problem. -- GreenC 00:49, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

em-dashes, en-dash & advisor.js

Thanks for correcting my em-dashes and en-dash (although I've never understood why this is important) I used User:Cameltrader/Advisor while fixing some reference CS1 issues. It might be worth talking to the developer/operator of that tool to stop it inserting the wrong ones (if they are wrong but as I say I can't see any difference).— Rod talk 20:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On the rendered page, em-dashes (—) are normally twice as long as en-dashes (–). In the edit window, there isn't much difference, if any - it will depend upon the fonts installed on your computer. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK maybe its the fonts I have as I don't see any difference. I'll just not use the advisor tool and leave the error message I get from it above the edit window telling me that they need changing.— Rod talk 20:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Judging by comments at User talk:Cameltrader/Advisor, the script maintainer hasn't been around for some years. It's not likely to be fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cross section of cleanup category & WikiProjects

Hey Redrose, do you know of a way to get a list of articles tagged for a category (e.g., Articles needing cleanup) within a specific WikiProject? The former is tagged on the article page and the latter is tagged on the talk page, so CatScan doesn't do an easy cross section, as far as I can tell. Open to suggestions czar 01:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I do this with Catscan. Here's a link to a search that looked within some copy-editing tracking categories for articles with a WP Biography template on their Talk page.
Remember to also check for aliases of the template that you are looking for (using What links here in your left nav bar). – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I see! Took a few tries to get it to run, but it's doing what I want. Thanks so much! czar 13:04, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

St Austell railway station

Just wondered if you realised that First Great Western have re-branded themselves as Great Western Railway when you reverted at St Austell railway station? Poltair (talk) 06:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Poltair: Yes, I do; what you probably didn't notice is that Merlinhst7 (talk · contribs) broke links when they edited that page, as well as introducing totally unnecessary <br> tags. I've been cleaning up after them. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:52, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Assyrian (Ashuri) script

The current category should definitely stay, insofar that it is the correct term and designation for our modern Hebrew script, whereas the original script was the Paleo-Hebrew script. This is evident in all of the writings of the Mishnah and Talmud, and is well-known by those who are engaged Judaic studies.Davidbena (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: No, the simple fact is that you put the category inside itself, and gave it no parents other than itself. This is not how we categorise categories. See WP:SUPERCAT "Category chains formed by parent–child relationships should never form closed loops; that is, no category should be contained as a subcategory of one of its own subcategories." --Redrose64 (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, the parent category should be "Semitic languages."Davidbena (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a category for a language, but a category for a script or writing system: therefore at least one of its parent categories should be a broader category for scripts or writing systems. See for example Category:Arabic script which has five parent categories, amongst these are Category:Abjad writing systems, Category:Semitic writing systems and Category:Writing systems derived from the Phoenician. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The best choice would be the parent category, Category:Semitic writing systems. Good luck!Davidbena (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bournemouth station

Hi, thanks for pointing out that error in the image caption box, I don't know what I did, but obviously didn't finish writing what I wanted to write! Jack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellminsterboy (talk • contribs) 09:12, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Birmingham meetup

See you there? Well... not here... this photo is from a pub in Manchester... but that's cos there haven't been enough meetups in Birmingham.
Hi there! Did you know that there will be a meetup in Birmingham on the 15th of November?

There hasn't been many meetups in Birmingham. I will be passing through on the 15th of November, so I thought I would see who fancied meeting up, while I'm in the area. I'm leaving this message on your talk page because you have previously expressed an interest in a meetup in Birmingham or Coventry.

Yaris678 (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Yaris678: Replied with this post. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:22, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ronny Lee

"first name spelled with 'y', not 'ie', on the end": Thanks, I have now italicized it, since writing "Ronnie Lee" instead of "Ronny Lee" is an error that even some of the referenced articles about him made (and he didn't like it, because "Ronnie" usually used to be short for "Veronica").

"Years" in "Early years" section header: Thanks, I have now done the same for "Later years" section header.

"D'Angelico": I have now put back the link in "D'Angelico guitar", but intentionally made it to D'Angelico--not to D'Angelico Guitars--since RL's guitar was made before 1964 (1927 + 14 = 1941) and that article more-accurately describes its features.

"Unpreparing for War" in Daugherty ref.: I have now put the phrase in single quotes, since you don't like double-quotes in ref. title--but they are double-quotes in title of Daugherty's paper.

"[sic]" to " [sic]": Thanks, I didn't know that existed.

DovidBenAvraham (talk) 11:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 07:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you --Redrose64 (talk) 07:45, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, dammit. I usually catch those myself when they happen - I don't know how I missed those.

I'll fix them right away; thanks for bringing them to my attention. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 23:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Hi. I have been trying to make the infobox image on Harry Potter and the Cursed Child‎ appear larger, but don't seem to be able to. Is there something I'm missing. Maybe its not possible.Blethering Scot 21:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox play}} doesn't recognise |image_size=, nor is there any equivalent. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
damn thats really annoying. Image doesn't display properly at that size. I see it was removed here, but i dont see consensus for it on the talk page of the template. Do u know if discussions were held elsewhere.Blethering Scot 13:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Have you asked Alakzi (talk · contribs) why that change was made? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I will ping him on template talk page. Someone else has asked the same question.Blethering Scot 21:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could u do me a favour. Could u look at the template talk page and explain to me what he means by you can change image size by using |image_upright= . I just am not getting how I can use that peramater to increase size.Blethering Scot 19:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Replied at Template talk:Infobox play#Image size option. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Beats of Rage -Protection Request

Please, protect Beats of Rage from anonymous users because uncontrolled editwar of the mad 31.173.243.24 and it's offsprings (I am the Recent changes patroller and I've caught that IP by the tail, but I can't block it)! I am suffering from his vandalistic edits. Natsume96 (talk) 12:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Natsume96: requests for increases to a page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Redrose64:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 20:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Bristol Temple Meads railway station

Hi Redrose64, thanks for correcting my image placement, this is my first day on Wikipedia! BristolIcarus (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford - Marylebone

I had just realised that I had gotten ahead of reality and had begun to repair the damage. Sorry if I've wasted your time. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:09, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@John Maynard Friedman: I'm at Oxford station most weeks, last visit was Thurs 29 Oct, next is Tues 3 Nov. The replacement bus service is still running but instead of being Oxford to Islip and Bicester, it's now Oxford to Oxford Parkway. The proposed lengthening of platform 3 (and the conversion of the parcels dock to passenger plat) has not yet commenced. Engineers are still working on the track from Oxford North Junction northwards. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can partly blame sloppy reporting in the media but I really ought to have asked questions first and shot second.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bicester - Bletchley

Hi Redrose, have you seen East West Rail delivery could be delayed by seven years (rail technology magazine, 03.11.15). Any idea what the proposed rephrasing is? It talks about 'phase 2' being Bicester - Bedford, but we already know that electrification of Bletchley - Bedford is 'planned but not scheduled', so it's hardly that. What we really need to know is this - is Bicester - Bletchley now 'phase 2a' and Risboro' - Aylesbury - Claydon Jn now 'phase 2b'? Or something else? Whether or which, we need a source that is less vague than this to qualify as a citeable wp:rs. Expletive deleted journalists --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I shot an innocent bystander again. Rail Technology was just reprinting this press release from the East West Rail consortium. Perhaps they have political reasons to conflate Bicester - Bletchley with Bletchley - Bedford? Was it ever likely that these two sub-projects would go ahead in parallel rather than sequentially? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reversions

Moved to User talk:Rebroad § Reversions
 – Redrose64 (talk) 12:27, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disrupting Wikipedia

Please note you have made the same reversion to this article at least 5 times in a row now, over the last few days, despite there being ongoing discussion. If you continue to do this you will be banned from editing Wikipedia. --Rebroad (talk) 13:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is "this article"? Please state which one you have in mind. If you don't like what I do, you are free to take me to WP:ANI. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:24, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You know full well which article I am referring to - the one we are currently talking about. But, if it pleases you:-

Information icon Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Double jeopardy, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Rebroad (talk) 15:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rebroad: At first that was the article that I assumed that you meant. But I looked at its history, and found that I had made four edits in a week, not "at least 5 times in a row now, over the last few days". To get the count up to 5, we need to go back to 23 September 2015‎, where I restored two templates that were apparently removed inadvertently by Sc0187 (talk · contribs) in this series of edits. As for "ongoing discussion", the only one that I am aware of is on your talk page, so you are just as aware of it as I am, so I could call you on WP:EW for four edits to Double jeopardy in well under two hours, every single one of which was a revert. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whitby Railway Station

Hi Redrose64 - Just seen that I left York off the list for the Tile Maps on Whitby Railway Station (D'Oh). Thanks for putting it right. How could I even forget York....? The joy of all things (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I spotted it was missing because the one at York is about the only one that I've actually seen in the flesh - something like 30 years ago, it reminded me of the tiled map at Manchester Victoria. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see the problem.

Mr Rose, you recently removed something on the wikipedia page, star trek generations 1997 video game.

I find it annoying that I should find out some behind the scenes information only to have it removed because of a link?! A link that actually illustrates a point. Forgive me but I thought wikipedia was a free source of information, and a lot of people like to read behind the scenes information about things.

Sorry for trying to post information. Maybe next time I just won't bother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.235.146.15 (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Star Trek Generations (video game)? I have never touched that page: my name does not appear in the revision history. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move redirect text

Please undo this edit to MediaWiki:Move-redirect-text, as pages in the MediaWiki namespace should not be edited without consensus. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GeoffreyT2000: Why are you asking me, and not Mr. Stradivarius (talk · contribs)? --Redrose64 (talk) 09:07, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@GeoffreyT2000: I've reverted it, seeing as this is the second request for me to do so. Also pinging Paine Ellsworth, as they are the user I've most often seen using {{redr}} in this way. Personally I think that using redr here is a good idea, but Geoffrey is probably right that this needs a wider consensus than just "what I've seen Paine doing". — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 16:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI

Just a heads up...I noticed you adding "class=c |importance=" to many "WikiProject Women" templates. That's fine, but I didn't want you to do excess work for nothing. Someone recently went around tagging all the tennis pages with "WikiProject Women" template and they shouldn't have. Per a discussion with that wikiproject, they only tag women's articles with "WikiProject Women" IF there aren't already templates for "WikiProject Women's sport" or "WikiProject Women's History." So many of those templates you are adding to are being removed anyway. I just didn't want you wasting time and effort. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyunck(click): Do you mean this thread, which I initiated? It seems inconclusive to me. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was a later thread. One that I started earlier here. Where it was said "Our policy has been that if the page has one of the umbrella tags on it, others aren't necessary." Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That one also seems inconclusive. If it hadn't been, my thread wouldn't have been necessary, or the replies to it would have pointed out an earlier consensus. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request re. persistent wholesale copyvios at Stirling Moss

Greetings. You contributed at the Stirling Moss BLP in the not too distant past, so you may already be fairly familiar with it. Would you be willing to take a look at the recent massive WP:COPYVIO cutting a pasting by LordAnon of Essex? Yesterday I restored the article to its pre-copyvio state (noted on the article talk page) and left a warning on the talk page of the user User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Copyright_violations_at_the_Stirling_Moss_article, who has been warned several times in the past for cut-and-paste copyvios on several other articles. The user either hasn’t seen the warnings or has chosen to ignore them—and simply continues with copyvio edits. I posted a second warning to their talk page,User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Persistent_reinsertion_of_copyright_violations_at_the_Stirling_Moss_article and again posted to the article talk page noting the resumption of copyvios. The user’s talk page shows a warning by administrator Garion96 as long ago as February 2013 that they would be blocked if the practice continued.User_talk:LordAnon_of_Essex#Copyright_violations Nevertheless it has continued. I have pinged Garion96, whose contribs history shows only very sporadic contributions, with nothing since October 24. I have also notified WikiProject Formula One Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Formula_One#FYI:_copyvios_at_Stirling_Moss. The scale and persistence of the violations are such that I think it might be time the user received attention from an administrator. Writegeist (talk) 20:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Writegeist: My only recent contributions to Stirling Moss concerned unsuitable links for OBE added by a user who was making similar poor edits on a variety of articles. I'm not a copyright expert - per WP:DCV, this is really a matter for WP:ANI. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the reply. But the ANI cesspit? No thanks! I never drag anyone there. Screw it, I'll just let it go. I mean, who cares, right? It's only some writer's work being used without permission. Writegeist (talk) 22:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So ask a copyright expert --Redrose64 (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the well-intentioned advice but rather than search for a "copyright expert" it's simpler and more straightforward for me to let the relevant authors and publishers know. Writegeist (talk) 01:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marie Serneholt

If you want to, please take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt, which is this weeks selected TAFI article. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 16:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
Thank you for fixing my errors! As always, I won't let them happen again. JAGUAR  17:20, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are these magic words for? VE likes to add them to the end of pages, such as Anye Elite or Ammunition. Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgwhite: I guess you mean this edit and this one (I reverted both). See H:MW#Behavior switches. Neither is useful: articles are indexed by default so __INDEX__ is redundant; and articles are not discussion pages, so shouldn't have a "new section" tab. I don't get involved with VE; indeed, I refuse to use it - have you informed WP:VEF? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't sure what NEWSECTIONLINK did. Yea, I get to add yet another phabricator ticket that will be ignored. There are ~40 articles with NEWSECTIONLINK in the last dump. Content Transcrapulator is worse than VE, but isn't used as much. You are lucky, I get to cleanup up all the crap VE leaves behind. The latest is when a quote is left off a ref name (ie <ref name="ref>), VE craps out. They are not going to fix it in VE, but instead they want CheckWiki to look for it so us peons can fix it. Bgwhite (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VEF is in Wikipedia, it's not a phab: page. If you don't want to post there, you could complain to Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk · contribs) directly. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Posted at T118796. Whatamidoing (WMF) is aware of my frustrations and I've already vented to them about tickets being ignored. I'm now wasting ~2 hours a day just fixing VE issues and getting burnt out. Bgwhite (talk) 00:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgwhite: Do you have any evidence, like own experience or claims from the editors, that VE does this on its own? If you edit with VE [1] then the top right has a page options icon with three horizontal lines. "Advanced settings" on that menu has "Let this page be indexed by search engines" and "Show a tab on this page to add a new section". Enabling these will make exactly the edit in the above diffs, placing the magic words at the bottom of the page. The meny has a third option "Enable display title" which will add {{DISPLAYTITLE:label}} at the top like this one if the user enters "label" in a box. I suspect it's just users not knowing what they do, like all the empty <ref></ref> new users make with the source editor button below the edit box. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: Why does VE even allow one to do this in articles? Neither of these options need to be set in articles. That is a bug, not a feature. If users are adding <ref></ref>, why is VE letting them do that? Egads, this is going to be another "need to educate the user" issue that Whatamidoing (WMF) said for VE adding a ton of <span lang=> tags everywhere and you said about the ref tags. I thought VE was designed for new users in mind in which they didn't have to take a course to use VE. Bgwhite (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgwhite: Empty <ref></ref> are not added with VE but with the normal source editor. It could be confusing if VE options depend on the properties of the namespace the page is currently in. It could for example be a draft with plans to move to another namespace, or a test of VE features, or editors could be preparing for a planned change of properties in the namespace. I'm not a VE developer or user. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There will always be people who play "what does this button do?" The thing to do is to ensure that the easily-pressed buttons are those that have a commonplace useful purpose. Adding __NEWSECTIONLINK__ is only useful on pages outside talk spaces where discussion is normal, like the Village Pumps (where it's already present); and adding __INDEX__ is almost never necessary. Those people who need to add or remove __NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ will almost certainly be people with plenty of experience, people who simply do not need VE. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:30, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Bgwhite: Hopefully you're not refering to my request to see if this could be added to CheckWiki. Looking again at my request, I see I didn't specify that I suggested CheckWiki in the hopes that it could be run by a bot instead of us humans. I fixed over 400 of the errors manually, but I'm sure there are more. Just want to be sure we're all good - don't want you sending your mother-in-law after me.  :-) GoingBatty (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
GoingBatty You aren't the only one to make the request this past week. When it rains it pours. I'm upset that they aren't fixing it in VE, not that anybody requested it. Why should we have to fix it? You are safe from my mother-in-law, for now. Bgwhite (talk) 05:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Safe because she's at MY HOUSE! Call her off, Bgwhite! (p.s. To Rose, sorry for all of this drama on your talk page. I'm off now.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Despite Bgwhite's assertion that "they are not going to fix it", the devs have already changed Parsoid to deal with the the invalid wikitext. He is technically correct, though, as the changes were to Parsoid, not to VisualEditor. The invalid wikitext should still get cleaned up anyway, because there are no guarantees that the wikitext parser will always produce the same behavior for this invalid wikitext. There are other approaches to solving this problem, if you'd rather, such as expanding BracketBot to inform people when they've left unbalanced quotation marks in the wikitext editor, or adding an edit filter that warns users before letting them save the page.
__NEWSECTIONLINK__ and __INDEX__ are being added by individual users. It might be possible to disable those in the mainspace on the Wikipedias. They shouldn't be disabled at all wikis (e.g., because some wikis actually use the mainspace for discussions). I'll ask around about it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whatamidoing (WMF) The bug report for the two magicwords was declined I don't have a clue why. I had high hopes for bracketbot, but the amount of broken brackets has only risen. Bgwhite (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your undos

Moved to User talk:Jocksterdug § November 2015
 – Redrose64 (talk) 13:38, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edits there: please be aware of WP:OUTING. While the other user was the one attempting to out someone, you repeated their accusation, and copied it onto another page, which is pretty much the same thing. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Beeblebrox: By "repeated their accusation", I assume that you meant that I copied their post verbatim from this page to that. This I did because I dislike split discussions: when a third person comes along, such as yourself, it's harder to follow a split discussion through in chronological order, working out what is being replied to. Then, when third person wishes to reply - do they do so on the page bearing the post that they are replying to - or on the other one (or taken to its illogical conclusion) on their own talk page?
Anyway. I didn't look too closely at the names given by Jocksterdug, other than spotting that one was the Wikipedia login name of the edits that they had been reverting; I had assumed that the other was also a Wikipedia login name, and that they meant that one of the two was a sockpuppet of the other. Reverting the edits of an alleged sock requires at the least a WP:SPI. Reverting en masse because you don't like the person's political views is not acceptable at all. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Claire Martin (gymnast)

I am sorry I did not respond to you when you first reversed one of my edits. Please explain to me why you reversed my edit on Talk:Claire Martin (gymnast). I added {{WikiProject Gymnast|class=stub|importance=low}} to that talk page. Is she not a gymnast? Is not the article a stub of low importance? I also added {{WikiProject Women's sport|class=stub|importance=low}}. Isn't she a woman, and engaged in woman's sports? Please tell me why my edits were not appropriate for this article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Dthomsen8, you added a nonexistent template. See the result of your edit here. Judicious use of the WP editor's "Preview" button (as RedRose's edit summary suggested) can help you to avoid this problem, and you should, of course, always check the results of your edits before you move on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, now I understand my mistake. WP:AutoWikiBrowser is a powerful tool, but using it for manual changes is risky. AWB has a preview, but frequent use of it is unlikely, but should be used if any manual, rather than automated changes are made. Thank you, Jonesey, for your help.--DThomsen8 (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Each week I go through Wikipedia:Database reports/Broken WikiProject templates and fix up the redlinked WikiProject banners on talk pages. Over a period of months, I've noticed that a lot of them seem to be caused by just three or four people, one of which is Dthomsen8 (talk · contribs), and I can only presume that they are guessing at the template name, and not checking that it actually exists. I never use AWB. I have seen people make whole streams of bad edits using AWB, and then somebody else is expected to clean up the mess. AWB has rules, first of which is "You are responsible for every edit made. Do not sacrifice quality for speed and make sure you understand the changes." --Redrose64 (talk) 10:02, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Protection templates

Hi Redrose64! Hope you are well. Regarding the manual removal of protection templates... I know there's DumbBOT that gets some of them, but any idea why the rest aren't covered? How do you and MarnetteD find those pages that need the template removed? Do they show up in Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates? You and Marnette deserve endless praise for your diligent, robotic editing in remove those, but I feel this can and should be fully automated. If it's as simple as checking that category, I can write a bot task to do this fairly easily. Otherwise I was thinking I could have the bot monitor the protection log and record their expiries, storing it in a local database, then go off of that to automatically remove the templates. This would be a sure fire way to ensure it doesn't miss any. What do you think? — MusikAnimal talk 23:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MusikAnimal: We do find the pages through that cat, but a simple removal is not always the correct action, since the problem might be one of the wrong template being used, or an incorrectly-set parameter. See the "Remedies" text on that cat page for further information. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Unless I'm missing something, this all seems like it could be handled easily by a bot. The bot can check the page protection level, and remove the template if it is not protected. Otherwise it can change it to use the correct template and expiry date/format. For template pages it would check if {{documentation}} or {{collapsible option}} are in the source, and remove the protection template if so. I can see a scenario however where one of those template was buried more than one level down of child template transclusions (if that makes sense), and in that case I guess the bot would just have to leave it be for human review. I can even have the bot check the category after it does all of this, and try the null edit trick if it hasn't left the category. That would be where it gives up. Does that sound right? Is this worth me putting time in to? I'd like to help :) — MusikAnimal talk 23:32, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @MusikAnimal: I'll add a couple things to R's post that I have noticed in working with this category. One of the bots (sorry I can't remember which one) removes any "pending changes" templates soon after the expire. Other protections are hit and miss and I have seen a few where up to two months have passed since the protection has ended. If a page that is already protected has that protection extended or changed the template rarely gets updated and that will cause it to show up in the category. If you get a bot to do most of these that is okay but, as a confirmed wikignome, I am happy to continue to work on these manually. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 23:46, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think I can have the bot do that, seems fairly straightforward to implement. Now, I'm not trying to put anyone out of work here, it's just that there's a million gnomy things to do that require humans, ya know? =P I've started with development and will let you know when I file a BFRA. Going to write a note at Category talk:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates about this as well. Thanks to you both for your help and the opportunity for me to further assist the community with my bot efforts. Cheers — MusikAnimal talk 00:36, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Redrose64&oldid=691763094"