User talk:Primefac

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mgp28 (talk | contribs) at 14:49, 1 March 2024 (→‎You've got mail: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Reminder

Hey, just a reminder to complete the work at Template talk:Copyvio-revdel (as you might have forgotten) —Matrix(!) (a good person!)[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much] 16:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:F5 was adjusted a few weeks ago. Primefac (talk) 21:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but I can't find the new template that should correlate to it. —Matrix(!) (a good person!)[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much] 17:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you're referring to {{Overwritten revdel}}. Primefac (talk) 18:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers —Matrix(!) (a good person!)[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much] 20:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I just want to apologize for my overtly aggressive reaction to Lightburst's oppose and I see why you saw the need to revert it. It won't happen again. Brat Forelli🦊 13:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Primefac (talk) 13:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks for having integrity Primefac. I would like to restore my support for the candidate when the struck oppose vote is restored. Sadly now another oppose voter has surfaced and it is for the same reason. Maybe if we unstrike the first oppose we can restore the integrity of the election. Lightburst (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Bureaucrat's Barnstar
Thanks for all you do in this role! DanCherek (talk) 00:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Primefac (talk) 06:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Front Street office buildings

Hi there! In this edit to the Front Street office buildings article, your bot accidentally removed the --> from the end of a URL, which caused part of the article and its categories from being viewed. I don't know if there's a way to prevent this in the future, but I thought I'd let you know. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 07:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uh.... maybe? I'm not sure if the regex can get that granular, and if this isn't just a GIGO issue, but I'll have a think. I do feel like there are some minor code fixes that I need to do (the order of the tracking variables matters, for some reason) so I'll add that to my list of debugs. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Country alias

Hello! Can you see regarding the Latvian country alias module and communicate with the Latvian user who has created this module?. I see that they use a old version of the module long before the new one was created. Can you communicate with the Latvian user and see how you can do it. 80.212.168.110 (talk) 10:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Latvian so any language changes between the two versions will be well beyond my comprehension. Primefac (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editor of the Week Banner Help

Can you please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Hall of Fame/2024-02-18. I have no idea why it won't load! Thanks as always! Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 12:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong bracket type, should be good now. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Portal German Empire

I was pointed to you as someone who might be able to resolve this following your comment on Explicits talk page re Portal World War II. Currently there are a lot of entries in Category:Portal templates with redlinked portals for German Colonial countries following the deletion of Portal German empire. These are through templates so I am unable to resolve them. I think a link to German Empire needs to be removed from the templates(s) or changed to Portal Germany. Possibly there is also a link to non existent countries causing the problem. Can you help? Lyndaship (talk) 13:48, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, right, there was no followup so it slipped off my radar. I've got cleanup running now. Primefac (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I made an edit to {{YearInCountryPortalBox/make}} that should clear many pages from Category:Portal templates with redlinked portals automatically. BHG sure left some messes behind. I hope when I eventually leave WP people do not say the same about me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good, thanks for that. I started digging into the yearboxes and gave up. Primefac (talk) 16:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95 has successfully sorted the German empire portal problem. I noticed that your bot removed all links to Portal World War II, can you do the same for Portal World War I which was also recently deleted? I also noticed that the bot removed links on pages other than mainspace and Category - I'm not sure if this is desirable as it will ruin old discussions Lyndaship (talk) 07:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The bot only removed links that were being generated from the {{portal}} family of templates. It did not remove any direct links (e.g. Portal:World War II). Primefac (talk) 07:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok this was mentioned to me as a questionable edit Lyndaship (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Family name hatnote

Hi, I just dropped by to thank you for adding the medieval Family Name Hatnote, and I see the thread has disappeared into your archive. It's working well, so thanks for that. If you have a moment for a minor correction, the word "is" appears twice in the template, and strictly speaking once would be enough ;-). But that's a detail the wikignomes will fix anyway. Thanks again for helping out. Doric Loon (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look. Primefac (talk) 15:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed now. Thanks again! Doric Loon (talk) 09:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amhara people

Hi, can you help in an a edit dispute in the page of the Amhara people? 2A02:6680:1108:D0A3:38A7:B868:B8BC:3320 (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a third opinion has been given, so hopefully the issue can be resolved. Primefac (talk) 07:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted material from Draft:Warren C. Trenchard

I would like an explanation for why you deleted a large amount of material from the draft page noted above. The log mentioned copyright issues. What are the copyright issues? I know of none. Everything was properly referenced.I would like to have had a head-up before you did this and have had an opportunity to discuss whatever concerns you had. This is, after all, merely a draft article, not a public piece. What is even worse, I can't seem to even recover or examine what you deleted. This is unacceptable.Wctrenchard (talk) 20:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright issue is that copying directly from an external source to Wikipedia is a copyright violation, especially when the page in question is marked as Copyright © 2024 Warren C. Trenchard. You were given the heads up, and have engaged in multiple discussions about the matter, so this really should not come as a surprise. That being said, administrators are not required to discuss copyright violations before they are removed, as they need to be removed immediately. Primefac (talk) 07:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What specifically are the copyright infringements?Wctrenchard (talk) 07:28, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The text was copied directly from your website. Primefac (talk) 07:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bible Gateway template

Hi. I see that your bot has replaced the old Bible Gateway access template, bibleref2, with the Oremus one (bibleverse), which is till working, but MUCH poorer. This happened after B.Gtw. discontinued acces via Wiki template, so I thought: maybe you know what happened? And, more importantly: can that be reversed? They have so many different translations to choose from, there was a trick how to avoid repeating the name of the biblical book but still link to the verse number, and, and, and. Lightyears better.

If it was a Wiki decision, how can we try to reverse it? If it was BG's, maybe we can still negotiate something?

Thank you! Arminden (talk) 12:28, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a TFD about the template family that resulted in everything being merged to {{bibleverse}}. All of the options that were previously available in the various templates, including avoiding the book name and linking to Bible Gateway, are still available and described in the Examples and List of versions. If anything is lacking or otherwise not seeming to work correctly, please post on the template talk page so that it can be sorted out. Primefac (talk) 12:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation by IP editor

I need either your help, (or a talk page stalker's help) with deciding how I should proceed with an IP editor who I've only dealt with on one occasion who has accused my character publicly on an article's talk page.

I reverted an IP February 18th on the basis that their edit was puffery/vandalism here as "He [Vyacheslav Molotov] is considered to be one of the greatest diplomats in history" is non-neutral language and triggers "according to whom" questions. "Anderson" is not a clear or understood reference. I warned them as vandalism L2.

I'm not comfortable with their public accusations of me and my character on the article's talk page, especially since it was our only interaction.

Their complaint on their talk page, while also a bit forward, is not as problematic and is tolerable (but close).

How shall I proceed if any? And is the article talk page section problematic and valid for a revdel removal request?

Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 03:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have given them a vandalism warning, because that's not vandalism, but that's neither here nor there (though I do agree the "Legacy" section doesn't say that specifically so it should be removed). Being accused of having bias on something like this is not really surprising, though. Just engage in a neutral and non-threatening manner and you'll be fine. Angry people are more than capable of digging themselves into holes without help from others. Primefac (talk) 07:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read it as them adding Puffery without a valid source. Briefly wondered if they were quoting themselves. Seems I read their intent wrong. I'll neutrally reply and hope things go well. Thank you for the words of wisdom, and giving a third party view of this. I appreciate this. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cookie for you!

Thanks for teaching me about the adjective definition of myriad in that undo! - Master of Hedgehogs (converse) (hate that hedgehog!) 21:05, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Any time. Primefac (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And a glass of milk.
Thanks for all you do around here Primefac! S0091 (talk) 21:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I was needing that. Primefac (talk) 07:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re:NPA

Actually, that was the civil reply, i'd been working on an email that was...uh..."more articulated" in its use of "creative" language for around 60 minutes before finally trashing it altogether because it was extremely unpleasant. This one didn't have any profanity or any suggestions about where to shove the email. That being said, I won't argue that it sounded harsh - although some times harsh things need to be said harshly for people to get the point (And that includes people saying things to me). In any case, thank you for correcting me, and have a good morning. TomStar81 (Talk) 17:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happens to the best of us. Have a good one. Primefac (talk) 18:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteering for ... positions that entail a large volume of feedback

Your tolerance for people picking nits every. single. time. you. do. something. is likely much higher than mine. It's a reason I gave up being an arb, and it's a portion of the reason I don't do much around here anymore, but you seem to be handling it well. But in case it's secretly dragging on you, this is just a note to say - whether or not everything you do is perfect - I'm glad you have the tools you have, and you have my trust to exercise your judgment whenever necessary. Thanks. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. This is genuinely appreciated. Primefac (talk) 18:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to plus-one this. I completely realize I am a (much) smaller name than Floq... heck, I wouldn't be surprised if you need to remind yourself who I am. Still grateful for this; the follow-up needed for making a change you personally opposed speaks volumes more than a single incident :)

And more to the point, as you have personally noted (in the past year, at least at least thrice) Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with holding advanced permissions. Sincerely: thank you. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:13, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is still appreciated :-) Primefac (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello, Primefac,

I was checking up on an editor I have concerns about and found my way to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants where I see that you almost single-handedly manage the approval process of onboarding editors into the AFC review process. I saw your acceptances and declines and agreed 100% with your decisions and just wanted to thank you for taking this task on.

I spend a lot of time reviewing AFDs and I regularly come across fairly new editors who just plunge into the deep end of taking on more responsibilities after they have only been editing a month or two. I'm sure I'd run into this at PERM as well. I get antsy about editors who rack up thousands of edits in their first month or two editing but without evidence of socking, I feel like all I can do is keep tabs on them. But I'm glad that such a competent admin+ is managing the AFC approval process. The last thing we need is edit-heavy but content-inexperienced editors advising newcomers to the project.

While I'm here, over my 10 years on the project, you have sometimes come to my user talk page to point out oversights or mistakes on my part as I went about my daily tasks. While criticism can sometimes be hard to hear, I always thought you were fair and, of course, accurate about policy and seemed more concerned with making sure I didn't continue making mistakes rather than scolding me so thank you for that as well. I think the best admins, and editors, have a solid knowledge of policy but also an ability to communicate with others about problems without animosity and I think you have both in spades.

As for the most recent noticeboard disputes, it's not really my place to advise but I think being honest and forthcoming about your decision-making process goes a long, long way. I have confidence that won't be a problem for you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the note. While we may not always agree, I know that you put in a lot of time and effort here and that is genuinely appreciated; it ain't an easy job but someone's got to do it, right? Primefac (talk) 09:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest management

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Conflict of interest management and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't emphasise enough that this is not personal and done out of a loss for what else to do, and fearing that if I didn't do this, somebody else would have. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't think it was, but thanks for the reassurance. Primefac (talk) 10:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: yeah, maybe better. Page One is that you name as few parties yourself as absolutely necessary. Hence, everyone—arbs and peanut purchasers commentators—begins the discussion within narrow parameters, and the case and the parties to it broadens as it goes along. Or maybe doesn't, and even finishes within three months. As opposed to naming multiple parties, all of whom are alleged to have 'done' (apologies, Primefac) completely different things, which could—and to some extent has—muddied the waters from the beginning. Remember the immortal words of Aone: 'Keep it nice and tight, people'. ——Serial 21:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

I 100% support your block of Fram. Good call, tough call, needed to be done. Acalamari 17:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Primefac (talk) 07:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Header problem

Regarding this, I'm wondering if something recently changed on the MediaWiki side that's causing this problem. <> have been used in arb section headers for a long time without causing this problem, and I don't see any recent changes to Module:Anchor that look suspect. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is THURSDAY... Primefac (talk) 20:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just stuck a note at VPT: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Anchor issue with LT/GT symbols GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deadmau5 protection

I think the protection of Deadmau5’s page should be removed. He’s barely talked about anymore at all making his page less of a target for vandalism and WP:LIVING violations. CharlieEdited (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bot mistake

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_American_Dad%21_episodes&diff=1198224470&oldid=1192637443 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 08:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I didn't check any other edits. Have a good one. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Primefac. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Mgp28 (talk) 14:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Primefac&oldid=1211237635"