User talk:Headbomb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
User Talk Archives My work Sandbox Resources News Stats

The Signpost
31 July 2019


For what reason? --Janggun Dungan (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Janggun Dungan: a few. First it's very odd for someone to create a draft and move it themselves into mainspace without review. Second, I can't see anything about other Tatort episodes, and I don't see that the sources support the 992nd episode being any more special than any other ones. Tatort: Die Kunst des Krieges also seems to be a bad title for it, and there are several inconsistencies in the article. Is it an episode? a movie? etc. People at WP:TV would be able to offer more help than me here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:31, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. To my mind, your arguments are open to question. --Janggun Dungan (talk) 13:43, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Thousand pardons! It turns out that I misunderstood your comment "into draft space so that it can ... get feedback from WP:WPTV. ... input from WP:WPTV would be good." I merely could not understand how I had to call for their "input." The fact is I am not as experienced as you are. --Janggun Dungan (talk) 07:33, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


Hi Headbomb. You deleted 3 links to LibriVox. Although currently LibriVox doesn't have a huge selection of audio books with the word "Physics" or "Chemistry" or "Biology" in the title over time that library will grow. These books are old and may appear irrelevant to modern research but they still have value. It would be nice to have access to free audio books with the most current information but copyright prevents this. The goal of this Wikipedia page is to enable people to learn about Physics. Many people have jobs and don't want to spend their whole lives sitting still looking at screens or printed text. Audio books allow people to learn about Physics while working, cleaning their homes, driving, walking outside, caring for children, etc. Almost all of the links on this Wikipedia page are to other pages with text or video. If you could create a link to LibriVox that selected all the audio books in the Physics category that would be ideal instead of just searching for books with the word "Physics" in the title. Thanks.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoffreyEdwards (talkcontribs)

Digital media use and mental health - soon FA nom? Interesting at least![edit]

Hi there how are you? I noticed you were recently editing Addiction vulnerability, as well as your prolific wiki experience. and thought if you had time and I could interest you could assist me as many others have in my cleanup and improvement of the Digital media use and mental health.

Theres a few page move / terminology discussions 1. Here (social media addiction) 2. Here (Internet addiction disorder)

and also I have had a lot of input from others here for considering the FA nomination of the mother article, Digital media use and mental health, if you have any further input!

New question today about the inclusion of internet sex addiction in digital media use and mental health - here. Terminology - should we call it problematic cybersexual behaviour, for instance?

Thanks so much for any thoughts!

Also many thanks to the extensive involvement of User:Doc James, User:Casliber, User:Farang Rak Tham, User:Seppi333, User:Twofingered Typist, User:Bondegezou, User:FeydHuxtable and others.--[E.3][chat2][me] 16:18, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@E.3: if I edited that page, it was in a drive by way. I have no opinion on anything in that article. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:19, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
No worries! thanks. Just with the wiki project addiction being empty trying to find other ways to get comments. Cheers! --[E.3][chat2][me] 16:21, 10 August 2019 (UTC)


Hi, I realize that you want to use your new toy, but honestly, I fail to see the interest of edits like this. All that happened here was adding empty fields to the infobox, fields that will never be used (it's an ornithology journal, so we'll never have a Bluebook, MathSciNet, or NLM abbreviation to worry about). And it inserted a lot if useless blanks. Nothing however that would result in a visible change to the article. I'm pretty sure that I've once seen some guideline/policy to avoid edits that don't result in a visible change in output. Why waste time on edits like this? --Randykitty (talk) 19:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Right now, I'm mostly testing it. I agree that Bluebook/MathSciNet/NLM could be optional/not added by default. Couple of other things could also be ommited, like |peer-review= or |ISSNlabel=. That said, the infobox is now incredibly much easier to edit. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:32, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, I'll give it a try, although I've never found adding an infobox that onerous. --Randykitty (talk) 04:25, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Have a look here. THe old infobox still contained a line for the RSS, which is deprecated. The script should simply remove that instead of appending it at the bottom. --Randykitty (talk) 09:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Yup, that and atom. It's on the to do list. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


Hi, when you add an infobox to an article, it's helpful to remove the "infobox-needed=yes" parameter from the wikiproject tag on the talk page, so that it gets removed from that maintenance category. Cheers! --Randykitty (talk) 08:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Pretty sure there's a bot that takes care of those. If not, there should be one. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't think there's a bot doing this at this point. --Randykitty (talk) 20:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
I'll make a WP:BOTREQ soon then. Having the script remove the infobox needed thing from banners has been requested though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


If you thought you had valid reasons to revert an edit, you should have specified them in the edit summary when reverting. Giving invalid reasons, and only on your third revert, indicates disruptive intent. (talk) 23:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I did provide them. And I asked you to take it to the talk page the first time, per WP:BRD, which you have yet to do. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


This page seems to use a non-standard citation format, and I have no idea how to fix it. Since you're something of a citation expert, maybe you could help me out? --Wikiman2718 (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

  • @Wikiman2718: what exactly is broken? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:58, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    If you click on a reference in text, it links to a note. Then you have to click on the note to get to the real reference. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 20:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    Seems things are working as intended then? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:06, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    I'm not sure. Surely this is non-standard referencing? --Wikiman2718 (talk) 20:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    What's nonstandard about it? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:55, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    Normally citations like to the references section, not the notes section. I have never seen an article with citations formatted like this before. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 22:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Charles Darwin's Illness (health)[edit]

Dear Headbomb, I am impressed by your massive contribution to Wikipedia and pleased that some of the more unlikely diagnoses for CD's illness have been regulated to the waste bin. I have moved on from the cyclic vomiting syndrome and now believe that Darwin suffered from a pathological mitochondrial DNA (MELAS type), inherited from his maternal (Wedgwood) forebears, a mutation that may be associated with cyclic vomiting. This mutation not only explains CD's illness but also the illnesses of his mother, her mother, his maternal Uncle Tom, and in particular the illness of the youngest sibling of the mother's generation. Mary Ann died at the age of 8 with MELAS.I would like my more recent paper to be referenced: Hayman J. Charles Darwin's mitochondria. Genetics. 2013;194(1):21–25. doi:10.1534/genetics.113.151241 With best wishes, (talk) 04:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC) John H

Not really sure what I'm expected to do here, I have no medical background, or particular insight about Charles Darwin's illness. I suggest you try WT:MED. However, see also WP:COI. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)


Hallo, I've seen several of your edits lately changing "2/year" etc to "biannual". I don't think this is an improvement as "biennial" is so easily confused, and "bimonthly" means "every two months" rather than "2/month". Is there a guide or policy supporting your change? I can't see anything in the infobox documentation or the essay on how to write about journals, but would be happy to start a discussion at an appropriate place. PamD 05:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Biennial is once per two years, 2/month is ~biweekly (or 24/year if you want to be more accurate). See our category descriptions Category:Biannual journals, Category:Bimonthly journals, etc. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:18, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
This really should be discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals. Tokenzero (talk) 10:32, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Bi- = two, semi- = half. —DIYeditor (talk) 08:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

I've now raised this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals#Biannual?, and along the way have found a set of examples showing that "...ennial" is misunderstood/misused. PamD 10:47, 20 August 2019 (UTC)


I know you are not a new user but I am aware that you are using an alternate indent style. I think it causes confusion and doesn't follow the logic or flow of WP:INDENT. Also it may fail WP:LISTGAP by following * with *** or : with :::? I don't believe that is permissible on its own.

First reply to comment
First reply to reply to comment
Second reply to comment


Second reply to comment
First reply to comment
First reply to reply to comment

A logical flow may be important for people with screen readers. Thanks for your consideration. —DIYeditor (talk) 08:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to fix stuff if you come across it, but I can't spare the mental capacity to figure out the intricate details of WP:INDENT/WP:LISTGAP and commit them to memory. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
One simple rule to preserve the list structure (in spite of the name of the page Wikipedia:Indentation, the : syntax produces HTML list items, not indents): Copy the prefix of the immediately preceding comment, and optionally add one *, #, or :. See User:Isaacl/On wikitext list markup for more details. isaacl (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Typo in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals[edit]

I think you mean "6/year"? All so confusing! PamD

Typed too fast, but yes. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:48, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject status[edit]

Hey HB, I say you reverted my add of {{Wikiproject status}} to Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia; I added it at the bottom to try to make it as unobtrusive as possible. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Council uses that tag to track projects (active ones, in this case) within Category:WikiProjects by status. Are you ok with my re-adding it (again, at the bottom) to facilitate management of the WikiProject subspace? Let me know, and thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

You could just add Category:Active WikiProjects directly, rather than clutter the page with that. However, I just added a new option to the banner |hide=yes, which will categorize things, but hide the banner itself. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:05, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I will use that parameter. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2019 (UTC)