User talk:MSGJ

Your email

There are just no words to express my gratitude to you, Martin, for your help and support over the years. You were there for me at my 2015 bid, and over the years I have learned so much from you! Now, I'm in my mid 70s, and while thanks to you and others I've learned from, I deeply respect the tools and those who have them, I'm really too old to go through that again. Will always be deeply touched by your suggestion, though. You are truly one of the greatest people I've ever known. Thank you so very much for wanting to do this. It's a high like no other!  Paine  17:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Image link in the banner?

In this conversion, we lost |image-link=, which made the image a clickable link to the project. Is there a way to restore that functionality? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:08, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes ppossibly, but not sure if this is something that should be encouraged. The link to the image is usually required for attribution purposes. Can you give me an example of how it was used? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

For example, in {{WIR-00-2023}}, there's |image-link=Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/252. Clicking on the icon would (ideally) take people to the meetup page. It's not quite a critical feature, since there's still the same link in the text, but it was something that was lost in the conversion. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, File:1day1woman.png requires attribution under its licence, so the link to the image page is needed. A similar question was asked in 2016 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Alright, no biggie. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Unused documentation pages appearing

Hey, did you change anything with how {{WPBannerMeta}} calls the documentation sub page? Pages like Template:WikiProject Commonwealth/doc have now become unused (appeared on the unused report) but I don't see any edit at Template:WikiProject Commonwealth that could have changed that. Gonnym (talk) 21:14, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that was me. The auto documentation is a long-term project but I have re-added the transclusion of local doc pages if |DOC=custom — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Edit warring report

Template:Edit warring report has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

WIR Test

Hello MSGJ, that test was meant as an opportunity for you to show how your idea of grouping wrappers in one banner would look in situ. I honestly think your solution, if implemented as I understand it (i.e., without the need to erase/merge all of the wrappers), would quite possibly calm everyone down and solve the problem. Worth a try? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:50, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
PS: Another example one could use would be Talk:Maria Cristina Didero (which I just cleaned-up following your example on Talk:Cheryl McKissack Daniel). If you leave the WIR tag were it is and integrate other wrappers into it, how would that work? I am genuinely curious about this and would much like to help find a solution. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 June 23#Template:WIR

Would you have any problem with me mass tagging all of the relevant templates with a TfD notice? — Qwerfjkltalk 11:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Surely that is not necessary? All the members of the project are aware of the discussion now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

From Ipigott, commenting on the TfD: I see that WIR-00-2021 is one of the few templates which specifically carries a message that it is a candidate for merging while nearly all the others cited as causing problems do not. This all provides a very warped view of the apparent intention to merge all the WIR article talk page templates. If this is indeed the intention, then merger messages should be placed on each and every template so that contributors who have used them or who intend to create or expand article talk pages can be alerted. Up to now, those members who have taken part is this discussion have come along mainly as a result of items on the main WIR talk page. If those proposing a merge seriously intend to cover all WIR article tags, then it seems to me that the current proposal should be withdrawn.— Qwerfjkltalk 13:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Questions re: WP Women in Green template adjustments

Hi Martin -- I help coordinate WikiProject Women in Green (WiG), and I've just been checking out some of the changes you've made to the WiG talk page templates today. It sounds like you're aiming to improve simplicity of use (which is great, thanks). Can you briefly explain the changes to me and what they mean for future templates? Do I still need to create a new template for each WiG event, or can I somehow just adapt the current core template? (I'm a neophyte and still learning when it comes to creating templates.) I would appreciate it if you could also leave a quick explanation on the talk page of Women in Green -- these templates are widely used, and project participants should be notified if usage procedures have been changed. Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 01:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

This wrecked the categorization of Category:All WikiProject Women in Green pages. Please restore it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:29, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MSGJ,

Why did you empty Category:All WikiProject Women in Green pages? According to the category update, you removed all of the articles from this category. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:14, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Headbomb, Liz: I've actually fixed the categorisation. In many cases (e.g. [1]) the categories were being wrongly suppressed and now they are working. All articles are categorised under Category:WikiProject Women in Green articles. Of course I did not intend to break anything so if the "All" category is needed then of course I will re-add it. I will follow up at the template talk page. Thanks! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:28, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Update: Category:All WikiProject Women in Green pages is now populated again — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:19, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Alanna: firstly what a fantastic project you have there and it looks like you are doing a great job of coordinating things. I have written some documentation at Template:WIG/doc and also left a few comments at Template talk:WIG. I'm quite happy to leave a pointer at the project talk too. If there are any queries then I am watching the template talk page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:44, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox golfer/ranking

Template:Infobox golfer/ranking has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Working with WikiProjects

I appreciate the challenges in getting members of a WikiProject interested in engaging with proposals to alter the templates they use. Nonetheless, in the end, there isn't much point in getting an external consensus for change if the project isn't interested in using the result. It's only going succeed when the WikiProject itself decides what changes it wants to make happen, including any workflow accommodations they feel are reasonable. isaacl (talk) 00:15, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Error in Template:WP1.0

Hi MSGJ; Template:WP1.0 gets an error for duplicate "ASSESSMENT_LINK" and "MAIN_CAT" parms. It's affecting about 14,000 pages in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. I don't understand the template's coding, but in looking at the diff, could it be related to the removed "}}" at old line 38? Thanks in advance. Davemck (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks I think I've fixed those now — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Vital article categories

Hi MSGJ, could you point to what happened to the Vital Article categories that led to this edit? I'm reasonably sure I used that category to clean up the unassessed vital articles. Are they now gathered elsewhere? Thanks, CMD (talk) 16:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi CMD. Short answer: yes they are now gathered at Category:Unassessed vital articles. Long answer: we have been exploring alternative ways to present the information in this template and for it to take up less room on the page. As a temporary measure it has been converted to use {{WPBM}} so that it will collapse properly when inside {{WPBS}}. In order to do this the categories needed to have the standard naming scheme, which has now happened. In the longer term the plan is to integrate this template directly into WPBS, but details are still being discussed. Hope this helps. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't fully follow the mechanics, but it sounds like the functionality is maintained. Perhaps redirects from the old categories might help? I'll leave it to your know how, best, CMD (talk) 14:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Query about "identifiers"

Hello, MSGJ,

I think I came to your talk page before to ask about "identifiers" and tonight a lot more identifier categories showed up on Special:UnusedCategories. Is it okay to tag these CSD C1? That's how I normally handle empty categories. Just let me know. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:35, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz, I think they were temporarily rendered unused during a transition I made yesterday but they should all clear out of that list once the job queue catches up. Thanks for checking — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:54, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, good, I'm glad I checked! Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

So, if you look at Special:UnusedCategories, you'll still see dozens and dozens of empty identifier categories. Do you still expect these to be full soon? Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Still interested in your opinion here. Do I remove the "Empty Category" tags from these pages and tag them for CSD C1 speedy deletion or will these eventually be filled again? If you don't know, is there a noticeboard I should go to or another editor or admin that I should ask? Just looking for direction here. Many thanks for any guidance. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

NetReputation (PR firm)

Greetings, MSGJ,

Upd: 23 July. The page was nominated to deletion. Not healthy action, can you advice or vote on the deletion discussion page? many thx! btw, it's frustrating much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paranoya23 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 23 July 2023 (UTC) This is a request to review the page about censorship organisation NetReputation (PR firm). I have tried 2 months ago, then 3 guys helped me to improve it. Please no delay because they will delete this from the Internet and people never will know the trust about operations this Florida-related firm. Also, thx anyone for an experience, cause I learned WP:ORGCRIT. GL HFParanoya23 (talk) 08:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:WikiProject Ecuador portal selections

A tag has been placed on Category:WikiProject Ecuador portal selections indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:49, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MSGJ,

On another category question, is there a good reason to empty Category:All Wikipedia vital articles so that it is deleted? Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:53, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

All of those are good to delete I think. Thanks Liz — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:16, 21 July 2023 (UTC)