User talk:MarnetteD/archive59

A Newcastle for you!

Cheers for all the work you've been doing lately on the articles! DonQuixote (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks DQ. I realized I hadn't been through our DW articles for a few years and decided it was time to take a journey through Time and Space :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Yowza. You turned an amber into a nut brown Redrose64. Many thanks :-) MarnetteD|Talk 20:37, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Neutral notice

This is a neutral notice to all registered editors who have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film over the past year (Sept. 15, 2018-present) that a Request for Comment has been posted here. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. Help improve the article. Thanks you. Vtukol (talk) 00:45, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello V. I'm not sure what I can do as the subject isn't my forte. I can say that it looks pretty good to me. You could make a request for input and assistance at any of the wikiprojects listed on the talk page Talk:Akane Yamaguchi. MarnetteD|Talk 00:52, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Raw links

Just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that I've been having an issue with Reflinks for a few months ago. I keep getting a python code error when I attempt to use it, and so have had to rely solely on Refill. My apologies for putting you and another editor to having to clean up articles I tag and can't completely scrub. But thanks for taking care of them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:37, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your note Onel5969. I hope you are well. Yeah I've seen it go out of service (so to speak) when it is being worked on. At those times it feels like we are trying to fix those pesky bare urls with one hand tied behind our backs :-) No need for apologies - you know working on them helps scratch my wikignome itch. I do appreciate all your efforts here at the 'pedia. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

You might want to see

WP:ANI#Controversial behaviour at squatting position and maybe [1] from the same editor you reverted at Kneeling. Looks like a sock. Doug Weller talk 16:30, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Doug Weller. I did check a bit of that thread. I was heading off to report the socking but saw that Floq had already applied the block. A crazy Friday so far :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:33, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

• Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
• Diversity winner
• Gender-gap fillers

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

RIP Jessye

Jessye Norman was one of the spectacular voices I've heard. Here is one of her special performances. MarnetteD|Talk 17:04, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to talk page

You are invited to the talk page on WP:FILM to discuss the issues with the format of 2019 in film. BattleshipMan (talk) 01:07, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

The Ocean Race

Usually, after I run ref fill, the "Bare URL" notice is automatically removed. I assumed there was some problem (that I wasn't seeing) which caused it to not be removed. Frequently, someone else comes by, runs ref fill again, and fixes more references. I can't explain it. I don't know how or why, but I have seen it happen. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:37, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

No worries 7&6=thirteen . I've found that there are several different bare url tags and refill isn't programmed to recognize all of them and that can cause them to get left after we've run it. Also the new "Refill 2" misses some that the old refill didn't. Cheers and happy editing to ya. MarnetteD|Talk 17:38, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Jemma Powell

Thanks for sourcing the article; surely the best outcome. However I'm a little baffled as to how you would justify letting an unsourced BLP sit in main space just because the redirect seems suboptimal. What would have been your solution if no one had seen fit to go find sources? Our policies are pretty specific on avoiding this exact case. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The redirect was completely baffling Elmidae. This morning I responded to Talk:An Adventure in Space and Time#Problem with a link and, as there is no immediate indication to why the link went to Jack's article, I found the removal of the redirect to be the one way to clear things up for the reader. I then got caught up in dealing with a large number of articles tagged with "bare url need fixing" templates. Mondays can be more than a little busy dealing with those. When I saw your revert I then went to work finding some refs. Please note that the only guideline listed at WP:RPURPOSE that could remotely be applied to JP's article is "Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article" and I did not see it as viable since her career is separate and apart from his and not mentioned in his article at all. Next be aware that sourced to IMDb is not completely unsourced it is just unreliably sourced. When you restored the redirect you returned the article to a state that was IMO suboptimal and that our policies are pretty specific about avoiding. The one thing that would have made the redirect marginally better is if, per MOS:SECTLINK, it had been to Jack Savoretti#Personal life and family then a reader would at least have seen Jemma's name. But that is not what happened. I would also note that their marriage is not sourced in that section and, thus, we are back to the same problem that started this. I do apologize if you find the tone of my reply harsh - that is not my intention. It is always difficult to cover everything in a typed response - especially when pressed for time. Best regards to you and thanks for all your work here at the 'pedia. MarnetteD|Talk 23:05, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Gotcha; thanks for the explanation :) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:00, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

You are welcome E. MarnetteD|Talk 00:27, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

That was a long climb

I recently made it to position 161 for the first time. I first reached position 162 way back in May 2017 and to climb just one place since then has taken 41944 edits, in the midst of which you passed me. -Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Congrats Redrose64!! Yep the numbers gap between editors grows the farther up the list we move. Add to that the fact that most editors in the top two to three hundred are still active so they increase their total at the same time that we do so passing anyone takes a looong time. Many thanks for all your work here :-) MarnetteD|Talk 12:38, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

????

So ... do you have some sort of magical version of Reflinks or something?? You seem to be able to catch/correct bare urls with Reflinks quite often ... that I cannot. Steel1943 (talk) 02:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Steel1943. Let's see if I can remember what I did there. If you take a look at this you will see a small box at the bottom of the editing field to the left. In this example it says "cite web" - if you click on the down arrow it will give you several other choices. When you click on one of them it will add the template around the reference but a few fields will be left blank. You can fill them in with the needed info before hitting save. Now my example isn't ideal since reflinks has supplied the full reference so you can use those when it just leaves a bare reference. I know I'm not very good at explaining these kinds of things in detail so my apologies if this is too confusing. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmm ... I don't see any "small box". But it's probably because I'm using the mobile version of Reflinks which probably looks different than the desktop version. (I edit with the desktop version of Wikipedia on my mobile device, but it doesn't seem as though there's a way to view Reflinks' desktop version while using a mobile...) Steel1943 (talk) 02:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Rats Steel1943. My example went away when I saved the edit. When reflinks runs you get a long rectangular box with the reference in it. Sometimes it is formatted and sometimes it isn't. The small white box I'm talking about is just below it too the left. Its default reads "simple" and then clicking on the arrow brings up the choices of cite templates. Hopefully this will make more sense next time you use reflinks. MarnetteD|Talk 02:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:09, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

PewDiePie

Hello,

"field does not exist" ? What do you mean? Why have few people something against my changes?

Jicco123 (talk) 21:41, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Infoboxes only display items that you add to them if the field exists in their empty form. If you look at Template:Infobox YouTube personality you will see that there is no field labeled "Creator". Wikipedia has guidelines and policies that are applied to edits added to articles. Any additions or subtractions from articles that do not follow those are subject to removal. MarnetteD|Talk 22:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	You do a lot of work here protecting articles and improving sourcing. You rarely seem to be rewarded for it! Sorry it's not a Criterion film but this is the best I can do.  ;-). ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:24, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you DB. Much appreciated and it takes up less shelf space :-) BTW the Godzilla box set is gorgeous. Since I'm snowed in its arrival is most timely. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Dade County High School (Trenton, Georgia)

Hi MarnetteD, noticed you did a refill for 5 bare references in the Dade County High School (Trenton, Georgia) article. You added dead link tags to three of them, however all of them work. Not sure if there could be something wrong with refill or maybe you made a mistake, but you added http again and a combination of percentages, numbers and letters. Anyway, just letting you know but don't worry about this as I'm currently sorting this article out, as the user who added an infobox has not done this correctly. Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:03, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Steven (Editor). I've seen it happen before though it is very rare. I see you have already fixed them so many thanks for your work. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 21:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Explanation of Siihb

I am trying to explain Siihb, not to excuse their behavior. As I said on WP:ANI, and we will let an admin close that thread now that Siihb is quasi-banned, there are a few editors who perform the service of responding to edit requests by COI editors. They include Spintendo and opencooper. They are doing a thankless job of reviewing the edit requests by paid editors (often working for Beutler, a PR firm that does paid Wikipedia editing). The problem is apparently that Siihb is very anti-Huffman or anti-Reddit, and opencooper made a requested edit for Huffman's flack after reviewing it, and Siihb wasn't satisfied. I haven't reviewed the facts. I am inclined to think that opencooper probably was being neutral, because I can see that Siihb is no judge of neutrality. So Siihb thinks that anyone who agrees with opencooper and with Huffman is probably in the pay of Huffman. I think that Siihb wanted to put a Controversies section in the article. That is what I think. But that doesn't matter now that Siihb has been quasi-banned.

By the way, the other editor who services Beutler edit requests is Spintendo. About a year ago, Beutler had the absurd nerve to report Spintendo to WP:ANI for disagreeing with them as to some of their edit requests. That is because Spintendo really was being neutral. I thought that they were treating Spintendo like a paid employee who wasn't doing what they were told to do. A paid employee who doesn't follow instructions can be fired. Well, okay, then fire the volunteer and get someone else to review your stupid edit requests. Oh well. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to go into things more fully RM. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 00:25, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Messed up my ping RM. Oopsie. MarnetteD|Talk 16:26, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay. The point is that Siihb might or might not have had a legitimate concern. On reviewing further, I think that I would have agreed that opencooper was being properly neutral. But Siihb completely blew it by making so much angry noise that we couldn't see the signal. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

The important thing was the policy violations. MarnetteD|Talk 16:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Three million years later...

Position after 1. P–K4

Alright, Hol? I'm just sending on the latest move in our chess game. My move is Pawn, right, that's the little knobbly ones down the front. Pawn to King four. Your move. Well, I'd better sign off now. <long pause> How do you turn this off then....? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:16, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Great stuff Lugnuts! Brings back fun memories. Thanks to Redrose64 for adding the visual. Happy Halloween to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 16:34, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Green America/ two column references

You helped me at Teahouse, I still cannot successfully put the references into two columns. When I put the code in, it shows up in the preview as two columns, but then when I hit publish changes it goes away.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_America helpToandanel49 (talk) 20:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

The columns are there for me Toandanel49 No code is needed anymore. The need for it was removed a couple years ago. The reason you are not seeing them must have something to do with your browser or your viewing settings or the device you are using. I suspect that if you try another computer you will see them just fine. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 21:10, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you again,Toandanel49 (talk) 23:18, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

You are most welcome. MarnetteD|Talk 01:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Notable Works

To whom it may concern, Please stop removing my known works lists. You are following my edits, and if I happen to edit a "Known Works" list that already exists, you delete it entirely. You did this for Stephen Frears, Joel Schumacher, John G. Avildsen, Stephen Goldblatt, and several others. All 4 of these articles had "Known For" lists before I edited them, but the moment I did, you erased them. I think this is unfair, and am being singled out for no reason. There are plenty of authors, actors, directors, etc. with "Known works" lists, yet you don't erase them. Please stop singling me out, as I am doing nothing wrong. Why won't you get after the other users here who created those lists in the first place? If I'm violating a rule, why not punish the others too? Jgwilliams873 (talk) 02:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

You might not be able to read my edit summaries so I will point out that the filmproject deprecated the use of that filed over a decade ago as it is inherently WP:POV. You can start a discussion there about changing that previous WP:CONSENSUS if you wish. BTW you are satill makring your edits as minor in spite of repeated messages to stop doing that. MarnetteD|Talk 02:19, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, but that still doesn't explain why you have been following/stalking my edits, and undoing them all, even if I am not "disrupting" anything. Also, you haven't explained why you only delete "Known For" or "Notable Works" lists if I work on them. Why not go and remove them from the articles on Charles Dickens or Martin Luther? It makes no sense.

Jgwilliams873 (talk) 14:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) No-one is "stalking" your edits. With your very poor "editing" record, you would do well to read and comply with what MarnetteD informs you. Otherwise, you will find yourself facing a much longer block than those you have previously had. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 15:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks David J Johnson. MarnetteD|Talk 17:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Caligari

Saw your edits on the Caligari page. Apologies, you are correct, I should've included an edit summary. If you think the Kracauer sentence should remain in the article, I'd encourage you to comment in the FAC. If it can perhaps be modified to provide some clarity and answer the reviewer's question, I wouldn't necessarily oppose it. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 03:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your message HK. I had forgotten that you were trying to get the article through FAC. If time permits I'll try to take a look at whether the mention can be adapted to fit. I guess I'm partial to Kracauer since I first read his work back in the 1970's. Speaking of which if you haven't seen this documentary about him and German cinema of the era you might find it of interest. I saw it on Netflix and it might be available in other places on the web. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 04:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for the recommendation, I will definitely check it out! — Hunter Kahn 05:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Bloomberg and refill

Thank you for your work on references. Please note that sometimes refill actually destroys Bloomberg citations, due to bot blocks. Nemo 07:05, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Ay yi yi Nemo. Thanks for letting me know. I am used to Bizjournal refs having problems formatting properly but I hadn't seen that before. I will keep an eye out for that in the future> Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk

Oh wait Nemo now that I take a closer look I realize that it is that thing where a website like Bloomberg wants a human to respond. I had seen it once or twice but not for several months - my apologies and thanks again for letting me know. MarnetteD|Talk 07:26, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Claire Danes

Hi MarnetteD! I just wanted to message you regarding the edit summary that you left when reverting an IP user's edits to the Claire Danes article here. I know that it can be difficult to do at times (trust me, I know... lol) - especially in the face of someone whose clearly not complying with NPOV, but we want to try our best to use care when leaving edit summaries in these situations, and make sure that we're not leaving any that could frustrate, antagonize, anger, or motivate other users in the wrong or negative direction. This user likely read your edit summary, "nobody cares", and decided that it was okay to use their edit summaries to take a jab back at you in response (such as what the user did here and here). That's all; I just wanted to message you informally about it and give you some positive input. I hope you're having a great day, and I wish you happy editing. Until we meet again... ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello O. I am afraid I cannot agree with your assessment. The first and second edit summary before the one that you are discussing indicated a WP:RGW WP:POV warrior and the back and forth since then has only confirmed that to me. While there is no way to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt if I had not made that summary things would pretty much be the same there. While I understand where you are coming from I am saddened that you feel the need to lecture me as though I am some problematic editor. Best regards and I hope the rest of your week is a delightful one. MarnetteD|Talk 01:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

MarnetteD, making you feel as if there was a need to "lecture you" or that you're "some problematic editor" was the very last thing that I wanted to present or make you feel in my message to you above. I saw the edits between yourself and the IP user, saw your edit summary and those that followed, and figured that I'd just message you about it informally. I'm sure you know me as someone who doesn't like to be seen as "that admin" who only lectures and annoys others and isn't respected by others... I saw the two edit summaries you mentioned that occurred before the edit summary you made. I should've mentioned this fact so that you didn't feel as if I thought you were the one who started things, and I apologize for that. The reason behind the message I left was to try and help keep the peace... that's all. I was certainly not trying to point fingers at you or present any "blame" at your doorstep. :-) I hope that my response has helped to clarify my intentions, and that it helps you to understand, and that it resolves any frustration that it may have caused upon you. Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:37, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi again O. I know you are one of the best and most caring admins on the 'pedia. In fact, considering the season we are heading into, I would say your heart is already as large as the Grinch's is at the end of the story and just keeps getting bigger as the years go by. Your message comes at a frustrating time - I hasten to add that there is no way on the face of the nine planets (yes I am so old that I still consider Pluto a planet) that you were to know that :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Ah, that's completely understandable. I'm sorry that the message incited further frustration upon you from elsewhere. If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I sure will O. Fortunately the one I was in the middle of reporting when I got your message has been zapped. Cheers again. MarnetteD|Talk 02:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Excellent! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

A Piraat for you!

Cheers! DonQuixote (talk) 05:46, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Yum Yum DQ. I'll save it for my Five Drs and Day of Dr viewing tomorrow night. I'd drink it in one of these if I could ever find one :-D Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 05:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Request for your expert attention

Greetings esteemed MarnetteD, it is your IP editing colleague. I would ask that you perhaps give a moment's attention to the article Life-cycle assessment. At its very top it has a redirect, such that when individuals search "Cradle-to-grave", they are directed to this article. I believe this to be inappropriate and time-wasting. Individuals looking for "cradle-to-grave" most often will not be looking for this very specialised article on environmental economics, where the phrase "cradle to grave" has, in the hands of a few writers, functioned as an adjectival descriptor of its economic analytical aims. Rather, someone coming with just this phrase may be seeking any one of a number of its descriptive uses (and not certainly this environmental one). For this reason, people searching "cradle-to-grave" or "cradle to grave" should—in my opinion—be directed not directly to this article, but instead to the Cradle to the Grave (disambiguation) page, which in turn links to this page, but also to many others. Can you make this correction? I lack the technical expertise to do so. Thank you. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:9B0:81FF:A789:8086:992A (talk) 15:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Is any more information needed here? Just looking in. 2601:246:C700:9B0:42E:50D1:45E4:5FEA (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Finally got to this. Apologies for the delay. MarnetteD|Talk 06:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Re-view of the Leninism article

Query for Editor MarnetteD

Greetings, Colleague

Might I trouble you to re-view the content of the Leninism article? I have completed a clean-up whereby I removed anti-Communist easter eggs and off-topic false statements piggy-backed onto sources that do not substantiate such anti-communist pov-pushing vandalism.

Let me know, if you might, because I sense a looming edit-war.

Regards

Chas. Caltrop (talk) 18:21, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for your post Chas. Caltrop. I'll take a look when I get caught up. My vacation has come to an end but, after two long days of driving, my energy levels are out of whack so it may be a couple of days. Thanks for your work on that article! MarnetteD|Talk 17:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

• Looks like your sense of what to come was correct Chas. Caltrop. I do think your work has made the article more factual and less of a POV problem. As the editor in question looks to be a WP:RGW person you might start a thread on the articles page explaining the problems with the old version of the page that your edits have corrected. MarnetteD|Talk 22:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Apologies, our editing crossed

Can you possibly do one more pass over the David Robert Grimes article? Have been trying to add professional positions, and the facts are elusive, and so I had to add further URLs to fill. Thank you in advance for the ReFill effort. 2601:246:C700:9B0:42E:50D1:45E4:5FEA (talk) 22:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Question

Marnette: in my ongoing quest to understand how Wikipedia actually works, I noticed this edit to prevent transclusion of an AfD. I was just curious to know what that will prevent? I find the whole transclusion thing like a black art. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello ThatMontrealIP. First off I find these when a page shows up in the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Next in the case of AFDs they always transclude to other pages. In this specific case the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 September 8 showed up in that category but that page was not protected so I knew to go and find what page was transcluded to it as one of them had to have had a PP applied to it. That is what lead me to the Mikee Plastik AFD. By adding the noinclude that gets the Log page out of the category. Now, because my post only focuses on this one edit I know I haven't really answered your question - many apologies. You are right about it being a black art :-) You can wander through Wikipedia:Transclusion when you have some time. Perhaps Redrose64 or another of my talk page watchers can do a more informative job of filling you in. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 06:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! This actually helps me understand it a bit more. It reminds me of object-oriented programing and how classes are extended. The black art comment is reinforced by Help:Magic words!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:16, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I never did work that out. I once came across something like this

class c extends d
end_class;
class b extends c
end_class;
object a isa b
end_object

a whole series of classes that apparently did nothing, yet object a, when invoked, was apparently doing something.

Anyway, transclusion is where the content of one page is copied into another. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC) --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion

	Suggestion
	I have a suggestion for your user page. Among the other information you have in there (this user is) you should write in your zodiac. Neomorph Xenomorph 04:24, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello NX. There are so many zodiacs to chose from. The western one, the Chinese, the Hindu, the native American. In the end I'm afraid I agree with Carl Sagan that the specific gravity of the OB-GYN who helped deliver me has more to do with who I am than far off stars and planets. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 05:38, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to WSAV-TV, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. 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 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. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 20:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Mvcg66b3r First you should read WP:AGF and then WP:DTTR before making an asinine post like this. First, when I ran reflinks it made the necessary fixes. For some reason not expressed in any edit summaries you reverted those and then restored one of them. You then restored the linkrot tag even though there are no longer any bare urls in the article. So I ran both reflinks and refill on that page and they both showed there was nothing to fix. Please learn what is and what is not a bare link before proceeding further. MarnetteD|Talk 20:53, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

While I figured there wouldn't be an apology I did hope for an "I'll be more careful in the future" acknowledgement. MarnetteD|Talk 17:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Philip Madoc

Re this edit "aren't they all famous" Well maybe, but that one is surely more famous than most! Hence these articles when he died [2] and [3] Not many actors who made a brief appearance in Dad's Army get remembered so well for it. Rodericksilly (talk) 18:21, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

You have missed the point. That is not the only famous episode of Dad's Army. MarnetteD|Talk 19:36, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Bare URLs

Thank you very much! Happy holidays! --Jamez42 (talk) 17:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome [[User:|Jamez42]]. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:06, 1 January 2020 (UTC)