User talk:Noyster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply somewhere else on Wikipedia.
22:53 Sunday 21 October 2018 - - - - WELCOME TO MY TALK PAGE

Please click "New section" above to leave any new message, and please sign your message (just type ~~~~).

If you leave a message here, I will reply here unless you ask me to reply on another Wikipedia page. This is to make discussions easier to read.
If you reply to a message here, please indent (start the line with ":") and sign your message.
If you are discussing any particular page, please provide a link to it - it makes life easier for me and anyone else seeing this page.

Thanks. Noyster

Why the "founded" parameter is not working?[edit]

Hi. Can you please take a look at Xscape Entertainment Centre? Found this article doing category maintenance and added 1 reference to it. I wonder why the "founded" parameter doesn't work at the infobox? I am puzzled. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:44, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bbarmadillo. Another editor has now resolved this by removing the empty foundation field from the infobox. This and founded are aliases for the same parameter, and evidently the empty field won out. Please see Template_talk:Infobox_company/Archive_10#Template-protected edit request on 18 December 2014: Noyster (talk), 09:15, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. So obvious. It is strange that I didn't notice it myself. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 18:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

MAGIC tradeshow[edit]

Hi there,

I have recently edited MAGIC trade show page, but you have deleted all my edits. I work for the company that organizes MAGIC, UBM, and can confirm that the description that was on the page is not fully representative of our business. I will be editing it again, to make sure that people have a correct understanding of what MAGIC trade show is. IF you have any questions, please reach out to me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kris ishch (talkcontribs) 01:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Kris ishch Your first sentence was unsuitable in several ways. It contained the promotional phrases "comprised of twelve unique communities" (the meaning of this is also unclear) and "the most comprehensive ... in the United States", which could only be admitted if sourced to published commentary independent of the trade show itself. There was also a weblink in the text, which contravened our policy on external links and unnecessarily reproduced the link correctly placed in the External links section.
Please note that a Wikipedia article should be a neutral description of its topic, and should not be written so as to advertise or promote the topic or convey a certain viewpoint about it. If you are employed by or related to the organisers of MAGIC, you are strongly discouraged from doing any further editing of this article and you should declare your "conflict of interest" as explained here. Please sign your posts to discussion pages: Noyster (talk), 08:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png Thanks a lot for correcting my footnote issue in the SCP Foundation article. The article now looks how I want it to look, and it was helpful to see the correct formatting for footnotes. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Portals[edit]

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the invite The Transhumanist. I like portals and would like to see them become a well-known, well-used and updated, and respected feature of Wikipedia. I'm not sure that a crash program, seeking to forestall the deletionists by improving a whole lot of portals while the RfC is still running, is the best way to go. Such an effort could well be dismissed as a one-off, unsustainable blitz; the anti-portalists could yet succeed in getting most of them deleted or, more likely, de-activated in some way; then any improvement efforts would go for nothing. Then there is the fact that many of the steps being advocated to improve portals are for various forms of automation, beyond the scope of the individual non-technical editor and requiring more than just a few days to implement.
Assuming substantial numbers of portals do survive, then the WikiProject could have a vital part to play in taking up and progressing the most promising of the many suggestions that you and others have already made: Noyster (talk), 16:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Good points. Thank you for your words of encouragement and caution. I believe the world is what we make of it. Pessimism shouldn't be part of the equation. This is a virtual environment. Nothing is lost here. It can be resurrected; or backed up, improved off-site, and re-introduced. Or developed 3rd-party. Or be transformed. Or parted out, with the best bits used to make something better somewhere else in the encyclopedia or its community. So don't worry about it.
Things are looking pretty good. Somewhere in between what the inclusionists want and what the deletionists want is a workable compromise. Legacypac, for example, is experimenting with a lot of approaches to cull the crap out of the set of portals. His latest approach, moving crappy incomplete portals into draft space, is ingenious. That approach hadn't occurred to me. He wants what we all want, a higher quality encyclopedia. We just don't exactly agree on what that is or how to get there. And he's a bit more impatient than I am.
If the portal set is substantially pruned, the bush will grow again. With deleted portals reintroduced once they meet the muster of whatever new quality control system we have in place at the time. To compliment inclusionism and deletionism is eventualism. The latter will out. Eventually.
You could watch from the edge of the pool, or jump in. Take my word for it, it's more fun in the pool.
Come on in, the water's fine.    — The Transhumanist   00:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Watching[edit]

Hey, in case you are interested, here are a couple suggestions on how to see what is going on. It's pretty interesting to watch the flurry of activity on portals these days.

I've watchlisted all the pages in portal namespace. There are about 150,000 of them.

To make it so someone can watch these without loading them all into the watchlist (which is a bit of a feat), the list of all portal pages has been split into 4, and can be viewed ala "Related changes" at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Portals#Watchlist.

If you notice anything out of the ordinary, be sure to let me know.

Have fun.    — The Transhumanist   00:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Update on the blitz[edit]

I think I forgot to mention above that we're not just updating the portals, we're upgrading them so that they update themselves. We're going for sustainability. And we're aiming for completion of this by the end of the RfC, to forestall future grumblings. Kind of like giving everyone a Ferrari to make them happy.

There's all this technology that has been added to Wikipedia and the software that runs it (MediaWiki) over the past few years that is just laying around not being used. We are finding resources, that we already have, that can rapidly solve our problems with portals. That is happening, as I write this...

There are 3 things we are currently working on adding to portals:

  1. Self-updating excerpts, that always match the article they are taken from. So that the excerpts never go stale or stray as a content fork.  Done This has been provided as a very easy-to-use template. The portal editors who have tried it so far are exclaiming that it makes portal creation much easier. We are now looking into adding more parameters to allow editors to configure it in additional ways.
  2. Automated topic selection, to provide ongoing new material to a portal, that matches the subject. They have such a feature for portals on the German Wikipedia. Porting it from there looks promising.
  3. Newsfeeds. Some portals here already have a type of newsfeed feature, so this looks promising too.

So, rather than a one-off maintenance pass that may never be repeated, this is an installation of portal "software" that runs on its own. Spot inspections of portals should be able to tell if they are working correctly. We will also be setting up a place where people can report malfunctions and problem portals. And I have the entire portal space watchlisted, and have set up a watchlist at the WikiProject page to allow others to easily monitor the space without having to load 150,000 pages into their watchlists.

Not only will the components mentioned above transform existing portals, they will help build the next generation of portals. They are easier to use than manually copying and pasting text, which was the method being used before this. This might cause a portal explosion.

I hope this boosts your spirits, it has certainly raised mine.

Feel free to stop by and check out what we are all up to. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   04:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kate Mara[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kate Mara. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sustainability in Merthyr Tydfil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Third sector (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Junípero Serra[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Junípero Serra. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much[edit]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

P.P.S.: Noyster, what do you think of the WikiProject, and portals' chances, now?

Thanks for your message TT. I continue to be a supportaller and it is pleasing to see the activity being kept up now that the RfC is over. The thrust of the project is too technical for me to offer much of a contribution, although I'm currently maintaining the list of recently created portals at the Community bulletin board – can you think of a way to automate that?: Noyster (talk), 12:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, that's already done for "recognized content". (See User:JL-Bot/Project content). So, maybe we can make new portals a type of recognized content. I'll add it to the list. And since you are interested in automation, I've pinged you on another thread. :)    — The Transhumanist   20:17, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
By the way, there are many non-technical ways to contribute to portals. For example, the list at Portal:Contents/Portals also needs maintaining. There's a list of portals not yet listed there, on its talk page. Building portals is non-technical: currently, it's mostly just typing or copying/pasting article names. That's using the tools rather than making the tools. We have two main types of people involved in the WikiProject: genies and wishers. Genies often don't know what to do until someone makes a wish. :) Ideas. What should portals do? What should be automated? You pointed out one, above. We need more of that. So, please don't feel intimidated by all the technology flying around. Help point it in the right direction. Cheers.    — The Transhumanist   20:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Don't want to? Or never thought of?[edit]

An RfA I mean... You wouldn't be interested in running for the same, would you? I_0urclc5 18:51, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

That's kind of you to make the suggestion Lourdes, but having seen what happened in Cameron's and Timothy's RFAs – and having just myself opposed Peter's – I don't think so. I don't consider myself even half as good a candidate as any of those people. Riddle: which editor could become an admin tomorrow without opening an RfA? Regards: Noyster (talk), 09:00, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforceability of logged voluntary editing restrictions[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Enforceability of logged voluntary editing restrictions. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Please help editing The Wrath of Vajra[edit]

Noyster, can you please edit The Wrath of Vajra, because it seems that it needs some more reliable sources. Apollo C. Quiboloy fans (talk) 01:41, 12 August 2018 (UTC)