User talk:RexxS/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

Community gardening in the West Midlands

Hi there! Hey, i commented after you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska. I don't recall having interacted with you before, thought I should say hi. I do honestly welcome you to the discussion there, and I was surprised but appreciate your contributing constructively to the Community gardens in Nebraska article.

On the lighter side...I can't resist... how about we start up Community gardening in the West Midlands (currently a redlink). Here's support for that: U.S. Google search, which actually does have some relevant hits!  :)

I notice that Category:Community gardening in England has just two items, Martineau Gardens and Phoenix Garden. I'm thinking about creating Community gardening in England (currently a red-link) as a new article, and then edit-warring to merge both of those articles into it....  :)

cheers, --doncram 17:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Doncram. You're quite right that I know Andy in real life - we are both volunteers for Wikimedia UK and often bump into each other at UK Wiki-events.

Sadly, Wikipedia doesn't seem to have anything about real community gardens in the Midlands. I know Martineau, and Phoenix looks the same: they are formal gardens rather than a place for the sort of gardening that exists in Omaha and Lincoln. It's a pity because the West Midlands with its population of about two-and-a-half million has around the same number of people as Nebraska (perhaps a little more) and I would have expected it to have a similar number of community gardens. However, we do have a system of allotments here that I think are much smaller than the community gardens that exist in the USA, so that may explain why we don't have the community gardens that you do in the States. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:36, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

My songs

Thank you for your helpful comments in the FA review of my songs! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Vesoul

Chauffe chauffe! Bishonen | talk 21:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC).

Chauffe Marcel! --RexxS (talk) 19:41, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Learning WP

Saw your submission to wikimania, I wanted to share a link to a word doc of an exercise I wrote for teaching high school students the basics of wikipedia who had not seen it. Intended to fit into one class period. Written Oct 2011, so some items are dated. See biocontact.org/docs/Learning Wikipedia.docx Jmdugan (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Jmdugan, that's a good resource, particularly as I think it could also be delivered as distance learning. Could you make it available on-wiki for everyone to see? I tend to find myself teaching face-to-face with a group of new editors, so I try to be as interactive as I can - I've jotted down a couple of sample sessions at wmuk:For trainers/Sample sessions that you might find interesting. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 19:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for suggestions

Sir, I am thankful for your worthy advice.Rajsector3 (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Please don't call me sir, Raj; I stopped being a teacher almost 20 years ago. Just Rexx is fine. I appreciate you taking the time to drop me a note here and I really hope you can make the adjustment to our norms here - you have much to offer if you can get the tone of your article writing right. --RexxS (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Trying to get the hang of this

Hi RexxS, I wasn't sure if I should respond on your talk page or mine, so just in case, I will do both. I am thankful for your response and want to be sure to reply to you in a timely manner:

I certainly want to follow the proper channels and definitely did not intend to initiate an "edit war" (?). I had resubmitted the deletion because I thought I had to include an edit summary (which wasn't on the first one). That is why I did it the second time. I am not sure what to do at this point? Does it need to be re-instated? How does the "debate" process work about the appropriate sources? I thought the talk page had the debate already. How does it get decided on what the final outcome is? If you have a suggestion a more productive way to edit the criticism, maybe you would kindly take the lead on that section? I just didn't see anything happening with it and there seemed to be no objections.

Regarding my username or COI, I am very familiar with PADI and experienced in the scuba diving industry so I do have knowledge that I think can be helpful particularly about this PADI page, but am not trying to trump any wikipedia culture or etiquette.

Thank you again, and I look forward to your feedback!TotalConversionMarketing (talk) 01:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rexxs, I saw you posted about the appropriateness of each source. Thanks so much for taking the lead on that! TotalConversionMarketing (talk) 02:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Formatting request

Great and scary dino, could you please make the text at the top of my talkpage red and a little bigger? (Or otherwise more in-your-face, feel free to be creative. People tend not to notice these.) I'm in a bit of a hurry to catch a train. Bishonen | talk 10:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC).

Done; Have fun. --RexxS (talk) 11:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

[Enviously] Pretty! I want one! Or, I suppose not really, cos I may log in over my phone to keep everybody in order while shonen is away! Could be fun! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 11:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC).

Paper

Thanks. :-) Axl ¤ [Talk] 22:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

RE:

WP:NGEO was no longer an essay. It's a guideline now. --180.172.239.231 (talk) 22:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah thanks. I've reverted my revert of your edit. Can't help but think it would have saved effort if you'd just put that into your edit summary, though. --RexxS (talk) 23:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ernst re pain... and talk...

Hi RexxS, please don't take this the wrong way (i.e. anything other than friendly): remember our conversation about this same source, where it took a few exchanges for you to realize that the search for adverse events being not just those limited to pain? How it had to do with a detail in the paper you were overlooking? I think you might be missing some context with his discussion on pain too. Or we may just be misunderstanding each other. I'd really be grateful if you could tone down the rhetoric (here) re "cherry picked source" and so on. I have read the paper multiple times and I'm not cherry picking, and my last edit along these lines -- re Moffet -- was, as Kww realized, accurate. So, benefit of doubt, please! And this:

"Your assertion in the edit summary that "source comments on subset of literature reviewed" is nonsense. You're not entitled to do amateur peer-reviews of secondary sources by policy."

....is way too aggressive. Why not try and make sure you know what I mean before going on the offensive? I'll explain the substance on Talk:Acupuncture. Just wanted to touch base and say, let's be collegial! cheers, Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 15:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

There's no benefit of the doubt available when Ernst states:

• "Real and sham acupuncture were both more effective in reducing pain than no acupuncture at all, but real acupuncture was no better than sham."

and you remove the text:

• "A systematic review of systematic reviews found that for reducing pain real acupuncture was no better than sham.<ref name="Ernst 2011"/>"

with an edit summary claiming that the source doesn't support the statement. That simply is untrue.

I'm sorry, but while you pick a fragment of a statement and try to pass it off as meaning something that it doesn't, that's the very definition of "cherry-picking" and I'm surprised you don't know that.

It's playing games to assert that Kww agreed with you before and therefore you must be right this time. Anybody who reads "Acupuncture: Does it alleviate pain and are there serious risks?" can see the conclusion that Ernst reaches about sham and true acupuncture being equally effective. Are you really claiming that the text I quoted above is not a conclusion of the review?

You're on shaky ground here and I'd strongly recommend you reconsider trying to impose a POV on the article that sources do not support. It's time for you to back off. --RexxS (talk) 15:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

RexxS... "Real and sham acupuncture were both more effective in reducing pain than no acupuncture at all, but real acupuncture was no better than sham." is talking about a particular trial and is not the conclusion of the paper... it's a context thing...this is just true... you're missing details... no hard feelings... please let's deescalate. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 15:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I noticed this when typing your username into search -- User:RexxS/Accessibility -- which reminds me: I'm active in autism rights (I have close relatives with autism) and I know a lot of people with these issues. It's a real challenge. Anyway, that reminded me, that paper is not the most accessible thing in the world, and I could see anybody, whether they have difficulties with accessibility or not, missing stuff. AGF, fellow editor! --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 15:38, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd love to collaborate with you on finding ways to improve the Wikipedia experience for anybody on the autism spectrum. Some of our most prolific editors self-identify as such and they are often a joy to work with.

Nevertheless, you're dead wrong about Ernst's conclusions in that review and I think that sooner or later, you'll have to recognise that. People who know me understand that I often write in a very assertive style, but it's nothing personal; I don't bear grudges, but I do feel strongly about defending the values that our encyclopedia is founded on. --RexxS (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Cool re autism! Thanks for explaining re your style, I thought so, although I think it's unnecessarily hot -- think about how sensitive people with autism are, it probably freaks some of them out. So -- have you read that first para on p.762? (btw I don't do grudges either, so we're cool) --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 15:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

[1] good point - thanks --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 17:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yer, I read it, of course. It's typical Ernst. He finds reviews showing a positive effect on LBP and osteoarthritis, so has to balance those with RCTs demonstrating that the effectiveness is only due to placebo by showing that true and sham are just as effective in those cases. But it's after that - the reference [128] (Suarez-Almazor 2010) concludes the point about osteoarthritis - that he makes the statement about real and sham having the same effectiveness. He doesn't reference it to anything, so I'm dead sure he's reached that conclusion that off his own bat. It's not a quote from one of those RCTs otherwise he'd attribute it (he's published too many times to make that sort of mistake). You really don't expect Ernst to be anything but highly skeptical about any sort of alt med, but you can't just go removing his conclusions from the article. If you want to give a broader pov, then don't attack the reliable source but find other reliable sources that give the other side of the picture. --RexxS (talk) 17:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi RexxS. Ernst, being careful, wouldn't shift topics right in the middle of a paragraph without saying so. As we both stipulate, para opens by stating that he's commenting on the reviews he reviewed "in light of" two good RCT's. The two sentences after his citation [128] -- i.e. "Real and sham..." and "Moreover, a communication style..." both refer to [128], which we know because [128] looked at BOTH of those things. The reviews he reviewed didn't all look at communication style; that's a simple fact. Why would he write "Real and sham...." about the reviews he reviewed, and then shift back to [128] for "Moreover...."? It makes no sense at all, and his citing [128] and then commenting on it further without repeatedly citing it is consistent with good technical writing; unlike we often do on WP, he's not cluttering up his paper by referencing every sentence. In the penultimate sentence he finally switches discussion from [128], which he makes clear by saying "In the primary studies included in the systematic reviews evaluated above...". Why would he have shifted focus earlier, with his "Real and sham..." sentence, without saying so? (inally, he concludes with his prediction, referencing one more source.)

H .... Far from attacking this MEDRS -- and notice my preceding ellipsis to indicate switch in topic, something all good writers including Ernst do :-) -- I'm simply interpreting it as I read it, not attacking it. I don't accuse you of bad faith in your reading of it, I just say you're wrong, and with good reason; your interpretation assumes Ernst had an acute but transient case of ADHD when he wrote that paragraph. I really do think you should turn your tone and ABF comments down a notch; it only adds heat, not light, and is unbecoming collegial, rational discussion. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me • COI?) 07:07, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

My view differs. Principally by the fact that Ernst is drawing together conclusions about acupuncture and pain in that paragraph. He has outstanding issues about two areas and adduces the two RCTs, not part of the review of reviews, to directly address those issues. We cannot know how many papers he has studied to reach his conclusion about real and sham, but he uses it to clarify the point that the findings of the RCTs explain the apparent efficacies of acupuncture for LBP and osteoarthritis. He then goes on to opine on the overall effectiveness of acupuncture, having dealt with the individual areas. That is a coherent and logical sequence: Ernst not only had an overall conclusion in mind, but already knew that sham worked as well as real, and knew which two RCTs to produce to rebuff the findings of the reviews based on that knowledge. Your story is that he somehow came across the two RCTs and having read only them, figured out that sham is as good as real - and that revelation then fortuitously turned out to be the link that showed the findings on LBP and osteoarthritis weren't significant. I'm sorry but that just doesn't ring true to me. It's a mistake to think we can put ourselves into the mind of the people who write secondary sources, precisely because every editor can make a different guess - and that's why it's forbidden by Wikipedia to "interpret" secondary sources. The conclusion Ernst reaches is his conclusion, based on all that he's read and his experience in the field. When we use a secondary source, it derives its authority from the authors, the peer-review and the publishing process, not its sources. That's why we cite the secondary source, not the sources that it employs.

In any case, when I've reached an impasse with intransigent opinions like yours, I invite others to address the issues and leave them to do that. You will note that I've allowed the debate to continue without constantly restating the same points again. You should be doing the same. --RexxS (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Chrome

Nominated Chrome for FAC today, FYI: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/California Chrome/archive1. Grab your popcorn and watch the show. Montanabw^(talk) 22:57, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Formatting again

Sort of back. I don't really like the note as big as it is now, but "1,5em" don't seem to work. If you'd be so kind. Bishonen | talk 09:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC).

(talk page stalker) @Bishonen: You need to use the English decimal separator (a full stop), not the European one (a comma): 1.5em --Redrose64 (talk) 12:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Trying 1.7em (15% smaller). I get horizontal scroll bars before the text wraps at that point size. --RexxS (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

[Concerning the comma.] D'oh! [Slaps self upside head, feels stupid.] Of course. Furthermore, Rex, does my celebration of Bastille Day look allright on smaller screens, do you think? It's supposed to have the images at either side of the text. Well, I suppose that's got to be impossible on smaller screens. Any suggestions? Bishonen | talk 11:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC).

It's fine - as the window gets smaller the text eventually moves beneath the images and the second image moves under the first. That's about as good as you can get it without having to specify the width of the text, so what you have remains pretty flexible - ready for Colombia's National Day on 20 July. --RexxS (talk) 18:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

RFC

Just FYI: You have been mentioned (positively) in this new RFC, but due to a typo, you won't have received any automatic notification. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, WAID. I'm not sufficiently invested in that issue to worry about it - as it happens, I'm pretty sure I'm technically correct that a non-admin can summarise just about any discussion, but in practice any CBAN that's obvious enough to to have clear support will undoubtedly attract an admin to close it sooner or later. And there's hardly ever any good reason to rush. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh no, not her again

Suddenly my most convenient links to other wikis don't show up on the page any more, at User:Bishonen#External links. :-( What happen? They're still there in edit mode. Bishonen | talk 08:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC).

That's odd. They work on user talk pages, but not on user pages... Worm^TT(talk) 09:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

They used to work since forever, and now they've disappeared. No doubt some improvement has been instituted. (I wish I could say that viva voce, it needs my full sourness.) Bishonen | talk 09:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC).

@Bishonen and Worm That Turned: This may be the problem described at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 128#w:(lang) links. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:11, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Aaah, I see that there have been some fixes. I don't think I'll bother getting my head round the fixed code; the URLs Worm put in will do me, even if it's not as neat. Thanks for the info, RedRose. Bishonen | talk 16:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC).

I've found that it's the specific format

*[[w:sv:Användare:Bishonen|Bishonen.sv]]
*[[w:de:Benutzer:Bishonen|Bishonen.de]]

(without initial colon) that doesn't work. If you add a colon at the start of the link, i.e.

*[[:w:sv:Användare:Bishonen|Bishonen.sv]]
*[[:w:de:Benutzer:Bishonen|Bishonen.de]]

this gives:

• Bishonen.sv
• Bishonen.de

You can rearrange that in either of two ways:

*[[:sv:Användare:Bishonen|Bishonen.sv]]
*[[:de:Benutzer:Bishonen|Bishonen.de]]

*[[:sv:w:Användare:Bishonen|Bishonen.sv]]
*[[:de:w:Benutzer:Bishonen|Bishonen.de]]

(notice that there is a colon at the start of all of them) and the links will also work as intended. Regarding the MediaWiki link, you can set that up either in the traditional manner, or with the initial colon:

*[[mw:User talk:Bishonen|Bishonen at mediawiki]]
*[[:mw:User talk:Bishonen|Bishonen at mediawiki]]

which give:

• Bishonen at mediawiki
• Bishonen at mediawiki

but in both cases, the w: must be omitted (because it's not a Wikipedia) and the initial colon is optional. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Just adding a colon and it'll work? Yes, I see it does. Thank you! Bishonen | talk 17:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC).

Nikkimaria

Hi RexxS

See that WP:AE#Nikkimaria has been closed without action as "wrong venue". I had already committed to an RFC on her conduct; would you be interested in helping draft it?

Note: I made a similar request to User:Boing! said Zebedee, before I was aware that the AE discussion had been closed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Watch this space — Alan / Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Will do! :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually, no, watch AN - I don't want to appear to be canvassing ;-) — Alan / Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Apologies to all, but I've been in London all day at the WMUK office trying to help resolve a problem. Tomorrow I'm travelling to Glastonbury to help two old friends move house over the space of the next few days, so I'm going to be mainly offline for a while. Please don't burgle the house while I'm away and I promise I'll do all within my power to help out when I get back. --RexxS (talk) 22:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

hope over experience

It'll all be done and dusted by the time you're back ;-) — Alan / Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Notification failed

Hi, I mentioned you on another user's talk page, but you won't have been notified because I had to fix it. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:30, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Congratulations! You made it at last! (And I don't care if you don't want it: you've got it anyway.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:34, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations, Rexx!

Congratulations on being granted "Autopatrolled" status after only 6-1/2 years of service as a contributing Wikipedian. You are truly blessed!

All snark aside, would you do me the big favor of dropping me a line off-wiki at ShoeHutch@gmail.com ? I've got some ideas to toss around away from prying eyes and your name has come up as one I need to toss them at. Best, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 14:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the lesson today

Many thanks

Janet Chapman Jachapman82 (talk) 09:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Infobox

Nice work on the box. Just a few quick thoughts:

• Can we make entries use initial caps (e.g "Educationalist" not "educationalist"?
• Can we add countries to birth and death places ("Dublin, Ireland" not simply "Dublin", etc)?
• Can we apply list templates when there are multiple entries?

Cheers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

It's only to get a feel for how these might work. As for the answers:

• Caps: We get the capitalisation that Wikidata provides. But I could automatically capitalise the first letter of the string returned in each call - is that what we always want?
• Places: We get what Wikidata stores i.e. what Wikipedia gives us as the relevant article name. "Dublin, Ireland" is Dublin; "Newport, Rhode Island, USA" is Newport, Rhode Island - that's a result of WP:AT and there's nowt I can do about it.
• Lists: Yes, I can change the output to create a hlist or an unbulleted list if you tell me which one you want instead of the comma separated list. Or do we need two different calls?

It may be that we have to override the Wikidata with specific values, etc. in some cases. We already have to do that when we only know the year of a date (otherwise it shows as 1 January YYYY). --RexxS (talk) 21:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Update: it's only the raw value calls that need initial caps as linked values are article titles; I've fixed getRawValue to always return the first letter capitalised. We might need to check that's always the desired behaviour. In Module:Wikidata/sandbox, I've sketched a version that would return hlist versions (if it were not for the fact that the wiki-text parser does templates before Lua, so the {{hlist}} isn't expanded). I'll have to re-write that to produce html lists inside an hlist class. Maybe tomorrow. --RexxS (talk) 22:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Turkish provinces

Hi RexxS; in the pub last Saturday, one of the topics was a serial sock who kept changing the names of Turkish place names. I don't recall whether these changes were pro- or anti-Kurd. Was wondering what you thought of Master Tyranus (talk · contribs) - it's a few days on, but I've just been reminded by Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 14#Category:Tunceli Province geography stubs. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Redrose, I don't think Master Tyranus is related to the sock because he's got just one very specific issue. It seems he has a beef only with the putative official change of name from Tunceli province to Dersim (Kurd version), and just doesn't accept it: hence all the changes to remove Dersim. The advice you gave on his talk page is very sound and ought to put the matter to rest. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 11:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia Science Conference

Hi Rexx. Good to see you again today. I promised you more info about the Science Conference I'm planning for London. I'd love to have you involved, particularly in the training aspect, and of course you'll have a lot to say about medical editing. Keep an eye on wmuk:Wikipedia Science Conference. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 22:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Martin, it's always good to get a chance to chat with you. I'd love to be involved with the Conference, so just assume I'll be there and will do whatever is needed to help make it run. I've bookmarked that page, so I'll see when things start to firm up. Cheers! --RexxS (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	Thank you for the help that you gave the Students 4 Best Evidence edit-a-thon. I was great that you could be there in person to help them. :-) Sydney Poore/FloNight♥♥♥♥ 06:10, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Programming Guru Barnstar

	Programming Guru Barnstar
	Let me send you barnstar for your kindness and skilfull solution at Module:Wikidata. Thank you RexxS! Was a bee (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Template_filling_from_a_DOI_ref

any thoughts?, cheers Wiki CRUK John (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I've left a few thoughts on Jfdwolff's page. --RexxS (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Just out of interest...

Do you really believe this will have any genuine impact? I see editors with 100k+ edits disappearing and no-one really cares a week later, why is this protest going to mean anything to anyone? (Honest question). The Rambling Man (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi TRM. I understand that it may come to nothing (and I've failed to boycott Monday again myself as you can see). But I'm an eternal optimist and I like to kid myself that making some sort of protest is better than accepting the loss of editors like Flyer22 and Sitush without comment. Hope all is well with you and yours. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey, yes, all well with my lot, thanks. I just can't see the boycott making any difference at all. When Eric is blocked, I don't see any major "where's the editor gone!" outburst (outside the usual AN/ANI channels). A protest like this needs actually impact the community directly. But hey, you're right, if you're the eternal optimist, then perhaps at some point someone might realise that a few regulars haven't edited on a certain day. I don't believe it'll make any difference at all. I think some of it comes from Eric's proclivity to announce his departure or abstinence from Wikipedia on a near-monthly basis, only to come back more acerbic than before, each and every time. It won't change the big picture. But I wish you (and Eric) luck. Seeing the rapid forgetfulness of the community, no-one will really care if you, Eric or I disappear forever. As such, the "Monday" protest is pointless. Just do what you can for the project, and if you genuinely feel it's fail(ed/ing) to the point of no return, do summit else... Once I'm done with my current project, I'll join you, at the bar, with the ferrets etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

(watching, and not on strike, and happy that I have good personal memories pictured on the Main page, and 3 new articles around them of today, with collaborative help): Flyer22 is there. (And the bat-cat-hat-trick unforgotten.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Inter-wiki links

Thanks for the technical advice on linking. I had no idea you were active in WMUK gender events; surely you must know how something like this looks. And together with the photo? Maybe I have misjudged that group, but ...<shrug>... Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 23:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm guessing that it's a cultural thing. In my part of the world "twat" as an insult is more or less the same as something like "prat" - i.e the recipient is thought to be foolish or annoying and there's no sexual or biological connotation. Our own article on Twat gives some context, such as the use in the film Kes. I do understand that in other cultures it may be seen as far more offensive, but I was specifically replying to Dr Blofeld who is another native Brit. The comment was also intended to satirise the overuse of swear words by using the word three times in the same sentence and personally I'm not convinced that the use of coarse language is any more off-putting to women than to men. Although this is merely anecdotal, my experience in discussing issues of women's participation in Wikipedia is that the principal barrier is the time commitment needed for regular editing; I've never had anyone suggest they wouldn't edit because they'd seen rude words. YMMV of course. --RexxS (talk) 07:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

So viciousness is just "culture" and "custom"? Whatever. If you believe the most revolting thing you can compare someone to is the female body, there's not much I will be able to say to convince you otherwise. And if the Manchester Mafia wants to ruin Wikipedia for everyone else, I doubt there's anything anyone can do to stop you. But here is the Beeb's editorial guidelines, and you know what? They list all three of your "harmless" words. You are full of shit. —Neotarf (talk) 06:38, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Those BBC guidelines to which you link state quite clearly that "The BBC does not ban words or phrases". @RexsS: I had no idea you'd relocated, welcome to Manchester! Eric Corbett 15:28, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

(watching:) I am learning all the time. The word "cunt" was not part of my education (nor "twat"). I didn't see the term "harmless words" other than in the link. I don't think "Manchester Mafia" is a friendly term, but perhaps it's also used in satire? - I knew "shit" and try to avoid it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

(TPS, and another native Brit who has been known to use four-letter words) It's not just the female body, "bollocks" is quite a common expression of disgust or frustration, for example. I used it today when I dropped some of the shopping. Though I do worry about editors who make more edits to the Wikipedia talk: namespace than to articles... HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The link to bullocks was by me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The word "bollocks" is not obscene but an Old English word. Re that BBC editorial guideline: it's clearly not 100% binding - in the most recent episode of Never Mind the Buzzcocks, Gabby Logan used the word "twat" to Rhod Gilbert. For those wishing to hear other slang terms for sexual intercourse and genitalia on BBC progs, I also recommend QI and anything which features Jo Brand or Jonathan Ross. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox UK disused station and Authority control

Bore da! Could you take a look at this template which has a module missing. It doesn't give me the name of the missing one. I'm trying to get the Infobox on cy:Gorsaf Reilffordd Rhuthun to work. Secondly, don't forget to take a look at this article which has another Lua scrip error, when you have a few minutes, please. Thanks RexxS! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 22:36, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000: Was my reply at Template talk:Infobox UK disused station#Luna calling inadequate? --Redrose64 (talk) 07:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I may have fixed it - see Template talk:Infobox UK disused station #Luna calling. I agree it's a pain when coders make modules that depend on other modules. It helps maintenance if we compartmentalise blocks of code, but it makes portability a real issue unless the documentation is up to scratch. I'm afraid that our script-kiddies learn how to create code, but never learn how to document it properly, so the issue will remain as an inherent flaw in our crowd-sourced project. I suggest we need a species of wiki-gnome who just goes around modules creating and cleaning up documentation and making sure that all dependencies are clearly noted. Maybe one day ... --RexxS (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Tagging those with no/ poor documentation would be a start. See {{Bad documentation}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Cheers Monty

This is a good one. Cheers, MarciulionisHOF (talk) 22:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Florence Mildred White

Hello RexxS, I have posted a paragraph on Florence Mildred White a few days ago in her Talk page. I am hoping to have another lead on sources. Ever the optimist. TimothyWF (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Request for accessibility review: List of Space Shuttle missions

Hey, RexxS!

If you recall, you helped me with List of space stations. I was wondering if you could review List of Space Shuttle missions for compatibility with screen readers and accessibility? I don't have access to the software to test it.

Thanks much! ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Poke me} 00:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Vacancies

There are still some slots over at candidates for deletion arbcom... All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC).

What's Doug done to upset you? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:44, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello! New editor interested in Lua and templates!

Hey Rexx :D I had the pleasure of meeting @CaptainMaya: today at Girl Geeks and she wanted to know more about how to code templates! I remembered the coding session you ran last year at Development House and I know you come to the Manchester Meetups sometimes so I said I would drop a line here and perhaps you could give her some pointers about where she might want to start reading about/getting involved if she's keen? :) Leela0808 (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Disinfoboxes

Hey RexxS. I was a bit annoyed by some of the statements at WP:Disinfoboxes and enjoyed your refutation. Anyway, just stopping by to let you know why I removed one of the the images. We can't display fair use images outside the mainspace. I would elaborate but I suspect you are already aware of that issue and didn't realize the image was FU. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: I've added a substitue image to the page; and note to that effect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:54, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Sexually transmitted disease#Requested move (2014)

You participated in previous related discussion. There is an ongoing move discussion, and I invite you to comment there. --George Ho (talk) 03:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello RexxS, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

2015 already

Just dropping in to wish you the very best for 2015. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Has the time really flown past so quickly? It was good getting together again at Wikimania 2014 and you know that anytime you're back in England, my place is yours (as long as you can stand the cat). All my best wishes for the coming year, --RexxS (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words - and I love cats. I don't know when I will be back in Blighty. It's a toss up this year between the UK and Mexico. With 3 Wikimanias on the trot, unless I can get help going to Mexico it will probably be the UK and I would jump at the chance of doing some Wiki workshops with you in schools in the Midlands. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Spinning Bishzilla

Here we go again — spinning Bishzilla nominated for deletion![2] This time by Bishonen! Silly girl! Iconic image! bishzilla _ROARR!! 10:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC).

I'm sure the local file is safe and then it doesn't matter about Commons. What is concerning, though, is that Template:Esoteric file is up for deletion. His Excellency would be pulling his hair out at the thought. --RexxS (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Elsevier access

Hello, RexxS. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Elsevier

Hi. I wanted to update you on the status of your Elsevier account. I sent the first list to Elsevier on 12 January. Elsevier reports that they will be e-mailing applicants next week with an access code, which will start your use of the resource. I appreciate your patience with this process. Feel free to contact me with any feedback or questions you have about Elsevier access. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the update, Chris. --RexxS (talk) 02:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Review of linearized layout table

RexxS, not sure if posting to one of your talk sub-pages results in a notify to you. I just posted to your accessibility talk page Thisisnotatest (talk) 09:38, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Thisisnotatest, thank you for the improvements. Posting to a sub-page doesn't give me a notification, so I'm grateful you posted here. I've commented at both Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility #Proposed solution and Talk:87th Academy Awards #Changed list for accessibility in support of your changes. To "sell" the idea, you'll need to wrap the div & sttyle in a template so that editors unfamiliar with html/css will be comfortable using it. I've made a draft version for you at Template:Award list header; feel free to edit it to taste. --RexxS (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

RexxS, thank you for the draft template. This is an opportunity for me to learn how to work with templates. Thank you for giving me the push. Thisisnotatest (talk) 05:32, 25 January 2015 (UTC)