User talk:Walter Görlitz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Update to scripts by AlexTheWhovian/Alex 21[edit]

Information icon Hello! This is a generic message created and copied to all editors using scripts that I have created. As I have recently changed my username from "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21", any scripts that I have created that are listed at your common.js page may, at the moment, no longer be working. To fix this, simply update all occurrences of "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21"; see here for an example. All the best! -- /Alex/21 11:07, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Just curious[edit]

Do you have something against ISO dates? It doesn't really matter to me, but I find the df parameter a lot easier to use than doing the full month names. howcheng {chat} 19:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Howcheng: No, but MOS:DATE (MOS:DATEUNIFY) suggests that there be consistency. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
I get that, but that can be done with df. The MOS doesn't specify that the wikitext has to be consistent. howcheng {chat} 20:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Redirects are cheap listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Redirects are cheap. Since you had some involvement with the Redirects are cheap redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

RfC discussion on List of 2017 articles that is really about proper use of Wikipedia:Article size. Requesting your time because I think a guideline is being misused[edit]

Please, I need your input. There is a conversation about splitting an article because of its size, but I don’t care which way you would vote on if it should be split or not. My issue is that the other editor and a companion-in-arms are misusing, mistranslating Wikipedia:Article size. These two are reducing the size of the largest articles in Wikipedia, which sounds like a noble goal, but when I asked what limit there should be on an article size, the response was 100 kB characters. The Wiki-guideline does state that readable prose should be less than 100 kB, but readable prose is the article minus citations, lists, tables, footnotes, and images, so I find the interpretation dangerous. The other editor said to get articles down in size, a yearly list could be cut down in half, in quarters, or even monthly. I cannot picture the easy usage of lists that is divided by month for multiple years. The guideline mostly states lists and tables are excluded from the guideline, so my objection to the split is that there is no justification except a misused guideline.

Basically, I think these two editors are going beyond being useful in improving Wikipedia and are moving into damaging Wikipedia, so I would like you to come to Talk:List of 2017 albums#Request for comment, read the discussions in the two section above it, especially Talk:List of 2017 albums#Redux, and provide feedback. I do not care if you say split or oppose, but to me the discussion is not about the split but the misuse of the Article Size guideline, and I want your and others I respect feedback on the conversation and the proper use of the guideline. Mburrell (talk) 05:04, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Soul Intent (group)[edit]

Walter, you know a thing or two about music. Can you have a look at this article and see what you can do? There's a dearth of sources, and there's a few disputes about names and dating. Whatever you can pull out of your archives, whatever you can add to the article will be greatly appreciated. Drmies (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Drmies: Wow. The supplied sources include passing mentions of the project, but it might be better served with a section on Eminem's article, since most mentions are in articles about him, leaving a redirect (and one for Bassmint Productions). Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
I was thinking that too, but there were a few records (well, tapes...), and I thought maybe you can find some more information to solidify as well as clarify. But maybe you're right. Thanks for looking at it--I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Chart genres discussion[edit]

I'll leave all my main points on the thread, but one question regarding where you want to put it. Since this started on a song, wouldn't it make more sense to go over to WP:SONGS instead and just leave a note on the albums project to join us there? Sorry I didn't think of that sooner. dannymusiceditor oops 20:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: the reason I put it in the music project is that I felt that it applied to both albums and songs. A pointer to that discussion might make sense. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
Thank you so much for introducing helping me with Wikipedia on my talk page! Just4science! (talk) 03:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Real Salt Lake‎ ‎Head coaches[edit]

fully understood and agreed. if you look at the previous edit there was an error in the formating change of the table that messed up the rest of the page. I made eddits to try and find the error, i should have put notes to what i was doing. please preview all edits before publishing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlater (talkcontribs) 23:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Wave Of Popular Feeling[edit]

How do you feel about me changing the "Discography" paragraph in Three Days Grace to have a sub-paragraph called "Studio albums as Groundswell" and including "Wave Of Popular Feeling (1995)" as a part of the discography? It's been days since I've applied the edit and you or any other editors haven't changed it. - User talk:Danielcool123 - 15:54, 7 March 2019 (GMT)

@Danielcool123: Sorry. I saw your message but had to start my commute. I'm fine with that option, but it has been removed in the past. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
But that album is not notable and should not have an article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Okay. Fine with that. What about the edits I made at the top of all existing TDG albums? - User talk:Danielcool123 - 7 March 2019, 18:04 (GMT)
They're a bit unnecessary, and similar edits have been removed in the past, but let's see what others think. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

The Joshua Tree[edit]

Hi. Per your edit on The Joshua Tree, did you see my explanation as to why I removed it? Template:Infobox album says that a microformat is emitted for the first duration detected if there is a recognised value. The duration template is only used because it emits a microformat for the length, so we don't actually need to use it when the album infobox provides what it does automatically. The template's documentation says to use the duration template for "more complicated values", and this is not a complicated value. Template:Duration itself also states: "In {{Infobox album}}, the microformat is added automatically if there is not one already. However, more complicated values might require this template." So it really doesn't need to be there and you didn't need to restore it. Nobody was disputing that the duration template is "correct", it's moreso that it's redundant. Can you please undo your own edit? You may revert this message if you wish, I don't really care, I just wanted to let you know because if you already did, I don't know why you restored it. Thanks. Ss112 08:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Apple Inc.[edit]

Sad mac.png

Hello Walter Görlitz,

You've been identified either as a previous member of the project, an active editor on Apple related pages, a bearer of Apple related userboxes, or just a hoopy frood.

WikiProject Apple Inc. has unexpectedly quit, because an error type "unknown" occured. Editors must restart it! If you are interested, read the project page and sign up as a member. There's something for everyone to do, such as welcoming, sourcing, writing, copy editing, gnoming, proofreading, or feedback — but no pressure. Do what you do, but let's coordinate and stay in touch.

See the full welcome message on the talk page, or join the new IRC channel on irc.freenode.net named #wikipedia-en-appleinc connect. Please join, speak, and idle, and someone will read and reply.

Please spread the word, and join or unsubscribe at the subscription page.

RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) and Smuckola on behalf of WikiProject Apple Inc. - Delivered 15:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Since the thread amounts to a bunch of people sniping at each other to no good result, and since it appears to be metastasizing to a general display of grumpiness to no useful purpose, I would appreciate it if the discussion, having made its point, would remain closed. But I'm not going to let it make me grumpy too. Acroterion (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Thanks for your involvement. I'm not sniping, at least I'm not trying to snipe. I'm actually trying to understand why one editor can remove another editor's comments on an uninvolved editor's talk page, and without a reasonable explanation. I'd also like to know why the other admin shut the discussion down so quickly. I'd be happy to discuss this in a more appropriate forum. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
As to the ANI discussion, I can't see that the affront rises to the level of ANI. I think you made the point that it's bad form to remove comments by another editor, but in this particular case, we have the equivalent of a long-established account. Would you template a regular for not using edit summaries? 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63's been around longer than many accounts, and gets fairly frequent warnings from editors who see an IP and assume a lack of clue. I'm not saying that's what you were doing, but it's getting into DTTR territory, and I've removed some warnings from editors who assumed 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 was just some random IP myself. Acroterion (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
@Acroterion: Thanks again for the discussion.
I would and I have used templates on the talk pages of established editors when they do not leave edit summaries. It's one of the only ones I would place on a regular's talk page. The only other templates I would use are edit warring and ANI discussion templates. This anon, in particular, is quite inconsistent in their use edit summaries. See 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I did read the notice at the top of the talk page and selected the notice based on that. The reverts and "protection" was uncalled for in my opinion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I find an absence of edit summaries annoying myself, and I kick myself when I don't leave one - a concise summary, even reply, is more helpful than many editors realize. But I really try to avoid templates for people who one might assume know better. Even a short "Hey, can you give us some edit summaries? - tks" is more likely to get a useful result than a template that's aimed at new users. About the only warning templates I use with anybody who's not obviously new or inexperienced are 3RR (when there's any doubt about whether they know about the policy) and discretionary sanctions notices. A note along the lines of "why template?" would be a more optimal response to a notice coming from an established user like yourself. It works both ways. The best response for all parties would be "meh" after one round, including 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63, who can just chalk it up to being an IP and blank as they see fit. I'm not a friend to recursive arguments about who's following the rules the best, or lengthy discussions about something that's merely sub-optimal. Acroterion (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Sometimes people (including me) find it hard to de-escalate. This event was a good candidate for breaking the chain of escalation. Acroterion (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

List of gospel musicians[edit]

I was just about to change it from "rock". As you can probably tell, I was copy and pasting from List of rock music performers -- and didn't do a good job of previewing. Thanks. But, I don't know what you meant by "many gospel acts were groups not individuals". What does that have to do with the changes? Musdan77 (talk) 04:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

The comment included "make sure it's an artist" implying an individual, which I changed to "make sure they". Feel free to modify the comment as you see fit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:29, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking you meant. But I'm surprised you don't that "artist" is an all-encompassing term in music to include soloists and groups. --But it's not a big deal. Musdan77 (talk) 17:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Is not a collective noun [1], [2] or [3], so to me it implies an individual. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
As I said: "term in music" that has been used for decades in books, magazines, etc. ("Best New Artist" Grammy) Another term is "act" - but for Christian/gospel music, "artist" is the preferred word. The term "performer" is also sometimes used for one or more people. Musdan77 (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

You appear to have an illegitimate fan club[edit]

...at least that's how I would describe this. Do with it what you will, I suppose. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 03:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not the first time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Obviously another editor who's be wowed by your particular brand of courteous and collegiate editing. KJP1 (talk) 23:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Amish[edit]

Sorry, misread the diff somehow. Thanks for catching it. Meters (talk) 07:38, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

CanPL team colours[edit]

Hi Walter, I've just changed all the CanPL team articles to improve, IMO, the language around official colours. To use the example of FC Edmonton, I think it's more accurate (and encyclopedic) to say

The official club colours are blue, navy, and white (branded by the club as "prairie blue sky," "River City navy," and "white rabbit")

instead of

The official club colours are prairie blue sky, River City navy, and white rabbit

We don't need to go to that length to preserve their branding in encyclopedia articles.

Just letting you know since you're an active editor in the space. Let me know if you have any concerns.

Madg2011 (talk) 23:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Madg2011: I saw that and was going to fix the MOS:LQ issues. The commas are to go outside the quotes. Other than that, it looks fine and is a good change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

[edit]

How do I upload The VeggieTales Show logo? The upload wizard said it is copyrighted. JATheEditor (talk) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@JATheEditor: If the logo has embedded exif information, you might have to remove that before uploading. I'd ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

What License do I use? JATheEditor (talk) 01:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@JATheEditor: No clue. We can't redistribute it. Maybe it requires a fair use rationale like File:VeggieTales 2014 logo.png, File:Jonah- A VeggieTales Movie.jpg or File:Pirates who dont do anything poster.jpg. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

How do I do that? JATheEditor (talk) 01:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Again, copyright isn't my main interest so I don't have much in the way of advice, but the Media copyright questions would likely be able to give you some options. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I tried that JATheEditor (talk) 01:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Ten minutes is not a long time to wait. Maybe give it a day and then ask again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:38, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

OK JATheEditor (talk) 01:39, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for following up about one of the edits I made yesterday while attempting to clean up the references in Alpha course. I thought that I'd checked the Wayback Machine for what the page looked like when that link was added to the article, but I guess I didn't. My mistake. Regards, --sanfranman59 (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

As I Lay Dying (band)[edit]

Do you have any further comments or are you willing to fix this article up now that I've finished the review for it? If I don't get any comments in the next two days stating they're at least willing to work on it, I'm delisting it. It's just not there as it is right now. dannymusiceditor oops 17:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: That's an article that is on my watchlist. I'm not up on the band and have nothing that I could add to improve it. I think it should be de-listed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply here and on the re-assessment. You were the closest thing I could think of to a main contributor; the original one who got this promoted hasn't edited in a decade and there doesn't seem to be anyone who takes care of it anymore. Since what happened with Tim and all that, I can't say I blame them. Several of the articles the original guy got to GA have also been delisted (and I, too, was responsible for those reviews). dannymusiceditor oops 22:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Rocketman (film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for templating you like this, but doing so assures that I'm fair to the both of you, leave you both the same warning (the IP user was left this warning as well), and that I don't play favorites. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

DrumSalad[edit]

Hi. Just letting you know that I've blocked DrumSalad as a sock of User:Jkmarold55, who was previously blocked for running a paid-editing sockfarm. Sadly, this was more of the same. - Bilby (talk) 15:43, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Wow. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Updating Reno 1868 FC crest[edit]

Hey there. I've noticed that the crest shown on the Reno 1868 page does not have the proper colors. I have a vector version of the proper version that could be replaced but I'm not sure how to go about uploading it to the Commons legally. I made the vector myself but of course I don't own the copyright to the crest, the team does. Any advice/help? Thank you! RaffOutLoud (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Since you're looking at Christian music pages right now...[edit]

Figured I'd let you know that Almost There (album) is up for featured article. I nominated it a month or so back but you're welcome to give it a look if you want. No pressure at all, just figured you might be interested since you've done some cleanup around that area. Toa Nidhiki05 01:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

@Toa Nidhiki05: Thanks. I saw it come up on Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

TIL...[edit]

...that quotemarks in song chronologies are automatic. Thanks! I was just trying to fix them from initially being italic (wrong). dannymusiceditor oops 16:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your help with image changes / reverts, etc. I'd changed some back because I thought it had been ME who forgot the locations (so, yes, kinda Good faith!). I'd have emailed, but I guess you've blocked that?

I'm learning, but it takes time! So all help v gratefully received.

Minnie Bannister (talk) 13:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)Minnie Bannister

Christian music articles in the Christian theology project[edit]

You reverted a Christianity Wikiproject assessment with a question 'Why are we adding Christian music subjects to the Christian theology project?'. When doing the assessment for WP Christianity, I found out that any article assessment for the Christian music project is stealthily linked and presented as "Other" in the WP Christianity Assessment table. The successful solution (to classify based on the quality scale) is to add a separate assessment for WP Christianity in the Talk page of the article. Do you know any other way to solve this? Peace. JohnThorne (talk) 23:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@JohnThorne: I saw that Christian music was added to the other project after I reverted you. My preference would be to remove it from the second project. I'm not sure if there's a way to add one as a work group of the other. That would be my second choice. Adding more projects just means more places from which to ignore articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
WP Christian music calls WP Christianity as a parent. How to separate their assessments? Similar situations also happen with WP Anglicanism, Calvinism etc. which also add assessment to WP Christianity without transferring the scale (so they are listed as "Other"). JohnThorne (talk) 00:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@JohnThorne: There are sub-projects of the Christian Music Project (the albums work group for instance) and so if you look at Talk:Home for Christmas (Amy Grant album), for instance, you can see how that is broken out. I'm not sure how that works though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Season 13[edit]

How would CBC air all 18 episodes of Murdoch mysteries before the end of the year? Season 13 starts in the fall and will only air on Monday nights. I found your comment to be very strange.

Mickeydee15 (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mickeydee15: It's not impossible in sixteen weeks. They've been running a follow-up show after it for a while, Jekyll & Hyde, Frankie Drake, etc. They could easily run double episodes. Although it's unlikely, it's clearly not impossible. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't see that happening especially since season 7 onward aired from September to March/April. I would love it if Frankie were on longer. Maybe if they have a fourth season that will change. Mickeydee15 (talk) 20:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Signing talk pages which the signature is different between two editors[edit]

On the WP:RFP article, what I believe I saw was a comment made to decline page protection to Matthijs de Ligt by the IP address with the signature of a user who has not been involved in any of this bunch of pages today. I was wondering - was that a good idea from me to remove that comment - what I think is that we cannot use another signature which links to user/talk pages which aren't ours and an administrator would have the final say, not the IP vandal. Iggy (Swan) 18:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan: I'm not sure. I saw the change. The same anon was making changes to the De Ligt article and the Ter Stegen article. I tend to agree that the level of disruption is lower on that that one. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
At least the IP address can't make any further disruption to the articles/being an imposter to another editor etc. I have checked the WP:Signatures page and it is clear to me that using other signatures will not be allowed. Iggy (Swan) 19:37, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

You might be interested in this...[edit]

I’ve stumbled upon what purports to be a complete database of every charting song in the history of CCM Magazine. It’s not a website, but I do have it in an access and excel document if you’re interested. It seems legit and is literally every chart they ever published - AC, CHR, Inspirational, Rock, Country, Southern Gospel, and a few more. Toa Nidhiki05 18:59, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


A Barnstar For You![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence.png The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for all your hard work! You are a brilliant and dedicated editor. LearnMore (talk) 21:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Metal Injection[edit]

Hi, you took this to AfD and it was closed "soft delete". This is just a heads-up that the article has been restored, so perhaps you'd like to re-nominate it, with hopefully more participation at the AfD this time around... --Randykitty (talk) 07:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Adding some information to Skillet's page.[edit]

Hey Walter, this is Pierce Morrison. I work with John Cooper and Skillet. I noticed that there are a few things that haven't been added yet, since you make the majority of edits on Skillet's page, I was hoping that you could help me out since I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. If I can I would really appreciate talking to you about those things.

Thank you for your time, Walter.

-Sincerely PierceVelvetKelm20 (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Annoying IP[edit]

He does the stylization on every page he can. Discographies, artists pages, record labels, etc. It’s really annoying and the fact he refuses to ever use his words makes it even more annoying. Toa Nidhiki05 02:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

@Toa Nidhiki05: I'm not sure if he IP-hops as well, but, yes, it's annoying. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:32, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

A stubborn editor[edit]

Hey, could you keep an eye out for Richarddo1442's edits on The Search (NF album)? They seem to edit NF topics more than any other. I see you, like myself, had a back-and-forth with them on their talk page about another issue, so it seems likely they will return and taking issue with something else. They seem to think citing iTunes for genres is acceptable now. Ss112 19:24, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Sinterklaas edit[edit]

Thank you for restoring the blackface link on the Sint article. I was merely correcting the sloppy grammar of a prior editor who changed it to "black or brown colored face." I didn't want to find myself in an edit war over it. Constablequackers (talk) 08:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

You may be interested[edit]

Hello, fellow Pending changes reviewer! As you and me are reverting these nonsense on the Bayern Munich article (and we are right in that), You may be interested here (ANI report by me). Best regards, Eni vak (speak) 23:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)