User talk:Bobblewik

Linking of dates

Ongoing discussion of this matter at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#linking_of_dates. Please add all objective opinions and suggestions there. --Quiddity 22:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a shame for the discussion not to include your input! Roxi2 02:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ohm

There's a vote at Talk:Ohm (unit) to reinstate as the primary topic after a move from Ohm. Have an opinion to share? Femto 16:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I have contributed there. bobblewik 19:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I appologize, but I reverted your talk page by mistake. I reverted it back to what you removed before I reverted it. I appologize for the trouble. --OrbitOne 19:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I won't even try to understand what was going on. But since you have put it back to how it should be, that seems fine. bobblewik 19:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to get stats

1. Look at the most linked page.

I presume you mean do 'What links here'. That shows 500 per page. It is useful for some articles. But it gets rather tedious after about 5000 and so is not good for checking solitary year articles.

Here and here. Rich Farmbrough 23:58 24 March 2006 (UTC).

Excellent. Thanks. bobblewik 00:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2. Run a scan of a database dump using perl or Bluemoose's tool.

I have never done a database dump. I suppose I should try to work out how to do it.

Download from here. Rich Farmbrough 23:58 24 March 2006 (UTC).

3. Use AWB to build a "what links here" list.

Yes, when I had AWB permission, that is how I did it.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Incidentally did you know you don't have a working email link? Rich Farmbrough 21:19 24 March 2006 (UTC).

Ah it is me then. I did enter an address. When I try to send to people, I get an error message 'No send address'. I thought that applied to the other party. I have now worked it out. It should work now, but I don't check that address unless prompted.

I will check it later today or tomorrow since you mentioned it. But normally if anyone wants to email me, they will have to tell me first. bobblewik 21:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sent 2 e-mails to you today, but both got bounced. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 21:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bobblewik lurks in a ten-story fortress of solitude built solely from year links he's removed from Wikipedia. So it's no wonder he's hard to get ahold of. --Cyde Weys 22:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the bounced email. I had not checked the account for a long time. It was over the limit and was refusing incoming mail. I have cleared it out now. Feel free to try again. bobblewik 23:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More delinking

This one doesn't really work correctly. Try it out:

Gavyn Davies (October 2001 - January 28, 2004)

--Cyde Weys 23:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So I see. I will have to look into that. Thanks. bobblewik 23:25, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It cannot distinguish between [[2001]] - [[January 28]] and [[2001]] - [[01-28]]. It avoids ISO 8601 dates by testing for a hyphen. It is solvable but I don't think I will be able to do it right now. bobblewik 23:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably things better left alone 12 July 12 August may 3 20 july - 12-12-20-12-12.... Even the wiki-parser gets the last bit wrong. Rich Farmbrough 00:02 25 March 2006 (UTC).

I just added a line to delink the year in [[2001]] - [[January 28]]. However, following your note, I have commented it out for now. bobblewik 00:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another one that's not working:

and a highly successful 1984 Victory tour before disbanding in 1990

--Cyde Weys 00:33, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. That is because the list of punctuation does not include the ' character. Perhaps there is a better way than just adding more and more to the list. Fixed now. bobblewik 00:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was incorrectly delinked. I'm assuming it's because there's a newline directly after the year?

| '''Major League Debut'''|| [[September, 3]], [[1988]]

--Cyde Weys 05:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The design goal of the regex is to delink anything that does not work with preferences. The format [[September, 3]] does not work with preferences. Thus it is correctly delinked in acccordance with the design goal. bobblewik 18:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also are you still using datestest.js or have you moved fully back to dates.js? --Cyde Weys 17:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to use dates.js for operations and retain datestest.js for development. bobblewik 18:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also 90s isn't being delinked at all. I hadn't seen this format before and I guess neither had you. --Cyde Weys 18:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen that one before but it is quite simple. It could easily be added when I (or somebody else) gets round to it. bobblewik 18:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Please test it (with datestest.js) where you saw it. bobblewik 19:03, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acckkk, apparently '''[[2005]]-[[10-05]]—[[2005]]-[[10-06]]''' is being delinked, and it shouldn't be. Might have to do with the quote marks in front of the year? Are you around anymore? I haven't seen you edit Wikipedia recently. Should I take over main control of this delinker? --Cyde Weys 19:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why that is happening. It could be the quotes or it could be something odd happening with the hyphens. Operation with ISO dates is more difficult to debug. As a false positive, that clearly needs attention. As far as the regex is concerned, feel free to suggest revisions. You can, of course, update your own version at any time. bobblewik 18:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that isn't working properly. I do hope you come back! In [[1998]], [[Marilyn Manson]] asked Navarro to play ... --Cyde Weys 18:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am back. So much to read.

It cannot tell the difference between In [[1998]], [[Marilyn Manson]] and In [[1998]], [[March]] because it only looks at 3 characters. bobblewik 18:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, damn, that thing again. I'll look into alternatives. Anyway, welcome back!! --Cyde Weys 18:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed remedy

Greetings, Bobblewik. I have proposed a remedy to the date unpleasantness, and it can be found here. Your input is requested. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 13:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, looks like a way forward could be found. Good if this can run it's course. Rich Farmbrough 19:22 5 April 2006 (UTC).

TR-3B Stryker II Deletion

Hi, the TR-3B Stryker II is on debate for deletion, well many of us are trying to keep it up, I was hoping you would add a keep to it since you helped it. Right now they are complaining that we are all new users trying to keep it up and it would be nice to have someone who has been around a little longer, make a keep post. Elgae Nacirema 07:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/TR-3B_Stryker[reply]

Survey

I am conducting a survey on Wikipedia and would like to invite you to participate in the study. I've posted a message on wikien-l, but here is the link again in case you are not subscribed to that list-serv. Thanks a lot for your time! --Mermes 01:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop

You've been asked to stop by many people, right up to Jimbo. You've instigated a discussion which is most certainly not endorsing your edits, and yet you continue to make them. I'm in the process of killing all your lastest batch, but you're likely to be blocked again if you continue. Ambi 04:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hectolitres in brewery articles

Hi there. I've reverted all of your changes to brewery articles to change litres back to hectolitres. I guess you didn't notice that they were all consistent for a reason, but hectolitres are the conventional metric units used when talking about brewery production. The European Union beer regulations use hectolitres. It is the de-facto standard. If you disagree, please discuss it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer#Units for production numbers before making any more sweeping changes. Mike Dillon 17:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate delinking

The dates delinker is now inappropriately delinking the year in ISO 6401 dates of the form [[2005]]-[[10-01]]. As an example, check out Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. Thanks. --Cyde Weys 04:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. Fixed now in datestest.js. bobblewik 17:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Advice: English dialects on Wikipedia: Wikipedia has millions of readers; some use American English, or British English, or International English, or any of numerous other local forms from Australian English to Canadian English. Because of this, Wikipedia has a policy of respecting articles written in whatever form of English the original author of the article used.

The guidelines are simple. For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. If it is an international topic, use whatever form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, just ask anyone on Wikipedia and they will help you. Enjoy your time on the internet's fastest growing encyclopædia (or encyclopedia, if you write it that way!). Thank you.

This notice is in regard to this edit. This article is written in American English, and you inappropriately converted units to the European form. If you're going to bulk convert "microns" to the SI form, pay attention to which national variety of English is being used in the article.--Srleffler 22:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite right. I should have paid attention to that issue. Thank you for identifying and correcting it for me. bobblewik 14:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]