| Revision as of 12:45, 28 June 2020 view sourceBrownHairedGirl (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,942,733 edits Undid revision 964930472 by Koavf (talk) -- as requested, go away. As usual, you are sniping, not helpingTag: Undo← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:56, 28 June 2020 view source Koavf (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,174,994 edits →Automatic category adding: Replying to BrownHairedGirl (using reply-link)Next edit → | ||
| Line 262: | Line 262: | ||
| ::::::If you want to change you tone, then I will be happy to discuss this issue with you. But unless you are willing to radically change your approach, the I ask you to not post here again on this topic. --] <small>] • (])</small> 12:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC) | ::::::If you want to change you tone, then I will be happy to discuss this issue with you. But unless you are willing to radically change your approach, the I ask you to not post here again on this topic. --] <small>] • (])</small> 12:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::OK, I'll add another one: . Please be more careful. ] <sup>] ]</sup> 12:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC) | :::::::OK, I'll add another one: . Please be more careful. ] <sup>] ]</sup> 12:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::{{u|BrownHairedGirl}}, Okay, changing tone: Fellow encyclopedia editor, is there anything that I can do to assist you? If so, please do not hesitate to ask. If not, have a pleasant day in your endeavors. ―]<span style="color:red">❤]☮]☺]☯</span> 12:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:56, 28 June 2020
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
This talk page was last edited (diff) on 28 June 2020 at 12:56 by Koavf (talk • contribs • logs)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1990s Philippine television seasons
A tag has been placed on Category:1990s Philippine television seasons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.
This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 21:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)The Signpost: 31 May 2020
- From the editor: Meltdown May?
- News and notes: 2019 Picture of the Year, 200 French paid editing accounts blocked, 10 years of Guild Copyediting
- Discussion report: WMF's Universal Code of Conduct
- Featured content: Weathering the storm
- Arbitration report: Board member likely to receive editing restriction
- Traffic report: Come on and slam, and welcome to the jam
- Gallery: Wildlife photos by the book
- News from the WMF: WMF Board announces Community Culture Statement
- Recent research: Automatic detection of covert paid editing; Wiki Workshop 2020
- Community view: Transit routes and mapping during stay-at-home order downtime
- WikiProject report: Revitalizing good articles
- On the bright side: 500,000 articles in the Egyptian Arabic Misplaced Pages
Administrators' newsletter – June 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Administrator changes
CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
- The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Template: Nationality television series debuts or endings by decade category
Hi! It seems that the above template has depopulated Category:Scottish television by decade and created the red cat Category:Television in Scotland by decade?
I noticed this on Special:WantedCategories Gjs238 (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Gjs238.
- The problem was that the rest of the "nationality television by decade" categories had been speedily renamed to "television in Countryname by decade", and Template:Nationality television series debuts or endings by decade category/core was updated to reflect this … but Scotland had been omitted from the list, so the revised template populated the redlinked Category:Television in Scotland by decade.
- I fixed that by boldly renaming the category, and also did the same for Wales. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:26, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Denmark–Togo relations
A tag has been placed on Category:Denmark–Togo relations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.
This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 01:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)update him
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Karolis_Lauk%C5%BEemis# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.101.182 (talk) 16:52, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
BHGbot: Hamilton, Queensland
BHGbot didn't deal with the unusual situation found at Hamilton, Queensland very well. This is probably a rare thing and may not need any special coding changes. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, Michael Bednarek. Yes, that situation of the eponcat being duplicated in a comment is rare, which is why I didn't code the bot to look for it. The regex to exclude category-within-a-comment adds a heavy load to the parseing of a page, which I didn't feel was justified by the rarity of the issue.
- Thanks for cleaning it all up, and removing the comment. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
"Marthas ( Handmaid's Tale)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Marthas ( Handmaid's Tale). The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 7#Marthas ( Handmaid's Tale) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
BGHBot error
Hello. I’m not sure what happened here but a paramilitary force is not a living person. Sildemund (talk) 08:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Sildemund, thanks for your message. I am sorry about that edit, and also bewildered, because I cannot see any way that this could have been done by the code in use (see Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/BHGbot 6/AWB module).
- Thanks for your revert.
- The best I can do with the bot is to restart AWB, in the hope that the problem was that it had somehow become corrupted. All very weird. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- No problem, stranger things have been known to happen! Sildemund (talk) 10:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
article undeletion
Hi:
I'm Nahshon Anderson an artist, writer and African American Transgender. In March, my Misplaced Pages article was nominated for deletion. In April, it was deleted. Since then, I have received two grants from national arts organizations. Though the grants have not been mentioned in the press (as of yet), I can provide you proof via email. Will you please consider reviewing them to restore my Misplaced Pages article or are you the wrong person to ask?
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nahshon_Dion_Anderson Shootingrange78 (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Shootingrange78
- an article about you is not your article. You don't own it.
- I don't see any way in which grant awards are relevant to a determination of WP:Notability.
- I see from your contribs list that you have posted similarly-worded requests to a total of 6 editors: me plus @Bearian, Materialscientist, Abecedare, Neutrality, and Keith D. That sort of campaigning is not helpful to your cause.
- I wish you luck in your artistic career, but suggest that you reputation would be much better served by allowing others to make decisions about whether you are suitable topic for an encyclopedia article. See WP:NOTPROMO.
- Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Shootingrange78, I would not mind writing an article about you at a future time, but be aware that BrownHairedGirl is correct. Once you hit the "Publish changes" button on Misplaced Pages, you give up your rights to what you write: "By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license." Be careful what you ask for. Bearian (talk) 01:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Category question
This users mass editing of categories came to my attention; this looks like the sort of thing that should have consensus, but I'm not well-versed in the area of category policy and convention. OhNoitsJamie 20:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
South Wales East (Senedd Cymru electoral region)
Hey BHG. Hope you're well. I'm reaching out to people who have edited and, in particular, people who know how to edit the table of list members. The Conservative Senedd member Mohammed Asghar has died and having tried to just enter "Vacant" underneath his name, I've got lost in a mathematical haze of rowspan=x rowspan=z rowspan=q confusion. I just can't for the life of me work out which rowspans and column spans and other numbers I have to increase by 1 to add the word "vacant" underneath his name. Could you either help or do this for me please? I had the same problems with European Parliament regions, I just get brain freeze whenever I try to work out what to do with rowspan numbers and I'm too scared to just go ahead and wish for the best!
Thanks for any assistance :) I'll post a version of this message on a few other editors pages too just in case there's someone else about. Speak soon doktorb words 18:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- And thanks to User: Arms & Hearts all is well. Stand down! doktorb words 19:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
WikiProject peer review categories due for a cleanup
Hi BHG, I hope that you're well - don't think we've interacted before. I edit in the anatomy and peer review spaces. As part of my biannual cleanup of peer review I've been trawling through the categories associated with peer review. I have seen you at categories for deletion and would like to ask for your opinion about the contents of this category: Category:WikiProject_peer_reviews. I can't find a single Wikiproject there which has open peer reviews. I opened ten randomly and the most recent review I found on any was in 2012. In fact most of them link to pages that may or may not have been edited (c.f. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Zimbabwe/Peer review).
I feel they should be deleted because (1) they are unused and clutter WikiProjects (2) if they become reused they may waste or soak up lots of time when we have a fine and up-to-date and slightly more viewed project already, and (3) they encourage WP ownership of reviews which is a no-no. Also, (4) I think overall it's better if we can just have a single way to do this, which can be maintained centrally and is easier for editors to learn how to use.
I wanted to ask your advice before putting these up for nomination because (1) I want to see if you think this is a reasonable request and the category has lots of associated pages, associated with Wikiprojects, and (2) I'm not sure about how I should go about this discussion. If I do this in the wrong way it will end up devolving into people commenting about how it was filed wrong, needed notifications, isn't possible for logistical reasons etc.; my goal would be to somehow post the discussion in a place and manner where a discussion on its merits can occur.
Over to you, and thank you for your advice / help! --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Help me to improve an article related India and its geography
Manimajra was renamed as sector 13 legally by UT government of Chandigarh in January 2020 and by February 2020 the new name was finally declared to be written everywhere on papers. Below are links to the decision:- 1). https://m.timesofindia.com/city/chandigarh/manimajra-to-be-renamed-sector-13-residents-elated/amp_articleshow/73114749.cms .
Being a Indian resident, i would like to contribute to this new law which was passed by our government .
It is true that the proposal had been initially opposed in december 2019. In the initial proposal, names like Sector M or Sector 26 east were proposed. Here is the link for initial proposals made :-
(these articles were published in newspapers in 2019 which is old).
5)https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/chandigarh/mani-majra-to-be-sector-m-863728 (This link i provided over here was published in Tribune India in November 2019 )
But soon the final decision was made which overruled the previous proposals and finally the new name for manimajra was concluded as sector 13 by the beginning of 2020. The next link (6th Link) was also published in Tribune India with the final decision which was declared in February 2020 :-
6)https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/chandigarh/its-official-mani-majra-is-sector-13-of-chandigarh-39042
Please help me by putting your vote in the panel discussion on the talk page section of Sector 13.
Here is an example on how to put your vote ___________.
- Support
- Strong Support
- Agreed
Click on the edit tab and please copy any 1 vote you want to put from the above or you can put you vote by putting a * star symbol followed by 3 apostrophe marks ' ' ' and then writing your word for vote like support, agreed etc and finally closing it with again 3 apostrophe marks ' ' ' in the end. Taal Saptak (talk) 04:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Bot and underlinked tagging
The bot is unneccessarily tagged a number of Scottish election results articles with the underlinked tag. Could you please change that option? I am trying to reduce the number of articles that show the tag. Thank you Rogermx (talk) 16:16, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Rogermx
- Any such tagging is added by WP:GENFIXES, not by any decision of mine.
- If you want to give me some links, then I can take a look and see whether User:BHGbot's use of GENFIXES is doing something wrong. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Brownhaired, thank you for your response. I admit that I do not know much about how the bots work, so I appreciate your assistance. Here are some of the links. 1997–98 Scottish Football League. 1962–63 Scottish Football League - there are about 19 Scottish Football league articles that are affected. Also, 1968 elections in India, 1895–96 Washington Huskies men's basketball team, 1897–98 Penn State Nittany Lions basketball team, 1896–97 Bucknell Bison men's basketball team. All these articles tend to tables of results with at most one or two sentences of text. Again, thank you for looking at this. Rogermx (talk) 20:45, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for those links, Rogermx.
First off, a technical explanation. AWB is a semi-automated MediaWiki editor designed to make tedious or repetitive editing tasks quicker and easier. It can be configured to do all sorts of tasks, and used either manually or (with authorisation at WP:BRFA) as an unattended bot. In addition to its configurable main task, it can do a set of general fixes, as set out at WP:GENFIXES. These are a huge set of tweaks, which are supposed to be appropriate on any page. Most of the fixes would be tedious to do by hand, so they are a v helpful bonus to any AWB run.
There is no tweaking of GENFIXES; they are either on or off. Which is fine, because they have been tested over many years, and it is very rare to find a problem.
in the examples which you cite, I am not sure that I agree with your view GENFIXES got it wrong ... but if you still think there is a problem, I suggest raising it WT:GENFIXES; if you ping me, I will reply there.. Hope this helps. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for those links, Rogermx.
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Education in Georgia (U.S. state) articles with to-do lists
A tag has been placed on Category:Education in Georgia (U.S. state) articles with to-do lists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.
This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 01:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)BHGbot's bolding error in first sentence
Hi BrownHairedGirl, can you please have a look at this? The minor damage is already undone by someone else, but this bot seems to need a subtle fix 
. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 10:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi DVdm, and thanks for the headsup.
- There is nothing in the bot's settings which could cause this, so it's a result of some corruption of data somewhere. The only thing I can do is to restart the bot, which I have just done. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:13, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks. It looks like one of the functions of the bot is to check whether the first sentence contains the subject in bold. The subject of this article E (mathematical constant) is a single letter.
- See MOS:BOLDLEAD, "If an article's title is a formal or widely accepted name for the subject, display it in bold as early as possible in the first sentence." The bot seems to have taken "as early as possible" too literally, mistaking the letter "e" as a part of a word as the article subject. Perhaps the regex that looks for the subject string can be adjusted to avoid matching with merely part of a word. Is there a way to test the bot with that particular article and see what happens? - DVdm (talk) 10:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- DVdm, that is part of WP:GENFIXES. I can either switch GENFIXES on, or switch it off. I have no ability to partially enable it or to change the code.
- If you think it should be tweaked, I suggest raisin the issue at WT:GENFIXES, or (betters till) WP:AWB/BUGS. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, now user D.Lazard has properly fixed it. Thanks, D.
- I have the page on my watchlist. If the bot does it again, I'll raise it at WT:GENFIXES or WP:AWB/BUGS. Thanks again, and cheers. - DVdm (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Category renaming
I strongly object to renaming categories for disambiguated genera. This will cause huge confusion, and make the correct use of the category difficult. Consider Category:Dracaena. At present the article on the species Dracaena arborescens has ]. It's easy for editors to remember that the category declaration for the article with the title "Genus species" is "Category:Genus|species". If the change is made, then the Dracaena arborescens article must use ]. This is clumsy and totally unnecessary. The way so many categories of different kinds have been nominated mixed together makes it almost impossible to discuss them properly. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead, that is basically a claim that genera should be exempt from the long-standing speedy criterion at WP:C2D, apparently on the grounds that editors working in that particular field are unable to derive category name by simply copy the article title of the genus.
- That seems to me to be a very dismissive view of editors working in that field. I have never seen any reason to regard them as less competent than editors working on other topics, who manage fine with disambiguated category names ... but apparently you have lower expectations.
- But if you wish to pursue the view that the editors working on this topic are exceptionally incompetent, then feel free to open an RFC proposing that genera be exempt from C2D, even when the current category title is ambiguous, because of limited editorial abilities. I doubt that it will get very far, but you are free to propose it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:43, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @Peter coxhead: Where there's ambiguity (compare Category:Dracaena (lizard)), there are awkward category names: thus Category:Churches in Georgia (U.S. state) and Category:Churches in Georgia (country) are more difficult to remember than Category:Churches in Texas or Category:Churches in Lithuania. PamD 10:44, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- The question is not whether sometimes it's necessary to have awkward category names, but whether it's necessary to do so when there is no need, which can only be decided in specific cases, not generally. There has been a tendency to disambiguate all uses of scientific names, regardless of which is the better known. In some cases, a proper discussion might suggest that "X (plant)" or "Y (moth)" is the most common, so the article can be moved to "X" or "Y" and the category left alone. Long-standing and undisputed use of an undisambiguated category name does suggest that perhaps the article should match the category, not vice versa. Please note that my comment above says "this is clumsy and totally unnecessary. If it can be shown that it is necessary, then of course we have to put up with the clumsiness. Moving solely because of a blanket policy favouring tidiness and uniformity is what I object to. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead, the principle of consistency is crucial to maintaining a system of two million categories. We will never have enough editors to micro-scrutinise every single one of them, so instead we have naming conventions and speedy renaming policies to allow that consistency to be maintained with minimum bureaucracy.
- In this case, you clearly miss the whole point of WP:C2D, which is that category names follow article names. So if you think that an article on a particular topic should be the undisambiguated primary topic, open an RM discussion. If the article name is changed, the category can be renamed to match per C2D.
- If you dislike the principle of consistency, then as I suggested before, feel to open an RFC. But it's really rather tedious to have a long-standing and experienced editor such as yourself just moaning about the long-term consensus. If you want to make solid proposals to change the policies, then make those proposals and see if there is a consensus to support you ... but in the meantime, please stop moaning at those who follow long-established principles and processes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- To me, this is a classic case of "long-established principles and processes" among one group of editors – those interested in categories – being used to avoid discussions among other groups of editors – in this case those who edit organism articles. Various Wikiprojects have detailed guidance on how to set up taxonomic categories, so at the least they should be consulted. I might well be in a minority, and would then accept the outcome, but I don't accept blanket nominations without proper discussion among relevant groups of editors. If you it's just a "moan" to complain about blanket nominations, then I'm sad that this is how you think collaborative editing should work. I don't, but I'll say no more. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- So I clearly objected to Category:Dracaena being moved, and alerted WP:PLANTS editors, only to find that the move had been made. Is this how you wish to proceed? Peter coxhead (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead, your objection was generic opposition to the entire WP:CFDS process, so it was removed by the admin Good Ol'factory.
Category:Dracaena was one of a batch of listings processed later in this edit by User:Ymblanter. - If you object to their admin actions, you should raise the matter with the admins involved. Sadly, you chose instead to engage in disruptive editing by reverting the moves made by the bot on the instruction of admin User:Ymblanter (here's a list of your contribs which reverted the move). I have reverted you reverts, to restore the status quo as implemented by Ymblanter ... and I have left a note on your talk warning you that if there is further such disruption by you, I will take the matter straight to ANI, with no further warning. You are a highly experienced editor, and you should know much better than to take unilateral action to overturn an admin's implementation of an established process, let alone do so without even attempting to discuss the matter with the admin(s) involved. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead, your objection was generic opposition to the entire WP:CFDS process, so it was removed by the admin Good Ol'factory.
- So I clearly objected to Category:Dracaena being moved, and alerted WP:PLANTS editors, only to find that the move had been made. Is this how you wish to proceed? Peter coxhead (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- To me, this is a classic case of "long-established principles and processes" among one group of editors – those interested in categories – being used to avoid discussions among other groups of editors – in this case those who edit organism articles. Various Wikiprojects have detailed guidance on how to set up taxonomic categories, so at the least they should be consulted. I might well be in a minority, and would then accept the outcome, but I don't accept blanket nominations without proper discussion among relevant groups of editors. If you it's just a "moan" to complain about blanket nominations, then I'm sad that this is how you think collaborative editing should work. I don't, but I'll say no more. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- The question is not whether sometimes it's necessary to have awkward category names, but whether it's necessary to do so when there is no need, which can only be decided in specific cases, not generally. There has been a tendency to disambiguate all uses of scientific names, regardless of which is the better known. In some cases, a proper discussion might suggest that "X (plant)" or "Y (moth)" is the most common, so the article can be moved to "X" or "Y" and the category left alone. Long-standing and undisputed use of an undisambiguated category name does suggest that perhaps the article should match the category, not vice versa. Please note that my comment above says "this is clumsy and totally unnecessary. If it can be shown that it is necessary, then of course we have to put up with the clumsiness. Moving solely because of a blanket policy favouring tidiness and uniformity is what I object to. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
I hope that, so long as Category:Dracaena is otherwise unused, it's not problematic to have a category redirect there. It does ensure that any editor that tries to set up e.g. "Category:Dracaena|americana" (a species with no article yet) is much less likely to make this mistake. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead: On the contrary, it's highly problematic to have a category redirect from an ambiguous title, just as it would be problematic in article space.
- If an editor adds Category:Dracaena to an article on any of the topics listed at the dab page Dracaena, the bots will promptly recategorise it in the redirect target, i.e. Category:Dracaena (plant). If the category is added using WP:HOTCAT, the Hotcat will in most cases do it before saving.
- So that redirect is a path to unintentional miscategorisation, which is why I have reverted it..
- As noted before, similar situations exist wrt to many tens of thousands of other categories. It is bizarre that you persist in the view that one topic area should be exempt from the norms.--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:56, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, so this needs to be discussed. I will open a discussion on the talk page. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Local news referencing for articles
Many news papers in maldives do not usually publish articles in English. Most in local language. It is difficult to put up unbiased information without being able to put around 85 percent of sources. Need your advice on this. YOU. How does a person makes a million edits. (JUST WOW)(Existance 21:51, 23 June 2020 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leesaaisath (talk • contribs)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2020 FIA Motorsport Games
A tag has been placed on Category:2020 FIA Motorsport Games requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:51, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Category:Queen's University faculty at Kingston
Hi BHG; I wonder if you could help me with a category issue? I feel I'm missing something here; as far as I can see, you wanted the title of the category for faculty at Queen's University at Kingston to be "Queen's University at Kingston faculty", which seems perfectly reasonable, but the bot has moved it to the bizarre "Queen's University faculty at Kingston". I can't locate any discussion for this, and I'm assuming that it's a mistake -- "at Kingston" is presumably being added as it's the full, official name of the university, and not to identify those academics who are part of Queen's but "at Kingston" (in contrast, for example, to those at the Queen's International Study Centre). Could you help out? What is the correct way to go about remedying this? Josh Milburn (talk) 12:58, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- Whatever happens an "Ontario" is needed in the mix. I was wondering what all these types were doing in my neighbourhood. Johnbod (talk) 13:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- I hear you... "Kingston, Ontario" would certainly be the usual way to refer to the town, but it's not part of the university's name. "Queen's University at Kingston (Ontario) faculty" is a bit of a mouthful, and doesn't reflect our article name for the university. Note that "Kingston" is only really included (everyone calls it Queen's University or just Queen's) to differentiate it from the other institutions called Queen's University. It's a minefield! Josh Milburn (talk) 16:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi Josh Milburn, Thanks for raising this. Short version: I screwed up, and I'll get it fixed.
As you rightly spotted, I intended to move the category to Category:Queen's University at Kingston faculty, and that's how I tagged the category..
However, when I manually added the list of subcats to the speedy nomination, I screwed up the rename target for the faculty category: see this edit..
I will do another speedy nomination to fix this. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- Correction nomination made:
- Thanks again, Josh Milburn, for promptly raising this. The fix should be actioned after the standard 48-hour CFDS waiting period. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks a lot. I know it's easy to make mistakes when you're doing large amounts of this sort of background gnoming. It's valuable, but people only seem to notice when you do something wrong! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for being so nice about it, @Josh Milburn. I think I have done over 500 such nominations this week, working thorough the latest set of results of a set of huge list-making exercises (as described at WT:WikiProject_Categories#Non-disambiguation_categories_with_eponymous_disambiguation_page_in_article_space) ... and while I am annoyed with myself about that error, but one glitch in that large set is not too bad an error rate. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:29, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks a lot. I know it's easy to make mistakes when you're doing large amounts of this sort of background gnoming. It's valuable, but people only seem to notice when you do something wrong! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Automatic category adding
Please be more discriminate. Do you need help checking other contributions to ensure that this hasn't happened in another edit? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Justin this AWB is based on analysis of category and article names. Issues like that will happen only when either the article or category are incorrectly named, and that's the first such case so far.
- Do you need help in seeing the naming problem? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, Which is "incorrectly named"? Are you suggesting that the admin who closed this discussion misread consensus? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, "the first such case so far"? So the song People from Ibiza is an example of a person from Spain? The American company Planters is type of gentry farmer? I'm guessing that the answer to my question that you did not give is "yes". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Justin what sort of folly leads you to believe that the primary topic for "People from Ibiza" is a 1984 song? In a search of Gbooks the song gets trivial mention.
- Or that a single company is the primary topic over the dicdef of Planters? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, Okay, so I'll take that as a "no" and that you are ignoring all of my questions and attempts to fix your errors (e.g. this town is not a fish). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Justin please do try to actually read my reply. It's not that complicated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, "Do you need help checking other contributions to ensure that this hasn't happened in another edit?" I don't see you saying "Yes, I need help as I did this thousands of times without previewing my edits" nor do I see "No, I don't need help, as I am taking responsibility to check my edits". Either answer would be fine but I don't think you gave either one. What is your plan to fix these errors you made? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Justin: See my reply below. Drop your hostile, fault-finding tone or stay off my talk. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, "Do you need help checking other contributions to ensure that this hasn't happened in another edit?" I don't see you saying "Yes, I need help as I did this thousands of times without previewing my edits" nor do I see "No, I don't need help, as I am taking responsibility to check my edits". Either answer would be fine but I don't think you gave either one. What is your plan to fix these errors you made? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Justin please do try to actually read my reply. It's not that complicated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, Okay, so I'll take that as a "no" and that you are ignoring all of my questions and attempts to fix your errors (e.g. this town is not a fish). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, Please, before you go moving pages, can you answer my question? I am looking thru your edits now and you start doing page moves and semi-automated link changes, that's only going to make it more difficult. It seems like you are refusing to audit your own work and are going ahead. Am I understanding that correctly? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have done no "semi-automated link changes". I disambiguated one title, which you reverted because after all your years of editing you you apparently don't understand that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC refers to the topic, not the title. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, You're not even paying attention to the posts that you're making on this talk page on a thread about how your editing is sloppy! Whom do you expect to fix errors like this? Yourself? Me? Someone else? No one? I need to know the answer to this question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Justin, if you had the basic courtesy to pay some attention to my replies, this dialogue would serve some purpose. However, you are clearly engaged in a hostile process of fault-finding rather than problem-solving.
- I will of course review my edits for the occasional exceptional case in the data set I am working off. But I am not willing to have my day soured by by your aggressive hostility. Misplaced Pages is a collegial exercise, not a forum for you to vent your grudges.
- If you want to change you tone, then I will be happy to discuss this issue with you. But unless you are willing to radically change your approach, the I ask you to not post here again on this topic. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- OK, I'll add another one: diff. Please be more careful. Dirk Beetstra 12:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, Okay, changing tone: Fellow encyclopedia editor, is there anything that I can do to assist you? If so, please do not hesitate to ask. If not, have a pleasant day in your endeavors. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- BrownHairedGirl, You're not even paying attention to the posts that you're making on this talk page on a thread about how your editing is sloppy! Whom do you expect to fix errors like this? Yourself? Me? Someone else? No one? I need to know the answer to this question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have done no "semi-automated link changes". I disambiguated one title, which you reverted because after all your years of editing you you apparently don't understand that WP:PRIMARYTOPIC refers to the topic, not the title. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)