User talk:Andrewa/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 → Archive 15

Disambiguation link notification for January 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited LiHe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Compound. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Good catch. Fixed. Thank you HAL! Andrewa (talk) 15:57, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News 2015—#1

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and worked on VisualEditor's appearance, the coming Citoid reference service, and support for languages with complex input requirements. Status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. Upcoming plans are posted at the VisualEditor roadmap.

The Wikimedia Foundation has named its top priorities for this quarter (January to March). The first priority is making VisualEditor ready for deployment by default to all new users and logged-out users at the remaining large Wikipedias. You can help identify these requirements. There will be weekly triage meetings which will be open to volunteers beginning Wednesday, 11 February 2015 at 12:00 (noon) PST (20:00 UTC). Tell Vice President of Engineering Damon Sicore, Product Manager James Forrester and other team members which bugs and features are most important to you. The decisions made at these meetings will determine what work is necessary for this quarter's goal of making VisualEditor ready for deployment to new users. The presence of volunteers who enjoy contributing MediaWiki code is particularly appreciated. Information about how to join the meeting will be posted at mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal shortly before the meeting begins. 

Due to some breaking changes in MobileFrontend and VisualEditor, VisualEditor was not working correctly on the mobile site for a couple of days in early January. The teams apologize for the problem.

Recent improvements

The new design for VisualEditor aligns with MediaWiki's Front-End Standards as led by the Design team. Several new versions of the OOjs UI library have also been released, and these also affect the appearance of VisualEditor and other MediaWiki software extensions. Most changes were minor, like changing the text size and the amount of white space in some windows. Buttons are consistently color-coded to indicate whether the action:

  • starts a new task, like opening the ⧼visualeditor-toolbar-savedialog⧽ dialog:  blue ,
  • takes a constructive action, like inserting a citation:  green ,
  • might remove or lose your work, like removing a link:  red , or
  • is neutral, like opening a link in a new browser window:  gray.

The TemplateData editor has been completely re-written to use a different design (T67815) based on the same OOjs UI system as VisualEditor (T73746). This change fixed a couple of existing bugs (T73077 and T73078) and improved usability.

Search and replace in long documents is now faster. It does not highlight every occurrence if there are more than 100 on-screen at once (T78234).

Editors at the Hebrew and Russian Wikipedias requested the ability to use VisualEditor in the "Article Incubator" or drafts namespace (T86688, T87027). If your community would like VisualEditor enabled on another namespace on your wiki, then you can file a request in Phabricator. Please include a link to a community discussion about the requested change.

Looking ahead

The Editing team will soon add auto-fill features for citations. The Citoid service takes a URL or DOI for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. After creating it, you will be able to change or add information to the citation, in the same way that you edit any other pre-existing citation in VisualEditor. Support for ISBNs, PMIDs, and other identifiers is planned. Later, editors will be able to contribute to the Citoid service's definitions for each website, to improve precision and reduce the need for manual corrections.

We will need editors to help test the new design of the special character inserter, especially if you speak Welsh, Breton, or another language that uses diacritics or special characters extensively. The new version should be available for testing next week. Please contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF) if you would like to be notified when the new version is available. After the special character tool is completed, VisualEditor will be deployed to all users at Phase 5 Wikipedias. This will affect about 50 mid-size and smaller Wikipedias, including Afrikaans, Azerbaijani, Breton, Kyrgyz, Macedonian, Mongolian, Tatar, and Welsh. The date for this change has not been determined.

Let's work together

Subscribe or unsubscribe at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter. Translations are available through Meta. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 20:23, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

WHFS-FM

Greetings! When you get a chance, could you take another look at the discussion at Talk:WHFS-FM, and respond in kind? I believe your concerns regarding the proposed page move now have been addressed. Cheers! -- JeffBillman (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm happy to explain

Sorry about replying here but I didn't want to add what might have been distraction at Template talk:Largest cities of Acre.

The sequence of dialogue was as contained here:
  • Oppose. Not worth bothering. The titles are perfectly clear either way, and for disputed territories - if it's disputed if a city is "of" a certain country, it is also disputed whether the territory on which the city resides should be considered "in" the country. “WarKosign” 16:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
WarKosign, The current title visible in the template reads "Largest cities in ..." Would you support the content functioning as in a "Largest cities in ..." type template? "Of" and "in" are different words with different meanings. GregKaye 20:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
"Of" and "in" are different words with different meanings (my emphasis). So you have said, repeatedly, but there is no consensus above that the second part is true in this context (I don't think anyone is suggesting that they are the same word). Is that understood and agreed? Andrewa (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Andrewa As a test case can I ask you your view on Ariel (city)? Is it "of" or "in" Israel? Both or neither? and to what extent is it in Wikipedia's jurisdiction to be making a judgement? How clear is the distinction regarding posession in comparison to location? It is very clearly to the eastern side even of the Green line (Israel). The same levels of confusion are clearly also possible in regard to any other nation with territorial disputes.
Not quite sure what you're driving at here, but I'll have a look when I get time. Andrewa (talk) 11:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
I would also appreciate it if you would leave the space for other people to answer questions that they are asked. GregKaye
Please explain... have I not been doing that? Andrewa (talk) 11:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
History has taught me that {u|Warkosign}} (finish the ping at your discretion.. it's your talk page) is inconsistent in answering questions. Content at, Template talk:Largest cities of Israel#RfC on Jerusalem illustrates this well as, in four separate posts, I asked him/her the question, "Would you define West Jerusalem and East Jerusalem as being individually defined as cities?". This was also interspersed with clarifications that it was a yes or no question. Warkosign also has a history of being quick to reply to many posts and I also know that he has been online quite soon after I added my ping at the RM thread.
This time the question was "Would you support the content functioning as in a "Largest cities in ..." type template?" and again I chose to phrase it as a yes or no question. Again it has not been answered.
To clarify, I have a great deal of good will to Israel, progressed well in Israeli folk dancing and support the existence of a Jewish state in the land. However, from my perspective, I object when people start/continue making claims as to what belongs to Israel before agreement on the subject has been reached. There is plenty of background material that you can read at Talk:Israel and allied pages if you desire and what I considered to be the surprising launch of the RfC. GregKaye 14:04, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Magneto (generator). Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Biscuittin (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #2—2015

Did you know?

With Citoid in VisualEditor, you click the 'book with bookmark' icon and paste in the URL for a reliable source:


Screenshot of Citoid's first dialog


Citoid looks up the source for you and returns the citation results. Click the green "Insert" button to accept its results and add them to the article:


Screenshot of Citoid's initial results


After inserting the citation, you can change it. Select the reference, and click the "Edit" button in the context menu to make changes.


The user guide has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has fixed many bugs and worked on VisualEditor's performance, the Citoid reference service, and support for languages with complex input requirements. Status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. The worklist for April through June is available in Phabricator.

The weekly task triage meetings continue to be open to volunteers, each Wednesday at 11:00 (noon) PDT (18:00 UTC). You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q4 blocker. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the Editing team's Q4 blocker project with the bug. Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal.

Recent improvements

VisualEditor is now substantially faster. In many cases, opening the page in VisualEditor is now faster than opening it in the wikitext editor. The new system has improved the code speed by 37% and network speed by almost 40%.

The Editing team is slowly adding auto-fill features for citations. This is currently available only at the French, Italian, and English Wikipedias. The Citoid service takes a URL or DOI for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. After creating it, you will be able to change or add information to the citation, in the same way that you edit any other pre-existing citation in VisualEditor. Support for ISBNs, PMIDs, and other identifiers is planned. Later, editors will be able to improve precision and reduce the need for manual corrections by contributing to the Citoid service's definitions for each website.

Citoid requires good TemplateData for your citation templates. If you would like to request this feature for your wiki, please post a request in the Citoid project on Phabricator. Include links to the TemplateData for the most important citation templates on your wiki.

The special character inserter has been improved, based upon feedback from active users. After this, VisualEditor was made available to all users of Wikipedias on the Phase 5 list on 30 March. This affected 53 mid-size and smaller Wikipedias, including Afrikaans, Azerbaijani, Breton, Kyrgyz, Macedonian, Mongolian, Tatar, and Welsh.

Work continues to support languages with complex requirements, such as Korean and Japanese. These languages use input method editors ("IMEs”). Recent improvements to cursoring, backspace, and delete behavior will simplify typing in VisualEditor for these users.

The design for the image selection process is now using a "masonry fit" model. Images in the search results are displayed at the same height but at variable widths, similar to bricks of different sizes in a masonry wall, or the "packed" mode in image galleries. This style helps you find the right image by making it easier to see more details in images.

You can now drag and drop categories to re-arrange their order of appearance ​on the page.

The pop-up window that appears when you click on a reference, image, link, or other element, is called the "context menu". It now displays additional useful information, such as the destination of the link or the image's filename. The team has also added an explicit "Edit" button in the context menu, which helps new editors open the tool to change the item.

Invisible templates are marked by a puzzle piece icon so they can be interacted with. Users also will be able to see and edit HTML anchors now in section headings.

Users of the TemplateData GUI editor can now set a string as an optional text for the 'deprecated' property in addition to boolean value, which lets you tell users of the template what they should do instead (T90734).

Looking ahead

The special character inserter in VisualEditor will soon use the same special character list as the wikitext editor. Admins at each wiki will also have the option of creating a custom section for frequently used characters at the top of the list. Instructions for customizing the list will be posted at mediawiki.org.

The team is discussing a test of VisualEditor with new users, to see whether they have met their goals of making VisualEditor suitable for those editors. The timing is unknown, but might be relatively soon.

Let's work together

  • Share your ideas and ask questions at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.
  • Can you translate from English into any other language? Please check this list to see whether more interface translations are needed for your language. Contact us to get an account if you want to help!
  • The design research team wants to see how real editors work. Please sign up for their research program.
  • File requests for language-appropriate "Bold" and "Italic" icons for the character formatting menu in Phabricator.

Subscribe, unsubscribe or change the page where this newsletter is delivered at Meta. If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

-Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk), 17:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Großer Tiergarten#Requested move 19 March 2015

I invite you to another RM on this subject. --George Ho (talk) 22:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Jethro Tull

good points but if you hadn't guessed this is yet another Kauffner sock In ictu oculi (talk) 16:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

So it is! No, I hadn't guessed. Sad. My latest theology page [1] is relevant if you are interested. Andrewa (talk) 19:41, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Mmm. I had a look thanks.
Thank you incidentally for addressing some of the questions at the Talk:Mandingo (pornographic actor) RM. And [Talk:Cytherea (pornographic actress)]] is still open, but it's a fait accompli. A significant handful of en.wp editors see pornographic actors as simply a variant of film actors. Different editor mindset here from foreign language wps. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #3—2015

Did you know?

When you click on a link to an article, you now see more information:

Screenshot showing the link tool's context menu


The link tool has been re-designed:

Screenshot of the link inspector


There are separate tabs for linking to internal and external pages.

The user guide has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has created new interfaces for the link and citation tools, as well as fixing many bugs and changing some elements of the design. Some of these bugs affected users of VisualEditor on mobile devices. Status reports are posted on Mediawiki.org. The worklist for April through June is available in Phabricator.

A test of VisualEditor's effect on new editors at the English Wikipedia has just completed the first phase. During this test, half of newly registered editors had VisualEditor automatically enabled, and half did not. The main goal of the study is to learn which group was more likely to save an edit and to make productive, unreverted edits. Initial results will be posted at Meta later this month.

Recent improvements

Auto-fill features for citations are available at a few Wikipedias through the citoid service. Citoid takes a URL or DOI for a reliable source, and returns a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. If Citoid is enabled on your wiki, then the design of the citation workflow changed during May. All citations are now created inside a single tool. Inside that tool, choose the tab you want (⧼citoid-citeFromIDDialog-mode-auto⧽, ⧼citoid-citeFromIDDialog-mode-manual⧽, or ⧼citoid-citeFromIDDialog-mode-reuse⧽). The cite button is now labeled with the word "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽" rather than a book icon, and the autofill citation dialog now has a more meaningful label, "⧼Citoid-citeFromIDDialog-lookup-button⧽", for the submit button.

The link tool has been redesigned based on feedback from Wikipedia editors and user testing. It now has two separate sections: one for links to articles and one for external links. When you select a link, its pop-up context menu shows the name of the linked page, a thumbnail image from the linked page, Wikidata's description, and/or appropriate icons for disambiguation pages, redirect pages and empty pages. Search results have been reduced to the first five pages. Several bugs were fixed, including a dark highlight that appeared over the first match in the link inspector (T98085).  

The special character inserter in VisualEditor now uses the same special character list as the wikitext editor. Admins at each wiki can also create a custom section for frequently used characters at the top of the list. Please read the instructions for customizing the list at mediawiki.org. Also, there is now a tooltip to describing each character in the special character inserter (T70425).

Several improvements have been made to templates. When you search for a template to insert, the list of results now contains descriptions of the templates. The parameter list inside the template dialog now remains open after inserting a parameter from the list, so that users don’t need to click on "⧼visualeditor-dialog-transclusion-add-param⧽" each time they want to add another parameter (T95696). The team added a new property for TemplateData, "Example", for template parameters. This optional, translatable property will show up when there is text describing how to use that parameter (T53049).

The design of the main toolbar and several other elements have changed slightly, to be consistent with the MediaWiki theme. In the Vector skin, individual items in the menu are separated visually by pale gray bars. Buttons and menus on the toolbar can now contain both an icon and a text label, rather than just one or the other. This new design feature is being used for the cite button on wikis where the Citoid service is enabled.

The team has released a long-desired improvement to the handling of non-existent images. If a non-existent image is linked in an article, then it is now visible in VisualEditor and can be selected, edited, replaced, or removed.

Let's work together

  • Share your ideas and ask questions at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.
  • The weekly task triage meetings continue to be open to volunteers, each Wednesday at 12:00 (noon) PDT (19:00 UTC). Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at mw:Talk:VisualEditor/Portal. You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q4 blocker. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the Editing team's Q4 blocker project with the bug.
  • If your Wikivoyage, Wikibooks, Wikiversity, or other community wants to have VisualEditor made available by default to contributors, then please contact James Forrester.
  • If you would like to request the Citoid automatic reference feature for your wiki, please post a request in the Citoid project on Phabricator. Include links to the TemplateData for the most important citation templates on your wiki.

Subscribe, unsubscribe or change the page where this newsletter is delivered at Meta. If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:31, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hobbys Yards, New South Wales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Service station. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll

You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:15, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #4—2015

Read this in another language • Local subscription list • Subscribe to the multilingual edition

Did you know?

You can add quotations marks before and after a title or phrase with a single click.

Select the relevant text. Find the correct quotations marks in the special character inserter tool (marked as Ω in the toolbar).

Screenshot showing the special character tool, selected text, and the special character that will be inserted


Click the button. VisualEditor will add the quotation marks on either side of the text you selected.

Screenshot showing the special character tool and the same text after the special character has been inserted


You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use VisualEditor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team have been working on mobile phone support. They have fixed many bugs and improved language support. They post weekly status reports on mediawiki.org. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are improving language support and functionality on mobile devices.

Wikimania

The team attended Wikimania 2015 in Mexico City. There they participated in the Hackathon and met with individuals and groups of users. They also made several presentations about VisualEditor and the future of editing.

Following Wikimania, we announced winners for the VisualEditor 2015 Translathon. Our thanks and congratulations to users Halan-tul, Renessaince, जनक राज भट्ट (Janak Bhatta), Vahe Gharakhanyan, Warrakkk, and Eduardogobi.

For interface messages (translated at translatewiki.net), we saw the initiative affecting 42 languages. The average progress in translations across all languages was 56.5% before the translathon, and 78.2% after (+21.7%). In particular, Sakha improved from 12.2% to 94.2%; Brazilian Portuguese went from 50.6% to 100%; Taraškievica went from 44.9% to 85.3%; Doteli went from 1.3% to 41.2%. Also, while 1.7% of the messages were outdated across all languages before the translathon, the percentage dropped to 0.8% afterwards (-0.9%).

For documentation messages (on mediawiki.org), we saw the initiative affecting 24 languages. The average progress in translations across all languages was 26.6% before translathon, and 46.9% after (+20.3%).  There were particularly notable achievements for three languages. Armenian improved from 1% to 99%; Swedish, from 21% to 99%, and Brazilian Portuguese, from 34% to 83%. Outdated translations across all languages were reduced from 8.4% before translathon to 4.8% afterwards (-3.6%).

We published some graphs showing the effect of the event on the Translathon page. Thank you to the translators for participating and the translatewiki.net staff for facilitating this initiative.

Recent improvements

Auto-fill features for citations can be enabled on each Wikipedia. The tool uses the citoid service to convert a URL or DOI into a pre-filled, pre-formatted bibliographic citation. You can see an animated GIF of the quick, simple process at mediawiki.org. So far, about a dozen Wikipedias have enabled the auto-citation tool. To enable it for your wiki, follow the instructions at mediawiki.org.

Your wiki can customize the first section of the special character inserter in VisualEditor. Please follow the instructions at mediawiki.org to put the characters you want at the top. 

In other changes, if you need to fill in a CAPTCHA and get it wrong, then you can click to get a new one to complete. VisualEditor can now display and edit Vega-based graphs. If you use the Monobook skin, VisualEditor's appearance is now more consistent with other software.  

Future changes

The team will be changing the appearance of selected links inside VisualEditor. The purpose is to make it easy to see whether your cursor is inside or outside the link. When you select a link, the link label (the words shown on the page) will be enclosed in a faint box. If you place your cursor inside the box, then your changes to the link label will be part of the link. If you place your cursor outside the box, then it will not. This will make it easy to know when new characters will be added to the link and when they will not.

On the English Wikipedia, 10% of newly created accounts are now offered both the visual and the wikitext editors. A recent controlled trial showed no significant difference in survival or productivity for new users in the short term. New users with access to VisualEditor were very slightly less likely to produce results that needed reverting. You can learn more about this by watching a video of the July 2015 Wikimedia Research Showcase. The proportion of new accounts with access to both editing environments will be gradually increased over time. Eventually all new users have the choice between the two editing environments.

Let's work together

  • Share your ideas and ask questions at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback.
  • Can you read and type in Korean or Japanese? Language engineer David Chan needs people who know which tools people use to type in some languages. If you speak Japanese or Korean, you can help him test support for these languages. Please see the instructions at mw:VisualEditor/IME Testing#What to test if you can help.
  • If your wiki would like VisualEditor enabled on another namespace, you can file a request in Phabricator. Please include a link to a community discussion about the requested change.
  • Please file requests for language-appropriate "Bold" and "Italic" icons for the styling menu in Phabricator.
  • The design research team wants to see how real editors work. Please sign up for their research program.
  • The weekly task triage meetings continue to be open to volunteers, usually on Tuesdays at 12:00 (noon) PDT (19:00 UTC). Learn how to join the meetings and how to nominate bugs at mw:VisualEditor/Weekly triage meetings. You do not need to attend the meeting to nominate a bug for consideration as a Q1 blocker, though. Instead, go to Phabricator and "associate" the main VisualEditor project with the bug.

If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact Elitre directly, so that she can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:01, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Behavioural issues at Talk Tagalog Requested move 25 July 2015

I have on the article talk page Talk:Tagalog#Requested move 25 July 2015 been accused of:

There have also been allegations of circular reasoning, illogic, etc, but these are content rather than behavioral issues. Behavioral issues should of course be discussed on user talk pages in the first instance, and not on article talk pages. This section is an invitation to discuss these behavioral issues. Andrewa (talk) 21:58, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I have posted heads-ups at the user talk pages of three users concerned [2] [3] [4] and hope they will all respond here.

I would also welcome comments from others involved in that discussion of course. Andrewa (talk) 22:41, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

The last three of the four bullets at the top of WP:WIKILAWYERING perfectly describe your disruption of the discussion at Talk:Tagalog language. It is clear and evident in the volume of pointless bandwidth which you have expended in pushing your position. Not a single editor has been swayed by your attempts to undermine the clear and overwhelming consensus which you disagree with. Your disagreement isn't based on any logic or desire to improve Wikipedia, but on a rigid adherence to your sometimes over-literal interpretation of various policies. You were the last editor to enter the discussion, but even with the abundance of argument that you have pushed (more than doubling the verbage that was there when you entered), not a single editor has been swayed to your position. Even your idiosyncratic interpretation of consensus is based on wikilawyering what is otherwise a plainly understood policy. I have no doubt that you are a good editor when editing content within your areas of expertise. But there is no evidence of that at Talk:Tagalog language where you overtly hope that the closing admin ignores an overwhelming consensus against your view and rules in favor of your minority view instead. I do, however, believe you when you have said that you will abide by the closing admin's decision. --Taivo (talk) 22:56, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I note that you do call my behaviour disruption of the discussion. Disruption is a far more serious charge than Wikilawyering, in my opinion.
But let's deal with the Wikilawyering allegations first.
...your attempts to undermine the clear and overwhelming consensus which you disagree with. Your disagreement isn't based on any logic or desire to improve Wikipedia, but on a rigid adherence to your sometimes over-literal interpretation of various policies.... That opinion of yours appears to defy WP:assume good faith. It is an uncalled for personal attack. I strongly reject the allegation.
Even your idiosyncratic interpretation of consensus is based on wikilawyering what is otherwise a plainly understood policy. Can you be specific? In exactly what way am I (deliberately, you claim) misinterpreting WP:consensus?
you overtly hope that the closing admin ignores an overwhelming consensus against your view and rules in favor of your minority view instead. I do overtly hope that the decision may be not to move, that much is true. And you have claimed, repeatedly, that a clear consensus exists to move. If that is true, what is the problem? I have claimed that it's not as clear as you make out, and even said that I'm glad it is not my decision. Is it a sin to hold or express that view? I do, however, believe you when you have said that you will abide by the closing admin's decision. Thank you. I have repeatedly said that I don't think it's a big deal, and that either name is acceptable.
What concerns me far more is the process. Your unfounded allegations would have deterred many editors. What evidence is there that they have not done so? What if other editors who might have !voted oppose looked at the hostile environment and decided not to get involved? That is one reason we have behavioural guidelines: So that people can feel safe expressing their honest opinions. Do you really think that this discussion has been such an environment? How can you claim consensus when you have so flagrantly defied Wikipedia behavioural guidelines in order to gain it? Perhaps I should even have said appear to gain it. Consensus gained by such tactics is no consensus at all.
That in my opinion is not sufficient to overturn the decision to move, if and when it occurs. The horse has bolted, and at the risk of mixing my metaphors, the bullets cannot be put back into the gun. I do not intend to invoke move review, and would oppose either a move review instigated by another editor or another subsequent move request, simply because they would not in my view improve Wikipedia.
But I would like to discourage you and others from repeating this false accusation of my having no desire to improve Wikipedia, and the similar personal attacks that have occurred during this discussion, whether against me or other editors (and I note here that I am not the only one who has been, falsely I believe, accused of disruption during this RM). It is not an acceptable tactic. Any suggestion that it has improved your chances of success is most regrettable, and frankly, I'm not at all sure how to avoid that impression if the move request now succeeds.
As another editor observed, In general the tone of this discussion has been very unfortunate. We should perhaps note that the editor in question is also opposed to the move, as far as I can see. Andrewa (talk) 02:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to debate you. You asked for our opinions and I gave you mine. You've posted nothing here which has changed my mind that you are engaging in wikilawyering at Talk:Tagalog language. You may be doing it unconsciously because that might simply be the way you always operate. Since you don't seem to write in any other way that may be the case. (For example, the ridiculous exchange when Manaus miswrote RfC instead of RfM. The banners on a Talk Page for both look identical and they can easily be mixed up.) I don't know. I've never encountered you before because you do not operate in my field of expertise and this is outside yours. What I know is that I am also not the only editor to have called you on your wikilawyering. I'm not a perfect editor, but when you mentioned that you felt I was personally attacking you, I responded by modifying my behavior. But in your case, your wikilawyering never ceased and seemed to get more intense and pervasive. When you tried to use the WP:TITLECHANGES argument based on the stub in 2003 without researching to see that the title changed in 2004 and then stayed stable for eleven more years, that was the last straw for me. Then instead of simply dropping the Title Change argument, you kept bringing it up (the latest time in your summary) as if it were something to bolster your argument. Then when you tried to misrepresent the clear meaning and Wikipedia-wide understanding of WP:CONSENSUS to keep pushing your view that the minority counts more than the overwhelming majority of editors who have reached a consensus. That just continued both your wikilawyering and your apparent lack of regard for the clear meaning of the word "consensus". Here's the part of WP:WIKILAWYERING that I think you don't understand: "Wikipedia policies and procedures should be interpreted with common sense to achieve the purpose of the policy... Typically, wikilawyering raises procedural or evidentiary points in a manner analogous to that used in formal legal proceedings... It can serve to evade an issue or obstruct the crafting of a workable solution." Like I said, I'm not going to debate you over this. You asked for our opinions and that's mine. If you think that five of you count more toward a consensus than 20 others, then you certainly don't understand the phrase, "Wikipedia policies and procedures should be interpreted with common sense". No one's a perfect editor--I certainly get under people's skins and sometimes cross the line into personal attacks. But I try to adjust my behavior when another editor points it out to me. Perhaps you need to take this opportunity to see how your own behavior crosses the line into wikilawyering. This is all that I will say on the matter. --Taivo (talk) 03:26, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I will say one more thing, though. Even though I think you are wikilawyering, you have been very polite throughout the whole discussion at Talk:Tagalog language. That is my particular weakness, that I don't modify my thoughts with proper Victorian phrasing. I am hard-nosed and thick-skinned and assume that everyone else is. But I honestly applaud you for retaining a very polite style. I do apologize for the harshness of some of my wording. I do not apologize for the point I'm trying to make, but for the occasional infelicitous choice of words and phrases. --Taivo (talk) 03:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you... (that comment crossed my post below somehow).
But I do not think it's just a matter of wording. You have explicitly and repeatedly accused me of bad faith and of disruption. And I want to understand why, and think I have the right and even responsibility to ask. Andrewa (talk) 03:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
You may not wish to debate this, but I am going to try to continue the discussion. You have answered my question, thank you... you tried to misrepresent the clear meaning and Wikipedia-wide understanding of WP:CONSENSUS to keep pushing your view that the minority counts more than the overwhelming majority of editors who have reached a consensus. Yes, my reading of WP:CONSENSUS is that a majority of editors (and I'm not sure that the adjective overwhelming is appropriate, I'll accept your count of 20 to 5, but that is five very experienced editors and RM tragics) can indeed be outvoted by a minority, if they present a better case based on the historical consensus represented by our official policies and guidelines. I cited WP:Wikipedia is not a democracy in support of this.
At the risk of labouring the point, is your reading of WP:consensus that this 20:5 majority is sufficient to call the consensus without considering the arguments at all? That seems to be what you are saying, and I don't want to misunderstand or misquote you. Andrewa (talk) 03:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes. 20 editors and admins who are just as experienced as the 5 do constitute a consensus (your attempt to characterize the 5 as "very experienced" while implying that the 20 are not was noted). The word "consensus" never means "minority" in English. When there are an even number of editors on each side of an issue, then the arguments become important. And in that case, in my experience, the closing admin almost always declares a "no consensus". The word consensus is always tied to either a majority or a compromise in English. (Remember the phrase from WP:WIKILAWYERING about "common sense"?) And your arguments are not superior in any regard. Indeed, the best argument in favor of returning the article to its stable title (Tagalog language) is from a policy (WP:TITLECHANGES) that you were trying to use to oppose the move actually. Eleven years of utter stability without even a request for move, however, speaks volumes for returning the article to its long-standing, long-stable title. That's the very point of WP:IAR and the wikilawyering warning about common sense. And the "historical consensus" is represented by the wording and interpretation of WP:NCLANG, which has been interpreted the same way since 2004: "When the language and ethnicity have the same name, then the language article is named "X language" and the ethnicity article is named "X people"." That's the "historical consensus". --Taivo (talk) 03:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
When there are an even number of editors on each side of an issue, then the arguments become important. (My emphasis.) No, WP:consensus#Determining consensus says no such thing. Does it? Where? It is just not any part of either the letter or the intention of the policy.
It may seem obvious to you that it should be there, in fact it obviously does seem obviously obvious to you that it should be there. But it isn't.
I am going to jump to a guess that you have been seriously misled by the essay at WP:Wikilawyering. It has no status as a policy or guideline... which just means, it hasn't ever been approved by the consensus-based approval process that policies and guidelines have undergone.
Having said that, it's an excellent essay. So why didn't it get the nod as a behavioral guideline? That's a very interesting question, and may also shed some light on what has gone wrong with the discussion at the RM.
Because I think we are agreed that the discussion there did not go well. Are you with me so far? Andrewa (talk) 04:34, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
The discussion has gone fine from my point of view. You have convinced no one with your legalism so, of course, you would think it hasn't been going well. Fortunately, the majority of Wikipedia editors are guided by common sense, including the common sense interpretation of policies and how they operate in Wikipedia. They are not swayed by the legalisms. That includes a majority of "very experienced" editors as well as admins. I am frustrated by "what I feel is your wikilawyering", but that doesn't mean that I am unsatisfied with the results of the discussion so far. The title Tagalog language was stable for eleven years before the "dead of night" move a couple of weeks ago by a "consensus" of four, none of whom were linguists, without proper notification at WP:LANG. Since then, an overwhelming majority of editors support a move back to that stable title despite the efforts of a tiny minority of editors who wish to ignore the historical and stable interpretation of WP:NCLANG. --Taivo (talk) 04:49, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'll take that on board, and reiterate that I find the discussion unsatisfactory, hence the move of some discussion to user talk pages to enable proper discussion of behaviour.
But you haven't answered the question. You say above When there are an even number of editors on each side of an issue, then the arguments become important. (My emphasis.) What makes you think that? I repeat, it doesn't appear anywhere in the policy, and doesn't seem to me to be consistent with its intent either. It seems to be based entirely on your idea of common sense. Andrewa (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Since there is not an even number of editors on each side of the issue at Talk:Tagalog language it's immaterial how WP:CONSENSUS applies in that case. Have you ever read the definition of "consensus" in a dictionary? That's "common sense" when applied to Wikipedia policy. Here's the definition: "An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole or by majority will." In no universe does the opinion of five over twenty constitute either the "group as a whole" or the "majority". But you keep returning to "what I interpret as your wikilawyering". You simply don't seem to be able to admit that an overwhelming majority of equally experienced editors and admins could ever disagree with you on the interpretation of Wikipedia policy at WP:NCLANG. So it's clear to me that you are not interested in a discussion here as much as you are interested in trying to force your legalistic view of the issue. I'm not buying it. I can't remember exactly when I started, but I've been on Wikipedia since the early 2000s. I know how Wikipedia works and especially how the language and linguistics articles work. If you are actually interested in something other than just quoting Wikipedia policy as holy writ, I might be willing to continue. Otherwise, have a pleasant day. --Taivo (talk) 05:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Let's get one thing clear: This discussion has absolutely no bearing on the RM result.
It is rather to give you and the others who have accused me of misconduct the opportunity to discuss that in an appropriate place. It's disappointing that the others have neither appeared here nor replied on their own talk pages. [5] [6]
That dictionary definition of consensus is interesting, but not the whole story. In the Uniting Church in Australia, of which I am a member, we use consensus-based decision making extensively, see Uniting Church in Australia#Decision making. I have seen a !vote where the count was more than a hundred to three (I was abstaining, but there weren't many of us either). The chairperson said "Then let's just hear from those three". Less than ten minutes later those three had won a unanimous verdict in their favour, and we were all happy that we had a good decision.
Building consensus requires listening. That's what we both need to do if we are to resolve this. Agree that quoting Wikipedia policy as holy writ is not part of that. (And quoting holy writ as holy writ doesn't work either, in my experience.) That would just be another form of legalism (of which I have also been accused). We need instead to build respect and understanding between editors. And we all need to have respect for the policies and guidelines as well, otherwise why have them?
Common sense means shared sense. It's actually a very similar concept to consensus. Andrewa (talk) 08:06, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Like a Virgin (song)

I started a move request. --George Ho (talk) 07:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Life on Mars (song)

I started another RM; make your decision. --George Ho (talk) 02:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi

If you find time for it please take a look at Security-related bills. Any help appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:36, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor update

This note is only delivered to English Wikipedia subscribers of the visual editor's newsletter.

The location of the visual editor's preference has been changed from the "Beta" tab to the "Editing" section of your preferences on this wiki. The setting now says Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta. This aligns en.wiki with almost all the other WMF wikis; it doesn’t mean the visual editor is complete, or that it is no longer “in beta phase” though.

This action has not changed anything else for editors: it still honours editors’ previous choices about having it on or off; logged-out users continue to only have access to wikitext; the “Edit” tab is still after the “Edit source” one. You can learn more at the visual editor’s talk page.

We don’t expect this to cause any glitches, but in case your account no longer has the settings that you want, please accept our apologies and correct it in the Editing tab of Special:Preferences. Thank you for your attention, Elitre (WMF) -16:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Claude "Pop" Laval

RM still ongoing; I invite you to improve consensus. --George Ho (talk) 10:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #5—2015

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Did you know?
You can use the visual editor on smartphones and tablets.

Screenshot showing the menu for switching from the wikitext editor to VisualEditor

Click the pencil icon to open the editor for a page. Inside that, use the gear menu in the upper right corner to "Switch to visual editing".

The editing button will remember which editing environment you used last time, and give you the same one next time. The desktop site will be switching to a system similar to this one in the coming months.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has fixed many bugs, added new features, and made some small design changes. They post weekly status reports on mediawiki.org. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are improving support for languages like Japanese and Arabic, making it easier to edit on mobile devices, and providing rich-media tools for formulæ, charts, galleries and uploading.

Recent improvements

Educational features: The first time you use the visual editor, it now draws your attention to the Link and ⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽ tools. When you click on the tools, it explains why you should use them. (T108620) Alongside this, the welcome message for new users has been simplified to make editing more welcoming. (T112354) More in-software educational features are planned.

Links:  It is now easier to understand when you are adding text to a link and when you are typing plain text next to it. (T74108, T91285) The editor now fully supports ISBN, PMID or RFC numbers. (T109498, T110347, T63558)  These "magic links" use a custom link editing tool.

Uploads:  Registered editors can now upload images and other media to Commons while editing. Click the new tab in the "Insert Images and media" tool. You will be guided through the process without having to leave your edit. At the end, the image will be inserted. This tool is limited to one file at a time, owned by the user, and licensed under Commons's standard license. For more complex situations, the tool links to more advanced upload tools. You can also drag the image into the editor. This will be available in the wikitext editor later.

Mobile:  Previously, the visual editor was available on the mobile Wikipedia site only on tablets. Now, editors can use the visual editor on any size of device. (T85630)  Edit conflicts were previously broken on the mobile website. Edit conflicts can now be resolved in both wikitext and visual editors. (T111894) Sometimes templates and similar items could not be deleted on the mobile website. Selecting them caused the on-screen keyboard to hide with some browsers. Now there is a new "Delete" button, so that these things can be removed if the keyboard hides. (T62110) You can also edit table cells in mobile now.

Rich editing tools:  You can now add and edit sheet music in the visual editor. (T112925)  There are separate tabs for advanced options, such as MIDI and Ogg audio files. (T114227 and T113354)  When editing formulæ and other blocks, errors are shown as you edit. It is also possible to edit some types of graphs; adding new ones, and support for new types, will be coming.

On the English Wikipedia, the visual editor is now automatically available to anyone who creates an account. The preference switch was moved to the normal location, under Special:Preferences.

Future changes

You will soon be able to switch from the wikitext to the visual editor after you start editing. (T49779) Previously, you could only switch from the visual editor to the wikitext editor. Bi-directional switching will make possible a single edit tab. (T102398) This project will combine the "Edit" and "Edit source" tabs into a single "Edit" tab, similar to the system already used on the mobile website. The "Edit" tab will open whichever editing environment you used last time.

Let's work together

If you can't read this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

— Whatamidoing (WMF) 04:16, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Relisting

Just a heads up, relists for RMs now need to go at the end of the nomination string to work. This was changed at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves/Archive 28#Changing relisting conventions to be easier and more intuitive.. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 10:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, I missed that (obviously). Andrewa (talk) 19:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Grid connection for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grid connection is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grid connection until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. No such user (talk) 15:18, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Andrewa/Archive_8&oldid=803571711"