User talk:Gettinwikiwidit

Welcome![edit]

Hi Gettinwikiwidit! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! GeneralNotability (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Gettinwikiwidit! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, My account appears to keep resetting, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help me understand[edit]

why it was necessary to add yet another link to the Theodore Roosevelt article with this edit. There are now 8 Wikilinks to Roosevelt in the article (2 of which are in the Infobox), so I need to understand why it was necessary to add another one. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 00:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It makes this document consistent with the other Presidents. The consistency helps tools like DBPedia parsing. It's also worth asking, why not have the extra link? Is this anything more than personal preference? Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I asked because I wanted to know - I figured you had to have some sort of reason for doing so - yay for DBpedia, a project I was now and still remain unfamiliar with - since you performed a similar edit on so many other US Presidential articles. Also, not a matter of personal preference, it's in the MOS, at MOS:DUPLINK.

Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead.

Shearonink (talk) 03:35, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also this was an info box and the doc on repeated links explicitly mentions that links may be repeated in infoboxes. I think this is precisely for parsing tools such as DBpedia. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 01:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point about Infoboxes, it's just that so many times repeated links creep into an article and duplicate linking is usually to be avoided. I'm not sure that DBpedia must have every mention of a person within an infobox Wikilinked/hyperlinked but, then again, technical aspects of WP are not my main jam, editing and writing are. Shearonink (talk) 03:35, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shearonink: No worries. I've tried to explain why they're useful in infoboxes. I'm not sure I understand why they're to be avoided elsewhere. Is the difference in highlighting distracting in the body of the text? Does it make it less usable for the visually impaired? I'm honestly not trying to force my viewpoint, but if I understood the reasoning I could factor it in to my decisions. Moreover, I intend to respect the style standards. If that's the only reason, I can appreciate that as well, but as I say I have respected the standard as written. Regards, Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 07:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Other than infoboxes, it's the MOS/style standard for Wikipedia articles to have the first instance of mentioning another WP article to be hyperlinked. I suppose you could look at the talk page for the MOS:Linking to see how that standard was arrived at but it's been that way ever since I started editing back in the 2010s. Makes sense to me, I think repeated linking of an article can be visually jarring to readers. Shearonink (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shearonink: Gotcha. Thanks Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To use the McKinley article as an example. It's more important to link that Theodore Roosevelt was McKinley successor as president, rather then his having been McKinley vice president. GoodDay (talk) 02:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: Is this a principle articulated in the MOS? I don't see it there. As mentioned above, duplicate links are explicitly allowed in the MOS for "readers" which I take to mean tools such as DBpedia mentioned in my commit message. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 06:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know, but it's been in practice for quite some time, not to double link in the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: Well now you know it's explicitly allowed according to the MOS. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't implement it. For example, it would look quite weird at George Washington's infobox, concerning John Adams. GoodDay (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: You are explicitly disregarding the guidance in the MOS. Bring it up with them. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read up on WP:IAR, which is this case is required for those infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 00:35, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: To be clear, I don't recognize you as an authority. Please discontinue this conversation as it is unwelcome. Further posts will be considered harassment. Regards, Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You pinged me here, with your questions. Now you're complaining that I'm responding to your questions. Please then, stop pinging me. PS - I don't like your attitude. GoodDay (talk) 00:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You initiated the conversation. I don't like your attitude. Please compare to the preceding conversation which was civil. Now stop. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 00:52, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]