User talk:Talk about confusing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk about confusing, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Talk about confusing! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Talk about confusing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Blythwood (talk) 22:19, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Bessemer[edit]

Great question-Anthony Bessemer’s a bit of a niche interest! There isn’t much information on him available, and this is a quick response so I haven't been able to consult everything you could. I should say that I’m interested in him from a history of printing and type design perspective–the sources I know mostly cover his later career in the UK, and I get the feeling that this is most of the coverage of him that there’s ever been. (I should add that I set out to write a basic quick Wikipedia page–I didn’t copy out every source I’d seen, and I've never read all the sources I've seen mentioned.)

Starting with the pseudonym point-can very well believe it (or at least that his name was spelled differently), but in 1795 he sold a font to the Enschedé type foundry in the Netherlands while he was working in Paris, and they reproduced this in a history in 1908, Charles Enschede’s 1908 Fonderies de caracteres et leur materiel dans le Pays-Bas (Type Foundries of the Netherlands, which I haven’t read, mind, although the 1969 JPHS source provides a picture from it) citing it as cut by him. So clearly they were aware of who he was. It doesn’t say he was Minister for Bread, but it does say “during the revolution he was an active member of the Commissariat department”–that said, apart from Enschedé all the sources they cite are British, and there’s no indication the author consulted French or Dutch sources. I've had a quick look and here's the text from Bessemer's autobiography, which I hadn't read up to now. Is that your source?

He was still residing in Paris at the time of the great French Revolution, and, as an active member of the Commissariat Department, he had to distribute a certain dole of bread and rice to the starving thousands, who formed a long queue for many hours every morning before the municipal bakery was opened. Everyone in Paris at that time felt the pinch for food. My father had a small estate some twenty miles out of town, and when he saw the probability of a famine, he had a few sacks of wheat taken to his house in Paris, and there secretly stowed away; for a knowledge of their presence would have brought the hungry mob upon him. It was my mother's task at night, when the household had retired to rest, to grind some of this wheat in a coffee mill, so that cakes might be made for the morrow's breakfast; and thus in secret my parents enjoyed the luxury of whole-meal bread of their own manufacture. My father was most anxious to return to England, but it was very difficult to get away. He could obtain nothing from his bankers but the paper money then well known as Assignats, which were issued for amounts as low as fifty sous, or about two shillings in English value. Fortunately a short lull occurred in those stormy times, and, taking advantage of the opportunity, my parents escaped to England, bringing with them about £6,000 in nominal value in Assignats, and only a very small sum in cash.

It is a bit fanciful! Although the stories of refugees often are. Bessemer was writing about events that happened to his father almost a century before, and I can imagine it being a bit romanticised, shall we say. Artistically he was clearly a virtuoso engraver, even if a lot of his work is rather hard to love. Lane doesn’t know when he died but he thinks it was after 1840 (he doesn't say why, although again I haven't read the whole of Bessemer's autobiography so maybe it's in there). Incidentally, I’ve removed one thing from the article: I think for some reason I believed he did work for Vincent Figgins, but re-examining the sources I looked at I can’t find reference to this, and I think I may have misunderstood something.

The remaining sources cited in JPHS are:

  • Hine, Hitchin Worthies (1932)-I haven't seen this
  • Johnson, Typographia (1824)-just lists Catherwood's foundry that he later formed a partnership with, see Reed (below)
  • Reed, A History of the Old Letter Foundries (edition edited by A.F. Johnson, 1952)-I don't have this to hand although the original 1887 edition is digitised; JPHS doesn't mention anything not in the original text
  • Caslon's Circular July 1880-not seen, but presume it's the text printed in an 1880 American printing journal, reprinting a letter from Henry Bessemer; it seems to tell more or less the same story as his autobiography

You may find contacting the PHS worthwhile in case they can suggest something, but to be honest I doubt they're going to have any sources from the Continent. I think the obvious source I can point you towards would be Enschedé but really I think for your enquiry you need to speak to a French historian who specialises in the revolutionary period. Blythwood (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at People's Republic of Korea, you may be blocked from editing. "Not possible"? You dont get to choose wether an article is relevant for the article or not! It may also have been added by a person who used it for the text but whom didn't know how to reference correctly! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 11:39, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vif12vf: you are the one disruptive. You are the one who is taking the text for other than what it is for. And your 3RR. See WP:OWNER Talk about confusing (talk) 12:58, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing references[edit]

Hi! A request: before you remove a reference as unused (as you did at ESMOD), could you perhaps first check why it is unused, and if it's not for a good reason, simply undo the edit that made it redundant. That would usually be more helpful. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:53, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And again today, on Qatar Airways Andy Dingley (talk) 12:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing valid edits[edit]

Please discuss your changes to the article before you remove edits. I have reverted and posted to the talk page of Friedreich's ataxia. Thank you--Akrasia25 (talk) 15:20, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PH wikidata[edit]

Thanks for your edits to Template:PH wikidata. They are a real improvement.

For reference, you might like to look at Module:WikidataIB which has the ability to fetch quantities from Wikidata and format their display with multipliers like thousand, million, etc. There are examples at Module talk:WikidataIB/testing #Scaling quantities. If you don't like the result of |scale=auto, you can still calculate a fixed scaling factor as you've done in Template:PH wikidata. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:15, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@RexxS: Gosh! I wish I'd known this earlier! I can change it soon.
While you're still on the line, another thing I need is getting 'latest' and 'second latest'. I can see 'latest' is easy. And sorting is easy, but is there any way of getting 'number 2' from the sorted list? Or general, can one get the nth element from a list.
Also, can you remind me about language – e.g. getting motto in English only. Talk about confusing (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean getting the value of a qualifier that is the second (or nth) latest? That's really hard work using template functions, but fairly straightforward in Lua. Perhaps you could give me a concrete example of what you want to do and I'll happily help you out with the coding. I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for with language, so could you point me to an article or Wikidata entry that you're trying to get the value from (perhaps you want to select a particular language for monolingual text? or did you mean an English translation of a Latin motto)? --RexxS (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RexxS:
  • for instance Tudela, Cebu Q316564 (but all similar the same) have a number of P|1082 (population) each with a quantifier P|585 (point-in-time). So the population could be ordered in date (newest start).
  • for instance Brussels Q239 there is a number of official name P|1448 with different languages. Not qualifiers exactly. – Talk about confusing (talk) 06:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have just to use this module. But these days I can't understand these questions like before. Could you write it down so I can do it. The first type is easy, just like anything such as Alcantara, Cebu. (In fact {{PH wikidata}}). The next type is a bit more complicated: in Cebu there is a table of municipalities. These were written before WikidataIB was working. So OK, but slow. Now I would like a new column, Revenue, using WikidataIB. Using scale – can't find that. And maybe go back to change what is already there for the other columns. – Talk about confusing (talk) 07:28, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps some examples of what the module can do may help. For article Tudela (Q316564), property population (P1082), with qualifier point in time (P585):
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1082 |qual=P585 |qid=Q316564 |list=ubl}} →
    • 3,561 (1903)
    • 4,896 (1918)
    • 6,703 (1939)
    • 6,837 (1948)
    • 7,380 (1960)
    • 8,052 (1970)
    • 9,020 (1975)
    • 9,611 (1980)
    • 9,537 (1990)
    • 9,358 (1995)
    • 10,401 (2000)
    • 11,266 (2007)
    • 9,859 (2010)
    • 11,296 (2015)
    • 11,304 (2020) Edit this on Wikidata
So far I haven't implemented anything but a simple alphabetic sort, but it's possible to add other types if there is demand for them.
For article Tudela (Q316564), property official name (P1448):
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1448 |qid=Q316564}} → Municipality of Tudela Edit this on Wikidata
For article City of Brussels (Q239), property official name (P1448):
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1448 |qid=Q239}} → Ville de Bruxelles Edit this on Wikidata (no official name in English, so it picks one)
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1448 |qid=Q239 |lang=nl}} → Ville de Bruxelles Edit this on Wikidata
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1448 |qid=Q239 |lang=fr}} → Ville de Bruxelles Edit this on Wikidata
For article Tokyo (Q1490), property population (P1082):
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=n |P1082 |qid=Q1490 |scale=6 |qual=ALL}} → 14.05 million (2020), 13.16 million (census, 2010), 12.58 million (census, 2005), 13.51 million (census, 2015), 14.26 million (2022) Edit this on Wikidata
Module:WikidataIB has a fair amount of internationalisation coded-in, so it works quite well in other language Wikipedias and in Commons. For numbers and dates (and monolingual text), you can select to see the results in a different language by adding |lang= with the ISO-style code used by Wikimedia:
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |qid=Q51673 |P569 |fwd=ALL |osd=no |lang=fr}} → 14 janvier 83 av. J.-C., 83 av. J.-C. Edit this on Wikidata
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |fwd=ALL |osd=no |P582 |qid=Q2269 |lang=zh |qual=ALL}} → 2010年 (在1840年之前, 在1820年之后) Edit this on Wikidata
Perhaps if you look through the examples at Module talk:WikidataIB/testing, you may find some ideas for how it can be used. Suggestions for improvements are always welcome. --RexxS (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention about the table. We don't have consensus to create prose inside articles from Wikidata, and User:ListeriaBot, which normally creates tables from Wikidata, isn't used in article space on English Wikipedia as a result. I can use WikidataIB to create single column tables, but to automatically reproduce the table in Cebu, with another column for revenue would need a new module or function just to do that job.

For article Cebu (Q13786), property contains the administrative territorial entity (P150):

Here's how to turn it into a simple sorted table 

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Municipality
<tr><td>
{{#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |ps=1 |P150 |qid=Q13786 |sorted=y |sep="</td></tr><tr><td>"}}
</td></tr>
|}
Municipality
Alcantara
Alcoy
Alegria
Aloguinsan
Argao
Asturias
Badian
Balamban
Bantayan
Barili
Bogo
Boljoon
Borbon
Carcar
Carmen
Catmon
Compostela
Consolacion
Cordova
Daanbantayan
Dalaguete
Danao
Dumanjug
Ginatilan
Liloan
Madridejos
Malabuyoc
Medellin
Minglanilla
Moalboal
Naga
Oslob
Pilar
Pinamungajan
Poro
Ronda
Samboan
San Fernando
San Francisco
San Remigio
Santa Fe
Santander
Sibonga
Sogod
Tabogon
Tabuelan
Talisay
Toledo
Tuburan
Tudela

I'll have a look at how much work would be needed to adapt the module to make a table for you, but You're obviously free to re-use the code yourself if you want to experiment in Module:Sandbox or a sub-page of that. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is good, anything to makes things easier (and faster). On the original work, I see almost what is wanted. The only thing left there is not displaying the currency name Philippine peso. That's not a qualifier, it's something similar to language. But it's not lang. It's just could unit in fact there was nothing stopped me changing from Philippine peso to sq metre! Within scale does it make 4 significant figures (2 integer and 2 decimal). In order tables would need to line-up against decimal point. Or add padding.
The outcome of Tudela / population. Currently in any order. Would a simple date-sorted table be easy. And having that, can it find the second element? (Either directly, or maybe somehow it can lose the first element.)
@RexxS: Are dates just numbers with lang around it. I mean, does lang=fr and lang=zh have the core date?
The table would be fine just as columns – the whole table includes data which isn't in wikidata. And some of the columns are options.
They is plenty to keep me busy. Thanks – Talk about confusing (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorting property values on qualifier dates can be complicated, but it's something I intend to implement in the future. To answer your question about dates, I'll show you how Wikidata stores a date in an item chosen at random.
For the date of death (P570) of Norman J. Rees (Q21176627), we can display:
1 February 1976 or February 1, 1976 or 1er février 1976 or 1976年2月1日, etc.
In Wikidata, it's stored like this:
table#1 {
    table#2 {
        ["id"] = "Q21176627$38C26863-CF40-47B9-8029-B4BE7E06EDD0",
        ["mainsnak"] = table#3 {
            ["datatype"] = "time",
            ["datavalue"] = table#4 {
                ["type"] = "time",
                ["value"] = table#5 {
                    ["after"] = 0,
                    ["before"] = 0,
                    ["calendarmodel"] = "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1985727",
                    ["precision"] = 11,
                    ["time"] = "+1976-02-01T00:00:00Z",
                    ["timezone"] = 0,
                },
            },
            ["property"] = "P570",
            ["snaktype"] = "value",
        },
        ["rank"] = "normal",
        ["type"] = "statement",
    },
}
The timestamp is "+1976-02-01T00:00:00Z" and we have to extract that and manipulate it to produce dates in a format we want to use. Hope that helps --RexxS (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Rexss: It looks to me that all the dates are the same, so it will be easy to sort. In fact the only problem could be with the ending Z, Z-Zulu which means UTC, if there is any other kind. Military time zones. And there must be a sign at the front – - means BCE.
I think you missed my question about currency name. That seems like a different tag from qualifier. It's called unit, where eg 'Philippines peso' lives, but in fact there no kind of validate check, and it can be changed to another name, such as 'sq metre'! I don't what to change any, just want to miss it.
I don't see |scale= in the document. Maybe there might be something more in {{wdib}}. Another question – there would be just one parameter (|qid=). This can be any Q but if it's the 'calling page' then it is be left out. Would there be a probably any problem haven't the parameter set even though the same. What I getting at is that there is no need for the correct {{#if:{{{2|}}}|yes|no}} outside the {{wdib}}.
On Friday I have it sorted, got the answers looking good. But now I can't remember what I wrote. I which I'd written it down. Sorry to be so dumb, but it's been awhile since I used my brain.
This is how I made the part of {{PH wikidata}}:
<code>| revenue = {{safesubst:formatnum:{{safesubst:rounddown|{{safesubst:#expr:{{safesubst:formatnum:{{safesubst:#invoke:String|replace|{{safesubst:#invoke:String|replace|{{safesubst:#if:{{{2|}}} |{{safesubst:#invoke:Wikidata|getValueFromID|{{{2}}}|P3087|FETCH_WIKIDATA}} |{{safesubst:#invoke:Wikidata|getValue|P3087|FETCH_WIKIDATA}} }}| %D+||plain=false}}|±[%d%.][%d%.]*||plain=false}}|R}} / {{safesubst:#switch:{{{3}}}|one=1|thousand=1000|million=1000000|billion=1000000000|trillion=1000000000000|#default=1000000}}}}|1}}}} {{safesubst:#if:{{{4|}}}||{{safesubst:#if:{{{3|}}}|{{{3}}}|million{{safesubst:hsp}}}}}}</code>
Could you write it in {{wdib}}?
– Talk about confusing (talk) 22:48, 3 March 2019 (UTC) [apart from being old, I had a stroke five years ago, which can give me trouble with writing / speaking – reading / listening is OK-ish. Sometimes I can't remember words, sometimes my brain writes words different from what I want. Also, it can take me so long, by the time I finish, I can't remember what I meant to say!][reply]

Your help desk question[edit]

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:09, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Kaske[edit]

Hey there. I'm currently in the process of expanding this article, and have started by pulling and adding sources. Your help with editing the article would be appreciated, but if you are interested in removing material, it would be most helpful to wait until I have finished adding it. The unused references are there so that I can add material sourced to them, including "his life's work" and "the proper bibliography" that you referred to. The man wrote some 60 articles, according to one obituary, so expanding the article in full will take some time. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 01:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameunique: This is an encyclopedia, not a laboratory. Each editor has a sandbox, and that is where you may try changes. (Right at the top of page, near your name at the screen icon). No-one will worry. Once you have what you want, then you can move it to the main page. Also of course one can try things offline, just in your own computer, e.g. Notepad. Easier, but that has limitations. – Talk about confusing (talk) 20:59, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you found this two-day process burdensome, Talk about confusing. You should find the references section more to your liking now. More to come once Magister regis: studies in honor of Robert Earl Kaske, which contains both a biography and a bibliography, is in hand. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Andy Dingley. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of XML and HTML character entity references without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

== 

==
 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DannyS712 (talk) 00:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– Talk about confusing (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DannyS712 (talk) 00:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

:Template:PH wikidata part 2[edit]

@Rexxs: I am stuck in my initial try to change my big complicated scaled |revenue=. I got it far enough, until I tried to get rid off the currency (Philippines peso)). There must be a lot of hiding text, because if I tried {{String|replace|...}} as used in other parts, it doesn't work. Ideally I would just get the 'unit' part, leaving just the number. I've sure it must be similar to |lang=, rather than |qual=. – Talk about confusing (talk) 23:36, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Ruger Security-Six, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 01:26, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BilCat: And you stop making stupid blunders. Try use your sandbox yourself. Make your own, rather than leave it for others. – Talk about confusing (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You removed a long list from the article, much of it cited, without any explanation. How is that "stupid blunders" on my part?? - BilCat (talk) 01:35, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@BilCat: Category:Pages with broken reference names (for people who can read). Stop making a mess of the encyclopedia. – Talk about confusing (talk) 01:40, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And you need to start using edit summaries so people who can read can read your reasons for your edits. This isn't the first time you've been told that. - BilCat (talk) 01:44, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

San Remo edits[edit]

While personally I have no serious objection to your reworking on the page, it is considered impolite to impose your version of what you think the references/citations/notes and so on should look like, particularly if you have not had any prior editing involvement on the page (not to mention that this and other Is/Pal pages are restricted for editing). There is no single general rule for these things, I have not myself seen another page laid out in quite the way you have done it here. If you want to see an Is/Pal article fitting the GA criteria and how it deals with this, you could take a look at Balfour Declaration At any rate, you might consider first raising up this sort of thing on an article talk page in the first instance.Selfstudier (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Talk about confusing and Template:TheFinalBall. --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:16, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia! However, you should know that it is not a good idea to remove citations or information sourced through citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to Boeing E-3 Sentry. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Links not used as references, notes or citations are not as important, such as those listed in the "External links" or "Further reading" sections, but bad links in those sections should also be fixed if possible. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 93 (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that and go a bit further. Please self revert any further instances of you doing that. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 00:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References are for references. Anything else should be left in your sandbox. That's what it's for. And suck eggs. Talk about confusing (talk) 00:17, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Brownsville, Brooklyn. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. John from Idegon (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@John from Idegon: I don't know what you're talking about. I would like an apology. Teaching grandmother to suck eggs Talk about confusing (talk) 03:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That won't be happening. I'd suggest not telling other editors to suck eggs when they point out to you a consistant error you're making. Don't remove dead links; instead tag them or replace them with a working link yourself. That's the SOP here. I fail to understand why that concept is so difficult for you to grasp. Or is it that I asked you to take responsibility for your actions that you've been repeatedly counseled on and undo them? So, do I owe you an apology for you telling me to suck eggs or for asking you be responsible for your own actions? Which is it? Enquiring minds want to know! John from Idegon (talk) 04:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing dead references[edit]

Hello Talk about confusing, thanks for your recent edits. I see that you have been removing a lot of dead references from articles, it would be better to tag these references with {{deadlink}} so that editors can attempt to find alternate references or archive the dead ones, as per WP:DEADREF. Greyjoy talk 11:38, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Geogene (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019[edit]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have been blocked immediately due to the fact that multiple users have complained to you and/or warned you to cease your edits, and you have either ignored them or responded with personal attacks. This would be a serious problem in any scenario, but is extremely alarming coming from a brand new account that appears to be running unapproved bot scripts (note that, for the sake of argument, it does not matter whether you actually are or just appear to be). This needs to be investigated and you need to engage in your fullest capacity if you wish to be unblocked. ~Swarm~ {talk} 22:09, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Swarm:
I don't understand anything about this. All I have been doing is Category:Pages with broken reference names. About a week ago there were about 3500 errors, but I have corrected more than 600. That's about 75 a day. All done it manually, I certainly don't do anything with a bot.
Nor do I call this 'disruptive editing'. Out of the 600+ correction, you can count the people who didn't like them on one hand – less than 1%. Polite goes along way, if they ever knew how to say it.
Certainly I haven't made any personal attacks, even though John from Idegon made some to me, to me out of the blue. For him, after I removed from Brownsville, Brooklyn one dead reference and added a {{convert}} he was the one who made personal attacks to me. Maybe he should read again WP:OWN.
  • Several times I'd find a error which had been there for five years or more. What's the use of getting it now. They'd been without it for so long, there time had gone.
Of more than the 600 errors I corrected, I guess about a half are from what I call 'rm dead ref'.
In fact I did ask in Village Pump just a few days ago Strange things oldid=888298623. Basically, here for instance, {{infobox}} any parameter, or rather not-parameter, can sit in there, and no one can really look. OK it shows at the top of an edit, but who cares to look? White Eagles and {{Infobox military unit}} there were not-parameter |ideology=|{{plainlist|
  • [[:Ultranationalism|Turkish ultranationalism]]
  • [[:Neo-fascism]]<ref>[https://www.politico.eu/article/turkish-grey-wolves-target-chinese/ Turkish Grey Wolves target ‘Chinese’]. ''POLITICO''. Authors - Aykan Erdemir and Merve Tahiroglu. Published 30 July 2015. Retrieved 22 April 2018.</ref><ref>[https://www.trackingterrorism.org/group/grey-wolves Grey Wolves]. ''Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium''. Retrieved 22 April 2018.</ref><ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/11824202/Adriana-Lima-tricked-into-flashing-neo-Fascist-symbol.html Adriana Lima 'tricked into flashing neo-Fascist symbol']. ''The Telegraph''. Author - Louisa Loveluck. Published 25 August 2015. Retrieved 22 April 2018.</ref>
  • [[Pan-Turkism]] and [[Turanism]]<ref name="Hunter"/><ref name="Østergaard"/>
  • [[:Anti-Armenian sentiment]]<ref name=spiegel>{{cite web|first=Renate|last=Flottau|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,580422,00.html|title=Albania's House at the End of the World: Family Denies Organ Harvesting Allegations|work=Der Spiegel|date=22 September 2008|accessdate=4 August 2012}}</ref>
  • [[:Anti-Greek sentiment]]<ref name="spiegel"/>
  • [[:Anti-Kurdish sentiment]]<ref name="Østergaard"/><ref>{{cite news|last1=Humer|first1=Stephan|title=Turkish elections: Turkey's Kurd-hating Grey Wolves spreading neo-nazi poison across Europe|url=http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/turkish-elections-turkeys-kurd-hating-grey-wolves-spreading-neo-nazi-poison-across-europe-1504725|work=[[International Business Times]]|date=5 June 2015}}</ref><ref name="lefigaro"/><ref name="2013 report"/>
  • [[:Anti-communism]]<ref name="Atkins"/><ref name="crisisgroup"/>}}
There are plenty, at least three times a day, where I take them strong editing to arrive at the good site. In the last 24 hours, for instance, I have taken
In fact, anything could be hidden, in plain sight. It doesn't matter. Similarly is anywhere where it lets uncontrolled text <!-- holding anything -->. So in {{references}} all manner of "old references" can be found. As far as I'm concern, all "old references" should be straight in the bin. Or maybe move it into the editor's own sandbox.
– Talk about confusing (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And none of that will get you unblocked. You've been warned by multiple editors that what you are doing is out of WP:PAG, and indeed been blocked for it, and you respond with more (incorrect) justification for your behavior. That will not get it. No one has "attacked" you, however you have attacked those warning you. If you want to be unblocked, you'll need to read all the dozens of links you've been given, understand them, and explain to an administrator why what you did is wrong, and what you plan on doing to keep it from happening again. This isn't a court; you do not have the right of appeal. You're blocked indefinitely. That does not mean infinitely. You've been counseled by multiple editors (whose aggregated Wikipedia experience totals close to 50 person/years) that what you are doing is wrong, but you with your +/- 12 weeks you are still arguing that you alone are correct and everyone else is wrong. Best advice is to take a week, read policy and guidelines and come back to make a valid unblock request. I doubt anyone holds any animosity against you; I certainly don't. As an editor who works primarily on high school articles, I encounter know it all noobs daily. Either they learn to back off their misconceptions about Wikipedia and listen to those more experienced, or they go away. Ref cleanup is a thankless task (much of it is done by registered bots just because of that), and if you want to do that according to policies and guidelines, you'd be a great asset to the community. But being an off the reservation rouge isn't helpful to anyone. Not your fellow editors, not the readers and most of all, not yourself. Please take this for what it is...advice on how to get out from under this. We were all new once, and even with 8 years experience I still screw up plenty. No one will hold this against you if you simply listen. Best plan for now...walk away for a day, come back and study, and in about a week, make a reasoned unblock request. I've told you how above. Good luck. John from Idegon (talk) 03:29, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you "don't understand anything about" why you are blocked, that is a serious problem. Let me break it down for you, though it may take me awhile to go over the drastic extent of your disruption:

  • "Correcting" errors: You claim you're merely correcting errors. It appears that you don't see the difference between actually fixing errors and systematically deleting them out of either laziness or terrible judgment. Let's just take a look at one of the many examples from the massive mess you've made. Here, we have a statement that is sourced with a named ref. In other words, it should be piggybacking off of a "parent" ref, but the parent ref of that name cannot be found. That's a minor, fixable error. It simply requires a bit of time and effort and nuanced investigation to fix. You chose not to fix it, but to simply delete it, leaving the statement unsourced. Had you actually been trying to correct errors, rather than mindlessly deleting them, you could have easily found that the ref was added here, by Beyond My Ken, a highly experienced editor, who had created a named ref called "abc" in the same edit. If you check that ref, you can easily confirm that the statement was indeed supposed to be sourced to "abc", and that "abr" was a simple typo. In other words, you deleted a reference, for no other reason than that it contained a typo. That's seriously disruptive as a one-time blunder, but you've repeated this on an uncountable number of references. This whole project is literally nothing than a reflection of references. Broken refs are a serious problem, and each and every one requires a nuanced, thoughtful investigation as to why it is broken and how it can be rescued. Systematically deleting them is unbelievably counterproductive, because, as EdJohnston phrased it, you're "deleting evidence of a fixable problem". You've created a huge mess for the community to clean up, to the extent that we may never actually be able to fully repair the damage you've caused. If you can't even begin to understand that, then you have no business editing here. ~Swarm~ {talk} 12:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bot-like editing: as has been explained to you, per WP:MEATBOT, it doesn't actually matter whether or not you're genuinely using bot scripts. Crawling a category and performing systematic, thoughtless edits in a way that causes disruption is considered to be no different from actually running an unauthorized bot, and engaging in such behavior without stopping when asked is, by itself, cause for a block under bot policy. ~Swarm~ {talk} 12:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ignoring warnings: I count eleven warnings or similar messages regarding your editing that were issued to you on your talk page, prior to your block. Refusing to heed valid feedback from the community is, in itself, considered to be disruptive editing. ~Swarm~ {talk} 12:36, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refusal to communicate: Communication is mandatory. By my count, no less than seven of the aforementioned complaints on your talk page went without any reply. ~Swarm~ {talk} 12:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personal attacks: undue personal commentary is prohibited. Some gems from your talk page: you are the one disruptive, stop making stupid blunders, for people who can read, Stop making a mess of the encyclopedia, Teaching grandmother to suck eggs. ~Swarm~ {talk} 12:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Edit warring: anytime you've been reverted, you've immediately responded by edit warring, usually with much more experienced editors who you completely dismiss with condescending edit summaries. Here's one example. Here's another. Here's another.
  • Competence is required: You seem completely unable to be reasoned with, and in spite of repeated challenges to your editing, you've dismissed complaints at every turn, and you seem completely unable or unwilling to participate in a collaborative project in good faith. This is a serious academic project rooted in community consensus, good faith collaboration, and collegial civility and respect. The fundamental ability to conduct yourself reasonably in a general sense is required. You do not get to lecture your superiors to "read", "use their head", or "keep it in their sandbox". Your participation here has demonstrated nothing but the opposite of competence and trustworthiness. Unless you're willing to commit, seriously, to understanding and rectifying all of these issues, and will help with the massive cleanup process that lies ahead, it's highly unlikely anyone is going to unblock you. ~Swarm~ {talk} 13:14, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeprecatedFixerBot: Unrelated to the "dead ref" issues, you were also involved in a disruptive incident in which identified a bot that was making a minor mistake. Again, rather than simply fixing the mistake, you blindly reverted the bot, overturning the bot's enforcement of a community mandate, and counterproductively making cleanup more difficult. You also left the bot operator a nonsensical message, and ignored a warning there, further reinforcing the notion that you are unable and unwilling to effectively communicate. You werereported to AN/I, and everyone criticized you for your disruptive editing, but beyond blaming others and misrepresenting the situation. You showed no indication that you understood that you were being disruptive, or that you even understood what was going on. ~Swarm~ {talk} 14:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
After running into a couple of TAC's disruptive edits, I came here to see whether to post a warning or report it at ANI. Looks like someone beat me to it. TAC should not assume that "you can count the people who didn't like them on one hand". Others like me may have come here, seen that it has been handled, and gone away without commenting. --Guy Macon (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Bessemer, again[edit]

  • Hi Talk about confusing, while it relates to the end of his career rather than the start, you may be interested in the new source I've had the chance to read if you're still monitoring developments on Anthony Bessemer. I'm afraid as you haven't enabled email this is the only method I know to reach you with. Blythwood (talk) 12:17, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Talk_about_confusing&oldid=1086813172"