User talk:TheSandDoctor/Archives/2018/June

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

Tech News: 2018-23

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • The MonoBook skin has been optimised for mobile devices. It now looks different. [1]
  • Planet Wikimedia collects blogs about Wikimedia. It will now use the Rawdog feed aggregator to do this instead of Planet. [2][3]
  • Redirect links in Special:WhatLinksHere now link to the original page and not the target page. This was done earlier and changed the used messages on some pages. This was a problem for wikis that customized the message. A new change fixed this by using the old messages with one more parameter for customization. Wikis that already changed their customized messages will have to move the customization back again. [4]

Problems

  • You will not be able to edit some wikis between 06:00 and 06:30 UTC on 13 June. You can see if your wiki is one of them.
  • MassMessage did not work 24–28 May. This is also why last week's Tech News was late. [5]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 June. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 June. It will be on all wikis from 7 June (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 5 June at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 6 June at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-24

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • In the Wikipedia app for Android or iOS users can create reading lists. The reading lists can be seen on different devices if you are logged in to your account. There is now a browser extension so you can add pages to your reading list from a web browser. At the moment it works with Firefox and Chrome. [8]
  • Advanced item There is a new version of Pywikibot. Pywikibot is a tool to automate tasks on MediaWiki wikis. [9]

Problems

  • The MonoBook skin was changed to make it work better for mobile users. This caused some problems. The change was rolled back to fix them. The new version is now back on the wikis. MonoBook users can opt out from the new responsive design. [10]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 June. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 June. It will be on all wikis from 14 June (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the Readers Web team IRC office hour. There you can discuss tools to contribute on the mobile web for the existing MediaWiki skins. The meeting will be on 18 June at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 12 June at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 13 June at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-25

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 19 June at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 20 June at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Some old web browsers will not be able to read the Wikimedia wikis. This is because they use an insecure way to connect to them. This means that we get less security for everyone else too. This affects about 0.08% of all traffic to the Wikimedia wikis. This affects for example those who read Wikipedia on a PlayStation 3. [14][15]
  • The new filters for edit review tools and interface for watchlists will leave beta. Because there is no new MediaWiki version this week it will happen on 25 June for most wikis. For the rest it will happen in early July. [16][17]
  • Advanced item All wikis that have not already done so will switch to use the Remex parsing library on 5 July. This is to replace Tidy. You can help fix remaining errors. [18]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Deprecated column format

Hello. I see that your bot DeprecatedFixerBot has changed a few articles that I watch. Unfortunately, the column spacing across the page has been lost and now the entries are a single column at the left. See the before and after at Frances Day as an example. Akld guy (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Akld guy, it appears that the bot is operating correctly according to the specifications and consensus reached before and during the filing of the BRFA. For me they are showing up as two columns. It was agreed upon that the value for "2" should be replaced by 30em. The BFRA contains the specifications for it, as does this discussion on the template talk page. Although this doesn't do you much good, for me there is no visual difference (intended result) between the before and after versions/diffs you linked, even when I resize my browser windows. If I may ask, what browser/OS are you using? --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Two year old iPad, 9.3.5, Safari browser. I've just checked all 3 articles on my cellphone too, (Android), and they're the same. The entries are all in one big column at the left. It happened at the time your bot made the change, as it's not evident when going back to the previous edits. I think you should stop the bot and ask other editors what they see. Akld guy (talk) 03:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
@Akld guy:  Done for the related task; the others will still run as necessary as they are unrelated. This discussion has now been linked on Template talk:Div col. Headbomb, @Jonesey95:@Redrose64:@Cyberpower678:@WOSlinker:@TAnthony:@TheDJ:@Lineagegeek: please read the above. What do you see when you view the diffs? --TheSandDoctor Talk 05:10, 15 May 2018 (UTC); edited 05:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the update. Watching with interest. Akld guy (talk) 06:16, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
My screen is 1280px wide and for the three diffs given I see two columns on each.
It should be remembered that different users have different screen widths, and on a given setup, two columns may look perfectly fine, but where a screen is somewhat wider, it seems silly not to make use of the extra width. Specifying the minimum width of the columns instead of an exact column count does this: for example, in the third case above (Hyde railway disaster), all of the entries are quite short and the columns could be considerably narrower such as |colwidth=15em. On a narrow screen this might still give two columns, but on mine 15em gives five cols (in five rows), so horizontal space is used more efficiently and at the same time, vertical height is reduced allowing the reader to see the next section more quickly.
On this basis I have amended a few articles on horse races from |colwidth=22em (example, which was showing three columns for me) to 15em (five cols). I am sure that wider columns will not be required since organisations such as Weatherbys and the Jockey Club (United States) set a maximum length for horse names of up to 18 characters, including spaces and punctuation, and most Latin letters are less than 1em wide, so allowing 15em for 18 chars still gives some unused width. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:50, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I see two columns in each of the three articles linked by Akld guy. The bot is working as intended based on the consensus developed at the template's talk page. I'm curious to know how many columns Akld guy sees in the Footnotes section at Hyde railway disaster; I see two columns, since {{reflist}} uses a 30em column width when there are ten or more references. If Akld guy sees just one column of footnotes, then div col and reflist are working as designed on their iPad and phone screens. (Redrose64 is welcome to correct me if I have gotten any of this wrong.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I see two as well in the references section. Akld guy? (I am pinging as unsure if "watching with interest" means you added this page to your watch list or not). --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
And I also see multiple columns as intended. It doesn't surprise me that Akld guy is seeing a single column on an iPad and an Android, though.— TAnthonyTalk 14:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
I see three columns on the three articles Akld guy linked. I have found that 40em are required to provide two columns when I look at them. I have seen some articles where {{reflist|2}} has been changed to {{reflist}} (on the basis that {{reflist}} defaults to {{reflist|30em}} revert to single columns. I use Chrome, btw. --Lineagegeek (talk) 15:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
The references at Frances Day and Patricia Farr have a single column; this is to be expected since thet have fewer than ten refs each. The refs at Hyde railway disaster had two cols before this edit, three afterwards. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Irrelevant. It's the Discography at Frances Day and the Filmography at Patricia Farr that are the problem, not the References. Akld guy (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, please be patient. I'm 12 hours out of sync with some of you and have just got up and done some chores. Frances Day and Patricia Farr are still the same because no edits have been made since the bot. The good news is that Hyde railway disaster is now fixed, due to this edit by Redrose in which she narrowed the column spacing. I now see 3 columns there. Akld guy (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Jonesey95: Footnotes at Hyde railway disaster: I see 2 columns, 1-5 and 6-12. Hasn't changed for months. Akld guy (talk) 21:46, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
There is no rush Akld guy, everybody is in different timezones (I think). The edit that now shows 3 columns for you now makes it 4 for me (was 2 before). The point being that I think it depends entirely on your OS and browser. The template parameter is deprecated and set to be removed, that is why they are being converted. I am more than happy to adjust the numbering (to replace it with) if we can agree on a set, but that would require further consensus and either a BAG amendment to the BRFA or a new one altogether. Ultimately though/something to keep in mind, the replacement parameter probably won't display perfectly for everyone, especially on mobile, no matter what value it is set to. I am not in a position to comment on the fact that the parameter was deprecated though (nor will I) as I was not involved in that decision and only came in to enact consensus in a discussion already taking place when it was brought to my attention (don't recall how it was though). Jonesey95 Redrose64 --TheSandDoctor Talk 22:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
The original discussion was at Template talk:Div col. I can't explain why you would have seen two columns in the reflist at Hyde railway disaster and only one column in the upper section. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Summary. At Hyde railway disaster, on my screen the Casualty list went from 2 columns (columns-list|2) before the bot, to one column (colwidth=30em) after the bot, and to 3 columns (colwidth=15em) after Redrose's edit. Perhaps the 30em is too wide for some screens such as tablets and smartphones, and 15em is better suited. I'll leave it to you experts to decide. Akld guy (talk) 08:19, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Headbomb, @Jonesey95:@Redrose64:@Cyberpower678:@WOSlinker:@TAnthony:@TheDJ:@Lineagegeek:, is 30em too wide or is there no concern (per the last comment by Akld guy)? For me, 30em is perfect and the changes above resulted in 3-4 columns instead of their intended 2. Ultimately, I believe it to depend solely on screen size, unlike how the (now deprecated) |cols= did it. If 30em is deemed too wide, we need to figure out a new list of values. Otherwise, I would like to continuing running per the below. --TheSandDoctor Talk 13:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
30em is pretty wide (remember that references have a font-size of 90% and em is relative to the font size), so in many cases that is wider than the reflist. As I've stated before, there is no 1 value to rule them all, since this template unlike reflist does not have a specific context in which it is used. So either you have to manually go through all of them, or we should accept that there will be some cleanup required by editors after running the bot. To me the latter is perfectly acceptable, Wikipedia is continuously evolving and never perfect. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:49, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
What I am seeing is a single list column on my mobile phone running the desktop Wikipedia. The previous diff had two columns.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
This is why I wanted to replace "cols=2" with a div col template with no parameters, so that we could adjust the default later if necessary. The consensus, however, was to explicitly set colwidth to 30em with the bot. Either way, the content is preserved, and the display is the same for most readers, so it's not a huge deal, as TheDJ said above. Since the work is about 90% done at this point, we should probably finish it, change the template to remove the deprecated parameters entirely, and then see where we are. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: I am happy to just remove the parameter for 2 and under for the last few thousand (easy fix) and/or re-run transclusions replacing 30em with default (shouldn't take long to alter), but would need a BAG amendment and (for the latter) a new task I would imagine? Headbomb Cyberpower678 Either of the three ways I am totally fine with. --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:25, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd consider that minor/routine adjustment per WP:BOTISSUE "Minor changes and tweaks to the bot behavior usually do not need to be reviewed by the community at large, so long as they do not exceed a reasonable interpretation of the bot's original mandate/BRFA and have consensus." If you have trouble determining consensus, BAG can get involved, but at this point I'm pretty sure you can adjust the bot based on a discussion/rfc at Template talk:Div col without BAG involvement. Probably a good idea to suspend the part of the bot that'd be affected in the meantime.Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:31, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification Headbomb. I am correct in assuming that a new BRFA would be needed to run through the transclusions and remove 30em where present though, right? --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Due to the inactivity of the below survey and the general consensus from above, barring any further (new) objections within the next 48-72 hours, I will reactivate the task in question and do the following:

  1. Set it so that "2" is replaced with the default
  2. Bring the discussion to the template talk page in an effort to gain consensus on how to proceed in regards to removing "30em" from all transclusions (where present) in favour of using the default (which would then be more editable should consensus become that 30em should no longer be the default.

Pinging Headbomb, @Redrose64:, @Cyberpower678:, @WOSlinker:, @TAnthony:, @TheDJ:, @Lineagegeek:, @Akld guy:. --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:16, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Survey

To be ultra clear: (pinging participants above) Headbomb, @Redrose64:@Cyberpower678:@WOSlinker:@TAnthony:@TheDJ:@Lineagegeek: --TheSandDoctor Talk 17:46, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Do you support the bot re-running with "cols=2" being replaced with the default (so just {{div col}}), or do you think it should continue to run as is?
    • Run as is based on the consensus at the template's talk page and then start a new discussion on the template's talk page. One note: this bot task has modified tens of thousands of pages, and only one editor has stated an objection, as far as I can tell. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
You are correct Jonesey95, this is the only complaint/concern the bot has had in over 99 thousand edits (about half of those being this task). --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I think we have had enough time for this survey to run. Let's get this bot task completed and then move on from there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: I agree and I had intended to wrap this up sooner, but I got preoccupied both on and off wiki. I wanted to implement the minor change discussed and re-run sooner, but was unable. I plan to resume the task within the next 24-48 hours. --TheSandDoctor Talk 05:50, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Do you think that the bot should run through the transclusions and replace "30em" where found in the template (after finishing cat) with the default (so remove the "30em" and leave just {{div col}})?
    • Not at this time. This should be discussed on the template's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion continued from above the Survey section

  • Some editors above are referring to References columns and have made comments that they see the correct columns. Please note: The complaint concerns edits made by the bot to the Discography section at Frances Day, the Filmography section at Patricia Farr, and the Casualties section at Hyde railway disaster. Nothing to do with References sections. Some editors may need to look again and change what they reported. Akld guy (talk) 01:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
    • I mentioned the References section of one article because {{reflist}}, like {{div col}}, uses 30em as the default column width. At this point, changes have been made to the div col instances on some or all of those three articles, so discussing them further is probably not useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

A suggestion for when you need WP:REVDEL

Email you friendly Admin Posting it on a talk page can bring unintended and unwanted attention. Streisand effect. I use it all the time. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen, I didn't receive an email? What are you referring to exactly? I dont recall requesting a revdel recently and do email admins for them when I do need them in order to not bring unnecessary attention? If you send the example you have in mind, I could probably give a more definitive answer? --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
It was somethning I observed on an admin page, Maybe user: Oshwah. Was not meant as a criticism, only a suggestion. If you are doing it anyway, then disregard. Keep up the good work. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:34, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
7&6=thirteen I was probably leaving a note stating that the revision revdel was requested on was completed, as I do do that from time to time and I wouldn't say that that draws any unnecessary attention as when I do that the revision is already hidden from (non admin) view. That said, without having a specific revision (of my edit in question), I cannot comment exactly. Regardless though, I do appreciate constructive advice and thank you for bringing this to my attention. --TheSandDoctor Talk 04:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
  • There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
  • It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

  • A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:00, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Stones

Thank you for your eMail; I can help out a bit. When it is nominated, whoever reviews it will provide feedback (I believe) as to what is required. In the meantime I note there is another editor attempting to CE the page. Some of their edits I am not altogether happy about and there are grammatical errors, E.g. here. Are you in touch with them also? There is an issue with ref 161... only in that the archive link does not seem to work properly; displays 404 error and only the article headline. It being the Daily Telegraph, the original link is still sound, but fixing it may be better in the long run. I do not know how to do that! Eagleash (talk) 09:47, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@Eagleash: You're welcome and thank you. I am not in contact with the other editor. They are one of the commenters on the FAC. As for the archive, that is odd, I will have to take a look at it. --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:15, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Timothy H Dixon

Hi 

 I am working with Timothy H Dixon to fix the problems that you have identified. He has gotten a Wikipedia account and is "timothyhughdixon". Is it possible for the 3 of us to work together to get his draft fixed and posted? I am a feeble wikipedia poster as you know by now and he is even worse, so we are going to need a lot of help. Our first question for you concerns your first "citation needed", concerning his PhD from Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Would it solve this problem if we changed his PhD to UCSD?  SIO is part of UCSD.  Thanks for getting back to both of us, we are working together today on this.

Zyzzy2 (talk) 14:09, 2 June 2018 (UTC)Zyzzy2 (Bob Stern)

Hi there Zyzzy2 (cc Timothyhughdixon), it is not advisable for Timothy to edit the draft about himself as doing so would put him in a conflict of interest and that is strongly discouraged. With that said, if he feels he must or wants to regardless, please refer him to WP:COIEDIT and this link about how to disclose a conflict of interest. In regards to your request for assistance, I can provide help with formatting etc, but I am not sure if I am the best one to ask as science related articles are generally not my specialty. I would recommend reviewing the notability guideline for academics/scientists. If he satisfies at least one of the criteria listed (or ones elsewhere on the page) then he could be considered notable (in terms of Wikipedia, of course I mean no disrespect or offense to Timothy).
Speaking directly of the content, it appears that he would satisfy WP:NACADEMIC criterion #3, if it were backed up by an independent source (ie not just Timothy's word; the statement is currently unsourced). Changing "PhD" to "UCSD" as you suggested would not resolve any concerns as it would still be unsourced. Please see this guide to referencing. If you have any questions (follow-up or otherwise), please do let me know. --TheSandDoctor Talk 04:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Your RfA

As we discussed over email, I've created your RfA subpage. You just need to accept the nomination and answer the three standard questions. There's no hurry, of course, but whenever you feel that you are ready to proceed, go ahead and take a deep breath, start the timer, and transclude. (Alternatively, I or one of your co-nominators can do it for you – just give the word.) Mz7 (talk) 17:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much Mz7, I am honoured. I have added my answers to the standard questions, I am just awaiting the co-nominator(s) to add their statements before issuing my formal acceptance (as explained over email). I am not in any hurry. --TheSandDoctor Talk 22:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

My question

Thanks for your answer to my question about edits on a resume, that's good thanks. I realise that nobody would actually include that level of detail on a resume (although I do mention Wikipedia in general on mine, and the areas I work in here, just because it's an unusual thing and I think it adds to my marketability with employers!) And yes, of course, individual edits are not the main thing, it's the overall picture, but I think you've answered the question well. Thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:45, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Amakuru: You're welcome! --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

DeprecatedFixerBot status

Just a quick heads up: the code

'''{{PAGENAME}} {{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{{FULLPAGENAME}}/status}}}}|true|aids in Operation Enduring Encyclopedia.|is currently grounded for maintenance.}}'''

on User:DeprecatedFixerBot won't work since you have a more complicated syntax at the bot's status page. You could use the following instead, which will search for "true" anywhere on the status page:

'''{{PAGENAME}} {{#iferror:{{#invoke:String|match|s={{{{FULLPAGENAME}}/status}}|pattern=true}}|is currently grounded for maintenance.|aids in Operation Enduring Encyclopedia.}}'''

--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 05:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ahecht: Thank you for this, I was manually updating it, but forgot to. How would that be modified to keep the bot listed in Category:Active Wikipedia bots when it is "true"? Sorry, I am just not that familiar with template syntax (outside of my bot work "hot swapping" specific parameter values). --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:01, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
You just need to add in a call to the category as part of the "operating" text:
'''{{PAGENAME}} {{#iferror:{{#invoke:String|match|s={{{{FULLPAGENAME}}/status}}|pattern=true}}|is currently grounded for maintenance.|aids in Operation Enduring Encyclopedia.[[Category:Active Wikipedia bots]]}}'''
--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
@Ahecht: Thanks! Has now been done (you should have got a summary ping I think?) Please let me know if you ever notice any mistakes/forgotten things like that again. --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
I just realized that that infobox has an "active" parameter that does the category work, so instead of putting it into the caption, you can do:
|active={{#iferror:{{#invoke:String|match|s={{{{FULLPAGENAME}}/status}}|pattern=true}}|no|yes}}
--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Your RfA so boring...!

Well, I was yawning looking at the oppose reasonings, which are so staid and lackadaisical – he seems to be hat-collecting; he seems to have padded his resume; he has an experience that is very balanced, in fact too balanced for our comfort; we want imperfect candidates. Lol. Those were the days when candidates' RfA's imploded and exploded because of big revelations, from sock-ids to arbcom restrictions to uncivil behaviour (wow, I miss those fights), and here we are fighting at a candidate who prepares well. Anyway, just sit back and relax. Your RfA is going to pass. Lourdes 06:35, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia - What a place! RfA - the distilled essence of Wikipedia. (rolls eyeballs). Fun, isn't it? Amazing how nice most of us actually are! And I say that without any intended irony. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the vote of confidence Lourdes and Pbsouthwood . We shall know definitively come around 3:05pm Saturday (my time; 22:05, 16 June 2018 UTC). --TheSandDoctor Talk 19:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

First Congratulatory Beer

A beer on me!
It may be 2 1/2 days early, but you deserve a Leinies. Break a leg! Dolotta (talk) 05:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
@Dolotta: But what if I don't wanna to break a leg? I got skating this weekend! Thank you for the congratulatory note. I am not quite to the point of "celebrating" yet though. --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:29, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
I've already managed to jinx a wedding and a musical. No need to jinx an RFA too! -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolotta (talk • contribs) 07:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Black Scar Blues

Hello, SandDoctor,

You declined Draft:Black Scar Blues. Now, at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Black Scar Blues, some of us are leaning in the direction of "good enough". You may like to participate in that discussion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Eid Mubarak

Eid Mubarak!
May Allah bless you in all your endeavours And lead you to the path of continued success and prosperity. My best wishes for you are the just prayers for your long happy life from God on this noble day. Eid Mubarak! Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 04:28, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello TheSandDoctor/Archives/2018, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

  • As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
  • Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 100 review coin, 250 review coin, 500 review coin, 1000 review certificate.
  • Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

A confectionery for you!

Pie cake n cookies
I won't be on in 9 hours, so here's an early congrats for your successful RFA. cinco de L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you L3X1! Let me know if you ever need any help (ie notice a vandal, need revdel, etc) and I will see what I can do (within policy etc of course). My email is always open. (Offer goes out to everyone.) --TheSandDoctor Talk 15:47, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on your RFA!

90%, quite impressive! My position hasn't changed, but hey, I know RfA is a tough process to go through because I've been there myself, a long, long time ago. And I honestly love when younger editors (as you at least appear to be, based on your comments) are able to make it through the process in good faith, especially ones that bring articles to GA. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 22:27, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you PCHS-NJROTC. I harbour no ill feelings . As I recently said on the RfA, I am 20 so find the age comments both odd and somewhat amusing. It makes me wonder what the median age for admins is... --TheSandDoctor Talk 22:33, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Pfft, 20, you're not even old enough to drink! (Not that I know anything about drinking, as an Independent Baptist ;]) To answer your question, there have been administrators who were in high school, and then there are administrators who are retirement age. If you can believe it, I think RfA used to be even more petty, back when candidates would get stacks of opposes (enough to cause them to lose) over being a teenager, having stated political/religious, opinions not having their edit summary usage at 100%, etc. I don't know if that's changed at all, but the last two RfAs seemed to go relatively smoothly. I feel like Pbsouthwood's (who I supported) would not have passed in those days. As an administrator on another wiki, my advice would be to respect the seriousness of administrative actions, but don't be afraid of them because you will pick up on it with practice and decisions become second nature; WP:NOBIGDEAL. Also be prepared for the excitement of that first block; I have to say my first whack at pwning a vandal was rather awesome and I remember it like people remember their first kiss. At any rate... good luck with the mop! PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 22:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
@PCHS-NJROTC: Aye, but that's just in the States. Here in Canada, the legal age for everything is 19 (18 in some places), so I am old enough to (then again, I choose not to as I do not see the need for mind-altering substances that just make you stupid and leave you with a headache. That is also my view on psychoactive substances; not my deal. Never have, never will.). Thank you for the advice, seriously. --TheSandDoctor Talk 23:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
I choose not to as I do not see the need for mind-altering substances that just make you stupid and leave you with a headache. Why oh why did I vote oppose? I wish more people my age and younger had that wisdom, though I will say some of you from Generation Z seem a lot more intelligent than a lot of the people from my generation. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 23:19, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Tide pods come to mind… cinco de L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 01:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations, good luck and best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Congrats

With 163 supporters, TheSandDoctor’s request for adminship is the fifth to pass in 2018 (image courtesy of Linguist111).

Have a t-shirt! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the club... lol ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:22, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations/commiserations! Welcome to the corp - TNT❤ 23:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks TNT! :D --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
It's not everyday a non-crat closes an RfA as successful, but there's a first for everything. Congrats on the promotion. :D—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:37, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: Or that the promotee removes it from WP:RFA and adds to the list of successful RfAs. I hope I didnt miss anything. Did I? --TheSandDoctor Talk 23:38, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I've added you to Wikipedia:Times that 100 Wikipedians supported an RFX. Congrats on your successful RfA, by the way! :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 23:44, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for adding that @SkyGazer 512: :D --TheSandDoctor Talk 23:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Congrats on getting the mop and bucket, and happy admin'ing! ƒirefly ( t · c · who? ) 23:54, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Conratulations on you RfA! Although I knew from the first day that it was going to pass, unlike PBSouthwood's one when I honestly thought he would fail at day 3. Its impressive to see a candidate that has been here for 18 months to pass with 90% support! L293D (☎ • ✎) 00:37, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I was watching that RfA and on the fence for most of it. By the time I made my mind up and went to !vote (support), it had already closed. Oh well. --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Felicitations on your RfA and welcome to the team. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:57, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Ad Orientem! :D --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Congrats, you blocked your first penis vandal. Seriously, though, well done. Home Lander (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations. Vermont (talk) 02:05, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:SWAT! I'm still working on the badges though, so for now you have to wear the tshirt Kevin provided Regards SoWhy 08:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations, when you get bored of scrabbling down the back of the sofa for the right block template, feel free to check out my monobook, some kind people have placed some nifty scripts there. ϢereSpielChequers 08:36, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
That's a good suggestion, WSC. If you need even more inspiration, you can also check out User:SoWhy/monobook.js. A while back I tried to add comments explaining the various scripts for people to easily pick what they need. Apart from Twinkle, I think CSDHelper, EasyBlock, ResponseHelper and XFDcloser are definitely helpful for any admin. Regards SoWhy 09:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Congratulations!! LinguistunEinsuno (Linguist111) 15:29, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Belated congratulations

Belated congratulations on becoming an administrator! My internet connection cut out right as I was updating your RfA page but it looks like someone else was kind enough to take care of it for me. Good luck with the admin toolkit and let me know if I can be of any assistance. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 02:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@28bytes: Will do and thank you! And it actually took three of us (myself included) and TNT laughing. See my user page. --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Congrats, and a quick note

Congrats on your AfD. I just wanted to give you a quick note about the answer I was expecting to question 32. The main difference between Speedy Keep and SNOW keep is that speedy keep (like speedy delete) has very specific situations in which it is allowed to be applied. These situations are detailed at Wikipedia:Speedy keep. SNOW keep is basically an WP:Ignore all rules skipping of unnecessary bureaucracy, and can be used in any situation where the outcome seems certain.

In the case of the AfD in Question 29, the close was inappropriate because "Appears to meet GNG and has reliable sources" is not a valid speedy keep reason. The two valid ways it could've been closed would've been: Speedy Keep: The article is currently linked from the Main Page or something like Keep: Appears to meet GNG and has reliable sources. (WP:SNOW).

Just something to keep in mind as you start closing deletion discussions.

Once again, congrats on becoming an administrator! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 02:21, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Ahecht: Huh? TSD said in his answer the close does not seem inappropriate since SNOW closes (which this was) are done to prevent bureaucratic delays (emphasis added). So he did indicate he knew that the terminology was wrong. On a side note, SK would have been wrong because at the time of the close SK#6 no longer applied. Regards SoWhy 08:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@SoWhy: True, but the emphasis here is that, regardless of consensus, you cannot speedy keep for a reason not on the list (per WP:SK#NOT). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 04:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations for your successful RfA! Hhkohh (talk) 06:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Ditto, mop it up like crazy!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  17:32, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Well Done, now it gets tough! Expect hate mail daily :-) Do have a read of Wikipedia:What you won't learn in new admin school - never a truer word spoken... Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

May I join? Congratulations for passing your RfA succesfully!--Jetstreamer Talk 20:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Ronhjones, Hhkohh, and Jetstreamer! That link was an interesting read RH and I am sure that it will ring even more true the longer I am an administrator. --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
It is a good read. Couple more you might like User:Evad37/FFDcloser - for closing FFDs, and User:Theopolisme/Scripts/adminhighlighter - handy to spot other admins. Ronhjones  (Talk) 02:11, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
@Ronhjones: XFDcloser superseded FFDcloser and I have been using adminhighlighter for a long time , only recently did I replace it with my own forked version to avoid potential highlighting of my own name while using it. Do you recommend any other scripts? --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:07, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Use User:Ais523/highlightmyname2.js to highlight your own name in red and you won't have that problem. Plus, it's always useful to spot someone mentioning / replying to you without ping. Regards SoWhy 07:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Wow, I checked your .js and you have a ton of scripts. I didn't see User:PleaseStand/User info or User:Anomie/linkclassifier though - my two favorites (though the latter takes some getting used to). ansh666 07:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Congrats and good luck. I won't say have fun, because that is not what the mop is about. Don't get too far sidetracked from content, that's what the pedia is about, and where the fun should be had. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Good recommendations, but I personally prefer User:Anomie/useridentifier.js to User:PleaseStand/User info (it shows permission icons next to the gender icon, and you can click them to get more user info). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Hm? User info shows permissions with links too, and the gender icon shows up without the need for a script. ansh666 19:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC) modified reply makes this comment hilariously nonsensical ansh666 06:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
No more scripts. An admin subpage is useful e.g. User:Ronhjones/Adminship - a lot of admins have similar, the templates are all done. I have that as a link in Firefox. Ronhjones  (Talk) 12:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Pukaar (Pakistan TV series)

Hi. You're right that Pukaar (Pakistan TV series) is too old for db-a10. But it can't stay in its present state. It was originally written about the Indian series, and was then usurped into an article about the Pakistani one, almost certainly by an IP sock of long-term abuser User:Pakistanpedia. Another editor then renamed it in good faith. I've reverted the usurpation. Redirecting it to the Indian series will be confusing to readers. What would you recommend? Thanks, TMGtalk 06:16, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@The Mighty Glen: Aside from seeing if the article can be improved or the two merged, PRODing or AfD are the only two routes for deletion in this case (since A10 does not apply anymore). Hope that helps! --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

DeprecatedFixerBot

Hi, just noting that your bot's task 3 appears to have been down since June 10 (unless you turned it off manually). Jc86035 (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jc86035: That sounds about right. Lines up with when my work week started and my RfA. Will run it some more today or tomorrow. --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Okay. Congratulations (or condolences?) on your RFA, by the way. Jc86035 (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

{{You've got mail}}

Got it, replied. --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

St Patricks Christian Brothers College

Good day TheSandDoctor

I would like to explain my comment and maybe I express myself incorrectly. When User:Legacypac accepted my last article, he said I could create any new articles on my own. I understand that it could be understood that it is for this specific article.

My apologies

User:Barry Ne 04:27 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at User:Kudpung/What do admins do?

−  You are invited to join the discussion at User:Kudpung/What do admins do?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:32, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Eh..My mistake:) Kudpung twice notified TonyBallioni and I undid the second notice.It's weird how I managed to undo his edit on your t/p too! Apologies,∯WBGconverse 06:22, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: No worries! I figured it must be a mistake or something, but thought it best to ping you in the edit summary and let you know on the off chance. --TheSandDoctor Talk 13:29, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Regardng Draft entry for Shirtless Violinist

Over the past two days I have been going through the application process to create a page for a gay musician the "Shirtless Violinist". since this the first time I have applied to create an entry, I am definitely in learning mode. And the first 3 reviewers have been helpful in suggesting the changes I need to make and I have been making progress Evidently in the last go around I included a hashtag that referenced a previous charity challenge sponsored by the Shirtless Violinist in 2016. I did not understand that hash tags are frbidden. Once notified I immediately removed this hashtag from the draft.

There seems to be some question about whether the Shirtless Violinist is "notable enough" and whether the news sources are "good enough". Matthew is a bonefide professional musician and has accompanied Josh Gobin and Andrea Bocelli in Seattle. He has a special role in the gay community. He is similar in presence to Steve Grand, Eli Lieb and Tom Boss (all gay musicians) who have their own Wikipedia entries.

Please do not delete this draft. I will continue to follow the Reviewers guidance until I get it wright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srunger72 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

welcome to the mop corps

Congratulations on your successful RFA!
Wanna hear what the puppy told me after my RFA passed twelve long, sordid,
can't-you-just-crawl-back-into-your-Arbcom-hole-and-be-quiet years ago? No? Too bad, so sad:
  1. Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable. I'd be shocked if you haven't done it already.)
  2. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.)
  3. Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.)
  4. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for?
  5. Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
    It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway.
  6. Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.


Katietalk 14:10, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better. Or not. Who knows.
All rights released under GFDL.

AfD closes

Hi there, please make sure that you wait 168 hours - a full 7 days - before closing an AfD, and also please make sure that the result is fully actioned - don't just blindly trust the script. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damon Dark for an example of both. Thanks, ansh666 06:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ansh666: Oops, sorry about that. Didnt look close enough at the time I guess (just dates). Would you like the delete completed or discussion reopened? I am fine with either. --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
It's only a few hours so there's no point in reopening it, just go ahead and delete it! (and of course belated congratulations on your RfA!) ansh666 07:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
@Ansh666:  Done. Will be more careful next time, sorry about that. Thank you for bringing it up (AfD) and for the congratulations . --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
TSD, you could use a tool to ensure you don't close AfDs before 7 full days. Lourdes 07:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
What most of us do is not touch any of the logs that aren't in the "Old discussions" section on the main AfD page (i.e. the one for discussions opened/relisted 8 days ago). There's generally no need to rush to close discussions immediately after the 7-day-mark; if it's actively harmful in any way it would likely have been speedy closed already. ansh666 07:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Hey TSD! Came by to congratulate you on your RfA and thank you for your email! I'm sort of smirking at this; I have not worked AfD in a long time, but I remember always finding the procedural wonkiness such as this to be insufferable. Did you know they once held an RfC, just to define 7 days as '24 hours x 7'? All because one non-admin got a little too overzealous with early closes! Now, the deletion process page has "168 hours" in parenthesis next to 7 days, and apparently people actually go around spouting "168 hours" like robots. Lol. For the record, it has always been a normal practice for administrators to close uncontentious discussions a little early on 7th day in the spirit of WP:5P5 and WP:NOTBUREAU; such closes are not and have never been considered out of process speedies, and rest assured there is no community mandate for a hard rule to prohibit such closures. So, don't feel too bad about this. It's normal to catch a lot of this petty flak as a new admin. People will be up in arms whenever you do something even slightly bold, slightly out of process, or slightly contentious. It gradually gets better over time. It's still important that you show people you're willing to be reasonable, listen, and sometimes even concede when you're not in the wrong, because it builds trust, and it is actually that earned trust, not your RfA, that will allow you to perform admin tasks without having people breathing down your neck or complaining about your every move. I'd leave you with some parting wisdom, but you don't need it. Feel free to drop by if you ever have any questions or need anything at all. Congrats again! Swarm ♠ 22:31, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
    Swarm, please don't spread that sentiment, it's not one the community endorses. I myself was against it, but 7 days/168 hours is what the community consensus at the RfC was, and it's best to stick to that rule. It's true that the vast majority of closes won't matter, but procedures like this are important to avoid any hint of impropriety. For the record, if I see anyone closing early, no matter whether it's the newest admin or a 10-year vet, I'll drop them a note, and I'd hope anyone else who notices would do so too. ansh666 22:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
The community consensus was to define 7 days as 168 hours as opposed to "on the 7th day", which was actually a pretty ridiculous thing to hold an RfC about as it has always been the case that never would have or could have yielded a different result. It imposed no additional guidance, much less imposed a bright line rule against performing the kind of slightly early closures which have always been routine. I don't wish to argue with you on a 3rd party's page, so feel free to come over to mine, but petty procedural policing such as this is not necessary or helpful unless somebody is getting carried away and closing too many discussions too early. Authoritatively instructing administrators not to perform such closes as a general rule is not the type of behavior the community endorses, and users should be aware that WP:5P5, WP:NOTBUREAU, and WP:IAR are fundamental, overarching principals on the project, "168 hours" is a definition. Swarm ♠ 23:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
The discussion being referred to: Wikipedia talk:Deletion process/Archive 9#The meaning of "seven days" in AfD closures. The way I see it, if the clock is ticking close to the 168-hour mark, but hasn't past it yet, it's good practice to just wait those few extra hours out, even if the outcome of the discussion is fairly clear. Not doing so gives editors a reason to contest the outcome of the discussion, and while we would correctly reject those objections on the basis of WP:5P5 and WP:NOTBURO, that is still community time wasted responding to those objections when waiting the few extra hours would have been less controversial. (Just look how many bytes we've used up talking about this here.) Mz7 (talk) 23:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Absolutely! Swarm ♠ 03:04, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
The parenthesis "(168 hours)" was added to WP:AFD earlier than that, I believe as a result of the Alexandra Quinn discussion at DRV. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:52, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

{{You've got mail}}

Got it & responded. --TheSandDoctor Talk 22:44, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Congrasandations on your RFA

Just so you know, I was almost considering logging out and using my IP address to vote support, due how much I wanted you to get it (I was under a self requested block at the time)💵Money💵emoji💵💸 03:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Money emoji! (Though I am glad you didn't log out as it A: wouldn't have counted and B: would be sort of socking it ) --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:28, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi TheSandDoctor, sorry if the note at Trump administration family separation policy came across as bitey–or whatever the equivalent of "bitey" is for new admins. I wasn't aware of the request at WP:RFPP, and I'm sure you're aware of the way WP:RM works, so I should have framed my comment more generally. (But again, if you have time to look at Talk:Plymouth....) Best, Dekimasuよ! 05:15, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dekimasu: Not a problem and I didn't take it personally. As I say, I was just filling a request (I don't just randomly protect pages outside of my or my bots' userspace ). As for Talk:Plymouth, that looks like fun, why don't you wade in there with me? . --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Using huggle

Hey there! Because you gave me the rollback privilege, I want to start using huggle. I haven't downloaded it yet though. Can I put "enable:true" to the "huggle.yaml.js" page now, or do I need to download huggle first? I know how to download, but I'm not completely sure how to enable it and all that. Thanks, Dolfinz1972 (talk) 05:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Update: I just installed huggle, and put enable:true on my "huggle.yaml.js" page. The only thing I need to do is enable SSL, which I don't know how to. The option to enable SSL is grayed out. I'm also worried I did the process incorrectly. Dolfinz1972 (talk) 05:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
@Dolfinz1972: Sorry for the delay. You could take a look at my Huggle file if you wish. It is located here. Hopefully that would be of some use. --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:14, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi Protection Request

Hello would you consider applying semi edit protection or perhaps pending changes to Cotton ceiling it appears to have been subject to some sourcing issues and vandalism recently. I'd think a week or two at max would be helpful. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 06:53, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for bringing this up Cameron11598 --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:14, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

The Rolling Stones

Hello SandDoctor:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article The Rolling Stones has been completed.

A couple of things. I added numerous citations to support the Stones’ album chart listings. I think I got them all. Some of the singles' chart listings and Jagger’s solo albums' chart listings still need to be cited.

This sentence in the Legacy section is cryptic:

"The Stones contributed to the blues lexicon, creating their own "codewords" and slang, which they have used throughout their catalog of songs, including some of their more popular songs."[331]

It needs examples to make any sense.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the FAC process.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:58, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Twofingered Typist! As for the examples, I pulled back up the academic paper. One is "losing streak" to refer to a menstrual period (the paper called it a Stones "coinage", "parking lot" to refer (I believe, paper didn't elaborate) to either intercourse or a vagina, and several others. Please send me an email when you get the chance and I will send you the page from the paper with all the examples (got access via my uni). --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:08, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi SandDoctor: No need to send paper. I added "losing streak" as an example - that's all the sentence needed. A user was trying to figure out how to plot album release dates on the personnel timeline. I've removed the leftover legend key and suggested this should not be part of this timeline. Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:07, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
@Twofingered Typist: Thank you for the review and fair enough. It is quite an interesting paper (it even adapted a Stones lyric as its title), definitely dated though (was published in '73). --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:03, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Re: Faith Knelson

Hi, TSD! Regarding this edit, I thought I should elucidate on the chain of events. The article was created by a new SPA who created two other articles for probably non-notable athletes immediately before. They then created the Knelson article in their sandbox and then moved it into mainspace. But immediately afterwards, they blanked the article (perhaps as a new editor they had not yet intended to publish the article and had made a mistake by moving it. SemiHypercube then added the G7 tag, I assume because they presumed the author had demonstrated they wanted it deleted by blanking it. At this point, another new SPA (User:Faithsfriend, whom I can only assume is connected through association with both the article author and its subject, given how quickly they arrived there) then reverted the tag and the blanking. Given that SemiHyperCube's original tag seemed like a reasonable extension of the author's intended efforts to remove the page, and that the de-blanking was conducted by an obvious COI-SPA, I re-blanked the page and re-added the tag.

Complicated, I know! But I thought I would clarify that I was not the one really making the G7 request (I was just restoring the tag and blanking, so the SPA interloper could not frustrate the process), in case you wanted to re-evaluate the speedy deletion request in light of the fact that the request does seem to arise at the original author's request. I tend to agree that AfD would work fine as a vehicle for deletion as well, but I don't have the time to shepherd it myself right now and I'm only 90% certain it doesn't meet WP:NATHLETE (with that 10% doubt being enough that I wouldn't want to file the AfD); so either you or SHC would have to nominate if you felt it appropriate. Snow let's rap 12:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Snow Rise and thanks for the clarification. I reconsidered deleting it via G7, but thought it best to nominate at AfD. I have created the nomination procedurally to address the concerns that you raised. --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:11, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Unblock pending experiment

Hi Doc.

I took the liberty of modifying your experiment with the "unblock pending" template, removing the category inclusion. It caused the rather peculiar line at the end of this listing. Favonian (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Favonian: It did indeed. Thanks for commenting that out, I will just have to remember to uncomment it if it ever becomes the actual template . --TheSandDoctor Talk 21:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Self-promotion?

Hello, I just noticed that this user added his personal YouTube channel to his user page. Is it considered a "self-promotion" or not? Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom (talk) 23:03, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Omgwtfbbqsomethingrandom: Hi there and sorry for the wait, there is not enough that is promotional about the account to warrant a block at this time. Having a lone link to a YouTube account and a similar username but contributing in a non-promotional way is not enough for a UAA case (unless it was a company account, famous, or another violation). Please do recycle nick/user names across sites and don't necessarily intend it to be promotional in nature. It is best just to watch the account's edits, but so far they seem fine when it comes to being non-promotional. --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Lil Kace official

Hi TSD. Welcome to the admin game. Can I suggest a hard promo block here since they've been spamming also? -- Longhair\talk 05:27, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

@Longhair: Didn't see the mainspace promotion. Block updated. Thanks for bringing this to my attention! --TheSandDoctor Talk 05:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Wasn't mainspace. They were drafting a draft about themselves. I've deleted it. Thanks. -- Longhair\talk 05:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
With a softblock, they'll just create another username and somebody else will be left to cleanup later.My logic is hit them with the facts from the start. Happy to help. -- Longhair\talk 05:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Hard block here too mate. You can bet they'll be here for disruption only with a name such as... Namefuckinme. -- Longhair\talk 00:14, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Longhair,  Done. please feel free to correct/tell me if you see future mistakes (still learning). --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:42, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
It's not a mistake. It's the unwritten stuff you'll quickly learn on the job. If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck :D Reach out if I'm around. You're doing fine... -- Longhair\talk 00:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

pixel gun 3d

delete it. it was a bad page. i will try to make better ones for Wikipedia. ty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoboicsg (talk • contribs) 07:54, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Yoboicsg, the draft was deleted by the admin RHaworth, who deleted it as being patent nonsense (G1) and pure vandalism or a blatant hoax (G3). --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:38, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Sorry I missed your RfA. Congratulations! ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 00:55, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Not a problem and thanks (for the cupcake and the congratulations) --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:02, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Kannur Sreelatha

Hi, at the above article the bot keeps replacing 3 columns to 2 and when I reverted it comes back and does it again, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, that is per consensus in the thread at the top of my talk page (User_talk:TheSandDoctor#Deprecated_column_format). The template works differently now and the old way is deprecated and set to be removed entirely. Please do not revert it as we have been through this discussion above. (cc Jonesey95). --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
I should ask though, what device and operating system are you using Atlantic306? --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:13, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Ipad safari, so how to convert two columns to three on ipad? thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
@Atlantic306: I just wanted to address why the bot re-ran the page. Pages which use the deprecated format slated for deletion (the deprecated format, not the page) are listed in Category:Pages using div col with deprecated parameters. When the bot corrects the template issues, the page is removed from that list automatically. Since you reverted the edit, it was readded and the bot happened across it again because of that. As for your device, IPads and other mobile devices are typically not very good at displaying layouts correctly due to their (sometimes odd dimensioned and) small screen sizes. Concerns about layout should be raised on Template talk:Div col, the bot is just enacting consensus and altering per the template. In the event that formatting or consensus changes, I will happily re-run the bot to make those changes (if need be) once the category is updated. --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
ok, chaging to 15 em gives me 3 columns in the new format, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
@Atlantic306:I assume that that is the text size on your screen? You're welcome! I'm glad that I could help . --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Alain Welter

hello

i wonder what could be a better ref than a book

regards

Alain Welter


Alain Welter (talk) 22:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Alain Welter. There is nothing wrong with that reference, but more than a single reference are generally needed for a draft to be accepted as an article as they have to demonstrate that the subject (be it a company, person, product, etc) satisfies the relevant notability guideline (in this case, WP:ARTIST). The current sole reference does not suffice. I would also recommend reviewing the rest of the comment I left (editing where you have a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged as they undermine public confidence and risk causing public embarrassment to the individuals and companies being promoted). If you wish to continue working with the draft, then please read these instructions on how to disclose your connection (which it appears exists based on the username of your account). This guide to referencing and this one for writing your first article might also be of use. --All the best, TheSandDoctor Talk 00:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)


hello again

i tried to edit as you suggested

what now ?

regards Alain Welter (talk) 09:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Alain Welter. I would suggest reviewing the two guides that I linked above and try to find more reliable (independent) sources that back-up the information in the draft. The book (assuming it isn't self published) is a good start, but not enough on its own. --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

would an interview on RTL television do it ?

regards

awe

Alain Welter (talk) 15:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

@Alain Welter: Interviews do not demonstrate notability (unfortunately), but can be used to back up some statements in articles. --TheSandDoctor Talk 20:13, 26 June 2018 (UTC)


i seem to be unable to put the category correctly Artist Contemporary Art Paintings and Sculptures Luxembourg Europe could some kind soul do this edit for me please ?

regards

Alain Welter (talk) 08:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Alain Welter, that category does not appear to exist? Also, please don't re-add the draft text to its talk page. Talk pages are not for article content (that belongs on the article itself), they are administration pages where editors can discuss improvements to articles or other Wikipedia pages. --TheSandDoctor Talk 08:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

ty again for your infos and help

1)i thought the talkpage was ment for other users to help improve my sandbox to get it finally published... 2) i didn t find a round about to get the category listed met for those infos that s why i asked for help

regards

Alain Welter (talk) 08:47, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Alain Welter: Hey Alain Welter, welcome to Wikipedia - I'm was just passing by, and I saw the article you were writing and thought I'd see if I can lend you a hand! First of all, I've moved it over to Draft:Alain Welter - everything is still there just how you left it, but by using the draft area of Wikipedia you can work on your article until you think its ready for review. That being said, TheSandDoctor above has pointed out that you probably have a "conflict of interest" as it looks like you're writing about yourself. Are you the Alain Welter? If so, I think having a quick read of these suggestions would be useful - namely "Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. We want biographies here, not autobiographies."
I imagine that's pretty disappointing to hear, but by discouraging article subjects from writing their own autobiography, we ensure that our articles are neutrally written. There are some suggestions here if you decide you really want to write about yourself, but I'd encourage you to instead request an article be written.
Finally, I'd like to ask you to stick around, and maybe see if you can help correct some errors on other people's biographies - Wikipedia always needs help, and we'd really appreciate yours! If you're interested in learning how to edit and improve other articles, have a read of this simple guide or just let us know! Regardless of what you choose to do, have a great day - TNT 💖 09:25, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

ty for your help and yes unfortunately i m the alain welter

i read many wikipedia suggestions and policies about it but who else could give more adequate informations as myself

as an example:nobody else then me has the copyright of the images posted in the draft/sandbox

also it s just facts (facts seem to be the most neutral you can post ) and yes i know it s not how wikipedia policies work but to me it seems to be a good start for an article and may be some day somebody else will finish and publish the article :)

hope dies last

regards

awe



Alain Welter (talk) 09:40, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheSandDoctor/Archives/2018/June&oldid=1045689969"