User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2015 June

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

Previous · Index · Next


Jump-to links

2024   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2023   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2022   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2021   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2020   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2019   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2018   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2017   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2016   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2015   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2014   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2013   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2012   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2011   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2010   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2009   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2008   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2007   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2006   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2005   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2004                                                           Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

Your signature[edit]

Hello! Are you using ~~~~ when signing? Wouldn't that use your sig configured at Special:Preferences and add the datestamp? I ask because it appears the datestamp in your signature is wrapped in a <small> tag, and it uses &nbsp; entities as spaces, and finally adds a <br/> tag at the end. This is not good because bots and scripts are not able to interpret it as a valid wiki-inserted datestamp (e.g. archiving bots, timezone changing scripts, etc). On some pages this could conceivably cause bots to malfunction entirely. Please consider allowing the software to insert the datestamp for you. Thanks! MusikAnimal talk 11:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some bots and scripts are not that smart, it is true. I have always believed that the answer to this is to make the software as smart as it needs to be, though opportunities to remove non-functional anomalies should be taken. This seems broadly to be consensus. All the best: Rich Farmbrough12:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC).
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Just allow me to ask, what is the rationale for retaining your nonstandard date format? You just want it to be smaller than the rest of your signature? This seems trivial considering the implications. We allow for custom signatures, so the bots have only the datestamp to reliably determine where a comment ends and when it was posted. I am very confused because I see that you are using Lowercase sigmabot III for archiving on your talk page, which I also use, yet your post from 2 May on my talk page was never archived. I have removed the added formatting from your datestamp to see if the bot will now archive it. MusikAnimal talk 12:29, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the non-breaking spaces in the timestamp. Let us see if the lowered intelligence requirement triggers a change in behaviour. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Hell yeah![edit]

Hi there. Thanks for the info! Cani get a hell yeah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.233.247 (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you got it! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Reference errors on 4 June[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:30, 5 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

can you look into this?[edit]

I tried to clean up Soybean Car but other editors thought I was a vandal. All of the refs in the Sources section are already refs in the body of the article. I also tried to get rid of dead links and blog posts etc. Can you check it out. 118.93.90.74 (talk) 02:53, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have replicated some of the minor changes.
  • The blog in external links may well be appropriate even if it is not suitable for a reference.
  • Dead links should not be removed unless an alternative source is supplied, sometimes this is an archive version of the dead link.
  • The conversion to "sfn" would remove the duplication. This was proposed on the talk page a little while ago, and is in progress now. You can discuss on the talk page.
  • You should at all costs avoid edit wars, even, and perhaps especially if you are right.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

The Signpost: 03 June 2015[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #161[edit]

At Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2/Proposed decision, with the exception of arbitrators and clerks, all editors must create a section for their statement and comment only in their own section. Therefore, please move your comments into your own section. Thank you. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 18:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rich, my apologies on spelling your name "Frambrough". L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 03:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
NP, probably gave anyone who saw it a giggle. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:47, 8 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

The Signpost: 10 June 2015[edit]

I asked Daniel Case but i trust you as well. Can you take a look at Daisy (advertisement)‎? An IP edited the article and has messed things up - i tried to fix it but i could use help - especially because the IP seemed to think the Daisy girl messing up her numbers was scripted - it wasn't, it was just the child actress being a three year toddler and toddlers don't know their numbers that well and do not have the ability to truly act or follow a script. Paul Austin (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any issue after your edit there. User:Daniel Case reverted to the version before the IP. I have reinstated the further reading. If someone has the book, it might be easier to check minor details such as the actor's age at the time of shooting. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Rich. Is this filter being monitored? It seems to be a bit too broad currently for any disallow/warn actions to be taken, but I was wondering if you're checking the caught edits. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This was based on a request at Village Pump (IIRC). I have browsed the log a few times and caught a few things. I really need to present the filter log to the BLP noticeboard, and see if they can make regular use of it.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #162[edit]

This article is largely uncited and uses emotional POV language such as "reliable". Can you take a hacksaw to it? Paul Austin (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article would certainly benefit from more citations. It should also cover New World A'Coming. I don't find the language that POV, maybe more of a tone issue. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

The Signpost: 17 June 2015[edit]

SP interview[edit]

Hey Rich, how are you seeing three-word lines on your screen? For me, it only makes the blockquote a little narrower, but I still have 24 words on the first line. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A formatting problem on Signpost

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Ah, a narrow screen. How does it look now? I've used upright= instead, so that it (should) sync to the size of your default image, rather than be hardcoded. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's a 24 inch screen...

I now see something like:

[I saw] carcasses of slaughtered
pigs in the kitchens of Muslim
houses, mines in the driveways of
Croat houses, [and] booby-trapped
Serb houses. But what really
affected me was the random

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

That's a 24-inch screen? I wouldn't have guessed that based on the image dimensions. To replicate what you're seeing on my 15.6-inch screen, I have to increase my font size to 30. What resolution are you at? 1920x1080? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
1920x1200. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:58, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Adminship[edit]

Hi Rich! I see you're one of the top five editors on Wikipedia, with over a million edits. You've been around over a decade — and you're still not an admin? That's unbelievable! With your permission, I'd like to nominate you :-) David Cannon (talk) 13:17, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David, you are welcome to nominate me. You should be aware that I had adminship removed a few years ago, see WP:ARBRF. The finding that said I had used my admin-tools incorrectly was vacated a short while later.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:19, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
  • Hey Rich. Where was the discussion that vacated that finding? It's a bit annoying that a link to that discussion was not placed on that page (I know that's not your fault). I find it darkly humorous that your arb case has it's own shortcut. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:25, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I created the short-cut a few minutes ago. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
That's great. In that case, I'll put your name forward as soon as another nomination of mine has been processed (i.e. in a few days). Just a question — if the Arbcom ruling was vacated, why weren't your admin privileges restored automatically? In my book, they should have been! David Cannon (talk) 08:27, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To answer that I would have to put myself in the mind of ArbCom, at which endeavour I have been moderately unsuccessful. They might well reply that RFA is always available, that I didn't ask, that my other sins are so egregious they could not consider it, that it didn't occur to them, or any of a thousand other reasons. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:57, 20 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Good points...[edit]

Just wanted to chime in that your comments here were spot on. Sorry if this disturbs your drama free days notice on the page, but wanted to let you know I agree with at least your original statement.--MONGO 05:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does not disturb at all! And your message is much appreciated, I don't know if it is wise to bring up these points, but it reassures me that it is right. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 10:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #163[edit]

Former Naval Person listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Former Naval Person. Since you had some involvement with the Former Naval Person redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Theosophist (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of GreenFacts for deletion[edit]

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GreenFacts_(2nd_nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jacques de Selliers (talk) 13:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Co-op Pilot Results & Mentoring[edit]

Hey there! The Co-op has been on a hiatus for a bit, but we are planning on opening up shop again soon. When you're able, please read over and respond to this update on our talk page. We have favorable results from our final report regarding the pilot, and we are interested in seeing who is available to mentor when we reopen our space and begin to send out invites again. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent by I JethroBT (talk · contribs) via Mass Message. (Opt-out instructions)

The Signpost: 24 June 2015[edit]

Invitation[edit]

Adminship[edit]

It's humbling to have been supported in my RfA by someone with the depth and breadth of your experience on these shores. I'm grateful for your kind words, and shall do my best to live up to them. Many, many thanks.--Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #164[edit]

Nifty template[edit]

This template Template:Establishment category by year by country looks pretty useful compared to template:estcatCountry, it seems to work correctly where it has been used for example at Category:2014 establishments in Thailand. Did you find any problems or is it ok to roll out more generally? Thanks, Tim! (talk) 09:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I hesitated to spend more time on it because it would have caused conflict at the time to "roll it out" (and would have been very labour intensive). Potential issues I can see are:
  • It could do with some user documentation, even if it's just one line.  Done
  • It doesn't automatically support establishments by year by continent, which would be nice.
  • It might be better to suppress or change the "See also: 2013 disestablishments in Foo" line where the category does not exist. On the other hand this may be considered a valuable hint to get that category created (and populated).
  • It might be worth considering what we should do if the category is empty. A tracking category could perhaps be added.
  • It might be worth creating a parallel "disestablishments" template.  Done at the time...
I'm not aware of any problems where the category name is well formed.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
It does assume that certain parent categories exist. They probably should exist if the category itself does. This is not the case, for example with Category:2013 establishments in Rivers State.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Also it may have issues with BC/BCE years. This could be fixed pretty easily.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:20, 28 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks Rich, I'll have look if I can try it out. The problems you highlight exist with the other template anyway - in fact I spent a bit of time yesterday filling in red categories from Wikipedia:Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories/5 where it had been used. Tim! (talk) 05:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edit request[edit]

Your comment at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Rich_Farmbrough_2#Questions_for_the_candidate included a reference to User:NewYorkBrad. The red color of that link left me concerned. I'm relieved to see that you meant (I assume) User:Newyorkbrad. Could you change it? I would, but I'm extremely careful about editing comments of others especially given the small possibility that you deliberately intended the red link for some reason.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:36, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for pointing that out. You are welcome to make spelling/typo corrections to any of my comments. I have, in the distant past, attempted subtle subtexts on Wikipedia. These attempts have all been dismal failures. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for helping out at the Teahouse[edit]

I mean that sincerely. You were brave to agree to be nominated for RfA, and you are handling things with aplomb. I wish you well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. Feedback is not only supportive, but useful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Nominated for adminship[edit]

Hi Rich! I've nominated you for restoration of adminship. (About time I kept my promise to do so:-)) David Cannon (talk) 12:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It will be instructive to see what happens. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:22, 27 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Good luck. -- (talk) 12:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rich, I'll lend my support. Good luck! Audit Guy (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
  • @Davidcannon: The new RfA was reverted shortly after it was initiated as it was located on the page of Rich's old RfA. I have copied the nomination to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rich Farmbrough 2 and formatted it. When ready for !voting, please transclude this RfA to the main RfA page and follow the instructions at the top of the request page. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I have accepted the nom, and answered the standard questions. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
    Would you like me to transclude the nomination? Thine Antique Pen (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That would be good, thanks. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
    Done, good luck! Thine Antique Pen (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    well it was unanimous last time, it is unanimous so far this time! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:40, 28 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
    Hi Rich, So sorry to note the negative trend. I wanted to contribute but I don't think my supporting vote would make a difference! Perhaps, should things change......My best wishes to you though. Audit Guy (talk) 05:09, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I've put in my bit. Hope it helps. Best wishes Rich! Audit Guy (talk) 09:47, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, your !vote is important. If there is a broadly 50/50 split that is valuable data - in fact whatever the result is the information is useful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
  • Perhaps this came a little too early for some people ... try again in maybe 2022 ;) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    To paraphrase John Maynard Keynes, to influence current affairs it is better to do something while we are still alive to do it. -- (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll second that! Audit Guy (talk) 10:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    There are certainly one or two "opposes" who suggest another year or two would change their minds. While a "pass" seems incredibly unlikely, the current balance is far more positive than certain people have suggested it would be. Admin tools are useful, but not essential. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
    It isn't so much that it came too early, but that there is a bloc of voters at contentious RFAs who will oppose the first time and support the second almost irrespective of the gap since the last incident. Hopefully this RFA will pass, but if it doesn't another in 2016 will probably pass and certainly do much better than this, whereas I'm pretty sure that if Rich had waited another year before running there would have been some people opposing because in effect it was his first attempt to regain the tools. Sad that this sort of thing is necessary, but if you let people vent their spleen in this RFA and then keep your nose clean for a few months the next RFA will be much easier. Nothing really negative is being diffed from the last 24 months, and unless someone finds something recent then I would hope the percentage of support will steadily rise, probably to more than 60% but it could even end in the discretion zone. ϢereSpielChequers 13:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Undoing a move you made back in 2008[edit]

Hi Rich, could you move Good manufacturing practice back to Good Manufacturing Practice? The capitalization is pretty much standard worldwide. Thanks, Heaviside glow (talk) 18:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking:
  • Ngrams says otherwise (area under blue curve plus area under red curve > area under green curve).
  • Wikipedia style is to "Use lowercase, except for proper names: Titles are written in sentence case." See WP:LOWERCASE.
  • I think you would need an admin to move the page, since the redirect has been edited.
Sorry I can't be of more help.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]