Jump to content

User talk:Chris Capoccia

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Boghog (talk | contribs) at 02:39, 10 August 2018 (→‎Milk allergy article: typo). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Changing the names of the refs

Why did you change the name to the PMID? Having the year in the name IMO is useful. Thus will switch back. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to check for duplicates and make sure that two refs weren't falling under different names. For example, there were two different refs for Anderson & Perry 2006. Some refs were named after authors and dates, some refs were named after some noun in the title like "pain" or "Enigma", some refs weren't named, some refs used the pmid number style. Anyway, I think all the duplicates are combined now, so I don't mind that you've changed the style for some of the refs back to author-year.  —Chris Capoccia TC 15:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your help! I just have a couple of questions.

Hi Chris, I have been working on the Bioelectricity Wikipedia page with my colleagues and I really appreciate all the help that you have provided us in making the page more suitable for Wikipedia. We have put in citations in all the places that citations have been requested and also responded to the suggestion to merge with Biomagnetics (which we do not agree with and put our statement in the appropriate talk page a couple of weeks ago). I am wondering if you'd be willing to remove the two tags on the top of the page that indicate the need for the citations (which we have put in) and the suggestion for the merge (which we don't agree with and no one else has added to the conversation)? I really appreciate your help with our efforts to make the field of Bioelectricity more available for the general public to learn about and to hopefully enrich and inspire lives through learning.

Best wishes and many thanks,

Tiadeeharrison (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2018 (EST)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sheila Kitzinger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Vernon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Tick Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Tornado chaser (talk) 16:05, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Milk allergy article

When I brought the Milk allergy article up to Good Article, the review asked that the formatting for the references be consistent. You partially deleted five, forcing a bot to repair those, using a different format. I have restored the consistent format. Please do not do any more reference reformatting on this article. To quote an earlier Talk page entry: "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference." David notMD (talk) 00:30, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A requirement for Featured Articles and also sometime Good Articles is consistent citation formatting. One of the advantages of |vauthors= is that it enforces a consistent format for first authors where as |first= enforces none. Chaining the citation format of a Good or Featured Article without obtaining consensus is especially problematic. Boghog (talk) 02:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There were first/last formats in the article before my edit. See reference named Caffarelli or Nanagas. Reference named BerniCananiPezzella2016 had a URL instead of using the PMC link and had incorrect pages. Reference named ShahSerajuddin2017 was missing volume, issue & pages. diff   —Chris Capoccia TC 03:21, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Before your first edit, 60 citations used |vauthors= and only 3 used |firstn=\|lastn= pairs. Clearly the Vancouver style was the predominate style before your first edit. In this diff, |vauthors= in 7 citations (VenterBrown2017, KoletzkoNiggemann2012, HeineAlRefaee2017, Feuille2015, Heyman2006, BerniCananiPezzella2016, Taylor2015) were replaced with |firstn=\|lastn= pairs. Why did you strip |vauthors= from these citations? Citation bot could have made all the other fixes you mention without touching the author parameters. Boghog (talk) 18:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]