User talk:Schwede66: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 292: | Line 292: | ||
Thank you for your help with the entry [[Margi Robertson]]. It has proven invaluable and I appreciate the time and attention that you devoted to the task. I am new to Wikipedia and still trying to get my head around the citation system. I noticed that you seem to suggest that I enter newspaper articles using the "manual" mode and then checking "news" for the template. I noticed that this gives a different format (or maybe I am doing something wrong) than checking "automatic" (last name first for example). Is it preferable to use the "automatic" function as opposed to the "manual function"? I have been using the "automatic" function for online sources and only entering these manually when the "automatic" function fails (generates a message saying that it cannot generate the citation automatically). I have been using the manual function only when the automatic function fails or when I am citing hardcopy. Do let me know if I am doing something wrong here. I am accustomed to a number of different referencing systems but find that this knowledge doesn't translate well into the Wikipedia environment. Any advice you might have would be much appreciated.[[User:Yrarendar|Yrarendar]] ([[User talk:Yrarendar|talk]]) 05:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
Thank you for your help with the entry [[Margi Robertson]]. It has proven invaluable and I appreciate the time and attention that you devoted to the task. I am new to Wikipedia and still trying to get my head around the citation system. I noticed that you seem to suggest that I enter newspaper articles using the "manual" mode and then checking "news" for the template. I noticed that this gives a different format (or maybe I am doing something wrong) than checking "automatic" (last name first for example). Is it preferable to use the "automatic" function as opposed to the "manual function"? I have been using the "automatic" function for online sources and only entering these manually when the "automatic" function fails (generates a message saying that it cannot generate the citation automatically). I have been using the manual function only when the automatic function fails or when I am citing hardcopy. Do let me know if I am doing something wrong here. I am accustomed to a number of different referencing systems but find that this knowledge doesn't translate well into the Wikipedia environment. Any advice you might have would be much appreciated.[[User:Yrarendar|Yrarendar]] ([[User talk:Yrarendar|talk]]) 05:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
||
:{{u|Yrarendar}}, welcome to WP and thank you for your contributions. Yes, it's a long and steep learning curve. I'm not familiar with the system of creating references that you describe, so I don't really know how that works. There are slight differences between [[template:cite web]] and [[template:cite news]] but if your system doesn't give you those options, then don't worry about it and keep doing what you are doing. Wikipedia is an exercise in collaboration; if it's not 100% right, somebody else can and (at least eventually) will fix it. Feel free to ask any questions you may have or for assistance with further articles. And a tip – it's easier for others if you wikilink relevant pages in talk page discussions (for example, I've edited your entry above so that the bio in question is linked). '''[[User:Schwede66|<span style="color: #000000;">Schwede</span>]][[User talk:Schwede66|<span style="color: #FF4500;">66</span>]]''' 19:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
:{{u|Yrarendar}}, welcome to WP and thank you for your contributions. Yes, it's a long and steep learning curve. I'm not familiar with the system of creating references that you describe, so I don't really know how that works. There are slight differences between [[template:cite web]] and [[template:cite news]] but if your system doesn't give you those options, then don't worry about it and keep doing what you are doing. Wikipedia is an exercise in collaboration; if it's not 100% right, somebody else can and (at least eventually) will fix it. Feel free to ask any questions you may have or for assistance with further articles. And a tip – it's easier for others if you wikilink relevant pages in talk page discussions (for example, I've edited your entry above so that the bio in question is linked). '''[[User:Schwede66|<span style="color: #000000;">Schwede</span>]][[User talk:Schwede66|<span style="color: #FF4500;">66</span>]]''' 19:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC) |
||
Thank you for your prompt and helpful response. I will remember to add links next time! [[User:Yrarendar|Yrarendar]] ([[User talk:Yrarendar|talk]]) 04:24, 7 April 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 04:24, 7 April 2018
| This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Schwede66. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Please add items to the bottom of this page. I will normally reply on this page to any conversation started here. There is no need to post DYK follow-ups here, as I watchlist DYK nomination forms where I leave comments.
Administrators' newsletter – January 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).
Muboshgu
Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
None
- A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.
- The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
- The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.
- Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Alex Shih, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, Worm That Turned.
Happy Adminship Anniversary, Schwede66!
Thank you kindly. Schwede66 01:49, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- Another thanks. You have helped me heaps at the start of the past year and though we haven't interacted much recently I still owe you a huge thanks. :) J947 (contribs · mail) 08:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- J947, the pleasure is all mine; I get a lot out of helping keen editors who show a lot of promise. Schwede66 08:58, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| good sports | |
|---|---|
| ... you were recipient no. 1548 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot, Gerda. Schwede66 08:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Interview request
Hi there,
I'm a journalist working on a story for Radio New Zealand's The Wireless about the representation of women in Wikipedia articles. I'm particularly interested in the current effort to turn Kate Sheppard's page into a featured article and would love to talk with you about your involvement in the project. would you be available for a short interview over Skype or phone in the near future? If so, or if you have any questions, you can contact me at [email protected]. I'd be really grateful for your help!
Best,
Tom Phillips TommyWommy (talk) 04:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 January 2018
- News and notes: Communication is key
- In the media: The Paris Review, British Crown and British Media
- Featured content: History, gaming and multifarious topics
- Interview: Interview with Ser Amantio di Nicolao, the top contributor to English Wikipedia by edit count
- Technology report: Dedicated Wikidata database servers
- Arbitration report: Mister Wiki is first arbitration committee decision of 2018
- Traffic report: The best and worst of 2017
deletion request under U1
Even though I use monobook,I added the script to my common file. It seems to be worimg fine now. Would you kindly delete User:Usernamekiran/monobook.js please? Pretty please. —usernamekiran(talk) 01:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Somebody's beaten me to it. Schwede66 03:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- It was a Slowily user I'd say. Also, you should start using pings
See you around guys. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 05:57, 19 January 2018 (UTC) - Also, how do you manage your archives? I mean, in the history I can see you doing it manually, but how do you create the pages? manually again? —usernamekiran(talk)
- Usernamekiran, sorry, I overlooked your last query. Yes, I do all of that manually. It gets managed via User:Schwede66/Archive box. When you create the next line for the next archive, it shows up as a red link. Click on it, start adding content (by archiving), and that turns it blue. Schwede66 00:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi. Thanks for the reply. And, lolol!!! I know how redlinks work
It is just, dont you find it boring/cumbersome archiving the discussions manually again n again? My talkpage isnt much active, but I guess I am lazy at that. I archived my talkpage recently after a long time ago. I had ClueBot for it, but then I set the time parameter for a huge amount. Then I switched from "Archives/YYYY/Month" format to "Archives/plain-numbers" format. But I think I should do something like yours. But not sure if I would be able to keep up with it, given my fondness for laziness. I would like your opinions regarding that. Like, how often it needs to be done, and similar things. I dont find anything boring, just plain lazy; like "yes, thats interesting. I will do it later/tomorrow." —usernamekiran(talk) 12:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)- I don't find it too taxing to manually archive once every few months. I don't do this to a particular time schedule, but when my talk page becomes too long. Schwede66 17:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi. Thanks for the reply. And, lolol!!! I know how redlinks work
- Usernamekiran, sorry, I overlooked your last query. Yes, I do all of that manually. It gets managed via User:Schwede66/Archive box. When you create the next line for the next archive, it shows up as a red link. Click on it, start adding content (by archiving), and that turns it blue. Schwede66 00:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- It was a Slowily user I'd say. Also, you should start using pings
Just an FYI
Hi, wanted to let you know that the reason I'd reverted the new user on Clive Roberts is because it's one of the most prolific sock farms that I've ever seen. There's some good edits mixed in with vandalism. That's all for now. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 00:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I wondered about the background to your revert, Dawnseeker2000. That clarifies it; thanks for the heads up. Schwede66 00:19, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Need help with Russian language names
Artem Ponomarenko, my guess is that you speak English, too. I see you work on Russian-language rowing articles. I could really do with a hand, as I'm struggling with names of Russian rowers. I'm setting up individual pages for the European Rowing Championships, and the sources are mostly in German. The Soviet rowers' spelling of their German names is often vastly different to their English names. I'm creating Wikidata items in parallel so that there's at least some name consistency between the different years. Is there a chance you giving me a hand with this task? Schwede66 00:40, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- Firstly. thank you Schwede66for what you do! Secondly, yes, indeed - I`m ready to help you. Just prepare for me some name list and I will translate for you. Artem Ponomarenko (talk) 09:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).
- An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
- Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.
- A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.
- The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardized editnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.
The Signpost: 5 February 2018
- Featured content: Wars, sieges, disasters and everything black possible
- Traffic report: TV, death, sports, and doodles
- Special report: Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative
- Arbitration report: New cases requested for inter-editor hostility and other collaboration issues
- In the media: Solving crime; editing out violence allegations
- Humour: You really are in Wonderland
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
- We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
New Year Backlog Drive results:
- We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!
General project update:
- ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
- Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 February 2018
- News and notes: The future is Swedish with a lack of administrators
- Recent research: Politically diverse editors write better articles; Reddit and Stack Overflow benefit from Wikipedia but don't give back
- Arbitration report: Arbitration committee prepares to examine two new cases
- Traffic report: Addicted to sports and pain
- Featured content: Entertainment, sports and history
- Technology report: Paragraph-based edit conflict screen; broken thanks
Thank you
For suggesting me to use User:Anomie/linkclassifier. It has proven very useful. Especially while performing post move clean-up after performing round-robin moves. This is going to be my last edit for around 15 hours I think, so you can see my edits related to "dragon breath", at the top of my contrib history. It is one of the circumstances where it would have been very irritating to check everything manually (even with "pop-ups"). Thanks again. See you around :) —usernamekiran(talk) 23:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
- I’m glad to hear that my suggestion was helpful. Thanks for the thanks. Schwede66 00:38, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).
- † Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.
- The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
- Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
- A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
- A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.
- CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
- The edit filter has a new feature
contains_allthat edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.
- Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.
- Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Table formatting
I see that in all your European Rowing Championship pages the formatting of the table has failed, apparently not accepting your rowspan=2 in the first cell. I've corrected it for one page in this edit so you'll see how to correct it for the others. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- David Biddulph Sorry, I've looked at it with three different browsers but can't see a problem. What browser are you using, and what's the problem that arises for you before you apply your fix? Schwede66 16:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting. I now see that it's OK in Edge and in Internet Explorer, but the problem is in Chrome, see this screen grab: File:WP screen grab.jpg - David Biddulph (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- Hm. Chrome is one of the browsers that I am using (mostly for the purpose of reading a translated page) but I've never seen this before. I'll keep an eye on it. Thanks for the heads up. Schwede66 16:55, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting. I now see that it's OK in Edge and in Internet Explorer, but the problem is in Chrome, see this screen grab: File:WP screen grab.jpg - David Biddulph (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
NZ Wikipedian at Large
Hi there. I have a Project Grant open for comment at the moment, to fund me for a year as a NZ Wikipedian at Large. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your opinion as an experienced NZ Wikimedian. If you think the proposal's a good one, I'd be very grateful for your endorsement; if you can see problems or have suggestions, feel free to comment on the Discussion page. No pressure; it would be good to have more local input from people who know the NZ Wikipedia scene. Cheers, Mike (Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 06:58, 7 March 2018 (UTC))
- Thanks for the prod. I saw this earlier on the WPNZ page but needed this reminder to voice my opinion. Schwede66 22:48, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
New article
Please take a look at (and add to?) List of electoral firsts in New Zealand, partly based on List of electoral firsts in the United Kingdom but with wider coverage of MPs and ministers generally. Hugo999 (talk) 04:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- Good stuff, John! Schwede66 04:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
- News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.
- Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.
- Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers
- Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs
- Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.
- Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.
- Humour: WikiWorld Reruns
New Page Review Newsletter No.10
ACTRIAL:
- ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.
Paid editing
- Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.
Subject-specific notability guidelines
- The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
- Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?
Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
- While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.
News
- The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.
To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Election box templates
User Neveselbert has modified several election box templates. As these are used on tens of thousands of pages I feel that some sort of consensus should be required to do so. I can't revert most of them so was wondering if you could? These ones in particular:
- Template:Election box informal
- Template:Election box majority
- Template:Election box registered electors
- Template:Election box total
- Template:Election box turnout
Thanks. Kiwichris (talk) 09:46, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Have left a message on his talk page under your message. Let’s see what will happen. Schwede66 16:49, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, it would seem unlikely that a self revert will occur or even for a proper discussion to happen. The user is now inferring that I'm accusing them of bad faith, which I most certainly have not. I suggest now that an admin should revert the changes per WP:CYCLE which hopefully could start a more constructive dialogue. Kiwichris (talk) 01:41, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Kiwichris, I have been at Totaranui for the last couple of days; no cell coverage. I suggest that you put your reason why you disagree with at least one aspect of the changes to Neveselbert; stay calm even if you get accused of bad faith. That will move it from maintenance to controversial, and as soon as it's disputed, the edit can be reversed (for interest, have a read of WP:TPEREVOKE). Given that I've been WP:INVOLVED, the reverting shouldn't come from me. Maybe involve Primefac as they have only just granted template editor rights to Neveselbert. Schwede66 19:03, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- Well, it would seem unlikely that a self revert will occur or even for a proper discussion to happen. The user is now inferring that I'm accusing them of bad faith, which I most certainly have not. I suggest now that an admin should revert the changes per WP:CYCLE which hopefully could start a more constructive dialogue. Kiwichris (talk) 01:41, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).
- Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
- Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
- The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
- The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.
- There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.
- The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.
- A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
- The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
Margi Robertson
Thank you for your help with the entry Margi Robertson. It has proven invaluable and I appreciate the time and attention that you devoted to the task. I am new to Wikipedia and still trying to get my head around the citation system. I noticed that you seem to suggest that I enter newspaper articles using the "manual" mode and then checking "news" for the template. I noticed that this gives a different format (or maybe I am doing something wrong) than checking "automatic" (last name first for example). Is it preferable to use the "automatic" function as opposed to the "manual function"? I have been using the "automatic" function for online sources and only entering these manually when the "automatic" function fails (generates a message saying that it cannot generate the citation automatically). I have been using the manual function only when the automatic function fails or when I am citing hardcopy. Do let me know if I am doing something wrong here. I am accustomed to a number of different referencing systems but find that this knowledge doesn't translate well into the Wikipedia environment. Any advice you might have would be much appreciated.Yrarendar (talk) 05:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
- Yrarendar, welcome to WP and thank you for your contributions. Yes, it's a long and steep learning curve. I'm not familiar with the system of creating references that you describe, so I don't really know how that works. There are slight differences between template:cite web and template:cite news but if your system doesn't give you those options, then don't worry about it and keep doing what you are doing. Wikipedia is an exercise in collaboration; if it's not 100% right, somebody else can and (at least eventually) will fix it. Feel free to ask any questions you may have or for assistance with further articles. And a tip – it's easier for others if you wikilink relevant pages in talk page discussions (for example, I've edited your entry above so that the bio in question is linked). Schwede66 19:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt and helpful response. I will remember to add links next time! Yrarendar (talk) 04:24, 7 April 2018 (UTC)