Primefac

Links to Wikipedia

Hi. A link to Wikipedia on policy pages may be counter-intuitive at first, but makes sense in terms of both new and regular users seeing it and deciding to read the Wikipedia article (which they may have never thought of reading). A link also makes sense in terms of understanding the full concept of the encyclopedia, which, again, many editors (new, old, or wandering by for a look) and the project may benefit from. So I think the links should stay, and were already on many pages. Thanks for the edit summary. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. Seems like overlinking to me but it's not a hill I even feel like getting a papercut on. Primefac (talk) 13:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. You made me realize that papercuts are probably becoming much rarer since the use of computers and mobile, and soon children will ask their great-grandparents, "Great papa, what's a papercut?" Then the grandparents will show them, and the children will PTSD all over the place and run screaming from the room. But I digress... Randy Kryn (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hah! Primefac (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Blocked user after procedural close?

I might be missing something, but this thread did not seem to indicate cause for this action. Would you mind explaining in a few details why you blocked that user? Please ping any response. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit conflict - two minutes before I blocked, Ammarpad closed the discussion. Figured it wasn't worth re-opening or commenting. Primefac (talk) 02:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC) Didn't see the request to ping. Primefac (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

[Thank you for the ping] Ah, gotcha that makes sense! Likely it won't matter since they aren't too keen on editing anymore regardless. Thank you for the explanation! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox football league season

Hi, since you protected the template, I can't make the change myself. Can you arrange a parameter for teams which withdrew (e.g. bankrupcy or voluntary relegation) or got removed (e.g. multiple no shows or misbehavior of players/fans) from a league (during the season). The documentation mentions a "Dissolved" parameter. However this parameter is not implemented. Dissolved doesn't cover all scenario's anyway. In case of a voluntary relegation, dissolved isn't the appropriate term. So maybe even 2 parameters, "dossived" and "withdrawn". --Sb008 (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

If you know a better option, i'm open minded. --Sb008 (talk) 19:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Sb008: Or you can use {{Edit template-protected}}. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, please make a talk page request so that others interested in the template can comment if necessary. Primefac (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

I have left a message on Template talk:Infobox time zone UTC regarding why we should unlock the template as we used to.

Hi Primefac, I have left a message on Template talk:Infobox time zone UTC regarding why we should unlock the template as we used to because I made a mistake by accidentally using edit warring when I didn’t know before I edited so now I know not to. I’m sorry I used edit warring when editing and I promise I won’t use it again, so I think we should unlock the template as we used to because me using edit warring was a mistake, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 11:28, 18 June 2019

There seem to be some decent discussions about the template, so let's see how they play out. Primefac (talk) 20:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Primefac may you get this to the editors that participated in the Administrator's noticeboard/I need help dealing with a Disruptive user

I tried to edit that discussion but it concluded before I had the chance to participate again. I was at work. I'm asking for your assistance because you were on the side of the section. I don't know if you were part of the discussion but I don't know how to contact them as a whole. And contacting them individually seems like too much work to me. If you can't then simply tell me so.

"Understood and I'll try to get better as an editor in this regard as it is correct I am not the best with edit summaries and I don't have much experience on Talk pages with other editors and I should begin to do that more. I need to personally improve in this regard. I had no intention of creating this section/discussion to belittle or demean MarnetteD. As redundant as it is to restate I have no quarrel with someone I don't know personally. I will try to take it to the forums you guys have told me of such as WT:FILM, WP:OR, WP:NOTESSAY, and WP:SECONDARY. Which before this I had not known about it. I will state that it's hard to learn from other editors as I often get nothing but minor snippets from them. Personally I wish there was an editor that would help me improve in all these regards by guiding me step by step. Now I know this is a content dispute and not behavioral. I didn't know which forum to take this to, I simply thought I was taking the appropriate actions. I have nothing else to comment on and I regard this case as closed. Thank you for all of you taking your time to even discuss this with me.

If any of you dislike me then that's fine, I don't any of you personally so that would be a waste of emotional effort on your part and mine. I don't know if any of you do, I simply am just stating this if that is the case with anyone here or other editors not on here who take issue with my problematic editing. This is simply a case of Wikipedia being a difficult thing to figure out.

If anyone receives this please know there was never any malicious intent." User:IceBrotherhood (talk 21:38, 20 June 2019

IceBrotherhood, let's start simple - if you write a huge paragraph of stuff it's very likely that it will go unread. I found it hard to follow your original thread on WP:AN; it does sound like it's a content dispute, but I'm still not entirely sure the actual substance of that dispute. Where's the original page/thread that you were editing? Primefac (talk) 12:21, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

TfD open for 14+ days, vote 4:1

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 June 6#Template:Infobox Palestine municipality - could you close it? It's the last Arab League member state that is not standardized. 78.54.44.99 (talk) 16:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

How long will my proposed changes to Template:Infobox time zone UTC be discussed?

Hi Primefac, how long will it take for my proposed changes to Template:Infobox time zone UTC be discussed because I really want to put them down on the main template to help improve the article and Wikipedia, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 12:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Technically I'm still waiting to hear back from you regarding the unused timezones. Also, the split proposal (which I'm somewhat in favour of) has not seen any reply by you. It's almost as if you don't actually want to discuss these things and just want to edit it the way you want. Primefac (talk) 12:48, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Primefac, I have just left messages on Template talk:Infobox time zone UTC regarding the unused time zones and the split proposal, I’m in favour of the split proposal because it will provide more information about the time zones and the Méridan of them and it will show a map of all the UTC time offsets.

I agree with your idea about you saying the unused time zones should not have a colour or have a key saying "  are no longer used because it will make more sense by having the colours of the time zones only being used because the colours and time zones won’t be a little confusing. Lachlb (talk) 13:20, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Okay. Primefac (talk) 13:29, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, I have just left a message on Template:Infobox time zone UTC requesting that the split proposal be installed and move the unused time zones onto a separate template and should not have a colour or have a key "  are no longer used. Please can you have a look at my edit requests and say what you think of them, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 10:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Index

Is Wikipedia talk:Bots/Archive index and Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox/search needed now that Wikipedia:Bots/ArchiveBox is more functional? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Not really. I created the index because {{talk header}} already contains the archives on WT:BOTS and WT:BRFA, but I don't think we need either page. If you don't think either is necessary I'll G7 it. Primefac (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

The index might have some worth, but usually archive indexices have a sort of summary about each threads (e.g. Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_Index). If it's not in that format, I doubt there would be much value in them. G7 would probably make sense. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Thanks! Primefac (talk) 19:24, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Permission to use AutoWikiBrowser

Primefac,

I see that you have the authority to allow editors to use the AutoWikiBrowser. You have addressed the use-requests of three editors, who all applied for permission after I did, yet you did not address my request.

If this place is the proper forum for doing so, please share your reasoning for neither approving or denying my request for permission to use the AutoWikiBrowser. If it is proper that this discussion takes place somewhere else, then I apologize for bringing up the question here, and I will be happy to repeat my question wherever you deem is the best place for us to discuss the situation.

I appreciate your attention to this matter, and I thank you, for your work on Wikipedia. catsmoke (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

You made a reasonable request, just didn't have time to think it through; the other requests were pretty straight-forward. Primefac (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

redirect

Hi. You just created a redirect page from a viable article. It has enough content to be classified as a stub, and developed later. The article is Ministry of Justice (Romania). And the redirect is towards a page with no info on the subject. What do you think is missing from the article? --MSClaudiu (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

MSClaudiu, the old version of the page (which you restored) was nothing more than a list of Justice Ministers. The page should be about the ministry, and if all that can be said is "The Ministry of Justice of Romania is one of the ministries of the Romanian Government. It administers the judicial system" then there's not enough information for an article. You are more than welcome to create a list article of the Justice Ministers, but that would likely be located at List of Justice Ministers of Romania, similar to List of Ministers of Finance of Romania. Primefac (talk) 13:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Sarah Segal-Lazar speedy deletion

Hi - I resubmitted the copyright permission form and received the following message: An email has been received at OTRS concerning this file, and can be read as ticket:2019062110000502 by users with an OTRS account. The email is in a queue awaiting processing.

However I do not understand why the rest of the page was deleted as I believe it conforms with standard wikipedia practices. Could you please be specific about any problems and I will try to correct them.

Thanks, Barry (BJLMtl) BJLMtl (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

BJLMtl, you sent in a permission request for the image that was nominated for deletion, which I believe is in the process of being dealt with. The article was deleted because it took content from other websites with little or no actual editing. Text copied from online sources, unless freely available for reproduction, is not allowed. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Let me know if I can answer any further questions. Primefac (talk) 23:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Redundant refs in infobox

Per you edits Steve Kazor, on what basis should we need redundant references in infoboxes? Such references are typically absent from Good Articles and others well-developed articles. Jweiss11 (talk)

Nah, you're right; I think I either mis-remembered or misread WP:INFOBOXREF; if it's in the text it doesn't need to be referenced in the IB. Primefac (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Infobox country

Just a reminder in case you have forgotten; it's been about four months and the thread has been archived. Template talk:Infobox country/Archive 13#Parameters. I still can't get this category down to zero. Thanks. MB 04:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I was looking at this yesterday and got completely sidetracked by more pressing issues. It's on my to-do list and I'll try to get to it in the next couple of days. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

courtesy notification

This is a courtesy note that based on your recent close [1] I have recommended that you be added as a party to the pending WJBscribe case [2] Regards, Crazynas t 09:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Seen, commented. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom courtesy note

Given the action taken re WJBscribe, I have added you as a party to case request. - SchroCat (talk) 10:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Seen, commented. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

RL infobox

Sorry to bother you, but when you have a bit of time would you mind updating this template as discussed on the talk page? J Mo 101 (talk) 11:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'll put it on my to-do list. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent disruption by Vulphere

Hello, I noticed that you are the one who have given this user AutoWikiBrowser rights. Their recent contributions show that they edited multiple articles (40 if I am not mistaken) in a very short time. All of the articles are within the scope of WikiProject Anime and Manga. They removed Romaji names from those article's infobox without giving edit summary. It took me minutes to clean up their mess. Also I just checked those edits on xtools and it turned out those were not automated edits. I had to issue warnings (including a level 4) to them. I think that their account has been compromised. My point is here that I don't feel comfortable that they have AWB rights. It may cause more disruption in future. Masum Reza^📞 04:47, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100, the only edits I see by them using JWB (seen here if I'm not mistaken) are them adding kanji and romaji text to infoboxes and fixing minor grammar issues. I'm not sure why that warrants a level four warning for disruption. Primefac (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes. But seeing how they were making edits I thought it was some kind of automated program. I issued those warnings because they were rapidly removing valid information from articles without giving any kind of explanation. Masum Reza^📞 12:53, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Unless there's a tag that says it's automated (see the edits I linked above) it's not automated, just "fast editing". Looking into their subsequent edits, they both added and removed the romaji and kanji. Maybe they decided (or realized) that they shouldn't have made those edits. Primefac (talk) 13:11, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

But some of them weren't made by them. Also they should have left an edit summary. I see no reason to remove valid, verifiable, true information from article. When one edits Wikipedia, they release their contributions to this website via a CC 4.O license. They should not remove them without a good cause. Besides articles are not owned by editors. Masum Reza^📞 13:35, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

That is utter nonsense. There are a hundred different reasons why someone would revert their edits, with or without an edit summary. If you don't see a reason to remove material that someone has added themselves, you're welcome to revert them, but to give a level-4 warning for someone undoing their own edits is unnecessary. Until they respond, consider the fact that they might have had a very good reason to do so. Primefac (talk) 15:06, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

On the other hand, Vulphere, I'm a little concerned that you managed to get four warning notices on your talk page while actively editing without (at the very least) responding to them when you were finished. Primefac (talk) 12:38, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

re-edting of Sarah Segal-Lazar page

Hi - thanks for your explanation. Can I have access to the page so that I can see what has been copied and where it came from. I would like the opportunity to re-edit so that it meets Wikipedia requirements.

- Barry 

BJLMtl (talk) 15:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

What is the best way to install my proposed changes down on Template:Infobox time zone UTC if the template gets unlocked to avoid them getting deleted and the template locked again?

Hi Primefac, I’ve heard there has been discussions about my request to unlock the template on 1 August this year. I wanted to ask you a question about how I can install my proposed changes if the template gets unlocked because I’m worried I might make a mistake when I install them? Can you please show me the best way to avoid them getting deleted and the template locked again, thank you. Lachlb (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)