Gonnym
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Strange revert at Template:Animanga/Print
editI do not understand your edit summary for this revert. This is a standard practice that I have applied to dozens or hundreds of templates. Editors apply italic or bold formatting to template parameters without considering that other editors might place italics or bold markup at the beginning or end of the template parameter value. This can lead to invalid formatting and Linter errors where there is no invalid syntax in the article. Adding a space is a harmless way to separate the markup, fix the rendering, and remove the Linter error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your change didn't fix the error it just moved the error along to somewhere else. Instead of a lint error which is trackable, it now becomes a hidden error, since the issue is still there. Now the title will be bold with two single quotes on each side. If you've changed other templates like that, then that's a shame. Gonnym (talk) 07:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide an example of what you are talking about. You can see why I made this harmless edit at this testcase. Your live version has a missing bold end tag and a stray apostrophe. My sandbox version has neither. What are you objecting to in the sandbox version? – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Bumping. You have made 433 edits since I posted the note above. Meanwhile, articles have formatting errors in them because of your double revert. Do you have an example of how my change to the template would be undesirable? – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand what example you want me to give?
|magazine=Shonen Jump ''(2001–2003)''<br>Other magazine ''(2003–2005)''
is obviously incorrect syntax and should never be supported. Either the magazine field should be used for multiple entries and then it should be modified to remove italics from it, or that incorrect usages should be fixed. Supporting incorrect user entered values is the worse solution. According to the template /doc,|magazine=
is for theMagazine or anthology in which the work was serialized in
. While it isn't written, that usually means the first place it was, not all magazines. If that specific case is a situation where a work is continued in another magazine (and I have no idea if any real case has this), then we can edit the template to use {{Detect singular}} which will then allow to actually use multiple entries with valid italic syntax. However, that should be done only if there are real cases that need this and not because editors misuse this parameter. Gonnym (talk) 08:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)- I do not see it as obviously incorrect syntax. I have seen this syntax used in many articles in fields where people want to legitimately de-italicize part of a parameter value that is italicized by the template's code. Adding a space to the parameter in the template almost always does the trick, and I've done in dozens or hundreds of times. I don't have the real article case at my fingertips, as I didn't need to edit it (it had no actual errors, just a false positive Linter error), so it is once again lost in the sea of missing end tag articles, but I don't change templates just for fun. I don't know why you object to this one instance. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Because I don't follow your edits and I obviously did not see them. There are two main issues here.
Shonen Jump ''(2001–2003)''
outside your change will make the year in italics, while here the magazine will be in italics. Code should always work as expected everywhere. When you need to hack something like above, that's a sign you are doing something incorrectly.- Additionally, is this parameter for multiple magazines? Based on the doc it seems it's not intended for that.
- Gonnym (talk) 14:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- The code (in my version of the template) is working as expected for editors: the parameter value is normally italicized, so adding italic markup reverses those italics. This is standard stuff. Unfortunately, because you appear to not want a non-rendered space in the template, that normal reversing (a) does not work, (b) causes a Linter error, and (c) causes an extra ' to appear in the infobox. I don't have an answer for your second question, but I have seen editors justifiably put multiple entries in many infobox parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- The fact that editors do something does not make it valid. This isn't userspace where we need to accept the fact that editors do whatever they want. If the infobox is not supposed to accept multiple parameters, it shouldn't. I also disagree that it works as expected. A hack is a hack, not an expected standard code. Gonnym (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- The code (in my version of the template) is working as expected for editors: the parameter value is normally italicized, so adding italic markup reverses those italics. This is standard stuff. Unfortunately, because you appear to not want a non-rendered space in the template, that normal reversing (a) does not work, (b) causes a Linter error, and (c) causes an extra ' to appear in the infobox. I don't have an answer for your second question, but I have seen editors justifiably put multiple entries in many infobox parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Because I don't follow your edits and I obviously did not see them. There are two main issues here.
- I do not see it as obviously incorrect syntax. I have seen this syntax used in many articles in fields where people want to legitimately de-italicize part of a parameter value that is italicized by the template's code. Adding a space to the parameter in the template almost always does the trick, and I've done in dozens or hundreds of times. I don't have the real article case at my fingertips, as I didn't need to edit it (it had no actual errors, just a false positive Linter error), so it is once again lost in the sea of missing end tag articles, but I don't change templates just for fun. I don't know why you object to this one instance. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand what example you want me to give?
- Bumping. You have made 433 edits since I posted the note above. Meanwhile, articles have formatting errors in them because of your double revert. Do you have an example of how my change to the template would be undesirable? – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide an example of what you are talking about. You can see why I made this harmless edit at this testcase. Your live version has a missing bold end tag and a stray apostrophe. My sandbox version has neither. What are you objecting to in the sandbox version? – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Gonnym. Nice to meet you. I noticed that you are listed as a member of WP:TV and WP:FILM and thought that perhaps you would not mind taking a look at an edit request I posted for Danny Cohen, who previously was the Director of BBC Television, and is now the President of Access Entertainment. The request can be found at Talk:Danny Cohen (television executive)#Infobox, BBC Three, and Personal life. Thank you for your help. C at Access (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi - posting again just in case you missed my above message. I would greatly appreciate you taking a look! Thanks again, C at Access (talk) 14:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
What did your AWB bot edits do to my shortdesc edits?
editI noticed in my watchlist that you used AWB in some articles where I added/modified short descriptions. Most of the edits was just removing a space character and adding it again, so virtually no visible change. May I know what these edits do? What parameter changes did I miss? If I did anything wrong (technical? or not) in editing short descriptions (40 character limit can be broken if necessary, right?), tell me. I'm just 2 months old in Wikipedia, and I appreciate knowing more about particulars in editing.
Some examples of my edits that you followed below:
Korean Ocean Shipping Agency: Revision history - Wikipedia
Go-Bang: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia
Ryuji Ito: Revision history - Wikipedia RFNirmala (talk) 12:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hey yes. Apparently you are adding an invalid space character that is causing some issues. Those pages appeared at Wikipedia:Database reports/Short descriptions containing invalid space characters. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for that, but thanks for letting me know. But what would be the usual cause for inputting an invalid space character? Copying some words in the article introduction might include these invalid space characters (e.g. copied text generated from templates, non-breaking spaces)? I use mobile app in editing, so that might lead to a possible answer. RFNirmala (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, if you copied it from the article then that was probably the issue. Not a lot you can do really if you can't see the difference between one invisible space character and another. I've asked at the template page if this can somehow be converted into a proper tracking category so pages can appear right away there, which will make fixing these easier. Gonnym (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for that, but thanks for letting me know. But what would be the usual cause for inputting an invalid space character? Copying some words in the article introduction might include these invalid space characters (e.g. copied text generated from templates, non-breaking spaces)? I use mobile app in editing, so that might lead to a possible answer. RFNirmala (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Austria rail transport color templates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm just wondering when will you finish removing the template to the remaining 200+ articles? 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 07:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi
editCould you arrange a refund of Template:Articles per day. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC).
- I'm not an admin, so can't help you there. Gonnym (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
before you put them all up, are you the slightest interested in conversation?
editIt would be very interesting to see whether you are interested in conversation before you list the rest? JarrahTree 11:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sure. What did you have in mind? Gonnym (talk) 11:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have created a large amount of mfd before actually conversing, is that how you usually do it? JarrahTree 11:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- The MfD is the discussion. Do we need to have a discussion before we have a discussion now? You obviously think having dead WikiProjects is good (see this revert). I think we should get rid of needless clutter that requires editorial maintenance and adds no value. Where do you see this discussion going? Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Well, there will not be a discussion about the eight moribund Western Australian WikiProjects, because there will be eight discussions. Maybe User:JarrahTree is saying that a single discussion would have been useful, or that bundling the eight discussions would facilitate an overall discussion. I have already !voted to Delete all of the useless WikiProjects, and I don't think that discussion would have changed that, but I think that is what User:JarrahTree may be saying. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- If there were a single overall conversation about these WikiProjects, I would say that I am beginning to think that some editors seems to see mystical value in WikiProjects, just like some editors see mystical value in portals. Many large and medium-sized WikiProjects have significant functional value for developing the encyclopedia. But it appears that small WikiProjects are created for mystical reasons and kept for mystical reasons. Maybe a discussion somewhere besides MFD might be in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- The MfD is the discussion. Do we need to have a discussion before we have a discussion now? You obviously think having dead WikiProjects is good (see this revert). I think we should get rid of needless clutter that requires editorial maintenance and adds no value. Where do you see this discussion going? Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have created a large amount of mfd before actually conversing, is that how you usually do it? JarrahTree 11:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Brad Winderbaum
editHello, Gonnym. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Brad Winderbaum, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Sharon Carter
editRegarding this edit of yours, "their" isn't a pronoun that she uses. Thehunterisshadowy (talk) 19:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you are offended for a fictional character that has stated their preferred pronouns. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I just wanted to correct you; also, she's referred to with "she" and "her" pronouns. But yeah, I just wanted to correct you. Thehunterisshadowy (talk) 22:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Lost season 2
editHello, Gonnym. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lost season 2, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Sleight of Hand
editThat's even worse than the usual abandoned WikiProject. Were you looking for unused WikiProjects, or did you just stumble on it?
I wonder how many others are as unused as this one. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- These appeared in Category:WikiProject banners with errors while we were using the new system to add the templates to the parent categories automatically. Those that didn't have a category that matched the pattern were added there. Gonnym (talk) 13:01, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Edit on Report (TV program)
editHello Gonnym,
I had a quick question, what did you meant by the edit summary on Report (TV program)? The edit summary you wrote was "Remove extraneous per infobox instructions". The information you removed from the page was "(as of January 16, 2023)" from the infobox. Soafy234 (talk) 16:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the infobox parameter
|num_episodes=
should only have a number value. The as of should not be entered. The "as of" could just as much be relevant to the entire article. Ideally, the number of episodes should be mentioned in the article itself, and a reference should be attached to it, that way anyone can verify the number stated (the infobox should not add information not mentioned in the article per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE. Gonnym (talk) 10:52, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Let's Make a Deal
editJust a heads-up. When you repaired the infobox on Let's Make a Deal, you accidentally removed the announcers. I restored them. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. That parameter was missing from my cleanup template. Gonnym (talk) 07:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
I cleaned up Ghost Rider (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.) per WP:INCDAB as it was listed in Category:Disambiguation pages with (qualified) titles. All three dab entries are already seem to be listed in Ghost Rider (disambiguation), so I felt I didn't need to change anything about the target. There are no incoming links. IMO, this INCDAB page may as well get deleted, but I didn't want to go the PROD or AFD route. If you can resolve the underlying issue in a better way than my attempt, please do so. Thank you. – sgeureka t•c 12:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- None of the links appear in Ghost Rider (disambiguation). You might mean other, similar titled, links, which are not these. Gonnym (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Addition of a field in the movie template
editHello! Can you add a field concerning voice actors in the movie template?. That would have been useful to have mainly because the starring actors provided voices for the characters in animated motion pictures and so on. 80.212.169.202 (talk) 13:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Any new field needs to have consensus to be added, and that can only be done on the /talk page. Gonnym (talk) 14:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies
editCould you perhaps expand on your snarky edit summary? Primefac and I removed all the duplicate templates. What cleanup is outstanding? – Joe (talk) 06:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirecting one banner with a completely different name and scope to another banner isn't complete. Even only following WikiProject Council (which you previously quoted) Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces#Converting existing projects to task forces point #2 says Reply
- What's the problem with the remaining transclusions? WP Ancient Germanic studies was merged—by consensus—to WP History. All the pages that used to be tagged as in scope of WP Ancient Germanic studies are now tagged as in the scope of WP History (via the redirect). That is the intended outcome of the merge. You could bypass the redirect on the remaining 722 talk pages, I suppose, but that would just be a cosmetic source edit.
- I nominated WP Kamala Harris for deletion. It's not my responsibility to implement the redirect outcome and I already informed the inexperienced closer that they had done an incomplete job. – Joe (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
editNine years! |
---|
Virgninia categories
editYour rename has caused many category redirects to populate and the templates have no instructions for how to fix this (and the creator is now blocked). Please can you sort out the ones in Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories so they populate the correct categories. Thanks in advance. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:56, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've tagged the relevant categories with speedy rename. These should be fixed within two days. Gonnym (talk) 13:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Romania political party name templates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Years in the Colony of Virginia
editA tag has been placed on Category:Years in the Colony of Virginia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)