User talk:Callmemirela/Archive 10
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
Template:NHL team schedule request
Hello, I've branched out a little into template editing recently and noticed your request for a new template. That request has been archived, hence my comment to you here about it rather than over there. I am somewhat swamped with duties for the moment, but, I'd be happy to help try and create something like this in the near future. I think you may find Template:X19 useful if you want to work on it yourself as well. It's a template sandbox where you can build up a template before letting it go live - assuming you're satisfied with the end result. I do have a couple of questions for you first though; 1. Do you need this template just for the Montreal Canadiens or do you want it to be useable for all NHL teams. 2. If for all teams, how are you going to work around the issue of "team colours". I think the team colours question may easily settled through a modifiable parameter rather than a static one. This does mean having to input the team colours in each individual template. I don't know what the feasibility of us making such a template is - as far as I noticed other sports seasonal results/schedules use wikitables as well -, but, could be worth a shot. That would be a couple of week aways though. Just thought I'd register my interest in helping you out with this project. Cheers, Mr rnddude (talk) 13:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: Thank you! I've been waiting for ages for somebody to answer me. To answer your suggestion: I have no knowledge or experience in templates except userboxes. I thank your for linking me to the sandbox, but it would not help because I don't know where to start from. To answer your questions: 1) I want it to be useable for all NHL teams. I noticed awhile ago that an NBA team was using a specific template for the scores and such, so I wanted to do it for hockey as well. 2) Since I have no clue what static is, my guess was to use a parameter like the series overview template for TV shows has. I was interested in making this template because the scores on the NHL teams look messy and confusing. It'a just a bunch of lines not indicating what it meant, where to put it, etc. Thank you again! Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 17:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- So I've taken a bit of a look around at what we'd need to make this template. There are some things that may make this fairly difficult, but, I think I can manage it. We'll need probably three templates simultaneously - you'll only need one, the others will be embedded within the first - and also one or two modules. The modules are the part that are going to be difficult. I have never tried to use Lua, or any other programming of this kind. That said, the modules will have a near identical function to ones that already exist. So I have a base from which to work from. The itinerary/task list is the below;
- Template for team colours - basically Template:NBA color except this will be for the NHL teams and will be located at Template:NHL team color - I can't use NHL color as that's taken for a different function. Incidentally, this is what the modules will be for.
- The first module will store team colour data. That will be located at Module:NHL team color/data. All I need for it is each teams' primary, secondary, tertiary and quarternary colours in hexadecimal. Home and Away colours in other words. Do all hockey teams have just three colors, btw? if so, then, forget the "quarternary colour".
- The second module will take the data from the first module and do this with it. What this is, I don't entirely know yet, but, I have an approximation of what it does in my head - I think it takes the data from the first module (module/data) and turns it into an output for use in templates. That second module will be located at Module:NHL team color.
- Template for the header - possibly I might not need this. The header is where the team colours will be displayed, so depending on the complexity of getting the modules to work within the header I may make this a separate template so that it is easier to use and doesn't clog the main template with lots of coding. Template:NHL game log header is probably where this template will be located.
- Template for the game logs - this is the main template and will have all other templates and headers embedded within it and will be the template you'll use in the articles. This will store the main parameters; game number, date, visitor, score, home, OT (SO? what is SO), Decision (referee in other sports I'm assuming), attendance, record, and recap.
- That's all I have for you now, I had some time so went to find what I'd need to make this template for you. I'll notify you once I've started building it, or, if I need something. Cheers, Mr rnddude (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Mr rnddude: “SO” indicates a game decided by a tie-breaking shootout; “Decision” is the name of the goalie who is credited with the win or loss. Team colours are not simply for home and away, but all together make a set or scheme, and vary in number; visiting teams usually wear white with coloured trim.—Odysseus1479 21:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response Odysseus1479. So the "decision" is in essence the person who was the deciding factor in the game. Makes sense to call them the decision. I did notice that for example the Montreal Canadiens wore primarily red in "home" gear and primarily "white" in away gear with blue being secondary in both cases. Mr rnddude (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Because goalies very rarely score, they’re rated by their goals-against average (per game, prorated according to the time they actually play in each), save percentage (goals ÷ shots on net), and win/loss record. The last is where the “decision“ counts (I believe it’s whoever was in net at the moment the game-winning goal was scored). I don’t know what will work best to display the colours in a header. I did a quick browse through our infoboxes, from which it appears that: most teams have three- or four-colour schemes (Detroit & Toronto have only two), all include white (the only one I noticed that doesn’t list it is Colorado, but nonetheless it’s prominent in their logo), and there are several sets that are shared by two or more teams except for slight differences (royal blue vs navy blue, &c.) with red-white-blue being the most popular—so I expect it will be tricky to make them all clearly distinct. Anyway, if you’d like me to compile a list of colours I‘d be happy to contribute that bit of legwork. And Callmemirela, excuse my butting in, but I hope you’ll forgive me if I join you in a chant of GO HABS GO!—Odysseus1479 23:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Odysseus1479, sure if youve got the time Id appreciate it. Thanks.
- Odysseus1479, sorry failed ping. Mr rnddude (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC) . Mr rnddude (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: no worries, I watch pretty well every page I‘ve edited recently (which is how I got here in the first place). Any particular format you want the colours in, or should I just make up a table in my sandbox (which could be a good learning exercise for me) and let you pick out what you need? If there’s an existing data-page you plan to emulate, just point me in that direction and I can probably produce something similar.—Odysseus1479 03:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- Odysseus1479, feel free to make a table in your sandbox in whatever format. The end result format for the template will basically end up being like Template:NBA color/doc. If you want to emulate it feel free to do so. Because the colors are going to be put through a module I'm not particularly concerned with the format, but, if you could just put them in order of primary through quarternary - or however many - that would be good. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: no worries, I watch pretty well every page I‘ve edited recently (which is how I got here in the first place). Any particular format you want the colours in, or should I just make up a table in my sandbox (which could be a good learning exercise for me) and let you pick out what you need? If there’s an existing data-page you plan to emulate, just point me in that direction and I can probably produce something similar.—Odysseus1479 03:54, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- Odysseus1479, sorry failed ping. Mr rnddude (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC) . Mr rnddude (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- Odysseus1479, sure if youve got the time Id appreciate it. Thanks.
- Because goalies very rarely score, they’re rated by their goals-against average (per game, prorated according to the time they actually play in each), save percentage (goals ÷ shots on net), and win/loss record. The last is where the “decision“ counts (I believe it’s whoever was in net at the moment the game-winning goal was scored). I don’t know what will work best to display the colours in a header. I did a quick browse through our infoboxes, from which it appears that: most teams have three- or four-colour schemes (Detroit & Toronto have only two), all include white (the only one I noticed that doesn’t list it is Colorado, but nonetheless it’s prominent in their logo), and there are several sets that are shared by two or more teams except for slight differences (royal blue vs navy blue, &c.) with red-white-blue being the most popular—so I expect it will be tricky to make them all clearly distinct. Anyway, if you’d like me to compile a list of colours I‘d be happy to contribute that bit of legwork. And Callmemirela, excuse my butting in, but I hope you’ll forgive me if I join you in a chant of GO HABS GO!—Odysseus1479 23:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response Odysseus1479. So the "decision" is in essence the person who was the deciding factor in the game. Makes sense to call them the decision. I did notice that for example the Montreal Canadiens wore primarily red in "home" gear and primarily "white" in away gear with blue being secondary in both cases. Mr rnddude (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Mr rnddude: “SO” indicates a game decided by a tie-breaking shootout; “Decision” is the name of the goalie who is credited with the win or loss. Team colours are not simply for home and away, but all together make a set or scheme, and vary in number; visiting teams usually wear white with coloured trim.—Odysseus1479 21:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- So I've taken a bit of a look around at what we'd need to make this template. There are some things that may make this fairly difficult, but, I think I can manage it. We'll need probably three templates simultaneously - you'll only need one, the others will be embedded within the first - and also one or two modules. The modules are the part that are going to be difficult. I have never tried to use Lua, or any other programming of this kind. That said, the modules will have a near identical function to ones that already exist. So I have a base from which to work from. The itinerary/task list is the below;
I apologize for my late reply. It's been a difficult week for me. My mom was a victim of a robbery while we were in the house and I've been out of character ever since. I think I am better now. As for the issue at hand...
Thank you Odysseus1479 for the help. Are you going to compile the list of all the colours? I'd like to help. And yes, GO HABS GO! :D Mr rnddude I seriously can't you enough. All that Odysseus has said thus far is exact. Should you have any other questions about the templates, please let me know. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 04:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- Very sorry to hear that; best wishes for recovery of your property, and most importantly take care of yourselves! I’ve started compiling my list offline, and am finding many discrepancies—mostly small—among 1) our infoboxes, 2) our logo graphics, and 3) some of the official publications & third-party lists I’ve looked at online. I expect sorting these out will take a larger discussion, but in the meantime I’m uncertain what to use. (I could go on at length about the general & specific issues, but will spare you that for the moment.) I‘m inclined to stick with (1) as probably the safest, considering they can be assumed to have consensus at present, and the specs can always be tweaked later. What do you and @Mr rnddude think?—Odysseus1479 20:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, Odysseus1479 I think using our current infoboxes is for the best. We can always change these at a later date if required. Any change to colour would be updated across the board anywhere we use the template, so it'll simply be a matter of changing the colour code itself. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- OK, I’ve started User:Odysseus1479/NHL team colours with the infobox/navbox colours formatted similarly to the NBA data page. I plan on adding some notes about possible applications & other issues (disambiguation, use of white, discrepancies, sourcing, &c.), with examples, possibly for bringing to a relevant WikiProject’s attention—but I thought I‘d get this up first, being the essential part, and so anyone who cares to can check the specs &c. They‘re sorted by division as in the main article, but can easily be alphabetized as a whole if that’s preferable.—Odysseus1479 01:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, Odysseus1479 I think using our current infoboxes is for the best. We can always change these at a later date if required. Any change to colour would be updated across the board anywhere we use the template, so it'll simply be a matter of changing the colour code itself. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Callmimirela, Mr rnddude has started a talk page for the above sandbox, which might be a better place to continue this.—Odysseus1479 07:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- My GA (one of them) has now gone through into completion and aside from general activities I don't have any other WikiDuties that need to forestall this. So, I am happy to start building up these templates and module over the next couple of days. Odysseus1479, I figure you've collected up all of the color data. Do you want me to start building the color module and color/data sub-module? Since these are integral to the functioning of the templates themselves I figure it'd make sense to start with those. Mr rnddude (talk) 14:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Best wishes
Hi again C. I saw this and just wanted to drop by a happy birthday note to you. Many happy returns :-) MarnetteD|Talk 22:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, Happy Birthday Mirela. :) Mr rnddude (talk) 04:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @MarnetteD and Mr rnddude: Thank you guys!! XX Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 06:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Userpage Shield | |
| Thanks for reverting that vandalism on my talk page! Most appreciated! DrStrauss talk 19:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC) |
- @DrStrauss: Anytime ;P Thank you for the barnstar! Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 00:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
mobile contributions via apps?
Hello, given your interest in mobile, did you check this discussion out? Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
New WikiProject!
Hello, Callmemirela! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time.
Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Not a content dispute on ANI
Mirela, complaining about my admin action (semiprotecting a page) as the IP did is hardly a content dispute. Bishonen | talk 17:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC).
- @Bishonen: Talking about removal of source for x reasons screams content dispute to me. You are more than welcome to revert my close or start a subsection. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- I will. Please attune your ear to information other than just the screaming when you make a non-admin close. Bishonen | talk 19:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC).
- @Bishonen: Attitude, Jesus. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 19:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- Nah I don't think so. I read it the same way you did Mirela, at first. I missed "just the screaming" in the post. I believe Bish's post should read with far less attitude than it looks. To paraphrase Bishonen, so it reads less touchily; look deeper into the issue before closing, not just what you're seeing on the surface. In this case you missed the semi-protect entirely, to quote the OP;
I do not think adding page protection was reasonable here, either
- this alone requires admin attention as only an admin can do anything about it. Even if it is just a content dispute the act of page protecting may be an admin abusing privilege to impose their "preferred version" of the article. The IP would be helpless to do anything about that without admin assistance. Sure, the gist of it may be a content dispute but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Granted all this is how I am reading it and is rather moot - IP blocked and discussion re-closed, again. I watched it unfold but stopped short of reverting Boing after he removed the IP's post close comments, though I was tempted to. Mr rnddude (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- Nah I don't think so. I read it the same way you did Mirela, at first. I missed "just the screaming" in the post. I believe Bish's post should read with far less attitude than it looks. To paraphrase Bishonen, so it reads less touchily; look deeper into the issue before closing, not just what you're seeing on the surface. In this case you missed the semi-protect entirely, to quote the OP;
- @Bishonen: Attitude, Jesus. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 19:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- I will. Please attune your ear to information other than just the screaming when you make a non-admin close. Bishonen | talk 19:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC).
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter #2
- Please help reduce the New Page backlog
This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.
- Getting the tools we need
ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Yo Ho Ho
Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.
New Page Review - newsletter No.2
- A HUGE backlog
We now have 809 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.
The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.
- Second set of eyes
Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.
- Abuse
This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and
- this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
- this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
- This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.
Coordinator election
Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.
Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:55, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections
Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Your username
I would always have to copy and paste your username when mentioning you, but I've now come up with a way of remembering how it's spelled, which is by separating it into three bits. I have to ask, then, is your username three words put together? Call Me Mirela. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Ahaha, yes. I created this account at around 14 years old. I couldn't find a fancy username so it's literally just Call Me Mirela, because that's my name. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter No.3
Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.
- Still a MASSIVE backlog
We now have 809 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.
Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
2020 election and Trump
Could you explain why Donald Trump doesn't deserve to be mentioned as a Republican candidate for president? I know there's a tiny sentence, but under the "Republican candidates" section, Jack Fallares, a barely notable nobody, is given a major table with a big picture and everything, while Trump isn't. Why is that? He has a formal committee, he's raised millions and he's already had a rally. That makes him a candidate. Bill Clinton didn't announce his candidacy until The day before the '96 convention started. I know it's too early, but It's not my fault, it's HIS.
So put the thing back, okay? It has nothing to do with opinion, it's just a fact. Trump is a candidate, he's the president, and he's thus the presumptive nominee. If something unique and unusual happens to change that, then a Republican will still be president and the presumptive nominee. If it happens, then we'll change it. Easy peasy.
Now as to the "Great Mentioner", it's a good (and encyclopedic) way to explain how the process works. Since the McGovern/Fraser reforms of 40 years ago, the presidential election cycle has been pretty stable:
Year one: Everyone in the media tries to ignore it (people who announce this early are hobbyists and weirdos) Trump is unique. I can't explain him. The great mentioner starts mentioning, and people mentioned laugh it off.
Year two: prospective candidates contact the media to see if the race is worth it. Which is why they came up with exploratory committees. These things cost money. The parties start making preparations for the conventions and debate schedules. "Serious" candidates start getting their asses in gear. Jimmy Carter announced in 1974.
Year three: This is the reality show. Starting with the 1984 election, the debates have started six to eight months before the actual voting starts. There are real candidates with real campaigns. Thanks to early voting, the primaries start in December!
The Democratic race is wide open. Right now, everyone's still in shock. The grass roots in the party are furious. But the emphisis is on Trump's chaotic new administration...and it should be. Nobody really wants to deal with this right now. What's going on right now is basically vandalism with actual references. Not me, I'm just trying to get the thing in such a shape that a reader can scan the thing and get a decent understanding of what is going on in about ten to fifteen seconds. Is that so terrible?
There's going to be a 2017 version of this, which is going to be totally different than the 2018 version, which is going to be different....the damn thing's in flux. There are lots of articles which are not. Most of them in fact.
So PLEASE stop deleting my edits....Arglebargle79 (talk) 00:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Arglebargle79: First, the article isn't yours, so stop pushing your POV into the article. Jack Fellure will remain regardless of his status in society. Secondly, Trump has sent in an info indicating he intends on running, he hasn't declared his candidacy. Thirdly, your recent edits were not neutral. Nowhere is it helpful or even encyclopedic to tell readers that "some in the press retell the myth of the "Great Mentioner"" or that "[w]ith no incumbent, or indeed a front runner, the Democratic presidential race is wide open." or even to say that "[i]t is traditional for politicians and celebrities who have had their names mentioned as possible presidents to feign interest in running whether their hopes and dreams include a race or not, especially before the midterm elections, where politicians might be running for reelection or doing their jobs, and celebrities have to get on with their careers." This not neutral, WP:FANCRUFT and, in fact, an opinion. This is an encyclopedia, not a press show. Going on to explain how the election "works" is unencyclopedic. Fourthly, no, I will stop reverting you if necessary until you abide by policies. And PLEASE stop talking to me about how elections proceed. I really don't appreciate comments such as
"The Democratic race is wide open. Right now, everyone's still in shock. The grass roots in the party are furious. But the emphisis is on Trump's chaotic new administration...and it should be."
Please stop expressing your opinion about the election. It's not the first time you've talked to me like this. I don't care. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 01:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)- @Arglebargle79: Not to intrude, but the answer is simple: because he hasn't formally announced that he will indeed run. The "Great Mentioner" bit doesn't prove that he intends to run, nor does it even explain the significance of the changes made 40 years ago that were mentioned as making modern elections more stable than those of say 1976 (which for some reason is being related to whether or not Trump is running). It fails to explain the motives and methodology of his announcement, and generalizes them to just him being "mentioned" before continuing to explain that he is unique allowing him - and he alone - to survive the early announcement and make it into the presidency. Yes, the media does speculate on next election's candidates, and the incumbent president is always mentioned, and even if almost every incumbent goes for a second term that doesn't prove Trump intends to run. I don't ordinarily come onto people's pages, but I'm speaking up because you can't just keep WP:POV pushing. I've seen you edit warring, and pushing similar issues in the past. It's not cool. Psychotic Spartan 123 04:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- There's the rally. The rally happened. That is neitherWP:FANCRUFT, nor an opinion. There's tons of references and it was covered extensively by the media. In 1996, Clinton did not formally announce a candidacy until a few days before the convention. In past articles, it was more than enough to have an organization which actively raised money.
Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a rally which is run by the campaign. To quote NPR: "A White House spokeswoman called it a campaign rally for America." How is it POV? The criteria for being a candidate has been fulfilled in Trump's case. He's sent a letter to the FEC, he's set up an organization which is currently raising money, and he's had at least one (large event) in relation to it. Whether or not he changes his mind in the future is irrelevent. It's the situation as of now. The "five major polls" thing doesn't matter, because until he withdraws his candidacy (like Harry Truman in 1952 or LBJ in 1968), there will be no polling on the Republican side. At least for the foreseeable future.
That is also not WP:FANCRUFT. What is, is putting Dwayne Johnson up there as saying he was interested in running. At this point in the cycle, the election is basically little more than fantasy football. That is not POV, that is also a fact. We should acknowledge this. Should it be less snarky? Sure. But right now, the page is a mess. Should there be another page somewhere where we can go over what we want this thing to look like? I would like that very much. I mean no disrespect, I'm just very passionate about Wikipedia. Arglebargle79 (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
DWTS
i'm not trying to disrupt wikipedia, i'm just trying to learn how to edit this page even if it's too early or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balto&michael (talk • contribs) 21:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Balto&michael: I beg to differ. If you've been here since August, potentially even longer than that. I've warned quite a lot regarding WP:Unsourced, WP:NPOV, WP:DE and WP:3RR. I think learning how to edit Wikipedia has passed at this point and in this case. If you want to learn how to edit, please use the sandbox instead. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 21:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:
Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.
The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.
So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Chicago Justice Cast
Please explain why it would be to soon for the cast table? I also made the same table for Chicago Med just now, does the same apply for that one? Wmulder (talk) 05:04, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Chicago Justice is barely a week old. It is far too soon to add a cast table. Perhaps after 3 seasons like Chicagoan afire and PD? This also applies to Med. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 05:11, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- But would it not be good to have all four shows in the same format? Anyway, you're the boss.Wmulder (talk) 05:15, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Not necessarily. It's too soon for that now. Also, I am not the boss. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 05:17, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- There are ways to correct mistakes, and that would be to delete them. However, if info is correct but a bit (or a lot) too early, there is another way to prevent it from showing up, and maybe that should be used here. (might have to go to edit mode to see this.) If you just undo everything you don't like you delete work others do and so discourage them to participate. Just my two cents worth. Wmulder (talk) 05:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Reverting is in fact deleting or removing content. It's just another way of doing so. I apologize if it seems as if I am discouraging you, but that's not the intention of reverts. Removing content manually and reverting leads to same results. Also, even hiding the table would potentially confuse editors and may encourage editors to add it. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 05:49, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- Cast tables shouldn't be used in main series articles anyway. We allow them in "List of <foo> characters" articles. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:39, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Reverting is in fact deleting or removing content. It's just another way of doing so. I apologize if it seems as if I am discouraging you, but that's not the intention of reverts. Removing content manually and reverting leads to same results. Also, even hiding the table would potentially confuse editors and may encourage editors to add it. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 05:49, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- There are ways to correct mistakes, and that would be to delete them. However, if info is correct but a bit (or a lot) too early, there is another way to prevent it from showing up, and maybe that should be used here. (might have to go to edit mode to see this.) If you just undo everything you don't like you delete work others do and so discourage them to participate. Just my two cents worth. Wmulder (talk) 05:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Not necessarily. It's too soon for that now. Also, I am not the boss. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 05:17, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
- But would it not be good to have all four shows in the same format? Anyway, you're the boss.Wmulder (talk) 05:15, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:56, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Chicago Franchise
Hi Mirela,
You have noticed me lately on the Chicago pages. So let me tell you who I am and what drives me.
My real name is Walter Mulder, I am a Canadian. ;)
I am a fan of the Chicago Franchise, and have contributed greatly to this Wiki: http://chicago-franchise.wikia.com/wiki/Chicago_Franchise
I like things orderly, so this morning I put all four series in the same format. All had some changes, but if someone does not know they would not notice I think. The format of all four is now like this: 1 Plot 2 Cast 2.1 Main cast 2.2 Recurring cast 2.3 Crossover characters 2.4 Guest 3 Episodes 3.1 Crossovers 3.2 Spin-offs 4 Production 4.1 Development 4.2 Filming 4.3 Casting 5 Reception 5.1 Ratings 5.2 Reviews 6 Broadcast and streaming 7 Awards and nominations 8 References 9 External links (numbering might differ if a heading has not yet been introduce on a page, I reached this order by studying the old formats and basically looking what was used the most and what made the most sense.)
I would like to work with other people, and will defer to expert advice. I have not contributed a great deal to Wikipedia, but am willing to learn. I believe you might be one of those experts.
Let me know what you think, Am I on the right track or should I leave it well enough alone?
Walter Wmulder (talk) 15:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Wmulder: Hello buddy! Which are province are you from? La belle province de Québec is where I live. As for your edits, they seem fine. It doesn't look like there's anything wrong. If you have any more questions, let me know. I'd be happy to answer them. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 22:59, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm an Albertan, although I originally came from the Netherlands at 17 years old. Originally we came by plane from Amsterdam to Toronto and by train (The Canadian) from Toronto to Calgary and than dayliner to Edmonton. I married a Canadian girl and on our honeymoon we went to Vancouver Island. Again by train from Calgary to Vancouver. As you can see, I travelled a lot of Canada by train, and there are plans for more since the east coast is still missing. In the near future my wife and I hope to spent a week in Nova Scotia and than take the train (The Ocean) from Halifax to Montreal and Toronto, finishing up at Niagara Falls before flying back home.
Anyway, AussieLegend mentioned previously "Cast tables shouldn't be used in main series articles anyway. We allow them in "List of characters" articles". Should I move them from Chicago P.d. and Chicago Fire? Wmulder (talk) 23:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Criminal Minds
It's not flawed. I only cleaned it up. Besides, it was a bit messily written. --Njorent (talk) 02:33, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Njorent: You're actually trying to justify your actions with flawed reasoning? I warned you back in December 2016 about removing spoilers, and you flat out ignored it. You reverted a user's edit as "too much info" which contradicts with WP:TVPLOT and WP:SPOILER. All episode summaries must be under 500 words; ergo, the word count was not an issue. The main issue revolved around spoilers. Per WP:SPOILER, they are not to be removed, which you continued to do by logging out (potentially as a sock) and edit warred to prove your point. That is a completely and utterly flawed reasoning to justify your actions. The edits were fine as they were. You've done enough for now. Please take it to talk page if you disagree. Otherwise, let it go. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Njorent denies that they are the IP. See also what I wrote to you at AN3. As well, I notice that you left the field diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page blank, which is not a good sign. Respond at AN3, please. El_C 04:18, 24 March 2017 (UTC)