User talk:Anomalocaris/Archive 2018

Sanna
Hi, thank you for all the good work you do here at Wikipedia. Could you take a look at the article about Sanna Nielsen to see if there are any bugs in the formatting that needs fixing. Appreciate it. Take care.--BabbaQ (talk) 01:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * BabbaQ: I improved the references a bit. —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:46, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Commons category in lists
Here's a search. I've been changing to inline version rather than removing the bullet when there's only one or two items (and switching to the right kind of list item). --Izno (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Izno: I thought that should be used in the body of the article and  should be used at the end of the article. —Anomalocaris (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Template:Commonscat-inline. --Izno (talk) 00:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Izno: Thanks. Unfortunately the documentation and talk pages of the two templates don't give any guidance for which to use. I don't have strong views on this. —Anomalocaris (talk) 00:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Right. Usually you use one or the other depending on the balance between right floated templates like commons cat and actual links on the left. When you have no other links, or only 1 other link, and no boxes, the inline template is reasonable. Once you're past that you should take a look to see which looks more aesthetic. --Izno (talk) 00:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Izno: Thanks. That seems like good advice, which I will try to remember to follow ... —Anomalocaris (talk) 00:35, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Thanks, fixed. Falastur2 Talk 16:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Html
Hi Anomalocaris, Hope all is well :), When you have a spare 5 minutes could you check my archive box and see if all's okay please?, I've updated the coding and removed the and <center coding so just wanted to make sure there's not any errors,

Also on my box the 2015 and 2016 lines aren't centered correctly like the lines above and below it - Is there anyway to fix this ?, Many thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 15:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Davey2010: Don't assume that any given request can be completed in 5 minutes. I edited your archive box, properly nesting . I edited  to remove some lint there. Your page calls , which redirects to  , which is missing a closing italics , but there's no point in my fixing it since the "page is maintained by a bot". I have asked the owner to fix it. The call to   is in a table, but lacked the pipe character  to indicate a table row. I inserted the pipe character, fixing a lint error, but this changed the alignment of the table. The page is now lint-free except for the missing end tag in  . —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No no no I never did expect it to be done in 5 minutes ? .... When I said "When you have a spare 5 minutes" I meant that as in "I know your busy all the time but when you have a spare 5 minutes here and there could you look into this for me" .... so you could've done it in a week, 2 weeks etc etc .... If I ever say to you"When you have a spare 5 minutes" that isn't me saying "Can you look into this right now" I mean can you look into it when you have a spare 5 minutes and aren't busy ...., Anyway thanks for your help much appreciated. – Davey 2010 Talk 11:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Font tags in my signature
Thanks for prodding me to finally use modern-ish HTML markup in my signature! --bdesham ★  23:02, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Color fonts
Hello, I made the change to my signature markup using one of the formats you had recommended. I wasn't aware that there were any problems as I normally use Firefox and the old one didn't appear to have any rendering problems. Should be fine for the next five years! Blue Riband► 13:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Thanks for the note about my signature font tags. I've been away from active editing for quite some time so hadn't left signed messages in ages until a couple of days ago. I've updated it and it should be all good now. AUTiger » talk 06:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Thanks, fixed my signature :) MossBoss254  Talk 01:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: Signature
Thanks for the heads-up on my signature! Without the notice, I probably wouldn't have ever noticed it was still using obsolete tags. My signature should now be up to current HTML standards. -- Aamsse talk to me 03:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Another thanks ...
— Mahalo for the corrected syntax! – Alt man 📞– 01:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

My signature
You pinged me: is my sig a problem? If so please explain what I need to do to fix it. Pam D  10:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * PamD: No, your signature is not a problem ... though it could be simplified from
 * : Pam  D
 * to
 * : PamD
 * ... but that's not what I pinged you about. I pinged you because I saw that on 18:09, 19 March 2017‎, you edited Signatures, and I invited you and others who also edited it to add your thoughts to discussions I started at WT:Signatures. If you don't have anything to say, that is fine too. —Anomalocaris (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Changed as requested. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, MidnightBlue   (Talk)  16:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Lint errors
Hello Anomalocaris,

You seem to have misunderstood the purpose of the edit protected templates. Per the instructions at Edit requests, the request needs to be specific. The people patrolling these requests are not necessarily those who are familiar with the various templates and modules, so all we can do is gauge consensus and do some basic checks.

If you need help fixing a particular error, you could try asking at WP:VPT. But generally it might be best to leave these errors to people who know how to fix them.

Regards &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:21, 21 February 2018 (UTC)


 * MSGJ: Thank you for your thoughts. I have submitted probably over a dozen edit requests on edit protected templates in the past, and in almost all cases, my requested edits were performed. In the recent case of, I was unable to generate the exact code change. However, I was able to state the exact problem. I disagree with you and with xaosflux. There is no urgency in responding to the edit request; it could just sit there as a discussion topic until someone capable of fixing the bug does so. You and xaoxflux seem to think the main thing is to make the request be resolved quickly. I believe that the main thing is to have a valid (even if not as precise as is desired) error report be resolved correctly, however long it takes. That's my view, and I realize you and xaoxflux don't share it. In fact, I might be the only one who sees it my way. Anyway, I won't persist on this. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. The request can sit there indefinitely, but the template should not be applied until a specific edit is ready to be made. The conventions on using that template are spelled out in the page I linked above. In general its purpose is not to get attention to a request. Cheers &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The edit request templates are an important part of dealing with disruption that can be caused by page protection - we want everything to be editable, but some things need review or to have consensus gathered first. Administrators actively patrol the edit requests to be responsive to other editors. — xaosflux  Talk 12:42, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

MSGJ, xaosflux: I don't want to get into a debate here, because, as I said, I won't persist. But I do want to explain why I hold my view. Protected pages replace the "edit this page" tab with "view source". On the view source page, such as View source for Template:Self, it says:
 * What can I do?


 * If you have noticed an error or have a suggestion for a simple change, you can submit an edit request, by clicking the button below and following instructions. An administrator or template editor may then make the change on your behalf. Please check the talk page first in case the issue is already being discussed.
 * If you have noticed an error or have a suggestion for a simple change, you can submit an edit request, by clicking the button below and following instructions. An administrator or template editor may then make the change on your behalf. Please check the talk page first in case the issue is already being discussed.

That "Submit an edit request" is the only thing most users will see. It's a beacon that practically begs the user to click. So the user clicks, and sees an editing window with an HTML comment, "State UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes below this line, preferably [emphasis mine] in a 'change X to Y' format." I know, people who respond to these requests want a request in the form of "change X to Y". But it is also unambiguous to simply report that a template generates a Multiline table in list lint error and it needs to be fixed. Ambiguous means "Open to multiple interpretations" or "Vague and unclear". There is only one possible interpretation of my request: the template creates a specific type of lint error. It is unambiguous.

Everything is set up leading the user down a primrose path, "Oh, please, click this button and submit your request" and then "state your request clearly in a way that can't be misinterpreted" and then editors come back, "You have to submit your request in the form of change X to Y." This is bait-and-switch, and it's not nice, especially to new editors (which I am not).

It doesn't have to be this way. Unambiguous requests, even if not in the form of "change X to Y", can remain open until someone fixes them. But, as I said, I don't want to get into a debate, and I won't persist. I just wish that this primrose path led to the garden of satisfaction. —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, it looks like we have some inconsistent messages on the edit request dialogs based on namespaces, protection levels, etc (see this one for example for the "big format". I suspect the ones for the MediaWiki namespace (where you have had several recent ones) need improving to include the expected Please provide a specific description of the edit request, that is, specific text that should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not helpful and will often be rejected; the request should be of the form "please change X to Y because... type directions. — xaosflux  Talk 22:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Outline navigation footers and the Harvard catlinks
Copied from User talk:The Transhumanist, where this conversation started, and the user responded here.

In your recent edits of many outline articles, you removed navigation templates and categories, examples below. Examples: As it happens, I came to explore your edits after I went to Outline of Mexico and saw that you had removed. So, what's going on? —Anomalocaris (talk) 07:01, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Was this on your own initiative?
 * Was this pursuant to some directive somewhere that implies that these templates and categories don't belong?
 * Was this pursuant to a discussion somewhere?
 * Other?
 * Outline of Harvard University removed  and others
 * Outline of James Bond removed and others
 * Outline of the Catholic Church removed and others
 * Outline of the United Kingdom removed
 * Outline of Wisconsin removed

Dear Anomalocaris,

Thank you for your interest. The outlines are usually a desert, where I'm contacted by other editors about my edits on them once in a blue moon. So, your communication is a breath of fresh air. I will be happy to explain the rationale for my edits, and look forward to your further feedback.

I'm in the middle of long overdue cleanup/maintenance of the outlines. This included inserting missing lead sentences, missing outline notice at the top of those outlines for which that was missing, missing sister links template, removal of the wikimindmap dead link, insertion of the Outline footer where missing, fixing category tags (mostly their sort order), adding missing "Wikipedia outline" category tag, and so on.

First, concerning the category links removed from Outline of Harvard University: note that the Harvard University category was retained. It was included at the bottom of the page as a category tag. The category links that were removed were hard links to categories. "Category" sections, and hard category links, are generally not included in outlines because they are redundant structural elements, and part of a separate navigation system (the category system). Recreating the category system (that is, the category links themselves, rather than tags) and its structure within the outlines is not a purpose of outlines -- those links are already in place on the category pages themselves, and can be accessed there and with the CatTree tool. Outlines are topical tree structures, and so each subject has one branch in the tree, with the branches populated by links to articles (including prose and list articles). Categories are not articles, and therefore don't belong in outlines as hard links (check other outlines, and you will see that is not generally practiced). In addition, note that categories are external to the encyclopedia itself, and have their own reserved location on articles (the bottom of the page, as category tags). I hope that explains the hard category link removal to your satisfaction.

Another way to approach the above issue, is by scope. The scope of outlines is to map out knowledge, and the contents of the encyclopedia. It is not to map out the other navigation systems, which would explode the size of outlines, and especially the amount of work needed to build and maintain them -- which is a very limited resource already. Note that Portals do include hard category links.

Navigation footers on the other hand pose different problems than hard category links. Outlines are a separate navigation system from navigation footers. Having the two systems overlap by having navigation footers on outline pages interferes with the development of outlines. For example, to determine what topics are missing from an outline, one would use the compare list feature of WP:AWB, to compare the links on the outline to the links on other navigation systems, such as the corresponding navigation footer. But that is rendered useless if the nav footer is present on the outline. What links belong to the outline and what links belong to the navigation footer becomes blurred. Determining which links on the Mexico template are not yet included in the Outline of Mexico, manually, would be extremely tedious.

Another use of outlines is as a source of links for its root topic. But navigation footers tend to accumulate on outlines, including those that do not match the scope of the outline, such as navigation footers for the parent topic, etc. This renders making lists of the outline's subjects (such as with WP:AWB's make list feature, infeasible. Those are used for many tasks, such as in the construction of indices and glossaries, lists for tagging articles within the scope of a WikiProject, focused recent changes efforts, etc.  But those are thwarted if non-relevant or off-scope navigation templates are present.

I hope the above makes sense. Please feel free to share your thoughts, and I will be happy to discuss the matter with you further until we reach a synthesis of purpose. I'm certain you wish what's best for the reader, as do I. Discussing the various options and ramifications should result in the best path to that objective, whatever that path happens to be. I'm not married to any particular course of action, and look forward to your further observations, questions, comments, and concerns.

And of course, I will refrain from removing navigation footers from the bottom of outline pages until a solution is worked out to your satisfaction, whether that be reinsertion of the footers, adding the links from the on-topic footers into the bodies of the outlines, or some other solution.

Sincerely,   The Transhumanist 08:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: please ping me when you reply. Thank you. -TT


 * The Transhumanist: Thank you, you have explained it all very well. As far as I'm concerned, you should carry on your mission. I simply wanted to know what was going on. I wonder if it would make sense to put some of your above thinking, perhaps in Outlines or nearby there, or at WikiProject Outlines, where a sentence or two could say something like, "Outlines should not include navigation templates" possibly with a reason or two. Feel free to ignore, but this is coming from someone who has successfully created "what to do" language that has remained active. For example, I'm pleased that my bold edit in Manual of Style has survived with only minor changes, so I encourage you to be bold and publish your thoughts in an appropriate place. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That makes perfect sense. I'm also a bit behind in the maintenance of those two pages you mentioned, and will get to them after giving the wording some deep thought. I appreciate your queries and understanding.
 * By the way, most of what has been going on, is happening behind the scenes, and I'm wondering if you would like to give part of it a test drive?
 * Building and maintaining outlines is as you may have gathered, very time intensive (i.e., slow). The current 740 outlines have taken over ten years to produce. I estimate we need about 10,000 of them. At the current rate, that would take 120 more years.
 * So, effort is underway to automate the process as much as possible, including building interactive tools to make editing outlines easier. A nice thing about this, is that it has resulted in generally useful technologies, sort of like what happens with space exploration...
 * One type of tool I've been working on are scripts that change the view of Wikipedia to reveal list items in wikiformat to make those easier for editors to copy and paste into outlines and lists. I've been trying to do this wherever they happen to be -- every nook and cranny of Wikipedia. I've found that they are all over the place.
 * One such place is in search results. And so I built a tool to look at those in outline/list format. Which required, in addition to the insertion of wikiformatting right on the screen, the hiding of various components of the search results so that they didn't interfere with the copying/pasting operation. And this is when it started to become applicable to users in general...
 * It dawned on me that each of these functions should be on a switch, so they could be turned off as desired. So I separated their functionality and give them each a toggle, in the form of a menu item in the tools menu in the sidebar. And I realized that sorting the search results would also be useful. So I threw that in there too. Then I made the script remember the settings, so that the switch positions apply to all searches, not just the current one. That is, the features stay on, until you turn them off.
 * The result is a general purpose search results enhancement script called SearchSuite.js.
 * It was completed to operational status a few days ago, and I'm looking for beta testers.
 * Care to take it for a spin? :) Installation instructions and a user's guide are including in the link provided above. ;)
 * I hope you like it. Sincerely,   The Transhumanist 09:56, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The Transhumanist: Hmmm... I use MonoBook, and use other templates only for brief "How-would-this-look" checks. I'll keep it in mind for when it would actually be useful, but I'm not eager to add another wikitask.
 * Lately I have been fixing lint errors and notifying users with non-HTML5-compliant signatures that their signatures are linty, and offering them HTML5-compliant equivalents. That user notification project is largely complete, but I can't finish until consensus is reached at Wikipedia talk:Signatures and Wikipedia talk:Signatures. And hardly anybody has weighed. If you have anything to add to these discussions, feel free. —Anomalocaris (talk) 10:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I'll give the discussions a look. And Monobook.   The Transhumanist 16:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

What are you trying to tell me?
I can't figure out what you mean by the edit you apparently made on my Talk page, or even where that match of text is. Please clarify; if here, ; otherwise on my Talk page,  Thank you. --Thnidu (talk) 05:43, 27 March 2018 (UTC) Thnidu (talk) 05:43, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Userspace page edits
Hey there! Is it possible that you could explain this edit to one of my userspace pages? I honestly have no idea what you’re saying in the edit summary, and I wouldn’t mind something perhaps more clear and concise for an average, non-technical user such as myself. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk ·&#32;articles ·&#32;reviews) 21:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * PhilipTerryGraham: Thank you for asking. By the way, the edit difference page you linked to could also be linked using the template this way:
 * As you can see from there, I removed the colon at the beginning of two lines that appeared thus:
 * The edit summary is "avoid indenting tables, which was causing Multiline table in list lint errors". The two indenting colons were each causing Multiline table in list Lint errors. For more on why this is a problem, see WP:Linter. —Anomalocaris (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Alrighty then, thanks for the heads up! Is there any possible way to place a margin on my collapsed transcluded table without using the  character and causing an error of sorts on a list page? – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 02:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The page already does contain several valid uses of
 * What causes the lint error is indenting this table and using inside it. However, even without indenting, using  inside the table causes problems although not lint errors. Under the heading "Good article reviews", click on either "show" link, and it's messed up. "==GA Review==" displays just like that, while the equals signs are supposed to be wiki markup for headings. It seems you shouldn't use  in this way. —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:03, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So, what could be a good way to transclude the GA review onto my "Reviews" page, without writing up like  and causing these aforementioned errors? – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 07:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I am learning as I go. I saw  and thought it was the Talk template; I didn't recognize it as transclusion. So, the real issue is that you are trying to transclude into a table something that does not belong in a table. I do not know if there is a way of doing what you are trying to do. Try the Village Pump. If you get an answer, leave me a message here. Good luck! —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The situation has been resolved now. Thanks for your help, by the way! :) – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 08:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So, what could be a good way to transclude the GA review onto my "Reviews" page, without writing up like  and causing these aforementioned errors? – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 07:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I am learning as I go. I saw  and thought it was the Talk template; I didn't recognize it as transclusion. So, the real issue is that you are trying to transclude into a table something that does not belong in a table. I do not know if there is a way of doing what you are trying to do. Try the Village Pump. If you get an answer, leave me a message here. Good luck! —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:01, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The situation has been resolved now. Thanks for your help, by the way! :) – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 08:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Uber edit
Hi there, in patrolling for reference errors I came across one at Uber, and found that in your recent edit there, you made a number of odd changes. I only mention this in case you were using an automated tool that caused these errors (your punctuation/spacing changes made me think this was the case) - if they were genuine typos/human error, please feel free to ignore me! A ref tag was broken, quote marks were put in where they weren't needed, and what I found most odd was that a few characters were removed from a url in a citation, breaking it. Anyway, no big deal, I've fixed these, just wanted to let you know. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 19:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Jessicapierce: Hi there. You're right; I made two careless changes inserting a stray quotation mark, one of the two erroneously replacing the greater than sign closing a ref tag. Not to make excuses, but this happened amid replacing numerous curly quotes with straight quotes and setting the comma and period inside or outside the closing quote per MOS:LQ. And thank you for fixing the URL I bollixed. Cheers!—Anomalocaris (talk) 20:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: My Thoughts (Montesquieu) (April 9)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MatthewVanitas was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:My Thoughts (Montesquieu) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:My Thoughts (Montesquieu), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:My_Thoughts_(Montesquieu) Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MatthewVanitas&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:My_Thoughts_(Montesquieu) reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:24, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Is it better now? ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 21:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * User:Editorofthewiki: Yes, thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mélencron (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mélencron (talk) 20:06, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hiral Tipirneni Twitter image.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I know, I know, I'm just one voice in a throng
With our newfangled extended-length edit summaries, it might be helpful when fixing lint errors to maybe link to LINT so that people have some vague idea of what you're doing. As I'm sure you've received a ping about, this wasn't too well-received. I've explained it (see two diffs later) but I thought I'd mention it to you here. I know you're doing good work, though, so keep it up! Primefac (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Talkback
 Red Sox Fan274  (talk ~contribs) 20:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Noted and thanks
Cheers. Will do. Yours, -- 1233 Talk 09:43, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Thank you for informing me with the issues with my signature, I have corrected it with the fixes you had suggested. &mdash; Iune  talk  14:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I feel obliged to say thanks too. My signature is corrected now. --Pajo Pajimir 19:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Tontine Massacre
I have found no news about it being unreleased or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TolkienLover1 (talk • contribs) 07:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I think it should be removed because it didn't receive much coverage anyway. Can you remove it? TolkienLover1 (talk) 07:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

TolkienLover1: Feel free to edit Tolkien family yourself! (I took liberty of adjusting the capitalization of this section's title.) —Anomalocaris (talk) 07:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I have. TolkienLover1 (talk) 07:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Your edit request
Hello, I did one of your edit requests here, but could not tell how my change was fixing any misnesting of HTML tags. Could you look at the result and see if it's OK? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * EdJohnston: Yes, you fixed it, thanks! Amory has already fixed the other two. For future reference, there are two ways to know if a page has Lint errors.
 * On the left side of the page, click on "Page information", and that will bring up a page that will show, near the end, lint errors if there are any. It will list each type of lint error and the number that type of error, maxing out at 20. It won't give any additional details, such as where the error is located or what HTML tags are involved.
 * The LintHint tool shows exactly where each error is located and what HTML tags are involved. By default, LintHint works only for articles in the Article namespace, but if you need LintHint for any other article, you can do this either by copying the entire wikitext into an article in the Article space and using LintHint there (and don't save, of course), or by enabling LintHint for items outside the Article namespace; to do this, see instructions at Wikipedia talk:Linter, under "Well, the following steps should work".
 * —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:19, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried the lintHint script from User:PerfektesChaos but get a lot of Javascript warnings in the Chrome debugging console: Jquery errors and 'Unknown dependency'. This is with all my other scripts disabled. Maybe I have some catching up to do. EdJohnston (talk) 01:28, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris: Thanks for hospitality and advertising.
 * Thank you for trying the gadget.
 * Version 3 has been released, just visit Special:Blankpage/preferencesGadgetOptions to request other namespaces (numbers required).
 * Regarding Chrome warnings they might be a bit anxious. The gadget is using standard procedures and should work the same way on all browsers of recent 5 or 10 years. I am not aware of any real problem, but I would remedy what is caused inside my own programming.
 * If they are originated from a certain  they result from MediaWiki or jquery library itself, while my code resides on   and tries to avoid such messages.
 * The warnings are probably about legal programming practices, which are in danger to be caused by typing errors. That Unknown dependency might result from a test for a possible but not mandatory situation, but could also indicate a real mistake. Those in MediaWiki are from a bit lazy test in rush, but no real errors.
 * We should continue on w:de:BD:PerfektesChaos/js/lintHint. You might drop the messages you mentioned there. Does the gadget work basically?

Gretings --PerfektesChaos (talk) 11:49, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

sigs
I've been asking people I encounter with bad-markup sigs to fix them. (and giving them the code to do it, of course). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * SMcCandlish: Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The Big Trail
Thanks for fixing the italics in the talk section for The Big Trail. I was writing it on my cell phone at the time, which never helps, and I've discovered that if you miss something in italics punctuation, which is impossible not to do when working with a cell phone, once you save it on a talk page, you can't go back and fix it unless you have a different level within wikipedia. I was appalled when I saw it and I thank you for fixing it. From now on I'll skip the italics on the talk pages when using a cell phone. Trocadero Thunder (talk) 09:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Trocadero Thunder: Yes, I did edit Talk:The Big Trail, and thank you for the acknowledgment. I have edited a few Wikipedia pages on a cell phone, but I strongly prefer a full-sized computer. I'm not sure what you mean about having a different level within Wikipedia. I don't have any special editing rights, I'm not an admin, just an ordinary editor like you. —Anomalocaris (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Bit of a mystery
Hark! An unexpected guest for super! How kind of you to call. But pray tell, Mr A. Malocaris, what prompts your visit to my lowly Talk page? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Could I have my archive boxes back, please? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Martinevans123: ✅ Thanks for letting me know. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Anomalocaris (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * One can't do without a few archives, can one. And they're "nont for sale". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC) ... and all still complete mystery to me...
 * Martinevans123: Your messages here are interesting, but it is sometimes difficult to determine what is intended by your unusual choices of internal and external links. Perhaps you are trying to say that you do not understand why I was editing your user talk page in the first place. The answer to that is I was eradicating lint errors. Anomalocaris (talk) 19:38, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, sometimes. Apologies. But well done. I found your edit summary on my talk page equally baffling. Looking forward to you fixing all my sprüngli errors. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC) .... p.s. I really don't like the sound of "multi colon escape".

Invitation
Dear Anomalocaris,

You are cordially invited to join the Portals WikiProject.

This is a very active project. We are in the process of completely revamping the entire portal system, and cleaning up the portal namespace. After these are done, we'll be greatly expanding the collections of portals. We have many design discussions going on, and many task types to choose from.

We also have a newsletter, that covers the progress of portal development, and the latest toys.

If you are interested, please feel welcome to sign-up at WikiProject_Portals.

By the way, I'm very interested in what you think of portals. What do you like most about them? What do they lack that they should have? What can't they do, that you would like them to be able to do?

I look forward to your replies. &mdash; The Transhumanist  09:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: Please me in your reply. Thank you. -TT

MediaWiki Talk pages
I've dropped the protection of these to extended confirmed. Please proceed to make the edits yourself, there is no valid reason I cna find for these to be sysop-only locked, and the protecting admin is long gone from Wikipedia. Courcelles (talk) 09:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Edit requests
Re - may be because the edit requests weren't for regular articles? I'll bear that in mind. Important thing is that the edits get made, thanks for letting me know. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:1.1em/1em Arial Black;letter-spacing:-0.09em"><u style="text-decoration:none;color:#38a">Fish +<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#B44">Karate 08:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

American Civil War Table
Thanks for helping with the tables. I appreciate your input! Need anything in return just ask. Adamdaley (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for closing my italics!
I appreciate it! Botterweg14 (talk) 17:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dana Rohrabacher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mother Jones ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Dana_Rohrabacher check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Dana_Rohrabacher?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

American Politics alert

 * Hi Anomalocaris, it looks like this revert violates the "Consensus required" provision of the discretionary sanctions mentioned above and listed at the top of the article's talk page. Please self-revert and join in the talk page discussion here to help find a consensus on how that paragraph should be worded. ~Awilley (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Signature
Hey, Anomalocaris,

I am returning to Wikipedia and just saw your message to me about my signature and some problems it might be causing. I cut and pasted the code you left but it was too many characters for the signature box. Is the signature still causing problems? If so, is there a shorter code that I could use instead? Thanks for the notice. Liz <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 23:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

West Africa Ebola virus epidemic
Hi this is to inform you that West African Ebola virus epidemic which you edited will be submitted for WikiJournal of Medicine...''The objective of this message is to invite the contributors to collaboratively submit the article for review through Wiki.J.Med, and if possible, to help in further betterment of the article in accordance to the suggestions of the reviewers. Wikipedia articles are collaboratively authored. So, it is very important to make the authors aware of such a process that the article is currently undergoing'' thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lacey Schwartz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antonio Delgado ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Lacey_Schwartz check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Lacey_Schwartz?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)