User talk:Deor/Archive19

Contacting users and telling them that they made mistakes
I found here that you noted that there is no "2013 Census" at Hazleton, Pennsylvania

I recently checked the Hazleton, Pennsylvania article and found that someone thinks there's a "2015 census" - I think this needs to be addressed with the users/IP addresses who made the changes. People need to understand and learn about the mistakes they made/make or they will keep happening again and again WhisperToMe (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and notified the IP user. Even if the person who made the change himself/herself doesn't see it the people around him/her will WhisperToMe (talk) 18:07, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The U.S. Census Bureau does publish population estimates between the official censuses—as here—and that's what is used and sourced in the infobox and the "Historical population" table in the current version of the Hazleton article, clearly labeled in both cases as an estimate. The problem arises when people change population figures without citing a source, without indicating that the revised figures are estimates, and often with a mention of something like a (nonexistent) "2013 census". I see that you've been cleaning up the Hazleton article; more power to you. Deor (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) - Yes there are census estimates between the years, and this needs to be made clear. As for Hazleton I'm trying to add information not only to the ENwiki article but also the Spanish article to serve the Dominicans moving to Hazleton. Strangely even though many Hispanic immigrants have moved to the US the ESwiki articles are often not as developed as one would think they would be. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * With regard to posting "educational" messages on IPs' talk pages, I used to do that sometimes, but I've come to the view that most IP editors (especially ones with dynamic IP addresses, obviously) never look at their talk pages and may not even know that such pages exist. (IPs, I believe, don't get those nice top-of-the-page alerts that logged-in editors rely on.) Deor (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It is true a lot of IP users may not see it since non-institutional IP talk pages get cleared. Maybe having messages in the history (as part of the edit summary) would be more productive, although a lot of people don't look at that either... WhisperToMe (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Commerce Tigers football
Hi there. Please do userfy this to me. I will see if I can get a piece on the school slammed out sometime in the next couple weeks. Thanks! —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 01:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

RAF Pembroke Dock
Thank you for coming to our aid. It was very kind of you to sort it out. Regards.The joy of all things (talk) 19:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. Admins are supposed to help people in cases where the tools are needed. Deor (talk) 20:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

"Tolkien" pronunciation
I've heard many prounce his last name as "toʊlkiːən", and according to this article, it is the correct one: http://periannath.com/feature/tolkien-101-how-does-one-pronounce-tolkien/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinKassemJ120 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * That Web site hardly seems a reliable source. It's clear how JRRT pronounced his surname, because he wrote (in several places) about how he pronounced it—"TALL-keen"—and it's preferable to use that pronunciation in the article. (As I recall, the matter has been discussed several times on the article's talk page, but I'm too tired to search them out just now. If you think that the pronunciation should be changed, I recommend that you start another thread there.) Deor (talk) 06:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Mass infobox changes
Have made the reverts to the infoboxes.Thank you FITINDIA&#160;(talk) 15:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Deor (talk) 15:20, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Americas, Etymology and Naming
Hi, you reverted my addition of Central America. Can you be more specific on your comment "not supported by cited source"? User:Luislema (talk) 19:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Speaking geographically rather than geopolitically, Central America is usually considered part of North America, whether one views North America as a separate continent or as a subcontinent. See our article Central America, particularly the first sentence. The matter has been discussed on the talk page of Americas before, as here. Although your source does claim that Central America is itself a subcontinent (my edit summary involved a misreading of the quotation on my part), I don't think that C.A. needs to be specifically mentioned in that sentence. If you think otherwise, I encourage you to raise the matter on the talk page. Deor (talk) 20:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * What about adding it on a separate sentence? User:Luislema (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that your best course of action, Luislema, is to seek consensus on the talk page. Deor (talk) 15:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * No objections so far... User:Luislema (talk) 21:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * In that case, go ahead and boldly make your change. I won't revert you again. (But someone else might, if I know the folks who watch that article.) Deor (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Dol-de-Bretagne's Cathedral (Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol):
You have directed the above to the old article on Dol Cathedral. I wish to add the contents of Dol-de-Bretagne's Cathedral (Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol) to the old article.i.e. merge the two but cannot now access the text of the new article. Rather frustrating as I did a huge amount of research on this. I would be grateful if you could somehow reverse what you have done and I will then merge the one into the other. Thanks
 * All you have to do is look in the history of Dol-de-Bretagne's Cathedral (Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol)—in particular, the version immediately preceding my edit to redirect the article; all your edits are there. (If you click on the link in the preceding sentence, you'll be taken to the Dol Cathedral article. Beneath the title will be a "Redirected from ..." tag in parentheses. Click on the link there, and you'll be taken to the redirect page, from which you can access the history.) I noticed, however, that much of the information in that article lacked source citations. Please don't add original research or other unsourced material to the Dol Cathedral article. Deor (talk) 12:48, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I will attempt to add more source citations to any text I add to the Dol Cathedral article (Weglinde (talk) 12:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC))

SMILE!
 Hello Deor, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2016 (UTC) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Red dot
Hi Deor Thank you for taking the time and the trouble to answer my query about red dots and maps. However, my frustration and your help does not get me any closer to a solution. I still think the red dot system is a waste of time.

Regards RASAM (talk) 15:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Why? A reader looking at an article sees a map of a country, city, or whatever, with a red dot indicating the location of the article's subject within that country, city, or whatever. It's not meant to be very detailed, but it does let the reader know (in a quick, visual way) that St. Margaret, Belize, for instance, is located in the central part of the country, rather than the far north or the coast. (In some cases, I know, the use of a pushpin map can be a "waste of time", as when one is used for a single outdoor sculpture within a large state, but such awkward uses are pretty rare and don't obviate the general usefulness of the feature.) What exactly is the problem to which you're "not ... any closer to a solution"? Deor (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay in answering (only just checked my talk page).
 * The problem for me is that seeing the map on the article page with only the red dot on it and clicking on it (the map) only results in a slightly larger version of said map, (at least it does for me), but no detail, apart from some internal boundaries. That's why I think the whole map thingie is a waste of time.
 * I think we will have to agree to disagree on this.


 * RASAM (talk) 22:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Crusadinggoonie
who just reverted you over era style at Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories edits a number of articles relating to Mamaroneck. One of the IPs geolocates there, the other nearby, both use the same ISP. Pretty much duck. I've given them a warning. I hope it's not OTT but it's pretty clearly deliberate. Doug Weller talk 11:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Damn. Looking at their edits I find Grass stitcher, a commercial product that seems pretty unnotable unless you count this. It really should go to AfD. What do you think? Too much after my warning? Doug Weller  talk 12:03, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I'd let the Grass Stitcher thing slide for now, although I've seen no evidence that "grass stitcher" is used as a common noun to denote that sort of implement. (From what I've seen on the Web, it appears that the name of the thing has been changed to Seed Stitcher, anyway.) Did you notice that the photo in the article—taken and uploaded by Crusadinggoonie—is actually of a Garden Weasel rather than a Grass Stitcher (the linked article has since been changed to a redirect)? Deor (talk) 14:44, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I couldn't resist changing the description of the image. I also discovered that the sentence "While cultivators till the soil by design, the grass stitcher actually prepares a seed bed ideal for sowing grass seed." is copied word for word from the source. This of course is just a lack of understanding, not like his behavior over the era style. Doug Weller  talk 16:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Mount Zion coordinates edit
Hi Deor. I reverted your removal of coordinates in the article's infobox, but could you please explain why you removed them in the first place? Crock81 (talk) 22:45, 12 October 2016 (UTC) Ok, I just found out why there can't be two primary coordinates on one article page. What about secondary? I will seek out a solution, but I'm happy to hear your suggestion Crock81 (talk) 22:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't notice that the article had two infoboxes. I've fixed it so that neither set of coordinates appears in the title position, but both appear in their respective infoboxes. Deor (talk) 22:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * HaHa, thank you for the effort. I also fixed it, but by going back to the Infobox protal and reading up on them. I used a different, but still applicable infobox for the first title, and edited the infobox syntax for the lat/long so both are now OK. You taught me something today, including Anglo-Saxon poetry dirge ;-) Crock81 (talk) 23:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Upper Passaic River
List of crossings of the Upper Passaic River is a new article that needs some work on coords. I wonder if you'd help. I've added some, others are in the general vicinity, and others are blank. Your fine work on List of crossings of the Hackensack River really added value to the article. Your efforts here would be greatly appreciated.Djflem (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll help. I may not get to it immediately and may not tackle it all at once. Be patient and it will happen. Deor (talk) 20:34, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Removing additional deprecated coord parameters
Hello Deor, thanks for taking the time to tidy up infoboxes after they've been modified to handle coords more consistently. This may have been a problem with how I was building infoboxes specifically, but many infoboxes that previously needed separate lat/long parameters to pass to the location map also included parameters for the other 'coords' arguments, such as "type", "region", etc... such as the ones I've removed in this edit. Is it appropriate for me to remove those parameters as deprecated, at least when a 'coords' template is included? The current documentation at i.e. Infobox islands makes no mention of them. (I'm not sure how common these additional parameters are, it may have been just me stupidly propagating an outdated infobox format.) Thanks again! Antepenultimate (talk) 00:09, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * As long as any information in those fields also appears in the template, all should be well. I'm pretty sure that Infobox islands adds "isle" as the type whether or not it's explicitly specified in, but there's no point in losing the region code if it has been included in the separate field but not in . Otherwise, those fields are completely unnecessary if  is used. Since the shift to making  (rather than "lat_d", etc., fields) compatible with location maps in all infoboxes began, there have been a few problems with duplicate coordinates in some infoboxes in which both used to be sometimes used; Infobox protected area is another one. I suppose that I should have been deleting those extra fields myself when deleting the duplicate coordinates, but they're easy to overlook and don't really harm anything. Deor (talk) 13:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Deor, glad to hear they're OK to remove, and I'll be sure to merge any existing arguments to the template. I agree they're not a big deal so I'll probably just remove on sight (when  is present), but won't be seeking them out. Some of those parameters, when found outside of, can be really confusing for new editors; for instance, upon seeing "|type=" in an island infobox, would an new editor think this is meant to describe the type of geographic feature for a map display, or could we forgive them for thinking it's a field for describing the type of island the box is about? So I think it's worth zapping them just to keep things simple for folks who are just getting started.I'm so happy to see "IB islands" and "IB protected area" getting these updates; they've always given me a lot of trouble and I'm fairly certain the 'duplicating' of coords was previously necessary in order to have both coordinates display in the IB, and utilize a location map (except when coordinates existed on WikiData... took me a while to figure that out). This project to unify coordinate behavior in infoboxes is very timely and for whatever part you've played in it, I thank you. Antepenultimate (talk) 23:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Prescott, Massachusetts
You changed the coordinates in this edit, but I changed them again. (What you'd changed them to seems to match Enfield?) Steve Summit (talk) 01:32, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata list
Hi Deor, As you can see I have problems displaying coordinates of a qualifier in may Sandbox. I'll ask tech-support. --YB ✍ 17:16, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Reverts on Apollo Epithets
Hi, thanks so much for contributing.

I do think the section would really benefit with some formatting. I am currently creating an article on the she-wolf and was looking for content on his association with the wolf and I found the current state of the section unhelpful, if not downright confusing.

In particular, the combination of the bold epithets with parenthetical IPA and phonetics, the Greek spelling/phonetics, and English meaning placed throughout the body of the paragraphs could be improved upon without hurting the content. At a minimum the formatting for this section should to some degree mirror that of the Celtic epithet section below.

Do you have any ideas or suggetions? Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 15:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * What mainly bothered me was that you added italic subheadings for no reason. If you hadn't italicized them, I probably wouldn't have reverted your edit. Go ahead and try again, keeping in mind that the is hardly ever needed at the beginning of headings and that only the first word should be capitalized. Deor (talk) 17:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Gotcha. The only reason I italicized them is that I felt they needed something else to help them stand out against the other bolds and the header supra.  I'll go ahead and restore them w/the feedback in mind.  Thanks again.  Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Lower Passaic River
At List of crossings of the Lower Passaic River I have been taking coords from individual articles and adding them, but it is incomplete. Wonder if you'd mind having a look when you've got time. Much appreciated.Djflem (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've started working my way downstream from the Dundee Dam—that is, from the bottom of the table upward. (One non-coordinate change I made was transposing the entries for the Gregory Avenue Bridge and the Acquackanonk Bridge, since the article Gregory Avenue Bridge says that the Acquackanonk Bridge was upstream of it.) More to come. Deor (talk) 12:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Portway Bridge (proposed): Have added references: two locations, one along PD Draw alignment, the other a dual bridge parallel with Lincoln Highway Bridge. What to do?
 * Newark Plank Road (removed): Was this at the site of the present-day Lincoln Highway Bridge, or was it at a slightly different location? (see below)
 * Pedestrian bridge (proposed). I cannot find earlier reference and since it's not repeated elsewhere, cut from list.
 * Once again, thanks for your superb work.Djflem (talk) 20:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

On closer observation one sees that the roadway and bulkhead for Newark Plank Road is just upstream of the Lincoln Highway Bridge. I shifted the coords for the latter, but it needs a tweak. Thanks. Djflem (talk) 08:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

A question: When one clicks on "map all coordinates", the OSM works well, but the Google Maps doesn't appear to work. Is there something within you capacity to fix that? Thanks. Djflem (talk) 08:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've noticed that, too; the Google link has been behaving that way for a while. I assume someone will eventually get around to fixing the problem, but it's far beyond my feeble knowledge of how Google operates. The matter has been brought up at Template talk:GeoGroup, though it doesn't look like anyone's come up with a solution yet. Deor (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)