User talk:Dmehus/Archives/2020/January

Disambiguation link notification for January 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sandringham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Queen ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Sandringham check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Sandringham?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

DABfixing
User:DPL bot churns out a variety of reports about bad links to DAB pages, but they don't differentiate between technical errors (links in hatnotes or see-alsos that need to go through the (disambiguation) qualifier) and actual ambiguities. They all need fixing.

If you're interested in the topic: sign up to WP:DAB and WP:DPL, bookmark WP:TDD, and sleep with MOS:DAB under your pillow. There are a couple of other useful WP:mnemonics at the top of my User Page. There's a selection of useful stuff at WP:DPL. User:DPL bot has a nasty habit of falling over, mostly it seems when WMF are making improvements, so you may need to refresh after a few minutes if a report doesn't load. Also bookmark Category:Articles with links needing disambiguation, which contains the too-difficult list. Fresh eyes there can be very useful. I attacked it as my first project, and helped get the number down from about 10,800 to about 4,800 before getting stuck. The current number is typically less than 1,500, which shows what collaboration can do.

By my estimate, there are about half-a-dozen determined/obsessive DABfixers. Some fight the new fires which break out every day (see WP:TDD), others have other specialities. We try to keep out of each others' way, but only to avoid duplicating effort: there are more productive things to do than looking at errors which someone else has already fixed. The vanity pages are DAB challenge and DAB Hall of Fame, which show who the most active DABfixers are. However, those reports only count errors which were present on the first of the month; some of the most active editors appear low on the lists.

Another useful type of search page is surname (and to a lesser extent given name). Those aren't DAB pages, but they provide the same sort of search function. I've created several dozen of those, simply by thinking 'Hmmm, that's an uncommon name - I wonder if there's a surname page?' and running an intitle: search.

Feel free to ping me at any time, or to ask for advice at WT:DPL, which is an active page. Narky Blert (talk) 08:27, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Please stop thanking me.
It's getting really obnoxious trying to close an MfD and constantly getting barraged by thanks. You have shown up on my notifications seven times today which is absolutely insane. -- Tavix ( talk ) 02:13, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , It's okay. I'm legitimately trying to show appreciation for editors'/administrators' actions. I do tend to use the "Thanks" feature, more than most, but I won't thank you anymore today. Doug Mehus T · C  02:21, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ...Make that eight times. Just please don't thank or ping me anymore, not just today. I'm simply exhausted of seeing you appear in my notifications. -- Tavix ( talk ) 02:25, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the thankses.
Hi Dmehus,

Thanks for the thanks, it is always nice, but you have now thanked me four times today and 11 times in the week. Could you please save the thanks for more special occasions? Also, the thanks notification is probably best not used for a post to which you make a pinging repl a y.

SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Okay, fair enough. I was thinking of posting a notice on my talk page (or user page) that "this editor is a serial thanker. If you would like to opt out entirely, or specify a maximum number of 'thanks' per week, please add your name to this log, and he will do his best to adhere to your wishes." Plus, in any case, if I've pinged you in a reply or concurred with you in a reply, the 'thanks' log is, more or less, redundant, is that what you mean by a "pinging replay"? Doug Mehus T · C  23:49, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Replay? Typo for reply.  If you thank me for my post.  Then reply to my post, pinging me in your post, and also pinging me in the edit summary of your post, then I get three separate notifications for the one thing.  That's too much.  One max please. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yeah, fair enough. I'll limit my pings to you to once per day, per separate thread, whether in pinged reply, edit summary 'thanks', or an edit summary ping, but not all thread. I will resist the temptation to use the 'thanks' for you and really try and limit my pings to pinged replies (as that's likely the most useful anyway). Doug Mehus T · C  00:35, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

(disambiguation) redirects
A tip, in case you don't know it. If you create one, tag it as R to disambiguation page. Narky Blert (talk) 14:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Oh, thanks. That's for those redirects with the (disambiguation) parenthetical qualifier, right? I did see that in the Archer script that created. In case you weren't aware of it, it is wonderful for creating and retargeting redirects. I particularly like that, for redirects without an rcat shell, you can just click "save redirect" with no changes and it'll auto-add the rcat shell for you. Aside from XFDcloser, DiscussionCloser, reply-link, and Twinkle, it is the script I used the most. In terms of non-talk pages, I would say I use it as much as Twinkle. 5 stars out of 5. Doug Mehus  T · C  15:17, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Re Draft:7889
I can't speak for everyone who has ever edited form here, this computer is public, however while I don't believe myself in nuking drafts shortly after creation just for having limited context or content with limited exception for cases where someone writes "this is a test" and walks away to limit the chance for bites, I would never remove CSD tags placed correctly by a user acting in good faith. I disagree with the G3 because vandalism is limited to actions deliberately intended to defeat the project's purpose which that was not, but G1 and G2 were both applicable. I would also point out that policy frowns upon preemptive page protections and those are rarely granted. In any case I'm out of here in around 24 hours, everyone else I know that has edited from here is either far more strict and quick to place CSD tags, or does not know what they are. 2604:2000:8FC0:4:68BA:3B32:8613:8B6D (talk) 01:32, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Pinged
Good work, Doug ... but where's the infinity key? -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:51, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. Infinity key? Do I need to add something else to that category, and I noticed that some of these categories weren't created. Can you add the company disestablishments and establishments by year categories to your bot (one of your bots)? Doug Mehus T · C  01:54, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Just an ordinary infinity key, like you use with any non-recursive transmogrifier. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , So...is it a wiki-joke, or am I legitimately supposed to be doing something? Sorry if the humour is escaping me. LOL Doug Mehus T · C  02:02, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was just being silly. Too much heavy wiki-stuff in the last few days, so I thought I'd change the tone.  Next round was going to involve the use omnium, but it's probably as well we didn't go there.
 * Seriously, it's all fine. You seem to have done exactly what I do in such cases, i.e. copy from another similar category and adapt as needed.
 * Unfortunately, this sort of thing isn't easily bot-able (yes, ugly invented word), because there are so many different types of category. So I do them manually, except in rare cases where there is a consistent set that needs creation for immediate population, when I use WP:AWB. Empty categories are speedily deletable per WP:C1, and articles shouldn't be left in redlinked cats (see WP:REDNOT) ... so these have to be crated as needed.  I and some other editors use Special:WantedCategories to identify needed categories, and if i feel in the mood to get ahead of SWC, then I use a custom Quarry tool: https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/30916.  Note that quarry allows only  the owner to run the query, so it's no use to anyone else.  I copied it off someone else.  If and when I get sent to wiki-Gitmo, feel free to take over the job
 * Anyways, the main thing is that you figured out for yerself how to do it right. Sorry we can't automate it, but thanks for kindly asking me to take a peek. I'd send you a barnstar, but my transmogrifier was crashed by some joyriders, so I can't deliver until the machine is repaired. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 02:38, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

List of senators in the 42nd Parliament of Canada
Hi Dmehus,

I find the pages dealing with Canadian senators to be byzantine, so I apologize if I'm missing something here, but I'm a little confused by your recent edit to List of senators in the 42nd Parliament of Canada that changed Joseph A. Day's status. My understanding of the End column is that it tracks who was a sitting senator at dissolution, and since Day's retirement only came today (during the 43rd parliament), shouldn't he still be listed as End–"Yes" for this page? — Kawnhr (talk) 22:12, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for your reply. Your guess is as good as mine. I'm not really sure what that last column is tracking, so I just specified 'no' since it was a mandatory retirement? But if that's the correct interpretation, absolutely, feel free to edit my change. Doug Mehus T · C  22:17, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I went ahead and undid that part of the edit. I think it's a very awkward pair of columns but it seems to be tracking what other lists (for example) were doing with other sections (which I find a much clearer layout, incidentally). — Kawnhr (talk) 04:55, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ,, and yes I do like that other layout. Perhaps that's something we can discuss later, about reverting to the former wikitable style, presumably via the Canadian Wikipedians noticeboard? We'd want to make sure we engage everyone, as there could be unknown research uses for certain columns. Doug Mehus T · C  14:06, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same thing; I'll probably raise it there sometime in the next few days. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ,, yeah, sounds good. I think it was an either an IP editor or at Talk:List of current Canadian senators by age that mentioned the usefulness of certain columns noting their age, term, term remaining, and such in days.
 * Speaking of which, was able to close that discussion as a WP:SNOW merge, but I haven't carried it out the because I want to initiate a discussion there to see which columns should be kept for research purposes. I'm inclined to leave it until March/April when I have more time, per WP:NODEADLINES, if that's fine with you. Doug Mehus  T · C  19:39, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm the, that I saw the page that referring to the outdated information on the Canadian Senators from the last 42nd Parliament. And I'm telling you, that I don't remember sending request about updating that time. Due for two reasons:
 * 1. My account was created exactly around May 28, 2017 or 28 [of] May, 2017 (for International users), so I don't remember sending it, as a anonymous user, before I officially joined as a normal User for your site.
 * 2. And secondly, I was not completely interest of Canadian politics, until officially around 2018-19 as the Nations' (and its independently connected provincial chapters) Green Party was spark of a semi-rise popularity before the 2019 Canadian federal election. As there, start a complete interest of your country's politics, since. Chad The Goatman (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Apologies if I had the wrong person then in that case. Nevertheless, I have seen you editing Canadian politics-related articles. Would you like to be included on some of our talkpage discussions via pings? Doug Mehus T · C  21:39, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If you wanted too, as I don't never hearing this mechanism before, since I joined the site. Chad The Goatman (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Sure, sounds good. For the record, the user I was thinking of was and the discussion was at Talk:List of current senators of Canada. Doug Mehus  T · C  21:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , Sure, sounds good. For the record, the user I was thinking of was and the discussion was at Talk:List of current senators of Canada. Doug Mehus  T · C  21:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot
Sorry, for forgetting to update some sections yesterday. I realized after the fact that I didn't. Also, good work on the Mark Gold update. You did that quickly. - MikkelJSmith (talk) 16:09, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ,, and no worries, I think between , , and , the changes got updated. I can't remember, what, specifically, off hand I'd requested you update (assuming it was related to Gold's departure), but it got done nevertheless. We should also make sure we try and ping Mikemikem, DeCoolRuler, and on our Senate of Canada talkpage discussions when possible, too. Doug Mehus  T · C  16:14, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , for sure yeah. I'll probably have to update the map soon. I haven't updated it since Andre Pratte's departure. MikkelJSmith (talk) 16:23, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've updated the map. Can you verify that the problem that occurred last time isn't happening? It's not the seating map but the other one with seats per province and a map of Canada. MikkelJSmith (talk) 23:00, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * For me, it looks fine. MikkelJSmith (talk) 23:02, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , ✅. . It looks good. I just counted up the circles for smaller groups, vacant, and non-affiliated seats, and they matched the totals in the legend. I meant to tell you, and in response to that thread on your talkpage that that caching problem of the old Senate composition map fixed itself. I wonder if maybe we needed to 'purge' the page or something? Maybe someone did that, and it fixed itself? Anyway, thanks again,, for your help on that. Doug Mehus  T · C  23:13, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

An exercise to try to understand you better
At Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 January 21, you stated Delete per nom. WP:FORRED could also, potentially, apply here, per Tavix?. I don't want to get into a discussion there because this is a bit off topic, but could you please go into detail about your train of thought when you formed this comment. I want you to illustrate why you think WP:FORRED could apply for this redirect, and, more important to me, why you think such such a thing would be "per Tavix". I want the whole story from the time this thought occurred to you through to its conclusion and then finally being convinced by this enough to decide to post it. -- Tavix ( talk ) 19:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. Sorry, I thought WP:FORRED was a shortcut alias for WP:REDLINK. I should've clicked through to the shortcut; this is one of the problems with vague Wikipedia shortcut aliases (i.e., WP:TALKPAGECLUTTER, which, interestingly, just closed as delete). I will correct my comment. That's more in-line why it was, at least in part, "per you," but I've still misinterpreted that, I can further amend. --Doug Mehus T · C  19:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * For redirects from foreign languages, my preferred shortcut is WP:RFOREIGN (and I also endorse WP:RFFL as a shorter version). I have never used "FORRED" and never will because I have always thought it could be confusing with redlinks. Perhaps now would be a good time to encourage you to do likewise. That being said, my only involvement in that discussion had to do with applications of the criteria for speedy deletion, so even with your comment being about redlinks, I'm still confused what that has to do with me. Also, I'm confused how a WP:REDLINK argument would be applicable to such a redirect, noting that the discussion is over Keep Calm and Click Edit, and not Keep Calm and Click Edit. Either way, do you think editors will add Keep Calm and Click Edit to other essays as a redlink to try to encourage someone else to create an essay on the topic? If so, what would be the plausibility of such an event taking place? What would such an essay consist of? These are a few questions to keep in mind when thinking if that is appropriate. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:05, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Re-read your comment and I see it had more to do with whether CSD G6 applied, so have removed that reference from my comment. I guess meant WP:RFD criterion #10, not WP:REDLINK. Thanks for your insights. I've initiated a discussion on WP:FORRED because I agree with you that the two shortcuts for foreign language redirects are much more clear (WP:FORRED wasn't even added to the target page, which suggests it's a non-community sanctioned shortcut that's managed to get a fair bit of organic traction with respect to usage). I think the idea of a Wikipedia dabification of FORRED merits some consideration. Doug Mehus T · C  20:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * This kind of shows what I'm looking to get at. I feel like oftentimes you jump into the deep end of a problem without fully understanding or digesting the issue at hand. It can lead to mistakes, misunderstanding, and misapplication of the relevant details. Others then have to explain where you are wrong or misguided, which can be frustrating for those who do it too often. I encourage you to slow down and really try to think critically about any issue, no matter how big it is, before deciding to jump in to hit that "edit" button in the future. I think that would lead to more productive discussions and a more collegial environment. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, for enough. I'll try and take a step back from my participation, at least for a little while as I do have other things to do. When I resume, I'll try and be more consistently methodical in my approach to the discussions, as I often do. I would say that is fair to say that I don't consistently think things through all the time. Thank you for the thoughtful, reflective, and productive discussion.
 * I'll leave the WP:FORRED discussion up, as I think it's healthy for others to weigh in, and it's a reasonable debate to have, but if a WP:SNOW "keep" consensus begins to emerge and there is no indication others would like to way in, I'll consider withdrawing my nomination as a speedy keep. Doug Mehus T · C  20:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be fair for me to make any conclusions about the way you think, one way or the other. You're truly the only person that would know that. That is part of the reason why I wanted to get a better insight into your thought process, so I decided to knock on your talk page to try to get a better understanding of how that process works for you. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be fair for me to make any conclusions about the way you think, one way or the other. You're truly the only person that would know that. That is part of the reason why I wanted to get a better insight into your thought process, so I decided to knock on your talk page to try to get a better understanding of how that process works for you. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

A userbox
Quite by accident, I found which you might like for your User Page. (I found it - well - on the User Page of an editor who'd just thanked me.) Yrs. Narky Blert (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , That's wonderful. for the find! I do tend to overthank, but I do think it shows appreciation. I think I've issued more than 1,500 thanks log actions in the past 8 months or something like that. Doug Mehus  T · C  20:05, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Something like this would be vastly preferable. I get so many notices from you in particular that it interferes with my ability to make any practical use of the notifications system.  I've gotten to where I just ignore it because it's just Dmehus over and over again. I've been meaning to bring this up for a while (again, actually – I e-mailed you over a month ago, advising against over-use of ping, but your use of that hasn't slowed down, either, and seems actually to have increased).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , fair enough, apologies for not having had a chance to read your e-mail yet; I hadn't realized it was, in part, due to my over-use of pings or, at least the 'thanks' log ping. I'll work on a 'thanks' opt-out entirely/reduction log. --Doug Mehus T · C  18:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to note, though, that in just the few intervening minutes I've received at least one thanks hit and regular pings from you.  Please consider that a) people have and use watchlists for a reason; b) we don't always want to track in detail the resolution of every single thing we comment on (often quite the opposite – we give our input and move on, trusting the community to arrive at a sensible consensus, rather than assuming we need to individually WP:BLUDGEON the process to get a worthwhile outcome :-); and c) we're all sensible enough to check back on user talk threads, noticeboard proceedings, article sourcing threads, and other discussions in which we expect/want further input.  Pings are primarily of use (sparingly) for drawing people back to discussions from which they seem to have disappeared for some time but which have evolved in ways that would benefit from their input, and we think that they'd want to give that input; and in cases where some statement, behavior, view, material, proposal, objection, or other "something" has been attributed to or associated with an editor, and we don't want to be talking about them behind their back (negatively or positively).  WP:NOT is important. We're here to do a lot of (a never-ending river of) work, not chitter-chatter all day.  At a real job, you would not pop by a co-worker's cubicle or call them on their desk phone or send them an e-mail dozens of times per day for little bits of assurance, agreement-indicating, or other "feels", since it interrupts work flow and attention. It also has the "crying wolf" effect. The notification system becomes something to ignore if it's always filled with trivia instead of requests for important and relevant input, notices of revert actions, and other things we care about.  It is nice to get a thanks ping every now and then for something that required a lot of thought and effort and judgement, but it becomes empty noise when used over and over and over for the trivial and commonplace.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:27, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, some of those replies are because I used reply-link and I do have to say, you are very diligent with your follow-ups and utilizing your watchlist. In short, you don't need the friendly reminder ping, so I'll try and remember to delete the auto-added username reference if replying using reply-link (like this). Doug Mehus T · C  19:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm not sure what "reply-link" is, presumably a template I don't use, or maybe a visual-editor feature.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't have/use Enterprisey's reply-link script? It inserts little "reply" links following a signature. When clicked, it inserts a quick edit-type box, with options to quickly outdent, if desired. It's somewhat buggy wherein there's frequent problems where it has troubles finding a signature, but he's prompt with fixing them. Doug Mehus T · C  02:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:REPLYLINK. On the page, is literally featured as the sole testimonial, quoted as saying, "Changed my life." Doug Mehus  T · C  02:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CKQQ-FM B103 radio logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:CKQQ-FM B103 radio logo.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) 18:34, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.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) 18:35, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.jpg


The file File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-free former logo being used in a decorative manner in an image gallery in CKQQ-FM which fails WP:NFG, WP:NFCC and WP:NFC. Non-free logos can sometimes be used, but the long standing consensus is that the logos themselves, not the former station, needs to be the subject of sourced critical commentary"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CKQQ-FM Q103 2010 logo.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Drafts
Saw your ping at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Luca Stricagnoli (2nd nomination). I tend not to bother getting involved when AfC is involved. I don't typically see a reason for deletion at MfD most of the time (for anything egregious, there's CSD), but if something is submitted and declined and the requisite time goes by, or if it's repeatedly resubmitted without improvement, or if it's just in draftspace too long, it's true that there's generally consensus to get rid of it. Meh. Part of why I'd never tell someone who has any sort of help in the Wikipedia learning process (e.g. at Wikipedia editing events, courses, etc.) to use AfC. Personally, I've more or less written off the drafts namespace entirely. Once upon a time I used draftspace, and told the newbies I helped to use draftspace, since I like the idea of a drafting area that's more easily findable than in userspace. In practice, though, nobody really collaborates on drafts except when pre-planned, when it doesn't matter if it's findable. That, and efforts at "reform" of drafts over the last 5 years have made it basically useless except as a place for unsuspecting newbies where their work is more easily deleted than in userspace. If someone has no help when learning Wikipedia, then ok, I guess, but over time the vast majority of my newbie-helping has moved offline, where I would discourage people from using drafts since there's just no benefit to anyone. $0.02, I guess. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 22:41, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:North Greece
The documentation on Template:Talk page of redirect states under the "misuse" section: editors must never create new talk pages just to tag them with this template. This is the second time I've corrected improper template use by you today. Please read the documentation of templates and make sure you understand it fully before using any template. -- Tavix ( talk ) 22:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, yes, I shouldn't have created that talk page as there wasn't an existing one, and, in the other case, there was only WikiProject banner, and I know that the guidelines suggest avoiding using a shell unless there's two or more banners; however, I was just thinking WP:IAR could apply for general tidyness and to de-clutter it. That was my thinking, if that helps with understanding my thought processes. Nevertheless, at minimum, I think creating the talk page was more problematic, and I'll operate within the guidelines going forward. Doug Mehus T · C  22:59, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you're okay with the deletion of that page, so I'll go ahead and take care of it. Do advise if I am mistaken. -- Tavix ( talk ) 23:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That's fine. Yes, you're right, I should've just requested deletion as, G7 (author requests deletion)? Doug Mehus T · C  23:12, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I deleted it under. I see you thanked me, which was a situation that I feel thanking is useful, so I appreciate it. -- Tavix ( talk ) 23:15, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Yes, that was my thinking, as the 'thanks' would acknowledge that I consented to a G7 deletion. Glad to know I am starting to understand your preferred use of the 'thanks'. Doug Mehus T · C  23:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

HTML geekery
Two minor tips for us WP:LINT types: hasn't existed in HTML since the 1990s, either; the current tag is. And if you strike a list item, the format is, not  , or it breaks the list formatting. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)