User talk:Equazcion/2013 5

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/New Dock (Leeds)
This submission is an edited copy of Clarence Dock (Leeds). I have reverted the redirection on this page as it should probably be a page move and the changes in this submission histmerging above this. Keith D (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * After checking the revision histories and comparing the mostly-copied-and-pasted pages, I concur. There may need to be a revert to the "AFC submission" version after the history merge.  Since this is a complex page merge, it would be best to explain what is going on at Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen and let an admin sort it all out.  If you are an admin and have it sorted out in your head, just make it happen. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  21:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

New AFCH gadget release pushed
From the release notes: The 25 September release brings with it a brand new interface to add WikiProject templates to talk pages, widespread CSD logging, integrated formatgeneral.js cleanup, automatic deletion of redirects in the way of acceptance (admins only), bug fixes, speed improvements, and unicorns. A new beta script has been pushed as well. As usual, you'll need to bypass your cache to see the new features. Please let us know here if anything doesn't work as intended so we can make sure everything is ready for the October backlog drive.  Theopolisme ( talk )  01:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Please check for existing articles when nominating, delaying/rescuing, or deleting G13s
Before nominating or deleting a G13 please check to see if the article has been created, as a history merge may be needed.

If the article was created and deleted the submission may need to be speedy-deleted under another criteria and/or a comment added before it is deleted, e.g. "an article on this topic was deleted in a deletion discussion, its content should be checked before this page becomes part of the encyclopedia (this edit is NOT intended to stop the "G13 countdown clock")."

Before delaying or rescuing a G13-eligible submission, check to see if the page exists. If it does, a history- and/or content-merge may be needed. If it is a copy-and-paste and the mainspace-article creator is the only significant editor of the submission, just G13-delete it.

Last night I went through a handful of 6+ month old submissions that were "rescued." The majority of them were copy-and-pasted into the main encyclopedia so I just declined them as duplicates. They will die to g13 in another 6 months. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  16:22, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added instructions and helpful links to Template:Db-g13/sandbox ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ADb-g13%2Fsandbox&diff=574890449&oldid=574888171 diff]). To try it out, go [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Db-g13&hidelinks=1&hideredirs=1 here] and add replace the db-afc or db-g13 template with db-g13/sandbox and preview it. Any objections to making this go live?  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  17:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm strongly opposed to it being added as is. The code is broken and doea not render as intended and it clutters up the interface for all users to display a note to administrators. I'll add the function to the anote= section later that only admins can see and fix the coding so it is not broken. Technical 13 (talk) 19:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I've tackled a few of these simply by changing the submission into a redirect to the article in mainspace, as we do when regular submissions pass.. This seems to be the ideal compromise. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   19:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay,, I've moved the code to the appropriate area. "if" the page doesn't exist, the response is kind of long (takes two whole lines on my screen), can it be reworded to cut it down?  Is it even needed?  I can see warning if the page already exists (although that information is already in the afc submission template. Technical 13 (talk) 22:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The G13 submissions are being deleted very quickly, and while I try to check for copyvios and existing articles, I may miss one occasionally. The copyvios are no problem, because they can be deleted as soon as anyone finds them, but I'm sure that some "rescued" articles will be found, after careful checking, to be indeed non-notable or unnecessary for one reason or another.  Since they will only have been edited by those rescuing them, do they need to wait another six months? Can we nominate them again now, or maybe to prevent confusion as soon as the backlog is gone?  Which reminds me that the "postpone" option doesn't seem to work on unsubmitted drafts (unless it was fixed this afternoon).  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * General reply to all above: I have no objections to re-wording and to making some text only visible to admins. If there is a way to show the "please check deleted versions" text only if the deletions exist, that is even better. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  01:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The problem of articles in Afc which are either copy-paste remnants or resubmissions of existing article subjects isn't unique to the G13 situation. Has anyone in the past created a "bot" that is triggered when a new article is created or moved into Afc space which searches the encyclopedia for an article with the same name and reports it?  I know that the move software checks for identical names, which helps with duplicates inside the Afc, but not with duplicates in mainspace.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 01:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I have checked as many of the December 2011 submissions that I could before they disappeared. Now the January 2012 ones are going, and I have only checked ones beginning with the letter A so far (see my list). I was keeping up for a while, but had to (1) eat (2) sleep (3) attend four jam sessions.  If anyone else has been checking them, please leave a note on either my list (if checking with the handy infobox) or DGG's list if checking by date, so that we can cover as many as possible before the backlong drive starts and our attention is split! &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 04:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

can't save a page, asked to post here if I received an error message.
having trouble creating new pages. The system seems to have changed dramatically from when I started the LXLE page. different format of editor. different rules. not sure what to do... noob here.

I just started talk page for uDuck

and now trying to start Libreante. Trouble with the latter. Mint Lulu (talk) 04:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * what error are you getting? Try adding to it, or copy paste the error message here. -- Mdann  52   talk to me!  07:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I wonder if this is somebody who used Visual Editor when it was the default choice, and is now confused because (by extremely popular demand) we've gone back to the source editor. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   11:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ to some degree. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/uDuck now has a draft template, which the user appeared to be trying to put on. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  13:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)