User talk:Fourthords

Changes to Wikipedia
Hello. I appreciate your attention to General Goodwin's profile, but after discussing with her personally, she wants these changes as they are the truth and read better for the end user. Can you tell me what the issue is please? And why you keep changing it? Thank you in advance. Pagecd (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Fallout: New Vegas / FNV
Help me out here, because this sure seems like a case of rules preventing the improvement of Wikipedia. It's eminently verifiable that Fallout: New Vegas is commonly abbreviated as FNV. Looking back in the page history, I can see I'm not the first to add it. Using a Firefox private window, the game was in multiple first-page results in a search for the letters on Google, DuckDuckGo, and Bing. (There was also a company we have an article on but was not previously listed. I added it, so that's something!) I could follow the advice of WP:DABABBREV and add it to the article, but... is that helpful, or just clutter? To be totally honest, I'd only be doing it to support the entry on the disambiguation page.

If you can consider all this and decide yes, the status quo is really in the best interests of readers, I'll leave it alone. --BDD (talk) 14:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Musgrave Park Hospital bombing
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Musgrave Park Hospital bombing, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/sandbox/43&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Fourthords&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=&preloadparams%5b%5d=1170892295 report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:55, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Musgrave_Park_Hospital_bombing&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1170892295%7CMusgrave%20Park%20Hospital%20bombing%5D%5D Ask for help])
 * Yarp, but that isn't my source: I don't have any more than the work and date info that was already there. Hopefully the error will spur somebody who does have access to the original source to both verify it and update the .  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:08, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Musgrave Park Hospital bombing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sunday Life.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I expected that might be the case.   In this instance, not only is the original source still not my own, but I couldn't even load the target page due to technical hurdles I'm suffering.  Again, though, when an editor has access to the actual original sources and is spurred to fully kit out those sources, hopefully the ambiguation will slso be specified.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 11:37, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert J. O'Neill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bond.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll be damned, you're right. This should've fixed it.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Removing sources?
I appreciate the expansion, but the source removal confuses me -- it went from fourteen to eight? This one, for example; sure, it's a passing mention, but passing mentions aren't bad. They don't confer notability, of course, but they don't detract from it or anything. jp×g 05:27, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

proof of life
Just verifying for that I'm the same editor they're speaking with off-wiki. —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 01:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Updating date tags on maintenance templates
Hey, small question, but when you update the date parameter on a maintenance template like use mdy dates (eg here: ), what is the purpose of that date change? — HTGS (talk) 22:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I just go ahead and update it for the same reasons the bots do, to indicate the most-recent date that the specific-fomatting conventions were checked. If I'm already in an article's edit, I might as well update the formatting template, which'll save somebody else time and effort down the line when checking articles which haven't had their templates updated in ages.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 00:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I guess I’m really asking though why the template would need to be “checked”? Like, it’s not like MDY or DMY date formats would change for an article over time. — HTGS (talk) 04:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * As I see it, the template serves two purposes: (1) formatting citation-template dates so that 2022-04-01 gets automatically rendered in the article as "April 1, 2023" or "1 April 2023"; and (2) to serve as a notice to editors, alerting them to which format they should use.It's not the template that needs to be "checked", but articles need to be checked periodically to make sure they're using the correct date format. Say you live in the US where the typical date format is MDY, and you often edit US-related topics, where MDY dates are usually appropriate, so you never even need to think about other date formats.  However, WP:MILDATE says that articles about the US military should be using DMY dates, but if you don't realize that, and if you don't see the template, you might accidentally use the wrong&mdash;MDY&mdash;date format in the article while working on it.  If I later go to edit USS Dingleberry or Flibbertigibbet Air Force Base, and notice that the  hasn't been updated since 2019, I'll take an extra minute or two to double-check the article's dates, find where you accidentally used the wrong format, and I can quickly fix it while I'm there.  Does that make sense?  I'm just telling other editors, "Hey, this article's prose was checked for correctly-formatted dates really recently, so you needn't bother."  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 22:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thaaaat makes a lot more sense. Thanks so much for explaining it, honestly. I was going around so confused that it would ever need changing—or even thinking that the older date maybe should have been more important—but setting the date to indicate that makes so much sense. — HTGS (talk) 20:40, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, I'm glad (and more than a little surprised) I could help! —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 05:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Dispute in Falling from Grace (film) article. Thank you. QuasyBoy (talk) 01:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, more power to ya! Do you need me to read and provide input there, or've you and the preexisting discussion got it covered?  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 05:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Just waiting for an administrator to respond to my request. I hope you will participate. QuasyBoy (talk) 07:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * If you need me to, I certainly don't mind stopping by and saying "hi!". —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 07:53, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh fuck me.
It looks like I unwatched my own user/talk page back in November when replying to the above. I will now reply to the messages below. —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Violet Keene
In reference to this conversation, you and I last spoke in September 2023 at: Talk:Violet Keene.

To whom this may concern:

Miss Keene (Violet Keene) is my great-grandmother; you'd told me in September, to get her English birth certificate.

I have it; her mother, Minna Keene is listed as the informant, and Violet's birthdate is, in fact, the 8 August 1893.

I can send a photograph as verification, if you'd like to see it. LucilleBall (talk) 06:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In September I referred you to the reliable-sources guideline, saying that materials needed to be reputably published for us to use them. I have, also, seen you message at that talk page and replied there as well.  So sorry for the delay!  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Slavica Ecclestone
Would you be so kind to review Slavica Ecclestone's article because there is a very disruptive, irrational contributor Denle1 with a political agenda. Thanks. Dekker2 (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * After these many months, I'm not sure to what you're referring. Does that article still need review?  So sorry for the delay here!  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Coagula
Hi there! I see you've reverted my bot twice on Talk:Coagula. The B-class parameters were recently from WikiProject Comics (as a result of this discussion at WT:COUNCIL). See the discussion at Template talk:WikiProject banner shell. GoingBatty (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I missed your comment here, but I think it was addressed in these edits of mine. So sorry for the delay!  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Pete Postlethwaite edit
I was astonished to discover this edit, in which you removed from a (dead) subject's biography all material within the article body pertaining to his most famous career roles, presumably on the basis that the paragraph was tagged for citation. Do you mind correcting that, please? cn is an invitation to improvement, not a death sentence, and the article as it stands is massively less evenly-weighted as a result. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've now undone the majority of this change. I'd still be keen to know why you made it in the first place. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 18:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * When you say, I assume that IAW Verifiability you also provided "an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." Because "material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source."  Right?  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Looking at that edit, I was removing uncited material (some seven years old) IAW Verifiability, as I linked to in my original edit summary. According to our policy,  would be "providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution."  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the ANI
 GraziePrego has given you a bowl of peaches! This delicious fruit promotes WikiLove and has hopefully made your day juicier. Spread peachiness and WikiLove by giving someone else some peaches, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, by adding {{subst:Peach}} to their talk page with a friendly message!

''I'm astonished by the tone and attitude that Bearcat has used against you, and I hope it doesn't put you off from continuing to build Wikipedia. Happy editing! GraziePrego (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)''


 * Gotta say, I do love peaches! Thanks!  Do you have any suggestions about how I should move forward?  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
I think you should apply for the Autopatrolled user right. I just reviewed Press Your Luck scandal at NPP and it seemed excellent to me. A brief check of your Xtools stats suggest you should be eligible; doing this will help NPP get on top of the backlog by removing the need for us to review every article you create. Best, Toadspike (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Michael Larson a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Press Your Luck scandal. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Jax 0677 (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the kind words! I will look into this at a later date, yes.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Michael Larson a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Press Your Luck scandal. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Jax 0677 (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't. The content of the latter article was originally and entirely developed independently of the former.  Press Your Luck scandal was created from whole cloth, and then Michael Larson was turned into a redirect.  I've boldly removed the  because I was worried a bot might make a technical mess by trying to merge two different wholly distinct article histories.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

What exactly is unrepresentative?
"Republican state legislators particularly relish passing legislation to exploit child labor. The Louisiana bill, now before the state Senate, is sponsored by Roger Wilder III, a Republican freshman who owns 19 Smoothie King franchises scattered throughout Louisiana and the Deep South."

What from that doesn't translate into what I wrote...? 92.21.86.180 (talk) 13:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

"Glory Hallelujah" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Glory_Hallelujah&redirect=no Glory Hallelujah] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 00:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If there's a better destination for that page, I certainly don't object. The page previously didn't exist at all, so turning it into the redirect as I did was just a helpful navigational aid for the time.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 23:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You'll have to comment at the discussion page for your opinion to be counted. It does look like you don't object to any outcome though. Jay  💬 14:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You're right on both counts. —  <templatestyles src="Template:Color/styles.css" /> Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 16:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Map bugs
wrt Template talk:OSM Location map. The programmers who introduced these bugs on map transitions across 180 degrees did not write consistent wrap around code for two behind the scenes modules when Kartographer implemented. Issues go back to 2016 at least. Perhaps a moan from a typical user editor will do some good as issue has been graded ever downwards to low priority. In practice it means you can't use Kartographer with overlaid features mapped by coordinate that cross 180 degrees to get consistent display on click through from the default map image generated to minimise bandwidth and server load. Cheers ChaseKiwi (talk) 13:01, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

TemplateStyles in signatures
Please remove the TemplateStyles tag from your signature. This has the same effect as a template, which are not allowed in signatures. IznoPublic (talk) 19:19, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I haven't changed my signature since August 2019, and that was just a capitalization; the style has been consistent for nigh decades at this point. I see what you're talking about in my recent posts, but as recently as 2 April 2024, it wasn't doing that, with the first instance being this signature on 3 April 2024.  All the while, the coded signature in my preferences hasn't changed.  It looks like I've been substituting  since maybe 2006?  Any thoughts?  —  <templatestyles src="Template:Color/styles.css" /> Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 19:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, saw the ping. I will revert the problematic change. Consider not substing the template for the future. IznoPublic (talk) 20:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * What's the ping? I haven't changed anything yet, though.  If substituting the template in the signature is the problem, how would I get the same outcome with the minimum/most-efficient coding (to keep it small)?  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This ping. I've fixed the issue, but to answer the question, here is what you can/should place in the signature box instead: . IznoPublic (talk) 22:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Gotcha! Sorry, I didn't think to assume you were watching their talk page.  Thanks for the heads-up; I've replaced the substitution code in my signature, and this'll be its first test:  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 02:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks identical to me! Thanks again.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 02:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding talk page archives
Hello,. I wanted to reach out in case any of my edits to your talk archives were confusing and/or bothersome. At some point in the future, archive will be updated with the code from aan, so I've been going through and converting any talk page that used archive+archive navigation to just use aan. You're welcome to ask questions, but I mostly just wanted to reach out and offer an explanation. Take care, Rjjiii  (talk) 01:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that is going to be merged into .  So you replaced the target of the merge, the template that's going to be kept and maintained, with a redirect to the template which is going away?  You replaced the template I specifically added to my archives with a redirection to a template that's being replaced with the template I already specifically added to my archives.  That's expending effort (yours, your bot's, and the server's) to effect no functional change except to compel all those users' pages to expend that tiny more server effort (redirection) in the future.  Yes, thank you for the… explanation.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 18:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Nope. In the future, archive will work as aan works now. Pages that currently use archive plus archive navigation would have two rows of duplicate links. Rjjiii  (talk) 18:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * First of all, doesn't "work" at all because it isn't a template; it's a redirect to .  More saliently, if  is going to be functionally synonymous with, then why replace other users' preexisting instances of the former with a redirect to the latter, at all?  Because based on what you youself're saying, that's literally 100% unnecessary (especially the redirection).  Here you replaced two templates with a redirect to a third, when by your own claims, simply removing  would have accomplished the exact same thing.  For that matter, the simplest and least intrusive thing you should have done was to simply post once on those users' talk pages that: templates they're using will be undergoing changes and merging, thereby letting them edit their own archives as they needed or desired.Ultimately, it's all moot, now: your bot's already edited across countless pages, and I've already repaired my archives from its one-time run.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 19:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "Because based on what you youself're saying, that's literally 100% unnecessary (especially the redirection)." Nope. Removing archive navigation would remove the navigation links until the templates are merged. Additionally, some archive pages have atypical titles like "August 2007-08" or "9¢", that automatic archive navigator cannot locate. This seems to have upset you, so I apologize for that. Take care, Rjjiii  (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * As unnecessary and excessive behavior I've never before encountered by an approved bot, I'm more utterly baffled and agog rather than upset. Your apology is appreciated, but I'd still recommend you be wary of making such sweeping, preemptive, and unnecessary changes to user pages not your own.  Nobody finds talk-page messages undue&mdash;that's their very purpose; changing the expected and future behavior of their pages on their presumptive behalf can be perceived as ogrish vandalism at worst (or even just a housekeeping annoyance, as in my case).  Cheers, and best of luck to you in the future.  —   Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 19:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)