User talk:Hike395/Archive 23

Official name for U.S. settlements

 * This might not work in this situation but what happens if a temporary bot is made to fix this issue? Have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 00:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it would be difficult to fully automate (unless the consensus is to simply remove all official_name from U.S. settlements). For example, I left a use of the parameter in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. We might be able to automate all cases where County of XXX or City of YYY, which would be a large subset of all usage (in the U.S., at least). — hike395 (talk) 01:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for bothering you again but I found out that Template US State also uses official_name. Also, if you did wish to request a bot, it might only need a simple if then statement to run "If official_name says City/Town/Village of X, then delete." Thanks again for your help, have good day! DiscoA340 (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Added a short version to the TemplateData guidance at Infobox U.S. State. My AWB run looks for transclusions of Infobox settlement, so it will catch all upstream uses (as long as official_name does not change parameter name). I could do a special AWB subrun for states.
 * I'm a bit reluctant to reach for 100% automation, even on a subset, because there is no room for error. I want to try to understand the usage better with a manual AWB run (for a while) before making a recommendation. — hike395 (talk) 17:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It's 100% your choice about automating the process or not. If you change your mind, I'd be happy to help with any concerns (Bot requests would be the place to file the request). Thank you for fixing the U.S. State Template guidance as well. Have a good day! DiscoA340 (talk) 18:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to have to halt the AWB work, because someone has objected and the discussion is still open at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. Hopefully we can come to consensus there. — hike395 (talk) 07:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for alerting me to this. Hopefully it can be sorted out. DiscoA340 (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey again,
 * I was wondering what your opinion is about the discussion so far. Quickly looking through the comments, it still seems there is a majority against using "City of X" wording for the infobox. Great idea for a compromise though but it seems the tide has turned against the official name. Thanks and have a good day! DiscoA340 (talk) 23:01, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the newer discussion here? I can try to convince some of these editors, but it looks like it will be difficult. The proposed change to the infobox looks like it will fail. We may still be able to change the documentation, however. — hike395 (talk) 03:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's up to you if you want to try to get the official documentation to include "City of X" or not. I may be wrong but the most current discussion seemed to be a last call for people who support using the official name to comment. Even when I added the RfC, none of these supporters showed up; so I think we can safely say that people are okay with the documentation for the three templates. When the RfC expires in a couple days, I believe you could start to remove the official name parameter again if you want to (Really the only other option is to start a discussion at Village Pump to find the true number of supporters but I doubt it would change the outcome of Template talk:Infobox settlement). DiscoA340 (talk) 23:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Documentation for Infobox classical composer
You kindly fixed the list of works in infobox classical composer, - do you think that the documentation also needs to be changed? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Not sure where to change the documentation? The change was that list_of_works shows up as Works not Notable Works. The latter wasn't documented. — hike395 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know, or would do it. I never use that template, - always infobox person. I thought that the parameter was now "works", not "list_of_works". Just asking. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries. The interface for that infobox remains unchanged. — hike395 (talk) 18:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Hike395!


Happy New Year! Hike395, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 16:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Moops Thanks so much, Moops! — hike395 (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am glad to hear that I brightened someone's day in any way. I wish that brightening days en masse was not seen as a 'disruptive' behavior by some. :( — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 22:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 16:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks for the barnstar! I'll chip away at this task -- it might take a long time. — hike395 (talk) 00:46, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Culture of Yorkshire
Hello, the change you made to the infobox on Culture of Yorkshire has lost the emblem image and just gives a link. Can you have a look at getting the image to show. Many thanks. Keith D (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Maps RFC
to reply to your last comment: I originally tagged you mostly just to make you aware of Billed-mammal's comment above. Billedmammal's original question to Rschen on the latter's talk page seemed to implicate you a little bit. The follow-up question was because I figured asking for some clarification of the context of that (rather technical) discussion might be helpful in figuring out how that discussion and this RFC would relate to each other, and to figure out if the accusation from billed-mammal held water. Which I don't think it does. Thank you for answering so clearly ^_^. --Licks-rocks (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing that! — hike395 (talk) 02:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Academic office errors
Hey @Hike395, I just wanted to notify you that I think some of your wrapping on Template:Infobox academic has had an unintentional negative effect on some infobox academic pages, particularly those which have an office module. I have worked on two pages which use the template — John Hart Ely and Ute Wartenberg (for Wartenberg, I've had to revert the office box) — and the office module now consumes most of the infobox and, for some reason, repeats itself twice. I suspect the same issue has happened on all pages which decide to use the IB academic and place an office module. Perhaps you might be able to look into the problem; I think having the office module now cripples the infobox. GuardianH (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know -- it was a simple-to-fix bug. John Hart Ely and Ute Wartenberg are now fixed. — hike395 (talk) 04:23, 3 June 2023 (UTC)