User talk:Hydrargyrum/archive05

Help with WikiProject Blogging
Hello! I am a student taking a Wikipedia editing class at American University this semester. I am currently engaging in the Wiki Project: Blogging and was wondering if you had any tips on what articles I should work on improving. Eb0178a (talk) 14:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * — With several thousand articles (or their Talk pages) listed in Category:WikiProject Blogging articles, there are plenty from which to choose. Many articles can use improvement of spelling, grammar, punctuation, typography and style. Many need verification of references or additional references, or links to external references need to be fixed because Web pages have been moved or have disappeared.  Since a great many contributors to Wikipedia seem to be amateurs with marginal writing skills, the potential work here is literally without end!  If you are interested in photography or graphics and have skills in those areas, that is another way to contribute to improvement of articles. — QuicksilverT @ 19:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:EFax logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:EFax logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 18:38, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 17:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Princess Cruises logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Princess Cruises logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)


 * NOTE: Link to image restored and image updated to reflect 2014 version. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 16:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2016 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:11, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:A123 Systems, Inc. logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:A123 Systems, Inc. logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Oanda-logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Oanda-logo.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:51, 15 January 2017 (UTC) <!--

Dashes
H, please note that in this edit you've gone from (correct) unspaced em dashes to (incorrect) spaced em dashes. Such spaces are used with en dashes, but if em dashes are used they should be unspaced. Please fix here and anywhere else you've done that. See MOS:DASH. Dicklyon (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and fixed that one. Dicklyon (talk) 03:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Also changed em dash to en dash in Koenigsegg CC. Dicklyon (talk) 03:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * — You didn't "fix" anything; indeed, you actually broke text flow. Evidently, the committee of two or three uninformed individuals who came to a "consensus" and formulated MOS:DASH were blissfully unaware that their rule causes dashes to sometimes end up at the beginning of a line, not at the end.  A competent professional typesetter will never wrap an em dash or an en dash to the first position of a line in printed material.  Unfortunately, many Web browsers do just that, and it makes text more difficult to read.  Therefore, I will continue to ignore MOS:DASH and will precede em dashes and en dashes with a non-breaking space and follow them with a space.  I will also continue to ignore the various templates that implement em dashes and en dashes in various screwy, unreliable ways.  Were you aware that inline templates break tool-tip previews of articles? — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 05:29, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Doesn't using spaced en dash solve that problem? Spaces before em dash are never recommended by any style guide that I'm aware of (even if some browsers do the wrong thing with unspaced em dashes). Dicklyon (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * And why not bring up your concerns at WT:MOS instead of ignoring guidelines? Dicklyon (talk) 05:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * — Since I started editing Wikipedia in 2004, experience has shown that it is usually wasted effort. Humans have an extreme reluctance to admit that they've been wrong, even if their actions, singly or collectively in small groups, has caused chaos.  I've pointed out obvious errors, but instead of taking corrective action, greater effort is expended justifying those errors with the flimsiest of excuses than simply fixing them.  Go figure. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 16:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed; my experience with editing wikipedia since 2005 also shows that it is usually wasted effort. Yet we persist. Cheers! Dicklyon (talk) 19:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

-->

Re: Your Signature
Oh, dear. Thank you for the heads-up on my signature. I'm hoping it isn't affecting too many pages, having changed that old and unsightly signature when I changed username. I appreciate the time you took to let me know and give a solution. I hope you might accept this barnstar as a small token of thanks. Rustic /  Talk  09:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors February 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

[Embraco logo.svg] Need to update Company logo
Dear H.,

I'm working at Embraco and I'm updating the logo of our Company in all the pages here in Wikipedia. At this moment if I look for embraco in google, the search engine is heading anyhow the old logo, that you created the page for (find here the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Embraco_logo.svg)

Could you please update the File:Embraco_logo.svg page with the new logo? Otherwise, could you please remove the page from Wikipedia in order to give us the chance to update our company page?

Looking forward to hear from you soon. Thanks a lot,

Jotty.501 (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Embraco logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Embraco logo.svg. 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) 18:31, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Redlands logo.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:University of Redlands logo.svg. 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) 18:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Please update File:Square,_Inc._logo.svg
Hello, I would like to get in touch with you to help update our company's logo because the version that is available File:Square,_Inc._logo.svg is outdated and we have a new logotype. Can you please leave a comment on my page and we can coordinate delivery of the new version in PNG / SVG format? Alternatively, Brandsoftheworld has the updated version available here: https://www.brandsoftheworld.com/logo/square-1 ... Thank you.! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dseward589 (talk • contribs) 20:40, June 15, 2017 UTC (UTC)


 * — I am happy to help, but be aware that there's something wrong about the file available from Brands of the World (BotW). The thumbnail shows the same lettering style as what can be found at https://squareup.com/news, but when I download the current Adobe Illustrator file from BotW and import it into Inkscape, it shows the same lettering style as in the old file I had obtained on 2015-07-25.  Moreover, when I run "fdupes" on the files in the folder on my machine, it says the "new" file is identical to the mid-2015 file, byte for byte.  Either BotW messed up and didn't update the Adobe Illustrator vector file, or the person who uploaded the "new" version of the logo provided an updated thumbnail to BotW, but then uploaded the old Adobe Illustrator file again.  Having dealt with BotW over the years, I have found them to be extraordinarily unresponsive, so appealing to them is pretty much a waste of time.  I found that Square Inc. uses a proprietary font in its literature, called SQMarket, and that the set of font files is available from a repository at GitHub, so I used the JPEG sample of the new logo from Square, Inc. as a guide and spliced in the word "Square" with the SQMarket font in Inkscape to produce a revised SVG file for Wikipedia.  It's close enough that only a digital forensics expert could find any differences from the original, and certainly close enough for the small display sizes of non-free logos allowed in Wikipedia. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 00:14, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Article Talk pages
Please review the talk page guidelines -- this is not appropriate. What matters if what RS say about X and how we handle that per the policies and guidelines here. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


 * — Please review WP:BLP. Use of slurs and pejorative labels in biographical articles of living persons is against Wikipedia policy, and using sly demurrers to justify such slurs and labels doesn't cut it. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 19:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Your recent edits at Le Rhône
Most of these are format/standardisation tweaks - however the explanation you add to the effect that it was the rotational inertia of the engine that made it hard to change speed (it was actually the difficulty of changing the throttle setting without messing up the air/fuel mix) adds a factual error. Have a read of the Rotary engine article if this is not clear. If you don't fix this I will - just a warning so my edit doesn't come as a shock, and to give you a chance to fix your own work. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 02:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * — Go ahead and fix it as you see fit. I was surprised that the key fact of the crankcase and cylinders spinning with the propeller wasn't mentioned at all.  It should at least get a mention without readers having to dig it out of other articles. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 03:30, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Done - hope this works for you --Soundofmusicals (talk) 08:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * My reversion of "itself" was unintentional, incidentally, but I hope I will be forgiven the following minor rant. "Itself" is not really a "reflexive" at all in this sentence - and if it was it would have little to do with "grammar" and most certainly not be a "misuse". The reason I didn't (deliberately) restore this first go was simply that "itself" here is (sort of) "redundant" - in that the sentence makes sense (sort of) without it, if not precisely the same sense as with it. I have a personal policy not to make a issue of this sort of thing, where little or no meaning is lost and the result is not too grossly stilted, if only because it's the facts that really matter. All the same, in an ideal world you would have thought about it again, and restored it off your own bat. Oh well... --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Hyphen
I changed CrowdStrike to remove the hyphen after 'wholly'. Please see WP:HYPHEN: "Avoid using a hyphen after a standard -ly adverb (a newly available home, a wholly owned subsidiary)". Happy editing! Chris the speller  yack  17:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * — Ah, more Wikipedia make-it-up-as-you-go rules of grammar and punctuation. This wiki's Style Guide is gradually devolving into illiteracy, as such rules are promulgated by minuscule groups of editors who somehow avoided taking English writing classes in high school or college. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 17:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

GOCE February 2018 news
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Redlands logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:University of Redlands logo.svg. 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) 18:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Redlands logo horizontal.svg
Thanks for uploading File:University of Redlands logo horizontal.svg. 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) 18:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Redlands logo
Hi. I uploaded the logo for the University of Redlands under that title since it is specified in their style guide that the horizontal logo is the primary version. Where does it say the vertical logo is the primary version? Thank you. Malayy (talk) 06:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)


 * — You may be correct. It's been some time since I fetched the vector images from the university site, and I was under the impression that the vertical format is the preferred one.  Moreover, a casual inspection of the Redlands site show it to be used in numerous places.  My main point in requesting a name change for the horizontal logo file was to avoid a clash with the names I gave the horizontal and vertical versions on Wikipedia.  If the vertical version gets moved to Commons, it will need to be renamed, that's all. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 09:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries, I understand. I uploaded the alternate versions of the logo to Commons. Should I remove the logo from the page and wait for it to be deleted or do you want to propose its deletion? Malayy (talk) 11:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)


 * — I've changed the logo wikilink near the bottom of the infobox in the University of Redlands article to the Commons file name. Don't worry about deleting the Wikipedia file, as the Wikipedia 'bot will discover it soon enough and mark it for deletion from the wiki. If no action is taken, it will just go away.  In future, instead of creating a duplicate file under another name on Commons, consider having the Wikipedia file moved to Commons, as it preserves the file history and can avoid confusion about which is the "real" file.  See Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons and Moving files to Commons for details. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 17:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! Thank you for informing me about that. Malayy (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Redlands logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:University of Redlands logo.svg. 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) 17:45, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Mixed bag at Loudness war
This edit is a mixed bag an I am hoping you will be willing to clean it up. Thanks for the other improvements you have made here.

You have replaced unpiped redirect links e.g.  7-inch singles  with more complicated piped links e.g.  7-inch singles . Both render the same for readers so this change is not an improvement to the (visible) article and I think we're better off if we can avoid the opportunity for error and reviewing overhead associated with changing things that don't need to be changed. Also in this case, the new link format is inferior in that if the target section (7-inch format) is renamed, the link from Loudness war will be quietly compromised.

You have also changed digital full scale to digital full scale. Again, I can't identify an improvement associated with this change. While both link to the same article, digital full scale is the MOS:SPECIFICLINK preferred here. Your change introduces an unnecessary maintenance issue should there come a time when the digital full scale redirect is improved to point at a specific section in full scale or even expanded to be a standalone article. ~Kvng (talk) 14:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for asking. For logged-in readers who use the "Navigation popups" feature of Wikipedia (preferences > Gadgets > Browsing > Navigation popups), having links that display the redirect content instead of the article can be a huge annoyance.  If I'm in an article to correct punctuation, grammar, English syntax or to fix something else, such as XHTML syntax, I try to take the time to change at least some indirect links to direct links, but especially in paragraphs with many wikilinks where 50% or more of them point to a redirect instead of the article.  Pop-up previews of links are a great way to enjoy a hypertext document, because a well-written lead paragraph can give a reader a quick thumbnail overview of the linked word or term without having to open that document in another browser tab or window and wait for it to render.  With that aim in mind, the example you give above could be expressed as  digital full scale , but I did not see it improving the usability or content, as there isn't an article discussing "digital full scale" specifically.  If you're not using the navigation popups feature, I highly recommend at least trying it out.  Yes, sometimes changing the wikilink from the redirect to the specific target can increase the article size, but there are also cases where the edit reduces the article size or points to a better article that a reader may find only after laboriously reading through the linked article and eventually discovering that the relevant information isn't on the linked page, but on another page whose link might be discovered 80% of the way down the next article in the trail of bread crumbs.  For example, I worked on an article recently that referred to Army Reserves.  I suspected from the context that it was referring to the United States Army, but that was not plainly evident in the article.  It was a redirect to Military reserve force, but I didn't find anything in that article that helped me understand the term in the original article.  I carefully scroll down the page until I discover a sub-section titled "Military reserve forces".  Under that I find a bolded linked subheading "United States" that doesn't yield anything useful, nor does the next one, Main article: Reserve components of the United States Armed Forces.  Finally, I hit pay dirt with United States Army Reserve.  So, why did the editor write Army Reserves when he could have simply written United States Army Reserve, which would have been the proper term and would have avoided sending a reader on a wild goose chase?

Another thing to consider is that Wikipedia articles may be read 50 or 100 years from now by someone who has no idea what a "7-inch single" is and, worse yet, may be reading the text of that article in isolation, not part of a wiki, where the hyperlinks are missing or don't work. Strange as it may seem to you and me, most young people who are under 20 years of age in 2018 have never seen phonograph records, much less having seen and heard a phonograph in operation.

I've been creating and editing Web content since the 1990s, and a key concept I learned early is that Web pages do not exist for the convenience of their creators, but rather, for the convenience of the users. That's why I do what I do, even though it may require more editing effort and I may violate some Wikipedia policies that have misguidedly enshrined bad practices. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 16:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * My general suggestion here (and I admit I don't always achieve this myself) is that we strive to avoid making edits that are not significant improvements. In this collaborative environment, we are implicitly asking others review our edits and should respect their time. For changes that are, at best, very small improvements, such as we're discussing here, the risk of introducing an error is possibly greater than the potential improvement.
 * In other news, my popups on redirects show the content of the article and section redirected to. I can dig into my account setup and see but, as far as I know, I'm using the standard popup feature. ~Kvng (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Please don't "fix" redirects like this. As explained at MOS:REDIRECT and WP:NOTBROKEN, trying to "fix" redirects actually damages the encyclopedia and impedes users finding the right article. If someone now changes the sub-heading at Single (music) the link you've changed will no longer work. It is better to keep the redirect in case an article on that subject is written or so that in the event of a change in the redirect target, only the redirect page needs to be changed and not all the incoming links. DrKay (talk) 20:37, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Mumia Abu-Jamal
Per MOS:MDASH, mdashes are unspaced in the Wikipedia style. DrKay (talk) 17:39, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

If you want to make sentences break before em dashes, disrupt flow and make the text hard to read, be my guest and leave your mark on the article. Professional typesetters don't do it that way, and the MOS:DASH decision by a tiny committee of four or five didn't take into account how Web browsers work. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 17:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You need to raise that at WT:MOS. DrKay (talk) 20:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)