User talk:Jmertel23/Archive 2019 05

Kudumbar and Devendra Kulathan
Expecting your view and some correction on Devendra Kulathan and Kudumbar pages. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Can you take a break?
Hello J. I have been working all day to clean up the article that you are adding the bare url tags to. While it only takes you a second to add the tag it can take 5 or more minutes to format the refs. I am the only editor working on cleaning these up at the moment and I am trying to whittle down the items in Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations but cannot make any headway. If you could wait until I have the cat down to 10 or 20 articles it would be a big help. If you don't have any other editing that you can do I will understand. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 01:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Absolutely! I've been surprised at how many of these university articles have references that aren't formatted correctly - it feels never-ending.  Thank you so much for working on these! Jmertel23 (talk) 01:56, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply J. See some of the info here Bots/Requests for approval/GreenC bot 16 where it mentions that there are numerous articles with bare urls. The bot that GreenC developed works well but we can't use it until there are less than 20 articles in the cat :-) I may not get caught up until tomorrow but you can always check the cat to see how many titles are listed there. Thanks for the compliment and I appreciate all the work you do here as well. Best regards. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 02:04, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Whew I'm finally caught up J. Not only do those university articles have bare urs most of them have ones that the bots can't fix and I have to do them manually - double whew - heehee. As you go back to adding bare url templates if you could limit it to around 20 until the category gets emptied out that would be great. It would keep me from feeling overwhelmed and allow me to get to other editing that I've been putting off. You could also use Green C's bot here Template:Cleanup bare URLs/bot and it will choose articles for you. I find it sorta fun :-) Cheers. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 21:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Great job! I can absolutely limit the number of articles I tag.  I also took the opportunity yesterday to practice filling a couple of the ones that needed to be done manually (I'm extra slow at doing it that way since I haven't really done it before!), so I'll keep practicing and will hopefully be more efficient at cleaning these up. Thanks for the link to the bot - I will check it out at some point! Jmertel23 (talk) 12:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I saw your name in an edit history or two. Many thanks! You are right about the time it takes on the ones that the refill and reflinks can't fix. You'll get used to it after awhile but that doesn't necessarily make them go any faster :-) I hope you have an enjoyable weekend!! MarnetteD&#124;Talk 14:43, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Leslie Leve
The Leslie Leve article has been updated with additional sources. OK to remove third party tag? QuakerSquirrel (talk) 13:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks much better now; thank you for adding the additional references. I'll take care of removing the tag now.  Thanks again! Jmertel23 (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

List of highest-grossing Nepali films
Hi Jmertel23, thanks for cleaning up the bare url's in List of highest-grossing Nepali films. Please recheck references 2 and 8, which seem to be redundant. I could not determine why they did not consolidate using WP:reFill. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 14:02, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Macronesia
Thanks for making clear to me the nature of "notability" in regards to Wikipedia pages. I'll start working on finding more sources for Macronesia so I can work on building a more proper, more adherent-to-policy page for it. Steamboat28 (talk) 00:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Removing barelinks
Please don't remove this tag without resolving the problem. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * an article with dead links should not be marked with the "bare url" tag. The tag is for live links that need to be converted to the proper format. Once dead, the "dead link" tag is sufficient to flag it. Jmertel23 (talk) 11:03, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi J. I tried to explain this to K here User talk:MarnetteD. K does not seem to get it. It is possible that K is confusing fixing bare urls with fixing dead links. As you know the two are not the same thing. I am sorry that this got dumped on you. Best regards. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 16:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting the conclusion, "an article with dead links should not be marked with the 'bare url' tag"? Is it from the documentation at Bare links? WP:LINKROT? Somewhere else? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:02, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * To clarify - it's fine to mark it if there is not already a "dead link" tag. But once there is a dead link tag, that tag is itself the cue to request assistance with fixing dead links. Jmertel23 (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting that it should be marked with that tag. Neither of the sections you've linked to say that a dead link can be fixed by adding a bare url tag. The handling of dead links is mentioned here Citing sources and no where does it mention using a bare url tag to fix them, FWIW we are "getting it" from practical experience. As I stated in my previous posts you are free to get claification in another venue. J your reply was much more succinct than mine - nice job :-) MarnetteD&#124;Talk 16:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * A dead link does not have to be a bare URI and a bare URI can be dead or alive. They are just two different problems. Where are you getting this conclusion I quoted earlier?
 * No one ever said that a tag fixes anything: it just points out that a problem exists. If a URI is dead, it can also be bare: both problems need to be fixed. If you find a live version of the web page but still use a bare URI, then that is a problem. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:11, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course a link can be both bare and dead, but it cannot be filled until after the dead link is addressed. Therefore, the people working on the bare URL queues cannot do anything to address that issue on a dead link. If, once a new link is found and added, it is still bare, then the "bare urls" tag would be appropriate. Jmertel23 (talk) 18:28, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * They can, in fact, do something about it: fix the dead link and then the bare URI. Since they are both problems, they both need to be fixed. Again, I would like to know where you are getting your conclusions since the tag and the guideline don't make this distinction that you are making and WT:LINKROT also says the opposite of what you are saying. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The Category:All articles with dead external links is for those who want to fix dead links. The Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations is for those who want to fix bare urls. They are not the saame thing. The fact that you chose to ignore that means we may have a WP:CIR problem. One last time we gave you the policy - try reading it again Citing sources then please stop beating a dead horse. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 18:59, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I know they are not the same thing: that's my point. Since a reference can be both, it should be in both if it is both. Feel free to not respond with irrelevant response to messages that aren't to you in the future and stop beating a dead horse. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:02, 29 May 2019 (UTC)