User talk:John Cline/Archive 3

New page
helpmeI created a new page at Pueblo Depot Activity and received the following error message: Cite error: There are ref tags on this page, but the references will not show without a references tag. Could someone please apply the reference tag to this article? Thank you!My76Strat (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Fixed The blue Cite error is a link to a help page. I think I am going to look at reworking those error messages to make them clearer. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 15:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Redirect question
helpmeI recently created a page Lethal Unitary Chemical Agents and Munitions. I believe Chemical Weapons should redirect to this page! Currently Chemical Weapons redirects to Chemical Warfare. Chemical warfare is a related topic but not exclusive in content to weaponry. Can I change the redirect for Chemical Weapons? and how?My76Strat (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I really wouldn't know how other editors would take it but if ou want to reirect chemical weapons to this new page than simply go to the chemical weapons article, wait for the redirect, then hit the back button one. After that click the move tab at the top of the page and follow the instructions.

Spitfire 19 (Talk) 16:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Image upload
How can I upload an image to the appropriate wiki commons for subsequent use?My76Strat (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * See Commons:Commons:Upload. JohnCD (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the above guidance! I encountered the following message: "You must have cookies enabled to log in to Wikimedia Commons." Do I have the proper credentials to upload an image? Can I create an account and begin with an upload?My76Strat (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Enabling cookies is to do with your browser settings, not anything to do with accounts here or on Commons. See WP:SUL for how to set up a unified account which is valid on all Wikimedia projects. JohnCD (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

List of templates
At one time I stumbled upon a list of standard templates. Now I need this information and can not find it. Please show the blue link to this information for me. Thank you!My76Strat (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * There is Special:Prefixindex/Template:, but did you need something more specific? What kind of templates are you looking for?    — Jeff G. ツ 02:15, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I very well may be misusing the term template. I assumed it was a blank format to follow for creating an infobox. That is what I am trying to do. so far every article I've referenced related to Army Depots and Public Law are also missing an infobox, so I have no example to follow. If you can help further I would appreciate it.My76Strat (talk) 02:39, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, so, an infobox is one type of template; there are many other kinds of WP:TEMPLATE, and there are many infoboxes, for different purposes. They all have different parameters. For example, has the applicable fields for people, and  for companies.


 * All of them are in Category:Infobox templates.


 * General help on infoboxes is in Help:Infobox.


 * To get the specific documentation for an infobox, put "template:infobox cheese" (or whatever it is called) into the Wikipedia search box.


 * For a simple example template, see user:chzz/help/infobox.


 * Please ask if you need more help with it, best,  Chzz  ►  02:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * (Copied from user:chzz/help/infobox) I played with this example by editing and showing a preview to observe the change. When I change the DOB to 04/02/ the "Age 1968" remains. Yet I fail to see where the template draws this information. Is there a way a gadget could be incorporated to update off a date format and be correct whenever it is viewed and where does the 1968 come from?My76Strat (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The age '1968' is calculated from the given date of birth, ie


 * birth_date = April 1, 42


 * This does make sense, in so much as, I claim to be born in the year 42 (0042 AD), and the template calculates that I am one thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight years old, and shows this in the line: Born    April 1, 42 (42-04-01) (age 1968).


 * Note, it may be confusing because there is a picture caption;


 * caption    = Chzz, aged 903


 * However this also 'makes sense' (as far as these things go), because pictures are often from an old date.


 * I should probably make the example more clear though, and will try to do so.


 * Anyway - to answer your question, in most cases, you can use |birth date =, ad that does indeed calculate the age automatically. For more on that, see Template:Birth date and age.  Chzz  ►  20:32, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * With that being said, when I changed the date from 04/01 to 04/02 and then again to 04/22 to be sure, the calculated date, or perhaps the miscalculated age was still shown as 1968. Why is that?My76Strat (talk) 20:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * To answer my own question, I now see that I only changed DOB by a few days so the correct age would still be 1968. After running a test where the year was changed, the age did update. With regard to the other age shown I'm going to exercise BRD.My76Strat (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. I also visited the page for the religion of your alter-ego ie the one shown in the picture with no insinuation to you yourself! Anyway I am embroiled in a discussion after raising NPOV issues. If you can add to the discussion it would also be appreciated.My76Strat (talk) 20:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Please come to http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=wikipedia-en-help so we can help you in a real time enviroment. :) Spitfire 19 (Talk) 21:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I have visited http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=wikipedia-en-help and could not find how to actually send a comment! Someone said hello and I couldn't even respond.My76Strat (talk) 01:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * its at the very bottom of the page, if you just start typing, you should see it in the small white bit Soph  ie  01:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Grammar
I apologize for the long reply; my visits to Wikipedia are occasionally sporadic so I don't immediately reply. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by user requests, do you want me to look over something? I wouldn't say I'm an expert at copyediting but I suppose I am fairly decent. Again, sorry for the length it took to reply. - Warthog Demon  03:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Lethal Unitary Chemical Agents and Munitions possible name change
What are your thoughts on a name change of Lethal Unitary Chemical Agents and Munitions? As I'm reading your article, it sounds like it discusses the storage and treaty arrangements of that storage more than it does the weapons as munitions themselves.

I think you'll agree that the LUCA&M name is cumbersome and not likely to be a search term. What would you think about a move to something less technical that emphasized the storage aspect, and expanded its scope. Something like Storage and disposal of chemical munitions. This would expand the scope (it could include information about things like Operation CHASE) and also make the naming more practical and likely to be searched for. It would also be a nice analogue to the nuclear storage articles and parallel them nicely.

WP:TITLE typically suggests common naming schemes, and I'm not clear about what "unitary" means here. Is that unitary as opposed to binary weapons? Because most of the V agents (at least according to our articles) can be deployed as binary agents, and certainly the storage arrangements don't specify based on that criteria. But maybe I'm misunderstanding that. Anyway, I'd like to hear your thoughts before making any kind of change. Shadowjams (talk) 07:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * As I said on my talk page, I'll wait to make any changes til I hear from you and I would start editing it now, but I wanted to hear your more detailed explanation first because I don't want to take the article in a different direction without knowing what you're thinking. Shadowjams (talk) 02:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Bob Barr
I added some comments in Peer review/Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008/archive1.

Note, you posted yours on the talk page - they belong on the Wikipedia: page - I had the two merged.

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  14:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Archiving
Hi,

I've set up this page for auto-archiving, as discussed.

Normally, I prefer to explain how to do stuff, but in the case of archive set-up, it's easier to just do it for you. The voodoo to make it work is here; the bot should come along within about a day and kick things off. Note the archive box at the top which, currently, will say "no archives yet (create)" - don't create anything, just let the bot do its thing.

It's set to 30 days (30d), you might want to change that. Note that a) it won't archive very small threads or things with no sigs in (ie no date) - you can cut those yourself and paste 'em into the archive page if you want.

So - that's about it; no action required, just let the bot do its thing, and - if I've done it correctly - all should be well. If it goes wrong, of course, give me a shout. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  22:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Peer review/Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008/archive1
I appreciate your comments and added an "Aftermath" section to the article to appropriately bring it to a close, see Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008. Let me know if this alleviates your concerns. Thank you. --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Refimprove
Er.. what article are we talking about? I edit rather a lot of them. Ironholds (talk) 07:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Right.. so at some unspecified point I added a tag to an unspecified article. If I've added a tag saying "this article needs additional citations", it's fairly obvious. I only add cn tags when it's a specific thing I'm querying - if I've added refimprove, it translates as "there ARE citations, but large chunks of this thing are unreferenced". It should be pretty easy to find the, say, entirely unreferenced paragraphs which are my usual target. Ironholds (talk) 15:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really, I just don't really know how to deal with such an unspecified request. If someone went to almost any user with "so at some point you made an edit - don't know where - and in it you said..." it's rather hard to help. Ironholds (talk) 15:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Unsourced
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. &mdash; Timneu22 · talk 19:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Question
What's this about? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 19:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Source Style
Template:Source Style has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.  — fetch ·  comms   23:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lethal Unitary Chemical Agents and Munitions


The article Lethal Unitary Chemical Agents and Munitions has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This article is a product of my own research. It really doesn't belong in article space.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. My76Strat (talk) 23:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hi there, I see that you've been tagging articles as being unreferenced or similar. There is a project WP:URBLP that is focussed on referencing all BLP articles that you may want to visit. A couple of pointers - please check the entire article for references before you tag as unrefenced. Eric Freeman (cricketer) for example has a source in the info box, so a No footnotes or BLPrefimprove tag would have been more appropriate. Also, there is now a new BLP IMDB refimprove and BLP IMDB-only refimprove that should be used on actors with IMDB tags. They are also working on a BLP selfpublished tag to be used when the only source is a Myspace or similar site. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 06:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In regards to your Ext Link template, I think half the problem with specialist templates like this is which cleanup cat do the assign articles to - the unreferenced one or the ref improve one?  I can understand the arguments from both sides, so I generally just try to bypass them and just reference the article properly!  Might pay to publicise the TfD (but don't WP:CANVASS) at relevant WikiProjects - WT:URBLP is one, but I think there is also a non-BLP specific project around too.The-Pope (talk) 10:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted you Rollback rights on the English Wikipedia. Please bear in mind that this is only to be used as a simple mechanism to revert vandalism and other malicious edits, and should never be used for good faith edits or in content disputes. Happy editing to you. Keegan (talk) 06:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

General
Hi. Please note that your changes to this article are largely unreferenced, and are very US-centric. Rather than revert them, I'm leaving you a note. Please review your changes, generalise them, (no pun intended), and reference them. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 19:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback. I attempted to make the statements less US-centric and removed content which was from a US specific source. (ie US Army regulations). To be honest a perfectly balanced page with no specific influence would leave the article as a disambiguation page IMO. Nevertheless I understand the intent of your comment and agree that this article should not be tailored to the US military. In so far as referencing content, the article had no references at all upon my first visit to it's page, I was going to tag it unreferenced but decided to add a reference instead. In fact I added the section for references and the only reference the article contains is the one I added. Those were my good faith efforts to improve the article and although not perfect far from vandalism. If you believe any content needs a citation feel free to add the tag to the appropriate section of content, and perhaps a reference will follow. Otherwise if the content is contentious, remove it. Kind regards.My76Strat (talk) 23:13, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In total, your edits are useful improvements to the page, particularly the addition of . Who knows - with time and patience it may get populated! And yes, to date I haven't given them much attention.
 * Regarding your comments above, I either agree, or largely agree, with all of them.
 * Personally, my own preference is to expand the breadth of coverage - non-western non-commonwealth armies don't have much representation. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 06:59, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Merge?
Hi,

You asked "I merged an article some undesirable things happened" but I was away; missed it.

If you do need help with it, leave a note on my talk. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  11:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. You also asked about some vandalism from - they've been blocked now, for 3 months. Next time, ask on WP:AIV. Cheers,   Chzz  ►  11:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

After speaking briefly on IRC, re. the merge, Thomas Scott Buckham Memorial Library, the section edit links trouble - it's called 'bunching', and happens when an infobox or an image extends beyond a section. Not easy to fix...explained in WP:BUNCH...however, in this case, it was fairly easy. The article shouldn't have had the 'hours of opening' at all, so I just removed that section. The 'refs' and 'external links' edit links are bunched, but there's not much we can do aboiut that; the article is just too short to support the long infobox. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  11:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Concerning your speedy deletion tag
The article I have created meets the notability guidelines:

Articles require significant coverage: Lengthely covered by Wired magazine, Guardian Unlimited Magazine, and The New Yorker Magazine

in reliable sources: All magazines are highly reliable and highly notable

that are independent of the subject.: All magazines are independent of the subject, as should be obvious

Further more it is indeed a famous thread and worthy of mention on Wikipedia. Anyone who has ever been lonely and searched google for help will almost indefinitely know of it. In addition to this, it is significant for the study of internet physiology, and one studying such an area may find good use in this article. Maybe I could expand on it more, but it's a new article, and is certainly something to belong on the most expansive encyclopedia in the world, and one searching for such an article should not be denied it's existence. Please try to keep an open mind to what is allowed here, you may not have heard of it but it is notable.NexCarnifex (talk) 21:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The article was not nominated for deletion, speedy or otherwise. It is obvious that your efforts are in good faith and the tag is a maintenance tag. meant to strengthen the article against any future such nominations. You have the burden of substantiating that this is not a temporary phenomena, ie "it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic to constitute sufficient evidence of notability" Good luck improving the article and if there are ways I can assist I will avail myself to that end. Happy editing. My76Strat (talk) 21:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: American Bang!
Hello My76Strat. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of American Bang!, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Their song is used as a theme song for a television series; this may make them notable under WP:BAND. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

welcomes
Re,

[05:18]  chzz what does this log represent? [05:18]  My76Strat sorry, sec, busy

Sorry, it got awfully busy, and I was unable to respond at the tme.

User:Chzz/logw is a log that I can create, on the fly, of new users with >1 contribution.

Using the popups - you can thus 'hover' your mouse over the name, see contribs, and if valid, can 'welcome' with that odd green link thing.

Hope that makes sense.  Chzz  ►  05:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)