User talk:Jonesey95

Guild of Copy Editors April 2024 Newsletter

 * Adding date stamp for archiving. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

User talk:Qwerfjkl/Archive 41
Forgot about this, I'm afraid. Anyway, I should be mostly free now, so I'm happy to help out. — Qwerfjkl  talk  19:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * For a quick batch of many thousands of errors, I suggest the "Why can't I edit Wikipedia?" substed message explained at User:MalnadachBot/Signature submissions. They come in a few variants; I have some regexes for the variants I have encountered in the "Block messages" section in my User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/doi.js file. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. It looks to me that the easiest way to handle this is to get the list of pages, check each page section for the "Why can't I edit Wikipedia?" part that seems consistent between them, and simply replace that ection with the corrected version, which should take care of any variations. Are there any issues with doing this? I'd need to make sure to keep the signature and anything below that, but that should be doable, especially if the  is always present. —  Qwerfjkl  talk  14:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have found that using the regexes I linked to does the trick for me. If you have another method that you like and that is reliable, that seems fine to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * When I ran the regexes I got edits like Special:Diff/1219573467 and Special:Diff/1219573457. — Qwerfjkl  talk  19:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It looks like the first one is valid but incomplete, and the second one is a complete, valid edit. In the first one, a p tag was missed. It looks like an additional or modified regex is needed. Replacing the whole section might be valid; I prefer to make as few display changes as possible when fixing these syntax errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I assumed the stray was invalid in the second diff. —  Qwerfjkl  talk  19:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Removal of that malformed /br tag does not appear to affect the rendered text. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * . — Qwerfjkl  talk  17:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Pretty much done now (13 pages left on the search). — Qwerfjkl  talk  17:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Great work! I checked all of the remaining pages, and about half of them were false positives. I fixed the rest. This task is complete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Div flip
I can't figure this divflip error out. Template:Letter A few hundred issues due to the two errors on the template, and I don't want to just hack at it with test edits. Cheers, Zinnober9 (talk) 23:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * One trick is to look inside the templates being used. Nowrap is a span template, and Smalldiv, which I created to solve thousands of misnested small tags back in 2018 or so, uses div tags. So this worked. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Nowrap... of course. With template code not triggering when passed through LintHint, and all the code looking tidy but so very nested, it's just not as easy to read as some other errors. Thank you again! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Template display
I'm going to suspect that you'll get reverted on User:Airtransat236/sandbox/template as that's essentially the same edit I made. I think they want it to appear as left half,  right half, as seen here and objected to the corrective edit which for some reason made both appear as 25% width, both on the left half of the page, but they didn't outright state such. I haven't thought of how to keep the 50-50%. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up on User:Airtransat236/sandbox/template. I have fixed the width of the diff row. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The remaining few table errors, other than User:Halibutt/Archive 15 (which I'll see if Primefac will assist with), boggle my brain at the moment, so if you understand them, all yours if you want them. Thanks for getting a number of other pages the last couple of days; I had gotten to a point where the remaining set of pages were a little puzzling and weren't as intuitive. Zinnober9 (talk) 22:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've been chipping away at them. They were mostly easy to medium until these last dozen or so. Some of them required digging through and modifying User subpages, which is always fun. I spent a few minutes on each of those lsat few and decided to work on something easier, and now they are all that is left. I know that I'll be able to fix at least some of them. It may take a few days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, it turns out all I needed was a snack. I fixed the rest of them, leaving only the protected page, User:Halibutt/Archive 15, listed at User:AnomieBOT/PERTable. Perhaps or  would be willing to get the glory of fixing the last page on this list. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I asked Primefac about it and some other Full Protected pages that appeared on Linter/reports/Protected pages by Lint Errors, so one of the three of us will get Halibutt/Archive 15 sometime soon. I don't mind who.
 * While I'm here, Portal:Maine got its layout malformed on Feb 24th. I've poked at it a little with edit preview, but haven't sorted it out if you want it. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Portals are the spawn of the devil. I fixed a few hundred or thousand (I have blocked out the memory) portal page errors back in 2022, getting the count down to a reasonable value, but the pages appear back in the report over time even when they are not edited. I became convinced, without any real evidence, that in order to fix Portal pages, we need to get article space down to zero errors first. I've mostly left the space alone since then. That said, I cleaned up a bunch of sloppiness at Portal:Maine. Editors, including myself, should use Preview more and inspect their edits after saving. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Now I remember one thing about Portal pages: the stripped tags often appear to be spurious or false positives. Most other errors can be tracked down with the help of the ExpandTemplates page, although it can be tricky to read all of the nested divs and tables. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It was the big empty space and the stuff shoved to the left I was hoping you saw the fix for, but Portals are certainly evil from the code standpoint, and it's fine if you didn't. Feel like reverting to WOSlinker's revision is a bit too overkill for the layout issue so far, but might come down to it if it's still wonky later. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The big empty space actually has some images in it for a quarter of a second, and then it goes blank. I can't be bothered if the primary maintainer of the page doesn't seem to care (and there are no Linter errors). – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Protection dropped on the requested pages. Primefac (talk) 06:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Zinnober9 (talk) 13:36, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Since apparently you did not subscribe
I am moving this to your talk page, since you are the one not acknowledging an error. Happy editing indeed.

Your edit summary gave me a smile. Unfortunately, I used the word "bogus" in a neutral, objective way in my edit summary. See Special:LintErrors/bogus-image-options. If you have a problem with your edits being associated with that word, your beef is with the WMF staff, not with me. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Awww and here I was hoping it was "good-faith patroller" that gave you a smile. I do think that that's you, but wasn't there some sort of decision after the last time not to edit people's work as they are working it? It's pretty disruptive frankly. I dunno what dialect of English that developer speaks -- and I carefully say this in the most neutral way possible, as a translator who deals with dialects -- but I agree with this here and with all due respect, it is an insult and I have not given you cause to insult me have I? Recently at least?
 * I just looked you up and will try to be a little less colloquial, but frankly, I thought you were British when I wrote the above. This is the problem with automated edits. It dehumanizes other editors. In case you hadn't noticed the article is complex and referenced within an inch of its life because it says that due to regulatory capture indigenous Mexicans with a life expectancy of 39 years are subsidizing US agriculture through a peonage system. I am surprised I haven't seen paid editors appear yet to call me a bleeding heart liberal. I would have fixed that caption ten minutes later. The fact that they are crawling on soil that has been pumped full of carcinogens is why the image is there however.
 * I am not trying to fight with you or give you a hard time. It's just that if you hit Random article, what you get will almost certainly need you more than this article does, and it is being actively worked.


 * SO. come tell me jokes or funny stories or gossip or, whatever, but if you really really must patrol my work, half a dozen people have done so this week without calling it bogus, and most of them got a thank you.

I would greatly appreciate it if you and your attitude fixed lint errors on some other article thank you very much Elinruby (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No attitude here. I just fix errors. I don't patrol the work of constructive editors like yourself. I usually work from this report. If an article pops up there with an invalid image option or any other high- or medium-priority error, I do my best to fix it. You appear to be manufacturing drama where there is none to be found, which will not help either of us. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You appear to be refusing to process my best attempts to civilly explain to you that "bogus" is an insult and you should not use it. With reference to me in particular in this case, but it would be a violation of the CoC civility policy when applied to anything but (possibly) obvious vandalism. "Manufacturing drama" isn't great either, so I beg to differ about the attitude, which continues to shine through. Please take this constructive criticism on board. If the incivility is caused by software, stop using the software. You and only you are responsible for what you say and do on Wikipedia. Elinruby (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * User_talk:Firefly is my attempt to resolve this. Possibly you could work on the attitude as your part in that. And maybe check to see if someone has edited a page in the prior few minutes before making decisions about what the photo captions should be. I am unsubscribing from this section. Elinruby (talk) 22:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Your verbose ire continues to be misdirected; I will, of necessity, be verbose in my reply in order to communicate thoroughly. User:Firefly is not responsible for the wording; their report just matches the word that the WMF staff chose.
 * I understand that you perceive the WMF's use of the word "bogus" as a synonym for "invalid" as an insult, even though the Wiktionary entry you linked to shows "(computing, slang) Incorrect, useless, or broken." as one of the definitions. That is the meaning used in this context by the WMF. "Bogus", with this meaning, was a 100% accurate description of the error I fixed in this case; there was an Incorrect, useless option provided in the File: invocation.
 * I have no control over what words the WMF staff choose. I linked you to Special:LintErrors/bogus-image-options (you can also see the word used on the MediaWiki site at mw:Help:Lint errors/bogus-image-options) with the hope that you would understand that I did not choose the word. I have made thousands of edits with an edit summary using that word; the definition as I am using it appears in its Wiktionary entry as a computing term. I used the word "bogus" to match the WMF's choice of words so that the meaning behind my edit was as clear as possible. The edit summary described the error I was fixing using the same words that the WMF uses.
 * However, out of respect for your delicate feelings about this valid word that I did not choose, I have changed the edit summary that I use in fixing these errors so that it uses the word "invalid" instead of "bogus". No doubt I will now get someone complaining on this talk page that I am using a different word from the official verbiage chosen by the WMF, but such is life. I can't please everyone, but I hope this change can at least please one editor.
 * If you object to the WMF's usage of the word "bogus" to mean "invalid", Phabricator is the place to file a change request. I apologize for the excessive length of this reply, but it is clear that a brief reply with explanatory links was not proving effective. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also,, since we are taking offense at the use of words, I see that you used the pronoun "his" when referring to my talk page and that you used the pronoun "he" while talking about me on another editor's talk page without notifying me. I urge you to refrain from assuming the gender and preferred pronouns of people whose pronouns you do not know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * they I stand corrected; I thought I remembered someone who would know calling you a "he". For that I do apologize, especially since I too am a deliberate "they". Apparently either that person was wrong or I remembered wrong. In any event it was lazy of me not to use the template and I should have done so. See easy it is to just acknowledge an issue that needs acknowledging?
 * I do appreciate the change to "invalid", actually. Thank you for that. As for not notifying you, I didn't mention your name over there because I was trying to leave you out of any drama, but will be sure to ping you in any further mutual drama that arises. And apparently there may in fact be some, because now we have to debate whether posting a link to your talk page that points to a section where a discussion took place constitutes notifying you of the discussion. Say it ain't so. (sad trombone noises) I am still describing you as a good faith patroller, btw, but you should probably apologize for "manufacturing drama". PS: if anyone gives you a hard time about the change, ping me and I will come over and explain it to them nice and slow. Happy editing! Elinruby (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you object to the WMF's usage of the word "bogus" to mean "invalid", Phabricator is the place to file a change request. I apologize for the excessive length of this reply, but it is clear that a brief reply with explanatory links was not proving effective. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also,, since we are taking offense at the use of words, I see that you used the pronoun "his" when referring to my talk page and that you used the pronoun "he" while talking about me on another editor's talk page without notifying me. I urge you to refrain from assuming the gender and preferred pronouns of people whose pronouns you do not know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * they I stand corrected; I thought I remembered someone who would know calling you a "he". For that I do apologize, especially since I too am a deliberate "they". Apparently either that person was wrong or I remembered wrong. In any event it was lazy of me not to use the template and I should have done so. See easy it is to just acknowledge an issue that needs acknowledging?
 * I do appreciate the change to "invalid", actually. Thank you for that. As for not notifying you, I didn't mention your name over there because I was trying to leave you out of any drama, but will be sure to ping you in any further mutual drama that arises. And apparently there may in fact be some, because now we have to debate whether posting a link to your talk page that points to a section where a discussion took place constitutes notifying you of the discussion. Say it ain't so. (sad trombone noises) I am still describing you as a good faith patroller, btw, but you should probably apologize for "manufacturing drama". PS: if anyone gives you a hard time about the change, ping me and I will come over and explain it to them nice and slow. Happy editing! Elinruby (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you
It looks better now. Much more to do, but it looks better now. MaynardClark (talk) 01:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I was hoping that you would think so. I was alerted to it because it showed up on a report of new syntax errors; I do not normally edit random editors' pages. Let me know if you want help with it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit Space
Thank you for help fix my edit space! I actually was wondering how do you get that square space around your own profile that contains the about you section? Thank you again! Arberian2444 (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , I have added a frame to your user page. If you do not like it, you can adjust it or undo my edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Arberian2444 (talk) 01:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Volleyball res 51 template.
Hi, I see you were the most recent person the edit the res 51 volleyball template. So I wanted to if you had any idea how to put a attendance section (either permanent or optional) in it because I have struggled to do it? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 19:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * All I did at that template was fix some syntax errors. I see that there are many similar templates in ; proposing a change to them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Volleyball is probably the best next step. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for offering me advice. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 23:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Consider using a bot?
Hi! Thanks for all your work fixing Linter errors. I wonder: have you considered using a bot for the task? I'm not normally someone who gets distracted by semiautomated edits in my watchlist, but your fixes resurrect old pages of interest (old AfDs, for example). They always attract my eye in a way they wouldn't if it were a bot making them. There are so many of the edits, over such a long period of time, that it seems rather well suited for a bot task. Curious if you've considered it. Thanks. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 21:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I do not have the programming skills to (1) create a bot or (2) ensure that it would edit in a fully automated way without errors. I check every edit before saving and frequently abandon edits without saving due to either failure to fix enough problems (hence requiring too many return visits, mucking up your watchlist even more) or script-proposed changes that would not actually be improvements. I wish there were bots that did Linter fixes, but the good ones have all gotten tired or been blocked for non-Linter-related bad behavior. I apologize for the noise in your watchlist; if there were bots out there, I would definitely prefer that they did the work instead of me! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox election row
I've no idea what happened there. I checked it in both the testcases (before implementing) and on a mainspace article afterwards (to make sure I hadn't messed something up when transferring the code) and the default 'Party' showed up... Thanks for fixing. Number  5  7  22:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sometimes reloading a page does not thoroughly reload every template that is used in the page. I have no idea why it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. Editing and previewing a page or section, in my experience, always shows you the right result (although saving that edit with no changes sometimes still doesn't, which is frustrating). – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I did actually edit/preview as I'm experienced this glitch, yet it still worked fine at the time... Number   5  7  22:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

My sandbox edit
Thanks for your edit/corrections on my sandbox. No problem btw GRALISTAIR (talk) 23:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text


A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗ plicit  14:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text


A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, Jonesey95,
 * This category keeps being tagged for CSD C1 because it's an empty category and it shows up on Empty Categories list as a category that should be tagged for deletion. If it is a category that is occasionally empty, you need to tag it so that it no longer shows up as an empty category. It's that simple. Liz Read! Talk! 01:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The speedy template instructions said to remove the CSD template, so I removed it, but then the speedy template was reinstated. That seems contrary to BRD to me. I linked to a relevant discussion in my edit summary. I think this category may have been emptied accidentally. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We have database reports and Quarry queries that list all empty categories. Regardless of BRD, we can't have categories keep appearing on these lists daily and ignore one indefinitely. I just tagged it for you so this would stop happening. Liz Read! Talk! 05:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be indefinite, just until it the problem is resolved. We have similar situations in many other reports with things like redirects that are taken to RFD and so show up on unused template reports. We just put up with the temporary annoyance, knowing that those discussions are open for only a week. Now that emptycat is on there, it seems possible that this currently bogus but possibly valid category could be ignored forever. Maybe that sort of thing shows up in a different report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. House Blaster  (talk · he/him) 16:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what a Linter error is but I don't want to make any
Hi Jonesey. Are you still up for taking a look at and/or helping me with a mass message? I need to send one for an LA Wiknic and I don't want to do that Linter error thing again. Thank you! Julie JSFarman (talk) 00:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, any time. Send me a link to the page, and I'll check it for you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it! It's here. I think the error may have something to do with the signature. (?) I know it can be wonky on mass messages. And! Will you add the the [[Image:Wiknic logo.svg|30px]]? Every time I try to add an image I mess up the layout. (I know, shocking.) Thank you x 100000.  JSFarman (talk) 06:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Did I somehow just add the categories field or was it already there? omg. JSFarman (talk) 06:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. I don't see any categories, which is good. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I just sent the message and the only mistake I made (as far as I can tell) is that my user name isn't included, which is fine for two reasons: a) there are editors who find mass messages very annoying and b) I would prefer they not direct their annoyance at me.  Thank you again!  (The categories still look like they're here, on your talk page, but I have been known to hallucinate.)  JSFarman (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Marco Kruger for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marco Kruger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Marco Kruger until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. JTtheOG (talk) 18:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice
Hey hope you're doing well. If you have time, your comments would be appreciated at WikiProject talk page. Regards. 113.210.105.64 (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Linking to template documentation vs template
Given your edit at Special:Diff/1228342855, can you review my related edits: I don't understand your reasoning about linking to templates rather than template doc pages. I'm content to accept your preferences on these edits. Daask (talk) 13:17, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Special:Diff/1227917571
 * Special:Diff/1228478838
 * Thanks for the links. I have made them all consistent. Linking to documentation pages is confusing for readers per WP:EGG; those subpages generally exist to support template pages and are meant to be viewed in the context of the Template-space page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, some template doc pages are shared by several templates, and vary their output according to which template they are transcluded to. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 14:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Lint error on Threadripper
What!? I specified the "div=yes" parameter in the collapsed infobox section begin template so that lint errors wouldn't occur, according to the template's documentation. Yet it still did?!

Also, I know hiding content generally goes against MOS:HIDE; I put those collapse templates there because the "transistor count" section was taking up an awful lot of space in the infobox. On the Ryzen article it was especially bad where the infobox would extend down more than an A4 page worth of length below and push down images, so I collapsed the cache and transistor count sections. Intel Core has a big enough such problem that there are complaints on the talk page there about it. — AP 499D25  (talk)  01:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "Page information" will show you if there are Linter errors. There were six or seven caused by that unreliable collapsing template. If the infobox is too long, remove some of the content and just have it appear in the article. Infoboxes should be a summary of "key facts that appear in the article". – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:58, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay I didn't know about the page information containing lint error info, thanks for the tip. I looked at the Linter MediaWiki extension and I had no idea how to install it.
 * I have ended up deleting the transistor count section anyway, if someone wants to (re)add it later it should be added to some table or section in the article, rather than in the infobox IMO. I have given the Intel Core article the same treatment, just deleting outright trivial info (e.g. bus width and speeds), and trimming some stuff down like the brands, rather than hiding them all in collapsed sections. — AP 499D25  (talk)  05:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

HBLR (possibly River Line?)
The signs in the infobox - the text is too large (to compare to real life sign). That's why I was doing that to decrease the size. Sorry if that caused any trouble. Pedroperezhumberto (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The infobox sets the size, and it is standard for all similar articles. There is no reason to make it smaller. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, it's because I thought they should be at least similar to the real-life size. Pedroperezhumberto (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make sense to me. This version before your edit and this version after your edit show only a small difference in the header size. The "real-life" sign labeling the station will be multiple feet across, not a few centimeters or inches like the infobox title. Meanwhile, all other railway station articles use a standard size. Deviating from the standard size introduces inconsistency among similar articles for no apparent good reason. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Fostered content (mostly) done
I think the remaining few dozen "42" Fostered content errors are beyond me (a little too templatey/functiony), so I'm done with that set. User:CaPslOcksBroKEn/sandbox (11 FCs) I know to be clean (Of all errors) as I've tested it in my sandbox twice in the last few months by saving it in 2-3 sections, but it's too damn big and won't purge or null edit for a clean result. Do you have any other ideas for clearing these ghosts? I've been aware of it for a few months, so not sure if waiting it out will allow it to self-correct, or if it needs to be pushed in some other way that I'm not thinking of.

Happy to have another bothersome error type pretty much eradicated from the list otherwise! Thanks for getting all of the pages you got to, hope you have a great weekend. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That was a fun project! I will poke at the remaining 42 every once in a while. Sometimes I have to sit and let ideas come to me. We can probably get it down to a dozen or so with a few tricks. I cheated on a few by wrapping the offending template code in  tags, since the code was working when transcluded. That trick will probably work on a few more pages, but it fails when there are already includeonly tags inside the code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks like today's new set of fostered content errors all seem to be related to &lt;onlyinclude&gt; or &lt;noinclude&gt; tags, either on the page themselves, or calling the Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OR/Blank template. I'm not making heads or tails out of any of them at the moment. These tags *shouldn't*? be causing these issues. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Me neither. I have seen those starting in the last few hours. They look like false positives. Post a new subthread at WT:Linter, in the "dark mode" thread I started at the bottom. I don't know if they are related to dark mode error detection, but something appears to have changed in the Linter detection and I think it might be a bug. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok. I had changed this page Opinion polling for the 2020 Polish presidential election due to this, but only since they were so oddly added with 5x of them at the start of every? table, and the other pages looked like legitimate usage of these. I've seen this popup on a few pages before, but they always cleared up before I got bothered enough to deal with them/ask about them. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * CaPslOcksBroKEn is now removed from the list. Might have been the two small templates that weren't closed correctly. Gonnym (talk) 12:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Thank you, not sure why they didn't appear problematic in my tests. Huge pages are ripe pain. Appreciate your efforts.
 * As for User:Wtmitchell/Draft1 where you replaced all | code and the like with |, |-, etc ... my understanding is when things are transcluded, they have a habit of interacting with the calling page's code in odd cases. Using | tells it to stay in its lane and not mix and create mutants with the calling code. @Jonesey95 is there a better way to explain this since you have a greater knowledge of the more template-y language than I? Zinnober9 (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * When pipe characters for table layout are used inside of #switch or #if statements, they can trigger the statements' logic instead of acting as table layout. The hazard of using the same character for two important functions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Wtmitchell seemed to have known that as well, given they had written a note stating "NOTE: The templated aliases (e.g., ", and Gonnym changed the page to use pipes and removed that note. I feel that's against the user's intentions, and since it is likely possible to clear the lint and keep the |, this was the wrong way to fix the page. Had there been no way to fix it with | , or justification (beyond "I checked all the transcluded pages and they are fine"), I'd be more supportive of this correction. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I just checked both of the places where that Draft1 page is transcluded, and the transcluded page looks fine in both places. I assume that Gonnym checked those pages as well and would have self-reverted if they had found any trouble. The page is three years old, so it appears to be no longer in active development. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Gallery display assumptions
Just a little FYI, the gallery pages of Charlesjsharp that you edited in April (Insects and Frogs) in a similar corrective way to my May edits for their Mammals and Birds galleries have a few undesired display issues based on last night's discussion on my talk page. I take comfort in seeing that we made the same assumptions in regards to the intended display of these pages with the thought of "User wrote it this way, so it's presumed intended display is this" with how the captions of each image display. Unfortunately, this is not how the user wishes their pages to be, and they (as I understand it) wish for the captions to be centered, and for them to display with black text for all image captions (other than the countries' names which are blue), and for any white lines crossing the page to be nonexistent. And they do not want the three images at the top (under the star) to have a white box encircling them (so don't make it two tables). End result desired is essentially a "do as I had originally displayed, not as I had written".

Would you adjust these two pages sometime when it suites or makes sense? I don't think Charles would be too happy to see I'd edited them all. You may wish to wait until after we know whether or not I've gotten the Mammal page all squared away for him and there are no additional issues found. That way you have a one and done with no back and forth and everyone's pleased.

Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I adjusted the pages. You are welcome to copy my edits if the editor is happy with them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You are welcome and thanks, we'll see how it goes. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I give up. I realized I left a fostered content error, so I fixed that, only to see the unwanted white box returned again. ARRRRRRG.
 * User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of birds on English Wikipedia, User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of mammals on English Wikipedia. Help. I know I can fix it and how to fix it, but I'm getting too into my head to perfect it that I've screwed it up again. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. Sometimes it's not your day. You'll be able to return the favor for me someday. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm mad at myself at letting it occur and ticked off that such a simple little thing tripped me up. I appreciate you greatly today. Hopefully I'll sleep it off and tomorrow will be a better day. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for attempting to resolve this. Looking at the Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of reptiles and frogs on English Wikipedia: Revision history page it was Jonesey95's edit on 29 April that removed the align center layout not Zinnober9. The error has not been fixed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * And thanks for putting up with our edits (so far). I have tried five different things to get the snake gallery at User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of reptiles and frogs on English Wikipedia to be centered, and I have had no luck so far. It looks like a bug so far, but I am going to try to make a simpler case to figure out what is going wrong. The documentation clearly states that  should center the gallery images, and copying that gallery to my sandbox results in centered images, but somehow, within the rest of the layout, the images are aligned to the left. It's frustrating. I'll keep working on it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Does this give you the desired outcome? I added the statement text-align: center; to each gallery's style parameter, like I had with Birds and Mammals and that centered things up.
 * A small side note: I see the page has some duplicate style="color:black;" statements in some of those galleries (you may wish to clear those up). Zinnober9 (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * See, I told you that you would be able to return the favor. That tweak should DEFINITELY not be necessary, but it works. F*** me. [edited to add: It looks like taking away also works around the problem.] – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, that works too. Kinda figured there was something external to gallery dictating that, but class="wikitable" would not have come to mind. I kept running into centering needs with the removals of the tons of obsolete &lt;center&gt; tags used to center tables when I was clearing fostered content the last few months, so got used to using text-align: center; fairly often. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject TikTok/doc
Template:WikiProject TikTok/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text


A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Gonnym (talk) 07:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit to Template:AmFootballScoreSummaryEntry
Just a quick question for you - a couple of days ago, you made this edit to AmFootballScoreSummaryEntry. I recently was looking over 2022 Liberty Bowl and saw that the score summary template's formatting was messed up, specifically in the vertical alignment of the home team's score in every row, making each row of the table significantly wider than it was normally. I didn't want to revert your edit just to see if that would work and so figured I'd just ask. Do you think something in your edit would have changed the way this template is formatted? Sorry to bother and thanks for your help! PCN02WPS ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * My edit did cause that extra whitespace, even though it should not have. I have fixed it. Thank you for coming to ask rather than simply reverting or freaking out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fix and for such a quick response! Much appreciated. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Infobox
Hello, Your last contribution to Infobox royalty have made a major change to the template. After the edit, the infobox looks very ugly on Mobile app. I suggest you to revert it because from desktop, the above (name) text in black however, in mobile app it is white and does not match with the background color. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)


 * From desktop, it may look good but in the app it's not you expect. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This mobile view looks fine to me. I'm not sure how else to troubleshoot it. I have reported the problem at this thread. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Your mobile view is on light mode? It works on light mode. Mine is on dark mode it's because of that. No worries. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Cite ****ing Q
Hi Jonesey95, I come here because you are one of the people who know everything about references and templates. I'm looking at Gwendolyn Grant (activist) where the sfns are broken because the references are using cite q, which is rendering the references with author rather than last and first. I would like to fix this by substituting the calls to cite q so that I get the call to citation that they're producing, and then fix them by hand, but I can't work out how to do that – simply substing the calls to cite q just gives me the invocation of the LUA (?) module, which isn't helpful. Do you know a way, or does this have to be fixed in a different way? Thanks in advance, Wham2001 (talk) 23:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That is citing a website so Urban League of Greater Kansas City should be changed to Urban League of Greater Kansas City.
 * Yeah, there is a bug in the expansion; url should not include the template's closing.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 23:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thank-you very much Trappist the monk! Wham2001 (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks TtM. Cite Q is junk. Expanding it so that articles can comply with CITEVAR is usually a good fix. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, my general experience of Wikidata has been "this is a good idea which has been implemented so badly that it's a giant net negative", and cite q is a major part of that. Meanwhile, the article's author has reverted all my citation fixes 🙄  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, your changes did contravene WP:CITEVAR, so the revert was justified. Cite Q is still a blight. I provided some options on the talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments; they're helpful. Yes, I know that my changes weren't strictly defensible given CITEVAR – I was half expecting the revert, tbh.  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, my general experience of Wikidata has been "this is a good idea which has been implemented so badly that it's a giant net negative", and cite q is a major part of that. Meanwhile, the article's author has reverted all my citation fixes 🙄  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, your changes did contravene WP:CITEVAR, so the revert was justified. Cite Q is still a blight. I provided some options on the talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments; they're helpful. Yes, I know that my changes weren't strictly defensible given CITEVAR – I was half expecting the revert, tbh.  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion about "Label" or "distributor"
Hi Jonesey. In the recent discussion of "Release history" table, Andrew318 said that those are distributors, not labels. So if you have any further comments. Regards. 2001:D08:2960:6C1:17E0:21DE:4238:7DE2 (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024
Hello, Jonesey95! You recently made an edit to another editor's user page despite the presence of a notice instructing otherwise. Please be mindful of page notices when contributing to Wikipedia — especially in another editor's user space. 9t5 (talk) 09:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did make this minor edit, as indicated and explained in my edit summary. I fixed ten syntax errors, including one high-priority error. Please let me know if I broke anything, and I'll be happy to fix it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Warsaw central stations/doc
Template:Warsaw central stations/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

ty for linting
This diff was really confusing but I was reading it backwards -- don't know how the hell I managed to leave out the closing tags for those. Anyway, thanks for letting me know, I am currently reworking the render script so I will make sure to get this cleaned up. jp</b>×<b style="color: #029D74">g</b>🗯️</b> 05:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you figured it out and didn't get grumpy with me. It's all teamwork. It would be great if you could fix that script; it would fix hundreds of missing end tag errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think everything is good now, take a look and lmk if anythings busted <b style="font-family: monospace; color:#E35BD8"><b style="color:#029D74">jp</b>×<b style="color: #029D74">g</b>🗯️</b> 21:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, besides the center tags, I will fix those later <b style="font-family: monospace; color:#E35BD8"><b style="color:#029D74">jp</b>×<b style="color: #029D74">g</b>🗯️</b> 21:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That page is still busted. This is the fix. And here's a list of all User/JPxG pages that are missing end tags. It should be pretty small after the bot is fixed and runs through the pages again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Times Top 100 Graduate Employers for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Times Top 100 Graduate Employers, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Times Top 100 Graduate Employers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Template:Format price broken for certain large numbers
Hi there, Jonesey. We are watching Reno 911! lately so I think of that when I see your name. I'm sorry your computer is sad but I thought I'd let you know I posted you a message here. FYI. Is Template:Format price supposed to start with a big red error? Thanks! — Smuckola(talk) 20:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox journal question
I've run across a slight quandary with a page due to Template talk:Infobox journal and the lint error on American River Review. The Website parameter does not allow "extras" to be written, just the website address and nothing else (a common theme of delinting for me the last few days). The stated website for ARR is now a dead link, so someone logically just added the Dead link template, but that is triggering a Link in link error.

The easy thing to do would just be to comment it all out, but I was wondering if a parameter like current_status = Active/Inactive like that on the Infobox website template would be beneficial, or if there was a better way of handling this one. Thoughts? Zinnober9 (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I just did a web search and found the new URL. It was the first hit. I'm not sure why couldn't find it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Had seen that site in the external links section, and thought that it was a supplementary link or a mirror and not the official. I see now that it was just added by Scott Crow in the edit prior to Conkaan (changed from a Facebook link) so possible Conkaan had the same thought I did. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your question
" Brazilian Romantic painting‎ diffhist  −4‎  Jonesey95 talk contribs (Fix Linter obsolete tag errors. Where are people finding this invalid syntax? It has been removed from all articles.)" I expect the answer may be that this is an OKA machine translation from pt:wp. Johnbod (talk) 15:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Some Wikimedia sites are doing better than others at removing obsolete syntax. We still have three million total errors here, but only about 65,000 left in article space after six years of consistent work. German Wikipedia is essentially free of errors, of course. I did some work over at Commons a while ago and fixed a few million errors by editing a handful of templates, but there is a lot of bot work that needs to happen if that site is to get cleaned up. Other sites are even more neglected. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Nearly there
The remaining few link issues in Userspace (minus Marine 69-71's that I'll get to) are cases I'm not coming up with a clean solution for. They are predominantly a userbox situation that doesn't accept linked text, but the user has dictated a different pagelink instead. The quick and dirty answer would be to just remove the user linking, but I was wondering if you know a way to cleanly keep them the way the users intended. For Jtmorgan's three pages, it's a difference scenario and is related to Teahouse/Question-form. There are also three Wikipedia:Teahouse pages with similar issues. Feel like it's probably at the template and not the end user, but it isn't apparent to me. And for Disco's errors... well, who knows if there really was a cat at all. As for the remaining 550-some in Talk, I assume they won't put up much of a fight, but we'll see by the end of the week. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This fix usually does the trick for pre-linked userbox parameters where the editor missed the documentation or the template is not documented well enough. I fixed a couple of other pages. I posted a note at User talk:Discographer about their too-large page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * A little surprised it was only Various–Music on that list since others of theirs I've come across have been too big for linthint unless I view the page in sections. As for the Good Article userboxes, thanks. That's a nice fix. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!
I just wanted to give you a massive THANK YOU for correcting the issues on my User Page, and for leaving such a kind comment. You are a fantastic user. Thank you. - Mike Longfellow (talk) 08:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)