User talk:Jonesey95/Archive2016

Minor fix
Happy New Year boss; just to tell you I fixed a probable error on the election page here; please feel free to revert if my change was inappropriate. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 11:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, that was a typo by someone. Thanks for catching it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

GOCE List of participants
Hello, Jonesey95 -- I was just looking at the GOCE's home page, and then at the list of participants. I looked for my user name because I couldn't remember whether I had added my user name to the list. I found it at 14 December 2013, but it shows my old user name. I changed my user name to Corinne about six months ago. Would it be possible to take off the last two letters, just leaving "Corinne", in that list?

I was also looking for the template that I've seen Baffle gab1978 use when finished copy-editing an article, placing it on the talk page of the requester to inform them that the copy-edit has been completed. Can you tell me where to find that template, or just tell me what it is? Thank you. Corinne (talk) 03:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes that's fine Corinne; feel free to change your username there. The template we use to notify requesters is GOCEtb, and you can use GOCEstartce to tell them you've started work. That gives them a chance to monitor the c/e and make changes if necessary. I generally replace the latter with the former when I'm done, and replace my sig and timestamp with five tildes; this means I don't leave redundant templates all over their talk pages. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:43, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
..for editing the Camilla Läckberg article. It looks great now. Could you please add the GOCE tag to the articles talk page. regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 15:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:43, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * After reading your review of the article in question I am considering a total re-write of the article. Either by myself or by request to someone else. It is OK for now of course but in the long run a rewrite might be the most appropriate.BabbaQ (talk) 00:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think there is still some copyvio left in there, and it doesn't follow the typical structure of a biographical article. I cut it in half, which was a start. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion to get more copy-editors involved
In the process of updating my user name on the GOCE list of participants, I was reading some of the comments in the right-hand column. I was struck by the enthusiasm for copy-editing expressed there, and I wondered why we see so few of them editing at the Requests page. I'm wondering whether some of those editors just never happened to see the link to the Requests page. If you think it would be a good idea to get more participation, what do you think of doing something to invite those editors to become involved? Perhaps a banner put up at the top of all talk pages for a week or two? A specific invitation sent to the list of participants? A temporary eye-catching banner on the GOCE home page? Or do you think it's better just to have those who seek out the Requests page on their own? (I know that a lot of people think they can be good copy-editors but in reality would not be, so I guess that's something to consider also.) Corinne (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The Requests page requires experienced copy-editors who also have a solid understanding of Wikipedia's Manual of Style. It also helps to understand Good Article and Featured Article criteria. I would rather cultivate copy-editors through the Drives, where Requests are always mentioned (and given 50% extra credit), and seek out Requests editors from that population if necessary. Since we got the Requests page down to 6 requests in December, I'm not worried about recruiting more editors for it at this time. Quality is more important than a quick turnaround for requests.


 * I'd really like to see the number of months in the backlog decrease in 2016, so as long as the Requests page stays under control. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with Jonesey above; quality not speed is the watchword when it comes to requests. Also, many of those on the list are retired, semi-retired, blocked or otherwise now-inactive on Wikipedia. Spamming their talk pages would be pointless, and that's what the mailing list if for anyway. They just get bored and forget they even added their usernames to that page; look at the editors who sign up for drived and blitzes and are never heard from again. Finally I would personally reckon that someone smart and willing enough to copy-edit for the Guild is smart enough and willing enough to find his or her way to the Requests page. This is also why we don't monitor either the mailing list or the list of participants. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * O.K. I understand. Corinne (talk) 01:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Passenger pigeon
I see the request and short discussion regarding the request for a copy-edit of Passenger pigeon has been moved to the Requests talk page. I guess I don't understand why, and I'd like to understand. Have I done something wrong? Corinne (talk) 18:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Requests usually take the form of the request, then a Icon tools.svg Working note, then a Yes check.svg Done note, then they are archived, which means they deleted from the Requests page. Requests with more discussion than that are often copied to the Requests talk page so that people curious about how we dealt with that request or how we deal with requests in general can visit the talk page (or its archive) to see what happened. You didn't do anything wrong. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * O.K. Thanks, Jonesey! Corinne (talk) 00:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Fernando Delfini
Hello, regarding your prod of Delfini I think you forgot to inform the creator .In the circumstances is it ok to deprod it, ?i havent informed the creator about it. I have just come across it and would like to look for sources but need more time.Atlantic306 (talk) 01:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I searched for mentions of this person in reliable sources and was unable to find a single source. If you can find one source and add it to the article, the prod tag can be removed. As it stands, it is an unreferenced BLP, which is not allowed on en.WP.


 * I am unwilling to remove the tag under any other conditions, since biographies of living people are held to a higher standard than other articles. If you want to move the article to Draft space, feel free to do so. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks.I haven't searched thoroughly yet: can you tell me when I should move the article to draft space as I haven't done that before. The Italian library service might help with sources but it would take a while.Atlantic306 (talk) 20:17, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I have moved Fernando Delfini to Draft space for you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ThankyouAtlantic306 (talk)|

Risssa -- "Beautiful World Tour 2007"
The Beautiful World Tour 2007 is on the list of articles that need copy editing so I did so. I don't know what to do next, however. Please advise. Thank you very much. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello Rissa; thank you for your help. We have a piece of javascript that couts the words in articles; see [Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Backlog_elimination_drives#Word_counting_script|installation instructions here] (note that you'll need a javascript-enabled browser). Once you've installed the script, revisit this version of the article as it was immediately before your c/e; you should see "Page size" listed under "Tools" on the left of your screen. Click this and the editable text will be highlighted in yellow and you'll see some information at the top of the window.


 * Add the wordcount found under "Prose size" to the article's entry on your section of the Drive page. If you prefer, you can use any word processing software to get the wordcount; just copy/paste from the article (not in the edit window!) and remove any non-article text like template messages, etc.


 * Please don't forgt to remove GOCEinuse from the article. Once you've done all of that, you can grab another article to work on. Have fun, Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Tracking category for Template:BillboardID
Hi Jonesey95, Pranavmk98 is working on T118081 so your help would be welcome clarifying what the next steps to take are. Thanks! :) --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 12:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Use of BLPPROD
Hi Jonesey95,

You seem to be using BLPPROD incorrectly on some articles. The way the BLPPROD policy works, if the article has an external link to anything that provides information about the subject, then it cannot be nominated for deletion under the BLPPROD policy. Even if the links are to unreliable sources or to something that isn't independent of the subject (such as their personal web page), having such a link in the article before a BLPPROD is placed prevents BLPPROD from being used. This is different than the requirement that if a BLPPROD is correctly placed on an article, then a reliable source is needed to remove the BLPPROD. This double standard is intentional and has been discussed several times in the past (see WT:BLPPROD archives). Please don't use BLPPROD on articles that link to anything that provides any information about the subject, even if the external link is to something that wouldn't be useable as a valid reference. Of course you should feel free to use other deletion policies such as normal PROD if you think a BLP should be deleted but it isn't eligible for BLPPROD. Calathan (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the detailed note. I will try to remember to use PROD instead of BLP PROD for articles that contain links or references but which otherwise match one of the reasons for deletion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , I have reviewed my edits back to November 22 (3,000 edits) to correct any other BLP PROD mistakes. I have changed BLP PROD to PROD on Saki Seto and Takahiro Fujita to comply with the policy. All other articles that I put BLP PROD tags on appear to be fine, or they have been improved to address the article's sourcing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:19, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for changing those to regular PRODs. Calathan (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Please check your recent edit at Elaine May
… in saving a major edit, I may have mucked up your wikilink fix. If I did apologies. (The text shows no red in the references, so maybe not.) In any case, apologies for the clumsiness. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 03:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. You didn't break my fix; you even improved upon it. I knew I was jumping into the middle of your intense editing session, but I was hoping that my tiny fix wouldn't cause an edit conflict. Great work improving the article, and merry Christmas, doctor. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

January Barnstars
Hello: I apologize for omitting the O* after the titles of the last two articles I edited. I have now fixed my list. Thanks for pointing this out. Kind regards, Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. I updated the leaderboard and the barnstar stats. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:25, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
...for noticing my cutting out a url=. Funny how little things like that can make a big difference. Thmazing (talk) 05:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Luckily, it created a nice red error message and an error category. I keep an eye on those errors, and fixing them is usually pretty quick and easy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:33, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Please discuss NEW problems from article David Lloyd George.
I need your help. Please come to this section of the talk page for this article and discuss new problems that have cropped up on the page you recently edited. Thank you Koala Tea Of Mercy ( KTOM's Articulations &amp; Invigilations ) 22:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Water engine
As you know, hydroelectric dams generate an enormous amount of energy, and smaller hydro electric generators exist most using a turbine and shaft, and some centrifugal design.

In theory, one would be able to recreate the process, using a reservoir tank, water pump, hydroelectric generator, and battery, they would be able to cycle the water and generate electricity similar to the hydroelectric dam process.

In theory, as well one could use compressed air and turbine as a substitute similar to the concept of the wind turbine, with a controlled and reused input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregMarson (talk • contribs) 05:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the educational visit. Your ideas are not just theory. Check out pumped-storage hydroelectricity and compressed air energy storage for more information. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

It's going to work with a radiator, pump, turbocharger, alternator, and battery. The battery has to recharge before the pump uses its charge, but it should produce a KW of electricity. Then we're gonna sell it on the black market, "water car" yeah!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregMartian (talk • contribs) 04:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there! You are welcome to post on my talk page if you have Wikipedia-related questions or comments. I was nice to you once above, but further posting of random ramblings here will likely be deleted. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Fix journal/arXiv parameter
When you change citation to cite arxiv you are also changing the citation style from CS2 to CS1, likely making it inconsistent in formatting with the other citations in the same articles, and likely breaking the links in any harv templates that refer to the citation. Please don't do that. The correct fix is to change a citation template with an arxiv url to a citation template with an arxiv parameter. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I see your point. I'll go back through and fix. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Alternately, if is the better choice, set cs2.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Oran fatwa
I just completed a copy-edit of Oran fatwa. I wanted to ask you for your opinion on the early part of the lead.

1) I want to know what you think of having the definition of a "responsum fatwa" right there in parentheses. Normally, I don't like parentheses so early in a lead, if at all. An alternative, at least as far as punctuation is concerned, would be a pair of dashes, but I don't like those so early in the lead, either, and I've been told that MoS discourages a lot of parenthetical commas. Another thing would be to leave the phrase "responsum fatwa, which is linked, and take out the definition, perhaps moving the definition to later in the article – but where?

Also, I noticed that "responsum" is in italics here, but not in italics later in the article. I thought MoS said not to put Latin words and phrases into italics. Is it all right to italicize it once early in the lead and then not after that?

I also wonder about having "issued on request" and then "issued for Muslims" so soon after it.

2) There also seems to be some repetition in the first two sentences. Here are the first two sentences. I've put repeated words and phrases in bold.


 * The Oran fatwa was a responsum fatwa (Islamic legal opinion issued on request) issued for Muslims in the Crown of Castile (now part of Spain) to address the crisis caused by forced conversions to Christianity there. The date of composition of the fatwa was given as the month of Rajab 910AH (end of 1504CE), shortly after the implementation of forcible conversions of Muslim in the Crown of Castile (1500–1502).

I'm not sure what to remove here. Maybe I'm too tired right now to figure it out. Your guidance and suggestions are welcome; also, feel free to make necessary changes. Corinne (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't have a strong opinion about the "responsum fatwa" in the lead, except that I would explain the whole responsum thing in a separate section lower in the article. The lead as it is contains too much detail to read as a concise summary of the topic. If I were writing the article, I would avoid repeating the words "fatwa" and "issued", instead writing something like "The Oran fatwa was an Islamic legal opinion issued for Muslims in the Crown of Castile...."


 * Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting explains how to format foreign words.


 * Here's a suggested rewrite:


 * The Oran fatwa was an Islamic legal opinion issued for Muslims in the Crown of Castile (now part of Spain) to address a crisis caused by forced conversions to Christianity there. The fatwa was published in 1504 CE (910 AH), shortly after the forcible conversions of Muslims began (1500–1502).


 * Something like that, anyway. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * O.K. Thanks. I'll look at it again. Corinne (talk) 00:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of President's Malaria Initiative


The article President's Malaria Initiative has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Links are missing or empty

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Prof TPMS (talk) 10:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Bare URLs are not a valid reason for deletion., please be more careful in the future. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, agreed. Regards, --Prof TPMS (talk) 15:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

AutoEd?
I noticed your edit summary for this revision notes that you use AutoEd to do this cleanup. One parameter in Spanish that you missed is "sitioweb", which is "website". Not knowing anything about AutoEd, I can't be certain, but I would suspect that this is an easy addition to the tool? Hope so! And thanks for your cleanup work! &mdash; D'Ranged 1  VTalk  06:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The script in question is User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/unnamed.js. I have added sitioweb to the parameters it looks for. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into the local language

Thanks again :) -- Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note, and, thanks for your service to the (Wikimedia) Foundation and to the movement. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:18, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Strange comment
See User talk:BOTFIGHTER. – Corinne (talk) 14:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like a misunderstanding stemming from the inadequacy of written communication, which lacks the nuance of voice tone and facial expression that would make an in-person conversation easier. I recommend leaving it alone. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming Art+Feminism events in Oregon
You are invited to participate in Oregon's upcoming Art+Feminism events, which will be held in Portland and Eugene on Saturday, March 5, 2016. Please see the following links for additional information, or to sign up: About Art+Feminism: Art+Feminism is pleased to announce its third annual Wikipedia edit-a-thon, an all-day event designed to generate coverage of women and the arts on Wikipedia and encourage female editorship. Last year, over 1,500 participants at more than 75 events around the world participated in the second annual campaign, resulting in the creation of nearly 400 new pages and significant improvements to 500 articles on Wikipedia. For more information, see Art+Feminism.
 * Portland: Yale Union (800 SE 10th Avenue), 12:00–5:00pm
 * Eugene: Architecture and Allied Arts (A&AA) Library (200 Lawrence Hall, University of Oregon), 12:00–5:00pm

You received this message because you have attended a Wikipedia meetup in Oregon or contributed to WikiProject Oregon. To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from this list. -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:18, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: 39 Pattern Webbing
Hello Jonesey95. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 39 Pattern Webbing, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''This doesn't appear to be an unequivocal case. It may well be that suspect source itself may have used the Wikipedia article. Tagging for further investigation. .''' Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 10:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

GOCE February blitz barnstars
Has anyone created a barnstar page for the blitz yet (I can't find one)? And is there a blitz-barnstar-table script, or have you used Torchiest's drive script (I have yet to run it successfully)? If so, do the barnstars need to be adjusted for the different scoring? All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I have it on my to-do list. I use my brain and a bit of manual spreadsheet work, not a script, to do the math for blitz barnstars, since it's usually not very much work. The drive script doesn't work for blitzes, as far as I know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2016/Barnstars is complete and ready for distribution. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but when I tried to do your barnstar (minor) it was redlinked to a March blitz; should CURRENTMONTHNAME in the template be changed to February? I'd do it, but don't want to make things worse. CURRENTMONTHNAME may not work here because we often distribute barnstars the following month. All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Bummer. That's a limitation in the template. The workaround for this month is to subst the template, then immediately edit and replace both occurrences of "March" with "February". – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The first time I tried to do this, I accidentally used the drive tag and it came up February (and redlinked, of course); I have no idea why :-).  Mini  apolis  19:38, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

 * Mmm, delicious. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! WP editors are so creative in the ways that they mess up ISBNs. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

This bibliography needs a lot of work
Pierre Moulin. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * No kidding. I cleaned it up as best as I could. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:42, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

check isxn
I fixed the module so you don't have to test for 'false' any more. Frietjes (talk) 17:53, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I considered trying to do that, but the module is used by other templates and modules, so I didn't want to mess with it., does this have any negative effect on the CS1 modules? – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:56, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Module:Check isxn is not used by cs1|2.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * For talk page stalkers, this message relates to work I have done to add ISBN error checks to templates listed at . – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

George the Fifth Class
Hi Jonesey, I changed five to 5 to emphasise the numerical pattern of 5 (also George V) - "Notes and exceptions: Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures", e.g. "There were 3 deaths and 206 injuries". I see you changed them to all from figures, not sure why when it is numbers we are dealing with?Rstory (talk) 12:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * See MOS:NUMERAL: "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words." I don't know what you mean by "the numerical pattern of 5 (also George V)". I don't see a pattern; all I saw were numbers that were not written in the way that all style guides recommend. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That's a good answer and to the point, the factual info on the talk page shows numerical relationships, not just 5 and the Roman V (5); 10 is above nine. I am not going to revert your edit, only request a look at the logic again.Rstory (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Louisville
A single sentence noting that a song won an award from a very non-notable association does not warrant significant third party coverage. ETA: There is very little to say about the song, so merging or redirecting to the album or artist is not a bad idea. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As I said, there are zillions of these song articles that appear to fail notability. If this is one of them, that's fine with me. Let's not have this discussion in two places, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Year style in articles on Islamic topics
A day or so ago, I saw a discussion on Drmies' talk page, and out of curiosity I looked at the Wajihuddin Alvi article that was mentioned. I made a few copy-edits. I just saw  edit. It doesn't matter to me which year style is used, but I have seen (and copy-edited) several other articles on Islamic figures and topics that give the AH year first, followed by the corresponding year in the Western calendar. Can you tell me what is the preferred style (and the preferred order, if both styles are given)? It seems a little odd to leave out the AH year entirely. – Corinne (talk) 03:01, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am unable to find the discussion you are talking about. If you want me to look at it, please link to it.


 * For guidance on how to refer to years in the English Wikipedia, see WP:OSNS. The Manual of Style is always a good place to look for guidance like this. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, the discussion where I saw the link to the article is User talk:Drmies, but that discussion had nothing to do with my question; maybe that's why I didn't provide the link to the discussion. You're right, Jonesey, I should have looked at the MoS, but sometimes it takes a while to find things on the MoS and I thought I might be able to get a quicker answer by asking you. Do you feel like answering another such question? See User talk:Dank. – Corinne (talk) 03:45, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Weird case?
Please check this. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:26, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ISBNs simply can't have the letter "e" in them. After some research, I worked around it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Have joined the guild
…as of this date, see my entry at that list. If there is any way to call my attention to articles most urgently in need of attention, in my bailiwick of the physical sciences, et al.—perhaps via a short list pasted here?—I would be appreciative (and well launched). I will look here to a reply. I am a poor correspondent at my own Talk page, for reasons of Time, and perceived futility in many conversations. However, the disclosures at my User page may also be a means of making my acquaintance. One further point to make in reply, but will await your response before continuing. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The foregoing content may also be of interest to   . Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome! The articles that are tagged for copy-editing are listed at . I recommend looking through there for articles that interest you. If you are new to copy-editing on Wikipedia, see Basic copyediting. For more detailed guidance about style on Wikipedia, the very detailed Manual of Style is the place to go. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome Le Prof; sadly, the ex-coordinators Pax and Keiran are not currently active on-wiki afaik. I echo Jonesey's recommendations, and if you need a tool to surf the backlog it would be CatScan, where you can search for articles cross-indexed in cats Physical sciences and Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. There's no urgency though, just various levels of incomprehensibility. Have fun, and I hope to see you around the Guild. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am just about lurking around now, haven't really found the motivation to return after such a long absence. I might pop up one day! Kieran  Tribe  14:23, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks all for welcomes. Will look to the links you have provided. Please note, I am not scrupulous about logging in, and at times you will see me from IPs as I travel, but will always try to remember to sign as here. Cheers, Le Prof 50.179.252.14 (talk) 14:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

BibISBN templates
Hi Jonesey. I've now fixed the main BibISBN template and it seems to display correctly. It needed a module to be imported and that's been done. So all good. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Very good. Thanks for letting me know.


 * FYI, We used to have a set of Cite ISBN templates here on the English Wikipedia, and last year, they were all substituted and deleted after an RfC. I don't know how these BibISBN templates are different from those, but be aware that the existence of this new template may be challenged. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Eurovision Voting Article
Hey Jonesy, sorry I bailed in the middle of the edit! I had to move across country and couldn't get back to it for awhile. I found that some of the language about when certain point systems were introduced, how points were distributed, and how juries were selected and implemented to be unclear, and I was afraid of accidentally introducing misinformation. I bit off a bit more than I could chew with this article (it was an overly ambitious choice for my 2nd copyedit), but I did get a little over halfway through. I can finish now, though, unless you would prefer to reassign it. Thanks!

Update: I see that Miniapolis has fixed it. Again, my apologies. But I learned something here, thanks for your patience and understanding.

1984&#38;co (talk) 15:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * We all learn here every day. I recommend choosing a shorter article next time. Maybe even read it through first to see if you can / want to handle it. If not, leave it for someone else. I've done that plenty of times. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Ancestry of Muhammad
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Ancestry of Muhammad &mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 89.240.87.162 (talk) 20:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

YGM

 * – Responded via mail. Thanks for thinking of me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for the reply. and ... thank you for helping reduce the duplicate category articles directory to under 10,000 entries.  to think we were at over 100,000 about a year ago :) Frietjes (talk) 00:03, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Teamwork! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Listed invalid ISBN is misused in many places
Example. I wonder how we fix all these stuff. I fixed almost 100 of them today. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * There are only 600 transclusions. I have created . – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

March drive bling

 * Love that rotating barnstar! – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't want to say it
Yup. --Izno (talk) 16:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Though, finding a source for what that obviously random string of numbers makes me chuckle. :^) --Izno (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I try not to send lmgtfy links to people, because it's condescending as heck, but some people are begging for it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Copy-editing
Hi there. I have attempted to copy-edit several articles recently. Palermo and Catania been two attempts. Would I be able to join your team? Regards, Huddsblue (talk) 22:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You did a fine job with those copy edits. The articles were improved considerably. I encourage you to participate the GOCE's April blitz and May drive. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:14, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Chandler
Hi, if you got time for it, please take a look at the article about Oba Chandler. Any improvements are welcomed. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Long Island
Sorry about the incorrect dashes in a few places there. I should have spotted them. Colonies Chris (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No trouble. I see that you have a good record of cleaning up after yourself when your hundreds of useful tweaks include one minor mistake. Go Team Gnome! – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

List of pages with invalid ISBNs in Wikidata!
User_talk:Knife-in-the-drawer. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, for goodness sake. Here we go. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, a bot unconditionally coped everything in Wikidata. I fixed some of them. I also requested conditions so that won't happen in the future. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It seems like there should be a tracking category and an error message in Wikidata for these errors. Also, I have noticed that some of these entries, like this one, are books with no title. I would think that a title would be required for an entry about a book. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

All errors in Wikidata fixed/removed/handled. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:23, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Erina language
Thanks, I've blocked that sock. However, I noticed your comment by pure coincidence so I wouldn't always count on it. Just report them to WP:ANI or WP:AIV for banhammering. Max Semenik (talk) 01:45, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!
... for adding the new maps to so many articles! I am working to updates maps, too. Glad to have these. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:37, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. They look much less silly with local maps than with a big red dot on a map of Oregon. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Pop Style // One Dance
Hi, instead of talking down / delting the Pop Style page, could you help trying to improve it, also why does Pop Style warrant a deletion but One Dance doesn't if both pages have the same / similar material, is it possible these two pages could be merged or expanded on as it makes no sesne to delete one and not the other? Thank You (talk) 16:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Articles that do not pass WP:GNG should not be on Wikipedia. I did some searching for coverage of that article and found only trivia, as I wrote at this discussion. It looks like new coverage has appeared since then. You should add that to the article if you want it to stay on Wikipedia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Certification Table Entry
Can you fix the duplicate citation error in Dark Light (HIM album)? You were the last person to touch the code, and now Finland is generating two citations with conflicting named references. 98.230.192.179 (talk) 12:18, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't create that problem in the template, but I think I have fixed it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

New ISBN checks to be added soon
After some database checks, WPCleaner will add checks for
 * ISNB digits
 * isbn digits
 * Presence of a opening parenthesis or a quote between ISBN and the first digit.

So prepare for even more ISBN errors. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I see that the page has increased in size quite a bit.


 * Will any false positives be eliminated? Like  and  ?
 * Something appears to have gone wrong with the latest updates. Why is List of Fist of the North Star chapters appearing in the list, for example? The ISBNs all appear to be valid, and they click through to worldcat.org just fine. Other examples of titles that have been added to the list: List of Fairy Tail chapters (volumes 46–current) and Library of America, both of which I fixed a while ago. There are others. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

It should have been fixed now. Please check once more. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that looks better. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

New entries appeared. Please join the Force :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Join it I will. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Less than 200 items. Please take a look at Sukhbir Singh Kapoor. Many there. My eyes see ISBNs everywhere. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Worldcat has some of them. I fixed a couple. It will just require some detective work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * All done with Sukhbir Singh Kapoor. I found a source for all but one on the web. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:29, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I am done with WikiProject Check Wikipedia/ISBN errors. I did quite a bit of digging for all of the items remaining on the list. Some are false positives, and some have comments in the citation templates explaining that they are invalid but should be ignored. Can we get those removed from the checking algorithm somehow? – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the great job! I'll see what I can do! New dump is available so we expect a new ave of errors. Our task is still not done :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

. It was a problem when the ISBN was at the end of a range (978-1-8697999 is the end of a range). Now fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

J. C. Daniel Award
Hai, can you take my copy edit request of J. C. Daniel Award in WP:GOCE/REQ. --Charles Turing (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe next week. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Charles Turing (talk) 05:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The article is taken by another editor. But would you mind Kerala State Film Award for Best Actor instead. --Charles Turing (talk) 13:09, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Arxiv cleanup
You were fairly efficient at cleaning up some of the arxiv crap back in February, so here are a few more for you if you feel like taking a stab at them: WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/A51 WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/E16 (Look for 'arxiv' in the first one, and 'eprint' in the other). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * , it looks like you fixed most of them. I mopped up a few. I don't know what to do about the ones that are listed as just "Arxiv" as the journal name. It would be useful if the report listed the actual articles, like the report at WikiProject Check Wikipedia/ISBN errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:09, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah I cleaned a few of them myself when the regex was easy to figure out, but I wasn't super systematic about it. I've also cleaned up a bunch of journal (and similar) manually, but by now the data dump I'm basing myself on is pretty outdated (March, the April dump is missing a bunch of articles apparently). I agree it would be useful if some error checking could be implemented, either via the template, or via Check Wikipedia lists. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 11:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

April blitz bling

 * Thanks for remembering! – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Deletion/merger of song articles
I hope you weren't put off by our disagreement on deleting "Pop Style" – I just felt it was an odd choice for a PROD as (a) it was always likely that as a new song and a hit record, somebody else would add to the content sooner rather than later, and (b) there are, as I pointed out, much better candidates for deletion among the 43,000+ song article stubs already out there. You got me thinking though, I've been revisiting some of those stubs and I do believe that if the only "notability" is that the song appeared on a national chart, it probably still isn't enough to warrant an article: the suggestion on the WikiProject Songs page is that if an article is never going to develop beyond a stub, it should be redirected, which is what you were suggesting. Trouble is, it's easier said than done: for example, I've come across this article which seems a perfect candidate for a redirect, and indeed has been redirected in the past, only for another editor to reinstate the content. Perhaps WP:NSONGS needs stricter or less ambiguous guidelines, otherwise it's going to prove difficult to cut down the number of song stubs. Richard3120 (talk) 18:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't put off at all. I just think that articles should stay in Draft form until actual notability can be shown via reliable sources.


 * I think you are absolutely right that WP:NSONGS needs to be clearer. Many editors seem to think that appearance in a chart automatically confers notability, which is not what the words at NSONGS say, and which is contrary to WP:GNG. Since so many editors misinterpret the words, I think the words should be changed.


 * I have reverted "(Pop, Pop, Pop, Pop) Goes My Mind" to a redirect, referencing WP:NSONGS. Edits like this (changing a redirect to an article without adding sources) to a number of songs by a single editor are what led me to "Pop Style" in the first place. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just to add... if you are really interested in going on a blitz of deleting articles that have no business being on Wikipedia, have a look at the proposed deletions on WikiProject Songs/Article alerts – Richhoncho is very active in hunting down and PRODding song articles... take a look at some of the articles on this list and you'll see why I thought "Pop Style" had a much better claim to be kept than some of these. There are literally hundreds of these pointless and unreferenced song articles out there. Richard3120 (talk) 00:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Andrea Rizzoli
Check the articles before putting a blp prod on them, Andrea Rizzoli says they have been dead for a while for example. Wgolf (talk) 04:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I see a biography and my brain says BLP. I sometimes forget the "L" part. I have tagged both articles with appropriate speedy deletion tags instead. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Phrathepyanmahamuni
I am not sure what happened to this page, nor what you mean by your comments. Are the external links posted to be removed?S Khemadhammo (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are talking about this edit, I undid your edits. Your edits changed book titles from italic to quoted, which is contrary to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, and your edits also made it so that links to ISBNs stopped working. If you want to provide a URL for a book title, wrap only the title in brackets, like this: Book Title. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll try again. Thanks.S Khemadhammo (talk) 06:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what you were thinking here..
here. You fixed a bunch of spam instead of removing it. ack. Jytdog (talk) 06:56, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I was using a simple script to fix URL errors and other citation errors. It does not detect spam in what is otherwise a normal-looking citation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

A script you might like
you might like [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Frietjes/common.js&diff=prev&oldid=717639572 this]. (1) open an infobox in edit mode, (2) press 'chk4unkwn' in the tools section, (3) you can ignore any popups about unprocessed stuff so long as the unprocessed stuff doesn't include triple brace parameters, (4) review the popup showing the text for adding a "check for unknown parameters", (5) scroll to the bottom of the template where the popup alert text was pasted for you, (6) move the inserted text, refine it, etc to your liking. Frietjes (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I do like it and will use it. Thanks! One question: it looks like it is supposed to sort the parameters alphabetically before inserting them, which makes the list much easier to inspect and modify, but when I run it, it does not do so. I looked at the code, but fixing it is beyond my current skills. Would it be difficult to make them sort?


 * OK, actually two questions. Is it acceptable to leave the new code at the very bottom of the template, where it is inserted, or should it be moved (for technical or style reasons) to the end of the template code, before the documentation? – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * currently, it sorts the parameters based on the first appearance within the template, but it would be very easy to make that alphabetical. I could also add some logic to have it try to move it up to a better location, but just haven't had a chance to do so. Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * ok, improved the logic so it now attempts a better placement and has an option to sort alphabetically (intermediate pop up with 'ok' or 'cancel'). checked it on Template:Infobox radio station.  will work on creating a default edit summary shortly. Frietjes (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Works great. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * , can you please make the sort case-insensitive, so that e.g. ISBN sorts with isbn instead of before all of the lower-case parameters? Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * done, and fixed the "parameter including a question mark" semi-bug, probably need to escape other special characters. Frietjes (talk) 22:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

List of infoboxes by transclusion count?
I'd like to add error-checking to the most commonly used infoboxes. I found List of infoboxes, but it's out of date and seems to have been compiled manually. Is there a way to make a list of infobox templates, sorted by transclusion count? Maybe only those with 5,000 or more transclusions at first. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I also found this database report, but it is three years old. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Chaco species articles
Hi, good to see the copy-editing at Chaco patagonica. If you have time, you might like to look at the other species articles listed at Chaco (spider), where there are some similar problems. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. That was tedious. I hope someone will copy and paste the format to the remaining articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:53, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Great job! There was serious concern over the very close paraphrasing before; much better now. I had them on my to-do list, but you've saved me the tedium. :-) Peter coxhead (talk) 21:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Alleged wheel-warring
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nyttend (talk) 01:29, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. I am surprised that you chose to escalate this discussion so abruptly without trying to seek an amicable outcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Permalink to this can't read / won't read debacle.

Maremma
Hello, Jonesey95 -- I just came across the article on Maremma and noticed a tag that has been at the top of the Maremma section since 2009. I don't think the article would qualify to be selected as a TAFI, so I thought I'd point it out to you in case you ever have nothing to do and feel like looking at it. – Corinne (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Princeton University: The First 250 Years
Ok, here I am. So, could you look at the article for what needs page numbers, find the page numbers (hope it has in an index!), and then give me those page numbers? I can handle the editing work. If you can't find something in the book, I assume the content would have to be removed per WP:V, or the refs replaced by cn. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:43, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look. This may take a couple of days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I neglected to mention that I much appreciate the offer to help! &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  13:42, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Also need the edition information for your edition. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  09:04, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Both items (Nassau Hall and the Chronology) were in the book's table of contents. Easy-peasy. Hip hip! – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Just to confirm, the content preceding one cite is on p. 24, the other five on pp. 268-269, and two Cite books for the same book is considered ok. Thanks very much, consider this an honorary barnstar! &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  23:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes, and yes. I sourced all of the information from two sections of a single actual hardcover book made of paper products, viewed with my own eyes at my dining room table. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * LOL. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  08:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Articles reviewed by the Guild of Copy Editors
Do we wait for Baby alice or Done Caparev to be  actually deleted (SD, no action by GoCE), or to be changed to an AfD, or maybe we never apply  at all?

There are over a thousand articles in Category:Articles reviewed by the Guild of Copy Editors, many of which I tagged. Should the GoCE do something with them>

As a GoCE leader, what is your advice to me?--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * My inclination would be to stop removing the copy edit tag from articles that are nominated for deletion, because then we end up with situations like Telman Malikov and Michael J. Hickey, where you removed the copy edit tag and then the prod template was removed from the article. Are you keeping these articles on your watchlist so that you can go back and reapply the copy edit tag? It doesn't look like it, since I have re-tagged a few of them for you already.


 * I don't like the GOCEreviewed template, since we don't currently have project energy around making sure they are removed when that is appropriate. If you want to continue applying it, then please make sure to keep those articles on your watchlist so that you can maintain the templates and articles as appropriate.


 * Since you asked. Sorry to be blunt. I'm in a hurry just now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

cit bot bugs
Hi, I see you are very active on the cit bot talk page, I filed two bugs. If you can take a look that would be awesome, thank you! Cheers, Ihaveacatonmydesk (talk) 09:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I looked at them and provided a comment on one. I have found it helpful in the past to provide a sandbox page for the bot to operate on to show how it works or does not work. You might want to do that for any bug reports that do not have links to diffs already. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Request for help
Hi, Jonesey95. This is perhaps an odd request, and no worries if you aren't interested, but I've been asked to write a Wikimedia Foundation blog post about one of my pet projects, Wiki Loves Pride. I just saved my first draft at Meta-Wiki, and I was hoping to have a few people take a look to offer feedback and copy edit as appropriate. I realize this is not a Wikipedia article, but you've done some great copy editing for me in the past and I was hoping you might be willing to spend a few minutes helping with a different sort of movement project. If you are up to the ask, feel free to ping me, edit the draft directly, or post on the talk page. Any of the above is fine, and any feedback would be much appreciated. Thanks for your consideration, --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:55, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * For you, anything. I'll even track it down, since you didn't provide a link(!), stinker.


 * I tried to punch it up a bit, which means that I may have turned some of your personal style into my own, something that may not be appropriate for a blog entry with your name on it. Change anything that doesn't suit you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you so, so much! And sorry for forgetting to include a link. Hopefully you didn't have to dig too much. I really appreciate your time and assistance. :) --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Edits on Ekphrasis page
My student User:DakinV had added a bunch of text to the ekphrasis article which got accidentally deleted when User:Bgwhite did a revert because of problematic references screwed up by the visual editor; I restored the relevant text, with an explanation as to why (I specifically wrote in the edit summary "Restoring User:DakinV's material that got expunged by revert. Some references need fixing; please do so individually, not by reverting"), and then you came along and undid it all, claiming that there was no explanation. I don't want to get into a revert war with you, but can you please restore the material that you deleted? Thank you. Dakrasne (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The solution is to not use Visual Editor. Manually copy the material and paste it into the article.  The references will be preserved at this point.  Wikimedia people  are aware of the problem, but I haven't heard if they will fix the problem.  Bgwhite (talk) 18:24, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but that's what I did -- and I don't personally use Visual Editor, it's my student who did -- but what did, as best I can tell, was to simply delete everything I had copy-and-pasted. Dakrasne (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for coming here to talk. It looks like the broken ISBNs brought me to the page. After poking through the history, I am unable to determine or remember why I reverted. I'll call that a mistake by me. I try to make one mistake every day; it keeps me humble.


 * I have reverted my revert and done some formatting cleanup. The ISBNs are still broken. If you can get them from your student, that would be great. The prose also needs some cleanup to make it more encyclopedic (I removed at least one "incredibly famous" and a few other obvious style flaws), so I tagged it with a copy editing tag. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


 * , Sorry, I didn't notice that you did copy/paste and not use Visual Editor. One of these days I'll learn to read. I see this same problem every day (today's example). The  refuse to believe this is causing severe problems as the error  was declined to be fixed. The Wiki Ed people  are also aware, but as this problem is not going away....  Wiki Eds please, please emphasize  to not use VE for copy/pasting. It also causes problems when copying from another source into VE, which also won't be fixed by the programmers. Bgwhite (talk) 10:19, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "please, please emphasize to not use VE for copy/pasting." We've got some updated language in our handouts and are planning on making profs more aware of the issues, but IMO our hands are tied on the larger problem. VE is the default for new editors, so copying into pages while editing w/ VE will be the norm even if we rail against it in training. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 11:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think what you need to do is to emphasize that you must use the visual editor for copying and pasting – and not the HTML ("Read mode") page.  When you're reading a page, the little blue clicky number is just a link to a different point on the page.  It's not actually the ref itself.  In editing mode, copying that will get you the ref rather than the link.  Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * . Yes. We emphasize that in the training now, although we run up against the problem that the two look quite similar. Our new editing wikipedia handout should further stress the point as well. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks to all;, since our semester is over, I'm not sure whether my students will continue to maintain their work (I suspect not, in most cases); this is one of the seeming drawbacks of the finite duration of a Wiki Ed project, though I still think in most cases it's ultimately beneficial! ;) , is there maybe a way to add some sort of generator for correctly-formatted ISBNs that students can use?  I have no idea if such a thing would be feasible or useful. Dakrasne (talk) 14:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * An ISBN generator is not necessary. Valid ISBNs are almost always available at worldcat.org (always copy and paste to eliminate typos) or on the page following the title page of the book you are citing. The red error message usually tells you that you made a typo of some sort. It is highly unusual for an invalid ISBN to exist in worldcat.org or in a printed book, though it does rarely happen. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

May 2016 drive awards

 * Thanks for giving out all of the barnstars! I just love this rotating one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Philadelphia Phillies
Thanks for reverting my țypo-y edit. Those v's... Ugh!

As for the spaces, though, they were intentional. When you're editing on a smartphone, as I frequently am, the compact format produced by "cite..." templates creates long unbroken strings of several parameters smashed together, with line breaks only when arbitrarily forced by the page width, ending in a single word plus most of a blank line, and then the next such string. I see something like this simulation (assuming you're reading this on a normal screen):

The rivalry between the New York Mets and the Phillies was said to be among the "hottest" rivalries in the National League. The two National League East divisional rivals have met each other recently in playoff, division, and wild card races. Aside from several brawls in the 1980s, the rivalry remained low-key before the 2006 season, as the teams had seldom been equally good at the same time.

You can see how difficult editing that would be -- was! -- till I added spaces after most of the parameter bars and a couple of equal signs. --Thnidu (talk) 15:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yep, that looks nasty. I see people put spaces into templates occasionally, and I imagine that they have their reasons. Your reason looks good to me.


 * I tried to revert only your erroneous edit. Usually I just fix typos like yours, but I will revert if it looks like someone is using a script or other automated editing that may have a programming error in it, so that the editor receives a notification to alert them to their malformed code. I always like to know when I've made a mistake with a script so that I can fix the code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Need extra help with ISBNs

 * Ancient Greek art
 * Arctic exploration
 * BTR-152
 * Bukosh (Vushtrri)
 * Caprodon
 * Gwyneth Cravens
 * Patrick Moraz
 * Riley 16
 * VSKhSON
 * Weapons of the Lebanese Civil War

A backlog is formulated and I far behind my schedule. Need reinforcements. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I fixed one or two easy ones. The rest will require some research. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I fixed a pile of errors from WikiProject Check Wikipedia/ISBN errors, including some of the above. More later, maybe. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:43, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ It took a few days a few editors, but these are all fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:47, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Question
Hi, Jonesey95 -- I just saw your question on the GOCE elections page. I've been a bit busy in the last few days. It's late here, and I will respond tomorrow when I'm more awake and rested. – Corinne (talk) 04:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Always a good idea to delay a thoughtful response until you are rested. I have done too many poor edits while up in the wee hours. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Errant "action=edit" links in WP articles
and, I have stumbled across a couple hundred articles that have links to edit WP articles (and other erroneous text) in their prose. Search for "action=edit" in article space to see them. Not all of them are errors, but it looks like at least 90% are. I do not have access to a computer that can run AWB, so I don't have an easy way to fix these. Are you interested? – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:04, 13 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Super nice catch. We should already be finding these via errors 90/91. It turns you just opened a new world for us all :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yea. I'm so excited. More articles to fix. Yea. We are catching anything with , but not with    I've added it to the code and it now catches Twydall.   Let's see how much misery it brings on the next run.  Bgwhite (talk) 23:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

There are 131 articles in today's run for #90, compared to the normal ~30. The list is ready for anybody to help out. Bgwhite (talk) 04:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

We need the help of too. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:39, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Tumsar
Hey, Jonesey95. I was copyediting the Tumsar article and noticed that the article had been copied and pasted entirely from this site. I don't think I should continue copyediting it, and I'm really not in the mood to rewrite the article, given that I can't even find sources. What do I do? Thanks,  MediaKill13  ( talk )   10:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have marked that section as a copyright violation. Keep going with the copy edit, removing and tagging unsourced text as you see fit. I would remove anything that seems promotional or biased. I tend to leave things like lists of schools, since they don't do much harm, tagging such things with unreferenced section or similar templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I've tried to copyedit the article, I really have. But I don't understand a thing and I don't know whether some of the writing is mistaken or correct as it is. I think I'll just take this article off my working list. Sorry for holding it up.   MediaKill13   (  talk  )   14:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

July drive editnotice
Hi, Jonesey. I've created the July drive page, but can't get to the editnotice in the create-your-article-list window to change the rollover-words link from March to May. Please teach me to fish and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:33, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Fishing instructions:
 * Go to the monthly list of Coordinator tasks.
 * Those instructions lead you to WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Intro, which is where you change March to May.
 * Happy fishing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for updating the drive instructions since I last checked them; that page name is nice and easy to remember.  Mini  apolis  22:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Indo-Bangladesh joint production
He you cannot delete Indo-Bangladesh joint production.The page contains all kinds of truth and right information.I dont see any fault in this page and also not a single unsource material.I think you can upgrade this page by giving duty to collect information & edit the page.But everything depends on you, I am just suggesting you. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msd2609 (talk • contribs) 08:48, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , the article has no sources. All Wikipedia articles need references to reliable sources. See Verifiability for more information. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Ensign N176
Hi, I spotted your PROD on the above. I'm not sure whether you're a regular editor of F1 articles? If so you are probably already aware of the long-term problems the F1 project has with the creator of this article. He has no concept of notability and constantly creates articles for cars which don't deserve them (in addition, they are habitually badly written and often copy-vio). Our usual procedure is to re-direct to the team page and place some carefully worded advice at the redirect that it should not be re-created. For example, see re-direct for RAM 02. This car was 'missed' when a number of re-directs were created recently (as were the Ensign N174 and N181). There is also an ANI discussion in progress about the editor. On another note I think it was you who told me how to get 'Ajax Preview' onto the editing box. Still grateful for that! Regards, Eagleash (talk) 09:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

(It was you: just found it your archives, December 2014). Eagleash (talk) 09:26, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , feel free to redirect Ensign N176 (and Ensign N179 as well, if appropriate). I do not edit vehicle articles of any sort regularly; I came to it because of the copy editing tag and found that it wasn't ready for copy-editing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, there's still a lot of articles which need to be considered for re-direction. It's a bit of an automatic reaction to tag his stuff for copy-edit as the pages are always so ungrammatical. (Commas to end sentences and capitalisation of car parts are regular things). I won't re-direct this one just yet as I'm interested to see his reaction to the PROD. His usual response is to just delete anything he doesn't like (or understand). Eagleash (talk) 10:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Coat rack tag deleted twice and I know he can remove the PROD if he so desires but I'm not sure what he thinks he's done here. Eagleash (talk) 16:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Time for AfD with a recommendation to redirect, then. I will let you do the honors. I have removed the coatrack content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:17, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

I have removed irrelevant content from the remaining Ensign vehicle articles, leaving them as stubs. We'll see what happens. Feel free to discuss them among your F1 project compatriots. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * There is already a loose consensus at the Wiki F1 Proj. to re-dir his stuff. (It's all like this one). So after only the briefest of discussions with one or two of my colleagues, I will re-direct as we have done in the past. The proj. also have it mind to try to establish some criteria for notability. It's a bit tricky because cars often last only one season or less and even if quite important in the history of F1, very often all we have to work with are the race results. Not always though, some do get individual coverage in the specialist mags. Anyways your input on this one is greatly appreciated by the Proj. believe me. On one last point, I think the results table should have been retained as it does relate solely to the N176 and it is F1 proj. convention to always include one. Academic now though. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 17:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If the article is redirected, the results table can move to the team page as well. I have no problem with a sourced results table living somewhere. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * The team page will already have a table incorporating all the team's results... which is not necessarily the same as the results for the individual cars due to 'privateer' entries. Just wanted to mention for future reference (as if) that all F1 car articles (notability notwithstanding) have results tables by convention. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 18:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * He's restored the N174 page...including the spelling errors... let the edit-warring begin. Eagleash (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No edit warring for me. I put a note on the talk page and reverted with an edit summary. I also placed a note on the editor's talk page. I suggest that you do the same, even if it seems like overkill and a lot of work, to show good faith when this issue is brought to a wider forum. It gives the misbehaving editor many chances to make good choices. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Notes on TPs are ignored or deleted (sometimes telling the writer to F off). He has had a year to learn to make good choices. The Proj. lost patience with him long ago as he takes no notice of any advice or requests and has no idea about any guidelines whatsoever. Eagleash (talk) 07:42, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I did leave a note on the TP but he's back as an IP restoring pages for N174 & N181. I've undone both of those. I've redirected the N176 already and I or someone will get around to the others pretty soon. Eagleash (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for commenting at the ANI. The problem has been needing someone from outside the project to add their weight to the discussions. IP/Rowde is probably gone for today now as it's past 8PM (UK) and that's usually the last we see of him. Eagleash (talk) 20:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Last name or first name?
Hey Jonesey, sorry to bother you about this, but I couldn't find an MOS page for this issue. When writing about a person, is there a specific name (first or last) I'm supposed to use? Example : The Phil Urich article. Should it be Urich next appears... or Phil next appears... or either? Hope this is understandable. Thanks,   MediaKill13   (  talk  )   11:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Last name, generally. See MOS:LASTNAME. Exceptions happen, though, especially if you are talking about multiple people with the same last name in the same paragraph. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:23, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Please don't copy material from elsewhere online
Not even temporarily for editing, like you did at Draft:Nell Jackson. Please do such work before you hit save, or use an external editor. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 03:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm. That's a pain. I marked it as needing paraphrasing, and I have been working on it in Draft space. Of course I would not place copyrighted material in mainspace.


 * You deleted text that I had already partially modified, including wikilinks and named citations that you have deleted and broken. Please restore the parts that are my own work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Copyright materials should not be posted anywhere on this wiki, not in draft space, not anywhere. I have restored the citations. I am sending you a copy of the removed material via email so that you can continue to work on it. — Diannaa (talk) 18:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Received, and noted. Thanks for explaining that so nicely. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for receiving this news in good spirits. — Diannaa (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Archiving
Hello, Jonesey95 -- I have noticed that articles whose copy-edits have been completed have not been getting archived as quickly as before, yet I see that you are currently active. I'm wondering if you are waiting for either me or Tdslk to do the archiving. If so, I'd be glad to do it, but I'm not sure exactly what I'm supposed to do. If you haven't been waiting for us to do this, but have just been busy, I'm sorry. – Corinne (talk) 04:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * typically does the archiving (mostly because nobody else does it regularly), but any editor, especially any coordinator, is welcome to do so. To archive a request, edit the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Archives/2016 page, scroll to the bottom, and add a new row to the table by copying the format of the last row in the table. Change the request information (article name, requested date, completed date, requester, copy editor, and any planned nomination), preview your changes, and save. Then remove the requested article's section from the requests page, with an edit summary of "archiving Article Name" or something similar. Does that make sense? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. – Corinne (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

List of Old Emanuels
Please could you stop changing the list? Randomly and from out of nowhere it suddenly gets reduced to what you think it should be, let it revert to what it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travis Knightley Wallace (talk • contribs) 18:20, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:LISTPEOPLE, which is a Wikipedia guideline. I removed only people who did not have links to Wikipedia articles, as I explained on the talk page. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:12, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox officeholder
Hello ... I'm Wikipedian Polish Wikipedia ... and I write on a certain issue .... As for the template: policies infobox..a namely parameters Date of birth / death and place of birth / death. U you in enwiki these parameters are at the end of the template .... because at the beginning of the parameter function .... and I would like to ask why it has been set ? For me ... that is, in plwiki ... these parameters are at the beginning of the template .... and I have to admit that the appearance of this template with you more suits me TharonXX (talk) 19:31, 4 August 2016 (UTC).
 * Sorry, I do not understand your question. It sounds like you are asking why birth and death dates are listed at the top of the infobox. I think that is just the standard practice here. I do not see a Polish version of Infobox officeholder, but when I look at the Polish version of Infobox person, birth and death dates are also listed at the top. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * pl:Szablon:Polityk infobox - This is the Polish version of the template ... come you can not see. My question was ... why with you in the Infobox officeholder ... Date of birth / death and place of birth / death are at the very end? TharonXX (talk) 19:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC).
 * Look at Alexander Mackenzie (politician), Abraham Lincoln, and Albert Speer. The information about the person's offices appears first, followed by personal details. The first information in "Personal details" is the birth and death date.


 * I see that in pl:Antonio López de Santa Anna and other infoboxes on pl.WP, the personal details are listed first, and the offices are listed after that. That looks fine too. Each Wikipedia can make its own choice about small details of style like that. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Why do you invented that these parameters were in the end ... do you approve of it too? Please ... answer me this question. And one more thing ... why do not you answer my talk page? Greetings from Poland TharonXX (talk) 08:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC).
 * It doesn't matter what I think. The design of templates is a matter of consensus on each Wikipedia. And I do not know what you mean about answering your talk page. I am answering you here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:04, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Bot should add more than four editors and add displayeditors=29 if there are exactly 4 editors
Do you know if this citation bot bug still exists. It looks like the fix is in the source code. Also, I posted a bunch of fixes to the citation bot talk page. Do you know if anyone exists to actually look at and add my code to the dev version. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 21:38, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know. You'd have to find a journal article with more than four editors and see if Citation Bot fills them in.


 * As for who might be able to implement code, look in the Citation bot talk page archives for the WMF editor(s) who posted there sometime in 2015 (I think). You'll have to ping him/her/them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:41, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * done.  Feel free to look at my code.   php is not my language of choice AManWithNoPlan (talk) 04:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I hope one of them replies. I have what I think are source code solutions for many of the bugs -- including both comments cause trouble bugs.  Seriously, in one spot, the comment finder is a greedy search: removed EVERYTHING between first and last comment. Oops  AManWithNoPlan (talk) 21:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

ISBN syntax
This one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Maybe Checkwiki could look for those. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:01, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It is in my to-do list together with this one. I am good in finding many cases :) -- Magioladitis (talk)

And yet one more case:,. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:52, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

I may need your help with this one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:05, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. WP editors are so creative! – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Perfect! In fact many of these I can do by myself but it is sooooo awesome to share these peculiarities with others. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

FAC: The Ecstatic
Hi. If you have the time and interest, I'd really appreciate having one more reviewer look at my nomination of The Ecstatic for featured status. Dan56 (talk) 10:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Let me know if you need help with those citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Packy
Would it be wrong of me to take on the GAN nomination as well, after I am done with the copy edit? Or would I now be considered an editor who has made significant contributions? - Pax  Verbum  05:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * "Reviewers may not review articles that they have edited significantly". – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I saw that, but wasn't sure if I was considered a significant contributor now or not. Oh well, I will find another to work on. Thanks again! - Pax  Verbum  14:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I consider my own copy edits very significant, so I stay away and let someone else have the GA Reviewer glory. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:53, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Your good idea and good approach
(discussion moved to Talk:Jane Austen on 16 August 2016). – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:47, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Jane Austen: strongly disagree with convert from MLA

 * strongly disagree with convert from MLA Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Noted. Please do not fork the conversation. There are already two conversations happening: one at the FAC page about the problems with the refs, and one at the Talk page about solutions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I know what a fork is, but unfortunately the relevant edits/editors do not have a STOP button similar to bots. A bit of extra communication was necessary. Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I keep an eye on my watchlist. I have not edited the article following your objections in the threads in question. Thank you for being willing to discuss. We await a proposal from you that will resolve the many problems that the current choice of citation style has introduced and that make the article difficult to maintain and verify. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:25, 17 August 2016 (UTC)


 * You haven't edited? Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 07:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Correct. I did not edit the article until you agreed that continuing to add sfn templates was compatible with your proposal to use the wikicite template. If you have diffs to the contrary, let me know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Then you only added sfns, and didn't work on the cite books? Well if that's so then I was wrong and I am sorry. But it is neither here nor there. I have already Opposed the FAC nom. I would be hesitant to continue discussing this on any forum, though would do so if necessary. Sorry for the trouble.  Lingzhi &diams; (talk) 13:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I was unclear. Here's the timeline.
 * You made your helpful post on the FAC page with a list of inconsistent and broken citations.
 * After some discussion about how to fix those citations, I edited the article's references and bibliography based on discussions in which multiple editors concluded that CS1 templates would work best for standardizing the citations.
 * You objected to those changes.
 * I ceased editing the article at that point, since doing so would be a breach of good faith discussions.
 * Once you agreed on the FAC page to the fact that continuing to add sfn templates would be compatible with any citation style, including MLA, I continued to add sfn templates to improve the article's verifiability. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:18, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Note: There appears to be FULL CONSENSUS among all 5 participating editors (,, , , and myself) that Jonesey95 should continue with the reformatting of the citations throughout the article as was started yesterday with multiple supporting editors opposed by one hold-out editor named User:Lingzhi. The format being used by Jonesey95 is identical to one which is used in dozens and dozens of peer reviewed articles at Wikipedia for years now and has in no way detracted from those peer review articles in their current FA and GA status even though User:Lingzhi is opposed to this well established standard. Further, User:RexxS has made a generous offer to switch the article to an alternate cite style is trying to bring the one hold-out editor towards consensus, and was immediately turned down by User:Lingzhi. User:Lingzhi apparently is opposed to the general Wikipedia policy as written in WP:CITEVAR and is using this article's assessment as a forum for pressing his old preference for MLA formatting which is only one option at Wikipedia (WP:Forumshop). It is suggested that User:Lingzhi recognize that there is a full consensus for supporting Jonesey95 on the reformatting which was started yesterday and that when there is full consensus then it is up to User:Lingzhi to start to move closer to the consensus of five editors rather than remain a single hold-out. User:Lingzhi may move his discussion to the Village Pump policy discussion board if needed, and his Talk page is notified as to WP:Forumshop which any editor can report. User:Jonesey95 is free to continue the reformatting of the Jane Austen article given the FULL CONSENSUS of the five participating editors, with Lingzhi the sole hold-out. We look forward to your being to continue the nice reformatting which you stared yesterday since you have multiple editors fully supporting. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 15:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Are you sure about that?
Are you sure about that? You're right about the year. The chapter name is irrelevant to WP:V if we have the page number. The work consulted should be fully cited: Grey, "Chawton", in The Jane Austen Companion, 38 is insufficient. We now have a cite error. --RexxS (talk) 18:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There is no book by Grey listed in 2006 that I can see. It came up as a big red error with User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js installed, which is how I noticed it. As for the chapter name, it is very helpful, some would say required, for a full citation, and since the chapter names of these books are currently in the article but not in the bibliography, I am keeping them. If there is consensus to discard the useful chapter names, we can discard them, but it seems risky to do so, given the sketchy nature of the verifiability of the References at this point.


 * What citation error are you referring to? There is a link to the full citation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Look at - don't you see the red " Cite error: A (see the help page) "? I fixed it now, but it would help if you check if it was what you wanted. --RexxS (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The best way to use chapter names with harvard referencing is to have separate full citations for each chapter cited. It allows the actual author of each chapter to be cited properly. See Oxygen toxicity for an example of two different chapters of Bennett and Elliott's physiology and medicine of diving being cited. --RexxS (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do see that red error now. I neglected to delete the Grey 2006 ref while replacing it with a corrected one. Thanks for catching it.
 * The best way to use chapter names with harvard referencing is to have separate full citations for each chapter cited. It allows the actual author of each chapter to be cited properly. See Oxygen toxicity for an example of two different chapters of Bennett and Elliott's physiology and medicine of diving being cited. --RexxS (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do see that red error now. I neglected to delete the Grey 2006 ref while replacing it with a corrected one. Thanks for catching it.


 * As for citing chapters, I think that you will find some opposition to what you describe as the best way; in your example, the chapters are separated from each other, even though they come from the same book. That is less than ideal. That is why I have noted in my edit summaries that my edits to short footnotes for chapters are partial and may need to be cleaned up once we see what they look like as a whole. We should definitely obtain consensus on the article's talk page before listing all of the chapters of a book in the Bibliography. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Victoria's comments on my talk page, User talk:RexxS : "A separate entry needs to be made for each chapter. I've done this in a number of literature articles I've brought to FA (as did Awadewit) so I'm sure you know where to look for inspiration."
 * You don't need to list all the chapters of a book: just the ones that you're citing. Have a think about it? Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:38, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * harvc
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:57, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have been thinking about this very thing from the moment I started working on the short citations. My gut feeling is that listing the cited chapters under the books in which they are contained is probably the best way to go. That may resolve the concerns that has been attempting to get through my thick head about what goes in a short citation versus a full citation. If "Smith 105" were hyperlinked to a full citation for "Smith, Jane. "Chapter about Jane Austen's Teeth". Thoughtful book about Jane Austen. Ed. Mary Brown. Oxford: Oxford Back Alley Press, 1996.", or linked to a shorter version of the chapter citation that is indented under the citation for the full work, then that would make the short citation verifiable, keep everything organized, and look really great.
 * I have been thinking about this very thing from the moment I started working on the short citations. My gut feeling is that listing the cited chapters under the books in which they are contained is probably the best way to go. That may resolve the concerns that has been attempting to get through my thick head about what goes in a short citation versus a full citation. If "Smith 105" were hyperlinked to a full citation for "Smith, Jane. "Chapter about Jane Austen's Teeth". Thoughtful book about Jane Austen. Ed. Mary Brown. Oxford: Oxford Back Alley Press, 1996.", or linked to a shorter version of the chapter citation that is indented under the citation for the full work, then that would make the short citation verifiable, keep everything organized, and look really great.


 * p.s. to Trappist: harvc probably won't work here, because MLA format is strongly desired. I believe I can make the Bibliography work without it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you take a look at Ormulum? That's more or less what MLA looks like. The citations in Jane Austen never looked like that. --RexxS (talk) 22:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in arguing about what is or is not MLA. The article's citations need to ensure verifiability. Other editors can decide what citation format they want, and once the article is verifiable, I will help format the citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no interest in arguing about what is or is not MLA. The article's citations need to ensure verifiability. Other editors can decide what citation format they want, and once the article is verifiable, I will help format the citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Bohemond III of Antioch
I just finished copy-editing Bohemond III of Antioch, and I went to add the WikiProject banner shell and the GOCE template, and when I looked at it in preview, there were two messages that there was an unknown parameter in the WikiProject Biography / Royalty and Nobility banner. Something is not right, but I don't know how to fix it. Can you take a look at it? Thanks. – Corinne (talk) 02:53, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! – Corinne (talk) 02:57, 19 August 2016 (UTC) I made two slight changes (hope you don't mind): 1) I changed "Iii" to "III" in Bohemond's name in the Biography template, and 2) I "hid" the GOCE notice. If there is a reason to have it visible, I'd be interested to know it and will reverse that. By the way, did you see the note I left you at User talk:Jonesey95, above?  – Corinne (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Archiving 2
Hello, Jonesey95 -- I have just archived two completed copy-edits at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Archives/2016. I have two different questions:

1) On the first one, Vasilije Ojdanić, there was some discussion, so I decided to move the discussion to the Requests talk page. I just copied the entire thing and pasted it, with an introductory note. However, I wasn't sure whether there was anything I could leave out when I pasted it. You'll notice that Two-fingered Typist pinged the requester toward the end, so the "discussion" could be said to be in two parts, and I didn't want to leave any of it out. What do you recommend as far as omitting anything when moving a discussion to the talk page?

2) On the second one, USS Tucker (DD-374), the requester wrote in the original request "Expect to nominate for GA". So, technically, it is not a good article nominee yet, so I didn't know whether I could write "GAN" in the last line when I archived it. I decided put put "GAN", but if you think it shouldn't be there, I'll be glad to remove it. – Corinne (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) You did the right thing by including the whole discussion. See Copying within Wikipedia for more detail than you care to know. I think it's useful to put a small note at the top of the copied section to explain where it came from.


 * 2) Putting "GAN" for that one is the right thing to do. Nice work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks! – Corinne (talk) 03:01, 3 August 2016 (UTC)


 * (I added a "2" after the section heading "Archiving" because there was another section with that same heading just above it.) I just moved the request for 2013–2014 Canucks season article to the archives page. I also moved the entire discussion to the Requests talk page and removed the "July 2016" heading from the requests page since it was the last request for July. I hope I've done everything correctly. I noticed in the request that the request was made as a result of a GA Reassessment done, I believe, in May. I wondered if some mention of that needs to be in the far right-hand column on the archives page. – Corinne (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I added an attribution statement on the copied section. Use the code GAR for a good article reassessment, as directed at the top of the Archives page (until a moment ago, it said "Good Article Review", which was the wrong name). – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:26, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh...O.K. Thank you. – Corinne (talk) 00:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Sad news
I've got some really sad news. Since I learned of it, I've been crying and cursing at all the Gods. Sigh, my mother-in-law is going to live and be just fine. If you need me, I'll be in the basement drinking another gallon of Everclear. Bgwhite (talk) 05:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * My condolences. I suggest mixing your beverage with some fruit juice, at least. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Source for Charlotte Bronte short citations in Jane Austen
I could not figure where to put this on the Talk page for Jane Austen, conversations move so quickly! I am giving you my research rather than entering it myself, as I suspect you will have changes from what I would put anyway, on account of the ISBN uncertainty.

First reference in the Bibliography list for Reception history of Jane Austen is Brontë, Charlotte. "Charlotte Brontë on Jane Austen". Jane Austen: The Critical Heritage, 1812–1870. Ed. B. C. Southam. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968. ISBN 0-7100-2942-X. 126–28.

citation |last=Brontë |first=Charlotte |chapter=Charlotte Brontë on Jane Austen |editor-last=Southam |editor=first=B C |title=1811-1870 |series=The Critical Heritage |location=London |publisher=Routledge and Kegan Paul |year=1968 |isbn=0-7100-2942-X |pages=126-128

This covers the two short citations in the Jane Austen article now, with author Brontë. From my writing on British variation of English articles, I am accustomed to dropping periods, where they would be wanted for American English. Hence, first = B C above.

http://www.slideshare.net/CRSohaib/routledgejaneaustenthecriticalheritage1811-1870mar1996-41290520 lists the Charlotte Brontë and Lewes articles as being in this book. This book has many editions.

This is a link to the 2012 edition, still with both authors included, and Scott as well. https://books.google.com/books?id=2JwOGLkVWM8C

Linking the ISBN to WorldCat brings up four editions. One is clearly the follow on to 1811-1870 (note it is 1811 not 1812), the other three seem to be this very book, but WorldCat does not list the essays included, as it does with Harold Bloom's essay compilations, or I did not find the right edition to see that list, also possible. Does someone really have that 1968 edition if the book is so frequently updated? 1968 was before ISBN system began. Not sure if the ISBN used in other article is useful. Okay to use a newer ISBN? Once Southam produced a second volume, it became a series, The Critical Heritage Series.

I hope this is helpful. --Prairieplant (talk) 17:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Nice work. I have fixed the Brontë and Lewes short citations. Any thoughts on Brownstein? – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * If we can get things back on board at the article, should we invite 13 back to participate? (Its Saturday and I don't know if you'll be signing in today. Cheers.) Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no opinion on whether that is a good idea. I'm tired of saying the same thing and making the same friendly offers over and over on the JA talk page and being beaten about the head and shoulders for it. I'm waiting for things to settle down. I will be happy to return when editors are ready for the skills I can bring to the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review - GoT
Hi Jonesey95, I hope everything is fine. I was wondering if you have the time.. could you take up(look at/review) the "Peer review" for Battle of the Bastards(Season 6, Episode 9 of Game of Thrones ("Spoiler alert if you have not seen the series")). I am trying to get this to a "Featured Artice".. (It has already been passed for "Good Article") and I need some one to review and tell me what to fix/do to make that happen.(Peer review/Battle of the Bastards/archive1) AffeL (talk) 20:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Need your kind attention at DataCore software
Hi Jonesey, I know you are a WikiProject Guild of Copy Editor. You recently edited DataCore software. There is ongoing edit warring between IP's and anon user User:NISMO1968. User:NISMO1968 has no user page. I have messaged him several time, user never replied. I don't want to involve in edit warring. I need your help here. Thanks. --Behaver (talk) 06:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I believe recently created User:Behaver reverted G11 tag I put at least once himself. It looks like he's engaged with some SPAs and IPs to imitate edit war. DataCore Software (upper case "S" in a "software") was deleted few days ago by User:Seraphimblade for a good reason. User:Behaver is canvassing User_talk:Belinrahs also. NISMO1968 (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It's very nice of you, you replied. Yes, DataCore Software was deleted. Editors will find out the truth. I'm trying to tell you about current version. Don't you think it is notable company? I have mentioned before in your talk page, Latest version has reliable references from The New York Times, Business Wire, The Register, even Forbes and Reuters. It passes the notability guidelines. Then, why are you adding TAGs? It's upto editors now, they will judge the situation. Thanks for your contributions.--Behaver (talk) 06:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I decline to get involved. Creating DataCore software while a deletion review for DataCore Software was in progress was disruptive. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:09, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cite IETF
I shall direct you to Template talk:Cite IETF. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2016 (UTC) (edited: 21:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC))
 * OK. I read it. You are welcome to fix the documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * My point was the template was never changed(?) as you had hoped, and thus it relies on Template:Citation/core not CS1. It is not a documentation error, but rather what you originally described. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 22:51, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I had no hopes for the template. I was merely pointing out that the documentation was wrong. The documentation was changed in 2012 by, possibly in anticipation of this template being converted to use the CS1 Lua module. That conversion never happened, but the CS1 documentation continued to be updated and revised to match the Lua module's features. At this point, only the CS1 templates that use the Lua module are using the CS1 documentation (AFAIK), and the Cite IETF documentation has been orphaned in an inaccurate state. Someone needs to clean it up. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

August GOCE blitz award

 * Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Doi with date
Ta for the reversion. That explains why ... But I also asked on the template thingy somewhere as to why. To be seen I guess. I went through the cite journal page and there are examples with outputs that don't suggest they should not be together. Does this need written clarification or do I just need to look somewhere else. ? Dave Rave (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I have overhauled the cite journal documentation to make a few things clearer. Also, in the documentation for access-date, it says "Not required for linked documents that do not change. For example, access-date is not required for links to copies of published research papers accessed via DOI or a published book." – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

ISBN
Pages with ISBN error increase again. Please help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

A Study on Iranian Theatre
The ISBN in this page works properly. I do not see why the red indication that it is "invalid". Do return the isbn. Sth else has to be mended perhaps.Salarabdolmohamadian (talk) 19:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this note. There was an invisible character in the ISBN. I removed it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Pages with ISBN error increased again. Please help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:32, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You and I have fixed all of the easy ones. Someone will have to do book-by-book research to fix the rest. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

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

dear Jonesey95 Jaishankar Chigurula (Director) bio is not copied from IMDB,
IMDB editors was copied from Wikipedia Jaishankar Chigurula (Director) bio updated in IMDb very recent after the Wikipedia hope you understand this. thank you chsrivaas (talk) 12:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That makes sense to me, but I have no way to prove it either way. Even though you removed the PROD tag, the article still has zero references to reliable sources. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * You're welcome. I try to be nice at least once a day. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The Novac - Guild of Copy Editors Elections
Hey, when do you think the next election will be? I'm interested in getting more involved in the guild. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Novac (talk • contribs) 03:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Thanks for the note, and remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes:.


 * We have elections every six months, in June and December (here's a link to the most recent one), but it would be highly unusual for someone who has not participated in any Guild activities to run for a coordinator position. I recommend that you spend some time participating in the Guild's copy-editing drives and blitzes to gain some experience with how the Guild works. Our next blitz starts on October 16. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:11, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Edit to my archive
You made an edit to my archive, amending a ten-year-old edit to introduce an untrue assertion that I am edit-warring today on an article that I have not edited at all for the past six months. Why did you do this? For some reason I am unable to revert your edit; please could you address this and remove the false assertion. RolandR (talk) 11:39, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That is very strange. First, I apologize, and I have reverted my (null) edit to the best of my ability. Somehow, you had "subst" statements on your talk page archive that had failed to substitute ten years ago, and that apparently also failed to substitute when your talk page was archived.


 * I was null-editing a bunch of articles to get them to be listed in a new error category, . Those articles will then need to be fixed by a bot for technical reasons that are somewhat explained in the category's description. Null edits are not supposed to leave an edit summary and are not supposed to change the page, but since you had unsubstituted "subst" statements on your page somehow, an unintended change was introduced. Bizarre all the way around. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Erm, is this the same issue that caused an edit to an AfD closed seven years ago that flashed up on my Watchlist? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:51, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Same set of tasks. That edit is to fix a self-closed tag that will reportedly break when future changes to MediaWiki are rolled out. You can see some explanation and links at the Village Pump, in the discussions related to "Tidy" and tags. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:00, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Re: Scottish Labour Party leadership election, 2014 copy edit
Just a quick post to say thanks for the copy edit. It looks great. I made a couple of minor tweaks (mainly splitting one or two lengthy paragraphs in two). I'll put it forward for WP:FAC in the next couple of weeks. Cheers, This is Paul (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Yikes
The November drive is bluelinked (and in the ombox), but when I went to sign up I saw that it's not really up :-). Can you fix? All the best,  Mini  apolis  19:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd do it, but don't know your backlog intentions :-).  Mini  apolis  20:01, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Funny! I didn't notice that. I have created a page. It still needs minor cleanup, but it's ready for use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:06, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll clean up what I see when I go to sign up. All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:54, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

On El Cid
In regards to what you wrote on my talk page, I wrote the "small" tabs myself. Feel free to make any changes you see fit. PatTheMoron (talk) 07:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the response. I have seen this pattern a lot recently, mostly by IP editors and by mobile edits, but it may be just coincidence. I was hoping that it was being done by a tool that could be reprogrammed; reprogramming humans is much harder. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016 GOCE blitz award

 * Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Yum! You did all of the work, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:06, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Module:Location map/data/Italy
Hi Jonesey95, I wonder if you could investigate if the creation of this module is why the India relief maps in our earthquake articles are no longer working. There may be others that are also affected, but this group of articles are what I first noticed as being different about a month ago. The timing of when it was created aligns with when the relief maps stopped working. It looks like all the articles in Category:Earthquakes in India that were pointed to the relief version of File:India location map.svg no longer display it. They display the default/plain map instead. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000  18:58, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed, I think. You may have to WP:PURGE each article to get it to show the correct map. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that did it. Thanks for all you do. I have to look at the Myannmar maps now, but I don't see any obvious relationship to the India map situation. Dawnseeker2000  21:29, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think I did the Myanmar/Burma map as well (I found India and Myanmar and a couple of others on a list of red-linked modules, so I created them). I don't know all of the details about how they are supposed to work, though, so thanks for coming here to let me know. If there are any problems with them, contact me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:56, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-44
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * Now you can include Commons video films with subtitles in your wiki language. Before you could see translated videos on file page at Commons only.
 * Search now has an updated preference tab to configure the search completion suggester.
 * The visual editor is now available on all wikis using only one language script.

Changes this week
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 1st. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from November 2nd. It will be on all wikis from November 3rd (calendar).
 * Now you can use autocomplete for page names in "" field when editing templates.
 * Special:NewPages can now be filtered by page size.

Future changes
 * Octicons-tools.svg New MediaWiki deployments will be now based on MediaWiki 1.29.

Miscellaneous
 * The Wikimedia Foundation's Technical Collaboration Guideline is available for community review. Any feedback welcome, in any language.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  16:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:NSONGS
Hi, the above guideline says charting is a criteria of notability Atlantic306 (talk) 00:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Wrong. A common misconception. Read it again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * So, it may be notable for charting but still needs sig rs as a single rather than an album track,right ? Atlantic306 (talk) 03:59, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Notability is established only by coverage in reliable sources. The text at WP:GNG explains it best. Charting is an indication that coverage is likely to exist, so it is a useful indicator, but that is all. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Some help needed
Iazyges could use some help with credit for copyediting.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 12:20, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * What do you need? Is this to do with the drive we are doing? Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  14:25, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , I think is referring to the "21" you placed as the word count for your edits to Aimery of Cyprus. That number should be 2,719 words for the version before you made your edits, which you can determine yourself using the Page size script. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:41, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, My bad, I was under the impression we were supposed to change it out. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  16:23, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

MassMessage
Hmm. That's almost exactly what I tried to do - make a list of pages in my userspace and target those with the tool. And it didn't work, and I tried it about three or four times. Let me try something a bit different and see if it works. Thanks for the tutorial; I'll give it a chew over tomorrow and see what it tells me. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 06:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Found out what was going wrong. I think I should be good to go from here, then.  Thanks for your help, and happy editing! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:10, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad I could help, if I did. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-45
 Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes
 * Victoria Coleman is the new Chief technology officer for the Wikimedia Foundation.
 * First release candidate for MediaWiki 1.28 is now available.
 * Octicons-tools.svg for MediaWiki branches and extensions switched from targeting a specific branch to using.
 * Section numbers in Table of Contents boxes will use grey to improve readability.

Changes this week
 * The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 7 November.
 * Octicons-sync.svg The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from November 8th. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from November 9th. It will be on all wikis from November 10th (calendar).
 * Special:ActiveUsers will allow users groups selection.

Meetings
 * Octicons-sync.svg You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 8 November 2016 at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.
 * Octicons-tools.svg You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topics this week are Image Thumbnail API and allow SVG files uploaded on MediaWiki to have XHTML namespaces. The meeting will be on 9 November at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes
 * RevisionSlider will be enabled by default on all beta wikis, on testwiki, testwiki2, mediawikiwiki and de.wikipedia.org.
 * Upcoming holidays will impact deployments. The schedule has been published.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.  23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Broken ref tags
CHECKWIKI/WPC 104 dump contains more than 2.000 pages. We need additional help to fix those! Please join the Force once again! -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Wikipedia editors are endlessly creative! – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Just for your information...
...any Wikipedia editor may effectively "ban" other editors from posting on their talk page simply by making the request not to post there. Such talk page bans have been upheld by administrative action many, many, times, including by blocking the offending editor if he or she refuses to honor the request. (Of course, when an editor is required to make a notification by Wikipedia policy, such "bans" have no effect.) Requesting an editor not post on one's talk page does not require administrative action of any kind, and is not itself an administrative action. (I am not an admin.)

The somewhat opposite situation, where an editor refuses to use their talk page to respond to the legitimate complaints or comments of other editors, will also usually end up with a block.

If you have questions about any of this, I suggest you bring it up with an administrator of your choice and discuss it with them. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Please keep discussions in one place, in this case at Bgwhite's talk page, per WP:MULTI. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * There is nothing to discuss. Please do not ping me to that page again. BTW, WP:MULTI is not policy, it is a guideline, and is not mandatory. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You are not being reasonable or kind to an editor with a simple question. I wish you well and hope that you are feeling OK. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Jonesey: You're looking for WP:NOBAN. While BMK's request regarding pings I can find nothing in guideline or policy about, a request not to use a certain user talk page is indeed commented on in guideline. --Izno (talk) 13:43, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. It is useful, but not relevant to this discussion. BMK did not make a request. Words matter. See Bgwhite's talk page for details. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Project on Lumièrè Shortfilm
Hello, my name is Sofia Hnidey. I am a native Spanish speaker student currently studying Comunication and Digital Media at the Tecnológico de Monterrey. I am currently working on an article about a shortfilm made by the Lumièrè Brothers called Procession at Seville and bullfighting Scenes. This project is for my public discourse and Academic Writing class and I could use some help in grammar and sentence structure. If you have the time and want to help, I would be very grateful. This is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thelmadatter/Procession_at_Seville_and_bullfighting_scenes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sofia Hnidey (talk • contribs) 18:16, 14 November 2016 (UTC) Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sofia Hnidey (talk • contribs) 17:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I have copy-edited the article. You should work on fixing the red error messages in the citations. Follow the "help" links to figure out how to fix the errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Advaita Vedanta
I was archiving completed requests just now. I added Advaita Vedanta to the list and noted it in the far right-hand column as "Declined". I thought the discussion should be preserved, so I copied, pasted, and saved it, but after I saved it I realized I had saved it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Archives/2016 instead of where I usually save such discussions, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Shall I move it to the Requests talk page, or leave it where it is? Does it matter? Which is the better place to save discussions regarding requests, declined or not? – Corinne (talk) 17:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Moving to the talk page is the normal thing to do, and then a bot will eventually archive it. You just did the bot's work in advance, which is fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * O.K. Thanks. – Corinne (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

MOS
I see your MOS-supported edit has been with the unhelpful comment "no". . The MOS represents the consensus, so if someone wishes to deviate from it, they need consensus can't can't simply revert your edits with no reason and no discussion. Furry-friend (talk) 11:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That's why I posted on the talk page for the article. BRD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Refs after reflist
Another interesting list. CHECKWIKI/WPC 111 dump. Ref tags after Reflist. Unfortunately, this can't be fixed by bots. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Template:Regulome seems to be doing odd things in some cases. --Izno (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

A problem with converting coordinates in Infobox ecoregion
Discussion moved to Wikipedia talk:Coordinates in infoboxes by Jonesey95.

There's a problem in converting Infobox ecoregion that you (and others) may not have anticipated. The same problem occurs in Infobox mountain.

There is a parameter of Infobox ecoregion: area, which gets passed to Infobox dim. Infobox dim takes the area and estimates the size of the ecoregion, passes it to the dim parameter of Infobox coord. This makes the Geohack map automagically have the correct size to show the entire ecoregion. It works pretty well, see Klamath Mountains (ecoregion) and click on the Coordinates link, then click on the Google terrain map. You'll see that the map is automatically zoomed out to roughly include the whole ecoregion.

This same feature works for mountain ranges with supplied lengths, widths, or areas, in Infobox mountain.

Unfortunately, this currently will not work if a user supplies a coordinates field with coord. In the current setup, only the coordinates field is parsed, not any other argument. Would it be possible to pass the output of Infobox dim into the parser to keep the estimated dim?

Pinging, because he/she understands all of the Lua magic involved.

Can we hold off any conversion of ecoregions (and mountains) until we resolve? Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 07:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That is some lovely Infobox magic. I think I see how it works, and we should be able to make it work with Coord as well. Pinging for an FYI. I'm pretty sure that we can do the conversions correctly by adjusting the infobox and the bot's code, but I don't yet see how we will allow people to use this auto-workaround-magic in the future if they want to use the Coord template in Infobox ecoregion without entering the dim: value. Interesting.  – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

November 2016 GOCE drive awards

 * Thanks for handing out the stars, . – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The Plantagenet Roll of the Blood Royal
Thanks for the heads up. In all there were about 90 of those pages. I had checked (by hand) for the type of errors you highlighted on those two already. One was an over-sight and the other an editing mistake. Those without a page number (a minority) I have usually already reverted. Those with a page number I converted to use the link in the page parameter rather than the title. So as far as I am aware there are no others like you highlighted. If you know of any let me know and I will fix them. -- PBS (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * , I think I found and reverted three or four that added a wikilink to a citation that already had a URL, which causes an error. It's possible that in any given article, I reverted more than just the link within title, so you might want to check the reverts to see if you want to re-insert links in the article prose. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I ran the AWB script for a third time (having run it twice before you contacted me). There are a total of 156 pages of which 12 do not have a link to The Plantagenet Roll of the Blood Royal. All of those are articles in which a copy of the link to a source is not page specific (and so ought not too be linked to The Plantagenet Roll of the Blood Royal). If you found four where I had made a mistake, then I had failed to spot them when I ran the script the second time. The other eight I had caught and fixed by hand. I probably could have totally automated the check, but for such a small number--and given the variability of the combinations--it would probably have taken far longer to write such a script than it did to check and fix those that could be altered to use a page number by hand. Thanks for the checks you did and sorry to have put you to any inconvenience. -- PBS (talk) 12:28, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No inconvenience on my part. I just know what it's like to do a series of semi-automated edits and then realize that I have made some sort of systematic error and need to go back through them all, so I thought I would try to prevent any future heartache on your part if you were planning on doing another thousand of them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Butterfly man
Fair to say I didn't give notability any consideration; I just noticed the style was inappropriate. I'm afraid my concentration is all on wikidata at the moment, and I'm seeing articles in 1-dimension at best. My database-fu is strong, but my writing-fu seems at a low ebb. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have the opposite issue: I can't make heads or tails of how wikidata works, but I can smell a copyvio non-notable article in a femtosecond. I used to be a live-and-let-live Wikipedia inclusionist, but spending time around new articles and notability guidelines has made me into a speedy deletion and PROD tagger. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:16, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

GOCE election
Hi again, Jonesey. Nominations will be closing in a week or so, and I wanted to know if you'd like a sabbatical from being lead coordinator; if so, I can take it over for six months (no one else seems interested :-)). I'm glad Tdslk wants to stay on, and asked Corinne about her intentions; she didn't know about the election, so I'll give her the links. Although I don't miss coordinating (cuts into my copyediting time, but I understand that someone has to do it), if you need the help I can come back. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I'm open to staying on or to having you lead for a bit. Some fresh blood would probably help. I created a draft newsletter to include the election and blitz info, but I haven't gotten any feedback on any of my proposals. I was planning to push out the blitz page and newsletter in a few hours. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:49, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * So I'll throw my hat in the ring again for lead or coordinator, although my blood is very old :-). A lead and three coordinators are a good thing. All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

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

Blitz confusion
Hi again, Jonesey. On Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/December 2016, there's some confusion because the blitz seems to have two objectives: November requests and "the oldest articles carrying the copyedit tag" (with no month[s] specified). I'm assuming that the latter doesn't belong there. All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Answered there, and clarifying edit made. Thanks for the note. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Good call; this way, there's something for everyone. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: New coordinates= parameter for Infobox NRHP
Thank you for your message about the coordinates parameter. I was aware of both methods of generating coords, but I did not know that one was preferred while the other was deprecated. Generally, when I was using the deprecated format, I was copying and pasting from the NRHP Infobox Generator Tool created by User:Elkman. I see from his own talk page that another user has recently notified him of the preferred coords standard and requested that he modify his tool. Perhaps you should consider modifying Template:Infobox NRHP/doc to flag the supported parameters as preferred or deprecated so that others will stop using the old format. Fortguy (talk) 00:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I have added a note to the page where we are tracking the infoboxes we are working on. As far as I know, the old parameters are no longer in the documentation (I did a bit more cleanup today to remove a couple of stray instances). If you find any, feel free to remove them or let me know where they are. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox oil refinery
Hi, Jonesey95. After the bot converted coordinates, there is no more a location map in Infobox oil refinery. I tried to fix it but it seems that I messed it up. Could you please help to fix it. Beagel (talk) 20:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the infobox and fixed the location map., you may need to make any other edits desired again. Jonesey95, unless the category is still populating, the bot is done with this template. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 20:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Every one of these darn infoboxes is a little bit different. I missed that this one was testing for lat/long before showing a location map. Thanks for contacting me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * and, thank you very much for fixing it. Beagel (talk) 06:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox former subdivision
This edit did something that messed up the template. Note the {{#if:{{{capital}}}| at the very beginning of the documentation text. Deor (talk) 16:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I have fixed it. Thanks so much for pointing out this error. Every one of these darn infoboxes is a little bit different. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox military installation
Your edit broke something. Red error appearing "malformed coordinates....". If it wasn't protected, I'd have undone, or tried to fix it, myself. Could you undo or fix please. GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I will be happy to fix it. Can you please point me to an article that is displaying this error? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:23, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I see you've got it working for now. GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

BS

 * Thanks. There sure are a lot of worms in this can! It's been quite an interesting challenge. As you can see from the discussion above and on the talk page for the project, there have been bumps along the way, but so far, everyone has been polite and constructive. Wikipedia editors are endlessly creative in the ways that they create and use templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I want in on the editing
Hi, how do i find the last list of articles that need editing. I can edit spelling, punctuation and missing citations. Tx. DBOhio (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The box labeled "Wikipedia articles needing copy edit" at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors is a good place to start. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

A Quick "Heads Up"
A new user - CoolieCoolster - has begun editing GOCE requests. Out of curiosity I checked a couple of them and found editorial issues with both, which I fixed. The articles were not tagged after the c/e was complete, nor was the requester notified it had been done. I tagged the two articles I looked at, and notified both individuals that CC and I had finished the c/e. Just so you know. Cheers Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:03, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It doesn't feel right to me when editors are discussed without notifying them, so, here's a ping.


 * I am very busy IRL right now, so if you want to discuss this, please take it to the Coordinators or Requests talk page. This is not a brush-off, I'm just very busy (as you can see if you look at my recent edit history compared to my usual participation). Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 09:06, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I was unaware of how to proceed in cases like this. I have posted to the Coordinators' page as suggested.Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. No apology necessary. I would normally be more verbose and thoughtful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry if I have made mistakes while copyediting, as I simply thought I had to look at a requested article, copyedit it, and then add the done tag on the request when finished with the request. CoolieCoolster (talk) 20:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

 * Thank you! – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:14, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Skipping bot edits
Using AWB it is sometimes rather hard to establish if a substantive fix has been made. A good example was when I used to date maintenance tags, and there were specific requests that if, for some unforeseen reason, only white-space was changed, the edit not be made (despite the fact this was probably less than 1 in 1000 edits). The problem was that a significant number of edits were fixing errors such as "June2016" => "June 2016". I ended up re-writing the whole bot in perl, a mammoth undertaking - just to prevent a few harmless "cosmetic" edits. One has to play the game.

Of course AWB is more sophisticated now, largely due to Magioladitis' efforts, along with the other devs. And there are ways to do what I wanted back in 2010 or whenever it was.

But it's really important that we look at this as a whole, YoBot has attracted criticism, but proportional to the amount of work it has done, a very small amount.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC).


 * The note above could be a good contribution to the conversation that is already happening. As I said, I am not a bot operator, but my impression of AWB bots was that they could either perform general fixes or not, and that there was a switch or checkbox saying something like "skip genfixes if no other changes are found". If both of those are the case, Yobot should have the latter box selected if at all possible. Bots should simply not perform only genfixes, and no other edits, in a given edit to an article, if I understand the AWB and bot rules correctly. I can't find that bit of consensus policy/guideline at the moment, but I recall seeing it somewhere. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Category Pages using eB1911... [sic]
Hey, did you intend to use the lowercase "e" here: Category:Pages using eB1911 with unknown parameters? Every other EB1911-related category has a capital E. Can you fix this? (also, we might be able to come up with a better name?) Pinging also. David Brooks (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * @David Brooks I've moved it without leaving a redirect to Category:Pages using EB1911 with unknown parameters-- PBS (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, (for fixing it) and  (for noticing). I didn't notice the lower-case "e" when I was making the edit, and I don't know why it appeared in the first place. I have a suspicion that it is part of User:Frietjes/addcheckforunknownparameters.js, and I missed it while applying the checking code to the page. I think I noted this minor error in one of my edit summaries at the time, and I don't think I can move categories, so I let it go until I could get back to it, knowing that it would be easily fixable (by an admin) and would do no harm in the meantime.


 * As for a better name, I have no objections. The script applies the convention developed for categories currently in Category:Unknown parameters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

ISBN errors updated to include a new world of errors
Now CHECKWIKI/WPC 069 dump contains a list of all pages with ISBNs hidden inside external links. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * 3,500 pages?!?? Wikipedia editors are the best. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

AWB fixed a lot. Let's see what's left. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

1,700 pages left. Errors #70, #71, #72, #73 still contain pages too. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks like there are patterns that might be able to added to AWB's general fixes or to a script. Syntax like  is pretty common in a few different flavors:
 * (also check for en dash in page range, but do not replace automatically)
 * (or "retrieved", with DMY and MDY date formats)
 * (existing AWB pattern, but with two ISBNs)
 * (or "retrieved", with DMY and MDY date formats)
 * (existing AWB pattern, but with two ISBNs)


 * I would start with something like, but I'm not great with regexes. I'm sure there are AWB programmers who could do better. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Jonesey95 I suggest that you open a phabricator ticket for these. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

for that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Updated ISBN lists provided. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I wonder what we should do with things like John Lowell Gardner II: ISBN 0-7404-2590-0.

Do we completely remove the external link or place it next to ISBN? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:38, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Like this. Link the title of the work (or a chapter or journal article, if one is cited) to the URL and leave the ISBN in plain text. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

DOIs
Thanks. I was going to look it up but you've beaten me to it. I must remember that in the future! Doug Weller talk 16:29, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:33, 28 December 2016 (UTC)