User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2014/November

Reference Errors on 19 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Vaccination page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=634606020 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F634606020%7CVaccination%5D%5D Ask for help])

The Bugle: Issue CIV, November 2014
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:27, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

MEDRS
Hi LSD, Apologies for the off-Talk page note, but I wasn't sure all of this was appropriate for that venue.

The edits I've proposed to MEDRS are a little politically sensitive, as you can see from the revert by Yobol and Colin (who think we pay too much attention to Cochrane) and JFW and Doc James (who hold Cochrane as the best source for all medical info). So we are walking a thin line here with the goal of eliminating a lot of the cherry picking and silliness of having two authors of a meta analysis quoted with greater weight than the entire AAP or IDSA. There are a lot of sensitivites to maneuver around, all the while trying to reach consensus before most of the mainstream editors get bored with the subject and move on.

Your criticisms are correct, but from my point of view (being in the middle of a difficult political maneuver), they are not terribly helpful. Particularly when they drift into what could be interpreted as slightly catty (In case you have not read WP:NOR for a while...).

I appreciate and respect your work here as an editor, respect your right to comment on any discussion on Wikipedia, and admit that you are probably right on the issue at hand. But from my POV, it would be a lot more helpful if at this point you just corrected the language in MEDRS instead of tossing the "you still don't have it right" comments over the transome. It isn't right, but that's because my attention has been taken up with what seem to me to be more important issues. Please just fix it instead of criticizing.

Sorry if this sounds cranky. I've worked pretty hard at this and gotten little in the way of positive feedback for my efforts. I realize this is not your fault. Formerly 98 (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you will understand that having my comments repeatedly ignored in that discussion may have contributed to the tone you found in my edit comment. You're not the only one who can get frustrated. I belatedly realized the NOR error was there before the discussion of the topic even started: I had thought it was proposed for new introduction. I'm content to defer correcting the error until the other matter is resolved. That said, regarding it as a matter of politics may be less than helpful. I don`t see any indication that any of these editors seek anything other than an improved encyclopedia. They just differ in their views on how to do that. Compared to most wikipedia disputes, this one is a picnic in the park. Just focus on addressing each concern and forget about whose concern it is. Then the politics tend to evaporate. LeadSongDog come howl!  20:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Systematic Parasitology, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Springer and Taxonomy. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2014 (UTC)