User talk:Lightmouse/Archive/2007Nov

Watch out for conversion errors like this
Hi Lightmouse,

Just a heads up:

Be careful when inserting conversions into articles. I just found this mistake in Madison Heights, Michigan: "at 300 West Thirteen Mile (19 km) Road". While 13 Mile Road is 13 miles north from a point in downtown Detroit, it is not appropriate to do a conversion like this on a proper name. It would be similar to saying a "9 mm (0.354 in) pistol or a 35 mm (1.38 in) camera. Regards, &mdash;MJCdetroit 23:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree with you on the proper names; however, the pistols are routinely done that way, to facilitate comparisons between those designated one way or the other. Gene Nygaard 00:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that proper names should generally remain unconverted. Converting "Thirteen Mile Road" is an error. I have caught a few of those by eye but that one slipped through. I will amend the code so that it looks for capital letters, that should help.


 * I will argue that some labels can be converted. You can either say that this is because the unit is not part of the name, it is a description, or you can say that it is part of the name but some names can contain conversions. Either way it is not all science e.g. 114mm (4.5inch) Gun. This is such a rare issue that it is not something I worry about.


 * Thanks for spotting and fixing the error. Lightmouse 20:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Stop the rampant addition of improperly used templates
I second MJCdetroit's comments above.

If you don't know how to use the precision parameter, don't do it. Leave it to someone smarter than you are. Gene Nygaard 00:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The one I first had trouble with was Lake Tohopekaliga; you've maybe done better on some the the others, I'm still looking. Some quibbles so far, maybe not as bad as I originally thought. Gene Nygaard 00:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking now I got a little carried away. and your edits on the whole are probably for the better of Wikipedia, though I'm sure I'll still quibble about some of them.


 * I remember now that we also discussed the naming of articles about units. What I saw of what you have done seems pretty reasonable. Gene Nygaard 01:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. I would be happy to discuss precision. I am not always comfortable with the precision choices that I make but sometimes it is a compromise for other reasons. I can go into more depth if you want. Thanks for the positive comments. Lightmouse 20:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom of the Netherlands
I reverted your changes at Kingdom of the Netherlands, then decided that wasn't the way to go but couldn't revert my reversion because of intervening edit. In any case, I don't agree with all your changes. Antillean is correct. The singular/plural stuff is probably a Manual of Style issue, though I didn't look at them all that close. So you might want to go back and look at that one again, take out some date links again, etc. Gene Nygaard 01:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not sure what you mean. I only touched 3 standalone years. I am not sure what you mean about singular and plural, are you thinking of another edit on that article? Lightmouse 20:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

mosnum
I don't see support in WP:MOSNUM for any of the changes in this diff. Linking years and centuries is only needed if it is "likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic."


 * I agree. I am not sure from your wording whether you object to removal in this case.

Replacing superscripts with Unicode characters, or HTML entities with specific characters, is not in MOSNUM at all. Could you avoid doing these things mathematics articles without either asking on the talk page or on the wikiproject page WP:WPM to make sure that the changes you want to make have some sort of general agreement? &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 13:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * That is interesting. I thought that there was general agreement. I will raise it on wp:mosnum. Thanks. Lightmouse 14:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry - I had been looking at the revert diffs, not yours, and I was confused about the dates. I completely agree with you unlinking those dates. I'll respond about the superscript stuff on the mosnum talk page. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 16:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Images
Please be careful when dealing with images (see this revert) — M ETS 501 (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Aha. As far as I know, the only way to avoid images is to spot them by eye. I usually catch them but clearly missed that one. I will have to be more vigilant. Thanks for fixing it and bringing it to my attention. Lightmouse 10:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Outer Continental Shelf
I reverted your edit there. See the Talk:Outer Continental Shelf discussion. The miles are different for Louisiana than for most, and there is vagueness on the Texas ones. And they are not measured quantities. Gene Nygaard 00:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Conversions
How does your conversion script work? I'm tryin to get this page converted so it has both sq km and sq mi. Someone told me about Template:Convert, but i have no idea how to use it  C t j f 8 3  19:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is how to get my script working.
 * 1. Copy the entire contents of User:Lightmouse/monobook.js to the bottom of User:Ctjf83/monobook.js.
 * 2. Clear your cache by pressing ctrl-shift-R in Firefox. If you use Internet explorer, press Ctrl-F5.
 * 3. For any page, click the tab called 'Edit this page'. You will then see some new tabs, press the tab called 'combined'.
 * Any questions, just ask. Lightmouse (talk) 20:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ok, i did that, but a bit confsued as to what these links at the top do  C t j f 8 3  04:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You asked me how to add conversions, those tabs add conversions. Go to Peoria, Arizona. Press the tab called 'edit this page'. Then press the tab called 'combined'. You will see that it adds conversions. Try it. Lightmouse (talk) 09:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ok, i see what it did there, but that doesn't work for List of countries and outlying territories by total area and that was the main place i wanted to see the conversions  C t j f 8 3  16:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I see. You are right, it will not work for that page. It only works for non-metric values where the value and unit name are adjacent. Sorry. Lightmouse (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Your Bugs Bunny edits
I just found where you de-Wikilinked a great many dates--most of which were of the "[year] in film|[year]" variety--in the article Bugs Bunny, and was sorely tempted to revert. Has there been a new Wiki policy concerning them put into effect? The articles those links led to seem to still exist (I haven't checked all of them, of course; there's just too many), so I am wondering. Ted Watson (talk) 19:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Plain year links are very common and add nothing to an article. Those links are not plain year links but they look like them so it is not likely that anyone will click on them. If you think that it is important see 'year in ', then perhaps they should be made explicit.


 * This is why some projects say things like:
 * Do not use piped links to "years in music" e.g. , instead add (see 1991 in music) where you feel it is appropriate.
 * I was being bold and delinking them because I think that they add clutter. If you disagree, feel free to revert, I do not mind. Lightmouse (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * O.K., I understand and I'll think about it a while before making up my mind on reverting or not. Ted Watson (talk) 23:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Dates
Hi, I was wondering if you could explain a bit better the reason for delinking two dates in this diff ? I thought all dates had to be linked to the date page, in order also for users to be able to choose in their preferences their preferred date format. Jackaranga (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I am happy to explain. The manual of style says 'Do not autoformat dates that are ... in date ranges'. This is because the preference mechanism actually makes things *worse* for the reader.
 * I presume that you either have no preference set or the US format. The text in question (" November 13 and 14 ") becomes '13 November and 14' for other readers. Try setting your preferences and you will see what I mean. Franky the whole date preference software is badly conceived and badly written. Lightmouse (talk) 14:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I see, hadn't paid attention to that, thanks. Jackaranga (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I see, hadn't paid attention to that, thanks. Jackaranga (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. Thanks for bringing it here. Lightmouse (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)