User talk:Morriswa/Archives/2012/February

Edits to my user page
Could you explain how your recent edits to my user page were intended to be helpful? Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Response would be appreciated. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia Cleaner suggested those edits.
 * Allen (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I am assuming good faith here because it is clear that a bot was involved. However, please note that this edit basically removed the functionality of my short cuts almost totally. As a general policy, though a user page ramains common property, it is generally assumed that what is on the user page, if put there by the user, is what the user wants on that page, for reasons best known to him/herself, and it is considered common courtesy not to make unrequested edits to another person's user page unless it conflicts with a Wikipedia policy. If you have a problem with somone's userpage it is considered courteous to notify the person of the problem on the talk page. If the problem is real, and they refuse to deal with it then you have some grounds for editing the problems, though in these cases it is usually better to request an administrator to step in as this reduces the risk of conflict of interest problems and flame/edit wars. When a bot suggests changes to a page, it is because the changes must be evaluated by a human editor before they are made. This means the bot is incapable or unreliable in judging the full scope of the effects of those changes. If you are not sure what the consequences would be, you too should not make the decision, therefore if in doubt, leave it as it is. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2012

 * —  Imzadi 1979  →   22:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

tagging and assessment categories
The assessment categories ("Redirect-Class Alaska road transport articles", etc) are generated by USRD, our project banner, on the talk page. They should not be manually added to a redirect page itself, just like they'd never be added to an article.  Imzadi 1979  →   05:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And if you find an article that isn't tagged, just tag it. Some, like Interstate A-4 may not be watched by anyone so your comments would have been ignored if I didn't see that in your user contributions.  Imzadi 1979  →   05:12, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit to disambiguation page using WPCleaner
It looks like this edit removed all wikilinks from the article. It was obviously unintentional, but I wanted to bring it to your attention because it looked like a tool-assisted edit.--Koppas (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Clinch template
No, that's the only one I have. Feel free to make a derivative for whatever system you want, though. I seem to recall one for US routes being around somewhere but I don't know the exact name or location of it. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 13:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Templates for Discussion
I was wondering: Are there any templates that will show a user's statistics on Wikipedia? Allen (talk) 10:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Automated templates, no. The problem is that the server doesn't have a way to directly parse your statistics and provide something for display. Now, there are various userboxes that you can manually update to show your edit count and stuff, but you have to update that count once in a while. I'm going to suggest some caution though. You seem to be wanting to include more and more information about yourself on your user page, and to a point, that's fine. Just remember that we're not a social network. User pages are typically about enough information so that your fellow editors have some idea who you are, but we don't need all of your vital data to form that impression. Let your work speak for itself in addition to some personal explanation.  Imzadi 1979  →   00:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I know there are stats templates on Intellipedia, namely Group Stats, but there aren't any on Wikipedia? Allen (talk) 01:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't Intellipedia. What user statistics are you looking for? I know that at WP:RFA or the ArbCom elections, we have to rely on tools on the toolserver to get statistics displayed on editors. The Popular Pages (see WP:USRD/PP for a sample) has to be edited by a bot monthly because it's not a function the server here is designed to directly handle. The community has traditionally had a conservative approach to editing. If it doesn't benefit the creation or improvement of the articles, it's not usually appropriate. We've allowed great leeway in what people do with their user pages, but that isn't carte blanche to put anything up there. Users have had their pages deleted at WP:MFD in the past. You don't own or control your user page any more than you can own or control an article, but unless you're doing something way off base, no one will complain. Share all you want on your Facebook, MySpace of Google+ pages, share only what's needed on your Wikipedia page.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know this isn't Intellipedia. I was just mentioning that the template is on there.
 * I know for sure that I want the number of edits on there. I would have to update you on what else I would like.
 * Allen (talk) 02:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * For various userboxes, there is: Userboxes/Wikipedia/Stats and tools, but remember that you have to manually update the statistics listed in them. There aren't bots or automated tools that will do that for you.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:23, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I know you are going to remind me that "this isn't Intellipedia", but, on there, there automated tools that automatically do this type of thing for you. It sucks that there aren't any here.  Allen (talk) 03:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * They've probably felt a need to automate something. In our culture though, we don't measure the worth of an editor by how many edits they make, rather by the value of the contributions. It's the old quality vs. quantity debate, and the Wikipedia community has sided with quality most of the time. Focus on editing articles and the community will value your accomplishments. Spend most of your time updating your user page, and they won't.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I know about the "quality vs. quantity" issue. I also know that the number of edits doesn't equal the quality (for lack of a different word) of the edits. I really like Wikipedia (my favorite website), and I want to enjoy editing. I don't have a website, so my user page is the closest thing that I have. Allen (talk) 03:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, the community frowns on editors using their user pages like a personal webhost. That's what Facebook and other sites are for.  Imzadi 1979  →   04:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)