User talk:RP88

Question about CIL template
I see that you've helped add some functionality to the template for linking to the C-S Databank entries for the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, which I use quite often when citing Roman inscriptions, and wondered if you could help with a problem, since the coding involved in this sort of thing is beyond me. Quite often I need to cite inscriptions that have an additional number after the original number, i.e. "10010,998". Unfortunately, if you try to link them using this format in the template, you don't get a working link—the Databank can't find the entry. Now, maybe this can already be done, and I just don't know the right way to enter this—similarly to how trial and error indicates that an entry ending in, say, "11678c" can be linked successfully by including the letter, although the template page might benefit from mentioning this. Or maybe there's an easy fix, a way to get this to work without loading dozens, or even hundreds of individual inscriptions when clicking the link. Either way, I think that more instructions on using the template might be a good idea, but without understanding how it works better, I'm wary of tampering with it. Could you please have a look, and tell me what you think? P Aculeius (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I might be able to help. However, for the failure cases I would need to know more about exactly what template calls parameters you were using, what happened, and what successful results should have looked like. At the very least, What EDCS search URL is correct for a query of "10010,998"? —RP88 (talk) 18:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, here's this is the example that inspired me to ask: EDCS-65901079. Although I've run into this type of citation many times before, this is the first time I've asked someone if they might be able to make the template accept input like this.  I tried , but that didn't work at all (no results on the C-S databank page).  I could have left "998" outside the template, but when I tried that, I discovered that without the latter number in the template, the databank pulls up at least 997 other inscriptions—and probably a lot more, judging from how long it was taking to load.  Ideally it should just pull up the single inscription with that EDCS number.  If this can be done—or even if it can't—I feel that the template page would be improved with more documentation concerning the parameters.  For example, the volume/part numbering is confusing, and it's not always clear from a citation how it should be entered in the template.  I can see where it's possible to use the template to do something like this, but it's not entirely clear to me what some of the citations themselves mean (ironic that the inscriptions are sometimes easier to interpret than the citations to them).  As a result, while I prefer to use the CIL template or the AE template (which works almost the same way) to place direct links to inscriptions, I sometimes have to pick a citation that I know how to enter correctly—or a source I can't link directly to, because I can't figure out how to use the template with it.  Since this isn't a very good way to choose one's citations, I thought I'd better consult an expert!  P Aculeius (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the example P Aculeius. Looking at your example of EDCS-65901079 it appears the problem is that EDCS thinks the publication is "CIL 13, 10010,0998" not "CIL 13, 10010,998". If I use it correctly produces  with a working link to a non-empty search result. I am not familiar enough with conventions surrounding the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum to know which is correct (or maybe the EDCS is being overly literal?). The documentation for the CIL template can be edited at Template:CIL/doc, if you'd like to improve the documentation by adding more examples, additional usage notes, etc. —RP88 (talk) 20:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back to me so fast. I didn't realize that worked... I've obviously been going in circles!  I may try adding those notes as you suggest—I just wasn't sure whether or where it would be appropriate to do so!  Now I'll give it some thought.  P Aculeius (talk) 20:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * For what it is worth, looking at a scanned copy of the 1901 edition of CIL 13 the leading zero is not present for inscription 10010 998 (i.e. it shows as 10010,998 not the 10010,0998 required by EDCS). I don't know if this is a change in convention for CIL citations or a quirk in ECDS. If you know of a bunch of other related quirks that cause similar problems I could convert the template to use the Lua scripting language and add built-in support for handling these quirks (via code that normalizes extant citations that differ from those needed by EDCS) if you know of an existing list of exceptions (or you wrote up a list of the exceptions you've encountered). —RP88 (talk) 23:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I expect the different formatting is a quirk of database entry.  A leading 0 doesn't seem like cause for worry.  I haven't made a list of issues—my main concern was figuring out how to use these templates when the citation format in EDCS didn't seem to fit, and I think I now know how to work with all the unusual citations I've encountered—at least recently.  But if I run into another problem with this, and can't solve it on my own, I'll know who to ask!  P Aculeius (talk) 21:58, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Naval Vessel Register URL/rules
Module:Naval Vessel Register URL/rules has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Apple A14
Thanks for the reminder! The text on iFixit's image is.. very hard to read! :O I'll update the image soon. -- Henriok (talk) 09:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Done! -- Henriok (talk)
 * Done! @ Apple M1 -- Henriok (talk) 20:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

SPI
Hi,

I've opened this SPI: Sockpuppet investigations/Nickyangau. Because it overlaps with Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Rodrickret, with which you were involved, I'd really appreciate it if you could let me know which enwiki pages (if any) these deleted files link to.

Thanks,

GABgab 21:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * At the time they were deleted none of the files listed at c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Rodrickret had links to wikipedia pages in their file descriptions. —RP88 (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update, I was curious if there might be other accounts involved on any pages. GABgab 21:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * None of the files at that DR were previously uploaded under the same file name by another account on Commons, nor did any other account appear to participate in post-upload editing of the descriptions for these files other than edits associated with maintenance or tagging for copyright issues. —RP88 (talk) 21:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Template notices
Not sure if you noticed the dates/times of the previous notices given to User talk:Yangganbei, but they were at ×2 level-3 warnings from a just a few hours ago, so not sure why else you would start at level-1, then level-2, especially since all the warnings are for the same disruptive behavior (adding bogus ship names to various articles). fyi -  wolf  07:17, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I did notice that there were warnings from about eight hours previously. I'm inclined to go easier with the warning templates for new users with regards to disruptive editing (as opposed to vandalism, for which I am inclined to have little tolerance) – particularly since I wanted to emphasize the lack of sourcing vs original research mentioned by the earlier series of warnings. It is hard for me to tell with this particular editor whether they're just overly enthusiastic about prospective ship names and getting poor information from some source, or whether they're inserting their own speculations into the article. —RP88 (talk) 07:46, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Template editor granted
Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.

This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

If you were granted the permission on a temporary basis you will need to re-apply for the permission a few days before it expires including in your request a permalink to the discussion where it was granted and a ping for the administrator who granted the permission. You can find the permalink in your [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/rights&page=User:RP88 rights log].


 * Useful links
 * All template-protected pages
 * User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable – outstanding template-protected edit requests (bot-generated)
 * Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection

Happy template editing! Primefac (talk) 23:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)