User talk:RexxS/Archive 22

This Month in Education: April 2013
 If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 21:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gene Hobbs
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Rebreather diving and Rebreathers
Hi RexxS, I have made the split, trimmed Rebreathers, and expanded Rebreather diving considerably. It is not finished (what is?) but I would appreciate a look-over and any suggestions that might spring to mind. If you have good references, go ahead and add a few, and challenge anything you think really need a citation. I don't have much at hand, and have relied on memory for a lot of the content addition, though much of it is fairly common knowledge. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, I think you'll find that Anthony will have a lot more to say about rebreathers than I. When it's all settled down, I'll certainly have another look, but I thought you did a fine job of the split. You may have to explain to Anthony the difference between WP:SPLIT (good) and WP:CFORK (bad) - and remind him of WP:TOOLONG. Gene is the man to go to for references, of course. --RexxS (talk) 00:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually the changes he made so far are quite appropriate and improve both articles, so I'm not complaining. He saw the woods while I was running around amongst the trees. This is why I like to get a second opinion. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't get me wrong - I know Anthony in real life from wikimeetups and he's a hugely likeable guy with a lot of knowledge about lots of things including rebreathers, as well as a very long-time editor and an admin. He is responsible for 99% of that article, and I have no problems in deferring to him. But he does like to pack every bit of information into the articles he writes, so you end up with huge articles that need to be split eventually - and your mission (if you choose to accept it) is to keep chopping things down to a manageable size! Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have read the talk page and looked at the history. I also tend to end up with huge articles. So I split them, and get two huge articles, so I split them and get four. I don't see a problem here, except the work of splitting. In the end the encyclopaedic content grows.
 * To get to the point, we now have two articles, each not much smaller than the original, but with any luck, each better than the original. I have done the groundwork, and its now time to stand back for comment and audience applause... (not a sausinge). With any luck we can consider it more or less settled down, so if you get the time and inclination together, please take that further look and point out the errors and omissions I will have made. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Naughty school IPs (now blocked)
One shouldn't encourage them by asking on their page, but how did they do that? The naughty little Darwinbish is interested. Purely academically, I expect! Bishonen &#124; talk 10:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC).
 * There are websites that can do this for you, such as this one. It's how I did my signature! :-) --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 10:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Now wondering if "worm|ɯɹoʍ" would be a better sig... Worm TT(talk ) 10:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * mroW ,ereht did uoy tahw ees I !siht od nac ti rO hsibniwrad, 11:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC).

Your brilliant new essay
I've moved your brilliant new essay to Wikipedia space. Can't keep that kind of quality under a bushel! (To any indignant tps: I did consult RexxS first.) How do you like the new title? Trying to think of a good shortcut. WP:URBAN is taken, unfortunately. Bishonen &#124; talk 10:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC).

This Month in Education: May 2013
 If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 17:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal: MediaWiki Group Accessibility Tracking
Dear RexxS,

following the process for requesting the creation of a MediaWiki group, here is a proposal for

MediaWiki Group Accessibility Tracking https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Groups/Proposals/Accessibility_Tracking

Your endorsements, improvements and feedback are welcome at the wiki page. Thank you!

PS: see also http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Groups/Proposals

Barrierefrei (talk) 12:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Barrierefrei, this certainly looks like a good idea and I'm more than happy to offer my support. Have you considered asking (perhaps on his home-wiki,  fr:Discussion utilisateur:Dodoïste) and  who both have made huge contributions to accessibility on EnWp and elsewhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RexxS (talk • contribs) 19:03, 16 May 2013‎
 * *cough* ;-) Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * There's really no way of being anonymous on this site, is there? BTW, Barrierefrei, you could do worse than getting Andy involved as well. (If you can stand the heat.) --Famously Sharp (talk) 23:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

WMUK's Lua on Wikimedia event
Hi, this is just a reminder that you have previously signed up for the Lua on Wikimedia event taking place at Wikimedia UK office this Sunday. The plan is to start at 10am, but I should be around to let you in from 9-ish. See you then! -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 10:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

1998–99 Manchester United F.C. season
Was there anything wrong with my edits for 1998–99 Manchester United F.C. season, as an anon user keeps reverting? Its nice to have another editor's opinion before this goes too far. Limefrost Spiral (talk) 19:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I must admit I'm not sufficiently expert to able to see any problem, but you must stop reverting, because participating in an edit war isn't not the way to settle differences. You need to start a section on Talk:1998–99 Manchester United F.C. season, explaining your position and why you think your version is an improvement, particularly showing the sources you used. Please don't call any edits 'vandalism' unless nobody could reasonably view them as a good-faith attempt to improve the encyclopedia. I've looked at the IP's contributions and they don't seem problematic either, so I'm going to leave a note on the IP's talk page asking them to discuss on the talk page as well, and I hope that you can come to an amicable solution. I'll keep an eye on the talk page and help where I can, hopefully other editors will see the discussion there as well and can bring other views with them. --RexxS (talk) 20:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Concert tour styles
Hi RexxS,

I hope you are well?

Could you please weigh-in here User_talk:ShadowRanger. The desired format for concert tour tables is shown in example A however, I am being told that example B is the current standard even though WP:CONCERT is blank regarding style. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  08:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Lil' - I'm good thanks; hope you're well too. Changing how folks have got used to doing things is something you will have to work on a bit at a time - like the old days in DISCOG. As it happens, all of the tour dates are unique, while the city and venue contain a duplicate for Albert Hall, London. That's different from singles where the title was unique, but the year could have more that one release in it. The row header doesn't have to be unique, but it's less confusing for the screen reader if it is. If I were you, I'd give way on the date, but insist on properly marking up the row headers even if date is picked as row header. I've done an example edit for them, and left a comment on the talk page. I'll keep an eye on the discussion for you anyway, but feel free to give me a shout if you need my help. --RexxS (talk) 21:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Oxford Meetup 5
Thank you for attending the fourth Oxford Meetup, and it was a pleasure meeting you. We have decided to hold the next Oxford meetup in one month's time, rather than two, so that it falls within Oxford term-time. A page has been created about the fifth Oxford Meetup; please sign up if you think that you are able to attend - if the date or venue are unsuitable, please comment at its discussion page.

Please spread the word to anybody else who you think might be interested. The next UK meetups are at: Glasgow; London; and Nottingham, all on 12 May 2013. -- Red rose64 (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It was good to meet as ever. Thanks for the tip on the alley leading to the New Street bus stop - it's a neat short cut. --RexxS (talk) 18:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You may have niticed I was confused about New Street - since I sobered up, I've worked out that it's New Road. It connects Castle Street and Bonn Square at the top with Park End Street and Worcester Street at the bottom.
 * When you first arrived, did you notice anybody wandering around looking for us? See User talk:Maproom. Maybe we need a flag or a novelty hat. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:47, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I noticed your discussion with Maproom because the new notification system works! I reckon we must have been at the bar while he was looking for us, and of course I still had my coat on, so the wiki T-shirt wasn't obvious. It's a shame we missed him - we'll have to promise pints to him to make up. I'll wear my outrageously loud red Wiki-in-Education T-shirt next time. --RexxS (talk) 19:47, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm concerned about the low level of support for the fifth Oxford Meetup. Are you unable to attend, or is it that you haven't seen the geonotice? -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:21, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't be worried, attendances fluctuate over time, but they will eventually stabilise at a decent level. For this one, please give my apologies to all the folks - I'm away but I'll do my best to make the next one. --RexxS (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * for responding. See you next time! -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Notice
While you are not the subject of the discussion, I have brought Lucia Black to WP:ANI and have cited an example which concerned you. This is a friendly notice that I have mentioned your name. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Chris. I hope you won't think any worse of me if I avoid the drama board unless I really have to. I see Drmies has grasped the issues and hopefully other involved commentators will reinforce his message. I know it's not a solution yet, but I guess there's a possibility that Lucia will understand she has to make some changes in her editing. Thanks for your patience and your efforts. Regards, --RexxS (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Children Act 1989
Hello! Thought I would come and ask your help regarding referencing for this article! The Children Act 1989 article was a bit of a mess and was copied from a law firm website! So I have decided to speed up my alterations for this article :) Though I have got a bit stuck with referencing it. I want to reference to the act and want to link specific sections. So I need your help with: Hope that all makes sense and I hope you can help! Thanks very much Staceydolxx (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) How do you reference an Act?!
 * 2) How do I put it in the format that you like.. you know.. with footnotes section?
 * 3) I don't want to have the footnotes linked to page numbers; instead I want it to link to sections.
 * The Act is available online at Legislation.gov.uk, so you might want to format that into a cite web template (you should have a nice "cite" tool in he toolbox to do this for you, but I can't remember where it is). I'm not certain, but I would imagine you can get permanent links to particular sections of the Act. Obviously you don't need to fill the whole template out again, something like, linked to the section you want on Legislation.gov.uk, would probably suffice. Does that help? HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  20:10, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've the relevant links to the infobox. These go to the front page, which contains links to the various sections. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much; I didn't think to do that! =) Staceydolxx (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've set that section heading into sentence case for you - you'll want to do the others as well. Guidance is at WP:MOSCAPS and WP:HEADINGS. If I were you I'd adopt a very simple style of referencing, e.g.   or something similar if it's all going to be taken from the Children Act 1989. Get your references in place first and then anybody can come along and convert them into templates for easier maintenance later. If you want specific advice on how WikiProject Law does these, you could drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law. I've just taken a look at Arbitration Act 1979 as an example for you (it's rated a Good Article), but they haven't used anything special there in the references, just plain text like   for the books that comment on the act - I'd have used sfnp for those. Not much use, I know, but I've got it on my watchlist now and I'll keep an eye on how it goes. I'll be away for a few days, but you have a number of watchers of this page who are extremely helpful and willing to lend a hand. I'll catch up with you all soon. --RexxS (talk) 00:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I am still very confused but I have done the best I can with help from Dave. I have asked for assistance recently on the Wikiproject Law page and no-one replied. Thanks for your help and enjoy your few days away! ツStacey (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added categories; every article should have at least one. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:33, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't know how to do that! Thanks very much, ツStacey (talk) 09:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Divers and traders...
RexxS, I created an article yesterday on Anne-Marie Baiynd that was flagged today: Articles_for_deletion/Anne-Marie_Baiynd. Notable traders are kind of like notable divers in my view in that there are many that do it but few that are worth mentioning. She was one worth mentioning. I just wanted an honest opinion on this one. Mind taking a look and giving me your 2c? Thanks! --Gene Hobbs (talk) 19:45, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Gene. It's a tough one because the field of trading seems overwhelmingly populated by small online websites specialising in various niches. That makes it tough to meet the need for provably reliable sources. Nevertheless, there are a lot of them that cover or relate to Baiynd's work, so I think that can be argued. The other problem is that her book is clearly notable, but counter-intuitively that doesn't make her notable, so we have to factor out much of the coverage of the book when trying to meet the conditions laid out in WP:BIO. I've left some thoughts at the deletion discussion, and I'll keep an eye on how it goes. --RexxS (talk) 22:36, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I had not even thought to look at WP:BIO since most of the articles I write are about folks I have significantly more knowledge about. I recently picked up her second book (Loved the first) and wanted to know about her. As usual, writing the article was a good way to learn something new. ;-) Thanks again for your comments. I'll spend some more time looking at those criteria too. --Gene Hobbs (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * So, I expanded a little today... I have one more reference I need to pull to an early interview and I'll work that in too. This evening I thought I would look around to see how other names in trading looked. All I can think is; seriously? I am getting a hard time when articles like Kenneth Calhoun slip through (You will LOVE that history page). Then I find that articles like Toby Crabel, Aaron C. Brown, Jonathan Kinlay, Linda Bradford Raschke, Jack D. Schwager, Larry R. Williams have similar references in industry publications and little pushback. Other clearly notable traders like John Bollinger, Richard Donchian, Charles Drummond, Ralph Nelson Elliott, William Delbert Gann, George Lane (technical analyst), J. Welles Wilder, Jr. have much worse referenced articles and these should be great articles...
 * At least I can feel good that the article I wrote is well referenced and shows where she was notable enough before the book to be asked to write the book. The articles in this industry are worse than the diving articles were when I started referencing them. Anyway, thanks again for the comments and motivation to fight to keep it as her name and not the book alone. --Gene Hobbs (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. But there's no justice on Wikipedia, so no point in wondering why your efforts get picked on - that's why we have WP:OTHERSHITEXISTS. It looks like the deletion debate is favouring 'keep' - and there are interesting issues for the notability guidelines as Amatulic says. --RexxS (talk) 02:47, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I should have used a more policy based argument on the subject but was distracted by the Notability (books) vs the Notability_(authors) thought process. Never a dull moment :-) --Gene Hobbs (talk) 03:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * and again... Articles_for_deletion/Anne-Marie_Baiynd_(2nd_nomination). Fun! --Gene Hobbs (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This is far too soon to bring another AfD. It's really disappointing when the obvious thing to do is to give other folks a chance to edit the article and bring other perspectives to bear. I'll keep an eye on it anyway. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 11:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Trainspotting
See my fine nerdy new userboxes! Trainspotting! Penyulap rules! darwin fish 21:54, 29 May 2013 (UTC).

Infobox single changes to template
&mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  21:47, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Odd inclusion in your edit
Hi RexxS, your recent edit has a strange inclusion at the bottom of the page. Was this intentional? Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:02, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter - thanks for the heads-up; that's certainly an odd thing to happen and it definitely wasn't intended. Coincidentally, I made that edit using Chrome instead of my usual Firefox, because I had Chrome open and had just installed a new addon. I suspect that there's a glitch somewhere in that, but I'll do an anti-virus/anti-malware check anyway. I've fixed my edit to the BC talk page, so fingers crossed that normal service will be resumed as soon as possible. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 12:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Courtesy notification
I have cited you regarding an issue with another editor, at WP:ANI. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013 Tech Committee
I'm scheduling a Tech Comm next week so please pop in your availability on | this doodle before Friday if you want to be there :) Katherine Bavage (WMUK) (talk) 09:57, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Oxford Meetup 6
I'm sorry that you were unable to attend the fifth Oxford Meetup. I intended to send this message on Monday, but I've been a bit busy, sorry.

Several of us would like to continue with the monthly plan, since trying to make a two-monthly cycle fit into the University terms doesn't work very well. It does occur to me that "first Sunday" is 7 July, which would clash with Coventry 8. Perhaps one of them could be second Sunday (14 July) which probably clashes with London 71, for which no date has yet been set, but there were reports at Oxford - I think from - that the London attendances are down. A page has been created about the sixth Oxford Meetup; please sign up if you think that you are able to attend - if the date or venue are unsuitable, please comment at its discussion page.

Please spread the word to anybody else who you think might be interested. The next UK meetups are at: London, 16 June; Manchester, 22 June; and Coventry, 7 July. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, since 7 July 2013 collides with Coventry 8, who have a prior claim to the date, and given that nobody has (yet) claimed 14 July for any UK meetups, I have decided that Oxford 6 should be held on 14 July 2013, and not 7 July as previously advertised. In this way, those who wish to attend both may do so. I hope the revised Oxford date is convenient for you. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Homage pronunciation
Hi RexxS, how would one pronounce "homage" in British English? I've always known it with a silent "h" but I'm pretty sure in the UK the "h" is present. I'm asking because I'm having second thoughts about this edit of mine. Thanks! Acalamari 21:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Acalamari, the original use of the word in the sense of a vassal pledging fealty to their feudal lord was taken into English a long time ago, so I believe that case to have become Anglicised, i.e. inflected and with an aspirated 'h' (so "a homage" [ho-midge] sounds right to me for that use). It does seem though, that the word has re-entered English from French more recently in a metaphorical sense - and then I hear it pronounced as it would be in French: [o-maj] which has a completely silent 'h'. That is the use made of the word in the edit you referred to, so I'm in two minds about keeping the French pronunciation "an homage" or insisting that the word already exists in English with an Anglicised pronunciation. I suppose it depends in the end how pretentious the use of French words sounds to you :) No doubt some of the TPS will give you opinions, and we could always ask Eric for a definitive view! Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't claim my view is definitive, but it's definitely that the "h" is not silent, so "a homage" is correct. I recall having a similar "discussion" with another editor some time ago about "an hotel" vs. "a hotel"; it was once common to pronounce "hotel" with a silent "h", but the only people who do that now are those who habitually drop their "h"s and stick them in where they're not wanted instead. In other words, when speaking some people might say "an 'otel", but in writing it's always "a hotel". Same with "homage" IMO. Eric   Corbett  22:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, RexxS and Eric Corbett! I'm grateful for the input from both of you; I'll let my edit stand, although, based on what you've both said, this is not likely to be something that I'll enforce either way and I certainly won't edit-war over it! Best. Acalamari 20:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration. Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:42, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
 * Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
 * If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

This Month in Education: June 2013
 If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 14:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Chester
Hi Doug, haven't seen you for a while - hope things are OK. I thought you might be interested to know that we've decided to try out Chester as a new Wikimeet venue on 21 July instead of Liverpool. Maybe see you there? Cheers, Bazonka (talk) 07:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI (Wagner talk page)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Smerus (talk) 16:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Accessibility at Template:Album ratings
Hi RexxS, I've asked if the template above could be converted to be more accessible but I'm finding mocking one up at Template:Album ratings/sandbox a little difficult. Could you weigh in please? The original edit request is here: Template_talk:Album_ratings. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  17:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Lil, sorry I've been on holiday and not keeping up with the wiki. I've looked at your suggestions and I see Plastispork has done the changes for you. You don't really need scope on "Professional ratings" and "Review scores" because the scope on the headers beneath ("Source" and "Rating") will be used by a screenreader for all the subsequent rows, but it's nothing to worry about. Your changes will have improved the accessibility and that's what counts. Regards, --RexxS (talk) 19:18, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Been a while?
Hey RexxS, I came here earlier to (once again) seek you wisdom and noted that you haven't edited for a while. Hopefully you're just on an extended holiday. In any case, all the best, ping me sometime if you get this. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I can confirm that RexxS is alive and well, was last seen by me talking to yesterday, 19:15 (BST).
 * RexxS, that hot air balloon that we saw to the left when approaching Oxford railway station - it came down at 20:30 (BST), just five minutes walk from where I live. Pilot and passenger unhurt, although it took until 22:30 for their road transport to arrive. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm fine - just enjoying a nice wiki-break, but if The Rambling Man has his notifications working, he should spot this :)
 * @TRM: Feel free to quiz me - I'll be keeping an (intermittent) watch on this page for the next week or so anyway. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Very glad to hear it. Perhaps Redrose64 has given you an indication of my query, which was about the explicit coding for MOS:DTT that you and I worked hard to incorporate into FLC. It would appear the row and col scopes are no longer required in certain circumstances, and I wondered if you had a moment to explain it to me in kid's terms (plus help us update MOS:DTT since if it's no longer needed, I should stop pushing editors into compliance with it...!)  My best, as ever.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * TRM refers to - which were to bring an article in line with DTT - and  - where I then made a case for those same edits being unnecessary. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed so. Perhaps since you know one another, Redrose64, you could be kind enough to broach the subject, or alternatively answer the question directly?  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * In the HTML5 Candidate Recommendation, there's a description of the  element which describes five possibilities for the   attribute. Four are explicit, and these are carried over from HTML 4.0 and thus also from XHTML 1.0; the fifth is the auto state, which "makes the header cell apply to a set of cells selected based on context. The   attribute's missing value default is the auto state". A little later there is an example, and the markup shown has no   attributes for four of the  cells - ID, Measurement, Average and Maximum. Just below the demo of that it states "The headers in the first row all apply directly down to the rows in their column.", and this is indicated by the irange arrows in the diagram below which show how the scope of those four   elements is for the whole column - even in column 2, which contains nothing but   elements. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's what I'd fear would happen, as most, if not all the tables you describe are trivially simple. But in a table with both row and col spans, what happens then?  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Redrose's accurate description of the changes made in the HTML5 specification, but disagree with his conclusions. Unfortunately, although our servers now nominally deliver HTML5, that doesn't help readers using out-of-date browsers or other user agents such as screen readers which don't implement the intentions of the latest HTML spec. Although it is usually simple to update an old browser, the same does not always apply to screen readers and updating JAWS to the latest version may involve an expense of hundreds of pounds (or dollars). We already know that different screen readers deal with table headers differently and JAWS users can alter its behaviour for different cases (absence of row headers, absence of scopes, etc.), so we can do much better than relying on the HTML5 spec being implemented in the user agent. By marking up both column and row headers and supplying scope for each, we remove any possibility of ambiguity for the user agent, particularly older ones. Take a look at WebAIM's current guidance at Creating Accessible Tables and you'll still see that both and the   attribute remain recommended. As usual, I'd also suggest reading the latest tutorial on JAWS and tables to gain insight on how our articles will be read - there's even an exercise entitled "Follow the steps below to tell JAWS to read only column headers for the table above that does not have proper markup". In short: it's too early to change our guidance yet. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 16:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks RexxS, just what I wanted to hear. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

This Month in Education: July 2013
 If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription &middot; Distributed via Global message delivery, 22:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Help getting page live
Hello RexxS. It looks as though my page is not published. How do I go about getting my page published please. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rosemary_E_Lunn

study day at a UK University Teaching Hospital
Hi Rex,

I was referred to you as you probably know most about the study day at a UK University Teaching Hospital that was organized by Wikimedia UK. I'm working together with Nicole Ebber on a presentation for Wikimania.The study day at a UK University Teaching Hospital was submitted as a potential project to present there very quickly, and we're currently figuring out more about the submissions to make an informed decision on which could be presented best. I read as much as I could, but some questions remained - some just to be sure. I wouldn't want you to spend a lot of time on this, if you could answer out-of-hand or by referring to web pages (in whatever language) that would be helpful already. At the same time, we have about 70-80 submissions to go through, so conciseness where possible is always helpful too. We want to make a decision this Friday.

My open quesions are mainly:
 * How many participants were present in the end, and how were they split up?
 * Was there any follow-up after the event?
 * Was there any analysis of the results/outcomes/retention?

Thanks in advance! effeietsanders 10:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I was only peripherally involved - the main organisation was done by Doc James, Sharkli and Jfdwolff. You may have already read the pages at:
 * WikiProject Medicine/Editor outreach/UK 2012
 * Eventbrite
 * As you can see, there were about 60 registrations and my recollection is that about 60 people were present. Each session was attended by the whole group, apart from the final one which was an introduction to editing Wikipedia which had around 40 people involved, plus trainers.
 * There was an informal meetup following the sessions and several of the participants have since formed the thematic group WikiProject Med Foundation that will organise more of these events in future. We also have established a continuing relationship with TRIP as a result of the workshop, but I'm not aware of any analysis of results/outcomes/retention. If I had more time, I could ping Doc James to confirm. Nevertheless I think the main outcomes (networking and 'spreading the word') were achieved, even if they are difficult to measure with the sort of metrics you may have been looking for. Hope that helps --RexxS (talk) 02:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Rexx. Yes that sums it up nicely. Many next year we can try to do something similar again when I am back in the UK for Wikimania? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the additional info, that gives me a better understanding! effeietsanders 21:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

FL review: Mikhail Youzhny career statistics
I've been told that you're some sort of an accessibility guru here on Wikipedia... A review of the Mikhail Youzhny career statistics FL nom said I should ask you for help regarding the list's accessibility... Would you be able to help me? Regards. --TIAYN (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I'm just a ordinary editor who has had some experience with accessibility issues. I'll try to help you, though, so I've left some comments at the FL review. Hope they make sense to you. --RexxS (talk) 16:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help, I've done as you've siad. --TIAYN (talk) 18:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Infobox evidence
Just read your contribution to the Infobox evidence, nice addition. (I had hoped to add something, but real life intervened, now I don't feel quite so bad as you made some of the points I wanted included.)-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  16:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * (watching) a little support in the workshop would be appreciated ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:33, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ps: to see the TFA start without infobox and end with one made my day, - the revert of Götterdämmerung had to be expected, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

pages with multiple ICD codes
Good to see you, RexxS.


 * Out of personal curiosity, I've taken a look at the number of ICD-10 / ICD-9 codes currently associated with some popular MED project pages. Among the top 20 pages bearing ICD codes, 11 have single codes displayed for both ICD-10 and ICD-9 (Schizophrenia, Asperger syndrome, Crohn's disease, Lyme disease, Multiple sclerosis, Borderline personality disorder, Fibromyalgia, Autism, Cystic fibrosis, Hemorrhoid, Obsessive–compulsive disorder). The others had multiple codes for either ICD-10 or ICD-9 (Tuberculosis, five ICD-10 codes / nine ICD-9; Bipolar disorder, seven ICD-9; HPV, two ICD-9; Gout, four ICD-9; Diabetes mellitus, five ICD-10; Meningitis, four ICD-10 / three ICD-9; Pneumonia, eight ICD-10 / eight ICD-9; Parkinson's disease, two ICD-10; HIV/AIDS, five ICD-10 / three ICD-9). I think Autism  etc provides an interesting example of how a WP language (here, en:WP) takes its own decisions with regard to page scope. In this case, the ICD-10 coding for the Autism page has been restricted to F84.0, presumably leaving some of the other F84.x codes to other pages, such as Autism spectrum, not all of which currently display ICD codes. Actually, we don't seem to display ICD codes in a standardized way. For instance, I listed the Scizophrenia page as displaying a single ICD-10 link: F20, but that economically labeled link actually covers F20.0 to F20.9.

...ok, so I'll take my anorak off now and brave the local road resurfacing works for, arguably, some more human sustenance. 86.140.51.65 (talk) 13:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good to see you too, 86. - Milton Keynes? surely not!
 * That is fascinating; I really had no idea that multiple ICD codes were so prevalent. Tuberculosis has ICD-9 010-018 which makes some sort of sense if 010 = Primary Tuberculosis, 011 = Pulmonary Tuberculosis, etc. You might find it interesting that German Wikipedia's featured article on Tuberculosis only lists the five ICD10 codes. You should check out Q12204, it needs somebody to add the other seven ICD-9 and three ICD-10 codes. It would be a new adventure for you! --RexxS (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, several of the popular pages that display a single ICD-10 code actually comprise multiple codes (in contrast to the restrictive en:wp definition currently used on Q38404). The wikidata layout does look potentially quite inclusive. Though I can't say that this individual volunteer is itching (or able?) to fill in all the wikidata entries from other languages. However, your suggestion did lead me to fix what looks to me like a simple but significant typographic error on it:Tubercolosi . Something that again poses to me questions about... well...


 * ...Surely it's essential that local control of such labeling shouldn't be lost in translation? As seems to be somewhat the case at the moment for interlanguage links . I agree with user:Wikid77 that the lack of many-to-one interlanguage linkage is an "elephant in the room" and I agree that cross-wp communication is an issue  (btw, does WP have an international forum, other than Jimbo's page, for us native drummers?) 86.130.63.47 (talk) 10:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Lists question
Hi I noticed on the ARBCOM page, that your main field of interest is featured lists, so wanted to ask for your input: I'd like to translate de:Liste der Baudenkmäler in Freising and similar lists. The main issues I can see is that the text of the list is based mainly on the official source by the government ministry in question (as such PD in Germany). The list pretty much consists of templates for each entry and the boilerplate stuff. For Bavaria we are looking at about 2000+ lists. The list entries typically are also covered in secondary literature. It looks like the missing pictures are added with the 2013 Wiki Loves Monuments event in September. Can you see any problems apart from the fact that I will need some help with architectural terminology? Agathoclea (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Agathoclea, I'm sorry I'm so slow to respond but that interminable ArbCom case is such a time-sink. Looking at Liste der Baudenkmäler in Freising, I'd say that the issue that concerns you would be covered by the CC-BY-SA license on that page - so you are free to re-use and modify (i.e. translate it) as long as you acknowledge the source - I expect you already know the Template:Translated page that you can use. There is certainly no impediment to using German sources for such an article, and I'd be surprised if any existed in English - WP:NONENG would be the policy to check.
 * You would probably want to create enWP templates closely corresponding to the German, etc. and I could help you when you get to that point if you need me.
 * Additionally, our guidelines on accessibilty affect lists by asking us to mark up data tables with proper column and row headers, and column and row scopes as described at WP:DTT. This would be incorporated into the templates so that later editors wouldn't need to worry about it. I could help you with some concrete examples if you needed to learn how to do that as well.
 * You can always work in user space to get a list started. Copy your wikitext of the list into a text editor so that you can find-and-replace every 'Wohnhaus' with 'Private residence' (or whatever you think best) in one go. I know you are a native German speaker with very good English, but I can still recommend dropping a note to Gerda who is also native German speaker and is always generous with her time. I've also found PumpkinSky useful as a native English speaker who speaks German well, in case you need help with a particular English idiom.
 * In short - why not go for it? Ping me if you need me. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Seen, and ready if time permits. Please let us know where you start in user space. Giano is my expert for architecture, - I don't know these terms in English ;) - I just put an infobox into the timesink and plan at least one more, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ps: I looked and think we could do a subset of buildings with an article in English or deserving one. "List of monuments in Freising"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad there is such an uptake. I will start in userspace later today and drop the links here. Beware there is an almost endless supply of lists in this genre. Agathoclea (talk) 09:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I started it at User:Agathoclea/List of Cultural heritage monuments in Freising to match the commons category. My biggest issue now is to get the coordinates converted to our system for the location and the requested images. Agathoclea (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've hacked User:Agathoclea/Denkmalliste Bayern Tabellenzeile to convert the coordinates for you - it's just a simplified version for now, but seems to work. I'll have a look at Template:Bilderwunsch/encode later when I've figured out what it's meant to do. My German is rather rusty :D --RexxS (talk) 19:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be an image requested template. I tried to take it out as I believe we only do that on talkpages here, and having it on deWiki suffices anyway as it will attract the photographers there (There is some tools that allows you to find requested images within x km from your location). Its not clean yet but I need a bit of time to learn the template syntax and work has cought up with me :-( Agathoclea (talk) 14:10, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Sherwood statue
I put the statue coords into the infobox and when I use that to get to Googlemaps, satellite view, the "A" marker is several feet to the southwest of the statue. Is this acceptable? The statue and its pedastal are quite visible in satellite view. Pumpkin Sky  talk  21:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 36.866139,-76.131811 puts the "A" marker dead onto the statue. The Bay coords are fine, I put that in a efn note. Pumpkin Sky   talk  21:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's perfect. I'm always pretty happy with coords that get to within a few feet of the target for any object, so I round to 3 decimal places. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your Arbitration evidence is too long
Hello, RexxS. Thank you for your recent submission of evidence for the Infoboxes Arbitration case. As you may be aware, the Arbitration Committee asks that users submitting evidence in cases adhere to limits regarding the length of their submissions. These limits, currently at 1000 words and 100 diffs for parties and 500 words and 50 diffs for all others, are in place to ensure that the Arbitration Committee receives only the most important information relevant to the case, and is able to determine an appropriate course of action in a reasonable amount of time. The evidence you have submitted currently exceeds at least one of these limits, and is presently at 812 words and 0 diffs. Please try to reduce the length of your submission to fit within these limits; this guide may be able to provide some help in doing so. If the length of your evidence is not reduced soon, it may be refactored or removed by a human clerk within a few days. Thank you! If you have any questions or concerns regarding the case, please contact the drafting Arbitrator or case clerk (who are listed on the case pages); if you have any questions or concerns about this bot, please contact the operator. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Hers fold ArbClerkBOT(talk) 18:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

review query
As a tennis project member, I want to make sure I understand what you wrote at this review for Mikail Yozney. As I read your review you had trouble with charts that only use color without symbols and you mention GA and G2 as examples. That we will fix. My question is that you also mention the "performance key" (and the wording is a little hazy)... my take on what you wrote is that it's fine. You personally might make the chart with no colors and you gave an example, but there is really nothing wrong with the original performance key since it uses letters and color. Did I interpret you correctly? I ask because your example is very large and consensus at Tennis Project is very much against it and very much for the compact nature of the original. We have minor players with only a paragraph of prose and a chart that size would be 2/3's of the article. Anyway I just wanted to make sure I read you correctly. Thanks for the insight. 21:47, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Fyunc, The point about the colour was that anyone using a screen reader wouldn't be able to tell which were GA and which were G2, for example, because they wouldn't hear the colour used, so that does need to be changed to meet WP:ACCESS.
 * The issue of the performance key template was not with the use of colour, but the relatively large amount of small text used, which makes it more difficult to pick out the information you want, but I do understand the reasons it was used and I don't consider it breaches our accessibility guidelines. I've tried to explain that in more detail at the review. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 12:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks once again. It's a tough thing to balance over thousands of player articles. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes PD
I know you're angry, and I can perfectly understand it, but some of your comments on that talk page are not exactly producing an atmosphere conducive to rational discussion. You do yourself and your arguments no favours with remarks like if you took your blinkers off or sarcastic comments, especially when they're directed at people like MLauba, who seems to me to be trying to offer a middle ground (whether you agree with his suggestion or not). But you already know that. If you can't comment on that talk page without losing your rag, don't comment. Do soemthing else and come back to it later. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  13:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the good advice, but in the face of the most one-sided decision I've ever seen, you can be pretty certain I won't be coming back later. And you already know I'm not joking about that. --RexxS (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that's a shame. You bring a lot to the discussion when you make your point calmly and reasonably, but you're clever enough to knwo that berating people won't get you anywhere. Whatever you may think of the decision, it's not set in stone yet. I'm not known for my confidence in ArbCom, but the arbs do seem to be willing to listen to sensible arguments here. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  14:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * (watching) see also about coming back or not, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The two cultures
Hi, dino. Spanning the two cultures as you do, could you see your way to weighing in here ? Bishonen &#124; talk 21:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Oh dear. I'm not sure I could add much as I've always used Twinkle to nominate for deletion. I know it's another thing to learn, but you only need learn the bits you use and it makes life so much easier for us peons. The point is that on Commons there is only really one thing we might want to delete - a media file (perhaps categories, but that's another story). Whereas on Wikipedia we might want to delete articles (AfD), templates (TfD), different sorts of files (FFD, PUF, NFCR), categories (CfD), redirects (RfD), miscellany (MfD), or the Administrators' Noticeboards (Yay) - each of which has its own venue. Then there's the moral obligation to notify the creator. As a result, on Wikipedia it would be tough (although by no means impossible) to have a single link to click in the toolbox in order to nominate for deletion. Twinkle uses JavaScript to perform its magic, so people using it have to have JavaScript enabled - but you can't make that assumption in general, so the developers tend to be loathe to incorporate features requiring JavaScript into the standard interface. Of course, all developers are naturally work-shy, so they will never prioritise stuff that can already be done by Twinkle.
 * Hmmz, well perhaps I could have weighed in a few grams of discussion - but I have an idea, perhaps you could send the nerdy Darwinfish over to VP(T) to explain why nominating is harder here than on Commons? I'm sure he'd enjoy the company over there. --RexxS (talk) 22:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Date parsing
Hey! I took a look at your Module:Sandbox/RexxS/DateData and Module:Parsedate and I'm definitely stealing some ideas :) I thought about just improving 1 module and not splitting up the same date parsing logic into multiple locations, which is what my WIP Module:Sandbox/Hellknowz/Test is doing right now. The issue is your parser accepts any text and tries to get a date (so it can wrap free-text and such), while mine only allows text that is an unambiguous date (so this can be used in infoboxes). I think the direction and purposes we are going for are different enough to warrant separate templates at this point. That said, we should probably collaborate on recognizing all the major formats and expected inputs. I'm slowly building a raw test list of these at Module talk:Sandbox/Hellknowz/Test/testcases. I already posted 1 infobox raw date field data on Andy's talk page, and I'll do more of these for real world examples. They will contain all the start date instances, so you can see what inputs should be anticipated. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:00, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Greetings
WP:WMF now exists, FYI. Best regards. Biosthmors (talk) 09:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Updating Template:Infobox album
Hi there, As a regular contributor to articles in the WP:MUSIC project I believe the following discussion will be of use to you. Please could you take the time to read the proposals at Template_talk:Infobox_album regarding the updating of Infobox album. Kind regards  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  00:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)