User talk:RexxS/Archive 29

Season's Greetings


Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 20:24, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Happy New Year, RexxS (sorry, I can't add the template without mixing it up with the one above). --Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 23:14, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:16, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Rex and stalkers
Happy new year, Rex. (Re Rubbish computer above: I can't even post without getting mixed up with Winkelvi. 'Tis the time of year.) What I came for was, there's a template near the bottom of my page which apparently bleeds into the question that follows. I can sort of see why, but not how to fix it. Please..? (I don't have time to research the question today, but in the meantime I just wish it wouldn't look like that.) Bishonen &#124; talk 16:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC).


 * Fixed - but your talk page is extremely long. Please archive most of it (or let me know if you'd like me to set up a bot to do so automatically). Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:49, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much, Andy. No, no bot — I'll archive soon. Bishonen &#124; talk 23:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC).

French region rename
Hi I was working on a bot to handle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Module_talk:Wikidata#Suggested_test_case:_New_French_Regions. It is my first try at this. The code I have so far is here https://github.com/utilitarianexe/wiki_france_region_rename. Right now has functionality to get the list of all the articles for various levels of French government that need fixed. It also has the code to modify the arrondissement articles. Still need to do the other levels. Anyway though you suggested somehow instead of just replacing the name to use wikidata. This seems like a good idea to me but not sure where to start. Any help would be appreciated. Lonjers (talk) 03:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Help decide the future of Wikimania


The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 23:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox concerning what should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Disability Arts Online editathon feedback
Hi Rexx,

I thought I'd set up this section for people who want feedback on their pages from the editathon. My page on Sue Austin is getting there, I think. I want to flesh out the 'Artistic practice' section before attempting to publish. Any thoughts? User:JTdisabilityartsonline/sueaustin JTdisabilityartsonline (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Feel free to use my talk page as a central clearing area for feedback. There are other editors watching here who may also help out. I've commented on your draft article at User talk:JTdisabilityartsonline/sueaustin as it's best to keep specific comments on an article's talk page - eventually others will see those and may find them helpful (it's far more likely than anybody seeing discussions in my talk page archives). Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've stuck my oar in on Sue's article and left some feedback.   Cassianto Talk   21:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've stuck my oar in on Sue's article and left some feedback.   Cassianto Talk   21:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

No-break spaces in Diving cylinder
I was following the advice of Peer Reviewer - "Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space - &amp;nbsp; between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 12 litre, use 12 litre, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 12&amp;nbsp;litre." - bad advice it would seem. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:35, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

On the side, how do I format a no-break space code so it displays the code and not the space? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:38, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

No worries, as you can see, I found out. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:45, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, yes it's a common misconception that we need a &amp;nbsp; between numerals and units. The reason for keeping two words together has always been to prevent a new line beginning with the second word, and that has been the case since the days of manual type-setting. To work out where a non-breaking space is needed, we only have to consider what the new line would look like if it started with the second word. A line starting with "litres" is no different from a line starting with any other word, but a reader will find a line beginning with a solitary "l" jarring - hence the MOS guidance to include a &amp;nbsp; only before abbreviations of units. In the grand scheme of things, it's not a big deal, but sometimes I've seen it taken to extremes: "4&amp;nbsp;batsmen made over 50&amp;nbsp;runs in the innings". Eventually, you can't read the wikitext for the "spaces". Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Project AWARE COI edits
Hi RexxS, I am undecided whether to revert User:Lauren.wiskerson's recent edits summarized as "Project AWARE staff edits" as you have made more recent edits to the article. The edits have removed sourced information and may or may not be improvements (I have not checked), but the language is somewhat promotional. Are you satisfied that the edits are an improvement or are worth fixing? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, It's mainly this edit as I reverted most of the previous stuff. When I looked at that a couple of days ago, I thought it was probably OK, because organisations change their focus and staff, etc. - even though it was somewhat promotional. Looking at it again, I can see that some criticism (the BBB section) was removed. I really don't like that sort of underhand whitewashing, so I'll go through and clean it up as much as I can. Have a look later and see if you can improve it more. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:18, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, It's mainly this edit as I reverted most of the previous stuff. When I looked at that a couple of days ago, I thought it was probably OK, because organisations change their focus and staff, etc. - even though it was somewhat promotional. Looking at it again, I can see that some criticism (the BBB section) was removed. I really don't like that sort of underhand whitewashing, so I'll go through and clean it up as much as I can. Have a look later and see if you can improve it more. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:18, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Towards a New Wikimania results
Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Help, help, melting!
Help, all the pretty white stuff is melting! I need a melting version of the snowman on my page, else I'll have to remove him and come up with something new! Bishonen &#124; talk 19:12, 27 January 2016 (UTC).
 * A snowman's demise - crop.jpg
 * I'll see if I can find one similar, but melting. If not I guess I'll have to draw one. In the meantime, Commons has File:Melting snowman - geograph.org.uk - 1658502.jpg or File:A snowman's demise - geograph.org.uk - 1658497.jpg - here's a crop one of them. --RexxS (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah... I've seen the ugly one, thanks. Do you think that would look good on my page? Will people even see what it represents, without a header? Draw! Draw! Bishonen &#124; talk 20:20, 27 January 2016 (UTC).
 * A Melting Snowman.svg
 * Is that any better? --RexxS (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey, I only just saw the melting snowman on this page! It was so far down, not visible on my screen. Finally the season on my page is just right! Thank you! Bishonen &#124; talk 00:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC).
 * 30 degrees C in my corner of this strange world; that snowman wouldn't know what hit him (her? snowperson?) Antandrus (talk) 00:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Ubi sunt
Agree with you here. I'd put him in the top two or three finest writers we've ever had in the whole history of the project. I was very sad when he left, although I could see it coming a couple of years off. Even now I still use a few of the phrases he coined, and not just on Wikipedia. As an aside, I'm utterly baffled by this Kafkaesque, bureaucratic exercise of deleting obviously public domain images; are these people daft? The whole thing seems generically related to the spiteful splatter of "citation needed" tags all over his work. Anyway I'll shut up. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You'll be pleased to know that he is still well and keeping busy - he even takes the time to visit Wikipedia every once in a while and makes a few quiet edits using another name. It helps keep me sane knowing that the toxic atmosphere around here didn't completely drive him away. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You'll be pleased to know that he is still well and keeping busy - he even takes the time to visit Wikipedia every once in a while and makes a few quiet edits using another name. It helps keep me sane knowing that the toxic atmosphere around here didn't completely drive him away. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Curious. What happened? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a long story, and I only know part of it -- the bit I would divulge publicly includes that he was sick of his work being degraded by various semi-automated bureaucratic processes, and having to spend more of his time defending rather than building. Imagine a career working in marble in an environment of ceaseless acid rain. Oh wait, we all do that. Antandrus (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, for the last line especially with which I agreed before I read it ;) - see my talk. Should he be on our sad list then? (linked under "despised and rejected", which I created in 1911) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's how I remember it: was an admin and an early creator of many fine literary Featured Articles. He was a regular collaborator with Bishonen and Giano and had a fine sense of humour. He used a non-admin account  to edit from work - he was a university lecturer at the time, if I recall correctly. Although virtually everybody knew who Utgard Loki was - his style is unmistakeable - he was eventually dragged to ArbCom in 2009 for operating an undisclosed alternate account. Take a look at Geogre's dignified defence in the "Statement by Geogre" section. There wasn't the bureaucracy in the early days and it would never have occurred to Geogre that there was any need to link accounts, probably because most folks operated on the basis of good faith in other editors. In my humble opinion, Geogre would never have used his alternate account to give the appearance of extra support for his position, but ArbCom found differently and desysopped him. Geogre took umbrage at being treated like a child or a criminal and stopped editing. Since then, the petty self-appointed guardians of the Rules of Wikipedia&trade; have torn down or eradicated his work because it doesn't comply exactly with the new standards that simply didn't exist when he was working. I've done what I could to stem the rot - User talk:Geogre  in 2011, for example (where I first ran into Nikkimaria), but it's a losing battle as there are far more people tearing down the best work than trying to preserve it. Sic transit gloria mundi. --RexxS (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely for our sad list then. I rescued an article the other day which was stubbed for similar reasons, and am quite proud that it has been suggested to appear on DYK on International Women's Day (not even by me). I have seen a GA deleted because the author was not trusted. It's back but not without effort. - Just today I was told that the game here is that anybody can add and revert, while I believe that adding is building the encyclopedia and reverting isn't (unless reverting vandalism, of course). Flores para los muertos. - On a different note (and death's bonds aren't even so different): could you take a look at the image review of BWV 4 and translate to me what is needed and how it can be fixed. - Did you know that Nikkimaria used hlist today? (see Sylvia Hallett) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ohh yes, I remember that -- it's even the time of year to recall Rimbaud's lines about the warm south wind of February stirring up the foul smells of yesteryear's dirt. Yes, one for the sad list. And damnatio memoriae for a couple of the names on that wretched ArbCom motion page.
 * The longer you are a Wikipedian, the more important it is to stay as far as possible from wikipolitics, if you want to remain a content creator. I may need to add an item about this. It's possible to continue, of course, just harder. Well I'm happy to know he is well, and busy, and even occasionally contributing: where have they gone? some have not even left. That's another curious thing about this place I rather like. So be it. Antandrus (talk) 20:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Gerda: I'm really sorry I haven't got any further with resolving down Nikki's concerns at the BWV 4 FAC. It's quite hard to play detective with other people's uploads when they haven't given enough information at the time. [Update:] I think I may have sorted the first one. I'll look at the others again now, but it may take some time to track down sources. --RexxS (talk) 21:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! - Back to the other: a genius! "Similarly, anyone who thinks that they can win a struggle against the voices of oppression on Wikipedia is misdirecting his or her energies grossly, if not criminally." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My favourite of Geogre's observations is User:Geogre/Comic. It's as true now as it was in 2006 when the "neapolitan mastiff" was being regularly baited. Any of the pages in Special:PrefixIndex/User:Geogre/ is worth reading. Some of them ought to be compulsory reading for anyone who wants to call themselves a Wikipedia editor. --RexxS (talk) 23:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. And it surprises me that there aren't more incoming links to advice as incisive as this. But he didn't self-promote. Required reading indeed! Or at least needs to be on an easy-to-find list somewhere. Antandrus (talk) 00:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Gave him Precious and added him to the sad list, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thaes ofereode thisses swa maegh, as the man said. (I got into a major kick of worrying out every word of Deor a couple of years ago, and the ambiguity of that poem is absolutely spectacular.) A tear rises to the throat, a lump to the eye, and some rough beast slouches over to the 'reset password' button. 64.234.66.158 (talk) 23:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. And it surprises me that there aren't more incoming links to advice as incisive as this. But he didn't self-promote. Required reading indeed! Or at least needs to be on an easy-to-find list somewhere. Antandrus (talk) 00:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Gave him Precious and added him to the sad list, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thaes ofereode thisses swa maegh, as the man said. (I got into a major kick of worrying out every word of Deor a couple of years ago, and the ambiguity of that poem is absolutely spectacular.) A tear rises to the throat, a lump to the eye, and some rough beast slouches over to the 'reset password' button. 64.234.66.158 (talk) 23:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Andrei Kobyakov
We're way beyond that. See Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Also, I responded on my user talkpage. Curro2 (talk) 01:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I hope you won't think any the worse of me if I decline to get involved with the action at The Great Dismal Swamp. Nevertheless, my advice stands: step away from conflict with the other editor, and concentrate on improving Andrei Kobyakov - it is far more satisfying to see an article dramatically improved than to score points over an online "opponent". Think about what you want as an outcome. Here's hoping you make good decisions. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I hope you won't think any the worse of me if I decline to get involved with the action at The Great Dismal Swamp. Nevertheless, my advice stands: step away from conflict with the other editor, and concentrate on improving Andrei Kobyakov - it is far more satisfying to see an article dramatically improved than to score points over an online "opponent". Think about what you want as an outcome. Here's hoping you make good decisions. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Diving weighting system
Hi RexxS, I would appreciate any comments or suggestions for improving Diving weighting system. I have done a bit of reworking, and think it is mostly improved, but a fresh set of eyes may bring some new ideas. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

FYI
From the Wikipedia article "English-speaking world":

"Approximately 360 to 400 million people speak English as their first language. More than half of these (231 million) live in the United States, followed by some 60 million in the United Kingdom, the first place where English was spoken."

"There are six countries with a majority of native English speakers. They are, in descending order of English speakers, the United States (at least 231 million), the United Kingdom (60 million), Canada (19 million), Australia (at least 17 million), Ireland (4.2 million), and New Zealand (3.7 million)."

Moreover, the most wildly estimated statistic I could find for Americans who speak English as their second or third language is roughly one fifth or 20% of the current estimated U.S. population of 320 million. That one fifth translates to 64 million Americans who are bilingual or speak English as a second language; conversely, the estimated 231 million Americans who speak English as their first language, as given in the Wikipedia article, probably understates American native-English-speakers by at least 25 million people, so that the total is probably closer to 256 million Americans, or substantially more than half of the roughly 450 million people worldwide who speak English as their native or first language.

It is rather odd that some folks try to count the 400 million to a billion people who speak English as a second or third language as an equally weighted segment of all English speakers. Clearly the balance of cultural weight and influence over the language is carried by native speakers and writers who generate the overwhelming majority of English language mass media, literature, and scientific and technical writing. While it is interesting to note that 125 million Indians speak English, only about a quarter million speak English as their primary language, and by the same token we could also draw attention to the 57 million Filipinos who speak an American-derivative variety of English.

Please do not assume that I am some sort of jingoistic American who believes in my variety of English uber alles, because I am not and I do not. I attended a rather well-known English/British university for a year of my graduate education, and I can write quite competently in British English when the need arises. I enjoy reading and writing in British English, and I am fascinated by how the language has evolved on both sides of the Atlantic (and elsewhere) over the past 200 years. I respect British English as the present evolution of the Mother Tongue, but I also believe that the variety of English which has evolved independently in the present United States since the 1700s is deserving of equal dignity and respect. And, yes, it does irritate the bejeebers out of me when a Wikipedia soap-boxer dismisses standard American English as some sort of parochial artifact of the British Empire, when, in fact, it is the most prevalent variety of the modern English language. Just as the use of modern British English vocabulary, spelling, punctuation and style should be respected, encouraged and supported in Wikipedia articles written in British English, so too should the use of modern American English vocabulary, spelling, punctuation and style be respected, encouraged and supported in articles written in American English. That's my bottom line, and that's why the WMF response to the force-fed use of ISO and DMY dates via auto-fill rankles so damn much. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you'll find my record in supporting the varieties of English used by our diverse readership speaks for itself. I regularly find myself fixing problems caused by editors unaware of ENGVAR in both directions; I always produce code that caters for both dmy and mdy formats; I spend time when writing scuba articles to ensure that values are always given in both metric and Imperial forms; and so on. I have never suggested that any of the varieties of English are any less worthy than the others, and I resent the implication that I assume anything other than that.
 * Nevertheless, we are writing this encyclopedia for the readers, not the editors, and it rankles with me when I hear claims that exaggerate the importance of American English over all others. The fact is that the majority of page hits on the en-wp do not geolocate to the USA. No matter how you look at the statistics, American-English speakers are not the majority of the 1.2 billion English speakers who make up our potential audience. It doesn't matter that a reader in Aberystwyth speaks Welsh as her first language and English second, the English Wikipedia is far more likely to have a developed article than the Wicipedia Cymraeg on a topic she searches Google for, and she will doubtless wish to read the English one. We're in the business of giving free access to the sum of human knowledge to every person on the planet, and it doesn't help that if we push the view that one language version has a primacy over the others. --RexxS (talk) 14:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, we are writing this encyclopedia for the readers, not the editors, and it rankles with me when I hear claims that exaggerate the importance of American English over all others. The fact is that the majority of page hits on the en-wp do not geolocate to the USA. No matter how you look at the statistics, American-English speakers are not the majority of the 1.2 billion English speakers who make up our potential audience. It doesn't matter that a reader in Aberystwyth speaks Welsh as her first language and English second, the English Wikipedia is far more likely to have a developed article than the Wicipedia Cymraeg on a topic she searches Google for, and she will doubtless wish to read the English one. We're in the business of giving free access to the sum of human knowledge to every person on the planet, and it doesn't help that if we push the view that one language version has a primacy over the others. --RexxS (talk) 14:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, we are writing this encyclopedia for the readers, not the editors, and it rankles with me when I hear claims that exaggerate the importance of American English over all others. The fact is that the majority of page hits on the en-wp do not geolocate to the USA. No matter how you look at the statistics, American-English speakers are not the majority of the 1.2 billion English speakers who make up our potential audience. It doesn't matter that a reader in Aberystwyth speaks Welsh as her first language and English second, the English Wikipedia is far more likely to have a developed article than the Wicipedia Cymraeg on a topic she searches Google for, and she will doubtless wish to read the English one. We're in the business of giving free access to the sum of human knowledge to every person on the planet, and it doesn't help that if we push the view that one language version has a primacy over the others. --RexxS (talk) 14:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Rexx, three quick responses --


 * "I resent the implication that I assume anything other than that" -- No need to resent the implication; it wasn't directed at you. I was venting.


 * "I think you'll find my record in supporting the varieties of English used by our diverse readership speaks for itself. . . ." -- Yes, it does, and I thank you for that.  I would hope my record of editing articles on Australian, British and Canadian topics likewise shows my appreciation for those varieties of English.


 * "claims that exaggerate the importance of American English over all others" -- There is no need to exaggerate the worldwide impact of American English in the 21st Century. It is what is, and the attempts to minimize that importance by some Wikipedians (not including you, Rexx) in style and formatting discussions is obnoxious.  I'm not arguing for the primacy of American English; quite the contrary, in fact.  As I said above, I'm arguing that American English deserves "equal dignity and respect," and I believe that's more than defensible.  And that's why, once again, our WMF friends are missing the point when they force-feed ISO gobbledygook and non-American style choices into our articles written in American English.


 * I think we're in essential agreement on all of the core points here, and I do appreciate your chiming in on BG's talk page. As predicted, WAID's party-line response was entirely unsatisfactory, and he and the WMF software people need to listen more and engage in techno-babble rationalization far less.  Wikipedia is written in English prose, and not computer-driven numerology; on this point, I know I am preaching to the choir.  Cheers.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, DL, but don't be too hard on WAID (who is a 'she', btw). She ends up sitting in the middle between the developers and the community, and has shown great patience in taking the flak from both sides when they don't see eye-to-eye. She's more often one of our allies in dealing with developers. I've been writing computer programs since the 1960s, so I can claim some understanding of the developers' mindset. Within a program, it's probably much easier to think in terms of the the "techno-babble", and the biggest failing I find of developers is their weakness in thinking in terms of the eventual user. It's really up to us to help them by explaining what we (and the general readership) need as clearly as we can, but we have to be realistic. Even with Micro$oft's vast resources, it took them years to produce a decent wysiwyg text editor, so we shouldn't expect miracles from our Visual Editor, which is a real budget production in comparison. --RexxS (talk) 15:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, DL, but don't be too hard on WAID (who is a 'she', btw). She ends up sitting in the middle between the developers and the community, and has shown great patience in taking the flak from both sides when they don't see eye-to-eye. She's more often one of our allies in dealing with developers. I've been writing computer programs since the 1960s, so I can claim some understanding of the developers' mindset. Within a program, it's probably much easier to think in terms of the the "techno-babble", and the biggest failing I find of developers is their weakness in thinking in terms of the eventual user. It's really up to us to help them by explaining what we (and the general readership) need as clearly as we can, but we have to be realistic. Even with Micro$oft's vast resources, it took them years to produce a decent wysiwyg text editor, so we shouldn't expect miracles from our Visual Editor, which is a real budget production in comparison. --RexxS (talk) 15:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I like YMD ... oh wait - I'm sorting files on my computer. baahaahaa <*runs and hides*> — Ched :  ?  11:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Infobox
Hi RexxS, or any of his stalkers, do you know of a suitable infobox I could use for this? Coordinates would also be much desired, if you know how to do it?  Cassianto Talk   10:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * (watching:) how about Infobox building? (I use Infobox person for all people ...) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Really Gerda? You kept that one quiet! ;) I'm afraid the template looks far too technical. I may just use the coding from another article which is similar. Thanks   Cassianto Talk   13:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've put a demo ibox on User talk:Cassianto/sandbox - you should be able to chop out any bits that you find trivial as it's an oversized template that's obviously grown to fit in everybody's taste in parameters. And please check the facts, as I may have made mistakes in transcription. For the coordinates, I often use http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html to find them. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks RexxS. Just one thing; I'm getting a red error message at the bottom of the page now, something to do with the coordinates?   Cassianto Talk   22:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * no more --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sometimes an infobox in building articles really does bring about an improvement. I was the one who requested those London ward maps a few years back for the infoboxes. In this case it looks great. I use flashearth to find coordinates, I'm sure Rexx's suggestion is equally as good.♦ Dr. Blofeld  22:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

tables tables tables
Crap! I'm really sorry that user on my page was alerted per the community sanctions for caste articles, because it meant I had to topic ban him per those, and log them here and it's ten times harder than logging AE sanctions in the central log. I hate tables so much. I've been messing with it for a while… could you please add the sanction since you're the tablemeister? With this info:


 * Topic ban
 * * Any edit to Komati caste and related pages for one month anywhere on Wikipedia per this notification.
 * One month
 * One month
 * One month

In despair, Darwinfish. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:56, 9 March 2016 (UTC).
 * ✅ --RexxS (talk) 22:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * And very pretty, too! Thank you! Bishonen &#124; talk 11:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC).
 * And very pretty, too! Thank you! Bishonen &#124; talk 11:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC).

Helium
Thanks! I think the helium day celebrations every year in india and the wrong history in a book will make a close look on the aricle necessary for quit some time.--Stone (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

UK Wikimeet survey results
Hello. This is a quick note to let you know that the results of the UK wikimeet survey have now been posted on Meta at m:UK Wikimeet survey 2015. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:07, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Your helpful comments
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Pyle stop
Hi RexxS, I have been doing a bit of cleanup on this draft, and I think it is now good enough to bring into article space. Would you take a quick look and comment before I move it? Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, I've gone through it and made a few minor amendments. Looks good to me as a stand-alone article, if a little weak on WP:GNG. I think Decompression practice should now be considered as a summary article because of its sheer size, so that justifies not merging as the reviewers suggested. You'll need to change the categories and clean the top, of course. --RexxS (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course, Thanks for the helpful input as always. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course, Thanks for the helpful input as always. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Fork or...
Re, I'm thinking... WP:Fork off or fuck off. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:42, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Scuba skills
Hi RexxS, I am considering polishing up Scuba skills and submitting for GA. Aside from the obvious need for more citations, which should be tedious but not difficult, are there any other major deficiencies that are immediately apparent to you? Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Mary Marquet
Hello sir,

I've just received a note informing me that this article that I created 2 hours ago will be presented for deletion because there is some policy in the en Wiki regarding living people. I understand that. Just Mary Marquet who was a leading figure in French theatre and cinema from the 30s' up to the 70s' died 36 years ago. Her dates are indicated in the first line of the page. How is it possible to apost a model regarding living people who died a third of a century ago? 15 pages link to this article; We live in a bizarre world don't we? Now, I'm also fully aware that I'm not used to the en Wiki practice. Yours, LouisAlain (talk) 12:28, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * . As the subject shuffled off this mortal coil some time ago, a BLP Proposed Deletion is indeed not applicable, so I have removed it. However, the article does appear to be unsourced, so it would be a good idea to add some citations - see WP:RS and WP:CITE for help with that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Boing! I've added a quick reference to her obituary on file at the Institut national de l'audiovisuel and indicated that further material is available from the article on the French Wikipedia. She has 53 film credits at IMDb, but I wonder how long it will be before somebody comes along and AfD's it because she's "not notable". --RexxS (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * And now has done a great job on translating the French version! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw the note he left at User talk:LouisAlain . I get reminded what I really enjoy about Wikipedia when a bunch of us can work together and it ends up with something good like that. --RexxS (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * And it's even better when other people do all the hard work ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Children
"...by demanding contrition or guarantees of future conduct..."

This is something that has bothered me for some time, quite apart from the infantilizing aspect - despite having sympathy with the intent of the Standard Offer.

Firstly we shouldn't mind if they are contrite or not. It is their edits that matter.

Guarantees of future behaviour are hostages to fortune, that many will baulk at giving.

It seems though that we do need some dialogue with some sanctioned users, other than just "I'll unblock you, but be aware if you go back to what you were doing before you will probably be blocked again."

Or maybe not?

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:57, 8 April 2016 (UTC).


 * It's all down to behaviour modification, and that seems to be something that folks in general have very little grasp of, and the Arbs in particular are not blessed with any greater insight. Most people probably remember what measures they encountered at school and extrapolate them (whether successful at the time or not) into adult behaviour. That's a recipe for treating adults as if they were children and it's no wonder that folks like Giano, Eric, Andy, etc. have had very poor experiences at the hands of admins. It's another reason I refuse to associate myself with the group. There are a lot of editors who would benefit from changing their ways - myself included, but that's not to say that they are doing anything wrong; they just allow others to put that gloss onto their actions, and if you throw enough mud, some will stick. If I could find a way of painless behaviour modification, I'd change Giano to suffer fools, Eric to stop calling a spade a fucking shovel, Andy to stop calling a 'non-automated metal-wood hand-operated digging implement' a spade, and myself to find trolls funny rather than annoying.
 * The teaching emotion (as Edward Albee calls it in Zoo Story) is the juxtaposition of carrot and stick. Anyone who is sanctioned and nothing else is rather unlikely to change their behaviour going forward; the recidivism rate is huge, particularly given the inability of the denizens of The Great Dismal Swamp to forgive, forget, or let things go. What is needed is some kindness to be shown: "I'll unblock you, and if you find yourself back where you were before, please talk to me [or Rexx, or 'Shonen, or Floq, or Rich ...] before you do anything precipitate. We're on your side and we want to help if we can."
 * All the very best, Rich, I'll catch up with you at a meetup soon. --RexxS (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

 * Normally I don't repeat what I said then (when we tried to have PumpkinSky set free from an unjustified block, the Great · Dismal · Swamp - no redirect needed), but it fits so well here (I just corrected my typo, - I was still in the beginning of learning accessibility ;) + added emphasis): Thank you for looking in detail at the aspects of complicated tables, improving their accessibility and clarity, and for wise words concerning the spirit within the project! - When I read the above, I laughed loud, twice, - in good spirit ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

User's stats
Hi RexxS,

Can you tell me if the English Wiki possesses this kind of page that is of use on the French Wiki?

Thanks in advance for your answer, LouisAlain (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, we don't have an exact analogue that I'm aware of, but the page at Statistics has links to a lot of statistical pages, including some similar to the French Wikiscan. Have a look at:
 * List of Wikipedians by number of edits
 * List of Wikipedians by number of recent edits
 * Those may give you some of the information you're looking for. If not, let me know - my talk page watchers may know of more resources for you. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 13:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Those may give you some of the information you're looking for. If not, let me know - my talk page watchers may know of more resources for you. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 13:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Most pages like this on en-wiki died along with Toolserver and thus no longer work (including List of Wikipedians by number of recent edits, linked above). Those that either still work, or are planned to be revived at some time, are listed at Database reports. I imagine that a full-scale "breakdown of users by everything they've done" along the lines of Wikiscan's userstats report would be extremely unpopular—even simple lists like WP:WBE and WP:WBFAN generate significant opposition. You can generate creepy-looking stalk-and-compare activity reports on individual users or groups of users using this tool. &#8209; Iridescent 13:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks to both of you. It goes to show things are different in the country I come from ... and conversely of course LouisAlain (talk) 18:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. ''This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page.'' For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)