User talk:Severo/Archive 7

Sorry if
Sorry if it looks like I was accusing you of trying to sneak changes to infobox cyclist under the radar. You clearly did the right thing in bringing the discussion to the attention of WT:CYC back in April. Not sure how I passed over it at the time: I guess I saw it as mainly dealing with jersey icons, and only really noticed nationalities disappearing when EdgeNavidad started rolling it out. Kevin McE (talk) 10:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Montreal Biodome
Thank you for fixing the official web site tag. I have bee frustrated by the fact that the template can't handle some URLs for a while, but did not know of the workaround. Donlammers (talk) 11:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
For the interest in our project, may I ask what brings you over to help? Btw, there is a backlog of sports article to review, as I never had time or will to take care of them beyond pre-screening them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Over 50,000 edits, looking for new things to keep me interested, oh and I moved to Warsaw. SeveroTC 19:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, then let me welcome you to the project :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There's also all the articles within one or two levels of who haven't been tagged - on my count 700 of the 2500 total articles in that category tree. SeveroTC 10:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There is lot of work to be done. That's Wikipedia for you :) Thanks for your help! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

There will be a problem tomorrow
When 2010 Vuelta a España is updated with the overall results. The race infobox doesn't seem like it can display the blue polka dotted jersey icon (I tried it in previews, and it does the others just fine, but not that one). Do you know what edit might be necessary to the infobox, or am I looking at it completely wrong? Nosleep ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 16:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What's the link to the jersey? My guess is it is not in the same naming format and if so I will request a speedy rename at Commons. SeveroTC 16:49, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Jersey blue dotted.png Nosleep  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 17:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, a png rather than an svg. We can either make an svg file of it or make an edit to the template to look for File:Jersey color.png if File:Jersey color.svg doesn't exist, which I think is possible but I'm not entirely sure how to do. SeveroTC 17:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Whatever works. Nosleep  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 19:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I while ago, I made File:Jersey bluedots.svg. I couldn't get it at the right location, so I gave up. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 07:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That does the trick, and "blue dots" is a better description than "blue dotted" (which could mean blue with dots) anyhow... that said I will make a renaming request at commons for File:Jersey bluedots.svg to File:Jersey blue dots.svg. - that's probably not a valid reason for renaming as per File renaming... oh well it does the trick anyway. SeveroTC 09:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Road Cycling
With all due respect, "Road Cycling" is a sport. The International Cycling Union does name the world championships the "UCI Road Cycling World Championships" for good reason. And I say this with the best of intentions, I mean to cause you no offence, I am just trying to correct an honest error. Deaddogwalking (talk) 08:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

See: http://www.geelongcity.vic.gov.au/2010cycling/ Deaddogwalking (talk) 08:51, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * On Wikipedia, the name of the sport is road bicycle racing: road cycling is any kind of cycling that happens on a road. When I cycle to work in the morning, it is road cycling, but I am hardly in contention to win a medal for it. We need to disambiguate it somehow, while "road bicycle racing" isn't the nicest of phrases, it is the one chosen and I would welcome anything that sounded nicer! Also, the UCI name the road world champs the UCI Road World Championships (in contrast, say, with UCI Track Cycling World Championships, which specifically uses the word "cycling" within its name); obviously the name of the sport is not "road"... Please do keep a check on your Manual of Style edits, such as use of sentence case (i.e. "Road cycling" rather than "Road Cycling" or "Road bicycle racing" rather than "Road Bicycle Racing") and WP:LOW which says that lists of things should be oldest first, and finally that unnecessary icons such as jersey icons shouldn't be used in lists in biography articles. And finally, your link is funny, because it shows the poor editorial standards of that website: look both at the logo on that website which disagrees with the page title and at the UCI website. SeveroTC 08:59, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd also challenge you to find references to "road cycling" within the UCI rule book, usually it is referred to as "road" or as "road races" (I found one oblique reference to "road cycling"). But either way, the unambiguous name of the sport is road bicycle racing. SeveroTC 09:12, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

You are very right indeed. My mistake. I do wish there was a more phonetically pleasing title, but I must conceed you are right in keeping the title consistent. And thank you for the editing tips for cycling pages; they are a much needed lesson for a wiki novice such as myself. Deaddogwalking (talk) 13:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Redlinked categories
Hi. I noticed that you've added non-existent categories to several pages. I reverted one and then after seeing the others I thought I'd let you know that, per WP:CAT, an article should not have redlinked categories. Could you please revert the ones you did? Thanks. Bento00 (talk) 22:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And then I almost immediately created the categories along the lines of existing category structure. Perhaps you could give experienced editors more than two minutes grace to do this? SeveroTC 22:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Incidental use of Railway Logo
Regarding your changes on Warsaw Wileńska station, Warszawa Gdańska station, you're being inconsistent. You're missing [], [], [], [], [], etc. Ajh1492 (talk) 13:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not missing anything. The Belgian Railways logo is not under a fair use licence, nor is the PKP logo at PKP Group which would possibly be acceptable in the railway station articles. The PKP logo is of course used on the Polish State Railways article - this is what fair use is after all! The fair use rationale applied to the PKP applies only to articles where that is the logo. It is not the logo of the stations. You could use File:PKP.svg as it doesn't have the same rationale so can be used widely. SeveroTC 13:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * So if you had a problem with the logo why didn't you just substitute the alternate logo instead of deleting it? Ajh1492 (talk) 14:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * What a daft argument. Why didn't I just finish off writing the whole of Wikipedia while I was at it? Wikipedia is built by a series of small steps. If you don't like other editors changing what you have written here, you shouldn't submit anything at all. I think I have helped you enough and more than I have had to. I don't have unlimited patience and I won't bother helping you in future. SeveroTC 16:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is built by a series of small steps. . . . seems if you knew of a better logo to use you could have just made the modification instead of just deleting the logo you claim a problem with. It's the same number of keystrokes as deleting the existing logo. Considering the station is owned and used by PKP . . . your argument is specious and without merit. Why don't you consider providing positive contributions instead of negative ones? Ajh1492 (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that most users would agree that the removal of copyright infringement is a positive contribution to the encyclopaedia. Have you actually read WP:FAIRUSE? I'm sorry I didn't link to it previously. Basically, any image which has a fair use claim can only be used on the article it directly refers (i.e. in this case Polish State Railways). The keystrokes you have used here could as easily have been put to use putting in the fair use version. If you haven't seen the small text underneath the edit box, please review it now: If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. Please do not be offended that I removed an icon which you had added. For what it's worth, I thought your edit was very positive as I have been looking at some Polish railway stations recently and a lot need work doing to them and there's a huge number of articles missing (except in one voivodeship). SeveroTC 18:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem, just trying to plug away on fixing the St.Petersburg-Warsaw Railway entries and saw that the other Warsaw rail-related articles were a mess and tried to start cleaning them up. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

World Tour/World Rankings
Hi Severo, please see my edit at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling for a discussion of these - I think that they're basically the same thing. --Pretty Green (talk) 10:36, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Seen it and replied :) SeveroTC 10:57, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Sport in Białystok
Saw that you were interest in sports articles, was wondering if you could take a peek at Białystok's sports section. I've adopted the article to try and finish getting it to Class-B. Would like to have the sports section as nice as Warsaw's or Krakow's. There's a lot of raw material in the PL:WP article that I haven't had time to translate, I've been busy correcting factual errors in the history, geography, politics & transportation sections. (my goal was to get the Bialystok PKP Station article created, but ended up cleaning the main article up). Ajh1492 (talk) 23:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at this soon. My initial thoughts are to replace what is there with a few sentences of prose (similar to Kraków) move all the existing information to a new page, Sport in Białystok (Poland is under-represented by Sport in city compared to other countries). But first I will take a look at some more GA city articles and see how they treat sport. SeveroTC 14:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That would be cool. I agree that the main article needs to be kept to a reasonable length. There should be a sub page with a good summary paragraph in the main article. Ajh1492 (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I took a look at this, but I couldn't find any model sport in city articles through the whole of Wikipedia - certainly there is nothing at GA-level or above, so I need to think about it a bit more. I don't want it to just be a forky list article but actually have some prose as well as lists... SeveroTC 13:54, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Zhang Lei (cyclist)
Under WP:CAT, in general, an article should not belong to a category and the category's parent category. Category:Olympic cyclists of China is a subcategory of Category:Chinese cyclists, so I believe that the latter category can/should be removed. --Nlu (talk) 11:36, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Not quite. We would do this if we also had a category such as Category:Non-Olympic cyclists of China (with the simplistic assumption that "of China" and "Chinese" were the same) for Chinese cyclists who hadn't competed at the Olympics. Almost all Olympic participation categories are in addition to the standard categorisation scheme. They are examples of WP:DUPCAT. SeveroTC 12:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * But I see no rational reason why this should be the case. (The "of China" and "Chinese" equivalency is a nonissue; even if "Chinese" were to encompass non-Chinese-national-ethnic-Chinese athletes, Chinese-national athletes would still be a subset thereof.)  This duplication of category creates the littering of categories on articles, which I think reduces, rather than increases, the usability of the categorization scheme.  --Nlu (talk) 12:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * So take it to WT:CAT. They are cases of WP:DUPCAT and there is no reason to just ignore that part of the guideline without wider discussion and broader consensus. SeveroTC 12:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

A suggestion about your AWB edits
Although I personally agree with the stub sorting changes you made recently I wanted to warn you that I just had my AWB access removed and the debate is ongoing at ANI for doing much more than that because the changes didn't change anything to the rendering of the page. Since working with stubs is directly mentioned in the AWB rules of use I just wanted to let you know so that someone doesn't do the same to you. --Kumioko (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm slightly confused. I'm doing stub sorting work, i.e. changing one stub tag for a more specific one (for example earlier changing Scotland-stub to Scotland-sport-stub where the article was about sport). I don't see this mentioned in the AWB rules of use (although it does mention just moving their position) and the ANI discussion seems to refer to bypassing template redirects (although I only read that one quickly). Am I missing something? SeveroTC 18:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Like I said I agree with what you are doing but some users could perceive this as a violation of rule 4 "something equally trivial". My AWB access was removed from removing garbage characters from talk page banners (like task forces = to no or blanks) under the argument that it doesn't render any changes to the page. Anyway you might be ok but I wanted to let you know just so you were aware. Just for info here is an example of an edit that was perceived as "minor" and trivial and aganist the rules of use. so IMO if this is ruled as against the rules of use then the same logic "could" be applied to what you are doing as well. Good luck and happy editing. --Kumioko (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, well I think they are different, but thanks anyway :) SeveroTC 18:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Colors
Talk to me! What are you trying to do? Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)