Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:09, 30 March 2021

This is Primefac's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48Auto-archiving period: 15 days

AfC Reviews

Hi, please have a closer look on the AfC Reviews from Jennyire2, for example this one claiming that she needs at least one source although several were present. I came in the last 2 weeks about several ones like this from her, she also was reminded several times not to take Articles to AfD without WP:BEFORE (happened a couple of times, see her talk page ). AFC Perm on trial ?! CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:38, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm doing some AFCP reviews tomorrow, so I'll add them to my list of folks to check. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, you may also want notice this one Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mariah200. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:16, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Similar username

Thanks for letting me know. They have concatenated the elements and each has a slightly different spelling. I'm okay with it, I think it's unlikely to lead to confusion. Leaky caldron (talk) 13:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Cool. Primefac (talk) 13:32, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

what–?

You removed something on my userpage and revdel'd every previous version with the note "trim"? What happened? What did you remove? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh! My apologies. I was in the process of alerting you with this note but apparently never saved it to your page. I removed a bit of information that really isn't a good idea to add, even though it may seem "fun". Primefac (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Got it! thanks so much :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

TWICE?!?!

I can't believe I screwed that up. I misread the header. My mistake. Thank you. Buffs (talk) 17:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Heh, no worries, it's a bit different setup than usual so I can understand the confusion. Primefac (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

That was very nicely handled. Great example of going the extra mile. Risker (talk) 17:44, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Sometimes a second set of eyes makes the next step a lot smaller. Cheers! Primefac (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Question - Redirects

Why Are Song Pages Getting Redirected To The Album The Song Is From? Hello 50 (talk) 17:49, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Songs that are not notable generally get redirected to the related album, as it is something that people might search for. Primefac (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Yoninah

Please explain why what is at present what we have about "one of the pillars of Misplaced Pages" is hidden in the history. If the link is a problem, can we have the thread without link? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

If you really feel strongly about continuing that discussion, you are welcome to revert my removal. However, without that link, there is no evidence or other indication that Yoninah is dead, and to me it feels inappropriate to discuss the death of an editor that might not actually be deceased (though I will admit I find that a very small possibility in this instance). Primefac (talk) 13:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'm not going to wheel war on you, but I disagree with your action. The last day of Yoninah's editing coincides with this one's death date. (Redacted) Also, there might be cause here for someone like yourself to protect Yoninah's account so no one else can edit under their name. If we jumped the gun on her death, Yoninah can surely prove who they are to the bureaucracy. — Maile (talk) 13:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Maile66: we C-ban people for fishing editors' RL identities: we certainly do not defend doing so just because the editor is not currently editing, and we rely on either reliable sources, as in obits, or information from close relatives, often via OTRS. We certainly do not begin making identification of the dead OK, if they did not do so in life, assuming anything like that has happened. ——Serial 14:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Serial, please see just below. She wasn't in a position that will generate an obit. Love and sadness flow now, and suppressing them makes them stronger. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Your behavior, Gerda Arendt is disgraceful, as is that of Maile66. Not only do you perhaps betray the memory of one of our editors, you support an administrator who should understand OUTING but publicizes RL identities. ——Serial 14:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't betray the memory of Yoninah, and have no words for you saying so. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

(ec) I didn't feel strongly about continuing. I feel strongly about informing the community. I received support privately that she is the one. (It's in Hebrew, which I can't read, and if I gave you the link, you might suppress that as well.) She wasn't in a position that will generate some official obituary. We better mourn now. - In the - sadly unlikely - case that some day she appears, we can "suppress". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I could be off-base here. Let me get a 2O from another OSer and I'll get back to you both. Primefac (talk) 13:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, don't know "off-base". - Edit conflict, what I wanted to add is: Just in case you don't know: she was missed, look for her name, Crisis on DYK because of her absence. I think saying that she was one the most beloved editors of Misplaced Pages isn't saying too much. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

• Just as an update, for any interested, I have conferred with some of the OS team and we are generally in agreement that there is enough private information from various editors to verify her passing, but that the link to the specific announcement of her real-world identity should remain suppressed for continuing privacy reasons. Primefac (talk) 17:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the update, I still am unsure as to how I should have approached the situation after finding out about Yoninah's passing since so many editors were concerned about her well-being, but I will be absolutely certain to refrain from disseminating private information in the future. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 18:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Everything except the link was fine, the main issue was that there was no on-wiki disclosure connecting her to the individual in the provided link so there were still privacy concerns. It's definitely not an easy issue to deal with, but if you've ever got questions about this sort of thing in the future (hopefully not though!) feel free to drop me a note here or over email (and that goes for anyone reading this). Primefac (talk) 18:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Thanks for clearing that up for me and for taking the time to verify her passing. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 18:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
      • How about some instruction regarding this on top of Talk:Deceased Wikipedians which I think is the proper place to post. I was twice in the sad situation to know privately about a subject's death before Wikipedias (German and English) and obituaries. Once, I mentioned my source (without any link), in the other case I waited. Who will now post what on Deceased Wikipedians? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
        • Asking more precisely: will you post something, Primefac, now that you looked into it and probably are best informed? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
          • Yes, that's a good idea. I'll see about tweaking the headers. Primefac (talk) 20:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Infobox artist

Hi there! Could you please consider firing up PrimeBOT to remove the unsupported parameters |residence= and |home_town= from {{Infobox artist}}? I hope it would greatly reduce the number of articles in Category:Pages using infobox artist with unknown parameters. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Um... those parameters seem to make up a tiny fraction of that category. It looks like most of the issue lies with |bgcolor=, |imagesize=, and |influenced=. I mean, I'm happy to do a run, but I'd rather remove the major issues as well. Primefac (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Wonderful - I agree with removing the major issues too! Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Drafting an RfC about TfM

Hey, I'd like to notify you that I'm considering opening an RfC about preventing "merge" closures at TfM without a merged version available. As you're pretty active at TfM, and at ACN's suggestion, I feel like you might be interested in the proposal. It's currently at User:Elli/tfmrfc - feel free to edit or comment your thoughts, I'm not particularly attached to the current state but I'm interested in solving these general issues at TfM. Thanks! Elli (talk | contribs) 04:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You are correct, I would be interested in watching how such a proposal played out. Based on my experience at TFD, that is definitely one of the major points of pointless contention in merge discussions, but precedent has all but thrown that argument out the window (and a backlog at the Holding Cell is nothing new, though I do admit I haven't had time to dedicate to clearing it lately).

Your proposal is interesting, though I wonder if in its current state it really does anything - the way I'm reading it, a merge-without-sandbox gets closed as "merge" but since it doesn't have a sandbox version it's actually... not merged? It sounds like too much hoop-jumping to me. Primefac (talk) 10:22, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a tough thing to get right. I considered proposing requiring a merge implementation to nominate in the first place - but the issue there is that it would be a large waste of time to write the merged code of complex templates only for the nomination to fail. So, this kinda felt like a middle ground - if you'd like to merge some complex templates, nominate it, get a consensus, ideally merge it within the timeframe, or if not, write the merged code and then re-nominate (should be easy since you got consensus originally). Perhaps allow skipping this step say, within a year of closure? Just don't allow "this should be merged" to linger forever. Elli (talk | contribs) 10:48, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

For what it's worth there are only a half-dozen templates listed at TFDH that are >6 months old, which is actually not too bad (considering that when I started in 2015 there were years-old discussions pending), but I know I'm mostly just making excuses.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, though; most of the folks that nominate templates cannot code up a working example, and doing all that work just to have something shut down seems rather pointless. On the other hand, I do agree that there should be more of a push for "you wanted it merged, so do the heavy lifting", as I feel like sometimes the TFDH crew are spending more time trying to figure out why a template was nominated for merging than actually merging them.

I guess it really just comes down to what you want this proposal to do. If it's forcing editors to come up with a working prototype of the merged templates before the TFD ends, you might get support but I suspect the number of merge requests will drop to zero. If it's trying to add in a semi-backdoor-pseudo-DRV that can throw out the consensus of a merge discussion simply because there's no working example, it will likely have majority opposition (purely from the "we must respect consensus" crowd). If you try to be too wishy-washy about "must" vs "should" vs "there's consensus but no sandbox so..." then there will probably be majority opposition. I think before you go live with the RFC, maybe contact a few more of the TFD "regulars" and/or start an informal thread at one of the Village Pumps about spitballing ideas, at least so you have a better idea of where the problems lie. Primefac (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't like this. For two main reasons. The first: I believe this is putting the cart before the horse. I don't like to waste time writing sandbox versions of a merged template if the community doesn't want to merge in the first place. One example was Infobox GB station which failed merge multiple times before for ideological reasons, rather than technical. Second, some people have good merge ideas but can't/don't want to write the template code themselves. So it sits around in holding, which is not a bad thing. Nobody is hurt by a template sitting around in holding. It's pretty much a WP:PHAB for templates - consensus exists, but no implementation yet. Same thing applies for other areas on Misplaced Pages. Software change? Get RfC consensus then file a WP:PHAB. Edit filter for sources? Get consensus at WP:RSN then file a request at WP:EFR. etc. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh and third, sometimes merges have small details which editors disagree on. TfD is not a good venue to sort these out. Usually I close such discussions as merge and say figure out the nitpicks in holding or template talk. This proposal would, presumably, require a finished product before the discussion can be closed as merge, which doesn't work for a lot of templates. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of the current proposal either. The work to merge two templates can be massive and committing many hours of work without any guarantee that it will be used would not be something I would do. I have to admit though that it isn't that rare to have mergers were I wished I would have opposed it because of things that come up during the implementation process which would be a problem of the past. It also wouldn't solve many of our oldest items in the backlog, {{Aircraft specs}}, {{fb cl}} and {{Old move}} immediately coming to mind as places where the actual template merging isn't the problem but replacing all the uses. Others still like {{Football squad player}} would probably never come to fruition either if we couldn't make the decision this proposal has consensus, but there is no consensus on the exact implementation. All in all I think the status quo is manageable but perhaps some procedure to relist discussion based on issues discovered while implementing a merger would be beneficial. Sorry for the rambling. --Trialpears (talk) 14:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

On that last point, I have relisted/re-opened discussions months after the fact when it turns out implementation is impossible or not what the participants meant. Primefac (talk) 14:22, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

case in point probably -- 2 years sitting in holding. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Yep, looking at that one right now promted by this discussion. I've implemented the template version without a module like most other user link templates, but I have no idea what to do with the protection banner. All seem to be through {{Pp-usertalk}} which I don't really understand the usage of since partial blocks and blocking people from their own talkpage exist. --Trialpears (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Devil May Care (TV series)

I understand the character guide in this TV show's page was cut and pasted from an article on Screenrant.com. Please put the page back and I will delete the copyrighted material and replace it. Is there a reason why the whole page was deleted and not just the problematic material? Please let me know so I may address. Douggold (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

The only thing in the article that wasn't a copyright violation was the opening paragraph, and in those instances we delete the article. I do note there are a fair number of references and formatted material (e.g. the infobox) so if you would prefer not to start entirely from scratch I can restore a redacted version to the draft space for continued work. Primefac (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

I would indeed appreciate a restored redacted version. If you could restore the episode guide chart as well that would be helpful, as the info in that chart is public. Please let me know how I can access the draft version to work on, I'm still figuring this all out. Appreciate the help. Douggold (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Restored to Draft:Devil May Care (TV series). I will note that while the information in the episode table might be freely available, the episode summaries are not (and should be written in your own words). Primefac (talk) 11:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

I believe the episode descriptions were the network's official info. Are those allowed to be used? Douggold (talk) 16:35, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

If they wrote them, then I would bet good money it's under their copyright. Primefac (talk) 16:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

User rights question

I asked for AFC rights and on March 1, you kindly said yes. Can you please also add AfC to my User Rights, assuming that's appropriate? Thanks! HouseOfChange (talk) 02:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Given that there is no AFC userright, and you were added to the AFCH list, there's nothing more for me to do. Primefac (talk) 11:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining! I guess I will take the "This article has been an Articles for Creation reviewer for 0 days" userbox off my user page. HouseOfChange (talk) 14:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Does that mean you no longer wish to be a member of the project? Primefac (talk) 11:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

My problems with Starzoner

I apologize if my behavior seems to be disruptive in your eyes but that was not my intention, it only seemed unfair what the user Starzoner did and that is why I denounced it three times. Now that it has come to light that this is a previously blocked user, you may consider that my claims made sense after all. I promise to stop going to multiple administrators from now on. Greetings. Bruno Rene Vargas (talk) 02:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

As I said somewhere else, I totally get it - there was a case a few years ago where an editor was doing something pretty similar to Starzoner, only with music-related articles (and some slightly-more problematic behaviours). The editor on the "receiving" end of the page moves and "takeovers" was similarly frustrated. I didn't mean to belittle your concerns by any means, but even with a valid claim such as this one when you cry to too many people they start to ignore you. It's one of those unfortunate things of being anonymous on the internet, as it's not always obvious who has good intentions and who is just trying to raise a fuss (clearly, you fall into the first camp). Primefac (talk) 10:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

AfC member

Hello Primefac, I'm unable to use AFC helper script because I have been renamed. Will you please update the list. Thank you! –Hulged ⟨talk⟩ 12:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 13:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! –Hulged ⟨talk⟩ 13:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

A prime thank you! #189733

	Primeception
	Thank you for your generous assistance and resources with Template transclusions! Shushugah (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Always happy to help :-) Primefac (talk) 00:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Help!!! Hazhar Saleh

Thanks for deleting the speedy delete tag and verifying the article.

Also, could you please remove the other tag that is related to several topics? The article has very authoritative sources that all refer to the same topic.

Article: Hazhar Saleh Aliasghar ghorbandokht (talk) 22:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the article other than to merge the histories, and I don't really have the time to dig into it and verify whether the tags are appropriate. Primefac (talk) 22:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Please sir🙏 A lot of effort has been put into writing the article Please check and then remove the tag. This motivates me a lot, thanks Aliasghar ghorbandokht (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I cannot make any guarantees about when or if I will be able to look at this article. Primefac (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

help for Hazhar Saleh article

Thanks for deleting the speedy delete tag and verifying the article.

Also, could you please remove the other tag that is related to several topics? The article has very authoritative sources that all refer to the same topic.

Best, Thank You. Brave.soul92 (talk) 22:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Brave.soul92, what is your relationship to User:Aliasghar ghorbandokht? Primefac (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

We are friends, and we've written this article together. Black Cats band and their singer Hazhar Saleh are very famous in Los Angeles. We thought it's a good idea to make a wiki page for both of them. Brave.soul92 (talk) 22:16, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks🙏🌹 Take a look whenever you can In his spare time🌹😃 These are the experienced users who give us young writers hope and motivation

Aliasghar ghorbandokht (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

COI templates TfD close

I know I'm not the most neutral regarding these, but I was flabbergasted to see this discussion closed, while still attracting new comments, as a straight "keep" without reference to or analysis any of the arguments made for or against deletion. I could see the case for delete or no consensus based on the strength of the arguments but other than by vote count a keep outcome seems very much counter to what I'm reading (a large number of keep votes are essentially "I like these" or "they're useful" with no engagement with any of reasons why others disagree with them or how existing alternatives do the same (or better) jobs without the identified disadvantages.) Thryduulf (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I was chatting about this with someone on IRC and mentioned a few talking points that I didn't bring up at the close itself. I will expand my close in a bit. Primefac (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Justice R Subbiah Page deleted. A Request, Please

It is absolutely correct to remove the Copy Right Violations. I Agree. It is the Policy of Misplaced Pages. My request is not to defend the Copy Right Violation. I request your suggestion to remove the portion which is a Copy Right Violation, instead of deleting the entire page. Please, consider my request and suggest me! Thank You. --A.R.V. Ravi (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

90% of the page was a copyright violation, and in such cases the pages are deleted. What little would have remained can just as easily be written from scratch. If necessary I can provide the references and the code that was present in the infobox for you to simplify the recreation. Primefac (talk) 17:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I respect the immediate response from you. Yes. Please provide the references and the code that was present in the infobox for me to simplify the recreation. --A.R.V. Ravi (talk) 05:37, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Please provide the references a nd code. Thank You ! --A.R.V. Ravi (talk) 23:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I will get to this tomorrow; it was a busier day today than I expected. Thank you for your patience. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hmm

Seems I missed the bit where you and the good Captain are members of ArbCom now. Just letting you know that I wasn't talking about you in front of you as some kindof rhetorical device. GMG 02:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I wasn't taking anything negative from it. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Summer Olympic flags

Hello! Is it possible to add the correct flags for the 1948 Summer Olympics for Bulgaria and South Korea. Bulgaria used the flag from 1948 which they changed to three days prior to the games. South Korea used the 1945 flag in both the Olympic Games of that year until they changed the flag in October of that year. Spain used the Olympic Committee flag during the 1980 Summer Olympics. South Korea used the 1949 flag in the 1984 Summer Olympics and Winter Olympics. Yours sincerely, Sondre --80.212.169.236 (talk) 10:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I'll look into this tomorrow. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		For making the decision that you felt was just rather than what others wanted. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

FYI

Re: . See block appeals at and . --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)