Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:02, 22 May 2013

Reminder

• {{Infobox climber}}
• {{Infobox climber/doc}}
• {{Climbing sidebar}}
• {{Climbing navbox}}
• /dissent

Berhault and thanks

Thanks, Nathan. I'm learning, I love the place and all the good work I see you guys are providing. As soon as I have enough time in evenings or afternoons. I'm trying to help and participate as much as I can, Still don't know how to use most of the features, how to send a message like this very one (should I do like that, editing your page?), etc. Glad to help. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akseli9 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Akseli9, you're doing great work. You got somewhat unfortunate at Articles for creation in that a relatively inexperienced editor reviewed the article. Sending messages is just like editing an article, which it looks like you know how to do, except that it's on a talk page. To sign a talk page, just type four tildes ~~~~. That will automatically expand (for me) into → Nathan Johnson (talk) 17:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Conflict Resolution

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Conflict Resolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Template help

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Could someone familiar with templates have a look-see at User:Nathan Johnson/sandbox and fix it. Hopefully obvious what I was trying to do, but if not, I want the {{Cite book}} template to be the expanded text when the template is substituted. Thanks. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, please don't. Have a look at lua templating at WP:LUA which can do this far more effectively with a simple string.format Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Unhelpful. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

{{subst:User:Nathan Johnson/sandbox|7|pages=41-65}} yields:

Steven M. Cox and Kris Fulsaas, ed. (2003). Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills (7th ed.). Seattle: The Mountaineers Books. pp. 41–65. ISBN 9780898868289. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |origdate= ignored (|orig-date= suggested) (help)

Let me suggest that after you tweak this and get it where you want it, find a good Lua expert to help you convert it. We do seem to be heading in that direction. – PAINE ELLSWORTH  21:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I don't think it'll get used more than a handful of times, only when I come across an incomplete reference to the book (usually an old edition that I don't have). That's happened a few times already, and I just ignored them, but in the future I want to update them. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 02:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, cool, and You're welcome!. FYI, the details on safesubbing are here. – PAINE ELLSWORTH  08:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Any idea why this doesn't work inside <ref> tags? -Nathan Johnson (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Evidently due to the occasional need to improve the code, templates have to be transcluded between ref tags. So leave the "subst:" out at the beginning and don't substitute the template. One possible drawback with this is that other editors, if they come across a deadlink that lies within this template, will find it more involved than usual to fix it. – PAINE ELLSWORTH  20:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Steven M. Cox and Kris Fulsaas, ed. (2003). Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills (7th ed.). Seattle: The Mountaineers Books. pp. 41–65. ISBN 9780898868289. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |origdate= ignored (|orig-date= suggested) (help)

PS. It's not explained, but it is noted at Help:Footnotes#Limitations

WP:LAME

I just wanted to say, I don't fully agree with this refactoring of your talk page comment, but I do agree that it is totally inappropriate to refer to WP:LAME in closing an RfC. StAnselm (talk) 05:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

This is lame. It's lamer when you consider how many bytes have been wasted arguing on the talk page. It's lamer still that some people don't actually think it's lame. I got nothing else; I don't care that my comment was refactored, though I don't think it was inappropriate to point out a lame edit war. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 05:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

But the RfC had nothing to do with the edit war... StAnselm (talk) 05:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Right... absolutely nothing. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Placing a "Travel guide" link to Wikivoyage next to the geographic coordinates in articles on cities and countries

Had I not been involved in this, I would have suggested this be closed as no consensus. I don't see that any developed there. I see opposes and alternate ideas and conditionals with little change in positions. Rmhermen (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the note. I'll re-read the discussion. (permalink for me). -Nathan Johnson (talk) 19:07, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to sleep on this. I don't think there's any hurry, so I'm not going to re-open it, but I don't think it should be implemented yet. Though I wouldn't object if you, or someone else, did so. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with Rmhermen here. There was no consensus no add a top link merely for Wikivoyage as you stated in your rationale. There were many conditional supports and opposes, mainly depending on whether or not this proposal was extended to include the other sister projects. I did not tally the votes, so there may or may not be a consensus to do so under these modified conditions. This should at least have been mentioned as one of your considerations in closing this discussion. —Ruud 12:31, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Re-done. Thank you both for your comments. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I still think your closing rationale lacks the necessary depth to do the discussion adequate justice and had hoped you would have consulted with another uninvolved editor, but being the proponent of this proposal I should probably let the matter rest for now. —Ruud 17:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Your summary at an RfC posting

Hi Nathan,

I just happened upon your December 3rd edit summary on the talk page here. While it is ancient news, I would appreciate if one item could be corrected? You wrote: "The result of this RfC is that two user receiving topic bans from this article." That is factually incorrect. Only one user received a topic ban in that RfC. The other user voluntarily self-banned to contribute toward resolving the issue. Big difference. And I wouldn't want anyone reading that summary to be misled by it. So if you could please fix it, that would be much appreciated. Thanks! 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:C89A:7FD2:E561:B6DC (talk) 19:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. However, I don't think I'm going to change the close at this stage. For one, it's pretty stale at this point, and, more importantly, the functional difference between self-banning in the face of a ban and a ban is nil. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Anna Stöhr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Austrian, Arco and World Youth Championship

Rock Master (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Arco and Vladimir Zakharov

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on MediaWiki talk:Bad image list

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on MediaWiki talk:Bad image list. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Copying within Misplaced Pages RfC

Hi. You closed WT:Copying within Misplaced Pages#Upgrade to Policy as no consensus two weeks ago. Would you consider amending your close to "consensus against promotion" or adding an explanatory closing statement? Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 04:35, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the delay, forgot about this. Oops. :-) -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Sockpuppet

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Sockpuppet. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:George Maharis

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:George Maharis. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Modified close

Hi, I took the discussion "Arbcom positions" out from the bottom of your close of User:Jmh649/Will Beback on the grounds that it is a different discussion. Cardamon (talk) 17:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Close of Merge proposal for Francesca Hogi

Hi. The author of the article is unhappy with the closure. I've made a note of this here. I'm not sure of the review process in these cases. The link to doesn't really make it very clear what the appeal process is. -- Whpq (talk) 11:54, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I thought consensus was clear, but apparently not. I have no problems with someone else taking a look at it. Cheers. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 14:53, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I think consensus was quite clear, but MouthlessBobcat (talk · contribs) has reverted all the changes after the close of the discussion. -- Whpq (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Francesca Hogi, Survivor Caramoan". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  03:45, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Litecoin

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Litecoin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Thanks...

Hi, I will try to contribute. So far I only tried to arrange Adam Ondra page, because I always found sport climbing on en.wiki in a very stub condition and I don't speak english very well. I never understood for example why american climbers like Robyn Erbesfield, Sean McColl, Daniel Woods, Sasha DiGiulian, Alex Puccio, Paul Robinson (climber), which are so famous in Europe, didn't have a page on en.wiki (or why Patrick Edlinger is called "free solo climber" :P). Probably because sport climbing and its competition are related to Europe and so there is less interest in sport climbing in USA and more interest about big walls or trad climbing. There are many things in sport climbing to correct, I will try to contribute to fix them. Cya! --Rotpunkt (talk) 15:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi Nathan Johnson, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Misplaced Pages:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! INeverCry 16:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Angela Eiter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Austrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Responded

Hi I responded to you at Talk:Arlene's Grocery Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 08:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, MarioNovi (talk) 07:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Your close

Hello Nathan. I imagine you've seen this discussion, but if not I would urge you to revert your recent move close for the reasons articulated here. I must say, I'm a bit surprised that as a non-sysop you would close a move discussion such as that, before the 7 days have run. Where it is clear that -- even if you disagree with them -- 80% of the !voters read the guidelines differently than you do. My experience is non-sysops tend to not close such discussions, and certainly not close them early (usually something reserved for a SNOW), when 80% of !voters have a view that differs from the non-sysop. We can of course run this through review and whatever other noticeboards are necessary, but I wonder if instead of wasting community time you might not give consideration to the points that your early close of the 7-day process might not perhaps be better handled by you reverting, and at minimum allowing the seven-day process to proceed unless the discussion is closed via SNOW ... which would be unlikely if only 20% of !voters see matters as you do. Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Done. Admins have no special powers in closing discussions though. I was just responding to the request at WP:AN/RFC. I didn't realize that it hadn't run the allotted time. Sorry. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 18:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. Much appreciated. As to non-admins closing -- yes, that is allowed. But, and I base this on various discussions I've seen at AN/I and AfDs, when it comes to a potentially contentious close (which, for the reasons I mention above, one could perhaps view this one as), from what I have seen in community discussion the suggestion appears to be that it is better left to an admin. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

See also Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/Archive 12#Review. It was about RfCs, but RMs allow non-admin closes too, even contentious ones. AfDs are different and I don't venture there. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. My comment was based on various discussions I've seen, but the comment here by Arb Committee member New York Brad captures the flavor of most of the discussions I've seen. No doubt, as even in that discussion, there are discussions and/or individual points of view that differ. I don't see any material difference in what the discussion is about, as long as it calls for a closure (e.g., RFC, AfD, move, RfA). Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

That comment was about a RfA closed as SNOW by an admin (non-crat) in March 2008. I don't understand how that is remotely related. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

It's the concept, though as you point out the circumstances differ as it was admin vs. crat, rather than non-admin vs. admin. I see the issue as being the same one, as I said, whether the discussion is about a move or a deletion or any similar community discussion that a non-admin may close.

The wp guideline Misplaced Pages:Non-admin closure is another example that contains language on the general issue of non-admin closures. It states:

"In general, administrators are responsible for closing deletion discussions. However, at times the many discussion venues become backlogged.... Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to an administrator."

Epeefleche (talk) 21:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

That's an essay, not a guideline. It's specifically about deletion discussions. And your "quote" isn't even on that page. It's on Misplaced Pages:Deletion process, which is, again, about deletion discussions, and not applicable here. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes -- I was citing to the guideline (as indicated by my quotes), but incorrectly gave you the link to an essay (which in turn links to the guideline). So my comment and quote are as to the guideline. My link was incorrect, and for that I apologize. Again -- in my view the rationale that we find at Non-administrators closing discussions, discussing the closing by non-admins of community discussions (in that circumstance, deletion rather than move discussions), is precisely the same as the rationale at move discussions. The fact that it is a move -- rather than a deletion -- does not at all impact the fact that it is better to have non-admins not close clearly contentious decisions, especially before the 7-day deadline, and especially when 80% or so of 15 editors have !voted one way and the closer is closing the discussion the opposite way. All the good reasons for a non-admin not closing those discussions apply, in my view, whatever the nature is of the community discussion.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I commend Nathan on his quick and friendly self-revert of the close. And I fully agree with Epeefleche that because of the very contentious nature of this particular title issue - for an extremely high-profile article, no less - it would be preferred that an admin does the close. However, I believe that many participating editors would not be opposed instead to a very good non-admin with strong closing experience. In any case, thank you to Nathan for undoing the close and, therefore, preventing a wikiriot. ;) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI... I finally found the policy about closing requested moves that I was looking for. ;) Rule #1, which was violated by a few editors, says, "Don't close requested moves where you have participated in the move survey." In particular, read the "Who can close requested moves" section, which clearly explains the conflict of interest issues I alluded to previously. With regard to Nathan's involvement, the policy also talks about non-admin closures. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 09:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Columbia Boulder (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Climbers and Camp 4

Daniel Woods (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Richardson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

About your removals

I am just writing to an administator. --Rotpunkt (talk) 16:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

WTF? Go ahead. WP:ANI is where you should go. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 16:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

No, Rotpunkt doesn't have to go to ANI, so there's no need for WTF. I assume that Rotpunkt came to me because they realized I used to hang out in Nideggen. See my comments on Talk:Daniel Woods. Drmies (talk) 16:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The WTF was because when someone disagreed with him, instead of discussing, he immediately went to a (presumably) friendly admin. ANI would have been preferred for a response from neutral admins. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 16:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Settle down. Asking a friendly admin for advice is perfectly alright. What did you think, a block was going to be handed out immediately? Admins do a lot more than that, I hope. I don't think I've ever interacted with this person--ANI is for intervention, and I don't see the need for that yet. Having said that, though, I think you need to take it easy with the reverts. Removing those "Biography" headings strikes me as retaliatory, and removing them makes the articles worse, not better. But see that talk page: if you all cooperate you can improve the project. Drmies (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I took the last week off from climbing articles because this user was pissing me off. I come back and within an edit he is already calling my edits vandalism and "writing to an administator". The heading removals was not retaliatory. Had I not been taking a short wikibreak this past week, I would have removed them as I saw them. It just happens I saw them all at once. And I disagree; I think removing them makes the articles better, hence why I did it. But I am open to communication, which in my experience, this user is not. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 17:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Read WP:LEAD. Without "Biography" or some such section, there is no lead. Drmies (talk) 17:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Adding a "Biography" heading between the first and second paragraph does not make a WP:LEAD. All it does is add an unnecessary heading. If he actually wants to write a lead, I'm fine with that. But that's not what he's doing. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 17:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: User:Xenophrenic

On February 24 you recommended a topic ban for Xenophrenic (and four other editors) at WP:ANI. Here is an RfC/U regarding the behavior of Xenophrenic: Please participate and provide diffs of your efforts to resolve these disputes with Xenophrenic, as well as any diffs of what you may consider to be his problematic behavior. kind regards ... Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)