Misplaced Pages

User talk:174.3.123.220: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:27, 22 December 2016 editSporkBot (talk | contribs)Bots1,244,917 editsm Replace template per TFD outcome; no change in content← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:04, 21 July 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Removed stale messages from inactive IP talkpage. (Task 13)Tags: AWB Replaced 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Blanked IP talk}}
== Changing otheruses4 to about ==

Why are you changing otheruses4 templates to about? Seems unnecessary, and in most cases the otheruses one is being used for its intended purpose. ] (]) 03:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to know the same thing. ] (]) 16:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

: <s>I think this user is quite the mystery. Puts much effort into something that only he really understands, is a wiki-recluse, and happily goes about his business unless someone reverts his edits. I think we should name him/her Jamie. Jamie, </s>whoever you are, welcome to wikipedia and thank you for your commitment! -]|] 18:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

::I apologize if you found any part of that comment offensive. My intention was to welcome you to Misplaced Pages, and not insult or offend. However, as another user has pointed out on ], you might have thought I was making fun of you.
::Also, although my comment may have read otherwise, I have no issue with changing <nowiki>{{otheruses4}} to {{about}}</nowiki>– in fact, I've made similar efforts in the past to get rid of deprecated templates. So to any extent that my attempt at humour may have been misinterpreted, I really am sorry about that. -]|] 00:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

: I think Jamie is an excellent name for him/her. ] (]) 20:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

::It's perfectly logical to change {{tl|otheruses4}} to {{tl|about}}. Although I never do it as the only change, I do it myself when editing an article. Note that {{tl|otheruses4}} is a deprecated old version of {{tl|about}} and redirects to {{tl|about}}, so it technically uses less resources to call {{tl|about}}. However, policy says we shouldn't worry about resources, so the only real reason to change it is that is simply easier to read and understand. Can any of you describe the uses of the six different templates from {{tl|otheruses}} to {{tl|otheruses6}} without looking them up -- I can't. <strong>Jim</strong> - ] (] • ]) 23:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

==Welcome to Misplaced Pages==
{{#ifeq: {{lc:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}} | {{uc:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}
| {{#ifeq:{{ns:0}}||
'''Welcome!'''

Hello, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for ]{{#if:|, such as the one you made to ]|}}. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] and ]
* ] (using the ] if you wish)
* ]

You are welcome to continue editing articles without ], but I highly recommend that you '''<span class="plainlinks"></span>'''. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see ]. If you edit without a username, your ] ({{ROOTPAGENAME}}) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on ], or ask your question and then place <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code> before the question on this page. Again, welcome!
|{{error|<big>'''Substitution required. Replace <nowiki>{{welcome-anon}}</nowiki> with <nowiki>{{subst:welcome-anon}}</nowiki>.'''</big>}}}}<!-- Template:welcome-anon -->
| '''Welcome!'''

Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for ]{{#if:|, especially what you did for ]}}. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
*]
*]
*] and ]
*] (using the ] if you wish)
*]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:{{#if:|{{{1}}}}}|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome -->
}} ] (]) 00:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

== April 2010 ==

] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. The <span class="plainlinks"></span> that you made to the page ] has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the ] for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative ]. You may also wish to read the ] for further information. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-huggle1 --> ] (]) 03:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

] Thank you for your contributions to ]. When you make a change to an article, please provide an ]{{#if:|, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to ]|&#32;for your edits}}. {{#if:|{{{2}}}| Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.}} <!-- Template:uw-editsummary --> ] (]) 03:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note re the Toucan. I'm afraid a disambiguation link in an article on a sports player is not an adequate source for a well-established article on a bird. If you have a source for that term other than the disambiguation play, please supply it. Thanks very much, ] (]) 03:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

<s>] Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did with <span class="plainlinks"></span> to the page ]. Such edits constitute ] and are ]. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the ] for testing. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-huggle2 --> ] (]) 03:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

] Please do not ] pages, as you did with <span class="plainlinks"></span> to ]. If you continue to do so, you will be ] from editing. <!-- Template:uw-huggle3 --> ] (]) 03:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

] This is the '''final warning''' that you will receive regarding your disruptive edits, such as <span class="plainlinks"></span> you made to ]. If you ] Misplaced Pages again, you will be '''] without further notice'''. <!-- Template:uw-huggle4 --> ] (]) 06:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)</s>

] This is the '''final warning''' you will receive regarding your ]. The next time you disrupt Misplaced Pages{{#if:|, as you did to ]}}, you may be '''] without further notice'''. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-generic4 --> Other notes about the disruptive template replacements appear below. Please stop replacing {{tl|otheruses4}} until the RfD closes. -- ] (]) 11:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

<div style="padding:5px; border:1px solid #c0c090; background-color:#FEC;" class="user-block"> ] Anonymous users from this IP address have been '''] from editing''' for {{#if:24 hours|a period of '''24 hours'''|a short time}} {{#if:disruptive edits contrary to recent TfD|for '''disruptive edits contrary to recent TfD'''|due to persistent ] originating from your proxy server or network}}. If you have a registered Misplaced Pages username, you may ] and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our ] first. {{#if:|] (]) 11:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)}}</div><!-- Template:uw-ablock --> -- ] (])

== Hi there ==

Looks like you've gotten a lot of vandalism warnings for edits that, as far as I can tell, are not vandalism, but rather completely well-intentioned additions. Sorry about that.

May I suggest creating an account? Lots of vandalism from editors who aren't logged in, so folks might have their guard up.

Best,

]|] 06:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

::I agree. ] (]) 08:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
::: So do I. Create an account. It's easy, free, and anonymous. <strong>Jim</strong> - ] (] • ]) 13:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

== Re: templates replaqcemeny ==

Saw your message on ]. I believe ] had wrote a bot that does this. See ].

I don't know if it's running anymore, but you could contact ] and ask.

Also if you nominate {{tl|otheruses4}} for deletion at ], on the basis that it has been deprecated by {{tl|about}}, the template will certainly get replaced when deleted (either by a bot or manually). -]|] 12:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

== get a life ==

There are some sad people that work this site but you my friend, are one of the lamest....if ''otheruses4'' has been made obsolete by ''about'' then nominate the template for deletion and let a bot do the rest!

Or do are going to single handedly check and change all 3.26 million+ articles on English WP? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I suggest you ignore this Internet Tough Guy. Not a very nice comment there.

:But the suggestion to nominate the template for deletion is valid and will save you a lot of manual work- I have suggested the same in a previous comment. See ], and let me know if you have any questions about the process. Otherwise, if you don't feel like doing that, feel free to continue with your efforts, but {{tl|otheruses4}} has thousands of transclusions.-]|] 16:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

::Fascinating the amount of action this IP talk page is getting...I came here for the same reason as everyone else, in particular because I placed the OU4 template when I created an article, and it has since been replaced. If I hadn't come here, I wouldn't have known to replace it with {{tl|about}}. Well done, we all enjoy editing in our own way, if you want to manually replace templates, have at it. Keep up the good work.--] (]) 08:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
:::However you should use ] to explain that you are replacing a depreciated template, you (should) will get much less flack.--] (]) 08:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

== Sorry ==

Hello there,

Just wanted to explain further in case you felt I, or others, were attacking you. My first message was in response to the improper vandalism notices you received because I wanted to let you know that there's nothing wrong with what you were doing and you shouldn't have gotten those messages. I did recommend registering, but I should clarify that there's no requirement to do so, and it's perfectly fine that you are editing without registering. You are not in the wrong here at all.

As mentioned before, my second message was meant entirely as a joke, and I didn't mean anything against you by it. I think you're doing a great job. I used to take care of the templates for deletion page quite a bit, so I know how tedious it is to change templates around. I also agree that {{tl|about}} is better than {{tl|otheruses4}} (mainly because the name is clearer).

I realize that maybe the second message didn't really come off as a joke, and it sounded like I was trivializing your intentions. Although that's not what I was thinking, maybe that's what I said (unintentionally!). Mea culpa, sorry, and thank you for your hard work. -]|] 08:26, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for your response! I am relieved to know that you weren't offended, which would have really sucked given the hard time you got with the unwarranted reversions & vandalism warnings. -]|] 08:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi there. I see what you're saying, but keep in mind that the book was controversial because of its racist undertones. So I think the author being a Scot who lived in India for an extended period of time is pertinent to give the reader contextually-relevant background on its authorship.

What do you think of this:"The Story of Little Black Sambo, a children's book by ], a ] who lived for 32 years in ], was first published..."?

This might flow better: "The Story of Little Black Sambo, is a children's book by ], a Scot who lived in India for 32 years. The book was first published..." -]|] 08:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

:I didn't mean controversial in the sense that the article needs a disclaimer. I meant that the book is famous, in part, for being racist (or rather having a racist slur in the title). So the author's race and where she has lived may be relevant. The book is entitled "little black sambo", and the cover features a caricature of a dark-skinned Indian boy. If the author is a caucasian Scot living in British-ruled England, this may have a different racial undertone than if it were written by an Indian person at the same time & place.

:So normally it would be overkill, but when the article is about a book that allegedly has strong racist undertones, perhaps the information might be more relevant. -]|] 10:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

== Re: Deletions otherususes4 ==

I think the attitude would be that it causes no harm so why not keep it as a redirect? Usually tfd's are successful when the template (content) is not needed. Old templates are typically kept as a redirect as long as they're still in use. You can try nominating if you want.

Instead, if you're serious about this, I would recommend marking the template as deprecated. See ]. I don't think it would be contentious, considering it's already been decided that the name should change.

When the template becomes orphaned & deprecated it may be a criteria for speedy deletion, see ]. In any case, it will put editors on notice that they should be using {{tl|about}} instead. Actually getting it to an orphaned state (not used by any articles) might be a problem.

As I mentioned before, ] wrote a bot that orphans templates which should make your life easier. See here: ]. Not sure if it's still running, but you can ask. Probably best to ask to run the bot when it's clear there are no objections- leave the orphaned notice up there for a couple weeks and leave a note on the template talk page, creator's talk page, and maybe talk pages for other frequent editors.

By the way, even if the bot isn't running, a template marked as orphaned should attract other editors to help you out.

Good luck, and let me know if you have any questions or need help.

]|] 09:53, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

:If you want to nominate for deletion, please nominate at ] first and then I'll put the notice up. But I would try the bot route first as long as there is consensus to do so, see Tim's response below. By the way, I didn't even notice that the template was protected, sorry :$ -]|] 23:17, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

::Sorry, I was planning on putting the notice on the talk page, which I incorrectly assumed was also protected. I notice it's not protected, so you can just put a note on the talk page. You can't really put the tfd notice on a redirect page, as far as I know. -]|] 23:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

:::This is actually a redirect, so I don't believe ] would be the correct venue. Also, given that the ] was denied, I don't see this as going anywhere at the moment. Perhaps once the transclusion count has dropped a bit, then one could try again at ]. ] ] 18:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{talkback|Tim1357|ts=22:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)}}
Hey there, I to your query. ] (]) 22:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

== Bot to orphan template ==

Hey Jamie ;)

I noticed you got in touch with Tim, and he made a good suggestion to put a note on the bot request page. I just found out that the bot that normally does this job at ] is ], so after you put the bot request note up, try leaving a message at ].

Since the owner has not made an edit in a few weeks, you can leave a note here after you've contacted him, and I'll send an email. I believe non-registered users cannot send emails. -]|] 23:22, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

:I noticed that it redirects to the owner's talk page. I might be best to leave just that one comment on the owner talkpage.:-)] (]) 23:32, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

::Right, that's what I meant. I sent him an email. -]|] 23:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

== Please stop ==

Please stop replacing "otheruses4" with "about". The redirect is up for deletion, either it will be deleted or not. In the meantime, it should be left alone, not systematically replaced. Particularly because, apparently, a bot request to do the replacing has already been denied. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 23:24, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
: <s>Uh, you gonna continue?</s> Ah, I see that it was suggested to you that if the transclusion count drop a bit, then it would help. The template is surely transcluded on at least tens of thousands of articles. Good luck with that... <font face="Verdana">]&nbsp;(])</font> 02:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

== Extra space in Regions of Slovakia ==

It's very easy to fix these. Just . <font face="Verdana">]&nbsp;(])</font> 06:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
: Not always. And if it were, now you know how to fix it in templates, anyway. <font face="Verdana">]&nbsp;(])</font> 08:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

== Clarification of fact in ] ==

Great to see that you've found other tasks on Misplaced Pages besides changing otheruses3 -> about, pending the bot request. By the way, ] is one bot that does changes like this (see its contributions, ). If you haven't had any luck finding someone willing to put that in their bot, you can ask that bot's owner.

My research indicates the population of Hungary protested the ]. My ref doesn't mention protests directly (claims widespread opposition by Hungary's population). Since the first reference did mention protests, I think protests by the populace is a fair inference. I made changes and removed your {{tl|huh}}.

Take a look at to the article and please feel free to improve further. -]|] 19:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
:My apologies. I must have clicked the wrong diff button, because I thought I was the one who added it. That is really a great idea, Jamie. I'm surprised there isn't already a contradict-other-multiple template, so I created one: {{tl|Contradict-other-multiple}}. Please let me know if it works for you. -]|] 03:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
::Hehe of course I don't mind. I made the talk page paramater mandatory, see my change to your edit. Do you think it would be better if that parameter was optional? I figured if you're claiming a conflict with ''multiple'' articles, it is probably best to force you to specify the talk page where the issue is discussed.

::I still have some tweaking to do, although it should be ok to use now. I'll add it to the template messages page when I'm done with that :) -]|] 12:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

:::That makes sense. I have added an optional "discuss =" parameter. The syntax you tried to use earlier works now. -]|] 19:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

{{talkback|frazzydee|rfd_not_likely_to_pass}}]|] 17:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{tb|Plastikspork}} ] ] 20:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

== Breathe Slow ==

Accident. I must have been looking at the previous version, and didn't notice that when I edited.&mdash;](]) 00:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

== Stop ==

Do not continue replacing otheruses4 with about. It is inappropriate to continue making this change, and I will block this IP address from editing if it continues to be used for this purpose. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 02:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

:Also, I and some other editors have rolled back the edits made with no edit summary since April 17. As I explained above, making mass edits while an RFD is open is inappropriate. If the redirect is deleted, a bot will make the changes, while if the redirect is not deleted then no changes need to be made. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 02:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The point here is that we just need to wait for the RFD to close, and not make any massive changes in the meantime. I am not involved in the RFD and will not be; you can make your arguments there and a neutral admin will close the discussion eventually, with a decision. But in the meantime it is premature to assume the result will be to delete the redirect. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 03:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

:{{Querylink|Glenn Perry|qs=&diff=next&oldid=356694346|Reverting}} the IP's ] replacement of {{Tl|Otheruses4}} with {{Tl|About}} seems even more pointless. -- ] (]) 13:04, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

::I did not roll back on the first warning, higher up. However, making large-scale changes presents a sort of ''fait accompli'', and sometimes leads to circular arguments ("this template should be deleted because it is orphaned", when it was only orphaned by the person who wants to delete it &ndash; that is exactly the situation here). Rolling back the edits is one way to avoid that situation. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 13:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

*Just a note that this is now being discussed at the Administrator's Noticeboard. You can find the discussions here: ]. Regards, --] (]) 16:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Since the RFD was closed as "keep", resuming the edits would be inappropriate, and will result in this IP address being blocked. I did not participate at all in the RFD, but the conclusion there seems to be that the redirect is OK. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 00:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

:Yes, the discussion was whether to delete the redirect. Its conclusion is that the redirect is OK, at least for the time being. So any massive series of edits to unlink the redirect would be inappropriate. If the usage declines via normal editing, that's a different matter. But to start unlinking the redirect now would ignore the RFD and our usual practice that edits should not be made just to bypass redirects. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 01:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The difficulty with was that, because you made ~500 edits with no edit summary, all of which seemed aimed primarily at changing otheruses4 to about, I and other editors simply rolled them all back. Here are two pieces of advice:
* Always use edit summaries
* If you change otheruses4 to about in the course of regular editing, that's fine. But since most pages don't include otheruses4, if you make a series of edits in which almost of the pages you edit have otheruses4, then it's clear that you are actually targeting pages that have otheruses4, rather than just doing general editing.
The best resolution here is to forget about otheruses4, which was kept at RFD, and move on to other things. You nominated the redirect for deletion, and if there were consensus to get rid of it then it would already be done. But the RFD closed as "keep", which means there is no reason to go through and replace it large numbers of pages. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 11:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

This is the last warning I will give. It is apparent from your edits that you are continuing to remove the template, while making trivial other cahnges ot the article (e.g. ). This is still inappropriate; the template was not deleted and does not need to be removed from articles. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 04:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

== A way out of this situation with otheruses4 ==

I encourage you that you help me move DAlinks on the top of articles while replacing otheruses4 with about. Here's . I expect about 4,000 pages to need update. Can you help me with that? -- ] (]) 23:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You can replace otheruses4 with about while doing the job I am telling you. You are not allowed to solely change otheruses4 with about and this is because this is a very minor edit. Page layout is serious stuff :P

I think the best strategy to find which articles are these is to go to and start checking. It should be the 1/4 of these articles that needs change.

For more efficiency consider creating an account and applying for ]. There are more tricks you could do.

Thanks for the help in advance! Happy editing. -- ] (]) 23:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

== Why ==

>no editsummary

Why no question mark? Why no proper spelling of "edit summary"? Why no listening to advice about making pointless changes against consensus? Why ask why? --] (]) 05:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

== Contradiction on Treaty of Trianon ==

See here

If you add it back please make a note on the talk page explaining the contradiction. Thanks! -]|] 16:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

== April 2010 ==

I don't want to get drawn into this silly template replacement argument; it's been hashed out in enough places already. I do think it's a fantastic waste of time to be making hundreds of essentially pointless edits to articles to provide an excuse for just happening to change the template at the same time, but I'm not going to try to stop you doing it. But when you dive into an article looking for random things to change, there's a good chance that you're going make the article worse, rather than better, and that I object to. Words and clarity matter and just because you *can* change something doesn't mean you should. If you're going to continue on this mission of yours, you are going to have to take greater care. Right now you're just making a lot of extra work for other editors who have to evaluate and undo the harm you're causing.

Here are two examples of the dozen or so edits I've had to undo - and .

I'd also like to note the ] matter where you introduced a "contradiction" template supported only by an edit summary rather than the more helpful Talk page entry called for by the template, restoring the template twice after perplexed editors removed it. And after an editor expressly asked you here to raise your concerns on the article's Talk page before restoring it again, your effort was confined to an unhelpful recap of your prior edit summaries on another user's talk page, . In light of your insistence that it remain, but unwillingness to discuss it, I wound up having to track down the supposed contradiction, figure out if it *was* a contradiction, and add a Talk page discussion myself explaining why I was removing it. It was only a half hour of my life, but I shouldn't have had to spend it on that.

In short please take more care in your edits or you are going to find yourself blocked. ] (]) 11:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
:Ah. I see that you have been blocked for 24 hours. I hope you'll take it to heart. ] (]) 11:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

== Admin, Post On Technical Village Pump ==

There might be a mix up. When I click on last messages, it doesn't take me to the last message. This needs to be posted on bugzilla. And this is probably the reason I didn't get that warning.] (]) 20:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
:Where exactly are you clicking on "last messages"? -]|] 21:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
::Oh, sorry I mean last change.] (]) 00:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::You mean when you get a new talk page message? If so, I think it just takes you to a diff of the last change made to your talk page...? -]|] 22:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::Yes.

::::But for me, it does not take me to the last diff.] (]) 22:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::Please post the URL it takes you to, and I'll have a look. -]|] 03:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

== JhunterJ needs to be reviewed ==

{{unblock reviewed|1=The last edit I made to an article was . It is impossible to determine if sent before I made .|decline=I'm not accepting this unblock request because the header under which this is filed is an accusation that JhunterJ is incompetent. Try filing the next request in a less accusatory manner. —<font color="228B22">'']''</font> <font color="00008B"><sup>(] ])</sup></font> 00:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)}}

{{unblock reviewed|1=The last edit I made to an article was . It is impossible to determine if sent before I made .

I will not make further edits to replace otheruses4.] (]) 01:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)|decline=That you made any substitutions after is reason enough to block you. We'll see after this block expires if you will live up to your promise. ] ] 06:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)}}

== Admines ==

Look, JHunterJ was either competent or not competent. He either made a mistake blocking me not. I sent out the evidence that he blocked me when I did not violate the last warning.] (]) 01:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Jeremy, this message is for you
:Please note I don't get two bites at the apple. Another admin will review your request this time. —<font color="228B22">'']''</font> <font color="00008B"><sup>(] ])</sup></font> 01:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:BTW, the block was for continuing the disruptive edits of replacing outheruses4 after the warning of 11:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC); one such edit was on 04:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC). -- ] (]) 01:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::No, the rfd had closed BEFORE you sent that warning! And this is why you should check your data before blocking people, so you aren't accused of incompetence, and if <u>I</u> am wrong here, please tell me why you have overlooked this!] (]) 01:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::But the disruptive edits should cease both before and after the discussion. Sorry if my adverb gave the wrong impression. -- ] (]) 01:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::::According to , who is an admin:
::::{{quote|You are not allowed to solely change otheruses4 with about and this is because this is a very minor edit. Page layout is serious stuff|] (]) 23:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)}}

::::How did I violate anything? I am entitled to an explanation.] (]) 16:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

My comment should be read as following: If you want to fix pages' layout, go ahead. Don't solely do minor replacements as the ones above unless there is consensus to do so. Apparently, no such consensus exists at the moment. -- ] (]) 16:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:{{quote|Don't solely do minor replacements as the ones above unless there is consensus to do so.|] (]) 16:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)}}

:Huh?] (]) 16:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
::Maye after I fixed the word makes more sense? -- ] (]) 17:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Makes sense.:-) But this was the only example:, specifically: which I interpreted as removing spaces was fine.] (]) 17:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

== Edit summaries ==

] Thank you for ] to ]. When you make a change to an article, please provide an ]{{#if:|, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to ]|&#32;for your edits}}. {{#if:|{{{2}}}| Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.}} <!-- Template:uw-editsummary --> ] (]) 18:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

== Your submission at ] ==
] Thank you for submitting an article at ]. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at ]. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article and resubmit when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. ] (]) 06:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
== Your submission at ] ==
]Your nomination at ] was declined, and ] was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to request article creation again once the issues have been addressed. Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages! '''<span style="font-color:black;">•</span> ] ] ]''' 15:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Template replacements - "otheruses4" to "about" ==

In asking to be unblocked you pledged, "I will not make further edits to replace otheruses4". See ]. Apparently you have resumed the practice anyhow. For just three of several such edits, see , , . I suggest that if you want to avoid future, and longer, blocks, you stick to your word. ] (]) 16:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{talkback|WP:VPT|.7B.7BChemicalBondsToCarbon.7D.7D|ts=20:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)}}
I changed the layout of the blank rows. The table is now drawing the top blanks all in the 1st period. I also modified row above the Lanthanides to remove the line that was jutting out the right of the series. ] (]) 20:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
:I followed Gadget's advice and modified the template again. —] (]) 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

== Headings ==

Since we seem to disagree on what are suitable edits to headings, I thought I'd share my thinking in the hope that we can avoid further edit disputes.

I agree that the word "The" should come out when encountered. Likewise a heading that simply repeats the name of the article. But that does not mean all prepositions are wrong. "History" by itself can mean for example, " in history", or "history of ". The former might describe the important role of the article subject in various historical episodes. The latter would, by contrast, describe the history of the item itself - how it was derived, how earlier versions differ from current versions. Similar observations might be made for "fiction", "culture" and other common headings. By and large I think relational prepositions like "in" or "of" are important to make it easy for the reader, reviewing the table of contents at the top of the article, to understand what the rest of the article might contain. So please, leave prepositions in where they add meaning. Can we agree on that? Thanks. ] (]) 20:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
:I'd also add that I looked pretty carefully at ] that you've been citing in your edit summaries, as well as the preceding section on article titles, and I think it's entirely consistent with what I've just said. It advises, for example, to leave out "the" or "about" (presumably because they add nothing but length), and to avoid repeating the article's title in headings - but says nothing about other prepositions. It does caution that headings should be changed only after careful consideration, which is really just what I'm urging anyhow. ] (]) 21:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
::We seem to be carrying on this conversation in two places (the other being my ], but I wanted to say that I thought your caption changes to Dystopia, , were pretty good. More like that, please. ] (]) 13:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

== May 2010 ==
] Thank you for ] to ]. When you make a change to an article, please provide an ], which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to ]. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-editsummary --> ''You have been asked recently to please use edit summaries, now I am asking you again.'' <font face="Georgia">''']'''<sub>'']''</sub></font> 01:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
:I would add too that simple allusions to various WP pages, like ], aren't helpful unless the change you're making is in keeping with an obvious and well-known requirement of the page. (Contrast, ].) Your edit summary, whenever possible, should describe what you're doing and why in a way that doesn't compel other editors to immediately set out for another page. ] (]) 11:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

:''If this is a shared ], and you didn't make the edit, consider ] for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.''

] Thank you for ]. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with ], a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the ] of clear-cut ] and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-minor --> ] (]) 07:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
:''If this is a shared ], and you didn't make the edit, consider ] for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.''

=== Concerning your ignoring of warnings ===
You've been asked on several occasions to supply a ] when making edits.

I can't see that you have replied to any such criticism, and ].

You should follow ], and the only way I'm aware of, to encourage you to do so, is to start down the road of reporting your edits to the ] page. I'm giving you fair and polite notice that this may happen. Please heed this and other editors' warnings. ] (]) 10:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

:Hey 174.3.123.220 you know that there is an option in "my preferences" (under the Editing tab) to always get a reminder whenever you don't supply an edit summary. Maybe you should activate this to avoid similar problems in the future. -- ] (]) 11:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

<!-- :{{tb|Trafford09}}
I've commented out the above TalkBack, as it was seemingly ignored. -->

==== Edit Summaries ====
(This block copied at 11:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC), from ]).

I am not obligated to supply edit summaries.] (]) 11:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

:Hi. Thanks for talking about the issue. Have you read ]? ] (]) 11:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC))

:As it seems you have time to on Misplaced Pages, I hope you will consider replying yes/no to my above question. ] (]) 10:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

] Welcome to Misplaced Pages. <span class="plainlinks"></span> on the page ] worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the ]. You may also wish to read the ] and its related ] for more information. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-huggletest1 --> ] (]) 04:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

] Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at ]. Your edits appear to constitute ] and have been '''automatically''' ].
* If you would like to experiment, please use the ]. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Misplaced Pages articles, and ] have the ability to ] users from editing if they repeatedly engage in ].
* Cluebot produces very few ], but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please ], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
* The following is the log entry regarding this warning: ] was by ] ] ] making a minor change with obscenities on 2010-05-20T06:53:48+00:00 <!-- MySQL ID: 623428 -->. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-cluebotwarning2 --><!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> ] (]) 06:53, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

==] case==
{| align="left"
|| ]
|}
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a ] case. Please refer to ] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with ] before editing the evidence page. -- ]&nbsp;(]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 22:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

== Nomination of ] for deletion ==

<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>The article ''']''' is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to ] or whether it should be ].

The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ] (]) 01:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:04, 21 July 2022

Unregistered editors using this IP address received messages on this talk page years ago. Since users of the IP address have likely changed, these messages have been removed. They can be viewed in the page history.

Welcome to this talk page

Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Misplaced Pages the best that it can be. Use this page to start a discussion about the edits made from this IP address. What you say here will be public for others to see. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several people.

Start a discussion