Jump to content

User talk:JMF/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Comics making

I'm putting my answer off of the article talk pages, because they are intended for editing discussions. There is a book currently out in a limited form, How Comics Were Made, that I've not read yet but is getting very good response for delving into printing details. It's focused on comic strips, but much of it would apply to comic books as well. It's coming out in a more general edition, under a slightly different title, next year. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 13:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

@NatGertler: Well in principle it could improve the article so is legitimate (i.e., not a wp:NOTFORUM vio). But thank you either way, I'll have a look. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

New message to JMF

Thank you for being such an active jaguar on my talk! I need to work on making sure new editors are less unsure of the reasons for reversions and such, especially given how scatterbrained I can be with replying to stuff out of order. You helping out has been much appreciated. Remsense ‥  23:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

My (guilty) pleasure. Main thing is to use the edit summary and (for new editors) take the sting out by starting their talk page with a {{welcoming}} and a brief explanation for the revert with a reference to WP:BRD to say that reversions are normal, it is what makes Wikipedia work. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
@Remsense: Might I suggest you consider using the phrase "better before" as an edit summary, as it is less likely to provoke a knee-jerk response than a judgemental statement like "not at all useful", "unconstructive" and the like? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

thats my bad

hit the wrong button, sorry. U in the right big dawg

L.E. Rainer 21:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

@Luke Elaine Burke: For future reference I advise that you immediately revert your error first and apologise second. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
sounds good. Thanks! L.E. Rainer 21:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

New arbs to be seated in January.
Will the fifth try at achieving peace be a mudfight, or something better?
Should old acquaintance be forgot?
An editor's reflection on social capital and their changing relationship with Wikipedia culture.
by Tamzin
Wikipedia aims to represent the sum of all knowledge. Is there an imbalance between Western countries and the rest of the world.
Ballooning British bias bombast!
Fighting and killing – on screen, in politics, and in the ring – competes for attention with Disney.
The importance of feedback.

Might you have the full citation data for your contribution to Asterism?

I write because I tried to address a missing title error for this reference, to no avail:

McAuley, James Phillip (1964). Quadrant. 8. H.R. Krygier: 33. {{cite journal}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

You appear to be the editor who added it! I know it's been nearly five years, but I hope my attempt at researching it will help. As far as I can tell, James McAuley was credited with two contributions to Quadrant in 1964/Volume 8:

1. McAuley, James (June 1, 1964). "The languages of poetry". Quadrant. 8 (2): 19–26 – via Informit.

2. McAuley, James (August 1, 1964). "Summer's close". Quadrant. 8 (3): 60 – via Informit.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find any way to view the sources directly, to confirm that either is a good match, and I also find it disheartening that neither matches the page you specified. I'm not familiar with the database I was relying on, so perhaps it's incomplete?

I know this is essentially a demand of your time, and it's likely a stretch to recall besides. I might have an alternate source for the statement you added, but I love this article and I want to preserve your contribution if possible!

spida-tarbell 𐡸 (talkcontribs) 07:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Gosh, it's dusty in here... brushes cobwebs out of face ... lifts a croquet set out of the way...
Yes, I remember researching Dinkus at the time (subsequently split out to its own article, where the same error appears). My source was https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=OBsiAQAAIAAJ&q=dinkus&dq=dinkus but I never had the original journal. And it looks like Google no longer gives the source information (which I guess came from a bookseller who had a copy for sale?), so you are in even a worse position than I was. And someone up there really likes to tease you, as it would be the fourth article:
Contents
Patrick Whites Plays.......... 7
The Grey Men of Business......13
Five Years of Castro's Cuba....28
8 other sections not shown
I've just tried to google "I became a member of the dinkus department" but nothing found. Sorry, best I can do. Best of luck in your hunt. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Traffic lights?

Your idea of Template_talk:Body_roundness_index#Traffic_lights? has been implemented, al be it in a different way: Waist-to-height_ratio#Recommended_boundary_values now shows a 'traffic light' of red, amber, green.

I'm thinking about a 'black', dead, impossible, all lights out.

  • For sure WHtR = 0, no waist at all, not even a spine, is dead, ashes to ashes. Or, looking at the brighter side of life: no fertilised egg yet.
  • For sure WHtR < 0, either height or waist is below zero, is a concept unknown to living humans. This must be a test by
    1. an alien that does know the concepts of negative height or waist.
    2. a non living human, someone dead with no more body, just a spirit,
    3. or a test by someone not born, not conceived yet. That is a unfertilised female egg cell, with sperm cells approaching,
    4. or a sperm cell who is racing to an egg cell,
    5. or a female egg cell, with no sperm cell in sight
    6. or a sperm cell, with no egg cell in sight (the implied go get F*****, may violate WP:NOMEDICAL and WP:HOWTO, ha, ha, ha)
    7. or, most likely, it is a mathematician or IT expert, testing the calculator with unrealistic negative values, so an little joke would be entertaining to those 'nerds', while the thought of entering negative values would not occur to normal people. They will never see the joke.
  • WHtR below the 0.22 of Cathie_Jung.
  • WHtR below emaciated. Can you find any sources on the WHtR values of emaciated? What is the lowest value in any WHtR/BRI research for living humans?
  • WHtR above the roundest person that is currently alive, or even above the roundest person ever.

Uwappa (talk) 07:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

So no because you cannot use it. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Does that include a waist of zero or below zero? Really? Uwappa (talk) 08:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
See Edge condition, Reductio ad absurdum and How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Please have another look at the sandbox version of the calculator.
Yes, still work in progress, usability testing has produced shocking results, a lot of time consuming work.
Long story short: Your idea of traffic light is now in the sandbox in a massive way at health risks.
Could you yourself do another regression test?
How much time do you need to find the answer to the question:
How much do you need to gain/loose waist size to be healthy? Uwappa (talk) 06:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that you recently reverted my edit on Skull and crossbones in the "Use in social media" section, I was going to add sources but I can't seem to find any reliable ones. They are either very informal (Reddit, Facebook, etc) or unreliable sources (Android Authority, Shutterstock, etc). The only reliable and formal source I could find is dictionary.com but something in my head says its unreliable. Please help! ミラへぜ (talk) (ping me!) 00:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@ミラへぜ: For the list of seriously bad sources, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. For the sources with dubious reliability, see User:Headbomb/unreliable (I recommend you install the tool provided there, it will alert you as you go rather than having to check after the event.). As far as I can see, Dictionary.com is acceptable. As you surmised, the others are out per WP:SPS or WP:UGC or both. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

5.43.67.103

5.43.67.103 (talk · contribs) has ignored the final warning you gave them. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have just now requested admin intervention. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
You know, I for some reason thought you were an admin. Unsure where I got that notion from. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
No, just an old lag! 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Season's Greetings
Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The Adoration of the Magi in the Snow (1563) by Pieter Bruegel the Elder is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For always edit patrolling and making amazing contributions to your home city, Milton Keynes. 90.218.120.231 (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Thank you
Wikiy programming makes it easy because I get notified of any changes to the many artickles that interest me. So I don't really do any patrolling. Why not create an account yourself and you will get the same facilities (and other easy ways to improve the encyclopedia). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
I have one. It's 千乇丨丂ㄒㄚ尺ㄖㄖ丂ㄒ乇尺. I have two houses and to be quite honest with you, I don't want to have to get my parents to drive to my other house to accept the thingy that accepts logging in from a different location. (I think they have that here). Sooo yeah. 90.218.120.231 (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
But you know, I could be wrong and I could be able to log in from a different location 90.218.120.231 (talk) 21:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
You can certainly log in to Wikipedia from anywhere in the world (subject to local censorship laws!). And from any device – phone, tablet, laptop, desktop, kiosk, whatever. Over WiFi, mobile or wired, doesn't matter.
I have done all of the above (well, some of the world and never in a kiosk) and never had to ask anyone to go home to "accept a thingy" for me. Do you mean a HTTP cookie ("internet cookie")? That's a one time thing that goes with whatever device you happen to use, wherever you are. Take the device, it goes with you. Use a different device, you get another one. Not a problem. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 09:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
You really need to resolve the difficulty because you can get blocked if you use two different identities to edit the same articles or talk pages. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 09:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Done! Thank you so much! 千乇丨丂ㄒㄚ尺ㄖㄖ丂ㄒ乇尺 (talk) 09:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
I think it's an appropriate time to do this! 千乇丨丂ㄒㄚ尺ㄖㄖ丂ㄒ乇尺 (talk) 09:49, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar
For helping an IP/user with their knowledge 千乇丨丂ㄒㄚ尺ㄖㄖ丂ㄒ乇尺 (talk) 09:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello JMF, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,

Abishe (talk) 21:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 21:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

What the VLOP – findings of an outside auditor for "responsibilization" of Wikipedia. Plus, new EU Commissioners for tech policy, WLE 2024 winners, and a few other bits of news from the Wikipedia world.
A personal essay.
Explanations for what led to it and what it was like to undergo it.
Plus, the dangers of editing, Morrissey's page gets marred, COVID coverage critique, Kimchi consultation, kids' connectivity curtailed, centenarian Claudia, Christmas cramming, and more.
Who's news?
And other new research findings.
Good faith edits REVERTED and accounts BLOCKED.
Peace on earth, goodwill to all!
Wicked war, martial law, killing, death and an Indian movie with a new chess champ!

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello JMF, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,

FeistyRooster (talk) 16:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

FeistyRooster (talk) 16:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Calculator for golden ratio?

How about a calculator for Golden ratio? Type one number and the calculator

  • will take it as an a, compute b and c
  • will take it as a b, compute a and c
  • will take it as a c, compute a and b

Uwappa (talk) 08:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Part of me says "great idea, go for it!". Another part is a bit reluctant because there is a mini-industry of pseudo-science around it, but I suppose that will always happen anyway.
Before you invest the time, it would be sensible to declare the intent at talk:Golden ratio as there is a possibility of consensus to exclude. (Make sure to italicise your abc for legibility).
As a, b and c are pure numbers, not measurements, the question of false precision doesn't arise. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
It will be simple to create, a few minutes for me, 1 input field, 3 result rows.
So I suggest I just create a template, you have a look and take it from there, trash it or implement it in the article. Uwappa (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Finally found a few spare minutes... How about:

Golden ratio calculator
a 1.6180339887498576
b 1
a + b 2.6180339887498576
a/b = (a+b)/a 1.6180339887498576

Uwappa (talk) 09:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Should a+b be an entry field too? Enter a+b and have a and b computed? Uwappa (talk) 09:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  • First impression: drop the (1+√5)/2 as will be in body text.
  • Simplify the next section to (a+b)/a = a/b
  • definitely lose the 1.6180339887498576 as will be in body text.
Make the function of the calculator more obvious, remembering where it is going to go (an article that fully explains all the maths), so how about

Enter any of the lengths a, b or a+b: this calculator will determine their golden ratio and return the value of the other two.

Howzzzaaaatttt! 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
As a an easy learning step, would you like to take out the duplicate-with-text bits yourself? It is just like taking out normal text, just remove things with the wikisource editor.

I'll look into the input field for a+b tomorrow, as this may tricky:
  • a impacts a+b
  • b impacts a+b
  • a+b impacts a and b
(this is similar to height impacts WHtR, waist impacts WHtR and WHtR impacts waist)
If you feel up to the challenge, just go for it yourself in a second update and just revert if it does not work out. A talk page is a safe environment to try things. Uwappa (talk) 17:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, the end of the 2024 was a bit more busy than expected. Done now, the circle is complete:
  • Input a and the calculator will compute b and (a+b)
  • Input b and the calculator will (a+b) and a
  • Input a+b and the calculator will compute a and b
Please remove the bits you don't want.
  • And just revert if you were a bit too enthusiastic removing bits.
  • And when you like the result, copy it to the article.
Uwappa (talk) 13:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll have a look this evening (UTC+00:00 ) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
afterthought: Move the phi row to the bottom.
That will make more sense, going from input to "output". Ha ha ha, that a/b is not really output, but the constant phi, don't tell anybody... Uwappa (talk) 13:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Done: moved phi to bottom row, removed phi, removed formula. Does that look OK for you? Uwappa (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
@Uwappa: Yes, just needs a legend that invites input of any one of a, b or a+b. But remove the current caption, as it just replicates body content.
Obviously the CSS will need to disengaged from the BRI sandbox before you can upload it.
It would be wise [for you!] to upload it to talk:Golden Mean first, to see if there are other opinions. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
OK, would you like to do those final adjustments yourself?
I'll have time from 4th January onwards.
I'd say WP:BOLD and just publish it. People don't know what they want till they see what they get. Uwappa (talk) 11:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
I can't do the CSS change.
Because that article has a history of lunatic fringe activity, it is not a place to be bold. What difference would an extra few days make?
It is your creation, it is you who should post it. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
O, CSS is too nerdy?
The WP CSS page is not much help but there are plenty of CSS tutorials on the web.
I'm not too much of a CSS expert myself, am very happy with the support of real experts like user:Cmglee and user:Bawolff
And... AI comes to the rescue.
I've used Opera Aria (part of the Opera browser, see https://www.opera.com/features/aria
For the golden ratio the CSS will be minimal, just colours for the prompt.
Suggestion: forget CSS, keep it simple and code colours in the wikitext.
I suggest a 'gold' colour which suits the 'golden ratio'.
Opear Aria suggests:
"
For a golden background, a popular HTML color code you can use is #FFD700. This vibrant shade of gold can really make your design pop!
When it comes to font colors that pair well with a golden background, contrast is key. Here are some excellent options:
Black (#000000) - A classic choice that provides strong contrast.
Dark Blue (#003366) - Adds a touch of elegance and sophistication.
Dark Green (#004d00) - Offers a natural, earthy feel.
Deep Red (#8B0000) - Creates a bold and striking look.
Purple (#4B0082) - Adds a regal touch to your design.
Summary:
Golden Background Color: #FFD700
Recommended Font Colors:
Black: #000000
Dark Blue: #003366
Dark Green: #004d00
Deep Red: #8B0000
Purple: #4B0082
Feel free to mix and match to see what resonates best with your design!
"
So, that yields (see source for wikitext):
  • black on gold
  • DarkBlue on gold
  • DarkGreen on gold
  • DarkRed on gold
  • Purple on gold
My pick: purple on gold, have updated the calculator above and removed the CSS call. Uwappa (talk) 03:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, agree, no reason to rush.
No worries, I'll post it and face the music. That will be less work for me than endless debates.
About the caption: I'd say: Don't add any instruction. The text around it in the article will explain the a, b and a+b. The input fields will be inviting enough for people to go play around. Later I'll look in the article and reuse calculator values, just like in WhtR and BRI articles. That way the text and calculator work seamlessly together.
I really like the simple result. It is now tempting to try and 'crack' the golden ratio. Uwappa (talk) 03:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment, but is there a need for a golden ratio calculator? I can't see what there is to calculate. Additionally, most people can't recognise a decimal number as fractions of √5. Cheers, cmɢʟeeτaʟκ 05:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
I am sure there is a need!
E.g. an artist that has a canvas with a given size (a+b), will enter a+b and will use a and b. Uwappa (talk) 06:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Changed table background to silver, which seems appropriate.

I'll have a look where to insert this little calculator in the article. If I do not see any objections I'll just boldly go for it and face the music. Uwappa (talk) 08:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Had a look and Golden_ratio#Calculation seems the best place. The current text already has an example with b=1. That 1 can interactively copy the current calculator's value of b and take it from there for a and a+b.

That will be an Easter egg for most users, as they won't interact with the calculator, but the few ones that do will see how the text follows their input interactively. Any objections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwappa (talkcontribs) 09:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

As I told you already, that article has such a history of daft bold edits that its watchers have become hypersensitive. I advise strongly that you put the proposal at the talk page first. That is far more likely to achieve success. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Oops, I thought we were on that talk page already. We are not, this is your talk page. Duh...
Excellent idea, I'll be happy to post the current result at that talk page with suggested new content for the calculation section, having "dynamic text" with examples that "magically" follow the calculator input, just like we did for WHtR and BRI.
Anything else you like to see changed before I do that?
Or is it now a green light, a thumbs up from you, go, go go? Uwappa (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't control the traffic lights. A consensus is formed by regular participants of the article concerned (articles, if the change is a template used in more than one article, so not immediately relevant in this case.) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, yes, no worries, I know the WP drill and what a shock it will be for text oriented Wikipedians to step into the 21 century and see a computer compute... Wow, what the f*** is this? Is it AI? Can we maintain this? FOMO, Amygdala hijack and all of that...
But is it green light from you to post it now on that talk page? No worries, I'll do it.
Or is there anything else you like to have solved before I do? and face the music? Uwappa (talk) 12:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for helping

I see that you are changing the UA to MKCC, like I did. Thanks for that. Also thank you for the revision on Buckinghamshire. FeistyRooster (talk) 22:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

There are a lot to do, so thought I should help as it'll take a few days. Well spotted, don't know how we've missed it for so long.
I think you might look at the Bucks article again, to drop the "area" and just name the UAs. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
I have FeistyRooster (talk) 23:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hello JMF! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Notability of electoral divisions, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 15:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

The 20th anniversary of The Signpost.
A lot of psephology!
HUMINT or humbug?
Hallelujah!
Johnny Au has edited for 17 years straight without missing a day.
Some thoughts from the original editor-in-chief.
Public Domain Day 2025, Women in Red hits 20% biography milestone, Spanish Wikipedia reaches two million articles, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
The Signpost staff on achievements of '24 and hopes for '25.
The latest crusade?
Our alumni speak!
Applying the scientific method to a model of conflict that leads to arbitration.
This post fact-checked by real Wikipedian patriots.

Eric Gill

I don't understand what you are trying to do with the images. The link to IMAGESZ is dead. But you have not just changed image sizes, but you have changed their positions so they no longer correspond to the relevant text. I am reverting your changes, but happy to discuss how this should best be organised Kognos (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kognos: Whoops,I should have written MOS:IMAGESZ (it's a Manual of Style thing). It says explicitly that we should not give the image size in pixels.
Alignment with text is practically impossible as well as pointless, because we have no idea what size screen the visitor is using. The layout will display on a wide desktop v a laptop v an even smaller tablet. See also MOS:IMAGELOC re other issues, such as 'goal-posts'. In general the best we can do is place the images in the appropriate section and let them cascade. On mobile, they don't even go alongside the text. If you have a big screen, check the effect on varying size of window to see what I mean.
WP:GALLERY is also relevant. The article does need its galleries, but they should be unobtrusive.
Can you revisit your reversions and see which you feel are really essential, please? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the revised link. I do look at the article on my phone as well as on my computer, and it generally looks OK, but I'll certainly check this out - will be mañana... Kognos (talk) 22:02, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I take your point about fixed pixel widths, and will certainly use upright=scaling factor in future. As regards location, It does seem good to have the images as close to the relevant text as possible. As I said, I do check how the page appears on my phone as well as PC screen, and although the images don't go alongside the text, they are stil closer to the text they refer to than if they are all at the top of the section. The page now looks good to me on both large and small screens. Kognos (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Brackley

Although I agree with you about WP:NOTAGUIDE my intent is simply to update outdated citations whose domain has been usurped, I try not to change the content of the article at all leaving that to editors who have interest and knowledge of the subject. In this case the citation is valid and proves that at the time of it being added the town had these facilities, furthermore a little googling shows these clubs still exist. I will restore my edit so that any editor who wishes can update the information and links Lyndaship (talk) 14:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

History of the metre

Hello, thank you for providing a link to the article Carlos Ibáñez e Ibáñez de Ibero in your edit in the article Prime meridian (Greenwich). I would like to inform you of a problem in the article Metre. Two messages have been placed at the beginning of the section History of the Metre. In my opinion the issues have been resolved, but I have a conflict of interest and therefore I can't remove the messages. Would agree to review this section in order to decide if you would find apropriate to remove the messages ? Charles Inigo (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

@Charles Inigo:, I've had a quick look at the Metre article and, regretfully, I don't see how I can remove the caution messages. My reason is simple: the section is grotesquely overlength. It really should be no longer than the lead of History of the metre – indeed if it simply copied that lead (using {{excerpt}}, it would be fine. Yes, readers who just want modern information about the measure (and perhaps explore the whole SI system) should be informed in summary about how it came about. Right now, the history section is so large as to make the whole article tl;dr. That is intolerable. Whoever put those tags on showed remarkable forbearance: I might have deleted the section outright in favour of the excerpt.
I suspect that this is not the answer you wanted to hear and maybe I might have wrapped it in cotton-wool but I feel it is most helpful to tell the unadorned truth. There is really no point in tinkering at the edges of the current text: it needs to be reduced by about 90%. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer. Do you think this section could replace the article History of the metre ? In my opinion the subsections are more appropriate than those of the article History of the metre. Charles Inigo (talk) 11:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
That really needs a proposal at talk:History of the metre (with a courtesy notification at talk:Metre and talk:International System of Units. I don't watch those articles so my opinion is not really helpful. But in principle the idea has merit. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hello JMF! The thread you created at the Teahouse, How to undo a page creation, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Futura in "usage" section

After fewer vandalistic edits (1, 2, 3 and 4) reverted as unsourced material, should we removed some trivial sections (which is unsourced) from Futura (typeface), unless if is sourced. 124.217.87.71 (talk) 13:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

What about for Gill Sans in "usage" section that fails WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS? 124.217.87.71 (talk) 15:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
I agree in both cases but the question needs to be put at talk:Futura (typeface) and talk:Gill Sans , not here. Maybe even generically at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Typography. Most of the entries that are cited have "citations" that are not valid, they are OR (editor observes a typeface to be in use and decides what it is) or WP:PRIMARY (source self-declares). Please raise it at one or all of those talk pages. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:46, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Misunderstood...

Dear senior editor, may ask you to exercise some assumption of good faith?

"...and you have been an editor for long enough to know about WP:NOTORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:RGW and WP:ADVOCACY "

I included enough evidence for the topic you deleted to warrant some negotiation about the severity of this summary judgement: WP:NOTORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:RGW and WP:ADVOCACY


~~~~ Janosabel (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Replied at the WikiProject talk page. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:23, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Do you ever feel like you're just talking to a brick wall? Perhaps it's just me. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

There is even a WP for that: WP:IDHT (and maybe WP:ILIKEIT). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
What's next, I wonder. A video of his children, calling Order the cat, on the University of Essex's Official Facebook page? It's a little exhausting. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Cheer up, it could be the Taylor Swift page. [deliberately not wlinking!] 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
It looks like there have been 32 Alternative Christmas messages on Channel 4, since it started in 1993. I'm not sure how many of those are still available via Channel 4, or YouTube, or Facebook, or Twitter... Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
and in any of them will the contributor have made an exclusive substantive statement that will make it the best (or only!!) citeable source. I'm thinking of a number that requires no fingers to count. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Luckily Stephen Fry already had a RS review source. But the others...? have not dared to look yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Acts of Union 1707, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Convention Parliament.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2025

But an open language model is ready to help.
The WMF executive team delivers a new update; plus, the latest EU policy report, good-bye to the German Wikipedia's Café, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
Editor Fathoms Below reminisces over their successful RfA from February 2024.
Plus, reports on the ARBPIA5 case, new concerns over projects targeting Wikipedia editors, John Green gets his sponsor flowers, and other news.
Wikimedians and newbies celebrate 24 years of Wikipedia in the Brooklyn Central Library. Special guests Stephen Harrison and Clay Shirky joined in conversation.
Ending with some bans, and a new set of editing sanctions.
The start of the year was filled with a few unfortunate losses, tragic disasters, emerging tech forces and A LOT of politics.

Hi!

I've realised that my revisions of the content is accepted but my reference to guidance paper related to CE Marking Guide was deleted. I'm sorry that I couldn't use RefToolbar properly which I'm not familiar, but I'd like to explain the reason to the external CE marking guide which answers more questions and state detailed information, related to missing modules in addition to general informations which are very frequently asked and searched by the interested parties, for example technical file, prices and terms. Even if we are a certification provider company, we didn't mention to our services in the Guide which is purely prepared for information seekers, so there is not any direct advertisement to our services.

On the other hand, there are other references which links to other guidance papers which provides different informations from our guidance.

Therefore I beleive our guideance paper is worth to be added to references for many reasons which provides important, rigth and true information that is not mentioned in the main page.

Thanks for your time.

İlker Sertifike (talk) 08:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

@Sertifike:, there are a few policy issues that stand in your way.
  1. Am I correct to infer that the similarity of your user name and the name of the website means that you are connected with it? If so, you must first study and respond to policies WP:Conflict of interest (and possibly WP:Paid editing?)
  2. A WP:self published source, such as this one appears to be, is generally not accepted as a wp:reliable source and thus may not be used as a citation.
So it is not obvious that your website can be cited in any case. You may continue to improve the article using your knowledge but any additions or changes you make must be supported by citing a reliable, independent, third party source that says so. (So I will have to look in more detail at your revisions as I only noticed your 'stray' reference.--𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Storm Éowyn - Impact vs Effect

I manually undid your edit on Storm Éowyn. "Impact" is correctly used. In this case, "impacts" refers to the severe, disruptive consequences of Storm Éowyn, such as fallen trees, power outages, and transport disruptions across the UK, Isle of Man, Ireland, and eastern Norway, emphasising the immediate and significant effects on daily life; whereas "effects" is a more general term that encompasses all outcomes, both minor and major, without highlighting the intensity or disruption caused by the storm. Please do not use "effect". TattooedLeprechaun🗣️💬 17:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

@TattooedLeprechaun: What provoked my edit was the word impact was grievously overused, even two or three times in the same sentence. Using the verbs impact (though that is an Americanism) , strike, affect and the nouns effect and impact makes the text easier to read as well as livelier. Perhaps with that in mind you might review and find a middle way? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
There was no need to change it. "Impact" was used to clarify the intenseness of the situation. TattooedLeprechaun🗣️💬 20:56, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
@TattooedLeprechaun: If a word is overused, it loses its impact. (No pun intended). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Then change it to another word like "impact", but not "effect" as "effect" is too light of a word in this situation.
If you want, you can change them to these below or something similar:
  • Repercussions – Emphasises lasting negative outcomes.
  • Consequences – Highlights cause-and-effect relationships.
  • Destruction – Suitable for severe damage.
  • Devastation – Conveys large-scale harm.
  • Toll – Often used for human, financial, or structural losses.
  • Damage – Direct and widely understood.
  • Aftermath – Good for discussing longer-term effects.
  • Ramifications – Highlights broader, sometimes unexpected outcomes.
These still convey the seriousness and damage Storm Éowyn did, but they don't use "impact".
TattooedLeprechaun🗣️💬 13:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

French Wikipedia defends a user against public threats, steward elections, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
"The only time I ever took photos in my entire life".
From patrolling new edits to uploading photos or joining a campaign, you can count on the Wikimedia platform to be up and running — in your language, anywhere in the world. That is, except for a couple of minutes during the equinoctes.
Or just the end of Wikipedia as we know it?
Of "hunters", "busybodies" and "dancers".
User Sennecaster shares her thoughts on her recent RfA and the aspects that might have played a role in making it successful.
What are they? Why are they important? How can we make them better? And what can you do to help?
Liberté, liberté chérie.
Grammys, politics and the Super Bowl.
Straight from the source's mouth. A source is a source, of course, of course!
Turkish linguist wrote about languages and plants; Brazilian informaticist studied Wikimedia projects and education.

Unicode: CR control char

Sorry, but now the sentence is plainly wrong. "End of Line" in classic Mac Os and other old OSes is signalled by a CR not foolowed by LF. Treutwein (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

@Treutwein: yes, fair comment. I have tweaked the text to remove the error. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

I've renamed to "Minor edits 2025" on my Talk

My Talk page has an old section "Minor edits" so I've renamed the section you started User talk:Pol098#Minor edits 2025. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

And many thanks indeed for your offer to set up archiving my Talk page, now implemented. I should have done this long ago ... Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

It's an ecstasy, my spring.
Let them know what you think!
Read this, then forget all about it.
Life on the Wiki as usual!
And WMF invites multi-year research fund proposals
The Oscars, politics, and death elbow for the most attention.
The photographers are the celebrities!
And very unusual biographical images.
Send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

Help with Draft

Hello JMF,

I have been working on a Draft: Paul J. Maillet. I recognize edits are needed and that improving the draft will take time. But I have reached my limit in working on the draft on my own. Can you possibly provide feedback as to whether the draft, with eventual necessary edits, has any value to continue to be prepared for possible publication as an article? Also, what further steps would be needed to improve (whether possible) the draft? Your recommendations and guidance would truly be appreciated. (This will also help in the preparation of 2 other drafts that I hope to begin soon, that are historical in nature.)

Thank you for your time and consideration. M0RPHEMEZ00 M0RPHEMEZ00 (talk) 19:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

@M0RPHEMEZ00: At a simple functional level, it looks ok apart from MOS:CAPS on section titles.
More significantly, there are two tests that you need to 'pass': WP:Biography of living persons and WP:notability. I have never done a biography so I am not really one to advise. Can you study the article about the Fritzl case to do a "compare and contrast". It is critically important that anything you write is cited twice over, because of the risk of being sued for libel. As for notability, it would be a good idea to ask for advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Brunswick or even Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada. Perhaps someone there might help you with the draft because it is way outside my comfort zone. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Honestly should have added "tax" after duty. Thank you for your edit. Eteethan (talk) 10:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

no problem. In fact I already did exactly what you did (pipe trick) as per normal. Difference is only that I spotted the side-effect earlier. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

Fellow doctor Osama Khalid remains behind bars for "violating public morals" by editing.
Major changes to core content policy, or still-developing plan for new initiative?
Defeat, or just a setback?
Plus: 30-year anniversary of wiki software commemorated.
Our content is free, our infrastructure is not!
What is to be done?
Advice to aspirants: "Read RfA debriefs", including this one.
Rest in peace.
Snow White sinking, Adolescence soaring, spacefarers stranded, this list has it all!
The Wikimedia Foundation's announcement from Diff.
Gadzooks!

Waist-to-height ratio

Hi Sir, I’d like to suggest a small addition to the “Public health tool” section of the Waist-to-height ratio article. There’s an online calculator at https://humanbodycalculator.com/waist-to-height-ratio/ that allows users to quickly calculate their WHtR and see how it relates to their health. It could be helpful for readers to have access to such a tool directly from the article. Please let me know if this addition would be appropriate. Thanks! Armanalimolla (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

@Armanalimolla: No, it would not. See WP:ELNO. The calculation is trivial and is already more than adequately covered in the article.
See also WP:conflict of interest. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:20, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

regions

Hi, Kings Sutton is in Northamptonshire (East Midlands); whilst Chorleywood, Rickmansworth (and Moor Park) are all in Hertfordshire (East of England). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:53, 26 April 2025 (UTC)