User talk:Plastikspork/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Aminat Ayinde or how to split the conversation and cause confusion

Yeah, I did take a look at some of them, Analeigh Tipton seems to have stand alone notability but I wasn't sure about Elyse Sewell. By the way you forgot to protect their talk page thereby preventing me from unprotecting and starting a period of action and reaction followed by a pleasant and civil conversation at ANI. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 17:18, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the humorous response. You have now gained a NVVTPS (not very vigilant talk page stalker). My first task was to make an uninvited edit to your userpage. Hopefully, I can be of more service in the future. Best regards. Plastikspork (talk) 17:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh noes, admin abuse. It's fine with me as it looks sort of technical and I shall therefore ignore it. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 20:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Defining entropy

See this thread

I think it is easier to improve the article from the version it is in now than to do it from the other version. The entropy article had until a few months ago been in a similar version (i.e. entropy vaguely defined in terms of work, heat, etc.) but little progress was made toward having an article that defines things more rigorously.

The next steps to improve the article is to explain the formula S = k Log(Omega), to define temperature and then explain the connection between entropy change, heat and temperature (which will define what we mean by heat). In the other approach you can't do much better than saying that entropy change is the integral over dQ/T over a reversible path, which isn't all that illuminating. Count Iblis (talk) 22:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Now if I only had some free time! Thanks again. Plastikspork (talk) 22:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

reverts vs edits

See also: Talk:Entropy

Hi. I am familiar with the three revert rule. So far I have made only one revert to undo one of yours. But you have now made two. And Count Iblis has made two. Rather than simply revert, why not make an effort to incorporate the suggested changes? Quantumechanic (talk) 21:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

2 + 2 = 1 ? And, yes we should discuss on the talk page. Plastikspork (talk) 21:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Trojan body armor

Hey, I noticed that you removed the trojan body armor page saying that it may be a hoax. It is not a hoax, it is an actual armor suit. I have been following it since its early stages because the inventor is a genius and his previous inventions were phenominal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfitzgibbons (talk • contribs) 13:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe you are refering to Trojan Body Armor? I am responding on your talk page. Plastikspork (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Wellington silva sanches aguiar

He is in the the first team of his club A brazilian youth international and one of the most highly rated young footballers in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCriticCreator (talk • contribs) 13:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately your article has been deleted. The entire content of the page at the time of deletion was as follows:

Wellington Silva Sanches Aguiar is a Brazilian footballer who plays for Fluminense in brazil, bor 1992.

he is one f the most coveted wonderkids in the world and is close to signing for arsenal fc.

he recently was promoted to the first team.

As was indicated directly above, this does not establish the notability of the subject. That does not mean the subject is not notable, just that it was not established by the article. One way to establish notability is to prepare a list of secondary sources to news articles about the subject. You may also want to read WP:ATHLETE. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you. Plastikspork (talk) 15:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

He is Notable, He is a PRO-Footballer, In the first team of one of the best teams in brazil,plays for brazils youth teams(u17) and is coveted by most football teams.

Im Talking Bout' Wellington Silva Sanches Aguiar.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCriticCreator (talk • contribs)

One way to establish notability is to prepare a list of secondary sources to news articles about the subject. You may also want to read WP:ATHLETE. Thank you. Plastikspork (talk) 16:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Why do I have to do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCriticCreator (talk • contribs) 16:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Do what? Add references or sign your posts? Adding references is necessary for WP:BLP. Signing your posts is necessary so I know who left the message. Thank you. Plastikspork (talk) 16:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

How come u deleted my page,is this what U spend your time doing.TheCriticCreator (talk) 16:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You may want to read WP:NOTE and WP:CSD. Thank you. Oh, and thank you for signing your post. The next tip is to use the edit buttons on the side of the page, which allow you to edit a particular section (topic thread). Thank you again. Plastikspork (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

If the author comes back to you about this, you may want to read this discussion I have been having with him. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I've been through his sources and told him there is no reliable evidence that his boy has actually played for Fluminense, so he doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE, and his only chance is to cite his references and argue that the player is so promising, causing so much excitement etc. that that makes him notable. I told him that wouldn't convince me but I'd ask you what you thought. Details on my talk page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Creating football player articles

Can I start a page if I can get actual sources(which i can) on other players like zezinho and nour Hadhria, who I know for a fact are playing for the first teams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCriticCreator (talk • contribs) 20:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Wellington ect

Thanks for helping,( Im not like a Genius on computers, sport is really my thing ), He is not causing enough excitement that makes him 'notable', But clubs like MADRID,ARSENAL.LIVERPOOL... all want to sign him, so what would make him 'worthy' of a page.

Alright, thanks mate, how long hav u actually been doin this sorta stuff?

soz i keeps on 4getting the ~x4 thing, TheCriticCreator (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreement with user Quantumechanic on entropy page

I discussed editing the entropy page with user Quantumechanic. He'll now edit the page starting from his last edit, but he'll take into account the objections to the use of density matrix in the lead. If there are problems we can comment on the talk page and ask Quantumechanic to make changes. Count Iblis (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Last time I checked the page was unilaterally reverted back again to the original, the one that doesn't even come close to an encyclopedic style. And my viable references have once again disappeared into various edit histories. According to policy I am supposed to revert again. But it is a waste of my time to keep working on this article when all of my efforts have been deleted. So I have not yet reverted, but am hoping to get more feedback from other interested users. Quantumechanic (talk) 22:27, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Your version was severely flawed. And yes, the current version leaves much to be desired, it can be made more encyclopedic. But you cannot edit in nonsense that appears to be corect (because you literally quote form a textbook out of context and are unable to provide the proper context and definitions in the article).

I was willing to accept another version of the article than I prefer (i.e. intead of information theoretical definition, your phenomenological definition of entropy), and let you do most of the writing, with me just making some comments, making minor corrections. But this is not going to work, because you don't seem to have a working knowledge of thermodynamics and statistical physics. Then, this will boil down to me having to write your version via my feedbacks while you would be behaving like a student who is not willing to learn anything from me. That's never going to work. Count Iblis (talk) 22:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Image template and upright=1.5

Thanks for installing that change to {{Image}}. You asked me to let you know of further problems. On further usage I discovered I forgot about the upright= option of the extended image syntax; can you please install support for that too? See my recent comment in Template talk:Image #Support for alt= and link= parameters. I'm sorry I didn't notice this earlier. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 21:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork (talk) 21:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

MyCeliacID articles

Hi Plastikspork,

Thank you for commenting on my article. Is there anything else that you see in the article that might get it flagged. I'm particularly concerned about maintaining impartiality. Let me know what your thoughts are.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

--EGOeditor (talk) 21:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. Plastikspork (talk) 22:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but

I don't think the edit you made to fix the RfA template will work. Now that you've substed it, it isn't really a template anymore, and therefore won't update. I could be wrong though; I'm only making educated guesses here. I'm sure X! will be back soon enough and see the problem either way. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 19:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize that both had been changed today. I reverted my edits. Thanks for the notice. Plastikspork (talk) 19:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

s t e a m P U N N K: Shades of Gray

Hey, I see you have deleted my page 's t e a m P U N N K: Shades of Gray', under the grounds that it is a hoax. It's not a hoax. It's actually a book that I have been writing on-and-off since 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravynmerch (talk • contribs) 22:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

"Consistency"

I forgot those other two areas. It's a very important thing that you performed those changes as it fits alongside my change, given that it wouldn't look fit for some tables to show white text, while other tables show black text on gray. Good job. Thanks! --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 00:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Thanks for the feedback. Plastikspork (talk) 00:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 00:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see this area. Thanks again. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 04:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Plastikspork (talk) 04:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

swansea city template

hey thanks for editing the liberty stadium again. could u fix a small problem 4 me. could you completely delete the swansea city afc template so i could start again and fix the duplicate problem all together. the problem is that i made the template but made a duplicate the difference being the dot at the end of the c. if you could delete both templates that would be fine. Swanseajack4life (talk) 21:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you provide links to the templates? I want to make sure I don't delete the wrong thing. Thanks. Plastikspork (talk) 21:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

okay go to either Cyril the Swan or Vetch Field and go to the template at the bottom. should be swansea city a.f.c. but if you try to edit it you'll see it is blank and the name at the top is swansea city a.f.c if you just delete both templates that will be fine Swanseajack4life (talk) 21:17, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help again. much appreciated Swanseajack4life (talk) 21:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Admindash Script

I added your admindash.js script into my monobook.js, yet I don't seem to have the "admin dashboard" option next to my contrubutions or my watchlist. Need I add it manualy? Fribbler (talk) 23:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Check the capitalization of 'importScript' and be sure to 'reload' your cache. Plastikspork (talk) 23:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it was the capilalisation. My poor eyesight let me down. Fribbler (talk) 23:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You might have screwed up the convert templates

Green Line (Chicago Transit Authority) is screwed up. This edit is the only substantive edit I can find in its transcluded templates; could this have caused the problem? --NE2 07:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It's been reverted for now. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Strange, thanks for sorting it out. Plastikspork (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Help

Could I get some help at Talk:WaterDrop Animations?? I don't quite know what to do with a hangon reason on the page... Thanks, Ks0stm ^(T•C) 04:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Ks0stm ^(T•C) 04:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Userfy

Thanks, though I'd have gladly taken care of that myself. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 00:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I had been watching the thread on alternative history and realized they were in the process of moving these pages to another wiki. Best regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rua (band)

Cheers for that Plastikspork.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 10:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I went ahead and deleted it since it was created in error, and was not linked anywhere. In the future, you can just mark it with {{db-author}}, and some wiki-janitoradmin will come along and delete it. Best regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Happy Plastikspork's Day!

User:Plastikspork has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Plastikspork's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Plastikspork! Peace, Rlevse 00:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that

...that edit to fix the "leave a message" link on my talk page. I can't say I understand what you did, but it works, so that's great. :) -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Glenn Douglas Packard

Why did you change an article that was a biography to a redirect page for a reality television show? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarheelz123 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There didn't appear to be any content beyond a copy-and-paste from http://glenndouglaspackard.com/bio.html , which as far as I can tell, is a copyright violation. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:38, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Date Trader

As long as the article information will be restored in the future, then I don't mind if it is deleted since it has no air date. WikiMaster500 (talk) 00:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Loner XL deals with Plastikspork II

So what are the so called "wiki-problems" for the photos being denied? They are legal. No one owns them, and they are free for non-slanderous use. And nobody is going to sue for them, so what's this permission thang all about? It's really, really sad that the "elite wikipedians" like yourself, never try to help or educate the ones like me that have little or no knowledge of wiki. Instead, you guys have fun in deleting everything. Wikibullies and Wikidictators.(LonerXL (talk) 19:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC))

Thank you for asking. If you check the link that you provided for the Kimora Lee Simmons photo: http://www.askmen.com/women/galleries/actress/kimora-lee-simmons/picture-3.html , you can see that under the photo it says © DailyCeleb.com. However, when you uploaded the image, you indicated that you were the author and you were releasing it under CC 3.0. Unless you can provide proof that you are the copyright holder, then this is not allowed. Let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for giving me time, Plastik! A fellow wikipedian actually trying to help me. This photo stuff is very complicated. So let's go one step at a time, using the Kimora photo for example. For author I should haved used "DailyCeleb.com." Right??? But do I still use CC 3.O? Or do I use another CC?(LonerXL (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC))

The copyright holder is DailyCeleb.com, which means that they would have to agree to release it under CC3.0. The problem with you releasing it under CC3.0, is that CC3.0 says that anyone can use it, copy it, modify it, etc. Unless you are the copyright holder, you cannot give this permission. So, unless you have permission from DailyCeleb.com (who would have to confirm this with WP), you would have to use WP:NONFREE.

Now, here is the most serious problem. The "nonfree" guideline states that non-free images can only be used if there is no possibility of a free alternative, which is unlikely since she is still living. If really want a more involved and detailed answer about other specific images, you can always ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions‎. I have always found them helpful. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to help. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

So in order for the photo of Kimora to be legit on WP, the actual source site - DailyCeleb.com, itself has to give permisson to wikipedia? And non free photos are usually only effective when a person is deceased. That is meta-technical, and it sounds like something that wikipedians should be paid to do. I always wondered why I see very few celebrity images on wikipedia, and you just answered that. You made it VERY CLEAR to me. Is it the same way with Video Game characters?(LonerXL (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC))

I believe you got it. The lack of images has been a common criticism of WP (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-07-20/In the news for example). There are a handful of people who are going around taking pictures of celebrities and posting the pictures on WP (see the photos by Glenn Francis and Entertainers by David Shankbone for example). Unfortunately, there is more money to be made by retaining the copyright and selling the images. As for video game characters, that is probably a different story, since they are not living people, places, or things who could be photographed. Screenshots can be uploaded if they are critical for describing a game. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Whenever I have an issue I'll definitely come ask you about it. Unlike all the other "elite wikipedians", you actually took time out to clearly explain why "this and that was deleted." I just hate when people delete good sensible/notable articles, and never care to eplain why. Or when they do, they just go by how they personally feel and not following wiki-protocol/wiki-prime directives. You made me learn to like wikipedia more now. I greatly appreciated your attention and sincerity. Here is the photo I am really trying to use on an article that I made Strider Hiryu. (LonerXL (talk) 03:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC))

Gettaround deletion

You deleted [Gettaround]. While trying to find out about this project mentioned here http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10314453-52.html (although not mentioned specifically by name), I was disappointed to find the page deleted. More info on the project is here: http://www.crowdspring.com/projects/website_design/small_website_uncoded/gettaround_com_share_your_car_make_money

I request a reconsideration of the delete. Thanks, RC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roc1 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me. I have responded on your talk page. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Undelete Gloria Velez

That's an order, soldier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmhs15 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha, thanks for your feedback. Here is the contents of the article when it was deleted for your reference:

“ was born in Miami fla. She has 2 beautiful sisters and 2 brothers. her parents are Jewish and are very into their religion ”

Yes, that's the entire contents. Feel free to recreate the article if you have more cited content. Best regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Update, checking the article's history, it appears it was deleted before (back in December 2008) by Wehwalt. If you want that version restored, I would check with Wehwalt first. I would suggest asking for an undeletion per a "contested prod deletion". Let me know if I can do anything else to help. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok man. Sorry if I sounded like an asshole or something -.-. You seem like a nice guy so, I'm sorry --Rmhs15 (talk) 22:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Archbishop of XX

Rather than deleting {{Infobox Archbishop of York}} and {{Infobox Archbishop of Canterbury}}, I suggest redirecting them to {{Infobox Archbishop}}. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, they can be redirected, but wait until the substitution is complete, as that will add the requisite archbishop_of field to avoid breaking any redirects. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

You seem to mean something different by "substitution" (subst) than I do. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps. If you replace "{{Infobox Archbishop of Canterbury" with "{{subst:Infobox Archbishop of Canterbury" it will replace the former with {{Infobox Archbishop}}, and fill in the archbisop_of field. Is this the same meaning? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 09:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry; yes. I didn't realise that was the case. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from GreenGnome

Hello Plastikspork, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to GreenGnome has been removed. It was removed by 140.105.48.199 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 140.105.48.199 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Template:RaisingtheBar

I noticed that this template (that I created) was deleted while I was away on vacation. Would you please userfy it for me? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the speedy action. – ukexpat (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

re: MC Hammer

I didn't put the original edit about this but backed it because there are already sources within the article and articles associated with it. It's also not difficult to see on the Billboard Award and Diamond Award articles that he is the first and only one (up until Notorious B.I.G.) to accomplish this in that genre. It's almost common knowledge, if you will. Not to be mean, but "we" aren't supposed to delete edits without disputing them in the talk page first when they are possibly reliable facts and not vandalism. It causes edit wars and people to be blocked who shouldn't be. Sorry, I'm just saying... I hope you will replace it or I will, thanks... have a great day!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billboard_Music_Award / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_in_the_United_States

Billboard Award: first Diamond Award (in hip-hop/rap): first/only at one time 63.131.4.149 (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Plastikspork: I'm not disputing the diamond status, I am asking for a source for the statement that this was the "first".

63.131.4.149 (talk) 03:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, could you add an actual source, rather than citing Wikipedia? Per WP:RS, Wikipedia is not a reliable source for information on Wikipedia. And per WP:BLP, we are supposed to be removing unsourced information from biographies of living people. Best regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

It's funny how WIKI says they aren't a reliable source and yet, oh nevermind. Ugh. Ok, there are sources within the articles associated with this article already. I'd have to do some homework/research. It's mentioned already in the article (and I'm not saying the article is the source, I'm saying there are resources within the Wiki article), in fact, let me check real quick... here it is mentioned in the section "Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em" within his article (among ones connected with it):

Follow-up successes included "Have You Seen Her" (a cover of the Chi-Lites) and "Pray" (a beat sampled from Prince's "When Doves Cry" and Faith No More's "We Care a Lot"), which was his biggest hit in the US, peaking at #2. "Pray" was also a major UK success, peaking at #8. The album went on to become the first hip-hop album to earn diamond status, selling more than 18 million units to date. During 1990, Hammer toured extensively in Europe which included a sold-out concert at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham. With the sponsorship of PepsiCo, PepsiCo International CEO Christopher A. Sinclair went on tour with him during 1991.

So as you can see, it's already sourced. The original editor put it in the intro. Hence, why it was just a summary of what was to be read in the remaining article. I was the one that moved it to the Awards section. Hope this helps... but knowing you fix allot of the references, I would have thought you would have caught this. Best wishes, good night. 63.131.4.149 (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, the references didn't translate to your talk page, but if you go to that paragraph, you will see the sources already there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MC_Hammer / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Please_Hammer,_Don%27t_Hurt_%27Em 63.131.4.149 (talk) 04:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

That should work, we just need to copy one of those refs to the main article, and make sure it appears next to the statement. It never hurts to put a ref next to something, even if it is common knowledge. You would be surprised how much stuff can turn into common knowledge, just be appearing on Wikipedia. The next thing you know, there is a ring of citations all citing one another and no one knows where the information actual came from. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Busy work. (smile) Done. Thanks for the fyi. P.S. I hope you will source that statement if you're not satisfied with those references. I have found article after article that he was the first, and only for awhile. He's not the only anymore of course, but was still the first rap artist to be diamond. If this WEREN'T true, alot of Wiki articles would need to be changed. 63.131.4.149 (talk) 04:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

So far none of the references appear to mention the word "diamond" when refering to the album. I will keep looking. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Nested template calls

Thanks for the help offer! I tried constructing two simple templates to illustrate the error, and for the life of me I can't reproduce it. Which makes me think the problem is not what I asked help with (IRIL when called via a different template still does not behave as intended). I'll need some time to figure out where exactly I am screwing it all up. Would it be OK if I contact you directly when I figure that out?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:03, August 27, 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I am always willing to help when I can. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:04, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Infobox martial artist

You dont think you should discuss before starting editing like that?Marty Rockatansky (talk) 03:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you thought my edits were too bold. There was a problem brought up at TFD concerning the fact that there were two templates with the only difference being the capitalization of the word "Martial" in the template title. If the resulting changes are a problem, I would be happy to revert and discuss instead. Let me know what you think. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I liked the way the color was kept minimum, not blue like that. theres infoboxes for boxers and mixed martial artists as well but im sure you gotta discuss that before starting merging. theres gonna be a lot of guys jumping on you.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 03:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, the merge has now been reverted, and I reverted the color back from blue. I hope this didn't cause too much trouble. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It looks like if "px" is omitted from "imagesize=" (when using {{Infobox Martial artist}}) the image is displayed in it's full resolution (see e.g. Cheick Kongo). Know of a fix? --aktsu ^(t / c) 03:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the {{px}} template will add the necessary px to the number. I have updated the template. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick note - the Team section seams to be missing from the Template:Infobox martial artist/doc. example Peter Graham (kickboxer). And I think we can lose the Teacher its pretty much the same as the Trainer. Martial art section overlaps with Style. I think we also had Stance Jérôme Le Banner its missing now as well from the doc. thx. Marty Rockatansky (talk) 07:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I added "team" to the blank template in the doc, and removed "teacher" and "martial_art". In the actual template, I merged the "style" and "martial_art" to appear under the same label. I kept the teacher option in the template, it's just not documented. The reason for keeping "martial_art" and "teacher" for now is for backwards compatibility, to make sure we don't break anything using the old {{infobox martial artist}}. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you enlighten me to the use of labelX= and dataX=? Is the reason this didn't work because I didn't use a number in the correct order? Is there a tool to help edit it so that I don't have to manually change all the below numbers when I add a field? --aktsu ^(t / c) 16:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

But I removed fightingoutof as an alternative to residence didn't I? (That's the way I think alternate names work at least... Learning on the job here.). My thinking is that a fighter might be billed as fighting out of somewhere he doesn't live (i.e., fighting out of the gym where he trains while living somewhere else). --aktsu ^(t / c) 16:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, didn't think of that -- do you have a few links to articles where it was used so I can check I don't break them when making changes? Now I see why it was formatted that way (and what it means). I assumed it was a mistake as it seemed to be a second parameter to {{official}}. Guess we'll have to use url= after all then... --aktsu ^(t / c) 16:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

thx guys for all the work. Aktsu you wanna take it up for disscussion and merge it with MMAbox as well. One more favor - theres three pages pretty much of the same subject but i have no idea how to merge them the correct way. Kyokushin fighters and List of karateka and List of karate competitors.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 06:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Other templates are excessive, not spacing templates

The indentation Template:in is used to indent the spacing within a line, and it is mainly used relative to nearby lines, rather attempting to provide identical spacing across all possible browsers. Hence, there is no need to deprecate its use, as it continues to be quite useful for spacing within a page. In fact, all the current spacing templates, such as {{space}}, {{sp2}}, {{sp3}} have been quite beneficial to quickly provide extra spacing within text lines.

However, there are hundreds or thousands of other templates which should be considered for deletion, as they merely select among dozens of options of other templates and should be coded directly, using those other templates repeated with specific parameters, not a separate template for each parameter choice. See: Template:S15 & Template:S4 as examples of minor templates that merely pass specific parameters to Template:R-phrase, rather than use a shared Template:Rlink. See the 203 templates in groupings: Category:R-phrase_templates & Category:S-phrase_templates. Perhaps {{Rlink}} should be expanded. There are other such limited-use templates which should be deleted: some were designed for use, many years ago, before templates could have parameters, and thus people created a separate template for each option, which now could be handled by a single template coded to allow parameters. Many of those hundreds of pre-parameter style templates should be deleted, as replaced with a single parameterized template. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but I still don't understand how {{in}} is fundamentally different from {{space}}, which is why I was wondering if they could be merged. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

• The Template:in uses all equal spaces, while Template:Space uses alternating combinations of several &nbsp and &emsp for both en & em-size spaces, which aligns with the colon-indent ":" spacing on some browsers (such as MSIE). Also, Template:In is already in use in several archived (non-editable) pages, so it shouldn't be removed. Meanwhile, the ancient Template:S4 is not used, but it should be removed and replaced by some other template, and also have documentation in that other template. There are at least 50 such templates that could be quickly deleted. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

La La Vazquez

Conversation moved to Talk:La La (entertainer). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Pakistan template conversion

Many many thanks for sorting that out. Now we need a bot to replace them... Himalayan 10:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

See also Template:Infobox of upazilas. They should be standardised like Kumarkhali Upazila. Himalayan 10:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. yes this is the former Dr. Blofeld speaking... I've also nominated the Pakistani district template which shows coding in the templates and looks bad, plus the Amphoe infoboxes for Thailand could be updated to allow flexibililty and allow for a pin map... Himalayan 15:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any opinion on {{infobox Indian jurisdiction}}? It could be converted to use {{infobox settlement}} as the backend, or, it could be replaced by infobox settlement. The reason I am hesitating on having the bot do the substitution on the three Pakistani templates is that I am wondering if they shouldn't all be merged with say {{infobox Pakistani jurisdiction}} instead. I believe your personal opinion is that they should all be converted, but I thought I would get your input first if you had any additional thoughts. The current {{infobox Indian jurisdiction}} isn't nearly as bad as the other three Pakistani ones were, in terms of non-standardness. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your kind words about my page design, my invention, Jack's programming abilities.. Well for Pakistan I would rather we just used standard, no need for a seperate template. My concern about the Pakistan district template was it often spews out unwanted coding like {capital} and {province} because the paramter hasn't been filled. They would look a lot better with standard. As for Indian jurisdiction, I'm actually responsible for most of the changes from previously (this is why it resembles standard), it is formatted pretty much like standard now so I don't have any major objections to it although at times adding a photograph is hard to remember what to add. Personally I would prefer if everyplace on here used the standard template though.... Himalayan 15:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Well nationalistfeelings aside "Hey that's our template" - "they have one we want one", etc., which is all rather OWNy I'm with the roofer on this one. And also, I, um well... already substed them all. Which has worked OK but left some template logic hanging around n the article space. I could do another pass and get rid of that, might be useful across the main space actually. Rich Farmbrough, 19:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC).

Wow, thanks for doing the substitutions. It would be great if you could do a pass to resolve the dangling logic. I'm currently doing this on a batch of Latvian Cities, see below. By the way, one the biggest problems that I saw was the incorrect use of commas vs. decimal points in specification of the area, which is why I had to put in the 'formatnum' stuff. It's still hosed on several of the articles (e.g., area_km2 = 35.000 or 350,00). Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Latvian Cities

There is also the Latvian cites template I began to phase out like this. They look of a much better quality. Himalayan 15:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem of unfilled labels appearing in the box can be fairly readily handled with an 'if' statement. If I have a second I will code something up to see what you think. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Eeeks what happened to Ainaži? The pink dot maps need to be removed and replaced with a decent svg pin map! Himalayan 17:39, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, for reverting it. I was in the process of changing the {{Latvian Cities}} to use the infobox settlement as its backend, and I wanted to test the changes on the one that you had already converted. Thanks for spotting the problem with the pushpins. I will fix Latvian Cities and try again. Thanks again! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:51, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes I figured, much better than before anyway. Oh those horrid pink maps with red dots drive me crackers!! Why anybody would make a pink map defies logic... .We have far too many of them for region/district locators too!! The sooner they are all replaced with decent svg maps the better they are so 2002!! Oh I also noticed that the generic Template:Pakistan topics is being abused in thousands of articles. It even appears at the bottom of some tiny village articles. I think it should only be used in core topic articles, what do you think? Himalayan 18:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, if you check the most recent edit history, this is the result of replacing 'Latvian Cities' with 'subst:Latvian Cities', on the old version before you converted it. And, this is after running a script to clean-up the ifs, and couple hand tweaks to set the settlement_type and move the nicknames to other_name. The problem with using other_name as the default right now is that some have really long lists which stretches the infobox, and will have to be cleaned up by hand. If you like the result, I can run a script to convert the rest. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

That looks great, no pink maps at least!. The only thing, is that the infoboxes will have to be changed in the future to allow for photos to be added etc. So for now go for it, but it will need a bot/AWB later to replace the old paramters with a sturdy settlement box on the actual pages (like Rich is doing at present with Pakistan). Yes, by all means use the script. I have a huge log of places to sort out in Nigeria, South Africa, Belarus, Romania and Russia let alone having to do Latvia!

Yep Jelgava looks perfect for now... Himalayan 18:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow you just don't know how much it means to me to have capable coders around me like you, Rich, Fritzpoll, Jack Merridew and Thaddeus. You guys fill in where my talents run out!! Your abilities have super potential....Basically my goal is to have every article on a settlement any in the world in a standard format and layout, standardised and simplified and to be referenced and containing quality information. Everything is gradually improving.... Himalayan 18:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'm happy to help when I can. I just finished the conversion, and nominated it for deletion at TFD. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Niice. Thanks! I wonder how equipped you might be to actually adding missing infoboxes to articles using AWB.... Can I give you a bell some time in the future when I need a hand? Himalayan 19:44, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, Although I don't currently use AWB, I have been thinking about trying it. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Castle merger

Thanks for the tip! I seen lots of articles that lost its content when merged. So, I prefer when somebody more experienced do the job. Will use REDIRECT next time if possible. --Kebeta (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Fix needed in Template:Taxobox_colour

See bottom of Template_talk:Taxobox_colour. No admin has fixed the 3 bizarre title characters (;"|) caused by the coding of the default color as "transparent". I think it would be just that one-line fix (needed for months). To test it, display Template_talk:Taxobox for the topic "Broken". -Wikid77 (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done by User:Rich Farmbrough. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:40, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

La La Vazquez

hello i have another question for you, how can I delete our conversation off my discussion page until the issue is resolved. i would not want everybody to be able to see the conversation we are having until i fix it. pls help. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaniv (talk • contribs) 01:03, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done So long as Tony (or someone else) doesn't object and revert it. Note that anyone will still be able to see it by accessing the pages history, like this for example. However, it won't be visible to the casual observer. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Infobox settlement

Hey whatever you did to the settlement box has made it go offline. For some reason every map is now on the left! Can you please change it back?

Thanks for letting me know about a potential problem. Can you show me a specific example? I haven't seen any other reports on the infobox settlement talk page. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Plastikspork, initially I though it was a problem with my ER but see this comparison (it transcludes the old template), the only way I can see the problem with the images on the left is with CSS turned off and that happens with both versions (before and after making the change). Luck Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 14:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Municipality pt

A request. Can you convert Template:Infobox_Municipality_pt to standard? Himalayan 09:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I will have a look. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. No, actually they are municipalities and all contain municipal locators in Portugal, they serve a good purpose and are more accurate than a pin in terms of location (to highlight municipal territory)... Obviously I would prefer that they were rendered in the style of the svg but it is OK.. If there are any articles about villages/towns within them we have that have another infobox then they can have a pin. Spain is going to be particularly problematic though. I want all of the articles to look like Nerha but check out Burgos for example, they use awfully made seperate make shift templates that are a target for vandalism. How do we go about replacing them? Check out this.

Anyway if you could replace those Portuguese template slike you did with Lativa using a script I can clean them up by adding the photos into the templates rather than sprawled across the bottom like Aljezur!! Eh? Himalayan 15:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Will do. The first pass will be to convert the malformed image and coordinates, then I can make a second pass to do the substitution/replacement with infobox settlement. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. P.S. isn't it funny how TFDs seem to attract so extremely few people compared to AFDs...15:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be some mismatch in the precision used in the coordinates. Should we ignore/remove the seconds in infobox Municipality pt, and just go with degrees+minutes? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

If that is easiest, go for it! Himalayan 17:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the reason for such little interest in TFDs is that (1) only a small percentage of editors actually understand how they work. In fact, it wasn't until I had been editing for about 1.5 years that I was able to figure it out. (2) for the most part templates are really secondary to articles, in that, they are usually modifying the visual representation of the information, and not the actual information being presented. This is one of the reasons why I have started to work on WP:TFD, in that there aren't nearly as many admins closing them, or figuring out how to best resolve issues after the closing. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hokay looks good thanks. Faro looks much better now. A lot of them need cleaning up now with adding a photo to the top to avoid clutter... I went to Faro and Lagos as a kid, the fishy smell was extreme to say the least. Everywhere I went in Portugal smelt of fish!! Himalayan 19:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Lucky you

I hope that you have a great holiday. By-the-way, I haven't heard from "La-LA" (smile). Tony the Marine (talk) 23:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:TFD

Ah, thanks for going ahead and doing that. I was about to myself, but I got distracted. Happy editing! Axem Titanium (talk) 05:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Holiday

Enjoy your holiday!!! When you return, I have Austria, Brazil and Colombia lined up in wait.... Himalayan 20:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Why is the infobox template now showing the map on the left instead of center align? Himalayan 21:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you show me an example? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Renaming {{otheruses4}}

I've started a new thread on Template_talk:Otheruses4#Request_move_discussion about moving {{otheruses4}} to a less esoteric title and I'd like to invite you to the discussion. Cheers, -Sligocki (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox religious biography

Do you need me to do anything on {{Infobox religious biography}}? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you check to make sure I got the classes right? I believe I merged all the entries from infobox Buddhist. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, thank you.I'm just updating the documentation. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Great, that would help quite a bit. I was just preparing to do that next. I will work on Infobox Buddhist biography next. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Greek Dimos

I'd be grateful if you could keep an eye on Template talk:Infobox Greek Dimos#Merging redux, please. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Rombouts

I deleted the page Rombouts on WIKIPEDIA. My family Rombouts doesnot want to advertise themselves. I have to respect that as a familymember.

Thank you again, for all advices, help & support.

Kind regards, Ben Rombouts, www.benrombouts.nl

PS. I also deleted all info on www.familierombouts.nl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgajrombouts (talk • contribs)

• Restoring Rombouts article

Dear Plastikspork,

I deleted my carefully constructed article on ROMBOUTS. Ronhjones and you made GOOD alterations. I was very happy with those.

HOWEVER, the WIKIPEDIA system that anyone can make changes seems OK to me. I THOUGHT. NOW I changed my mind. IT IS NOT A GOOD SYSTEM. Before some patroller starts deleting he should contact the author FIRST , or contact YOU.

I had made external links on ROMBOUTS. Three were to the Rombouts College (Bernardinus College) in The Netherlands. It was founded by my great uncle (uncle of my father) Priest, leader of a famous convent in the South of The Netherlands, Damascenus Rombouts , Franciscan Priest. The Rombouts Colleges, are in the Bernardinus Foundation (=Stichting) . There are now totally 6 Colleges with 10.000 students. Also Rolduc College belongs to the Bernardinus/Rombouts group. Rolduc is on WIKIPEDIA !!! (MY NAME IS Bernardus G.A.J. Rombouts, I am named after Bernardinus Rombouts, Franciscan Father in New Guinee Inonesia, founded a school there. It is on my www.familierombouts.nl website. The Rombouts College was also named after him : Bernardinus College and Foundation. FAMOUS WORLDWIDE, WORKING WORLDWIDE, even in Africa and Poland, now they are in Krakow.

THOSE LINKS, also to my great uncle Damascenus Rombouts WERE DELETED by some WIKIPEDIA patroller.

NOW I DELETED THE WHOLE ARTICLE. For your information, I speak 9 languages including some Mandarin Chinese, Bahasa Indonesia and some words in Japanese. I come in ALL countries of the Far EAST since 1974. I was a buyer for importers and later head buyer departmentsores. Bought eastern Arts and Crafts and antiques, porcelain ware, hand knotted carpets of wool and silk. Total retail value I bought around 1.000.000.000 EURO. (ONE BILLION).

Now I regret I deleted the article . Do you still have it ? Thank you,

B.G.A.J. (Ben) Rombouts B.G.A.J. Rombouts Born 1951 Rotterdam The Netherlands (talk) 09:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ben, your revisions are still saved in the article's history. If you click on Rombouts, then click on the history tab, you will see a list of all the revisions to the article. If you click on any of the "time stamps", you can view old versions. If you then click on the "edit tab" you can even copy material from old versions. I have also saved your original version of the article at User:Bgajrombouts/Rombouts. However, I would encourage you to work with the structure of the article as it is right now. If you click on the category link at the bottom of the Rombouts page, you will see links to other articles about surnames. This will give you an idea of the structure used by Wikipedia when writing articles about people, things, places, with the same name. Let me know if I can help. Best Regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• Re: Rombouts on Wikipedia.

Plastikspork, thank you for yr CLEAR reply.

I shall stick to the article ROMBOUTS as you made it !

I can add MANY Rombouts companies , WORLDWIDE, will do ASAP.

TKS, Ben Rombouts, bgajrombouts, B.G.A.J. Rombouts Born 1951 Rotterdam The Netherlands (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

• Familie Rombouts website and companies

Thank you for making Rombouts more clear !

I see www.familierombouts was deleted and also some Rombouts companies.

Was there a good reason ?

Kind regards , Ben RomboutsB.G.A.J. Rombouts Born 1951 Rotterdam The Netherlands (talk) 18:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The deletion of the website link, was mostly due to it not being formatted in a manner which would conform with WP:LAYOUT. The deletion of some of the companies was due the fact that they were not linked or cited to give enough context to figure out exactly where to find more information about the companies in questions. Let me know if you have any further questions or problems. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:46, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear Plastikspork, : The deletion of the website link, was mostly due to it not being formatted in a manner which would conform with WP:LAYOUT. ???? IT is an external LINK, I donot understand what WP:LAYOUT has to do with my OWN WEBSITE layout. www.familierombouts.nl ??? Kind regards, Ben Rombouts. bgajrombouts@gmail.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgajrombouts (talk • contribs) 03:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I JUST made an article about my eldest cousin Peter Rombouts, he is a TOP POLITICIAN in The Netherlands. The article WAS REMOVED IMMEDIATLY by Dutch WIKIPEDIA. PLEASE RESTORE, Kind regards, Ben - B.G.A.J. Rombouts Born 1951 Rotterdam The Netherlands (talk) 23:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator on the Dutch Wikipedia. You should probably take it up with the person who deleted the article. Thanks for letting me know. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Amphoe

Looks good, as long as they are all replaced with the standard infobox settlement soon. They will need to have the empty parameter options in the version it is in now (number of sub communes/villages/established date) to allow editors to add the missing details.

You may want to look at this. All of the Austrian infoboxes are in German!! Aside from the tiny map and huge red pin I think this template could be converted to standard... Himalayan 10:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW I'm using firefox and the map is for some reason now on the left. I tried my mum's desktop earlier and used Internet Explorer and the map looks central and fine!! For some reason on mine it is showing on the left and looks deformed. Any idea how? Himalayan 11:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I've placed the Bangladesh district infobox up for deletion too today, I've converted one, see Bagerhat District. What I've done is created district locator maps which should replace the pin maps. These are not towns but districts... If you could convert the Bangladesh district to standard and introduce these new locator maps in due course this would be appreciated. Himalayan 15:56, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I've also proposed this if you care to see September 6 TFDs. Anyway, that is enough for now, plenty of work!! Himalayan 18:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you disagree, or didn't you catch my messages? Himalayan 20:27, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I am a bit busy right now, I will be sure to respond within the next few hours. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Me too! Anyway I'll lay off the TFDs for a while, sometimes they create conflict (as that Greek dimos template and Norwegian kommune template did in the past...) .... How a fair consensus can be called though when project members turn up to furiously protect it I have no idea how a closing admin makes a judgement on that... Take care. Himalayan 20:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem remains that certain things aren't implemented on here because of sheer numbers. You can replace all the templates for some second/third world country and nobody will batter an eyelid but as soon as you try to something to change something for a country like Australian, UK, USA and Canada suddenly it becomes overwhelming. This itself shows how biased the balance of editors are on wikipedia... Can a consensus to keep really be based entirely upon the views of one project though? Himalayan 12:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

There is quite a bit of WP:BIAS. If you nominate something which touches many United States/United Kingdom/Australian locations, you will certainly hear about it. Also, it's important to nominate these things at a slow enough of a pace that you can have significant discussion. I would say that you are experiencing quite a bit of backlash from the rapidity with which changes are being proposed. One way to potentially reduce the amount of backlash is to: (1) convert the infobox to use the desired template as its backend, (2) wait for backlash, (3) Deprecate the non-standard names for particular fields, (4) wait for backlash, (5) A script can convert the field names to standard ones in all articles using the template, (6) wait for backlash.

Of course, the obvious step 7 would be to then nominate the template for deletion. However, I don't think this is entirely necessary. One problem with these very large templates like {{infobox settlement}} is that they have a very large number of parameters, and can encourage the overuse of the infobox. The good thing about using it as a backend is that encourages a more uniform presentation of information. Perhaps the best compromise is to have regional frontend templates, but use settlement as the backend. The casual user would not see the messy details and would be encouraged to only use the parameters presented in the frontend. I believe Swiss Kanton is doing something similar to this. This way you can have a standard, but you don't have to paste these large messy generic templates at the top of these small articles. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

A simple way to deal with concerns about possible over-use is to have a cut-down pro forma blank of the template on project pages. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

That certainly helps, and I could see that working. However, I wouldn't be opposed to see a direct straight-pipe through of almost all parameters to a backend with a few things like subdivision_type =, subdivision_type1 =, subdivision_type2, timezone, etc. already filled in. The massive number of generic/blank fields can be somewhat unintuitive and creates the ability to arbitrarily inject information into the infobox. The problem is that the mess we have today is that there is no standardization. A first step might be some standardization, using {{infobox settlement}} as a backend. Once that is accepted, one can discuss step 2. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually that was the first thing I objected to with the infobox settlement is the sheer number of empty paramters, especially if inserted into a very stubby article. There is a case against adding a too monstrous template, cutting down to a bare mimimum is probably better, but basic vital details it may be better to leave them until another editor can fill them, e.g like a photograph parameter, many editors will not known how to add one etc. Anyway I'll lay off on the TFDs for now, I've sene some good prgoress already with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Portugal and Lativa at least.. I am not withdrawing my Austria nomination as I believe I have a valid point about German text on english wikipedia, at least.... I have often negotiated a move towards a standard layout in the past, the Indian and German templates we see today are because I discussed it... Himalayan 15:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I have my doubts about Template:Infobox Brazilian State too.... Anyway I'll let somebody else decide upon that... The sad thing is that a number of recent nomination from September 5-7 have attracted a big backlash from editors who otherwise wouldn't have turned out because of other deletion proposals. I fear many of them may have to be renominated later to get a fairer consensus.

Have you noticed how a common argument seems to be "the philosophical approach of one-size-fit-all is deeply problematic in it that usually either results loss of features or in greater complexity". Are they not aware that we ensure that no information is lost in conversion and that more often than not the structure of them is actually simplified and easier to understand? Anyway... Himalayan 15:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your continued contributions to Wikipedia! --eric dilettante' (mailbox) 06:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Canada

HI, just a heads up. If replacing Canada can you replace the old dot maps with a pin map and template the flags like this.? Himalayan 17:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Seeking clarification re edit on Moss Side

In what way does this edit ([1]) relate to your edit summary? I'm not particularly bothered as it has an alternate source, but there's nothing on the page linked relating to the edit you made. Fol de rol troll (talk) 18:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I used AWB to replace a template which was deleted after a discussion at WP:TFD. One of the features of AWB is that it will perform other minor fixes while it is performing a task. If you look closely, you will see that it didn't actually remove any references. It replaced <ref name="surprises">{{cite news|date=2006-09-11|title=Killing surprises few in Moss Side|first=Nick|last=Ravenscroft|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5334510.stm|publisher=[[BBC]]|work=[[BBC News]]|accessdate=2008-11-14}}</ref> with <ref name="surpises"/>. It was able to do this since the reference named "surprises" is defined elsewhere in the article. I hope this answers your question. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have looked more closely. I thought it was two seperate refs. Cheers. Fol de rol troll (talk) 18:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

care

Please exercise more care with typo corrections as you incorrectly changed four instances of the Pictish word caled in the Kirkcaldy article to called. I appreciate that this was an automated change using AWB but the entries were clearly marked as being from a language other than English and the end result was a repeated error. I'm not familiar with AWB so can you suggest a way of avoiding this happening again (it's not the first time that an AWB user has made this mistake in this article)? Can the word be flagged either in the article or in a database as being valid, for instance? Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:Lolblock

Where did you see "Userfy" as the "winning" !vote? It was overwhelmingly Keep. I suggest you follow the clear consensus, which went Keep and readd it back to template space. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:50, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

My reading of the discussion was that there was no consensus to delete it, and that there was strong consensus that it should be kept on Wikipedia. At that point, the question is whether it should be kept in main template space, or if it should be moved elsewhere. As these are !votes, I didn't perform a strict count, but found that there were roughly as many people in favor of move/userfy as there were for a strict keep. In the end, I looked to see where the discussion was moving as a whole, and majority of the votes near the end of the discussion were for userfication. I view userfication as a compromise, and felt that relisting it would not serve any useful purpose.

If you feel seriously offended by my close, you can always start a thread at WP:DRV. Or, if you are feeling very bold, you could always create a new one. I won't object; although someone else might. I certainly won't cry "wheel warring" if some admin reverts my decision. Thanks for your feedback. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

e-mail

Do you have an e-mail address (you can e-mail me via may user page). Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, in a few minutes. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

'Uses Infobox settlement' template

I created {{Uses Infobox settlement}}. Please add it to template documentation, where appropriate. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

TFDs

Hi. I think I'll stay well clear of nominating templates from now on, it causes too much conflict and under my new account I'm supposed to be keeping a low profile. I hope you still want to speak to me and discuss anything I could really use your help with adding infoboxes even if I directly don't nominate a template for deletion. Himalayan 18:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a reasonable plan. I think a slower staged revision process is probably in order. I don't think it will be particularly controversial to convert the backends of many of these templates to use {{infobox settlement}}. It certainly doesn't require a TFD, and can be done with minimal reasoned debate on a case-by-case basis. Once that is done, one can consider complete replacement, which would be as easy as running a script to perform the substitution. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:41, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Didn't you mean to nuke Template:Infobox Municipality pt? Himalayan 20:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't feel as though I could make that decision without a greater level of community involvement. Letting a TFD run seems like a reasonable next step. I didn't seen any outcries after the initial conversion, and now that some time has past, I don't see any particular reason why it won't result in an eventual deletion. The only potential snag would be if someone tried to bundle it in with the rest of the outrage over replacing templates with {{infobox settlement}}. If that happens, one can always wait a month or so and try again when people have calmed down a bit. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

BJJstatsbox

{{BJJstatsbox}}, which you deleted on 14 August, has just been recreated. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

That went quickly! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I turned it into a redirect to encourage use of the standard template. We shall see if that helps. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox MMAstats - help needed.

Please could you take a look at Template talk:Infobox MMAstats#Infobox martial artist. Thank you. And apologies for finding you more work! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:BJJstatsbox

Well, actually I do mind :D Because MMA ≠ BJJ. Tuplad (talk) 09:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I hope that's better. I think there is a better way to structure the template to allow for plugin statboxes, so we don't need to guess all the possible competitive martial arts. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:sisterlinks

Has something fundamentally changed with policy since this discussion? I don't think there is any need to fully protect the template. ~ Paul^T+/_C 06:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see that for some reason. I will step back the protection. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I also noticed you protected {{Fashionmodel}}. This template has less than 500 transclusions. Would you mind changing this (and any other template you have deemed "highly visible") to semi-protection as well under the same rationale? I realize there needs to be some centralized discussion about this on WP:HRT but I think we can both agree that less than 500 transclusions is not highly visible. ~ Paul^T+/_C 00:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

This template is already semi-protected, not fully protected. Let me know if you see any which are fully protected but shouldn't be. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

My apologies! I just noticed "protected" in your logs. That is what I get for Assuming things... ~ Paul^T+/_C 00:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox martial artist - children & spouse removel

Removing these screws up pages that use them, see Brock Lesnar it know reads Notable relatives "Rena 3", which is totally random, who is Rena? (His wife) What does 3 refer to? (# of kids)--Phospheros (talk) 17:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I still think wife/children should be deprecated. If the children are notable, then they can be listed under relatives are notable. If the spouse is notable, he/she can be listed there as well. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yet another example of where a single policy (and possibly sub-template or set of common fields)) for global use would be useful. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox scientist

Speaking of {{Infobox scientist}}, it seems to have very few fields not in {{Infobox person}}. Perhaps it should be merged into that? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Merging would be a serious pain. I would let it be for now. Later, perhaps, but there are many other less widely used templates which could be addressed first. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Errors with Infobox martial artist and citing references in record

Because the info box calculates a total # of fights if someone tries to cite a references for the # of fights won/lost/drawn/etc. it will cause an expression error. Should This functionality be removed or should a bot just strip out every "rev" in the MMA record, it's not like a citation is really needed as every box will eventually have a link to the fighters Sherdog record. --Phospheros (talk) 21:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I would say it's probably better to just move the ref to the "footnotes". Or if it's entirely redundant, then remove it. What do you think? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I guess that will work, then in the future those citations that are extraneous can be manually removed and those with pertinent info can be kept. --Phospheros (talk) 22:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I will see if I can write a script to check all the pages, and move the refs to the footnotes when necessary. As you said, it will take more inspection to see if they are redundant. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Universal templates have same name on Wikimedia Commons

Hello, Plastikspork, let me see if I can explain what a universal template is in terms you can comprehend. A universal template exists on multiple Wikipedia sites under the same template name:

• Universal templates have the same name on Wikimedia Commons.
• Universal templates have the same name on Wikimedia Commons.
• Universal templates have the same name on Wikimedia Commons.

That means: don't delete a universal template because it is expected to exist on both Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Commons (did I mention as the "same name"?). Wikimedia Commons is where most images are stored for use by the various other-language wikipedias. Anyway, the template name is intended to be universal. Can you comprehend even one word of what I just wrote? It's not intended as an insult. You seem very slow-witted. -Wikid77 (talk) 09:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. Let me know when you have started a thread at WP:DRV. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:44, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

TFD requests

Can you put Template:Municipality_of_Slovenia up for deletion. I did go through a lot of them replacing it before but I believe 3/4 of the articles still have them.

Can you give me a link to a page where you replaced the template? I would like to see what is being proposed as the alternative. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Add to that Infobox Algerian District and Infobox Algerian municipality and Template:Infobox District Peru. Himalayan 10:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Same for these as well. If you could show me what you think is the better alternative, it would be helpful. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

OK. For Algeria most articles use infobox settlements.. An example I added is Biskra . For Slovenia see Ajdovščina as compared to Mirna Peč. The existing box for Peru is Trompeteros District. I'm wondering why it has a world map and green bloated columns... P.S. would you or Andy be interested in a taskforce of WP:Cities to try to esnure all place articles have an infobox and map? . At the moment it only seems as if it is I and Markussep who actively add infoboxes to place articles. Ideally we need a bot or automated assitance... . Himalayan 19:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I will start by upgrading them to use {{infobox settlement}} as a backend, which will provide a more direct path to replacement if that's deemed to be the best option. I think it's often hard for people to see how the conversion will take place. In a few of these, it's going to require some preprocessing due to the use of commas and incorrect use of decimal points. See Skikda_District, the decimal point and comma are backwards.

As a minor point, when you are adding these infoboxes, try to use unformatted numbers for the population_total field (i.e., no commas or spaces). If you use unformatted numbers, the infobox can automatically calculate the population density. It will also automatically format the number for you. As far as the taskforce is concerned, I am happy to help perform any script related task. If there is a pattern to the editing task, then I can program a script to perform the task. If it requires too much human intervention, then I will find it hard to find the time to do it. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:21, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Template: Big Brother endgame

Hi, I reverted your edits on Template: Big Brother endgame because it broke the infobox and rendered the colors useless and not visible. If you would like to make changes to the templates like Endgame or Housemates please use a sandbox and test out your sandbox to ensure your changes won't break the template. Thank You. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I had already reverted myself before you reverted me. I am aware that there was a problem and I am working on it. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

TX

Thanks for that. I've been quite ill recently so freely admit I didn't investigate as thoroughly as I should have. On reading the source code of the template (as I did with others I voted on), it becomes rather obvious. Orderinchaos 07:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I made the same mistake. It must have been the deluge of {{infobox settlement}} related discussions. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Multiple amateur records

What are your thoughts on adding sport specific amateur records to the template? Looking at the Mirko Filipović page it looks a bit confusing as Amateur career is under MMA record, now obviously this refers to his amateur kickboxing career and as Cro Cop has no amateur MMA career it's not that big of a problem in this specific case but I'm sure as more kickboxers & boxers come over to MMA there will be a need to list multiple amateur records. --Phospheros (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

One option would be to allow for the subsection label to be redefined. I already did this for MMA, although it is currently undocumented. I just added an 'amlabel' option for the Amateur stats, so one could put 'amlabel = Amateur kickboxing record' for example (see Mirko Filipović). Yet another option would be to allow for entirely freeform stats section, where they could be defined however one wanted, but this is probably a bit too much unless it is specifically needed. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

AWB correction is incorrect

Hi, I've had this conversation with quite a few AWB users, so don't feel bad.

You've changed the word "Enmascarado" to "emmascarado", that is wrong, "Enmascarado" is the correct Spanish term and should be left the way it is please, thanks in advance.  MPJ-DK  (No Drama) Talk  05:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it looks like it's now inside a {{lang}} tag. If you see this happening in any other places, short of fixing AWB, you can stick it inside a {{lang}} tag and AWB will leave it alone. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done Fix requested here. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Austria and Italy

Not much I could do about that Texas infobox so I didn't say anything. Could we arrange for a private discussion with WP:Italy, WP:Austria, and WP:Switzerland to backend the templates. I'm sorry but I don't find German text within an infobox really acceptable, they at least can be adjusted, if the projects agree to it. In such cases negotication is better than TFDs which attract a lot of editors who really don't understand how they work. Himalayan 13:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'm tied up at work all day today, but I would be happy to join any discussion. I'll create a sandbox version to get the discussion rolling when I get back tomorrow. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Template frazione

Wow, very very good!! See here --Francesco Betti Sorbelli (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox settlement

I'm not sure but it seems your recent edit to this page may have broken something. (Example: Columbus, New York). Can you figure it out? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done It was some test edit/vandalism to {{Location map New York}}. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Image deletion policy

Yes, we should absolutely challenge this. Do the deletion review, and let me know what assistance you need. How many people did you contact for the discussion, out of curiosity? Peripitus' decisions seems rather arbitrary, and based on his aesthetic whims rather than policy, if his response on my Talk Page to my question of whether there was a policy/guideline page explaining the criteria by which an image is or is not judged to be provide significant understanding of a topic is any indication. Low-res fair use images to illustrate TV shows, movies, books, magazines, etc. are perfectly valid, and should not be done away with. Nightscream (talk) 22:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

You are the only editor that I contacted, as I didn't want to WP:CANVASS. I did drop notices on the talk pages of the respective articles, but I don't think anyone was watching. As I said, in retrospect, I should have delsort-ed it in the Television list. I figured with two for and two against it would default stay open for a bit longer, or perhaps close as "no consensus". I have never filed a DRV before, but it shouldn't be too hard to start one. I think the folks over at ANTM would be interested any precedent on this subject as well. I'll let you know. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

There are four criteria for violating CANVAS, three of which are fairly easy to avoid: Be open about your alerts, make your messages to the people you contact neutral, do not select the people based on whether you think you know how they'll "vote", and make sure your messages are "limited". Of those I only find the last one iffy, since I don't (and CANVAS doesn't say) how many constitutes "limited". Nightscream (talk) 02:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

ROL3 and FOL3

Hello Peripitus. Could I get you to have a second look at ROL3Cast.jpg and FOL3Cast.jpg? It seems as though there was some disagreement over interpretation of the word significant in NFCC #8. I was not aware of any guidelines in this regard when it comes to low resolution full cast photos. I am aware of guidelines when it comes to individual photos of living individuals. I thought I would see if you could take a second look before considering doing something more formal, e.g., a review. Thanks in advance for your consideration, and best regards, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Plastikspork, thanks for the opportunity to explain the closure. There are few specific guidelines for non-free images beyond the broad "acceptable" and "unacceptable" lists in Wikipedia:Non-free content. My interpretation of the "significance" requirement is that a non-free image must both tell a reader something more that is covered by text or possible free images that could be created. In addition what it tells the reader must more than marginally increase their understanding of the topic. When closing FfDs on the basis of NFCC#8, as in closing these, I look for arguments (or a rationale on the image page) that tell me what useful information the image adds to reader's understanding and how this addition gives them a markedly increased understanding of the topic. Looking at the first as an example:

• • File:ROL3Cast.jpg - The nominator stated that it failed the criteria (in essence saying the image is largely decoration). Your argument that it shows the diversity of the cast was countered, and also did not say why showing this diversity mattered. Another editor agreed with the nomination and again refuted your argument. Lastly Nightscream argued largely that the simple act of illustrating the article was sufficient as it showed the reader what something looks like. None of the arguments to keep I found overrode the delete opinions that the image did NOT add significantly to reader's understanding. Lastly I looked at the image page and saw a rationale that stated the purpose of the image was to illustrate the article....nothing more. If there had been sourced commentary in the article about the appearance of the women, commentary that would be hard to comprehend without an image, then I expect the arguments would have been different and the debate closed differently. The same would have happened if the article had been about the image itself - either of these are usually taken to meet the "significance" requirement. There is a general consensus that certain types of articles can have an image without significant justification (album art in an album article, a character shot in an article on the character and some other) but for most other non-free images there must be a compelling reason shown as to why we host the content.

Sorry about the long reply. I understand the consternation felt - particularly as it is possible to find similar debates about similar images that had different outcomes. I do see though that by the understanding I have of both the NFCC and consensus closures of Ffd debates that I closed them correctly - I am happy to be found wrong ! Your thoughts ? - Peripitus (Talk) 05:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me for my terse rationale on the FFD. I have never commented on one before, and I improperly assumed that with so few people weighing in, and with no clear consensus, that it would close as no consensus or be relisted (I spend most of my time working at WP:TFD).

I believe that there is a mismatch in the interpretation of "significance", which was essentially being debated in the FFD. These are single low resolution non-free images which show the entire cast as a whole. They are typically labeled with the names of all the individuals appearing in the photo. When someone is reading the article, they might ask, "I remember that show, which woman was Amber, or Eyez", or whatever nickname might have been used on the show. I really don't think it would be possible to convey this information in words. You, and others, feel as though the add no value to the article and are purely decorative. I and others disagree. I feel as though they help to identify the individual participants, with differences (diversity) which is impractical to describe with text. You alluded to a precedent, but I have never seen discussion about the use of low resolution entire cast images in television articles (please correct me if I'm wrong). I have, however, seen dozens of articles which contain such photos, and these photos have remained unchallenged for years. My request would be to either (a) re-close the two debates as no-consensus and suggest that a wider debate on this issue is started or (b) re-open the two debates, and relist them for further discussion. I would like to see some "informal policy" set on this issue, otherwise I don't see a significant difference between these photos any those appearing in other reality television articles (e.g., ANTM and The Real World). Some time could have been saved if the nominator just joined the entire group in one big bundle. In any event, I will do the necessary work to alert everyone actively editing in the area. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Periptus' articulate response is appreciated, and I can see how from one POV, it sounds reasonable. However, I disagree that there should be a reason for using a non-free image other than to simply illustrate the article. Many articles on corporations feature the companies' logos as the main accompanying image. I don't know if that's "compelling", and indeed, I have a problem with such criteria because what's "compelling" is subjective, but if what you say is true, Peripitus, than all these images have to be removed, and I do not think that would improve the articles. If there is a consensus on this as you say, I'd like to see firm documentation of it, and not just an anecdote to that effect. Light illustration in an article is valid, IMO. Nightscream (talk) 02:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Plastikspork, I'm not ignoring this - just had poor net access for a few days. I'll contemplate this and come back to you tommorrow. Best regards - Peripitus (Talk) 05:54, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox CityIT

Could you have a look at converting the back-end of {{Infobox CityIT}}, please? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I will do it later today. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done See here. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Checking now. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

It should be converted asap I think as part of the drive to imporve these commune articles. So far I've had to manually replace ones i'm working on with standard to improve them. Himalayan 13:33, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

There is a small amount of preprocessing needed to add the 'latd/latm/longd/longm' information to get the pushpin to work, but that shouldn't take more than a few days with AWB. There are about 7000 transclusions, so it will take some time though. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

That's good to hear. I am very disappointed with the latest backlash against all this. 99% of the people voting to "keep" do nothing to work on these places like I do and don't see why it is important. For instance see Forchach which I converted to add a much needed municipality map. Now say I wanted to add municipality map to another in that district, let's say, Elmen. Now look at that template, what the heck does it mean and how do you know which is which without spending time to work out what the German is and the possibility of how you actually include the map. Now say a newbie wanted to help add maps, they would take one look at the box and think , urgh how the heck am I supposed to add a map? There is absolutely no reason why any settlement in Austria shouldn't have a template and municipal map like Forchach. The ones at present to not even have locators for municipalities which is a basic essential! I think we are going to have to discuss this with WP:Austria as the people currently commenting on such templates at TFDs who vote to keep purely based on "counteract systematic bias must keep regional templates" and"municipality is not a settlement" is outrageously misguided. I couldn't give a monkeys what editors who don';t edit these articles think, they are not the ones who want to edit Elmen and see this, It is not acceptable on english wikipedia and in any other circumstance would have bene deleted. The response was "most people will be German looking at these". Does this not completely go against that wikipedia is for everybody in any country and should be preesented plainly and simply in English... Himalayan 20:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I think "step one" is to add alternative common/standard English language field names, which would allow the use of either when calling the template. Then, "step two", is to have a bot (or AWB) run through and convert all the old uses to the English language field names, if there is no objections Finally, "step three", is to discuss completely phasing out the old usage. Hopefully the number of TFDs being proposed can be slowed a bit so that reasonable discussion can resume. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree, I don't think nominating a huge number of templates at once is helping the situation, it is disrupting other nominations which would never normally attract WP:POINTers and is affecting their outcome. We should do it in stages exactly as you said to avoid misunderstanding and misconception of what actually it is we are doing. Many many thanks for your work on this. Regards. Himalayan 20:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Oops!. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Host of "unsourced"

I don't think is such a nice move to add that ugly unsourced markup to a host of Italian cities articles. In many the local official webste is mentioned, which I think suffices as resource given. Let me know and good work!! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 10:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you are talking about. Could you provide me with a pointer to the particular article so I can be sure not to do it again? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox settlement and infobox region

Hi. You may have noticed recently that editors such as Ezhiki have objected enmasse to many of Andy's region/province TFD nominations. While I think that accuracy and useability of the template is far more important I can see why he believes "settlement" is politicially incorrect as such to have in an article about a province or district etc. Now I fully support Andys's goals of standardisaiton in part but I wondered whether we ought to copy the contents of infobox settlement into another template for region/district articles just o be politicially correct. I don't think it is of major importance given that the template clearly state district or province in the blue banner I am just trying to think of a way to deal with such a conflict as people are voting to keep templates based on naming convention rather than actual quality or accuracy of their content. Would it be that problematic to replicate the template in aregional naming and use that in all articles about regions/ districts/provinces/states etc to avoid terming them "settlements" in the naming. I jus tthink this issue could be easily solved and than ongoing conflicts wjhether at TFD or ANI or not really helping. Personally I think the content of the settlement box can be adapted to clearly illustrate what it is intended for but if editors are going to continue to turn up at these nominations and influence outcomes we need to sort something out. I would propose a Template:Infobox Division to be used in most articles about provinces/districts etc to avoid labelling provinces "settlements2 so to speak. Given that they will be exactly like infobox settlement in all but settlement type naming I don't think it is a problem to have two main templates given that they would beoperated exactly like infobox settlement. Personally I don't think infobox settlement or infobox division at the top is really worth too much heartache but I am willing to respect the views of people concerned and sort something out. This would solve virtually all of the issues over naming surely and it looks pretty natural and a good idea to me it would be used in all the articles about provinces/districts. I don't see why we couldn't adminster the same naming over all articles about divisions to avoid the "settlement" naming. From a maintenance point is shouldn't be difficult, to me it seems a plausible development. Himalayan 17:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

We don't need to maintain more than one such template; I've redirected {{Infobox division}} to {{Infobox settlement}}, of which it was apparently, contrary to policy, a direct copy. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

OK then but can we consider the actual name of template when applied to provine articles for instance to make sure it is "politically correct" but based on the same template. If is all in the same format and style I don't think it would cause major probelm with just tweaking the name for the same purpose, it is still the same template. Himalayan 18:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

If the only objection is to the name of the template, this seems like a problem which could be resolved. I personally don't care what it's called. Call it "location" or "place" or whatever. I believe that the other issue is that people appear to feel as though {{infobox settlement}} is too general and bloated, since it tries to cover all possible governmental divisions of countries, states, municipalities, cities, towns, hamlets, suburbs, ... I don't really have a strong opinion about this. I do agree that the purpose of an infobox is to "promote a more uniform presentation of information" and the purpose of making a templated version of an infobox is to "make it easier for editors to present this information in a uniform way". If a template has too many "blank fields", then it's not really serving either purpose as a frontend template. Templates with many blank fields are useful as backend templates (e.g., {{infobox}}). As templates become more bloated, they start to become more useful as backends, and less useful as frontends. I'm all for consolidation, but we shouldn't get too carried away, or try to make changes too quickly. Anyway, that's my opinion on the matter. You can feel free to disagree or agree and I won't think any less of you. However, debating this on my talk page probably won't make much of a difference as I am just one editor. I would like my role to be helping to resolve technical issues, whether that is creating more frontend templates, or consolidating templates, or adding missing features, or whatever needs to be done. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

That is why infobox settlement has the option to remove empty paramters so it isn't unnecesarily bloated... Himalayan 10:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Using that logic we just should use {{infobox}}, there is no reason for any of these templates. I'm not talking about leaving fields blank. I'm talking about 'blank_name_sec1', 'blank_name_sec2', ... Excessive blank fields discourages uniform presentation of the information. Have you counted how many of these blank fields there are in the template? These are fine in the backend, but in the frontend, it's not helpful use so many. If you want a completely flexible template which allows anything, just use {{infobox}}. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

help please

hi, once again can i ask for your help please? I created the filmography table on Megan Hauserman because it is more tasteful than other suggested tables and is often used. I'm having trouble with one part of it. Could you align the "Episodes" part of the table to the left? I've tried without success. It would be much appriciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiguy09 (talk • contribs)

I removed the 'text-align:center', but I think the table needs some more work. In particular, I don't think you need to have the individual episodes in the table. It's too much detail and does not render very well on smaller screens. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to rearrange it, but if you still have some issues you can tell me and we'll try to work them out. Thanks Wikiguy09 (talk) 03:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I came up with an idea, but it may be far-fetched. I was thinking that instead of deleting the information, perhaps there could be a "Show/Hide" button for that section? I'm unaware if one is able to do this, but I want try to make progressive changes. Thanks for your help. Wikiguy09 (talk) 04:53, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

It is possible, but per MOS:COLLAPSE, it's perhaps not the best plan. I think the best idea is to just reduce it to the number of episodes, instead of an itemized list. The list of episodes already appears on the individual show pages. This is the standard convention used for all (or almost all) reality television show participants. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

It is true that the information is on main articles, and I removed the column as suggested. Thanks for your help again Wikiguy09 (talk) 23:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Tailor-Made

I was in a bit of a hurry (almost late to my union meeting, and I'm on the board), so I got a bit sloppy with the block history checking, and didn't have time to straighten it out before I had to log out. Thanks for cleaning it up. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedian of the Day

Congratulations, Plastikspork! For your kindness to others, your hard work around the wiki, and for being a great user, you have been awarded the "Wikipedian of the Day" award for today, September 17, 2009! Keep up the great work!
Note: You could also receive the "Wikipedian of the Week award for this week!
If you wish, you can add {{User:Midnight Comet/WOTD/UBX|September 17, 2009}} to your userpage.

Happy editing!

[midnight comet] [talk] 00:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks so much. I have been so busy this past week that I didn't get a chance to respond properly. Best regards, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:07, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Reverts

Are you aware that all of your edits in this series have been reverted? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. When I converted those pages a couple weeks ago, I did more than just change the template. I painstakingly fixed erroneous area and population figures, as well as, merging redundant coordinate specifications and added references. Some bold editor comes along and blindly reverts all my edits with no courtesy note or anything. As a result, about a dozen were displaying red text and another dozen had all kinds of errors. It took the better part of today to sort out the entire mess. I really don't care if they keep using {{infobox settlement}} as a backend rather than a frontend, but to revert all the factual corrections is pretty much unacceptable. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:06, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I imagine that must have been very upsetting for you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

America's Next Top Model, Cycle 13

Spork, can you semi-protect the article for two months due to IP disruption editing on future episode prediction and speculation. Thanks. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 04:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

infobox rugby league super league biography

If you require any assistance to change over the remaining infoboxes to their original title I would be more than happy to help out, given that it was myself who offended a few people in creating a new infobox, rather than adding the new material to the existing one. If you do want me to take some weight off your shoulders, just holla. Lando09 (talk) 18:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I think it's basically a solved problem. The {{infobox rugby league biography}} is nearly identical in terms of the parameters. There were a couple parameters which were supported by {{infobox rugby league super league biography}}, but not supported by {{infobox rugby league biography}}. So, I just changed all calls to {{infobox rugby league super league biography}} to use {{infobox rugby league biography}}. Any extra parameters are harmlessly ignored. If those extra parameters are added to {{infobox rugby league biography}}, then they will automatically start showing up in the infobox. Until then, it didn't seem like any harm to just leave them in each transclusion. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that sounds very much like the case. Sorry for the extra work that I gave to you, once again sorry for the inconvience. Lando09 (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Kappa Alpha Order

I have deleted the controversy part on the page because it is wrong. No KA was in blackface at the party-it was members of Zeta Psi. I cited the Daily Cavalier articles showing that earlier. KA was cleared in that controversy. As for Thomas Dixon having lunch at the VA chapter, he was a lecturer in high demand around the turn of the century. Many schools hosted him. There is no reason for a 104 year old lunch to be put in as a controversy. As I recall, UVA was segregated at that time.

Nothing on the controversy is on the Zeta Psi page. This shows me that the person posting this is doing so to intentionally hurt KA.

txattorney328 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Txattorney328 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me. It appears discussion is ongoing on the talk page. I would encourage you to join. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

France

What do you think of User:Himalayan Explorer/France. Is there a way you can update the infobox French commune like you did with Italy? Let me know what you are up to... Himalayan 21:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I will have a look in a bit. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocking me from editing Real Madrid page

What's the deal with blocking me from editing the Real Madrid page? Every edit I made can be verified and cited from the Real Madrid website. Why was I blocked from editing the page due to "vandalism"? What is that supposed to mean? I'd like an explanation.

Bigboipcf (talk) 03:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The page is under "semi-protection" until October 3, 2009. It could be that you don't have enough edits to allow for editing pages under "semi-protection". You can always request an edit on the talk page, or wait for a couple more days until the protection is lifted. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Wisła Kraków

Why have you deleted the templates? Loosmark (talk) 22:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if it wasn't clear. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 September 24. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Consensus reached by only two people voting!? I find the templates useful and I wasn't aware of the deletion proposal. Loosmark (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Three votes if you include the nominator. This is actually average for WP:TFD. I'm sorry you weren't aware of the proposal. The TFD notice appeared above every transclusion for the week that the discussion was open. If you want, I can provide you a copy of the templates in your userspace, and perhaps you can start a wider discussion? Let me know what you think. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to keep that option open so I'd appreciate if you do that. Loosmark (talk) 00:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Loosmark (talk) 01:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Your SHADOW-EDITS of all my recent edits

02-Oct-2009: I have noticed that you've been editing many of the pages that I've recently edited, in diverse areas. In fact, it seems you've been editing almost all of the pages I've changed in the past week. I edit medical articles, and you change them. I translate articles from German Wikipedia; you change them. Dude, that shadow-editing seems creepy; it seems like you are wiki-stalking all of my edits. At this point, I think we really need to talk. I've been afraid to open a dialog with you, because, quite frankly, you seem so mentally unbalanced that I am quite afraid of what you'll do next. Also, after your rapid deletion, eradication, and repeated extermination of universal Template:in, I suspected that you have shown a multi-month pattern of extremely obsessed behavior. Do you understand how your behavior can be causing extreme fear in other people? Please let me know, below, your intentions to keep changing every article after I edit it. Thank you. -Wikid77 (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry that your are experiencing "extreme fear". It appears you are asking for advice? I edit thousands of articles, often wikifying articles, and so it's bound to happen that I will edit same pages. I would suggest starting with WP:AGF. The tone of both this message and your previous message makes it difficult to have a rational discussion. If I recall, you called me very slow-witted. I would not call this civil. I would be happy to engage in a civil conversation if you wish to have one. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

• OK, I would like to work together with you to eliminate hundreds of old templates, but I wasn't sure how you viewed the situation. You seem more agreeable than I had thought before. -Wikid77 (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Thank you again for all your hard work, on the deletion of 'place' infoboxes. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I second that. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. My very best regards. Himalayan 11:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you sort out Offlaga with an infobox? Keep up the great work. Himalayan 16:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I fixed that one. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Italian comunes

Great work so far, what do we do about the many places without infoboxes like Racale? Himalayan 13:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I added one. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you sort out Offlaga with an infobox? Yuck quite a few from that region need sorting out like San Zeno Naviglio too. Keep up the great work. Himalayan 16:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I will take a look. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

If you add {{subst:Infobox Italian comune/translation}} to an article, it will paste in a basic blank infobox. If you add the same, but with the {{comune}} infobox from an Italian wikipedia article, it will give you a rough translation. The result will need to be tweaked a bit to get the Province, Region correct and to move any elevation spans to the 'elevation_max_m' and 'elevation_min_m'. Other minor changes are decimal points vs. commas in the area/population, and general italian -> english translation of dates and saint names. Otherwise it appears to be pretty good. If you have a larger list of ones which are not correctly formatted, I could potentially work with the translated table directly, but I would need a list to run WP:AWB. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I made it through all the links in {{Province of Brescia}} today, so they should all have standard infoboxes now. I fear that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Rare templates Col-7, Col-1-of-7

There are numerous small templates trying to avoid direct wikitable coding. However, I feel that these templates are excessive, as listed in Template:Col-begin/doc:

• For 5-column table: {{Col-5}}, {{Col-1-of-5}}, {{Col-2-of-5}}, {{Col-3-of-5}},... {{Col-5-of-5}}
• For 6-column table: {{Col-6}}, {{Col-1-of-6}}, {{Col-2-of-6}}, {{Col-3-of-6}},... {{Col-6-of-6}}
• For 7-column table: {{Col-7}}, {{Col-1-of-7}}, {{Col-2-of-7}}, {{Col-3-of-7}},... {{Col-7-of-7}}

I would like to start an effort to remove those 21 templates (and probably others).
In my opinion, people should be learning how to code and customize wikitables (with the direct symbols "{|", "|-", bars and "|}"), rather than create so many confusing templates. If people want to indicate "column 3 of 5", then they should put a comment at each column as "<!--Col 3 of 5-->" rather than have a template named for each situation. What do think about reducing all the various 50 table templates, which mask wikitable coding? It seems like an easy way to remove 21 (or more) templates. -Wikid77 (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good, I will have look in a bit. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

---

04-Oct-09: I think {{Col-6}} is used in many pages, but {Col-1-of-6} (to 6-of-6) are mostly used in those guestbook, signature-tables of perhaps 150 users. In the remaining 30? articles, I am converting {Col-1-of-6} to just {{Col-break}} (so those other 6 templates to 6-of-6 will become unused). I think the reason that few people have tried to cleanup the 65 table-templates is that 7 varieties of template-sets are being used hundreds of times. Here's what I've seen for the 7 sets of template varieties (you might know this already):

• Set 1: {{col-begin}}, {{col-break}}, {{col-end}}
• Set 2: {{col-begin}}, {{col-2}}, {{col-2}}, {{col-end}}
• Set 3: {{col-begin}}, {{col-1-of-2}}, {{col-2-of-2}}, {{col-end}} or {{End}}
• Set 4: {{Top}}, {{top2}}, {{Mid}}, {{Bottom}}
• Set 5: {{Columns-start}}, {{Column}}, {{Columns-end}}
• Set 6: {{Multicol}}, {{Multicol-break}}, {{Multicol-end}}
• Set 7: {{Div col}}, {{Div col end}}

Naturally, because many people are using those limited templates, they have been forcing tables to fit whatever those templates had as preset table options. Many users have created cramped, over-wide tables because they could not easily set the column attributes, because they had not been using the full-featured wikitable codes (begin "{|" with "|align=right width=10%|" and "|}" at end).
German Wikipedia does not have those 65 templates: if fact, I've never seen any table-templates in German WP, so everyone must learn the full wikitable coding, which evidently is easier when that's all they see, and all the options are visible in their German tables. To start converting to more visibility, I have changed the docpage "Template:Col-begin/doc" to say:

"For 7, use: {{Col-break|width=14%}}  or for 8, use: {{Col-break|width=12%}}, etc."

Those examples of using a pre-existing template, with parameters, are intended to keep people from creating {{Col-9}} or {{Col-10}} with {{col-1-of-10}} ending {{col-10-of-10}}. It might take months to eliminate some of the other 50 table-templates. That's the status so far. -Wikid77 (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

WoW!

I just noted on my watchlist that you appear to have manually deleted the {{Charmed Companion}} template from all the pages it was on. I realize that, while it probably took a fairly significant amount of time, it probably wasn't so bad as it could have been. Is there a bot for the larger lists? or do they also have to be done manually when a template is deleted?
 —  ^{.`</sup>^) Paine Ellsworth<sup>diss`cuss} (^^`.  04:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I usually write a short script if there is more than a dozen transclusions, or if the edit is somewhat complicated. In this particular case, I was on the phone and the task was relatively mindless. This partially contributes to the 3000 edits per month You should check the edit history of my AWB account, User:Plasticspork, if you want to see some mindless automated editing. That account typically racked up over 16000 edits last month, which is mostly TFD (and template merging) related cleanup. We used to have an editor, Erik9, who ran an actual bot to do the work, but he was banned for sockpuppetry. If I don't have the time to sort it out, I usually just drop it in WP:TFD/H and see if someone picks it up. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

So, when you say you "write a short script", this is like a temporary bot? (Sorry, I'm not a programmer, so much of the behind-the-scenes items are foreign to me, yet I still remain curious.) I'm glad, though, that there are ways to make the job easier for you. From the outside it looks quite teejus.

 —  ^{.`</sup>^) Paine Ellsworth<sup>diss`cuss} (^^`.  05:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

It's a script which adds a tab to the top of the page which will automatically perform a particular editing task on that page. For example, I you can check out WP:AutoEd, which is a script which performs basic clean up edits. I keep a very short variant of AutoEd in my own userspace which I modify each time I have a new task to perform. If the task involves more than 50 pages, I usually use Autowiki Browser, which also uses similar "regular expressions" or pattern-based edits. The difference is that it runs a bit faster and can be set to run in a semi-supervised mode, so it reduces the amount of clicking. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the effort, Mr. P, but it all "looks Greek" to me <g>. I suppose one needs some prerequisite instruction that I have not learned. I'm just glad that the tools are available for those who know how to use them.

 —  ^{.`</sup>^) Paine Ellsworth<sup>diss`cuss} (^^`.  16:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Unlinked 14 table-templates Col-1-of-6 or 7

I am unlinking those 14 templates from this talk-page:

• For 6-column table: {{Col-1-of-6}}, {{Col-2-of-6}}, {{Col-3-of-6}},... {{Col-6-of-6}}
• For 7-column table: {{Col-7}}, {{Col-1-of-7}}, {{Col-2-of-7}}, {{Col-3-of-7}},... {{Col-7-of-7}}.

Hundreds of articles use {{Col-6}}, but at this point, a group-TfD could be started to remove those 14 other templates, which are almost totally unlinked. Half the time, people were using {Col-7} as a narrow form of Col-6 or Col-3 rather than set "width=14%". I guess people discovered to use {Col-7} to get a narrower column, when just using 3 or 6 columns; anyway, the use of {Col-7} was often confusing in a 3-column table. Also, people often put {Col-1-of-7} then {Col-2-of-5} to get column 1 narrower in a 5-column table. I did not know, until checking, that people were mix-matching the templates to force unusual table columns (because they didn't have "width=14%"). Hundreds of tables are bizarre from mixing those 65 templates (with others). -Wikid77 (talk) 00:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Reducing the number of these templates sounds like a reasonable idea. Feel free to TFD them yourself if you don't want to wait for me to have a look and potentially do it myself. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Mandy Moore FAR

I have nominated Mandy Moore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Enigma^msg 04:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

An award

Spaghetti fork

Here is an appropriate new edition to your fork family. Please adpot this Italian spaghetti fork as a gesture of appreciation for your considerable efforts with Italian comunes. Any developments with the French commune box? Himalayan 14:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Fork. I am a big fan of both specialized and multi-purpose utensils. As far as the French commune infobox goes, we are working on it. There are a few minor glitches that need to be worked out, but I think we are getting close. It's going to take some time considering the large number of transclusions, but there appears to be some consensus toward switching the backend. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Re: BB Housemates: The colors are now fixed for both the Big Brother Housemates and Endgame templates. Thank you. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 03:49, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Revisions at the Monte Maggiore Belsito link

Hello.

     My name is Mike Mason. I am 48 years old. My Father left my family when I was a baby. I was adopted at the age of 5 and was given my step-fathers name of Mason. My real name however is Favata. My grandparents, that I knew little of, the late John Favata and Anna (Zhanghi) Favata, where from Palermo, I knew that. My Fathers name was Anthony Favata, I never knew him. I recently found out from a reliable source that my granparents and Father probably came from Monte Maggiore Belsito . While researching the Town I found the street of Via Favata and in researching my Grandmothers US Census records located information that said she was from Monte Maggiore Belsito. So I am thrilled to know more about who I am and where I came from.

     I feel and have always felt a connection to my Sicillian roots and am very proud to be of Sicillian descent. So when I was doing research on the town at Wikipedia I found it seriously lacking and bereft of information. I did some reasearch and posted more info, the official website, pictures, census info, ect. I just revisted to find your revisions and want to thank you. It looks much better than when I posted. I have only contributed a few times to Wikipedia and am not sure how to do it. So, again, thank you for cleaning up the information I posted and for your contribution.

Mike (Favata) Mason (MichaelAMason talk) 16:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)).

I'm glad to help. We are in the middle of a massive cleanup effort on all the Comune pages, and I spotted the external links while I was cleaning the infobox. You did the hard work of finding the links. All I did was reformat them to follow WP:LAYOUT. Thanks for all your hard work on Montemaggiore Belsito. Best Regards. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox artist

It's better not to merge the no include for {{pp-semi-template}}.[2] It's a separate item to the main Infobox content and may need to be accessed easily to be stepped up to full protection, or even removed temporarily. It should be at the top of the page per usual practice. Having it at the bottom makes it harder to find, and is more likely with a merged no include to lead to mistakes. Ty 19:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. The convention is to put it at the bottom with the other <noinclude>...</noinclude>. I can point you to hundreds over other templates which do this. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

In addition, pp-semi-template is actually a redirect, and is deprecated. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course, that's my opinion, and sorry if my response came off a bit glib. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The convention is indeed to have it at the bottom (in noinclude tags), or even in the documentation (also at the bottom, in includeonly tags). See also wp:protection#Templates. {{Pp-semi-template}} is indeed a redirect to the general {{Pp-template}}, which can detect the appropriate level itself. Hope you don't mind me dropping in. It is just that I have a lot of experience with these templates. Debresser (talk) 20:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah. I don't make any claim to be an expert on templates, so I defer to the standard practice, which I was not aware of (though it seems less intuitive, but anyhow...). Any informed help on getting it right is welcome and appreciated. I reverted some recent edits, only because it's gone a bit fast; there have been problems with malfunction; and some changes may not be right for usage in the genre. But everything is open to discussion. Ty 22:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I welcome the reverts, as I stated in my edit summary :) My edits were in response to "edit requests", and I really have no opinion on the collapsible sections or on the inclusion of a signature. My only desire is to try to make implementation similar to other infoboxes. To make sure I don't make any controversial edits, I will be sure to request more comments, as you suggested, before making any new changes (unless of course it's something which is obviously broken for some reason). Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Austrian political party

Hi, I undid your addition of lang1 parameters to {{Infobox Austrian political party}}, because they didn't work and I changed the one occasion where they were used (Unity List (Austria)). Svick (talk) 22:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Australian political party templates

Hi. I saw your changes to a few Australian pages, including Division of Kalgoorlie, "consolidating templates" by replacing "/" with "|" in templates. I'm curious as to why this is necessary, and as a comparative template-novice I'm wondering if you could explain it to me, since all the templates are located at titles including "/" in their name, and if this is correct then it will necessitate an absolutely enormous amount of work across the entire project. Can you help me out? Thanks. Frickeg (talk) 23:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I was testing it as a proof-of-concept, but had planned to get wider input before changing more than the few that I changed. The basic idea is that instead of using hundreds of small stub templates, these could be consolidated into one switch statement. It would seem easier to maintain to have all the colours in the same place. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The other reason is that the current stubs use bgcolor instead of CSS (style) statements, which is somewhat inflexible for uses in other infoboxes (see {{Infobox Australian political party}} for example). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Good luck with that, and hopefully a bot can be commandeered to make the changes if you're successful! Thanks for the quick response. Frickeg (talk) 23:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

TfD relisting

Was there a reason the rxIRC version subtemplate TfD was relisted, particularly given the lenghty AN/I discussion? --Tothwolf (talk) 01:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't following the AN/I discussion, and I didn't feel I had enough information at the time to close it. In any event, it will be back at the bottom of the TFD list in about a day, and we rarely (if never) relist things twice. If there is an admin who has been following the discussion more closely, he/she should feel free to close it early. I would have no objection, especially considering no further comment was generated by the relisting. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Tibetan Buddhism infobox

Hi. I have a request. Can you build an infobox for Tibetan Buddhist monastery? It may need its own infobox because of the high number of transliterations and specifications it requires. See Template:Infobox Tibetan Buddhist monastery. However, if you could find a way to add parameters to the {{Infobox religious building}} I'd be happy to use providing you can develop it to the specifications given in Template:Infobox Tibetan Buddhist monastery. If you can't can you please create a template for use? Himalayan 14:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I will have a look in a bit. It appears there is also {{infobox monastery}}, which could be potentially modified as well. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Help! Himalayan 19:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

How's that? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Italian communes

You did know when you started that gargantuan task that there were 8,100 of them? Anyway congratulations on the excellent work. Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 06:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

When I loaded up the task in AWB, it found about 7500 of them, which means there are many without infoboxes at all. I have been adding infoboxes whenever I spot such a case. In fact, I wrote a translator which translates infoboxes from the Italian wikipedia to use {{infobox Italian comune}}. This makes the job go pretty quickly. I am still trying to figure out the best way to get a list of all the comune pages without infoboxes, without going though region by region. My AWB account had over 16,000 edits just last month. It will probably take another few weeks (or perhaps a couple months) to finish all the clean up tasks. Luckily, it's almost entirely automated. If there is some cleanup task that I am missing, let me know. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I will certainly remember that offer! My little contribution is what I believe to be an accurate list of the 8,100 communes: if you need it in a different format, or with links [some of them redirects] to their Italian Wikipedia articles, that will be no problem. We have articles on them all, or rather each has an article purporting to be about it: at least one of the articles I had to check had been unilaterally changed from being an article about an Italian commune to one about an Arab tribe in Pakistan, another had been redirected to an article about its beach district (‘it's very hot!’), etc. etc. Cheers Ian Spackman (talk) 23:15, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Protection level

So what did you do to {{Tfd}} in the end? You know I hold semi-protection is enough? Debresser (talk) 16:57, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll be happy to step it down to semi-protection if you want to make some changes. Just let me know. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I have made all the changes I wanted through editprotected request and with my "partner" Rich Farmbrough. I just happen to think that this template isn't in use enough to be fully protected. I can't find out who was the protection editor, or I would have written him about this. Of course, if you disagree with me, feel free to leave the protection in place. I am, after all, only stating my opinion. Debresser (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I counted around 1200 transclusions, which some may consider high-use. I could go either way. If someone requested unprotection at WP:RFP, I would support stepping down the protection level. Or, if someone made an edit request, I would support stepping down the protection so edits could be made. I really don't care either way. When I made the change to the protection level, I thought it was one of the tfd templates which is always substituted. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

That is because editors nominating templates for deletion aren't carefull to use <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags. I'm not just saying so, I checked this. Debresser (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

If the tag is put inside a <noinclude>...</noinclude>, then a wider audience is not aware that the template is being considered for deletion. Of course, for some inline templates, not using <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags creates some very unreadable pages, with disruptive newlines. I agree that the number of transclusions is not just restricted to the templates themselves. Again, I don't think 1200 is too many for the template to be simply semi-protected. So, I basically agree with you, but I don't see a particular reason to change the protection level right now. Any reasonable request to edit the template would cause me to change my mind. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:53, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I posted at Wikipedia:Rfp#Template:Tfd_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29. Debresser (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, we are down to around 700 transclusions. And I'm not finished yet. Debresser (talk) 15:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Make that around 50. Debresser (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

It's fine to put the <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the {{tfd}} for inline templates, but not the best idea for other templates (like infoboxes). The idea is to allow the tag to transclude to alert other editors to the discussion. If the addition of the tag causes the article be unreadable, then by all means stick it inside a <noinclude>...</noinclude>, but otherwise, I would leave it as is. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

tfd unprotection request at WP:RFPP

Hello, Plastikspork. You have new messages at WP:RFPP.
Message added 06:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Can you weigh in on the discussion about lowering protection on Tfd that is/needs to happen at WP:RFPP? Curious what you thoughts are before acting on it. tedder (talk) 06:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Military Structure

HI. Please replace the dot pin with File:Castle.svg as used on German wiki. Looks better for castle location. Himalayan 22:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. We will see if anyone complains. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, the Tibetan infobox looks fantastic!!! O if nobody likes the red castle I can make a black one instead... Himalayan 11:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

See Likir Monastery and Tashilhunpo. Looking good? Such some minor tweaks. Can you add banner sections (like the Tibetan and Chinese headers) for "Location" (above the map) and then above the founded by section a "Monastery information" section. Also can you add another photo section to give the possibility of having two photos and give the infobox a gold border? Should look perfect then. Oh one thing. I wanted to a [[Template:Location map India Jammu Kashmir. However the odd way the indian jurisdiction have things organized there is not one as such, although I would like to use the state locator map like Leh. How do we go about this? Himalayan 12:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks great thanks. One last problem is location maps. I've created one for Tibet here but I don't have the coordinates. Do you know how to add the correct position coordinates using google earth? I'd ask my old buddy MJC detroit but he is never around these days.. If we could work out the coordinates for File:Tibet&neighbors.svg Himalayan 15:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Nordnordwest on German wiki gave me the coordinates, however he said that the rpojection of the map is not fully correct. However he said the map works for places nearer the center like Lhasa. See Potala Palace -looks in exactly the right place Lhasa is to me... Himalayan 18:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Yuck, I just tried Rutog which is one of the westernmost towns in Tibet near the border. However the pin displayed it several hundreds kilometres east just west of Lhasa!! It seems to be working though for the Lhasa monasteries Himalayan 18:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

It's probably a problem with the map projection. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is. The previous northern digits ofr 41 worked better, your 39 seems to place the places in Lhasa further awy from where they are... Himalayan 19:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I guess we'll just have to wait now for some accurate svg pin locator maps for all the Chinese provinces. One could use do with some decent ones for the Indian states too, not a fan of the current colored maps. I mean at least they are state maps but the rendering looks very amateurish.. See what I mean... Himalayan 19:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

A development. I've created a pin map for Sichuan. If the projection turns out to be fairly decent and coordinates can be added to here etc I should be able to to create deriratives of existing files for this purpose for most of the Chinese provinces. I'll require coordinate assistance though. I'll see what NNW says about the Sichuan map. No rush, though, they can be made gradually.... Himalayan 19:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Grrr the damn thing was right all along. Rutog Town had the flamin wrong coordiates! The map looks perfectly OK now. Himalayan 23:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

My merge nominations

I nominated a lot of templates for merging on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 October 9. I was cleaning up a certain page. First of all, there are a few discussions that are clear "keep"s. In view of the fact that I have factually withdrawn the nomination, or even per wp:snow, I think you can close them without anybody's feelings getting hurt. On wp:cfd they also do so. Secondly, I'd like to offer my help if any merging will need to be done after the closure. I have some experience with templates, and have no problem with helping out a little. Debresser (talk) 07:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to help resolve the merger issues after the TFD's close. I find myself spending quite a bit of time dealing with such issues, and often it takes quite a bit of time. Thanks also for withdrawing the obvious keeps. As far as the obvious deletes/mergers, I tend to let them run until completion as there is usually plenty of other stuff to do. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your policy. Deletion is a more delicate matter, and you never know who will come up with what valid objection. So better wait out full term. Yes, you do seem a little understaffed at Tfd, so to say. Debresser (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Tfd protection

I have an edit I'd like to make to tfd. WP:Templates for deletion has been moved to WP:Templates for discussion. Debresser (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

You should be able to edit it now. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Any idea about what to do with {{Tfdend}}? Will the new logs have the "discussion" prefix? It would be a pain to create redirects for all the old ones, and but nonsensical to create redirects for all the new ones. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Not yet. It is 4 AM here. Tomorrow I'll have time to think about it. Debresser (talk) 02:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I quickly did some work on the basic templates, but not the minor. I created some categories and changed the tree of others. I think we could leave Category:Wikipedia templates for deletion and Category:Templates for discussion apart. That is what I have done so far, but it would be easy to change that if you think otherwise. Nevertheless, on Cfd they also have them apart. BTW, perhaps move the deletion category to simply Category:Templates for deletion (which is at present a soft redirect)?A good night! Debresser (talk) 02:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

It is finished now, with help from User:Jafeluv. I have implemented all I suggested above: keeping Category:Templates for deletion and Category:Templates for merging apart as two subcategories of Category:Templates for discussion. Analogous to Cfd. I speedied Category:Templates for deletion templates (you are welcome to take care of it), and turned Category:Wikipedia templates for deletion into a soft redirect to Category:Templates for deletion. All of this of course while changing the categories on the templates and the links. To hurry up the moves I null-edited all templates, and they are all over. In the process I removed the many noinclude tags I added previously, since they served their purpose (cleaning out 700+ of incorrect Tfd transclusions). Is there anything I forgot? Debresser (talk) 16:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Sources

Thank you for the warning. I will be sure to include my sources next time I edit a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.97.94 (talk) 23:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

What and what not

It says in the Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Header "On this page, deletion of templates (except as noted below) is discussed." As a matter of fact there is no such section. Also, this sentence has become a little outdated, now that we merge as well. Debresser (talk) 02:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Right, we are considering both deletion and merging. It should probably be updated. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

RW/RR

I think that it would be good for the RW/RR fans to see some stats on some of the cast, I was planning on doing this for quite a few cast members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.224.61 (talk) 02:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe the question is whether or not the information can be adequately covered on the individual Real World and Road Rules articles. For contestants who are only famous for that one thing, the don't need individual articles. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox russian federal subject

Hi Plastikspork,
as a registered user, I changed the Template:Infobox Russian federal subject to have it use Infobox settlement as a backend. In doing this, I replaced three other templates, all used for federal districts of Russia (Template:Infobox_Russian_federal_subject2, Template:Infobox Russian federal city and Template:Infobox Russian federal city2) fixing every instance and spending hours to fix and improve the layout. Now, half a month later, all my work was reverted by an admin (User:Ezhiki) citing a lack of discussion (after two weeks?). Now, I don't know if I should be bothering you with this at all, but frankly I feel deeply frustrated, considering that all the time I put in that template, trying to make it work properly, rewriting the documentation and all, is going to waste for no apparent reason. I hope you can help me, and sorry for my poor English.--93.45.20.113 (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand your frustration. Perhaps the best thing to do at this point is to mock up something in the sandbox, and start a thread to discuss the merits of the two implementations. I would be happy to join any discussion. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

NFl

Apart from the first four parameters these templates are completely different. What do you suggest? Debresser (talk) 17:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

It turns out that {{Infobox NFL coach}} only had one transclusion (when I got to it). So, no problem with just redirecting it and converting the single transclusion. Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Working on Convert & Gconvert

19-Oct-2009: Hello, Plastikspork. Wikid77 here. I got distracted in a massive emergency at Template:Convert, where some European users had again noted that heights & weights did not match world-standard conversions (due to over-rounding). I created a general-purpose Template:Gconvert to experiment using more precise values for some measurements. However, as you can imagine, there were fears of a "rival template" that would lead to total chaos in all wiki-dom, if diversity were allowed. There are numerous rounding problems, but they can be hidden when setting the round parameter as "0" or "2" (etc.). Meanwhile, I noticed that some options had not been fully implemented, so I created 120(?) new Convert subtemplates to finish "disp=comma" and "disp=or". That brings the total to over 2,500 subtemplates, and hence the need to reduce, as explained in the next topic. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I generally use {{height}} for height conversions, and specify the precision for weights. I had been following the initial discussion about changing the default rounding rules. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Method to reduce 1600 of 2500 Convert subtemplates

19-Oct-2009: Although it will take some weeks (or months) to gain consensus, it would be possible to put simple if-logic inside some of the 1,800 various Convert output-display subtemplates, to allow deletion of the others. The simple if-logic would mean perhaps 200 subtemplates could handle the various options of the current 1,800+ output subtemplates (of over 2,500 total). I will write a wiki-essay with full details, but for now, I am experimenting with User:Wikid77/Template:Convert2 to pre-screen the option values and re-invoke fewer subtemplates (each still small) to handle many different options: no longer would there be a separate subtemplate for every possible combination of conversion options. Options would be passed into a few subtemplates that handled multiple combinations of: lk=on, abbr=on, disp=comma (etc.) plus a separator "sep=," or "sep=(" or "sep=/" and such. Because lk/abbr & disp had not been passed into the subtemplates, there had been no simple way to handle combined options in the past. This message is just a heads-up notice that reduction of 1,600 subtemplates would be fairly easy, using a bot-edit to add those parameters, and then TfD the 1,600 obsolete subtemplates. I'm sorry I don't have more time right now. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, people are generally resistant to change. This is especially true if they feel things are changing too fast. Things are compounded even further by the complexity of templates like {{convert}}. Your best bet is to move slowly and brush off any ad hominem attacks. However, it is essentially to do everything possible to gain consensus before making any changes in article space. If there is any way to do a slower change, perhaps in stages, people will be more likely to react favorably. Best of luck and let me know if there is anything in particular you would like me to read or comment on. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref in template

Thanks for that, I had tried some time ago to get that to work and just gave up. As it happens today I translated a French article and saw that you can do substitution in URLs (which I had assumed was the problem after trying almost everything) so went back and got it to work by kinda not putting it in the ref. Some other time I will now play with {{tag}} to do that, it's exactly my aim, yes, to defer the expansion. I am translating a Hungarian article now so I will carry on with that and come back to it later.

Thanks once again SimonTrew (talk) 21:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had run into a similar problem with <math>...</math> tags. Let me know if I can help. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Members parameter in Template:Infobox French political party

Hi, I didn't use {{Infobox politcal party}}'s membership parameter for that template's members, because it has different meaning there. I added it when merging {{Infobox French Political Coalition}} into it, and it isn't count of members of the party, but list of parties that are members of that coaliton. So, firstly, I'm not sure that these two diferent things should use the same parameter and, secondly, I don't think it makes sense for list of members to be under the label “Membership”, but I could be wrong at this one, as English isn't my native language. What do you think? Svick (talk) 10:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

You are probably right. I didn't check the usage that carefully. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Deleted templates, why?

I'd like to know why those templates has been recently deleted:

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_September_5#Template:Auto_PS

And which (new?) should I use for the replacement of them i.e. in this article…

Opel_Omega#Engines

--Shaman (talk) 16:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I performed the conversions in the above mentioned article. Basically, all these templates were replaced by {{convert}}. I can create a conversion guide if it would be helpful?

re:Careful

Ah yes, there was an edit conflict. I did actually copypaste my comment from the older edit window to the conflict window, as usual, so the newer edit with the other request should have been in there. Must have been a glitch. --84.44.248.66 (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Cheaters TV show

If you would prefer me to call a news station or something like that I can if you wish them to be publicated as being fake. Since the state is also open records I can just pull up the city's report of the happenings last night and hand those over too. However there is no current online refrence to something that happened LAST NIGHT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.231.23.244 (talk) 20:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Recentism. Is it really that important in the context of the history of the show? Thanks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Template

Thanks. How are you doing? I haven't checked to see what you are up to for over a week. Did you finish Italy? Himalayan 18:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm on the second (or third) pass through Italy. I keep thinking of new things to check. I got sidetracked with new work on {{Infobox political party}}, where there is an effort to merge all the regional political party templates and fix deprecated parameters. It looks like you have been keeping busy. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I have indeed. One request. Can you add a pushpin map option to Template:Infobox dam? Himalayan 15:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I will have a look. Right now they are using the coord template, which means the latd, longd is not being sent to the template. Depending on the number of transclusions, I can always run AWB to convert the coord templates to latd/longd, then add a pushpin map. This is what we did on the Italian comune articles. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Merge

What do you think about merging Template:Infobox volleyball player and Template:Infobox Volleyball biography, it would be great.

And I wanted you to notice, how should we know wich infobox use for beach player, when visiting the template Template:Infobox volleyball player.

I mean, If I am going to edit or create a new article from indoor, visiting the infobox article, we can get appropriate code, but what about beach volleyball, how can we get the right code?

Thanks

Oscar987 21:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I had a look at {{Infobox Volleyball biography}} earlier, and it's on my "to do" list. I will try to update the documentation on {{Infobox volleyball player}} to make it more clear what to do for a Beach vs. Indoor player. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:31, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

Thank you! CTJF83 chat 21:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The soft touch of trouting

Is it too unfair for admins to be held accountable for their actions just like everyone else? Just wondering.--125.239.151.99 (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I routinely trout any admin who I feel is not following policy. In the particular case that prompted me to ask the question at AN/I, I felt the issue was resolved. If there is an admin who is not following policy, then please start a thread at WP:AN/I. However, the original purpose of my thread, which was a clarification of policy, has been resolved as far as I'm concerned. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Trouting is not the same. Trouting doesn't leave a permanent stain (eg. block log entry) on the administrator's account. Trouting does not topic ban administrators who have bended the policies and/or gamed the system. Trouting is nothing compared to what non-admin users and ip-editors are dealt when they make similar actions. And admins are the ones that should know best.--125.239.151.99 (talk) 05:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Believe me, I know what it's like to try to edit as an IP. I routinely step in to defend IP users when I feel they are being treated unfairly. But again, in the particular case that caused me to file the question at AN/I, I don't think it's necessary, as the IP user is clearly a vandal. The purpose of blocks is to stop disruptive behavior, not to punish editors. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

About this disbanded parameter

I think when the dissolution parameter is present it's obvious that the party is disbanded. At this case "leader" of course means "leader at the time the party was active". In fact a disbanded part has no former leader, it had a leader. These are just some thoughts I made just now :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that if a party is disbanded, then it should be clear that the leader is no longer an active leader. Perhaps we could change the way that this parameter is used. I had seen some "former political party" templates placing the text "former party" or "former political party" just below the logo. The reason for adding this parameter in the first place was Template:Infobox Australian political party. I agree that if there is a dissolution date, then disbanded is redundant. If you want to remove this parameter, or change how it is used, I can add it to the tracking category, and change all transclusions if necessary. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You should ask Svick if he has any ideas as well. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we start a discussion in the template's talk page. I don't have the time this week for big changes. We are doing well so far with the unification. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Converting Convert to 2,000 less

Prior topic: #Method to reduce 1600 of 2500 Convert subtemplates.

Wikid77 here. I have written "WP:A plan to reduce Convert subtemplates" (an extensive technical essay) linking to 3 new condensed subtemplates (which could eliminate 900). As you suggested, I have discovered a way to subdivide the work into 13 sub-tasks, each creating small condensed subtemplates that eliminate 250 (or 300) similar old subtemplates. Meanwhile, I have been fixing the current Convert gaps, and created 450(?) more subtemplates to handle "disp=or" or "disp=comma" or "disp=output only" (etc.). So, now, expect someday to delete over 2,100 display-subtemplates, in groups of 250-300. The vastness of the current 2,800 subtemplates is highly confusing, but I suspect the new condensed templates could be even further condensed. Of the current 12 unit-groups, perhaps imperial units and US-units could be re-done using the regular-unit subtemplates, and condense all 3 into one group. The current 12 unit-groups might become just 7. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Spanish infoboxes

Looking at all of the Category:Municipalities of Spain I would say we would greatly benefit from making a makeshift Spain infobox and copying infoboxes directly from Spanish wiki. Then coordinates pin maps can be added afterwards. It would seem that most municipalities have no information or infoboxes or have horrid grey infoboxes often which contain out of date data. Also we have the Catalan infoboxes currently up for TFD which I would say would be better replaced. So I think the articles could all be made consistent by overiding the grey infoboxes we currently have with a makeshift template and then use automation to replace with infobox settlement afterwards. An example would be Alegría de Álava. Using automation the infobox can be directly copied from Spanish wiki in a wrapper template, and all of the municipalities made consistent. It might be a week or two though before you have time to look at it but what do yo u think? The Spanish municipal articles are a mess!! Himalayan 21:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

That is a mess! I am using a similar procedure to add infoboxes to all the Italian comune articles. Once I have finished that task, I will look at the Spanish municipalities. Right now the procedure is only semi-automated, in that I copy and paste the templates by hand, but my script then reformats them for English WP. I should be able to script the copy part as well, but I haven't had the time to work on cross-language WP scripting yet. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Well I did start with Nerha which is how I'd like them all to look eventually but I took one look at the all of the municipality articles and thought, mmm, this will take yonks manually... Most of the articles are in a mess. I would think it best to create a similar template like Italy use it to overide all of the current individual grey boxes and then use it to add infoboxes to all of the missing ones. I did add infoboxes and pin maps manually to some of the main Spanish cities anyway.. What we need is definately like you have been doing with Italy, Italy though was better of than Spain is at present! And to think a lot of the articles on resort towns and that probably get a lot of traffic from holidayers looking to read about thep places they are going to! A shambles... A lot of them look like Amurrio.... I'd say you could probably sort something out from here and get it to look like the Nerja template...Anyway major thanks for your work on Italy to date too! Himalayan 21:44, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Right. Formatting like Amurrio is what I am seeing on about 10 percent of the Italian pages. This isn't so bad, since it just means copying over an infobox, rather than cleaning up a big mess. Some of the Italian pages had been hijacked to point to towns in other countries, or to advertise some business. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah that's best. Also I would say you'd probably also be best replacing even the current infoboxes for articles like Puebla de Don Fadrique with an updated version consistent with the others you will transfer. Population is more up to date and the parameters and I would say that the ghost coat of arms images templates don't exactly help the situation.... I would ignore those personally... It is up to you though how you want to go about it, anything would be better than the present state!! Regards. Himalayan 21:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I will code up a transitional translation template, which can be used to help speed up the process. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

That would be excellent. Again it is the consistency thing, some have no templates, some have horrid grey fat ones, others have geobox which is barely legible and those in Catalonia have infobox catalan. A mixed bag but I suspect you'll find the majority have no infoboxes at all as I know Italy was mostly done using Eubot which added infoboxes first time but bypassed the stubs already created, all of Spain was started manually with no real coordination, and the results speak for itself! I'd say then a Template:Infobox Spanish municipality would do for a temporary outlined like infbox settlement and then can be converted later. Happy editing! Himalayan 22:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I started something, but it will require some more work. The transitional version has both English and Spanish options, but the idea is to split these and create a AWB translator, but I wanted to see if all the important parameters could be remapped. I will take another look at in about 24 hours or so. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually the grey Spanish city infobox isn't ugly, its OK see Algeciras but redundant nonethless. Himalayan 17:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

So perhaps the better choice is to convert to {{Spanish city}} instead? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:01, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Check the usage, Spanish municipality is a more accurate naming, you could move the city infbox to municipality and temporarily convert. Whatever you find easiest. I would rather replace the grey infoboxes with standard... Himalayan 20:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

We could probably change the backend of the "Spanish city" box to make it use "settlement". It will require a small about of preprocessing to unwrap the coordinates from the coord template so that they can be used by the pushpin map. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:01, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep, San Marino though is very small, so that problem shouldn't be extensive!! Himalayan 23:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to add to the workload but I've just noticed Template:Venezuelan Municipality. Awful. The municipalities should all have an infobox like San Joaquín, Carabobo. I was about the add a few more but came across that nasty unnecessary infobox. Another one for conversion... Shall I TFD it along with the Venezuelan province infbox? Himalayan 14:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Let me run them through AWB first to clean up the population, area, density, ... After that, I can change the backend to use settlement, or substitute each one with the settlement infobox. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hokay. Oh, Stoccareddo is a frazione not a comune. The comune is Gallio (VI) (typical that a smaller division article is more developed than its parent eh? Himalayan 16:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

How's this {{Infobox Venezuelan municipality}}? Thanks for the note about Stoccareddo. The next pass is going to be to cross check the transclusions with the list of Comunes to make sure there are only comunes using the comune infobox (and that all comunes have an infobox). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

That's great, thanks for that. We'll have to oust those ugly grey maps though... There must be better municiapl locator maps. Pin map position in Spain will also need adding.. Himalayan 20:58, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

For the pushpin map, there is Template:Location_map_Spain_Catalonia, in addition to the obvious Template:Location_map_Spain. I actually like the small inset map in File:Location_of_Camprodon.png, but I agree that the gray is not so pleasing. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah its the dark grey and yellow dot I don't like, a light grey with a black dot would be better. Never mind it does look better when there is a pin map along side it like Camprodon. Himalayan 21:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Camprodon

Best bet would be to replace with another pin map like the right example... However at present the makeshift template doesn't cater for two pin maps. I guess when you do the conversion fully the dark grey maps can be removed then. Himalayan 21:13, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Right. I could add a second pushpin map option, but it seems a bit much. I could just change the coloring of the Catalonia map? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, don't worry about it then... I would though rather we do have the national locator maps at least, if we keep the grey maps I'm fine with that.. If we use File:CatalunyaLoc.svg actually that looks rather good.... Himalayan 22:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking the exact same thing. See {{Location map Spain Catalonia}}. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Your new svg version looks heaps better. I think we can use two pin maps, if you think it will look tto cluttered then we can use just the Catalonia pin.. although I think the two don't look too cluttered, I would rather get shot of those grey maps in all honesty, svgs are always better anyway... Himalayan 22:25, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Two pushpins looks fine for long articles. For stubs, it's a bit much. I will add it as an option. When I go through and perform the substitutions, I will remove the gray maps whenever coordinates are available for the pushpin. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, but the main problem here is that I believe most of them don't have the coordinates!! Himalayan 22:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

If there are coordinates anywhere in the article, I can add them to the template. Hopefully it's mostly a matter of just moving and unwrapping the coord templates to fill in the latd, longd info. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:40, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

OK what we can do then is use one regional pin like Camprodon. I think that looks heaps better... Himalayan 22:40, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Weep, weep I also just found Template:Spanish comarca Himalayan 22:46, 31 October 2009 (UTC) What do we do about the articles that don't have them like Olivella? Himalayan 23:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I suppose either add a blank stub of an infobox, or try to convert one from another WP. Unfortunately, I am done for the day. Other things to attend to. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to use {{flag|. There is one editor only who disagrees with their useage, Rettetast... Himalayan 23:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

If you want the flag in there, then go ahead and add it to the template, and it will go in when I do the substitutions. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

We are somewhat lacking details in these articles eh compared to es wiki!!. Ah well, infobox sorting and standardising will set them on the way, these articles are pretty embarrassing... Himalayan 23:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, we want to retain the municipal maps though, see Ligao City. Would you be against adding the national locator and coordinates to the infoboxes? Himalayan 17:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking that two maps would be good. I just unrolled the coordinates on Ligao City to show you what it will look like when I'm finished. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, because the municipal maps are quite compact so the two in this case will look fine I think.. Oh I spotted Template:Spanish city too (that was the big fat grey one I talked about before. I'll TFD it.. The mess.... Himalayan 17:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

When you come to do the Philippines can you fix the names from City of to ...City which is the formal naming. Like this. So Davao City is correct not City of Davao. Heavens the text within the Filipino city articles is just awful, lists 200 odd barangays a bunch of governors and schools and just bad, bad paragraphs..As to be expected I guess... Himalayan 17:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

This is what I mean.... Himalayan 17:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)