User talk:Colonies Chris/Archive/2017/Jul

Unlinking dates in portals

Plerase stop doing this. In portals, the dates are linked exactly once per page. This allows people to find outher things which happened on that date. WP:UNLINKDATES. They are "germane to the subject" in this case because the dates are linked in a calendar section (usually an "On this day..." area). Also, please do not swap day and month when you're doing this per WP:ENGVAR. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 15:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Where the links may be germane to the subject I have left them linked. For example in Portal:Australia/Anniversaries/October/October 3, the year links are actually "year in Australia" links, so they possibly have some relevance. In other cases they are not germane and so I've unlinked them. For example, Portal:Criminal justice/Selected article/29 had several year links with no more relevance than they would in an article, where they would not be allowed. Another example is Portal:Malta/Selected picture/15, where the year link is not only not germane, it's just plain stupid, as the article is referring to the "early 1950s", but the link is "[[1950]]s". Another example is Portal:China/Anniversaries/January/January 6, where the year links led to articles which have no connection with China, nor with January 6. What use would it be to a reader to click on one of those links. Thety're looking at at a China portal, and those links would take them away from that subject. They are not germane, so I've unlinked them. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Nihonjoe, Chris is simply reminding us of a long-established protocol for deciding whether chronological items should be linked. The only exception—by agreement wrought through a massive RFC in 2009—is intrinsically chronological articles, like 1969 or 20th century. Tony (talk) 13:53, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Tony1: Date pages in portals are intrinsically chronological articles (or pages). They are specifically and only about things that happened on that date. I don't know how you could be more chronological than that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:10, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of eponyms (A–K), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page André Bloch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Adding breaks to the active roster

What was the purpose of doing this? I had to mass revert all of the edits, as none of them needed it. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 06:04, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

You didn't 'have to' revert anything. My changes didn't introduce any errors that needed urgent fixing. Why not just ask me for my reasons before reverting? Since you now ask for my reasons, I'll tell you - simply because it makes better use of the limited space available in a navbox. Unless you come back with a very clear reason for objecting, I will reinstate those edits. Colonies Chris (talk) 08:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I fail to see how it makes "better use" of the template, when the entire thing can fit on one line. There is a reason why this hasn't been done before, and if it has, been reverted for the same reasons. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

It makes better use of the horizontal width. By folding the text onto two lines, the available horizontal width is increased, so more of the many items can fit into the space. You seem to be sure there's a reason it hasn't been done before. Perhaps you'd like to share that reason with me? Colonies Chris (talk) 17:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Edits like this have been reverted in the past, simply for being unnecessary. "Makes better use of horizontal width" is just your personal preference, as the whole thing fits on one line for me. And this has never been an issue before, as I've maintained these navboxes for over 4 years now without any sort of edit like this. Make your case to WP:NFL and gather consensus for these first before changing again. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:31, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

You are misunderstanding me. I'll try again to explain. Of course the whole phrase 'Active roster' can fit on one line. That's not the point. The point is that if it's split over two lines, the leftmost column requires less width. This allows the rightmost column, which contains a large number of links, to be wider, and thus to occupy fewer horizontal lines. This is standard practice in many many templates where the number of links on the right far exceeds a single line, and the leftmost heading can naturally be split. For example, see {{NFL seasons}} or {{Defunct NFL stadiums}} or {{MLB All-Time rosters}} or {{Epic}}. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your corrective editing. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Colonies Chris's positive contributions are numerous. So numerous, in fact, that acknowledgement of them is long overdue. As one example of Chris's repair work, he fixed the spelling of Shields–Watkins Field so that the piping would send the reader to a more specific article. Changing the piping at Fleming Field, which is an article specifically about that field, is another example of correcting linkage. This is what he does! His corrective editing helps readers that are searching for older stadium names by creating a redirect from older venue names to newer ones. Correcting spelling within links, fixing incorrect city links and fixing uses of the template that redirected readers to less useful destinations are all those little under-appreciated tasks that improve the readers use of the encyclopedia. Without the tireless efforts of editors like Colonies Chris the encyclopedia would be littered with dead links.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Thanks again for your efforts! Lepricavark (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

In his tireless housework, cleaning up, applying logic, and thus giving WP greater authority, Chris deserves editor of the decade! Tony (talk) 08:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Julian Peploe Studio

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Julian Peploe Studio, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Light2021 (talk) 19:42, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Waterloo–Reading Line

Your recent edit of this template has broken the template navigation buttons (V.T.E in the top navbar). It ought to be fixed but I'm not sure how. The same applies to other similar edits you've made recently (e.g. Template:Acton to Northolt Line). Bazza (talk) 10:48, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

When updating the links on RDTs, remember that the |navbar= parameter refers to the diagram itself and should not be changed (unless the template is moved). Useddenim (talk) 11:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)