User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2014/Aug

List of multi-sport athletes

You might want to give me a good reason for this revert? Did you take the effort to click on the link of Christa Luding? Just check her medal record in both Olympic Winter and Summer Games. Besides that she was world champion in track cycling and in speed skating. So please add

• Christa Luding, excelled in both cycling and speed skating

or some better phrase to the article again. Thanks. -- BTW, this was not an edit requiring "good faith", my contributions are always serious, substantial and based on cited sources. You rather control edits manually than shoot too fast with this automated tool. --80.221.207.252 (talk) 15:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. Please note the source in your edit summary, though. Epicgenius (talk) 00:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

It is not that easy, that you just say "sorry" (and even add some instructions) and leave it to me to repeat my contribution and do that work again. You behave like a supervisor who is only here to control whatever others do, just see similar threads here on your discussion page. You will please move forward and build up again what you have torn down. Who are you to delete other contributors work without at least the simplest of a check and then tell them "Oh, you have to do your work again, I am sorry", telling them at the same time, if they don't comply with YOUR standards, you are going to do the same again. I may remind you that this is Wikipedia, not Epicgeniuspedia. --Goodgirl - talk to me 06:44, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

@Goodgirl: That context is wrong because you don't seem to have the full history of what is going on. The page you just linked to, /Terms and Conditions, is a summary of Wikipedia policies, not my own. Plus, I have had no time over the past few months to make the edit, so I have my reasons in telling people to do it themselves. Also, if you have noticed, three of the four threads on this page concern the user Beyond My Ken's edits regarding my actions, and he is a user whom I have had poor interactions with in the past. Finally, WP:STIKI is very prone to errors. Epicgenius (talk) 14:09, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Sunday August 17 NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share (RSVP). 2pm–5pm at Yeoryia Studios at Epic Security Building, 2067 Broadway (5th floor). Afterwards at 5pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided). We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 15:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Westinghouse Time Capsules

- your edits and those of the I.P. address in your same location in NYC are not constructive. Example: Compare your version to the last good edit of June 6, 2014. The 7-ton "permanent sentinel" granite monument inscriptions are no longer with the pictures as they should be. The pictures in the Gallery are not formatted correctly and are not displayed correctly, as they were as of June 6. I'll put back correctly AGAIN and please do not come in as an I.P. address and vandalize. If you continue to do non-constructive edits you could be banned from editing.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I would appreciate a show of some good faith, as I have not been socking and vandalizing. For an experienced editor, you can't tell (or won't acknowledge) that vandalism from well intended but horribly executed edits, that users in Brooklyn and Queens are not in the same location in NYC, or that however unintended it may seem, you've been threatening a community ban. I'll stop bothering "your" article on the grounds that you don't like it, if you can do just that. Also, the template and categories are most definitely not vandalism, so I will put them back. Have a good day. Epicgenius (talk) 23:48, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and BTW, RPPs like this should be used sparingly. They aren't usually performed unless there really is vandalism by multiple IP users, rather than a single collection of edits by a single IP user. Please keep in mind that most others only use that page as a last resort, after using the talk page to discuss article disagreements. Epicgenius (talk) 02:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 6 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the National Action Network page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kew Gardens Hills, Queens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parsons Boulevard. 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) 08:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter—July and August 2014

The VisualEditor team is currently working mostly to fix bugs, improve performance, reduce technical debt, and other infrastructure needs. You can find on Mediawiki.org weekly updates detailing recent work.

Dialog boxes in VisualEditor have been re-designed to use action words instead of icons. This has increased the number of items that need to be translated. The user guide is also being updated.

The biggest visible change since the last newsletter was to the dialog boxes. The design for each dialog box and window was simplified. The most commonly needed buttons are now at the top. Based on user feedback, the buttons are now labeled with simple words (like "Cancel" or "Done") instead of potentially confusing icons (like "<" or "X"). Many of the buttons to edit links, images, and other items now also show the linked page, image name, or other useful information when you click on them.

• Hidden HTML comments (notes visible to editors, but not to readers) can now be read, edited, inserted, and removed. A small icon (a white exclamation mark on a dot) marks the location of each comments. You can click on the icon to see the comment.
• You can now drag and drop text and templates as well as images. A new placement line makes it much easier to see where you are dropping the item. Images can no longer be dropped into the middle of paragraphs.
• All references and footnotes (<ref> tags) are now made through the "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽" menu, including the "⧼visualeditor-dialogbutton-reference-tooltip⧽" (manual formatting) footnotes and the ability to re-use an existing citation, both of which were previously accessible only through the "Insert" menu. The "⧼visualeditor-dialogbutton-referencelist-tooltip⧽" is still added via the "Insert" menu.
• When you add an image or other media file, you are now prompted to add an image caption immediately. You can also replace an image whilst keeping the original caption and other settings.
• All tablet users visiting the mobile web version of Wikipedias will be able to opt-in to a version of VisualEditor from 14 August. You can test the new tool by choosing the beta version of the mobile view in the Settings menu.
• The link tool has a new "Open" button that will open a linked page in another tab so you can make sure a link is the right one.
• The "Cancel" button in the toolbar has been removed based on user testing. To cancel any edit, you can leave the page by clicking the Read tab, the back button in your browser, or closing the browser window without saving your changes.

Looking ahead

The team posts details about planned work on the VisualEditor roadmap. The VisualEditor team plans to add auto-fill features for citations soon. Your ideas about making referencing quick and easy are still wanted. Support for upright image sizes is being developed. The designers are also working on support for adding rows and columns to tables. Work to support Internet Explorer is ongoing.

Feedback opportunities

The Editing team will be making two presentations this weekend at Wikimania in London. The first is with product manager James Forrester and developer Trevor Parscal on Saturday at 16:30. The second is with developers Roan Kattouw and Trevor Parscal on Sunday at 12:30.

Please share your questions, suggestions, or problems by posting a note at the VisualEditor feedback page or by joining the office hours discussion on Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 09:00 UTC (daytime for Europe, Middle East and Asia) or on Thursday, 18 September 2014 at 16:00 UTC (daytime for the Americas; evening for Europe).

If you'd like to get this newsletter on your own page (about once a month), please subscribe at w:en:Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter for English Wikipedia only or at Meta for any project. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment

As someone who has edited the article Asian American this year, I am seeking your input on a proposed change to remove a reference to epicanthic eyefolds. This topic has prompted discussion in 2009, 2010 and most recently in 2013.

There's a fine line between being WP:BOLD and subverting WP:CONSENSUS. Given the history of this topic, I'm hoping that a robust discussion, for the record, would improve the article whether this reference stays or goes. Ishu (talk) 13:50, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'll make sure to stop by there. Epicgenius (talk) 11:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Bronx intro

In reverting the edit about the West and East Bronx instead of fixing the minor error, you reverted it to include the much larger error the the West Bronx is 1/8th the size of the East Bronx and took out a bunch of internal links to Bronx neighborhoods and reverted them to plain text. What is the point of that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.80.193 (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

It isn't that size? Sorry. I thought the Bronx's east side was considerably bigger, but did not know the ratio. Epicgenius (talk) 11:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

They are about the same size. The Bronx River pretty much bisects the borough evenly (the East is a bit bigger). The entire South Bronx is part of the West Bronx ... a fact that folks in the northern part of the West Bronx really tried to de-emphasize after the really bad years in the South Bronx in the 1970s through 1990s. I think the edit I've made satisfies your concerns. If it does not, please just make the necessary edits rather than reverting. (11 August 2014) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.80.193 (talk) 12:46, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Oh, I just realized how much of a genius you really are, with the code in your userpage? And when typing this, I just realized that your username contained the word "geniuss" in it.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 16:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Epicgenius (talk) 23:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Overland Park, KS -Reform or Orthodox Jews

Why do you only want to list Orthodox congregations in Overland Park when anyone who really knows the area realizes that the a Reform population is much larger? Are you one of those Haredim who doesn't recognize Reform asJews? You clearly know very little about Overland Park. Have you ever left Brooklyn? I am about to send the "corrections" you made to the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, which is published in Overland Park. I should have done that months ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apace361 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I live in Queens (explained above), I am Chinese, and I don't know what you are talking about (for example, what are Haredim?). Could you please show me the edit where I made such an overture? Anyway, I'll check that article out, and see what exactly it is that I did wrong. Epicgenius (talk) 23:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, our friend @Apace361: seems to be suffering a fairly common imbalance: Abundant enthusiasm about a topic, without attentiveness to detail, procedure, or method. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I concur there, Jim.henderson; since the POV in that edit is slanted toward the Reform Jews without proper sources, I'd removed it. I think the edit can be supported though; there are ostensibly sources that can give ample material to hold up that statement. Epicgenius (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Civility

Telling me that I did not read various proposed references regarding West End after I discussed them in some detail on the talk page is a personal attack. Please comment on content and if you wish to address me personally, only in a civil substantive and constructive manner, please visit my talk page. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 17:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I see you misunderstand me. I simply told you to read the pages again, and if you didn't, you should read them. That is not a personal attack, that is a suggestion. Epicgenius (talk) 17:50, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

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

Bernard Tschumi

added a link pointing to Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

New York Aquarium

added a link pointing to Human remains

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Scarborough MTA station

Epicgenius, thanks for the content additions, although I don't believe 922 passengers is supported by the source you used; it instead appears to be the number of passengers listed for Yonkers.--ɱ (talk) 22:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ɱ: Yes, you are right. According to a MTA file on Pedestrian Observations Wordpress, weekday and weekend inbound boardings at Scarborough are 742 and 135, respectively. I need better source, however. Epicgenius (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

So where did you get 922 and August 2006? The above linked source is for 2007, and it lists 865. Aren't those the numbers we want? ɱ (talk) 23:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ɱ: I don't know. The article said 922 in Aug. 2006 in the source already there. By the way, I noticed the article has been nominated for GA. I may be able to provide suggestions tomorrow morning but I may not be able to do the review itself, due to my having edited the article before. Epicgenius (talk) 00:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

The source already there (also here) says 885. Where are you seeing 922? Also, I would be glad to have more suggestions. And WP:GAN/I only discourages heavy editors, I don't think anyone would consider your edits today to be very heavy.--ɱ (talk) 00:15, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I am referring to my edits earlier this year, when I added the platform configuration that is about 5% of the article (still not a lot compared to what you did; good work, by the way). Anyway, the text before says: {{As of|August 2006}}, daily commuter ridership was 922.<ref name="Stats"/>. I have changed the infobox text accordingly. Epicgenius (talk) 01:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't see that you had added the platform information. With regard to that, I haven't edited too many train-related articles so I'm unfamiliar with what's standard, but I saw a table that looked clearer on another train station article. I know the current one is in use on most (if not all) MTA station articles, but I think that developing something like User:Ɱ/sandbox14 may be clearer for readers. Do you agree?--ɱ (talk) 02:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree, your station platform layout table in your sandbox is a better table to use. It gives more details about the platform shape and the levels of the station. Epicgenius (talk) 03:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

(←) OK, cool. I'll begin formatting it for the article tomorrow.--ɱ (talk) 03:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I couldn't respond in time. Sounds like a good idea to me. Epicgenius (talk) 13:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I finished the formatting. The template doesn't give me a lot of room, but I have two possible choices, User:Ɱ/sandbox13 and User:Ɱ/sandbox14. Which do you prefer?--ɱ (talk) 14:30, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I like #13 better. I've changed both of the layouts, by the way, to make them more visually presentable. Epicgenius (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, looks good. Thanks.--ɱ (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Unused NYCS templates

Hi Epicgenius. Are Template:NYCS Platform Layout IRT Pelham Line and Template:NYCS demolish, both of which are unused, still required? If not, I'll nominate them for deletion. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 06:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

@DH85868993: No, they aren't needed. The platform layout was meant to replace four other platform layouts, and the other template was meant for demolished stations, but both templates were superseded. You can nominate them for deletion. Epicgenius (talk) 12:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I've nominated them both for speedy deletion. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits

I've reverted your edits on both the F and G train articles, respectively. I mean we've had many weather-related shutdowns, minor derailments etc, and none of them are mention here on Wikipedia, are they? We're not going to mention every last one of them, are we? JoesphBarbaro (talk) 17:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. However, the F train derailment (in a history section that is written in bullet points) isn't part of the service history, so it shouldn't be included because it would be an awkward setup. Consequently, the G train shutdown (in a history section that is written in prose) is continuous for five weeks, so it should be included. By the way, the F article's history section needs to be rewritten as prose, so that it would look less awkward. Epicgenius (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Please...

...stop combining street articles unnecessarily, and without discussion beforehand. Your behavior is becoming disruptive, and if you continue, I will have to bring it to the attention of the noticeboards. BMK (talk) 00:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

So why don't you stop making unnecessary unmerges? Your restoration of East River Esplanade, for example, is totally unnecessary, as it's a park that is considered part of the East River Greenway. (Also, your edit of SHoP Architects to undo an edit I made because of your claim that I stalked you is totally rubbish. I'd also mention a list of pages that you followed me on,* but it'd detract from the main points,) Anyway, what unmerges do you want to discuss? Epicgenius (talk) 02:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

*(For example, Blue Condominium Tower and Vesey Street, neither of which you edited before, but both of which you moved because I edited them a day or two before. Epicgenius (talk) 02:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC))

You need to stop stop your merging of small, detailed articles into larger, harder to find, omnibus article, without any discussion at all, there will continue to be problems. You've been here long enough to know that disruptive editing, and editing without or against consensus are serious problems, which generally end up with serious remedies. BMK (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll stop merging these articles. You should stop reverting my edits indiscriminately. Epicgenius (talk) 15:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I have not reverted your edits "indiscriminately". Those that are good, I have left as is - but you can't see that - those that are not beneficial I have reverted, as always.

BTW, You should probably consider not making image and layout adjustments, they are not your strong point.

(And of course you "stalked" me -- you admitted to it in an edit summary on this very page. You know full well that is the case, so I presume that you're posturing for your talk page audience. Do I have to take the time to search back in this page's history to find the edit?) BMK (talk) 15:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, so they mostly aren't indiscriminate.

I'm trying to learn to make better image adjustments through trial and error; if it's out of place, I re-adjust it.

That edit summary was nine nine or so months ago... Epicgenius (talk) 17:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't say it was recent, but it did happen, and you admitted to it - and also promised not to do it again. When I see you popping up on pages that I've edited that you've never edited before, and that have no obvious connection to your normal range of subjects, my Spidey-sense starts tingling. Of course, we have a large overlap in subjects that we're both interested in, so I expect to see you on those articles and other related ones, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Let's please keep it that way.

BTW, edits can't be "mostly" indiscriminate, that's like being a sort of unique or a little pregnant - I'm either reverting your edits indiscriminately or I'm not. I'm not. BMK (talk) 19:31, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

So they aren't indiscriminate reverts after all. I see. Anyway, I'm glad we can find an amicable solution to this. Epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Bill Thompson, person, place or thing

I noticed your move to Bill Thompson (comptroller), and you are correct, he is not a place, but for that matter he is not the Comptroller, either, any more. "Comptroller" is not what he does for a living, it is just one of the public offices he has held. He is, however, still a "politician," and it is typical to have a more general phrase like that in a title. But it can't be Bill Thompson (politician) because there is already a Bill Thompson (South Dakota politician), Bill Thompson (Ohio politician) and Bill Thompson (Wyoming politician). So I think it would make sense to follow the existing pattern and move this to Bill Thompson (New York politician). Neutron (talk) 18:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

@Neutron: I didn't notice that before. Now that I think about it, I also noticed that he hasn't been only a comptroller. Thanks for the heads up; I will move it now. Epicgenius (talk) 20:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Update: Moved. Epicgenius (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)