User talk:Ned Scott/archive current

I'm not that active these days, but I'm still around. Feel free to send me an extra poke here or via e-mail for anything, trivial or important (or to just say hi).
E-mail: Special:Emailuser/Ned Scott

Archives • ℹ
1. 02/06 - 05/06 2. 06/06 3. 07/06 - 08/06 4. 08/06 - 09/06 5. 10/06 - 11/06 6. 11/06 - 01/07 7. 02/07 - 03/07 8. 04/07 - 05/07	9. 05/07 - early 08/07 10. 08/07 - 10/07 11. 11/07 - mid 02/08 12. mid 02/08 - mid 05/08 13. mid 05/08 - mid 07/08 14. mid 07/08 - 11/08 15. 12/08 - 05/09 16. 06/09 - 04/11 17. 05/11 - 06/18

"List of Lost episodes/Use of images" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect List of Lost episodes/Use of images. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 11#List of Lost episodes/Use of images until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vahurzpu (talk) 18:09, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cocktaildb recipe

Template:Cocktaildb recipe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. —¿philoserf? (talk)

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:31, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reason for revert of syntax error fixes?

Is there a reason that you just did a bunch of reverts like this, of bot edits that fixed dozens of syntax errors in your talk page archives? – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:22, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes -- Ned Scott 19:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

That is not a helpful answer. Please provide an explanation. Those errors were fixed by an approved bot task. If there were errors in the bot edits, please specify what the bot did that you view as incorrect. You have restored errors of a couple of types that had been completely eliminated from the English Wikipedia, so your pages are likely to draw attention from editors who work to fix those errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I understand, but do not wish to explain further. These are my talk page archives. Maybe I want to archive incorrect formatting? Maybe I'm just a jerk? Maybe I don't trust people to edit those pages for any reason, especially when they ignore the notice to not edit the pages and didn't bother to ask me about it. The reasons are mysterious. They're marked as archives and with nobots. -- Ned Scott 19:31, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Since it's not yours, you should supply a valid reason. Gonnym (talk) 19:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to debate this. Leave my talk archives alone. -- Ned Scott 20:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh my god, I just took a closer look at what exactly you guys are doing, and it's not even fixing anything. You can't tell me that

• <font color="#ff9900">[[User:Krimpet|krimpet]]</font><font color="#ff6699">[[User talk:Krimpet|✽]]</font>

being changed to

• [[User:Krimpet|<font color="#ff9900">krimpet</font>]][[User talk:Krimpet|<font color="#ff6699">✽</font>]]

is doing anything necessary or fixing some kind of formatting issue. -- Ned Scott 20:16, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Ned Scott: とある白い猫, WOSlinkerBot, Qwerfjkl, Tholme, Izno, CommonsDelinker, Jonesey95 and Gonnym are among numerous Wikipedians working diligently to eradicate lint errors from Wikipedia who have edited one or more of your talk page archives. The edit about which you are godsmacked is a correction of an Old behaviour of link-wrapping font tags lint error. The Wikimedia software that makes Wikipedia work preprocesses or parses Wiki markup (Wikitext) with a tool called a linter. Around 2019, Wikimedia replaced the old linter with a new linter. Under the old linter, <font>...</font> immediately surrounding a wikilink or external link behaved as if the font tag were inside the link. That means that such font tags would override link colors. The new linter doen't work this way, and font color tags around a wikilink or external link don't override default link colors. This edit restores the display of Krimpet's signature to its original appearance, as everybody saw it, until the new linter came in. Old behaviour of link-wrapping font tags is considered a High Priority lint error, and we completely eradicated it from English Wikipedia. The only pages that have it now are your talk page archives.

Another High Priority lint error is Multiple unclosed formatting tags. The most common example of this error is a <small> tag closed with another <small> instead of </small>. The old linter usually fixed this error silently, but the new linter regards this as two unclosed <small> tags, which means that everything following these tags is displayed double-small, all the way to the end of the page, unless the leak is contained by a table or some other structure. We completely eradicated Multiple unclosed formatting tags from English Wikipedia. The only pages that have it now are your talk page archives.

David Levy edited one of of your talk page archives to correct "buy" to "but" in his own comment. That's not unreasonable, but it might have been better to mark it up as <del>buy</del> <ins>but</ins>, i.e. buy but.

There is a theory held by a small number of Wiki editors that archives are a historical record that must never be changed. That theory is incorrect. On Wikipedia, we edit talk page archives all the time for a variety of reasons, including copyright violations, renaming of image files, and, yes, lint fixes. This is explicitly encouraged at WP:Linter. We have been doing this for years. Most users appreciate it. A few users question it, but nearly all of those come to respect it after we explain it. I hope you will come to respect and appreciate it also. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:10, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

It's an archive, and is already full of red links, missing images, regarding topics that lack context, and more. I don't agree that this is something that needs to be done. Regardless of the situation, bots still need to follow the nobots tag.

That being said, seeing as this is something that is showing up on a report, that means you guys will never stop bugging me about this. So I give up. -- Ned Scott 23:00, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I see you have already self-reverted your reversions of lint fix edits of your talk page archive pages. Thank you for your cooperation. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)