| Revision as of 19:03, 27 October 2021 editEviolite (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers12,859 edits →Access date formats: new sectionTags: Reverted New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:47, 28 October 2021 edit undoNehme1499 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers101,530 edits →Possible sockpuppet?: new sectionTags: Reverted 2017 wikitext editorNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| Hi GiantSnowman, I noticed that you used a script to change the date format in access dates (]). While I am not opposed to that edit since it doesn't really change much and is not a big deal, I was wondering if I misunderstood the MOS; the script is meant to fix ] issues but that guideline states that {{tq|Access and archive dates in an article's citations should all use the same format, which may be: the format used for publication dates in the article (see above); the format expected in the citation style adopted in the article; or yyyy-mm-dd}} (under the consistency section), then gives an example of {{tq|Jones, J. (20 September 2008) ... Retrieved 2009-02-05.}} being valid. So in my view I didn't see an issue with the existing dates in the article, but evidently the script did. Can you confirm if it was an issue or not? (The main reason I'm asking is because I used that format when referencing for several other articles as well and will change it if it is an issue.) Thanks, ] ] 19:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC) | Hi GiantSnowman, I noticed that you used a script to change the date format in access dates (]). While I am not opposed to that edit since it doesn't really change much and is not a big deal, I was wondering if I misunderstood the MOS; the script is meant to fix ] issues but that guideline states that {{tq|Access and archive dates in an article's citations should all use the same format, which may be: the format used for publication dates in the article (see above); the format expected in the citation style adopted in the article; or yyyy-mm-dd}} (under the consistency section), then gives an example of {{tq|Jones, J. (20 September 2008) ... Retrieved 2009-02-05.}} being valid. So in my view I didn't see an issue with the existing dates in the article, but evidently the script did. Can you confirm if it was an issue or not? (The main reason I'm asking is because I used that format when referencing for several other articles as well and will change it if it is an issue.) Thanks, ] ] 19:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC) | ||
| == Possible sockpuppet? == | |||
| Over 1 month ago, a Bosnian-based user asked me to create a couple of Bosnian footballers (]) (notice the phrasing "I saw you made 167 new Misplaced Pages's for football players"); he has been blocked since then. Today, a user has asked me to create two Bosnian players pages (]), again with the same exact phrasing ("I saw you made 166 new Misplaced Pages's for football players"). I think it's pretty much obvious that we are dealing with a block evasion here. ]] 11:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:47, 28 October 2021
 Archives |
|
2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 • 2018 • 2019 • 2020 • 2021 • 2022 • 2023 • 2024 • 2025 • |
Quick question
Hi, what tool do you use to add the delsort notices such as "Note: This discussion has been included in..." at Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion? I'm designing a bot, and I noticed that most notices have the "class=delsort-notice", but some don't. Yours don't have the class attribute. Trying to understand the variation. Winston (talk) 01:56, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
Access date formats
Hi GiantSnowman, I noticed that you used a script to change the date format in access dates (Gao Yan (politician)). While I am not opposed to that edit since it doesn't really change much and is not a big deal, I was wondering if I misunderstood the MOS; the script is meant to fix MOS:DATEFORMAT issues but that guideline states that Access and archive dates in an article's citations should all use the same format, which may be: the format used for publication dates in the article (see above); the format expected in the citation style adopted in the article; or yyyy-mm-dd
(under the consistency section), then gives an example of Jones, J. (20 September 2008) ... Retrieved 2009-02-05.
being valid. So in my view I didn't see an issue with the existing dates in the article, but evidently the script did. Can you confirm if it was an issue or not? (The main reason I'm asking is because I used that format when referencing for several other articles as well and will change it if it is an issue.) Thanks, eviolite (talk) 19:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppet?
Over 1 month ago, a Bosnian-based user asked me to create a couple of Bosnian footballers (discussion) (notice the phrasing "I saw you made 167 new Misplaced Pages's for football players"); he has been blocked since then. Today, a user has asked me to create two Bosnian players pages (discussion), again with the same exact phrasing ("I saw you made 166 new Misplaced Pages's for football players"). I think it's pretty much obvious that we are dealing with a block evasion here. Nehme1499 11:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)