Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
::::::By the way, I also wanted the 100,000 YouTube subscribers mentioned. You said no. I accepted that. But now it's time for you to get back in touch with reality. ] (]) 20:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
::::::By the way, I also wanted the 100,000 YouTube subscribers mentioned. You said no. I accepted that. But now it's time for you to get back in touch with reality. ] (]) 20:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
:::::::P.S. ], I find it particularly insulting that you proposed that Duff and the other contributors to the article should work it out on the article talk page. First of all, that would be a violation of {{U|Bgwhite}}'s rule; secondly, show me ONE sentence that Duff (who fought vigorously for the deletion of the article) has contributed to the Kitt page; thirdly, Duff's behavior made the other main contributor decide to leave Misplaced Pages permanently. So, what the hell were you thinking? If you had any dignity, you would step down immediately from this mediation process. ] (]) 20:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
== request to reapply BG19bot ==
== request to reapply BG19bot ==
Revision as of 20:37, 20 April 2014
Welcome to my talk page
I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag or a warning, please assume good faith.
If I have erred, don't hesitate to tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
I will not tolerate anyprofanity or extreme rudeness. If used in any way, it will be erased and your message not read.
Archives
Bot archives discussions after 30 days of inactivity into the latest archive
Hi, I've just made this edit, and only afterward did I check the page history and find that it was all added in this edit of yours. Although it was two and a half years ago, do you recall where you got the information? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
For changing the citation style as I have been trying to figure it out and now that I have an example of what it should be I will add it to my notes: .
+ Chad Noel had a scene with Corrigan in "Every Poolboy’s Dream", and he performed in the industry under several other names, sometimes bareback: Donny Price, Kyle Young, and Craven Cox. He died in March 2010 from an illness related to HIV complications. He was 25 and a native of Laramie, Wyoming.
By the way, could you run a search on "assistance" and change the spelling to "assistance" for the appropriate redirect page? Only one should come up. Thank you.76.170.88.72 (talk) 23:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
That should have been a search on ASSSITANCE with 3 "s" 's I've already coprrected the articles with 3 "s" 's since they were in the text but that last one is a redirect page and there is not a way to get to the text that I know about,76.170.88.72 (talk) 06:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Jim Cartar, ah joy, vandalism. Generally, page protection isn't added for one day's vandalism spurt. Majority of people quit after a day or two, you just have to wait them out. It's the persistent ones or the ones that hop to different IPs that are the "fun" ones. I've put the page on the watchlist. I'll block them if they come back. Bgwhite (talk) 04:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Jim Cartar, the So Fresh article is unfortunately a normal one. There's constant vandalism, but nothing "too bad". I don't do any vandalism patrols. If I did, I'd get very angry and depressed. On my normal routine, I do reverts on 30 or so pages a day. It is one of the joys of working here. I don't know what my block or page protection rate is, but about 20% are requests. Bgwhite (talk) 04:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I understand.. actually I'm becoming frustrated while dealing with this. Anyway, thank you for your help. Jim Carter11:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
The latest version of MediaWiki (1.23wmf20) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on March 27. It will be added to non-Misplaced Pages wikis on April 1, and all Misplaced Pages wikis on April 3 (calendar).
Typography Refresh was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on March 27. You'll only see it if you use the Vector skin. For users on non-Misplaced Pages wikis, it will be enabled on April 1, and for Misplaced Pages users on April 3.
CirrusSearch, the new search tool, was enabled as a beta feature on over 30 new wikis on March 27.
VisualEditor news
Blocked users now see the same messages in VisualEditor as in the wikitext editor.
The search box for re-using a reference in VisualEditor is now cleared after each use.
New links on sub-pages no longer point to the wrong location in VisualEditor.
VisualEditor's media dialog no longer breaks when opening some types of images.
Future software changes
You will not be able to use the Wikitech wiki for a short period around 16:00 UTC on April 1 due to a server change.
CirrusSearch will become the main search engine for all non-Misplaced Pages wikis except Commons, Meta and Incubator on April 2.
You will soon be able to use a new special page listing duplicate files.
Deleting a version of a file or a version of its description page will soon be shown differently in the logs.
JRSpriggs, headings are already bolded. They do not need to be bolded twice. If you look at your version and the bot's version, visually they are the same. This might change come Wednesday as the typography of Misplaced Pages is getting a "refresh". See post above towards the top under "Typography Refresh" Bgwhite (talk) 18:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It's one of those things that varies from browser to browser. In Misplaced Pages, level 1 and level 2 headings are normal weight (it's the large size - 188% and 150% respectively) that makes them seem bold. Since they aren't explicitly bolded to begin with, it's possible to boldface a level 2 heading and have it show as heavier type in almost any browser.
Headings of levels 3 to 6 inclusive are bolded as part of the Misplaced Pages skin styling, and this is where the browser variation comes in. If these headings include bold text, some browsers will say "it's already bolded - I'll ignore that instruction", whilst others will say "I'll make it extra-bold" (the CSS spec allows for 1000 levels of boldness although it describes no more than nine, and warns that some browsers provide fewer).
Back to the point: MOS:BOLD says "Bolded headings, though technically possible, are not appropriate." which isn't an explicit prohibition; and MOS:HEADINGS doesn't mention boldface at all. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
To Bgwhite: I do see a difference in the two titles in question, although it is less noticeable than in ordinary text. I use Firefox and the Monobook skin. JRSpriggs (talk) 06:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
JRSpriggs, don't use Monobook as a reference for what other people will see. Readers use Vector. When I look at what readers will see, I don't have the browser logged into Misplaced Pages. It is not noticeable in Chrome, Opera or Safari. It is a very small difference in Firefox. I've got two versions of IE. One is noticeable (more than Firefox) and one isn't noticeable. No math articles use bold in headlines. As bold headlines "are not appropriate" and no other math article use bold headlines, I see no reason to bold here, especially when the difference isn't all that noticeable. Bgwhite (talk) 06:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
JRSpriggs, Redrose64 & Magioladitis. With the new typography in place, I took a look at the bold headings again. I can't see a difference between bold and not bold in any browser. However, the bold does show up in the ToC in all browsers. I can't remember if it showed up before or not. They were going to update the look of the ToC with the latest update but pulled back at the last moment (If I remember correctly). Maybe it's time to think about changing MOS to allow bold in headings if it now shows up in the ToC? Links... bold & no bold.
I also noticed the text looking much better in Firefox and IE. Looks like crap in Chrome. I haven't checked my settings yet. Bgwhite (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
IIRC bold has showed up in the TOC for a long time. I put together a short test page at User:Redrose64/Sandbox5. On that, I see no visual difference between the first and second subheadings in Chrome, Firefox, IE8, Opera, Safari, but using the "inspect element" feature of Firefox reveals that in the second subheading, the letters E and B have a font-weight of 900 and the rest of that subheading has a font-weight of 700 (as does the whole of the first and third subheadings).
Going through my watchlist (and WP:VPT accounts for most of it), I have come across this post. This gives me the impression that there are at least two ways of making boldface text: one is to use a normal-weight font (the Arimo 400 mentioned there) and apply what that post refers to as "faux-bold"; another is to use two fonts - one normal-weight and one that is already boldface (the Arimo 700 mentioned there). If "faux-bold" is applied to Arimo 700, it might be emboldened still further. I would say that the possibility of emboldening parts of a subheading depends not just on browser, but also upon the font families that are installed. Since we cannot control browser, and cannot completely control the font families (just because a particular setup has Arial doesn't necessarily mean that it also has Arial Bold), we cannot assume that it is possible to embolden parts of a subheading - but we cannot assume that it's impossible either. We must aim for maximum compatibility - Inhomogeneous electromagnetic wave equation#E and B fields does this by having the very first sentence as "Maxwell's equations can directly give inhomogeneous wave equations for the electric field E and magnetic field B." so that the terms referred to in the subheading adopt the correct font weight early on in the paragraph. If this had not been done, some redundancy could have been introduced, for example by introducing the paragraph with "The E and B fields, which represent the electric and magnetic fields respectively, ..." --Redrose64 (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
ISBN
Don't worry, that was the "Marine" part of me reacting. I also have a good sense of humor side in me. I know the "West Side Story" song that you are referring to. Rita Moreno sang "Puerto Rico, my heart devotion, let it sink back in the ocean". I found it interesting that the songwriters made the Puerto Rican girls sing against Puerto Rico, while the boys sang for Puerto Rico. Anyway, it is all water under the bridge. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Checkwiki does find a false positive error. Whitelist is for pages that have false positives, for whatever reason. If I remember right, which is doubtful, It is related to the <<br>>. 22:37, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems a good reason, WPCleaner wouldn't find it as an error. One way to modify it so that it's not detected anymore is to use <<br />>. --NicoV04:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Again visual problems
I'm getting those visual problems again, this time when I logged in, I got large fonts on every page. The fonts are very strange and enough large. --Captain Assassin!01:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your fixes in the article! I am in the process of adding more ISBN citations. Is there something that I need to do to avoid further errors with them? :-)
2602:306:BDA0:97A0:466D:57FF:FE90:AC45. The big thing is the references. You don't have to write out the same references every time. Using the <ref name= > notation will save time and make the references section less cluttered. For the ISBNs, it's just the ISBN and the number. No commas, colons or labeling them ISBN-10 or ISBN-13. With wikimagic, it becomes ISBN 0123456789, where you can click on the number to go search for the book. Bgwhite (talk) 05:12, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Where can I learn about how to do the "ref name=" notation? Also, what's "Wikimagic"?
Hi Bgwhite. I'm sure that you agreed to let Lesser Cartographies be the mediator for conflicts on the Kitt page because he has experience and many Wikipedians speak highly of him, but he has made too many mistakes dealing with Duff and me, to the point where I think I have proven sufficiently here that he is unfit to continue being the mediator for problems on the Harp Twins article. I certainly do not trust him. When I blew things out of proportion, as you said, and showed primitive behavior, it was precisely to expose his flaws and build a case against him. The elimination of the shop links isn't so bad if no clear mistakes on his part can be pointed out, but for whatever reason he has disqualified himself, in my opinion, because there ARE too many mistakes. I hope Lesser will agree to let someone else be the referee because we all know that Duff will be back sooner or later, and I really don't want Lesser to be the one in charge of negotiations. Look, you are an administrator, yet you never act like you are superior to me, and it's one of the reasons why I respect you, whereas Lesser is very insolent, which causes serious problems. Please read what I wrote when you have a moment. Thanks as always... Dontreader (talk) 07:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Dontreader, I haven't talked to Lesser, so I don't know what is going thru his mind. I think you have worn him down. You keep after him for the same thing and I don't think he cares anymore. You've got to drop the Amazon/iTunes reference thing. Let the Kitt article stand as is and only update with new info. I know it is easier said than doing it, but you need to let it go. Bgwhite (talk) 06:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Bgwhite. I gave Lesser a hard time because I don't like people with double standards, and who don't treat me with respect (instead, he has insulted me, both subtly and very clearly, as can be seen in the archived discussion on his talk page which I shared with you), but I promise not to mention the Amazon/iTunes stuff again, unless there are new incidents related to that issue. I will let it go, as you put it. What worries me is the future. Duff will come back to cause trouble if the page is updated (unless the updates are totally uncontroversial), and I don't want Lesser to then say HERE I AM to mediate, and give Duff what he wants again. That's my concern. Actually, there have been no new "notable" events in the Harp Twins Revolution, but things happen unexpectedly. Two questions, please:
1. May I update the Singles Releases section? That seems uncontroversial to me. It's just a matter of adding like three more tracks. Or I could do it in my sandbox for you to add them instead if you prefer that.
2. I know you help tons of people, so you forgot to tell me if you think this feature in Metal Hammer magazine is notable enough. It's the blue stuff. I'm not good at diffs, so I apologize if that's not the proper way to show you that material. Metal Hammer is big and very well known among metalheads. Here is how that feature looks. I don't see a reason for not including it in the Kitt article.
Lesser Cartographies, I don't think you're getting the message. Besides, Bgwhite apparently implied above that I could directly update the page with new info, but I need to be sure. You can already see exactly what the proposed edits are: updating the Singles Releases table, and reinserting the Metal Hammer feature which you took out. Dontreader (talk) 06:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Dontreader, sorry, I didn't mean to imply you could add new info directly. I meant don't change or ask to change the article unless there is new information. Metal Hammer does have an article, so in theory it is notable. What exactly do you want to source it with? Seeing "Heavy Fucking Metal" on the same page as the Harp Twins doesn't seem right. As Lesser said, put what what you propose in your sandbox. Ahhhhh Camille. Bgwhite (talk) 07:34, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks, Bgwhite, for clarifying the situation. The source for the Metal Hammer article that I have is this:
But I could also add the Facebook source merely to show a picture of the feature. I have seen Facebook as a source on other pages but I don't know if that is frowned upon or if it depends on what the Facebook source is being used for. I'm not very comfortable with "Heavy Fucking Metal" either, but the usage of the F word is one of the main commandments in the Heavy Metal faith, and it is our duty to show religious tolerance. I will let you know when my sandbox is ready. And yes, I still can't believe that Camille is so hot... just imagine if she had an identical twin sister! Dontreader (talk) 23:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Bgwhite and Lesser Cartographies. As requested, I made changes to the article in my sandbox. Here is the Musical Career section, where I made some very minor grammatical changes intended to improve the article, and I included the Metal Hammer feature, plus I added that they have over 100,000 YouTube subscribers because I believe that as mere harpists it's a notable enough achievement. I apologize for not having the current version available in my sandbox (I pasted it there but I made changes without remembering to save the current version first). Even so, it's easy enough to see what I did. I also updated the Singles Releases section while taking out a couple of tracks that are not singles, here. Please take a look, and thanks in advance... Dontreader (talk) 07:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Good morning from Corning, Iowa: just west of Quince Avenue and due south of oh-god-I've-been-on-this-train-for-three-days (and it's still better than flying United). To the matter at hand:
1. Don, next time around, here's how to make life easier for a grumpy reviewer. Make a brand new page, say, User:Dontreader/sandbox/Harp Twins (draft). Copy and paste the entire Camille and Kennerly Kitt article there and make your changes. That way, I can go to the article history of the new page and see a "diff" comparing the first version and the most recent version that shows me just the changes you've made. I did this for the Musical Career section and here are the results.
2. Metal Hammer is the kind of citation I expect to see in articles where notability isn't quite established. The article is well past the point now where we need to record every bit of press coverage to make sure it survives AfD.
3. I updated the six most recent singles. Let me know if there were more additions that I missed.
4. Grammar tweaks were helpful. Let me know if I missed any.
5. I don't have any sense as to whether 100,000 youtube subscribers is unusually good, unusually bad, or unremarkable. I'd prefer to see this in a reliable source before adding it.
6. Ok, I've changed my mind about Metal Hammer. It kinda sorta emphasizes the dissertation cite. Better wording may come to me with more coffee and a night spent in a real bed.
7. Looking forward to Harp Twins covers of Demdike Stare. Hey, why don't have a Demdike Stare article yet? Well, let this tide you over until I get it written.
Hi Lesser Cartographies. Thank you very much for making the edits so quickly, and while travelling in a train, besides. I should do that next time I go somewhere. I have detested American airports ever since 9/11. Also, trains have nicer views. Enjoy your trip!
1. I'm sorry for the trouble I caused you from not knowing about sandbox subpages. I did apologize for something similar last night but anyway, thank you very much for showing me how to do things better in the future; in fact, I have already created the page you recommended, here.
3. Every single that you added was perfect, but I think there are three tracks that must be deleted, and one ("Amazing Grace") that should be relocated with a different release date, if you have time. My new draft page should make things much easier, I hope.
4. You took care of the grammar tweaks perfectly. Thank you very much for your help and time.
5. All right. That's reasonable enough.
6. Thanks for including the Metal Hammer feature. The problem with Bledsoe's dissertation is that she wrote it before the Twins' cover of Iron Maiden's "Fear of the Dark" was released, which certainly does not perpetuate "the angelic, calm, feminine stereotypes of the instrument." Neither does their cover of the intro theme of The Walking Dead, which is eerie. I'm not comfortable with "Playing up the contrast in styles". I just don't think it conveys anything concrete. I'd rather use "However," and then mention the Metal Hammer feature; they got that interview and feature because of their highly praised version of Fear of the Dark. Also, I don't understand why you omitted the Hot New Band reference. That's a prestigious label that Metal Hammer doesn't give to everyone. It's relevant, notable, and I see no point in making the article shorter than it has to be. Please reconsider.
7. Demdike Stare should work great on harps! You should make that suggestion on their Facebook wall! They do reply to everyone! :)
Hi again, Lesser Cartographies. Thanks for your continued edits. I don't mean to bother, but if you look very carefully at the sandbox subpage that you suggested for me, you will see that "Auld Lang Syne" was also removed, and "Amazing Grace" was relocated with a different date. Also, the correct title of "Sweet Dreams Are Made of This" is "Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)". If I were you, I would have erased the list entirely and replaced it with my sandbox list, but it's too late for that. Practically all the work has been done. Please just make those final changes. Thanks again for your patience... Dontreader (talk) 06:46, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
1. D'oh! I put my draft version in mainspace instead of my sandbox. I blanked and CSD'd it. Sheesh. Let the record show that Don did as I said and not as I did and put his own draft in his sandbox where it belongs.
3. Tracks deleted per your suggestion at your sandbox page.
6. WARNING: gratuitous personal opinion alert Compare either of those covers to, oh, Deborah Hansen-Conant doing a non-calm, non-angelic blues solo. End gratuitous personal opinion alert. Can you put up some sources for the praise of "Fear of the Dark" (or others) that mention how it shows their style becoming more diverse? Also, I must admit I'm not a regular reader Metal Hammer; I had thought "hot new band" was just a bit of standard music journalism puffery. Do you have a source that mentions that this is something bestowed by the editorial department instead of an individual writer, for example? (Don't worry about reliability at the moment; I just want to understand how you're interpreting these sources. We can worry about getting better sources later if need be.)
7. I just might do that....
Should be pulling into Cleveland at 5:30a. Looking forward to a proper breakfast.
Here you are now, Lesser Cartographies! I left you a message a few minutes ago at the end of the previous thread. I hope you saw it. Oh, you did. Thanks! Perfect! I was already at point #6 writing stuff. I'll finish soon...
1. Oh well, at least I learned something very useful! Thanks again! Very cool!
3. I addressed this issue above. Fixing tables can be a b*tch! Sorry for the inconvenience, but I do appreciate your patience. I got a headache fixing it last night in the regular sandbox. Not much left to go...
6. That's crazy stuff that you showed me! Never would have guessed it was a harp if I hadn't actually seen it. Certainly not angelic and calm, but the covers I showed you were not angelic either. Anyway, the Twins are not more diverse now than a year and a half ago, but it's not the point I was trying to make. However, I simply don't have reliable sources that indicate extra praise for their cover of Fear of the Dark; it's simply how they got featured in the magazine. Here's praise for it (nearly 100,000 shares on a Facebook page, as an unusable example), here. Regarding the Hot New Band label, it's completely editorial. Let me retrieve the picture of the feature, so you can see the label, here. No author is named, as you can see. There were four bands in that edition that were called Hot New Bands, always with that star and ribbon. I have the magazine, which is how I know. I hope that helps.
7. Good! But they are travelling now, like you, so ask them in a week or so when they get back home! Many thanks again... Dontreader (talk) 07:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Lesser Cartographies. I hope you were able to read my latest observations. I'm certainly very grateful for all your help, but I remain uncomfortable with "Playing up the contrast in styles", which doesn't seem to contribute anything concrete to the article, in my opinion, and as far as I can tell, it's not the sort of thing one finds in Featured Articles (you have said that Featured Article standards should be applied to the Kitt article). I'd rather see this: The June 2013 issue of Metal Hammer featured an interview article about the Harp Twins, titled "Harp Attack!", and labeled them a "Hot New Band". At least the Hot New Band label should be added in some way or another. You asked me for information on the matter, and I have given it to you. That was clearly an editorial decision. There is absolutely no way that anyone could argue that this information is fancruft. If you happen to be in a coma, I'll give you one more day to reply. Thanks again. Dontreader (talk) 03:24, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Don, I had read your response when you wrote it and didn't think you were asking for a reply. "Hot new band" doesn't signify any particular achievement in this context. And the article did indeed play up the difference in styles between what Metal Hammer regularly reviews and what the twins do. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Lesser, you are frustrating me yet again. First of all, how can you say that you didn't think I was asking for a reply? You wrote, "Do you have a source that mentions that this is something bestowed by the editorial department instead of an individual writer, for example? (Don't worry about reliability at the moment; I just want to understand how you're interpreting these sources. We can worry about getting better sources later if need be.)" That was a question, and I answered it, and I added, "I hope that helps." So, of course I was asking for a reply. Besides, I had told you that I was uncomfortable with "Playing up the contrast in styles". Look, "Playing up the contrast in styles" lacks clarity. It's a mediocre edit, at best. Please don't be stubborn. If you were expecting that the "Hot New Band" label was an individual writer's choice instead of an editorial department decision, then that's not my problem. I proved that it was an editorial decision. Your reply makes no sense whatsoever. The fact that Metal Hammer named them as a Hot New Band should be included, and your edit that says "Playing up the contrast in styles" should be removed. Bgwhite, please, what do you suggest? I'm fine with calling other editors to settle this matter if you are. Thanks for your patience. Dontreader (talk) 07:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Don, if you head over to the wikia project you can create an entire wiki devoted to the Harp Twins where you have complete editorial control. If someone disagrees with an edit you make, you can ban them. Here, though, you're going to have to wrap your head around the fact that the article is written collaboratively, rather than at your direction, and that means you're not going to get you way much of the time. If you'd like to discuss this issue with a wider group of editors, I'll ping Duff and whoever else has contributed to the article and we can hash this out on the article talk page. As to not replying: I asked you a question and you answered it. Based on your answer, I thought it was obvious to both of us why I wasn't going to make the edit you had requested. I'm apologize for the miscommunicataion. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 13:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Lesser, you are the one acting like you have complete and arbitrary editorial control over the article. And stop being a hypocrite. Duff is the one who is controlling YOU. I hate the Misplaced Pages email service except for administrators, maybe, but everything else should be public, including your communications with Duff. What you are saying here makes no sense whatsoever. This situation is exactly the same as your defense of your Madonna Collector source; I told you to admit you were wrong, but you refused, and eventually IndianBio created a humiliating situation for you, after you embarrassed yourself at the Teahouse, where you are ironically a host. Let me try again to help you understand the situation, using very simple English:
I wanted "Hot New Band" to be included.
You replied, saying "Do you have a source that mentions that this is something bestowed by the editorial department instead of an individual writer, for example? (Don't worry about reliability at the moment; I just want to understand how you're interpreting these sources. We can worry about getting better sources later if need be.)"
I gave you a source that PROVES that this is something bestowed by the editorial department instead of an individual writer.
However, you REFUSE to include it, resorting to the most nonsensical sentences that I've seen ever since the infamous Madonna Collector source defense.
By the way, I also wanted the 100,000 YouTube subscribers mentioned. You said no. I accepted that. But now it's time for you to get back in touch with reality. Dontreader (talk) 20:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Lesser, I find it particularly insulting that you proposed that Duff and the other contributors to the article should work it out on the article talk page. First of all, that would be a violation of Bgwhite's rule; secondly, show me ONE sentence that Duff (who fought vigorously for the deletion of the article) has contributed to the Kitt page; thirdly, Duff's behavior made the other main contributor decide to leave Misplaced Pages permanently. So, what the hell were you thinking? If you had any dignity, you would step down immediately from this mediation process. Dontreader (talk) 20:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
request to reapply BG19bot
I've been working on the Klingon grammar article in my Sandbox, on text formatting (see Talk:Klingon grammar#Tt-Klingon) and a whole lot of larger and smaller text edits. Before installing my revision, I checked the page's history since I made my sandbox working copy, and found that your BG19bot had cleaned up the tables. Naturally, my replacement effectively undid that work. Would you please have the bot redo the table fixing? Thanks. You can {{ping}} me if you want to discuss it. --Thnidu (talk) 06:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
The latest version of MediaWiki (1.23wmf21) was scheduled to be deployed to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on April 3, however it was temporarily put on hold due to localization issues. (calendar).
Typography Refresh was enabled on non-Misplaced Pages wikis on April 1, and on all Wikipedias on April 3. You'll only see it if you use the Vector skin.
CirrusSearch was enabled as the primary search method on over 400 non-Misplaced Pages wikis on April 2.
Future software changes
A new special page (Special:TrackingCategories) will soon list all the tracking categories on a wiki.
All Wikiquote projects will start using language links from Wikidata on April 8.
The Hovercards feature will soon work with right-to-left languages.
You will soon be able to download files directly from MediaViewer, the new multimedia tool.
MediaViewer will be enabled for all users on MediaWiki.org on April 10. Comments are welcome.
You can help check that users can read CAPTCHAs in your language.
Thank you for your help cleaning up the Nuclear labor issues page, I really appreciate it. As a Misplaced Pages newbie as of Feb. 1, it has been a real pleasure to find so many helpful folks here. In the next weeks I plan to continue to work on the article, adding and organizing content, cleaning up (all those dang capital letters from my bibilography, argh!) and keeping up to date on new sources of information on the subject. Netherzone (talk) 01:07, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Rudd Center entry
Hi, thanks much for your kindly heading fix on the Rudd Center entry. This is being edited a bit by my university students, and we will be proofreading it more closely in coming days.
````Phoebe13
Reference Errors on 10 April
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:
Hi. This edit, with summary "Restore the removal of a reference", reinserted the spam link that was previously deliberately removed. The link is to a web page that contains no relevant information about the release of an English language client or the developer's efforts to partner with a publisher for N.America/EU. It also reinserted an external link to the homepage of mmocast, again not directly relevant to this specific game or article. Without any direct relevance or necessity, they are simply spam. I have reverted the insertion again. Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 08:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
Thanks for removing the inappropriate "Technical Request" on the page "Energy minimization". Did you remove it completely or move it?
AussieScientist I removed it. Not sure what you were trying to do. Also, you left your signature, which never goes in articles. What was your original intent with the edit? Bgwhite (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Aaron-Tripel, have the decency not to assume bad faith and have the decency to actually read the diff. I said and did nothing wrong. It was you who got mad and lost control. I get reverted around eight times a day. 1/2 by vandals. 1/2 by editors reverting my edit and the the vandalism edits before me. If you are going to play with AWB to change alot of articles, get used to it. Bgwhite (talk) 22:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
In my notification pane a message appeared "Your edit on Dumka railway station has been reverted by Bgwhite". Then I read "Vandalism by new user". Nothing more.--Aaron-Tripel (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Aaron-Tripel, exactly my point. You assumed bad faith and you didn't investigate. In the notification pane, there is the "see changes" link. Next time, you need to click on that link, investigate and see what was changed. You will get a notification of a revert even if your one edit is among 20 edits reverted. The notification doesn't mean your edit was reverted, it could be just a casualty in reverting other bad edits. Bgwhite (talk) 04:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
We are looking for contributors to help write new issues every week. If you would like to help, please contact us.
Recent software changes
The latest version of MediaWiki (1.23wmf22) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on April 10. It will be added to non-Misplaced Pages wikis on April 15, and all Wikipedias on April 17 (calendar).
MediaViewer was enabled for all users on MediaWiki.org on April 10. It will be enabled for all users on the Catalan (ca), Hungarian (hu) and Korean (ko) Wikipedias and English Wikivoyage on April 17. Comments are welcome.
Font issues caused by Typography refresh for Windows users were fixed on April 7.
VisualEditor news
You will now see only three options when you try to add a template parameter in VisualEditor; you will see other options after a click.
The size changing controls in VisualEditor media editing dialog were simplified further.
The wikitext editor tab will now fold into a drop-down menu in the Vector skin if there is not enough space on your screen.
Future software changes
The font used for body text on Wikimedia wikis will change to your system default sans-serif font. This temporary change will be enabled on all non-Misplaced Pages wikis on April 15, and on all Wikipedias on April 17.
Files from Commons seen on another wiki will soon have a tab saying "View on Wikimedia Commons". The create tab will change to "Add local description" (see screenshot).
You will soon be able to hide Notification and Hovercards pop-ups by pressing the Esc key.
Shorter lists of language links will soon work in right-to-left languages. Languages that you have used before will be shown in the list.
You will soon be able to send messages with the MassMessage tool to all pages in a given category.
An IRC discussion with the Wikimedia Foundation Multimedia team will take place on April 16 at 18:00 UTC on the channel #wikimedia-office on Freenode (time conversion).
Problems
Wikimedia Foundation servers were updated after a security bug called Heartbleed was discovered last week. You should change your password as an extra precaution.
Thanks for the edits on the GJ Reynolds page. I had a question: I noticed you removed all the links to the celebrities featured on his radio program. Is that because they weren't credited with links? If so, can I add them back in so long as I reference each one with a link?
Fattutor, I made some copy edits. One thing that struck me King's College. I have a feeling if you say King's College in England, everybody knows what you mean. However, people outside of England doesn't know which one. Could you add a wikilink to the correct place. Bgwhite (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for tidying up the article. Re the refs, I have been informed that the forcing of a fixed number of columns in reference lists has been deprecated in favour of specifying a column size. See template:Reflist#Columns for more on this. So I guess it should be changed back! Proscribe (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite. This edit reordered some of the text. All fixed now, but if this is an error in an automated tool I thought you would like to know. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 16:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
A film's training is undergoing, while slated to start shooting on April 22, can it have an article? I think it can, because training's a part of production, not film but production. --Captain Assassin!09:33, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, you cleaned up with AWB, thanks. I note that you (or AWB) changes "date" to "year" in Template:cite book when only a year is given. However, according to the templates documentation, "year: Year of source being referenced. Required with some types of {{sfn}} citations; otherwise use date." It seems to me as if no change from "date" to "year" should be made. Note that, using the standard "cite" templates as provided by the toolbar, no "year" parameter is available for "cite book", not even among the "extra fields".
Obviously, if this is an AWB standard change, then we'll need to raise this there, but I'm not sure whether this is standard or your personal change. It's not a big problem in any case, everything still works. Fram (talk) 09:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
"They" are depreciating/changing parameters for the cite templates, include some date parameters. This started when Lua modules were introduced. Might as well invite everybody.... Andy would know what is going on in that world. Bgwhite (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Previous conversation seems to have been archived. Please cast a critical eye over recent changes to "Water on Mars". There's bound to be a few typos remaining in the references. -- 79.67.241.203 (talk) 14:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
DrmiesKelapstickMandarax. I have seen season one on Netflix. I wouldn't call it sci-fi except for the clone element. The actress playing the clones was amazing. Playing a druggy Brit, uptight Canadian soccer mom, American doctoral student and a psychopath (Dutch?). It started off slow, but picked up.
I really enjoyed the sci-fi show The Returned. Probably the best show I've seen this past year right after Breaking Bad. It won an International Emmy for Best Drama Series. It is on streaming Netflix. I haven't seen the similar American show, Resurrection.
Netflix did have the original movie Sizzling Bacon. I didn't know it was an April Fools prank when we started watching it. We were really confused when all they showed was bacon cooking.
Drmies, by the The Killing, I think you meant Forbrydelsen. The original Danish version is much better than the American/Canadian version.
I'm concerned about the involvement in the Sense8 project of the people from The Matrix, which I didn't like at all.
Drmies, I think I saw part of the pilot of The Killing, but it didn't interest me and I never saw any more.
There's a tragic story about Twin Peaks. I had watched the first episode or two, and then a friend arrived from out of town. He said he'd been watching the show and asked me to tape an episode for him. Turns out he didn't need the tape (he had set his VCR at home or something), so he didn't need to watch my copy. But then another friend was interested, and wanted to watch it with me. Unfortunately, we didn't get around to it before another week had arrived. I obviously couldn't watch the new one without having seen the previous one, so naturally I taped the next episode so we could watch both of them in order. I think you can guess where this story is headed. I ended up with the entire series strewn over a bunch of video tapes, which I still have, all still unwatched. I should round those up and get rid of them; if I ever do get around to watching the show, it certainly won't be on tape. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM00:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi there Bgwhite, it's been a while since our last contact. Just wanted to ask you about this edit. Is there any particular reason for altering the alphabetical order in the references?--Jetstreamer01:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Error fix #97
Good morning. I had to revert your edit since it completely ruined the formatting (pls check the diff). This is ok, we all sometimes make mistakes, and there is nothing particularly wrong with it. However, since you were using automatic software, it is possible that you could have made a number of similar edits in other articles. Could you please check. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Ymblanter: AFAICT, the script removed the |} because it thought that it was unbalanced - that is, it didn't realise that {{SIoCPoNaRS header}} was the matching start of a table. It is for this reason that many templates that start tables have a corresponding template that ends the table - for example, {{s-start}} and {{s-end}} - so as not to confuse the scripts and bots. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It is quite possible, but we still have hundreds if not thousands of articles with the same core (which is btw not mine).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
There are only 30 transclusions to the {{SIoCPoNaRS header}}, so it wouldn't be painful to add footer template. Might as well add a footer to go along with all the sports and election footers. I have this strange desire to smirk every time I say footer. Bgwhite (talk) 19:24, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm 
