Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:11, 30 March 2020

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, Holiday cards 2015, 42, 43, 44, 45, Holiday cards 2016, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, Holiday cards 2017, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, Holiday cards 2018, 57, 58, 59, Holiday cards 2019, 60, 61, 62

Sandbox

I am using this space to create my sandbox. MarnetteD | Talk 20:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is another. MarnetteD|Talk 21:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

and one more MarnetteD|Talk 22:13, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminders

Margie Hines

I need some major help over here. I'm trying to cite https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0385695/ for not just Margie Hines' death date, but also her death place. Every time I keep trying to do it, it just says THIS!!! "A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page)."ParaWarnerViacom-17 (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

ParaWarnerViacom-17, IMDb is not a reliable source. (talk page watcher) Schazjmd (talk) 18:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Schazjmd. ParaWarnerViacom-17 please see WP:RS/IMDB. Also see the extensive comments on the talk page of the article about her death date. MarnetteD|Talk 18:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

ParaWarnerViacom-17 (talk) 01:26, 23 March 2020 (UTC) That's it, goodbye everyone!

Hello

Hi! Hope all is well with you in your part of the world. Everything is slowly shutting down in England. No Cannes Film Festival, no international cricket and working from home for the foreseeable! Crazy times. Take care. Lugnuts 20:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for stopping by Lugnuts. Truly crazy times. The shutting down isn't as comprehensive here as in other parts of the US but it is heading that way. I keep waiting to see this scene outside my door. My 20+ years of buying DVDs is finally paying off as I have plenty to watch to fill the days and nights. I'm currently working through all 30 of Kurosawa's films. Even the ones labeled by some as lesser are remarkable. Stay safe and well my friend. MarnetteD|Talk 21:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

A Piraat for you!

Cheers! DonQuixote (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Sip sip glug glug. Thanks DQ. MarnetteD|Talk 17:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

"Do not add access dates"

Writing to User talk:MarnetteD and User talk:Derek R Bullamore I would like to have the checkmark removed from the Refill tool "Do not add access dates" option. I uncheck it every time. When would we not want the date added to the citation?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dthomsen8. I'm not sure where to find the answer to your question. As you probably know questions at the Zhoafeng refill talk page go unanswered. I've started more than one thread at the WP:VPT with the only one coming close to getting an answer being Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Requests for help regarding refill. My apologies for not being able to get you a better answer - maybe DRB will know something. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:54, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Dthomsen8. I have learned that you are using the original refill. As far as I can gather it is no longer being maintained by anyone so you will just have to keep clicking on the checkmark. I have posted some info here Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)#Logged out by using REFILL about refill2 that might be of some use for you. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 17:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I have learned that using the old original refill tool is one way to put access dates on references, the other being to do it by hand after a URL cleanup with the new refill2 tol. Please tell me what the improvements are for the new tool, or perhaps there are only bug fixes. I have been using both. It seems to me that both may never do anything except waiting, but restarting may give success. If I want success and don't get it myself, I sometimes tag it for Cleanup, and sometimes I give up. --Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Most understandable Dthomsen8. For me the main asset of the new tool is that it will convert bare urls in the external links section. Now it doesn't put them into cite templates but it does put them in brackets and add a title. Nothing around here is ever perfect is it :-) that just means your work is appreciated all the more. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 03:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU 00:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much CAPTAIN RAJU. Who would have thought that the piece I heard on NPR about this newish website called Misplaced Pages would lead to fifteen years of typing :-) Thanks again. MarnetteD|Talk 01:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Esteemed colleague

Can draft works be subjected to filling by ReFill? If so, would you mind having a look in at Draft:Muck Rack, which I am trying to salvage from oblivion? If so, thank you in advance for your effort. As always, we would be helped by the appearance of complete of fields as the tool options allow, including access-date (from which we will not infer checked accuracy, only that the URL was working on that date). The article will likely be reduced to 5 sentences and 5-10 citations, when it is brought forward as a stub. Cheers, your every shifty IP colleague. 98.253.16.23 (talk) 22:00, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello ip. Done in part Reflinks which adds access date has been down for several days and there is no way to know when it will be going again. Feel free to add them in when you have the time. Regards. MarnetteD|Talk 22:26, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you again. I indeed had noticed in an attempt to avoid bothering you, that the Reflink I had used in past was not working properly. Thank you again for your persistent efforts at the quality of the encyclopedia. See also below, cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:90CB:77CE:20F1:3AF4 (talk) 03:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

article tag

Over at Moses Inwang, I used twinkle to add the bare refs tag. It has the option to group maint tags within MI, and that is the default and I never really think about unchecking it for any reason. But if bareurls is an exception, should we try to get twinkle changed to treat that one differently and not group it. MB 01:54, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your response MB. I know that is one of the things twinkle does. If you take a look at {{Bare URLs}} you'll see the parenthetical (One such tool to fix up some types of bare URLs is reFill, see also its documentation) - clicking on the word refill in that sentence gets the program to running. That option goes away when the template is put inside a multiple issues template and those of us who work on fixing the bare urls have to take the extra step of digging the template out. Not the worst thing in the world but those extra steps do add up when working on a list of 15 or more articles (as was the case tonight) that have been tagged with the template. OOF I hate to think of the sturm and drang to get that one little thing changed at twinkle. Some editors using twinkle have responded to my request about placing that template outside the tag others haven't. Now I know that seems to be shifting the extra step from one editor to the next :-) If you can do that it would be a help but if it is a drag on your time no worries - we will both just keep out noses to the WikiP grindstone. Cheers and stay safe in these crazy times. MarnetteD|Talk 02:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

It seems that the maintainer(s) of twinkle have been quite responsive to making changes, so I'm not sure there would be a lot of "sturm and drang". When I add this tag manually to an article that has one existing tag, I already keep it separate the save the effort of adding MI and then removing MI again shortly when your or someone, usually within a few hours, fixes the problem. You have provided a second reason. I think it is worth asking (I am likely to forget to uncheck the box when I'm moving quickly along doing other things). I'll put in the request. MB 02:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

That would be great MB. Thanks. MarnetteD|Talk 03:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Please, perhaps you or another

Hello. In editing the Robert R. Redfield article, I sought to encourage some previous users to revisit the page, to help with work. In doing so I came across User:Matthewobrien. He appears in my review to be regular contributor, and to be doing standard and constructive edits. I write to you because a sockpuppet tag appears on his user page. In reviewing it, it is clear it was a passing concern, unproven, and the case was closed (with a single vote of "unlikely"). None of the original participants are active, except the accused. I cannot remove the tag from his User page. I am wondering if you could do this service (since the original and continuing evidence is that he is a fairly regular and constructive, if shy/non-communicative editor). I know people will feel more comfortable communicating with him, if the tag is removed (see my edits in his Talk page history). Cheers, your friend ip. 2601:246:C700:19D:90CB:77CE:20F1:3AF4 (talk) 03:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)