User talk:Ahecht/Archive 12

Hi! The RINA measurements are "length between perpendiculars" and "load line length", which are shorter than the total length. AIDAnova's sister ship Costa Smeralda which is the same GT was measured by Lloyd's Register has an overall length of 337 m. Every other ship in the list uses the overall length so I just wanted it to be consistent. ArcticDragonfly (talk) 13:03, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@ArcticDragonfly: Fair enough, but I would cite Lloyd's^[1] since at least they get the tonnage right. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

A very alert reader noted that the company logo doesn’t quite match what we have here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bentley_logo.svg

The right wing(as you look at it, the left from the bird perspective) has eleven feathers, while the current file has ten.

I check the original uploaded by ANGELUS, the updated versions by LG4761 and Ronhjones, and each have eleven.

The transition from 11 to 10 seems to have happened when you did the svg conversion.

Can you confirm, and if so, is this something you can fix?S Philbrick(Talk) 22:04, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: Strange. I don't remember what the source of the SVG was, but I thought I got it from a PDF put out by the Volkswagon Group. In any case, I updated it to a new version derived from the bitmap image on the Bentley website. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 05:49, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I also found a source that claims that cars built by Bentley in Crewe did use a 10/10 logo instead of the 10/11 or 13/14 versions: http://www.car-brand-names.com/bentley-logo/. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:06, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Ahecht,

Thanks for your very prompt attention to this.

Thanks also for the link to the interesting article talking about the various number of hackles. My guess is that explains what happened — given that some cars at some times had 10 each, you probably found one of those and used it. The closing sentence of the first paragraph suggests that all 11 and 10 are seen more often so I think that's the way to go.

I did give a link to this discussion to the person that brought it up, so I hope they will see how quickly were you responded. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello. :) We spoke about the R-templates and module science redirect a fair while back (summer last year I think?), but I've been absent until recently. Now that I'm back, I've been making some progress on getting things sorted into the existing parameter-defined categories, and I can confirm there definitely are enough redirects for molluscs and for amphibians lingering in there. You said something about those parameters existing but having commented them out in the module due to the absence of their accompanying categories, iirc?

From what I can tell/remember, not only did no one object to the originally activated batch of parameters, just about no one commented at all. (Then again, the number of folks doing any significant amount of taxon redirect templating/categorization can be count on one hand anyway.)

Do you figure there's any good spot to see if there's consensus for activating those two parameters and creating the accompanying categories? My first thought would have been the talk page of the science redirect module, but it doesn't seem that one gets more than a handful of views each month tops. Talk page of each of the relevant templates have pretty much the same issue and would split up the discussion across multiple places. Rinse and repeat for the associated category talk pages. AddWittyNameHere 06:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@AddWittyNameHere: My best suggestion would be at either Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Animals. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 12:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Probably WikiProject Redirect with some quick cross-notifications to Tree of Life and Animals, then. I'll see if I can't whip up a post some point soon (though probably not today). AddWittyNameHere 18:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

This does not seem to handle the case of both a template and module with {{high-risk}} well. For example, Template:Age and Module:Age both show 28000 transclusions when Module:Age actually has more than 900000 transclusions. Thanks for doing Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Ahechtbot_6, by the way, which is definitely a good idea. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:37, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

@Galobtter: Good catch! As a short-term answer I disabled the database lookup when in the module namespace. I'll look into having the bot retrieve transclusion counts for modules as well. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:39, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ovation of the Seas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White Island (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 08:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, the Miami Dolphins color scheme in navboxes and infoboxes makes the text black instead of white, do you know how to fix this? I noticed you made a change here to Module:Gridiron color but I'm not familiar enough with modules to know if that was the cause. Any help would be appreciated, thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

@Eagles247: That's by design. White text only has a contrast ratio of 3.95 on that background (see https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/?fcolor=FFFFFF&bcolor=008E97), which is lower than the requirement of 4.5. Black text has a contrast ratio of 5.31. See MOS:CONTRAST for more info. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, I'll update the team templates to reflect this. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Can you weigh in at User talk:Corkythehornetfan#Black text in NFL team templates? Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:08, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

More information Rank, Username ...

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

Close

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the move discussion, doing the user pings and whatnot. Popcornduff (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Ahecht. Happy New Year! You've added the "Note to editors" page notice template to the List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 1970s–2000s ‎ and List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2010s. A new list has been created for the 2020s: List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2020s. Could you please add the page notice to this new page? Thank you! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pyxis Solitary:  Done. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:50, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I guess you won't be hearing from me again until another ten years. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:00, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:AMC-Logomark.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

I just stumbled across Cyberbot signatures that are causing multiple missing end tags in each signature, and there are sometimes multiple signatures on a page.

This is one search that shows 87,000 pages.

One whole pattern I found looks like:

[[User:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</span>]] [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Notify</sup>]]

And should be changed to:

[[User:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</span>]] [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Notify</sup>]]

There may be variants of this signature out there. I'm happy to search for more after an initial bot run. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up: I just noticed that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Ahechtbot 5 is the latest run, and that we discussed some additional signatures there from my doi.js file. I hope that you are still willing to chip away at this iceberg. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Good find on the Cyberbot one. I'll put together a bot request in the near future. How many of the specific signatures in your doi.js are issues that are still problems and are in scope for a bot run? I don't think there is consensus to run a bot with general fixes, so I'd only be targeting specific signatures. Some, like the SNUGGUMS one, I've already run the bot for. Others, like swapping <font> for <span> (fixes deprecated, but not necessarily erroneous, usage) or fixing signatures that aren't the correct color because the <font> or <span> tags are outside the link but not actually producing bad HTML, are minor enough that it's not worth running a bot to edit every single page where they exist. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ahecht,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey I'm using tables with many empty columns and rows, that should not appear in the wiki. This might be a common problem, so if there is an easy way to modify your Tool, it would be of great help could you enable auto deletion of empty rows and columns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sj4jc (talk • contribs) 10:18, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sj4jc: That's sort of out of scope for what Excel2Wiki is supposed to do. While it might be possible to remove empty rows, removing empty columns would require a complete re-write. You'd be better off removing the empty rows and columns in excel before copying and pasting. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 16:24, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Template:Current other has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:32, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ahecht! I would like to request you for reviewing my draft page Epos 257 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Epos_257). I know that it was already reviewed and unfortunately declined, nevertheless I have rewritten it and I would like to ask you very much to check the article if at least a little possible...Thank you very much! Regards Jiří Jiří Gruber (talk) 12:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jiří Gruber: I wasn't involved with the original review, so unfortunately you're either going to have to wait in the queue or contact Bkissin, the original reviewer. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:25, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, here's IP user 2409:8A62:1E14:84E0:5461:8A51:F0D2:ADC8, I hope you can creating new article for Raytheon Technologies and revert current Raytheon Technologies to previous United Technologies. Thanks, have a good day ! - 2409:8A62:1E14:84E0:5461:8A51:F0D2:ADC8 (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

@2409:8A62:1E14:84E0:5461:8A51:F0D2:ADC8:  Done. There are now three articles: United Technologies, Raytheon Company, and Raytheon Technologies. Raytheon is now a redirect to Raytheon Technologies. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Boardwalk Pipeline Partners logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the new Raytheon Technologies article. I would have done the same thing had I still been awake at the time the UTC article was moved. I wanted to start on the new article last night, but wasn't able to get to it. Thanks again. - BilCat (talk) 19:50, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Boardwalk Pipeline Partners logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

You have a much better handle on the technicalities of the medical cases chart. I wanted to try to fill in the red link for Guam. Maybe the reason it has not been attempted is the difficulty in presenting the information. The basic Department of Health presents its data here complete with history. But the major factor is the US Navy, and in particular the noteworthy arrival of the USS Teddy Roosevelt with its crew infected. The Navy is not apparently presenting clear data, USA Today has tracked it here as best they can. Because of the Roosevelt and the subsequent firing of the captain and his potential reinstatement, this is a front line story to track. How do we present this? Trackinfo (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Trackinfo: While I'm familiar with the templates from the technical side of things, I'm not that familiar with the content side. That would be a better questions for WP:MED. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll bring up the content issues there, thank you. When we present this data, with the two divergent pieces of information (DoH figures for the public, conjectured figures for the military) we will need your help to present the two tracks, and possibly adding the note in the time line of the date the ship arrived in port and when sailors were dispersed. Note also, there appear to be other infected ships out there and they may end up in other locations. Trackinfo (talk) 20:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ahecht, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Since you changed the format of the chart to something much less intuitive to read, will you be handling the daily updates? Because the data was updated hours ago. Guettarda (talk) 22:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Guettarda: The majority of medical cases charts already used this new format before I switched the ones over. The new format is virtually identical to the old one except that it uses ';' instead of '|', and you no longer need to specify the divisor and the numwidth on each row. Nothing has changed in how you do the updates other than which key you press in between values. For today's update, for example, instead of

{{Medical cases chart/Row|2020-04-15|1921||28059|||28,059|+1058||+4%|divisor=100|numwidth-mmnm}}

You just have to enter

2020-04-15;1921;;28059;;;28,059;+1058;;+4%

With the old format, you would've had to replace the divisor for every row with today's update, since a divisor of 100 causes the table to overflow. With the new format, you just have to change it once, or you can just delete the |divisor=100 line altogether and the template can calculate it for you. Behind the scenes, deprecating the old format will allow the template to be made more efficient, which will be important as these charts get longer and longer. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I can figure it out and updated up. But as I said, it's much harder to read. So I'm just asking that since you made the change, would you please commit to keeping the page updated? I'm happy if you're willing to take over the task. But please get it done on time. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 22:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Guettarda: I'm working more on a behind-the-scenes overhaul to take advantage of the |data= format to drastically reduce the impact this template has on large pages, and I unfortunately don't have time to update the 450 individual location templates as well. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

[what's the point] Guettarda (talk) 23:08, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

It appears that the change you made has broken Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/Canada/British Columbia medical cases chart in a way I can't determine. Can you please have a look and see what's gone wrong? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: Fixed. I had tested it a ton in the sandbox, but that was apparently an edge case I hadn't checked. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 04:12, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it so fast! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:35, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

For some reason, neither of internet browser programms does not open Mainland China template correctly. After yesterday till now. All other countries are shown correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheldon73b talk contribs (talk • contribs) 19:57, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Sheldon73b: Working on it. It appears to be a problem with how it's automatically calculating the divisor. I have a fix in the sandbox, and will deploy shortly after a little more testing to make sure I didn't break anything else. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Sheldon73b: Fixed. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted your edits to 11 AD year talk pages that replaced the whole page with {{WPDisambig}}. Those talk pages are the talk pages of AD year articles, not of disambiguation pages. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: Thanks. I think I was tagging them at right around the same time they were being moved, so I probably ended up tagging the wrong pages. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I noticed you reverted an edit on Terry Ray (boxer). I was just about to file an editor assistance request but figured I’d see if you could advise me instead. What’s the next step in a content dispute if an editor refuses all attempts at discussion? Thanks. – ².O.^Boxing 23:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

@Squared.Circle.Boxing: probably WP:DRN or, failing that, WP:ANI. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 00:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I was going to try DRN but wasn’t sure if it was the right place as there’s been no discussion. I’ll give it a try if the content is removed again. Thanks very muchly. – ².O.^Boxing 00:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

@Squared.Circle.Boxing: There's also WP:AN/3RR. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 00:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I’ll go there now seeing as that was the fourth revert. Thanks for the advise. – ².O.^Boxing 00:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Explain how the edit “did not appear to be constructive”, rather than sending some automated message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:3FB0:300:D4D4:59A2:4EA1:2479 (talk) 01:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I had including the reason in my edit summary. "Focused" is the more common spelling. While some people do spell it "focussed" in the UK, arbitrarily changing between regional spelling variations is frowned upon (se WP:ENGVAR). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 01:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

“Focussed” isn't regional because it’s used across the whole of England, but ignoring that supposed fact, the hyphen is still necessary.

Fair enough. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for being a recent changes patroller! I was reviewing edits recently and you beat me to correcting several! Dar-Ape 15:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)