User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 58

Thanks. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:12, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed we're going back and forth on a few disambiguation pages, I'm glad we're correcting one another! Cheers, I love doing this. Any tips? Ithinkicahn (talk) 20:06, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

@Ithinkicahn: WP:DAB and WP:MOSDAB are the primary sources. WP:WikiProject Disambiguation has pointers to a variety of resources. One thing I noticed, you really shouldn't copy and paste to move content as you did with Akköy (disambiguation) --> Akköy or Aladağ (disambiguation) to Aladağ. In both these cases, you first moved a page that had been at the base name to a disambiguated title (e.g., Akören to Akören, Konya and Aladağ to Aladağ, Adana). You then edited the redirect by copying content of the existing disambiguation page over the redirect and then changed the previous disambiguation page into a redirect. You should first delete (or request deletion) of the redirect created by the first page move and then move the existing disambiguation page. As you are not able to delete pages without administrator assistance, you can request deletion either by placing {{db-movedab}} on the page or by requesting the disambiguation page be moved at WP:RMTR. older ≠ wiser 20:30, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Note that when pages are moved in this way, the edit history of the disambiguation pages are preserved and in most cases the talk pages will by default move along with the pages (in some relatively rare cases, the talk pages may need additional sorting out due to artifacts from previous page moves). older ≠ wiser 20:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Zar may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *Zar, a fictional land in the short story "[[The White Ship (story)|The White Ship]]" by [[H. P. Lovecraft

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ace (disambiguation) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Association of European Film Archives and Cinematheques]] (French: {{lang|fr|Association des Cinémathèques Européennes}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bkonrad. Thanks for correcting my recent edit on the Bohemia page: I don't know the area well and I'm guessing that you do, and local knowledge is usually a lot better in these situations. This does, however, leave the issue of a link from a disambiguation page going through a redirect page: how would you feel if that entry were changed to the following?
Bohemia, an area in Silverhill, East Sussex, a suburb and electoral ward of Hastings

With best wishes, ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

@Dom Kaos: There's nothing inherently wrong with using redirects where appropriate (see for example, WP:DABREDIR and WP:NOTBROKEN. However, if the the name is little used, the version you suggest may be OK. older ≠ wiser 18:52, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping clean up those DAB pages. It was long overdue. Regards, Rob (talk) 18:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Bkonrad. You have new messages at EuroCarGT's talk page.
Message added 15:07, 15 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

///EuroCarGT 15:07, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Meaning of word INDIAN". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 05:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

its slang in my region of the globe to summit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hospitality manager (talk • contribs) 14:01, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia so don't know what the etiquettes are so apologies if I am treading on the toes of a master! I made an entry into the section for tola to include its meaning as a hamlet and you have deleted it - twice. Just wondering what your objections to it are? Best wishes, Sopatna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sopatna (talk • contribs) 11:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

@Sopatna: Is there an article for the meaning you describe (or even some other article that at least mentions that usage). The entry that you added did not link to any article. It only contained a self-link back to the disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages are meant to help readers navigate existing content on Wikipedia that share an ambiguous name. Unless there is something on Wikipedia about this usage, there is nothing to disambiguate. older ≠ wiser 11:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Why do you keep responding to him? You're not changing his mind. No one else is paying attention. If you stop responding then maybe he'll stop too. --Golbez (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

You're right, but it's like an itch that is hard not to keep scratching at. older ≠ wiser 15:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

This disambiguation page is called "Unionist Party". Its purpose is to tell people what is or was called "Unionist Party". I see that you do not understand that the party formed from the union of the Conservatives and the Liberal Unionists was not known as the "Conservative and Unionist Party", it was known as the "Unionist Party". Please stop removing this name from the page. Moonraker (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, the meaning of "Unionist" as a supporter of "The Acts of Union 1800 between Great Britain and Ireland" is historical only, because that union has been dissolved. The Union relevant in Northern Ireland now is the one created in 1922 between Great Britain and the six counties of Northern Ireland. The distinction needs to be made. Moonraker (talk) 22:19, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

@Moonraker: Disambiguation pages are not articles and shouldn't contain any information that is not supported by the linked articles (and that is also relevant for disambiguating between the articles). That is, disambiguation pages are a pointer to articles that might otherwise share an ambiguous title. To specific points, the linked article Conservative Party (UK) does not make any claim that the party is or ever was commonly known as the Unionist Party. Until that is cleared up in the article, preferably with citations from reliable sources, the disambiguation page cannot claim that the Unionist Party is the common name of the party. To your second point, the linked article is Acts of Union 1800, which united Ireland and Great Britain. Whatever may have happened subsequent to that is not really relevant for the purposes of disambiguation. older ≠ wiser 22:39, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I take your point that the Conservative Party (UK) article is lacking suitable coverage of this period and the "Unionist Party" name. I shall deal with that as soon as I have found the sources needed.

I cannot agree at all that "Whatever may have happened subsequent to that is not really relevant for the purposes of disambiguation." The page needs to deal with the present reality as well as the historical one, especially when it fails to distinguish between them. Moonraker (talk) 22:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with removing the definition of "Unionist", which is clearly not essential on this page. What I objected to was the misleading definition which was there. Moonraker (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

(ec) @Moonraker: Does mentioning 1922 help a reader looking for the 1800 Act of Union article find that article? Is there something in that article that is a reader would need the 1922 cue to be able to recognize that article as the one they were looking for? Come to think of it, that article make no mention of any Unionist parties. The details of the subject of Unionism is best left to the main articles. If there are in fact specific entities known as "Unionist Party" with coverage in a Wikipedia article, these can be listed, but the main subjects are far too complex to telegraph in a short fragment on a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 22:50, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you explain this edit please? Thanks, Instaurare (talk) 21:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

@Instaurare:. Yes, you performed a cut and paste page move, which in most cases is inappropriate. The move discussion at Talk:Flight 93#Requested move, which you opened, has not been closed. There are instructions at WP:MOVE regarding how to properly move pages and at WP:RMCI on how to close discussions. In general, if you have participated in the move discussion, you should not close the discussion. Best if you simply wait until another user closes the discussion and properly moves the page. older ≠ wiser 22:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Understood. There was only one comment after a week so I thought I could do an uncontroversial move. Thanks for explaining. Instaurare (talk) 22:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I recently added a description of word El in wikipedia. The added entry is given below,

'El (Sun), a Tamil word for Sun'

I intended to write an article on the same subsequently.

I could see that this entry has been removed by you with a comment "non-article foreign language dictionary gloss" Is it possible for you to give some description about the comment and pointers to any guidelines that I have violated while making the above entry.

Thanks, C. Balaji Cmbalaji (talk) 03:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

@Cmbalaji: In general, articles on words as words are discouraged, unless there are multiple English-language general (non-dictionary) references with coverage of the word. See not a dictionary. As for disambiguation pages, see WP:disambiguation and WP:MOSDAB, or more specifically: WP:DABNOT and MOS:DABOTHERLANG. older ≠ wiser 12:33, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: Thanks for the information.

Cmbalaji (talk) 12:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, disambs links should show the full link. To quote WP:MOSDAB#Individual entries "The article title should appear exactly as it is on the target page; the link should not be piped except to apply formatting (see below)." See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Title templates. Please quote where your differing interpretation has come from ? The Yeti (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

@The Yeti: That section is describing how to construct the link when it is the ambiguous term. The section referred to as "see below" (WP:PIPING) describes appropriate uses of piping in the description of an entry. In particular:

• When the link is part of the description, rather than the actual entry name, piping can be used more freely. However, the text of the link should still be very similar to the title of the target article, to avoid confusing the reader. For example:

Switch may refer to: "Switch", a song by Siouxsie & the Banshees from The Scream ("Switch", a song by Siouxsie & the Banshees from ''[[The Scream (album)|The Scream]]'')

This example is exactly analogous to the situation on Arvon. older ≠ wiser 01:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Just checking - I don't wish to you to be offended. (And at the other end of the spectrum, your support would be more than "useful".) Do we have "a big problem/conflict", or do you see this as just a series of minor tweaks? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

@Pdfpdf: I'm assuming this is about placing {{coords}} on disambiguation pages. In general such templates should not appear on a disambiguation page. Coordinates may appear on some WP:SETINDEXes which sometimes look like dab pages, but in general dab pages should not. See WP:MOSDAB#Images and templates. older ≠ wiser 13:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

a) Thanks for the quick reply.

b) You've missed my point, mainly because I didn't make it clear what my point is. (My apologies.)

c) It's past midnight here - perhaps I'll be able to make a more coherent posting tomorrow!

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Gimme-a-break! (I assume you are always right, and everybody else is always wrong.) I suggest we other mere mortals may find it useful if you read WP:AGF and rejoin the human race. BTW: You've now created problems on the higher level page. Are you going to fix them, or are you just going to leave it to lesser mortals? (And yes, you are quite correct - I am pissed off with your superior and arrogant know-it-all attitude. In case it wasn't obvious to you, this will NOT encourage collaboration.) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

The snark isn't appreciated. Care to be more specific? older ≠ wiser 12:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

And, in case it wasn't already blindingly obvious, your superior and arrogant attitude isn't appreciated, either.

Why don't we just avoid all this unpleasant crap, smile, be nice to each other, and live happily ever after?

I'd rather have you as a useful collaborator than a carping negative critic. And I see no benefit in engaging in a long and possibly unpleasant conversation which is highly unlikely to achieve anything useful. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Please monitor the United States Senate election in Michigan, 2014 as an editor is inserting material with citations which require a subscription to read which should not be allowed in the article. Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

What does "now that they all have stubs, this is an incomplete dab" mean? Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:INCOMPDAB. Generally, a title with a parenthetical disambiguator attached should either be an article or in some cases a list article (or WP:SETINDEX). A disambiguation page with a parenthetical disambiguator is considered incomplete disambiguation. older ≠ wiser 12:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

BTW, I don't think Seal Island (Shoalwater, Western Australia) actually is in the Shoalwater Islands Marine Park - I think it's somewhat north of the park - but I'm happy to be proven wrong by a reliable reference ... Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I based the description on the Shoalwater Islands Marine Park article. Feel free to correct this if you have better information. older ≠ wiser 13:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Sadly, I don't have "better" information, just "different" information, and (other than the apparent differences in geographical location), no data to enable an assessment if either is "better" than the other. Surely life doesn't need to be this complicated! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Yehoshua may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Jesus]] (Hebrew: ({{rtl-lang|arc|יהושע}} ''{{transl|he|Yehoshua}}''), the central figure of Christianity

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Could we perhaps ignore that rule and add back the external page? I can't find any other template, and I'm unsure if I can add Special:Search/"nightmare on" --George Ho (talk) 15:07, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to include an external search. That's not what disambiguation pages are for. older ≠ wiser 16:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not looking to pick a fight - I'm just trying to educate myself, understand your POV, and gain general understanding.
WP had a "real" page called Seal Island (Western Australia), but you turned it into a redirect to Seal Island#Australia.
per se I don't object,
But I would like to understand why you decided to effectively merge the data in Seal Island (Western Australia) into Seal Island, rather than leave Seal Island (Western Australia) as an entry on the Seal Island page.
As I said, I'm neither objecting nor disagreeing.
Quite simply, I don't understand, and I would very much appreciate it if you attempted to educate me.
Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

In general, incomplete disambiguations are redirects back to the general disambiguation page or often to a specific section of the page. The reasoning is a little convoluted, but essentially it is a matter of both minimizing the number of hops a reader needs to traverse to find a topic with the title "X" and also to avoid having duplicate lists (which invariably tend to get out-of-sych with each other over time). That is, we don't necessarily expect a reader to be familiar with Wikipedia naming conventions. So first stop for a person searching for "Seal Island" is likely to be the disambiguation page at that name. There's no reason to force them to go to a separate page for Western Australia places -- the disambiguation page generally includes ALL topics with coverage in Wikipedia that are ambiguous for a given title. In some cases, there might not be any coverage in Wikipedia on a topic, but there may yet be reason to include it in a list for completeness. This is where set indexes come in. These lists can at times superficially look similar to a disambiguation page, but they can more freely include redlinks, non-article entries, additional blue links, references, and detailed information that would not be appropriate on a disambiguation page. For example there are several SIA for mountains that all have the same name. These mountain index are often in the form of a table and are intended to be a comprehensive listing, even though there might not be any article on a particular mountain, or even any mention of the mountain in any other article. In such a case, the disambiguation page would include entries for only the mountains that do have coverage in existing articles as well as a link to the list article. Similarly, there are comprehensive lists of places (such as rivers, or lakes or whatnot within a particular state in the U.S. Some editors prefer to move such lists to titles such as "List of lakes named X in Foo" or something similar, rather than "Lake X (Foo)", although there is variability in that regard. older ≠ wiser 14:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't wish to sound, or be, sycophantic, but I appreciate the effort you have gone to. Thank you!

{{ec}It may take me a couple of days to appreciate the significance of your reply, but in the interim, thank you. (Thank you very much!)

(There's ALWAYS a "but", isn't there ... ) Cheers (and thanks) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Timezone says it's past bedtime - no further responses "today" Pdfpdf (talk) 14:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

More specifically to your question about Seal Island, until you created stubs for all the islands, the list about the WA islands was in effect a set index, in that the intention appeared to be a comprehensive listing of islands with that name in Western Australia, regardless of whether there was any coverage of the topics in Wikipedia articles. The disambiguation page included those entries that had existing articles or which satisfied WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL as well as a link to the comprehensive list. Once stub articles were created for all of the islands, entries for all of the islands were fit to include on the general disambiguation page. Thus the comprehensive list became redundant. You could, I suppose still have a comprehensive list article, but it would then fall under guidance for stand-alone lists and would be titled "List of ...". older ≠ wiser 14:37, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

re the above

re Perth

satusuro 01:24, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I've noticed that you've edited the Trick-or-treating article recently. There's been a debate running for the last few days over the title of this article. Your input would be appreciated! — Smjg (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

--Angry Mustelid (talk) 19:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The programme (Especially Earl) makes may references to the Chevrolet El Camino. I thought it should've been mentioned as a piece of media (TV) history.

I've responded to your point on my own talk. This is on another issue. I notice from the nature of your reverts that you used the rollback feature. Please be aware that rollback is only for vandalism and not designed for blanking the entire set of a contributor's edits. Had you used the summary the first time to explain your position then I myself would not have reverted. OK? Zavtek (talk) 22:00, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Understood. But I see many such edits on pages like WTF where some editor I've never encountered before (no offense) adds a malformed reference to some expletive or another. It looks an awful lot like vandalism. You're quite right about my second revert. I should not have used rollback for that. older ≠ wiser 22:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Bkonrad, I see your reasoning too and I appreciate you realise that I was genuinely attempting something in good faith. Can be difficult when expletives are involved and that page has obviously been protected for a reason. All clear now. Take care. Zavtek (talk) 22:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)