Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions with SiBr4. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
|
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flags of the British Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newfoundland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 12:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
The edit summary of your recent edit to ISO 3166-1 asks, "What's wrong with pipe linking to a country's common name?" There are several reasons why you shouldn't edit a link just to avoid a redirect, given at WP:NOTBROKEN. Please do not make such edits, especially when similar edits have already been reverted. Dricherby (talk) 12:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I wasn't avoiding a redirect, but I thought that in that case, linking to Russia (which is the common name) while displaying "Russian Federation" was better than linking directly to Russian Federation. L.tak (who reverted HIDECCHI001's edit that I redid) pointed at the editnotice that the article should use the names used by ISO, but didn't explain why it couldn't link to Russia. I know there's nothing wrong with linking to redirect, but I don't understand why linking the the original article name is wrong. SiBr4 (talk) 13:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Russian Federation is a redirect to Russia so replacing [[Russian Federation]] with [[Russia|Russian Federation]] is just avoiding a redirect. Dricherby (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- As I said, I didn't pipe link to Russia just to avoid a redirect. I linked to Russia because that's the common name, while keeping "Russian Federation" as the displayed name (as that's the name used in ISO 3166-1). SiBr4 (talk) 18:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- WP:COMMONNAME is a policy that applies only to article titles; within articles, we can talk about the Russian Federation and wikilink to "Russian Federation" as much as we like. Whether it's pipe-linked or not, the reader gets the article "Russia" when they click on the words "Russian Federation". The only difference is whether it goes through the redirect or not. What benefit do you think the pipelink has for the reader? WP:NOTBROKEN, although only a guideline, explains why it's preferable to go via the redirect when the displayed name is the name of the redirect, rather than the name of the ultimate target article. It gives three exceptional cases where it might be preferable to pipelink straight to the target article but none of those applies here. Dricherby (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- As I said, I didn't pipe link to Russia just to avoid a redirect. I linked to Russia because that's the common name, while keeping "Russian Federation" as the displayed name (as that's the name used in ISO 3166-1). SiBr4 (talk) 18:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Russian Federation is a redirect to Russia so replacing [[Russian Federation]] with [[Russia|Russian Federation]] is just avoiding a redirect. Dricherby (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
So the article on United States should say that it is the third most populous country after the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India, that it borders the United Mexican States, etc...? I think articles themselves should use common names as well, not only the titles.
Also, of the six reasons why linking to a redirect can be good, most (if not all) don't apply here either:
- Intentional links to disambiguation pages always use the title with "(disambiguation)", even if that is a redirect. (not a dab page)
- Shortcuts or redirects to sections of articles or of Wikipedia's advice pages should never be bypassed, as the section headings on the page may change over time. (not a project page)
- Redirects can indicate possible future articles. (I don't think there should be separate articles for Russia and the Russian Federation)
- If editors persistently use a redirect instead of an article title, it may be that the article needs to be moved rather than the redirect changed.
- In most articles, "Russia" is used rather than "Russian Federation". ISO 3166-1 is an exception as that uses the names from the actual standard.
- Non-piped links make better use of the "what links here" tool, making it easier to track how articles are linked and helping with large-scale changes to links.
- I don't get why piped links make using the "what links here" tool harder, but does this mean that every piped link in the encyclopedia should be changed?
- Introducing unnecessary invisible text makes the article more difficult to read in page source form.
- I think having "[[Russia|Russian Federation]]" actually makes it clearer, as readers/editors who know the country as Russia can know that the "Russian Federation" is the same country. This applies not so much for Russia, but if there's one "Korea, Republic of" and one "Korea, Democratic People's Republic of", piping makes it clear which is North Korea and which is South Korea when the user hovers over the link, without having to click on it.
- SiBr4 (talk) 11:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- Of course we should normally talk about "Mexico" and "China" but nobody proposed we shouldn't. Of course we shouldn't delete all pipelinks but nobody proposed we should. The issue is whether pipelinking to avoid redirects is in general useful and whethere it is specifically useful in the case of Russia/the Russian Federation in ISO 3166-1. In general, it is not useful, as explained at WP:NOTBROKEN. In this specific case, it is clear enough that Russia and the Russian Federation are the same thing; any reader who is unsure can click the link and find out.
- Introducing the pipelink clutters the source. Yes, it provides a mouseover hint that "Russia" and "Russian Federation" are the same thing but, on the other hand, a reader might have already clicked the link and then be surprised to be taken to the "Russia" page if they don't know it's the same thing. Linking through the redirect prints a helpful message at the top of the page that makes it clear they're on the right page. The pipelink also stymies statistics collection through "what links here" by making it look like fewer pages refer to "Russian Federation" than actually do. So, the pipelink has one benefit for the reader (mouseover text) and one disadvantage (possibly surprising target), along with two disadvantages to editors (cluttered source and breaks "what links here"). Dricherby (talk) 13:18, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- On the other hand, keeping the link as "[[Russian Federation]]" makes the "What links here" look like fewer pages link to "Russia" than actually do. Linking to Russia therefore could actually be an advantage, as clicking the "What links here" link at the left of the Russia page (even when arrived there via a redirect) opens the page Special:WhatLinksHere/Russia.
- And why exactly does the piped link clutter the source? Adding "Russia|" adds only seven characters to the wikicode, and still fits on one line. The HTML source is even shorter with the pipe link, as the class="mw-redirect" text is removed.
- As for the "possibly surprising target", the first sentence of the lead of article Russia is
- Russia (Russian: Россия, tr. Rossiya), also officially known as the Russian Federation (Russian: Российская Федерация, tr. Rossiyskaya Federatsiya), is a country in northern Eurasia ...
- which makes pretty clear that Russia and the Russian Federation are the same thing, even without the "(Redirected from Russian Federation)" text. Mouseover text lets a user know that they're the same without even having to click. In this case it's clear enough from the name, but in other cases it might not be (for example, the Koreas). SiBr4 (talk) 14:15, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
See Template talk:Country data Luxembourg (Belgium). Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey SiBr4; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for compiling this! ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm assuming the note you removed here means that the contiguous area of Brazil is larger than the contiguous area of Canada. Whether or not this should be included is another matter. CMD (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Two things we should bear in mind before we delete autonomous okrug (disambiguation): IP address users, ie. people who are actually using Wikipedia as opposed to editing it, are fobbed off with versions from the cache on whichever server they are connected to and these versions may be even days out of date. We should wait until the page view statistics drop to a much lower level than currently. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- @RHaworth: Now that Special:WhatLinksHere/Autonomous okrug (disambiguation) lists only this talk page and the statistics page shows two views in the last week, can the deletion of Autonomous okrug (disambiguation) be reconsidered? SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 11:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at British Overseas Territories shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Montserrat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparkyb10123 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 6 December 2013
- You removed something from the article without explanation. I reverted once and asked why. Per BRD, the next step would be you going to the talk page and explaining why it shouldn't be there. Instead you revert my revert, again without explanation, and accuse me of edit warring and violating 3RR using an automated template (without any meaningful additional reasoning). I really don't consider this accusation a serious issue. SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 16:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
You shouldn't remove images from a gallery when the use of them in the gallery is fair use. Arms Jones (talk) 21:41, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- Fair use is meaningless on the English wikipedia, the policy that governs our usage of non-free media is WP:NFCC which has far more strict usage requirements. Werieth (talk) 21:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Arms Jones: To be included in an article, a file should have a fair use rationale for the specific article on its description page, which none of the images in question have. It is not true that "copyrighted files wouldn't be at Wikipedia at all"; such files may be used in articles, but only if they respect the non-free content criteria. SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- These do. Arms Jones (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- At the respective image pages, it can be seen that the Canadian arms has a FUR for the article Arms of Canada, the Grenadian arms for Grenada and Coat of arms of Grenada, and the Nigerian arms for Nigeria and Coat of arms of Nigeria. None have a fair-use rationale for use in Gallery of country coats of arms. Fair-use images should have a FUR for each article it is to be used in, since that's one of the non-free content criteria. SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 22:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- And besides failing that, they also fail WP:NFG, usage of non-free media in galleries is not permitted. Werieth (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- You can't just go around saying there's no rationale just because noone has rationalised about it. You have to consider the rule for every instance at hand. What's your reason for saying there shouldn't be a rationale for these images to be used in a collection of all such symbols in the world? And no, the use of non-free media in galleries is not strictly forbidden, which you would know had you read WP:NFG. Arms Jones (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's a fact that these images don't have a rationale: that can be easily seen on each image's description page. Sure, a FUR can be added for the images, but policy says that non-free media can't be added to articles until a fair-use rationale has been written. I never said "there shoudn't be a rationale for these images", just that there currently isn't one. You're right that there is no strict prohibition on fair-use images in galleries, though you're the one who should prove that the files in question meet each of the non-free content criteria before adding them to Gallery of country coats of arms. SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 11:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- You can't just go around saying there's no rationale just because noone has rationalised about it. You have to consider the rule for every instance at hand. What's your reason for saying there shouldn't be a rationale for these images to be used in a collection of all such symbols in the world? And no, the use of non-free media in galleries is not strictly forbidden, which you would know had you read WP:NFG. Arms Jones (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- And besides failing that, they also fail WP:NFG, usage of non-free media in galleries is not permitted. Werieth (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- At the respective image pages, it can be seen that the Canadian arms has a FUR for the article Arms of Canada, the Grenadian arms for Grenada and Coat of arms of Grenada, and the Nigerian arms for Nigeria and Coat of arms of Nigeria. None have a fair-use rationale for use in Gallery of country coats of arms. Fair-use images should have a FUR for each article it is to be used in, since that's one of the non-free content criteria. SiBr4 ("CyberFour") (talk) 22:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
- These do. Arms Jones (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Fijne box, bedankt! Fnorp (talk) 11:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address one or more redirects you have created. You might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I need your help. I have:
{{AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
|BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
|CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
and I want to put a sentence after AAA
{{AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
<!--DDDDDDD-->
|BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
|CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
Xaris333 (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Xaris333: Your request isn't entirely clear. What templates/parameters would you want to put a comment in? An example would help. SiBr4 (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
- I see you asked the same question to Mr Stephen, which again you shouldn't do to avoid users pointlessly answering a question that already has been answered somewhere else. For requests like this you could ask at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser or a relevant subpage; if there are certain users you know might be able to help, you can alert them using templates like
{{user link|Example}}. - In relation to your previous request at the WT:AWB project page, some more regexes have been suggested at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Find and replace. SiBr4 (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Never mind. Sorry for your time. Have a nice day. Bye. Xaris333 (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, i would like to have your opinion about a discussion which i started here, thank.Kingroyos (talk) 14:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of flag names, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triband (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Whoops. Sorry about that. I eyeballed the change at the time and wondered if it was right or not. Clearly I made the wrong call. I've stuck it on the bot's exception list so it won't happen again. Thanks, CmdrObot (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
As you've recently been editing the Top 4, I was wondering if you could have your input into some thoughts I've posted here. Thanks! NikNaks talk - gallery 14:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for undoing vandalism at List of countries where Spanish is an official language. I noticed you used the 'Undo' function, which can be rather tedious. As an admin, I can offer you the rollback function to make it easier to revert. Let me know if you would like for me to enable it.- Gilliam (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Your account has been granted the template editor user right, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit edit notices.
You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edit notices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established.
Before you use this user right, please read Wikipedia:Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation. This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.
If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
Useful links:
- All template-protected pages
- Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection
Happy template editing! — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 21:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your Asian Organizations SVG. I think you should include the Arab League, even though it has also African members. I tried adding it myself, but my SVG skills are nowhere near what is needed (I use inkscape). If you are ambitious, you may want to add the organization of the Islamic conference. Samfreed (talk) 10:28, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's a diagram of Asian organizations, so I don't think it should include any organization with members outside Asia, to prevent it from turning into "Supranational Global Bodies". There is already a template for a number of Islamic organizations. SiBr4 (talk) 10:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
I know this is the English spoken Wikpedia, but I'd like to point you out to a nother discussion about the flag of the Isle of Man. It is on the Dutch spoken Wikipedia, but in English. See on Frys discussion page there. Dqfn13 (talk) 20:25, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, I wouldn't have expected a discussion on the Dutch WP since Fry isn't Dutch (though I am). In that discussion it seems pretty clear that at least three more users support the circularly centered version. I'll start an RfC about the issue on Commons. SiBr4 (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello again! Do you remember me? I am Xaris333 from Greek Wikipedia. You helped me with a template. I need your help again, if you have time... Xaris333 (talk) 18:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
- You may ask it, but I'm kind of busy right now and may respond either tonight or tomorrow CEST (I don't know how difficult your question is). SiBr4 (talk) 18:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
When ever you can! The template is el:Πρότυπο:Κουτί πληροφοριών ποδοσφαιρικής περιόδου πρωταθλήματος. It's about football league season. It has english parameter.
- I want prevseason and nextseason to be shown after a line. Then I want another line and to have advanced_level and lower_level. Show de:First Division (Zypern) 2013/14 for example.
- In the header Άνοδος/Υποβιβασμός (promoted/relegated) I want if the parameter of promoted is completed (but the relegated is not) to show in the header only Άνοδος. If only relagated is completed, to show only Υποβιβασμός. If are both completed, to show Άνοδος/Υποβιβασμός. Xaris333 (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
- On the German WP, the infobox de:Vorlage:Infobox Fußballsaison directly contains a table. The horizontal line above some fields is made by giving the cells containing the previous/next season and lower-division season data a border using
style="border-top:1px solid grey;". The Greek WP infobox transcludes the general el:Template:Infobox3cols, which allows for CSS like that by filling in parameters, like I've done here. - That could be done by a series of embedded {{#if}} cases, though I have done what I think is easiest. Using {{#if}} cases it creates a two-digit code where "1" means "defined" and "0" means "not defined", and chooses a header for each possible combination (11 if both are defined, 10 for "Άνοδος" only, etc.).
- Please let me know whether both edits do what you wanted (I created a user sandbox specifically for the second :) ). SiBr4 (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
- On the German WP, the infobox de:Vorlage:Infobox Fußballsaison directly contains a table. The horizontal line above some fields is made by giving the cells containing the previous/next season and lower-division season data a border using
Thank you very much!! The second edit is excactly what I wanted! The first has a proble. Look, the example at el:Πρότυπο:Κουτί πληροφοριών ποδοσφαιρικής περιόδου πρωταθλήματος. The lower-division came near previous season. I want it to be under of previous and next season, with a line between them. If it is possible. And maybe previous season and next season be on different line, like german one. If it is difficult, I will juct remove the lower-division parameter. Xaris333 (talk) 21:48, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
- I previously didn't even see the lower-division link since it's stuck to the previous-season link, so I assumed the example in the documentation didn't contain the lower/higher divisions at all! I have now put the lower/higher-division links on a separate line (it's actually a hack since the standard infobox doesn't support a second below row) and added some conditional stuff to remove the horizontal rules if some season link parameters are not defined. SiBr4 (talk) 22:21, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. There is a problem with the template. See el:Β΄ κατηγορία ποδοσφαίρου ανδρών Κύπρου 2006-07. "Γ΄ κατηγορία 2006–07 ↓" and "Α΄ κατηγορία 2006–07 ↑". One of them must go to the left and the other to the right, like "← Β΄ κατηγορία 2005–06" and "Β΄ κατηγορία 2007–08 →" above. Xaris333 (talk) 20:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes! Is it possible to have a line after "Κύπελλο Κύπρου 2006-07" (between "domest_cup" and "prevseason")? Xaris333 (talk) 21:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
- And there is a big problem: "| belowstyle = border-top:1px solid grey; }}" is in every article!! Xaris333 (talk) 21:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks!!! Xaris333 (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) That should now be fixed. I miscounted the curly brackets with my previous edit. Would that be troutworthy?
- As for the "Κύπελλο Κύπρου 2006-07" – the horizontal rule didn't show because it was supposed to be added by the "border-top:1px solid grey;" CSS which wasn't applied because of the same bracket mismatch. It is now back. SiBr4 (talk) 22:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
The template is el:Πρότυπο:Football teams/Κατάλογος ομάδων and the category is el:Κατηγορία:Πρότυπο:Football teams για ομάδα που δεν υπάρχει στον κατάλογο. I tried to do what you said but maybe I write it wrong. Xaris333 (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- I have replied at WP:VPT. With highly active discussions like the one there, I keep monitoring the page history, so there's actually no point in continuing the discussion on my talk page except hiding it for others watching the VPT. SiBr4 (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I have a request. Can you help me change File:木棉花旗.jpeg (flag of kapok) to SVG ? The flag used by the movement for an independent Cantonia (a.k.a. "Cantonian sovereigntists"),Source &author are "Republic of Cantonia Provisional Government". Thank you so much.--DannyChan (talk) 11:14, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
- See WP:GL/ILL#File:木棉花旗.jpeg. SiBr4 (talk) 13:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Can you help me? I copied english infobox country template to this incubator template but it doesn't seem like english wikipedia for example you can look this. thank you Ceas08 (talk) 21:57, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
- @Ceas08: It's the code
class="infobox geography vcard". The CSS classinfoboxis defined on EnWP to apply the stylingborder: 1px solid #aaa; background-color: #f9f9f9;"(light grey background, darker grey border). Incubator's central CSS page does not include this definition, so the infobox shows the HTML default of transparent background and no border. To make the infobox there look like the ones here theborder: 1px solid #aaa; background-color: #f9f9f9;"styling should be added to thestyle="..."parameter of the table tag on the template itself. SiBr4 (talk) 22:38, 16 July 2014 (UTC) - There is actually a lot more automatic styling of infoboxes on MediaWiki:Common.css, including some for geography infoboxes specifically (the grey borders between the rows, for example). Another way to test infoboxes is to copy some of EnWP's CSS rules to incubator:User:Ceas08/common.css, though this will change the appearance for you only. SiBr4 (talk) 22:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
- It works. Thank you. Ceas08 (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Can you help me? make a Nuvola flags of Hong Kong.File:Flag of Hong Kong (1959-1997 3-5).svg--DannyChan (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- @DannyChan: Done. See file to the right. SiBr4 (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- It is nice. thank you !DannyChan (talk) 06:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Excuse me.It is extra help.Can you help to write SVG for Flag of Great Castle Peak Empire? And the png file is Here.thanks you.DannyChan (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- @DannyChan: Now that is a harder file to vectorize. I don't think it's possible to create an accurate SVG version unless you can find a higher-resolution raster image or a suitable template file for the crown (for example here). SiBr4 (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- File:Imperial Crown Heraldry.svg is nice .thanks.DannyChan (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
- @DannyChan: Sorry, I forgot about this one. I made an SVG (fairly different from the raster images due to the different crown) but still have doubts as to whether the flag is actually freely licensed and whether it would be in scope for Commons/Wikipedia. Judging from the Google results for "Great Castle Peak Empire" and its apparent Chinese translation, this empire seems more like an alternate history-like creation from a random Internet forum than an actual state/entity, though I don't speak a word of Chinese and rely on Google Translate for this. SiBr4 (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- File:Imperial Crown Heraldry.svg is nice .thanks.DannyChan (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
- @DannyChan: Now that is a harder file to vectorize. I don't think it's possible to create an accurate SVG version unless you can find a higher-resolution raster image or a suitable template file for the crown (for example here). SiBr4 (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Category:List of transcontinental countries, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 22:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
;_Flag_of_Syria_(1963-1972).svg)
Hi, I need help with some historical flags. Here is 9 files I want to have converted to nuvola flags. Maybe you would figure it out or lead me to someone who is able to fix this problem :) Thanks, Chris-dlc (talk) 19:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Creating a Nuvola variant of an SVG flag is usually a matter of opening an existing Nuvola flag with a similar design in Inkscape, changing colors and copying, resizing and skewing any emblems until it looks good. If you don't feel like doing them yourself I'll do some tomorrow. SiBr4 (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I need help with SVG flag. Can you help me change File:Flag of HKIP.png to SVG?This flag is for hk independence. The scale of flag is 1:2. Background color is flag of UK. The coat of arms on the flag is File:HKUrbanCouncil.svg.Thank you.DannyChan (talk) 07:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Done:
File:Hong Kong independence flag.svg. SiBr4 (talk) 09:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi SiBr4: I removed the Macedonia entry at Template:Year in Europe per the delete result at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 in the Republic of Macedonia. The article was the only one (e.g. no series of articles was present), and consensus was for deletion. Of course, the link could stay in place, particularly in the event of any editors wanting to create a series of "years in" articles for Macedonia. Feel free to let me know your opinion. NorthAmerica1000 22:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Northamerica1000: The template contained all countries of Europe; I'm sure there are other states for which no "<Year> in <country>" articles exist. The template internally uses {{#ifexist}} cases to check for the existence of a year article, so after the job queue is cleared the link is automatically changed to History of the Republic of Macedonia instead. SiBr4 (talk) 23:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- All right, and no problem. I noticed your revert of my edit on the page, and let's leave the template as-is (without the removal I performed). Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 23:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting my mistake with the Pskov city/oblast flag. Incidentally, the oblast recently adopted an official flag and coat of arms (), so hopefully someone is out there working on an svg version. -Sumiaz (talk) 01:44, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Sumiaz: I knew it was the wrong flag because I did the same thing (mistaking the flag of the eponymous capital for a flag of the oblast) years ago. Google Translate-ing the news article, it seems the regional parliament has yet to vote on the symbols. If the flag gets adopted though, we can just use the JPG from the news site until there is an SVG (it should fall under {{PD-RU-exempt}}). SiBr4 (talk) 11:39, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
1. In this context of names & codes of country subdivisions the descriptive term "nations" for EAW, GBN & UKM is not acceptable. Not only is it very ambiguous, it is simply incorrect because the only entity that qualifies for the title "nation" is the UK which is a member of the United Nations.while the others are just a part of the UK. A suggestion could be the term (political) "Associations" as the codes refer to conglomerates of subdivisions but maybe someone else might be able to come up with still better terminology.
2. The Changes section mentions the addition of IOS (Scilly), yet it is not in the list.
BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 11:04, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- While I fully agree about the UK subdivisions being "just a part of the UK", "nation" is the term that is used in the ISO standard for England and Wales, Great Britain and the United Kingdom. Since the article is about the ISO standard we should not replace it with our own preferred term.
- For my previous edits, I copied the "Changes" table from the ISO site and compared ISO's and WP's list entries one by one to check for discrepancies, but somehow did not notice the new entry. Just added it. SiBr4 (talk) 11:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK, I understand your point of view. Nevertheless it remains a very wrong naming convention which leads to a lot of confusion as if the UK-UKM-GB-GBN issue isn't already complicated enough. Of all the countries the British are the only ones who make such a mess of their subdivisions & associated codes.
- Anyway, thanks for your prompt reaction & update; you are definitely doing some good work on Wiki (nice flags pages too) although I've seen that you've been thwarted several times by incompetent users. Happy 2015! BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, the UK must be unique in that it is one of its own subdivisions according to ISO! Anyway, we could add a note in the spirit of "the entities ISO calls 'nations' are actually XY" if that clarifies anything. It could also be helpful to re-add the former designation of "included for completeness". SiBr4 (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well, it would surprise me if the terminology came from ISO itself. But you have a very good idea there. You get my full support: adding such an explanatory note would indeed shed a better light on the origin of the confusion. BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 02:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, the UK must be unique in that it is one of its own subdivisions according to ISO! Anyway, we could add a note in the spirit of "the entities ISO calls 'nations' are actually XY" if that clarifies anything. It could also be helpful to re-add the former designation of "included for completeness". SiBr4 (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Please also update the remark concerning the codeless part of the country as DU now got its code assigned. BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, forget about that, I noticed too late that it is now hidden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk • contribs) 09:22, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- @BeerBuildsBetterBodies: I have now removed it entirely and clarified the part of the lead about it. SiBr4 (talk) 09:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi SiBr4,
please fix again the height of the Nepal flag in "Template:Country data Nepal" to 23x18px, as you see here:
Vatican City
Switzerland
Nepal – current 22 px height is too big- Nepal/sandbox – this is my sandbox test; I think it's better (height is same as by VAT & SUI, and it's only 1 px higher than all others)
France
Russia
thanks, Maiō T. (talk) 00:00, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
| 18px (sandbox) | 20px | 22px (current) |
|---|---|---|
Hi! You helped me here. Actually, .mw-disambig.mw-redirect isn't working. For redirects to disambigs is used the style for redirects (in other words, redirects to disambigs are in green). Could you help fix that? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:39, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Looking at the HTML source for some pages on lvWP, it appears links to redirects have the
mw-redirectclass and links to dabs have themw-disambigclass as expected, but links to redirects to dabs have onlymw-redirect. Apparently the software only adds themw-disambigclass to direct links to dabs, not to redirects to them (unless the redirect is itself marked with__DISAMBIG__). For me links to redirects to dabs are correctly styled, because Anomie's script adds thedisambiguationclass as well asredirectto such links, and I've set my CSS to add styling for those classes as well. SiBr4 (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)- Ok, thanks for clarifying things. Maybe I could go to Phabricator and request that adding? Or it would be useless? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 20:44, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Following up on this template deletion discussion: given your familiarity with AWB, can you help search and replace/remove {{flag|Mughal Empire}} and {{flagicon|Mughal Empire}}? Thanks Abecedare (talk) 21:30, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- The closer Plastikspork has already started doing it, apparently manually. If Plastikspork agrees I can take it over with AWB. SiBr4 (talk) 21:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- All transclusions are now replaced. SiBr4 (talk) 22:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
- Believe Plastikspork has finished with the substitution, although that didn't have the intended effect of removing the problematic image from article space. So the basic task, which still remains, is to remove File:Flag_of_the_Mughal_Empire_(triangular).svg from en.wikipedia article space, whether it has been included directly or through {{flag}} or {{flagicon}} templates. If this task (in whole or in part) is easier done with AWB, I would appreciate your help in doing it. If not I'll gather a posse to do it manually sometime over the nest week. Abecedare (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- AFAICT the edit at the Indian Rebellion of 1857 article was the only of Plastikspork's edits that kept the flag image. The other 74 articles that use the file didn't use it through flag templates, and already included the image directly, or include it through other templates. SiBr4 (talk) 10:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
- Believe Plastikspork has finished with the substitution, although that didn't have the intended effect of removing the problematic image from article space. So the basic task, which still remains, is to remove File:Flag_of_the_Mughal_Empire_(triangular).svg from en.wikipedia article space, whether it has been included directly or through {{flag}} or {{flagicon}} templates. If this task (in whole or in part) is easier done with AWB, I would appreciate your help in doing it. If not I'll gather a posse to do it manually sometime over the nest week. Abecedare (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you help me change File:Vf-logo.png to SVG ? ". Thank you so much.--DannyChan (talk) 09:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Done. In this case it helps a lot that there is already a useful SVG to base the logo on. (Please use the Graphics Lab for image requests, though; other graphists also willing to help are far more likely to watch that page than my talk page.) SiBr4 (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.
What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.
This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.
If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!
- The simple solution is to simply include the "rawcontinue" parameter with your request to continue receiving the raw continuation data (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&rawcontinue=1>). No other code changes should be necessary.
- Or you could update your code to use the simplified continuation documented at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Query#Continuing_queries (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&continue=>), which is much easier for clients to implement correctly.
Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.
Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.
Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you moved the federation flag back to historical flags. While I don't dispute that it is a historical flag (I even added the vexillological icon identifying it as such). I am not sure it belongs in the section that infers its a historical national flag of Zambia. It is a related flag and one no longer in use but it was never the Zambian national flag (or the national flag of a predecessor). Anyway, thats my thought process, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks Paul Bradbury 18:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- The Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland article implies Nyasaland and the Rhodesias formed a single national entity together, which would technically mean the flag of the federation was the "national flag" of Northern Rhodesia during the existence of the federation, and its own flag a subnational one. I've added a note to clarify that the federation was a larger entity that included Northern Rhodesia, and also expanded the lead to explain what Northern Rhodesia was in the first place. SiBr4 (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi SiBr4. I was notified that my correction of the geographical location of Macedonia and Serbia in the article on landlocked countries from Central to Southern Europe was reverted by you. The location of Macedonia in Southern Europe is evident and undisputed, while Serbia is typically considered a transitional country, although most often it is mentioned as part of Southern Europe. If you were unsure on the location of Serbia, perhaps we could designate its region as "Southern/Central Europe". Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I have just checked the paper titled "Economic Development Problems of Landlocked Countries", which is used as a source in the article, and found that there is no definition of Central European cluster. All landlocked countries in Europe are simply placed in a European cluster. Best.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- I don't dispute Macedonia and Serbia are in Southern rather than Central Europe, but that isn't what the column is about. It gives the location of the contiguous clusters of countries (i.e. groups of bordering landlocked countries) that they're part of, which in several cases span multiple geographical regions. The names of the clusters can be debated, but all members of a cluster should have the same text in the "Cluster" column. Would it be an option to rename some of the clusters to list all regions they extend into; e.g. "Central and South Europe", "West, Central and East Africa"?
- The cluster was originally called just "Europe"; I had changed it to "Central Europe" to distinguish it from the previously excluded de facto-only Eastern European cluster (Moldova and Transnistria), which the paper does not include. SiBr4 (talk) 11:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Despite your willingness to make it clearer, changing it on your own without any reference to reliable sources is a classical example of original research. I have added the tag on the top of that section and started a new thread on the discussion page. Best.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:11, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Coats of arms of states of Mexico, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/mexico/Aguascalientes-M-xico/Aguascalientes.html.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- The bot would have noticed the copyvio earlier if only it could check new sections on existing pages as well as new articles... I merely moved the content from Coat of arms of Mexico, which had included it since 2009. SiBr4 (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
You have more experience than I do it would appear, will Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Come see the New WikiProject Wikipedia.21 be auto-archived without a signature, and if not, would me putting a closing template with a signature allow it to be archived? Jerod Lycett (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, SiBr4! I noticed that you have created the Template:Year in Europe, and I must thank you for that - I use it often, have added it to several articles (and will ad it to more) and see it as an excellent tool of navigation. There is one thing which should be adjusted to make it easier to navigate though. The template shows the alternative "Sweden-Norway" in 1815-1905. This is a problem, because both Sweden and Norway has their own separate year-articles, and with this name on the template, it does not lead to articles such as 1861 in Sweden and 1861 in Norway and so forth. Separate year-articles for Sweden and Norway in 1815-1905 are justified, because though they were in union with each other, they did have their own government and administration and laws. A similar problem is the one with "Denmark-Norway", which causes the template not to link any of Denmark's or Norway's Year-articles before 1814. While Norway was indeed a Danish province for centuries until 1814, they still have separate year-articles here, and as they are different nations now, that is as justified as the separate year-articles of Scotland and Ireland and Wales, which has their own Year-articles despite them being regarded as part of England/Great Britain for centuries. Perhaps there are other examples, but of those I am aware, Denmark, Sweden and Norway have their own year-articles and the Year-template should link to those. I therefore think that for the template to work for those, the "Denmark-Norway" (until 1814) and the "Sweden-Norway" (1815-1905) should be split to Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Unfortunately, I do not have the skills to do that. Can I ask you to perform this? It would really make the template even more useful as a navigation tool! My best greetings,--Aciram (talk) 23:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Replied at Template talk:Year in Europe. (Please see WP:MULTI regarding posting the same thing on multiple pages.) SiBr4 (talk) 09:11, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
- It was not my intention to post on two pages: I simply realized after posting it on the article talk page, that it would perhaps be more effective to post it on your page, but having done so, it did not felt honest to delete a post I had already done there. it was not done with bad intentions, and I appologize if it offended - its was just my being a dizzy head I suppose! --Aciram (talk) 13:03, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, regarding the flags of the Kazakh and Kyrgyz SSRs, you removed them because they were not "national flags". I had added them because other Soviet Republic flags are currently included (e.g. Estonian SSR). As to the status of SSR flags, are they not similar to the colonial flags in the various timelines? Although they didn't represent independent states, they were distinct flags used in their territories, and are part of the heritage of those nations. For example, the Seychelles timeline shows a British colonial flag; the Union Flag isn't the only flag shown prior to independence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snd3054 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Can I ask a small favor? I posed the question at VPT about Regex code. Trappist the monk suggested some code, while you came in with a proposed modification on the chance that there might be embedded templates. I ignored your suggestion because I was sure there were no embedded templates.
I was wrong. It jumped up and bit me.
I have been building a table at User:Sphilbrick/USA_Ref_replacement_table to build the AWB search and replace elements as well as a record of what I have done. My first run used the 17 items related to World University games (WUG).
That worked well, so I moved on to the Pan-American games, and I'm now building the Jones cup games items. While I'm reasonably certain that the embedded template was a one-off dealing with the misspelling in the 1995 Pan Am reference, I was wrong once and may be wrong again, not to mention it's probably poor coding to simply cross my fingers and hope there are no embedded templates.
I made a copy of that table, renamed it User:Sphilbrick/USA_Ref_replacement_table2 I then did a search and replace using the two sets of code that you suggested.
I.e., I searched for [^\}]+ and replaced it with [^\{\}]+
It is getting to be a large table and growing and I'm not asking you to look at everything but could you look at the first row and see if I accurately made the change you suggested? I'm still a bit of a Regex newbie, and while I get a sense of what's going on in that code I know enough to know that a single character wrong will mess the whole thing up.
I do understand, or at least think I do, that if I do have a cite web template with an embedded template your code fix doesn't make it work properly, it means it won't do anything at all which is fine because then I will just handle it manually.--S Philbrick(Talk) 01:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
- You did. It's possible to replace templates with embedded templates correctly as well, though, which of course requires a more complex regex (e.g.
\{\{\s*[Cc]ite\s+web[^\{\}]+(\{\{[^\{\}]+\}\}[^\{\}]*)*\}\}replaces one level of embedded templates). SiBr4 (talk) 10:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)- Thanks for checking. I also appreciate the code for dealing with the embedded template although I'm not going to try it at this time. I think, among the few hundred references I created, the 1995 Pan Am may be the only one with an embedded template. If I find I am wrong once again, I'll come back and look at that code.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:11, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You reverted my change to the Europe template explaining that the template is supposed to remain opt-in. Does that mean it is possible to opt-in for individual articles? I'm not sure how that works. Spiritofstgeorge (talk) 16:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Adding the parameter
|UK_only=noadds the UK constituent countries, as explained here. If there are a lot of articles on the topic in question, you can create a wrapper template with the parameter and replace direct calls to {{Europe topic}} with that. I personally oppose putting the home nations in the same list as sovereign states only because their articles exist, though. The (quite lengthy) past discussion about changing them from opt-out to opt-in is here. SiBr4 (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, @SiBr4: I am from Vietnam. I talk are you have know about template Flag not yet? Please you help may be fix template flag for my wikipedia Vietnam. Let's look at link here goes see flag Nepal in page doc. Thanks! Boyconga278 (talk) 16:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Boyconga278: Known problem. I've applied the workaround that is used here at enWP: adding a space after the border parameter. SiBr4 (talk) 18:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
@SiBr4: Thanks! I can understand all then! Boyconga278 (talk) 00:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Country data San Marino. Hi SiBr4, could you help me out please with my edit request? Thanks. Neve-selbert 03:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Country data Nicaragua. Sorry to bother you again. Many thanks. Neve-selbert 07:37, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the userscript -- it's been very helpful. One feature that would be nice to add is for the script to remove a trailing }} from the input as well. This would allow something like {{Example}} to be copied into the search box and automatically replaced with Template:Example. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:08, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Template:Country data Commonwealth of Nations/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Neve–selbert 18:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
There was an edit conflict when we were both editing this article a few minutes ago, which caused me to make a minor change to your edit without having seen your edit summary. I removed the "at least" phrase from the beginning of the sentence, because it seemed to be an admission that we weren't really sure how many states have official flags. But the point raised in your edit summary is valid, as well. I'll defer to you as to whether the phrase should be restored. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Did you read my message on Commons? 174.113.214.250 (talk) 11:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
I saw a broken template and absently minded fixed it without realizing it was vandalism. --occono (talk) 21:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Last year we had a talk about rendering the content on ISO 3166-2 pages exactly in the same way as it appears in the ISO standard. Although certain descriptions are sometimes ambiguous or don't make sense (we were discussing the GB page) I could understand your point of view of sticking to that principle. Your latest edit on the HT page, however, makes me raise this issue again. The change of spelling in this case is not 100 % but 200 % incorrect. This is a French language name & a construction like this (Grande'Anse) is totally impossible in French. The apostrophe indicates omission of 1 or more characters; the space between the word involved & the next one is dropped. In this place name the apostrophe serves to replace the e in Grande. There is no way they can appear together: the right spelling is Grand'Anse. Do we really have to copy & list such ISO errors until someone points this out to ISO after which it will probably take many months before they send out an update? IMO, people who are looking up information should get to see valid data, not obviously wrong stuff like this just because it's in the standard.BeerBuildsBetterBodies (talk) 13:35, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- I'd say keep the wrong name in the list and add a footnote explaining that it is wrong. If we do it the other way around (changing the name in the actual list and adding a footnote with ISO's name), we should be consistent and change all ISO 3166 articles to the common names. SiBr4 (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, SiBr4. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
