User talk:Headbomb/Archives/2022/January
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Unused templates
Hey, are you still working on Template:Vitality/colour and the Template:L1-Vitality family templates or are these abandoned? Gonnym (talk) 13:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- I haven't touched those in years. Might want to ask at the Template:Metabanner talk page if they're a potential use for them. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. You were the only possible user of them, as I'm sure that if they needed such templates, they would have used or created ones by now. Gonnym (talk) 14:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:L1-Vitality and friends
Template:L1-Vitality has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Morricone
Re Morricone: "Françoise Hardy – Mon amie la rose site in the reader's poll conducted by the newspaper la Repubblica to celebrate Mina's 70th anniversary in 2010, 30,000 voters picked the track as the best song ever recorded by Mina." which you reverted to is not a grammatically correct sentence. The sentence should begin with the word "In" "Françoise Hardy – Mon amie la rose site" is part of the previous reference, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venndiagram8 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- I don't care what you do with the sentence, just don't break the reference. Specifically
- "
|url-status=dead}}</ref> ''Françoise Hardy – Mon amie la rose'' site in the reader's poll conducted by the newspaper'' [[la Repubblica]]''"
- Should not become
- "
|url-status=dead ''Françoise Hardy – Mon amie la rose'' site in the reader's poll conducted by the newspaper'' [[la Repubblica]]''"}}</ref>
- "
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
iPad editing
Thanks, I couldn’t get all that to happen from an iPad …. Was trying to add an inline commentary, iPad won’t do it, and couldn’t find inline for primary source. I am writing up a long explanation for all of the problems with those edits, but will have to move to a real computer to finish. He also provides the example you asked for yesterday! More when I get on real computer, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:50, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- "He also provides the example you asked for yesterday" not sure what you mean by that. I've also removed the medcn tags and the primary sources inline tag, because I do not see how the existing refs (Cochrane + NIHR) fails sourcing requirements. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- That’s elsewhere … I’ll get to it on real computer … the current schizophrenia is still messed up (but was before they edited as well), but I’m making it worse while trying to ipad edit … will respond at WT:MED when I can do full and correct write-up when not iPad editing…. Thanks for fixing mess I left. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- PS, not sure if you are aware (see the top of my talk page), but I have to limit my time sitting at computer since the tree fell on me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:00, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear that. Without knowing the exact details of your situation, if sitting causes you issues, you might want to consider a standing desk (here's a random YouTube video by a guy that's been using them for a year). Not sure if you knew those existed, but they might help! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I know of those, and other options … so far, I’m out of luck. But yesterday was worse because I was also editing from a hotspot from the car with hubby driving … I will catch up in a bit when I get on real computer. I try to do as much as I can from iPad and then briefly move to computer for more difficult edits, and am (unfortunately) finding that responding to that good faith editor on WT:MED will take a long post that should not be filled with my usual iPad errors. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:14, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I made a (still unresolved) mess at the article, since ... well, see WT:MED ... is it a journal, or a website, or what? I can't find a journal article, so we need an access-date, which document doesn't allow ... unsure how to fix, leaving it to you, but I don't think we have properly cited the text, but schizophrenia should go to FAR anyway, so I may stop worrying about keeping it up to snuff. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear that. Without knowing the exact details of your situation, if sitting causes you issues, you might want to consider a standing desk (here's a random YouTube video by a guy that's been using them for a year). Not sure if you knew those existed, but they might help! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Utensils
May I suggest disengaging? They're blocked, they're warned against repeating the edits, and your exchange with them is just winding them up -- there is obviously no chance that you explaining further will be helpful. --JBL (talk) 19:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah I'm pretty much done with them. It's evidently useless to engage more. They have the proverbial rope whenever they get unblocked. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Bots Newsletter, January 2022
Bots Newsletter, January 2022 | ||
---|---|---|
![]()
BRFA activity by month Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots. After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever. Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020. Overall January 2020
February 2020 ![]()
March 2020
April 2020 ![]()
May 2020 ![]()
June 2020 ![]()
Conclusion
These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out! Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC) (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.) |