User talk:MB

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MB. Just a heads up, there has been more activity from Segura Asst (talk · contribs). I reverted the text that they changed, but kept the headshot of Segura (s)he uploaded. I posted another message on Segura Asst's talk page. In case you're wondering, the Olga Segura article is on my watchlist.

I'm not sure if I'm the best person to handle the COI at hand, but want to make sure to maintain respectful discourse. Olga Segura's acting has inspired me, and, considering her indirect but still relevant involvement here, I would not want her to be left feeling negative. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 05:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you MB, learning as I go! I sent you an email and also create a user page and listed about me and what my affiliation is with Cabo Verde and the airline. Ultimately I love the place and hope w can communicate with the rest of the world just who we are and what we do. I am not paid to edit wiki pages, but I am a consultant to the CEO (and am paid for that), I have been helping where I can, but my real role is to improve other things, getting the name correct and a lot of other pieces and telling about the islands is more of a passion to create opportunity for those from the islands and those who come here to work. I went to a school whose motto was to create sustainable prosperity worldwide. Thank you again for bringing this to my attention. Have a great Sunday!10:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)10:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)~~

Template_talk:Press#The_"details"_link_in_the_template Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't change to US spelling in an article like Denman College on a UK topic. Thanks. PamD 08:46, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PamD, I didn't realize that was British spelling. Thanks for the message. MB 14:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m trying to provide prove but it won’t let me publish anymore? Dwkling (talk) 02:56, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you take down my post about her death today? She died in Naples Florida. I have prove as well.... Dwkling (talk) 02:38, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dwkling, an editor making a change is responsible for providing a reference. MB 02:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

— Wug·a·po·des​ 06:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC) 12:03, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m new to this and wanted to make sure my thanks are getting through. And wanted to let you know you can blame St.Ed"s for the grammar. THANK YOU--Theemurman (talk) 17:29, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theemurman, Yes, I received the thanks. Since each one is completely separate, one per article is plenty - no need to send thanks every edit. Also note that much of your work has been removed as copyright violation. Articles need to be written in your own words based on the facts in the sources. And don't include anything that isn't in a source, even what you know to be true - everything must be WP:VERIFABLE. The WP:TEAHOUSE is a good place to ask questions. MB 00:18, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in your edit adding an NRHP infobox to McCoy Farmstead (Holly Hill, South Carolina), you introduced a reference to the NRIS database, which was not in fact your source. You referenced a 2010 version of NRIS, but no available version of NRIS that we know of covers that site, which was NRHP-listed in 2019, right? I just wonder if you could please revise the article to fix that.

BTW, it was me that created the article, and maybe/probably I should not have, as it turned out I could not find any good references to develop it. I think i was trying to respond to someone's request at wt:NRHP for help adding recently-listed items to the county list-articles, and I tried to go further.

cheers, --Doncram (talk) 02:45, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doncram, done. I didn't notice that you created the article. I was responding to the "needs-infobox" request. I just did a copy/paste of a infobox from a neighboring property and edited the information from the county list - that is where I got the address and coords. The ref was just leftover.

And I just noticed that the article says Holly Hill, SC, but the county list says Orangeburg, and the weekly listing (the only ref we have so far) says Holly Hill vicinity. If the coords are correct, it is 30 mi from Orangeburg and in an unincorporated area just outside of Holly Hill. Magicpiano updated the county list; should I change the location there to Holly Hill?

And welcome back from your break. MB 03:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MB, thanks for your diligence at Stamford, Connecticut. Looking at the history, I see both User:RepublicanFan and User:RepublicanFan2 have edited the article, with one reverting the other here. This doesn't look like a lost password scenario (since their edits overlap), and I don't know if this is two different users (with one impersonating the other) or a good hand, bad hand scenario. Since you're more active in watching that article than I am, I figured you might want to keep an eye on things. Thanks!

Kinu, I hadn't noticed the second account, and haven't been watching Stamford, Connecticut at all until I found this new editor adding OR/unsourced/unencyclopedic content to several Connecticut articles. I've reverted a lot and find it to be a big waste of time. But the editor seems to be well intentioned. I hope they learn quickly. MB 17:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A page I recently created has been added to Toyin Sanni ‎with a copyvio. I see you've spotted it. I am an admin but feel too close although I have left advice for the new author Victuallers (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC) The picture of her also looks as if it might be from AMP studios in Nairobi... Victuallers (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Victuallers, perhaps you meant this message for Money emoji who detected the copyvio. My only involvement with the article was some minor syntax editing. If you have a link to the source of the image, I would suggest you nominate if for deletion at commons. MB 21:19, 19 February 2020 (UTC) Oh I did, thanks for your help anyway Victuallers (talk) 23:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MG, thank you for the warning. Could you please help me to revise this page linguistically? :-) I hope that the content is quote clear. I would thank you so much. Best --Marco Ciaramella (talk) 16:33, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Ciaramella I have listed the page for translation cleanup where someone fluent in English and Italian may be able to help. MB 19:38, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SMcCandlish, your discussion at WP:T made me think that creating {{BoldIR}} (bold incoming redirect) to be used, at the first instance of a redirect, to apply the bold markup would prevent the bolding from being removed if it was otherwise not obvious why it was bolded. (I may have inadvertently removed some valid "bolding for redirects" while cleaning up excessive "bolding for emphasis" that sometimes happens.) If this template also created a section anchor, it might keep help Wikipedia:Database reports/Broken section anchors from growing as fast. Thoughts? Should I propose this at WP:VPR? MB 17:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure which discussion you mean; WP:T goes to the Wikipedia:Tutorial page. Such a template is not a bad idea, in its essence, though there are some technical considerations of the additional features to think about. I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "If this template also created a section anchor"; sections are auto-anchored by the parsing of the == or whatever markup. If you just mean #foo anchors, which would generally render as <span id="foo">...</span> around the anchored term (or <span id="foo"></span> immediately in front of it), that might be possible, but arguably of dubious utility. We likely don't want to link to the exact spot in mid-sentence where the redirect-from term was used in the article, but rather to the section containing it, for context. We do sometimes have {{R to anchor}} instead of {{R to section}} cases, but these are generally to tables, list items, or other discrete blocks of content that just don't happen to have separate subheadings. Another problem with auto-anchoring from a template like {{BoldIR}} would be that if the page already has a heading (or other anchor) by this name, and the template is inserted above it (e.g., because the term is first used in the lead section in the article, despite having its own entire section lower down in the article body), then the template would "usurp" all incoming links to that section (the target ID of which would be changed on the fly to something like foo-2.

That said, the general idea of marking up the first-occurrence-boldfacing of a term that redirects to the article is good, though I don't think I would call this "BoldIR", except maybe as a template shortcut; we're not regularly using camelcase like that in template names, and have been moving them (especially ones used by reader-editors in mainspace, to more plain-English names. So, something like {{redirect bold}} or {{bold redirect}} might be better. I'm not sure there is any cure for WP:Database reports/Broken section anchors, other than doing something on the MediaWiki code side: it could have "smarts" in the background that auto-fix these things, the same way Windows updates shortcuts and macOS updates aliases when you move the target file/directory (in contrast to symlinks which just break, in *n*x, Windows, and macOS alike).

I have actually though before about instituting a simple {{redirect bold}} myself, but it would probably need to do something unique and practical, like add a hidden maintenance category ("Category:Articles with incoming redirects boldfaced in the text"? I dunno – do we have any actual use for tracking such a matter?), or it would get TfDed. I can't think of any templates we're keeping that just serve as markers/indicators to editors, i.e. as alternative to HTML comments. Even {{Not a typo}} can use {{sic}} for string obfuscation to prevent auto-correction by tools like AWB. One thing such a template as we're considering could do is add a new CSS class, so that people who don't like the style of bold-facing the first occurrence of redirected terms can change it to font-weight: inherit; in their own user CSS.
 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my user name is Lumacido. I would like to get the last version of the page Love Smiths (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Love_Smiths&action=edit&redlink=1) before it was deleted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumacido (talk • contribs) 09:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lumacido, I can't help because I am not an admin. You should contact the editor that deleted the page - Sphilbrick. MB 19:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear MB,

I had created an Article on a the psychologist stub Dr. Ahmed Emara in which even you had added you also had inputs to it. Yesterday one of the editor User:DGG had moved it to a Draft space saying it was too promotional and I don't understand what was too promotional since I had only mentioned facts to the page on the basis of my research. If such issue was there, then a senior writer like you would also have addressed and corrected it since i mentioned it as a Stub. Could you pls help me in reviewing the page back to article space. Young writers should be encouraged to write for wikipedia.

Kindly waiting for your reply.

Terminatorwil (talk) 23:24, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Terminatorwil, I only made some minor formatting fixes. You should have directed this to DGG, or asked for help at the Teahouse where you would have been pointed to various resources for new editors. I took a quick glance at the article; the second sentence is promotional and not encylopedic. The number of Youtube views is not sourced as is the entire Early life section. Everything should be neutral-sounding and supported with references so anyone can verify the accuracy. You mentioned "your research"; remember you can only summarize what has been written in other sources. DGG may have more comments. MB 23:44, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This seems more understanding than just moving anything to an article space and not mentioning the main sentences to be edited. For the youtube views, I have mentioned his youtube channel link in the external link. Isn't that enough for the authenticity as youtube itself has written the original view count of his page. Terminatorwil (talk) 23:58, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]