Tell me stuff that I've done wrong. A garbage person (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, A garbage person. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Would you mind if I asked you, why do you call yourself "a garbage person"? SharabSalam (talk) 00:44, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because it amuses me. A garbage person (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which one? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw your work on the Dongding Island page. I made some more changes based off your changes- I didn't realize that I had accidentally made the quotation from the 1958 incident seem to be unsourced. I'm not 100% familiar with all the niceties of Wikipedia citation, so I invite you to continue your work there if you see any more problem areas. Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:10, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, A garbage person (excellent username, BTW) Thanks for your constructive edits on a couple of articles that I started, Shen (clam-monster)‎ and Yunji Qiqian. However, I wish you had known about WP:CITEVAR and first discussed changing in-line Harvard citations to footnotes. Is there an easy way to change this back? Keahapana (talk) 23:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Keahapana! I'm aware of WP:CITEVAR, but I thought it was just a lack of understanding of wiki reference templates that kept them as parentheticals. I shouldn't have presumed! My apologies.

It's pretty easy to convert the footnotes back into parentheticals. For short footnotes, they use the format {{sfn |Author |Year |p=Page Number}}. If you want standard Harvard parentheticals, with everything in the parentheses, just change it to {{harv |Author |Year |p=Page Number}}. If you want the author name outside the parentheses, change it to {{harvtxt |Author |Year |p=Page Number}}. For the ones where I took the citation from the middle of the sentence to the end, it should be fairly easy to cut & paste them back.

I don't think either article has any footnotes of the type <ref>{{harv |Author |Year |p=Page Number}}</ref>, but if you run across that, just remove the <ref> tags and paste the Harvard citation wherever that reference is called.

I re-did one section in the Shen article to have parentheticals--if you look at the differences, it's just swapping out one template for another.

Related: in the "Problems" section of Yunji Qiqian, I'm not sure if you need to have all the page numbers with the use of the parenthetical referencing in such a short page range. However, I'm leaving the {{page needed}} up, since if the content gets moved away from the introductory paragraph, none of the quotations will make sense. I did remove the section heading, though, because neither the {{page numbers needed}} or the {{page numbers improve}} templates were applicable.—A garbage person (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information about converting footnotes to parentheticals. Full disclosure, for many reasons, this curmudgeon thinks HTML endnotes (not <f[oot]n[ote]) formatting is unsuitable for Wikipedia.

It's fun to learn when one is wrong about what we think people will see and what they do see. I assumed that when someone clicks to edit a page beginning with "Use Harvard referencing|date=December 2017", they would probably do so. Go figure. I'll try to find the easiest way to change back into inline refs and will find Lin's 1995 article again to add the pages.

I'm curious why you like working with citation templates. Best wishes, Keahapana (talk) 00:54, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That would be because my brain turns "Use Harvard referencing" to "Use short footnotes" instead of the actual meaning, "Use only parenthetical referencing". And I love citation templates because it puts information into a standardized format, both machine- and human-readable. It makes the librarian side of my brain very happy.—A garbage person (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good thing you have the patience for such bibliographical manipulations -- I really don't. It drives me nuts if I try to do anything other than the simplest and most basic form of citing... AnonMoos (talk) 03:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I LOVE well-formatted citations. As I say on my userpage, I really think it's something wrong in my brain, but I won't complain. Let me know if you come across (or make) any un-cited or under-cited pages and I'll happily fix them up. And thank you for the compliment, AnonMoos! —A garbage person (talk) 20:29, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Quatrefoil were definitely an improvement, but I'm actually a little afraid of exposing some informally-cited pages (that I'm more directly personally involved in than I was at Quatrefoil) to the merciless glare of fully theoretically-correct sourcing practices... AnonMoos (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're misapplying Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines for table colors in the List of Solar System objects by size. The Manual of Style says that table colors can appropriately be used to convey information in tables. The chief concerns that might be relevant to the tables here are that there should be sufficient contrast between the text and background colors, and that the colors shouldn't be the only means by which the relevant information is conveyed. Now, all of the colors formerly used in the table conveyed useful information. Whether it's the best way of conveying it is another matter, but one that could have been discussed on the article's talk page. Personally I think it would make more sense to limit the number of colors to planets, moons, dwarf planets, and other objects, instead of using a different color for each planet and its moons. But that's another matter. The table should have had other indications of the type of object, but the remedy for that is to add the missing information, rather than to delete the colors. Now, I'd like to work to fix these problems, but I'd like to see if we can agree on what the accessibility guidelines say before I attempt to do something along those lines, and head off a potential edit war before it can start. Would you review the MOS on table colors, and let me know what you think? P Aculeius (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking back to the Data Tables Tutorial, which goes over ways to appropriately use color with accessibility in mind. I may have been overzealous, and I have no problem with using more accessible (i.e. higher-contrast) colors within the tables. Feel free to revert and edit, P Aculeius. —A garbage person (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

lmaooooooo i found your page on recent changes

take care

SilentRevisions (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This edit broke at least two templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:51, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! I usually proof after adding so many--I'm not sure what happened with this one. —A garbage person (talk) 16:29, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a 2MB limit on "post-expansion template size." See the explanation at the top of Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded for details.

When you added the {{lang}} template throughout Family tree of ancient Chinese emperors, it you caused it to exceed the limits. As a result, templates near the bottom of the page do not display properly.

Consider reverting your change for the time being, but perhaps leave one usage so the page is categorized properly.

The proper fix is probably to split the page by era. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, another editor has reverted your changes due to the "post-expansion template size" issue I mentioned.[1]. If you plan on restoring them, do it in a way that does not cause technical problems with Wikipedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:38, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, davidwr. Most of the pages I've edited have been relatively small, so I've never run into this problem before. I've been on a break, so when I dive back in, I'll start with requesting and/or making a page split. —A garbage person (talk) 18:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read and follow. Happy Christmas! Johnbod (talk) 12:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I've taken it off my to-do list of citation cleanup. —A garbage person (talk) 19:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A person please or thing. 2603:6080:7300:33D3:80FC:7B82:B9DD:3460 (talk) 08:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm just letting you know that I reverted your change to Orphic Hymns, per WP:CITEVAR (which I'm sure you're already aware of), and because I personally tend to find citation templates somewhat tedious and inflexible (and I think it's unlikely that anyone else will contribute significantly to that page). I also noticed your recent changes to Persephone (which I didn't see any point in reverting, as the page and its sourcing are overall somewhat of a mess), and thought it would be worth noting that a number of editors who work on Greek mythological topics tend to prefer citation styles without templates, as they can be more permissive when it comes to citing primary sources. Best, Michael Aurel (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed, but thank you for the heads-up! I'm happy to leave the citations alone. I would still love to link the footnotes to the references for my own satisfaction, but there are ways to do that without forcing stuff into CS1, and I have plenty of other citations to fool around with before I get there.

I'm trying to fix the Persephone references as I go along whenever I have free time, so some of the fixes are indeed clunky! I'm trying to ameliorate that with "orig-year" to make it clear when something's a classical source rather than a modern one. A garbage person (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. For the Persephone references, removing the date of the translation would indeed be handy (we don't want someone thinking Ovid lived in the 20th century!), and I seem to remember that Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome/Guides/Primary sources#Shortened footnotes explained a neat way of achieving this, so that might help you there. When you say link the footnotes to the references, and doing so without forcing stuff into CS1, do you mean without the use of templates? If that's the case I'd certainly be interested; the one major downside to the citation style I've used at Orphic Hymns (and elsewhere) is that you don't get the elegant linking feature. – Michael Aurel (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that link! I KNEW there was some way to call Harvard footnotes without having to do author-year, but my editing is so sporadic I forgot the name of it. And I've adjusted the footnotes in Persephone to reflect them!

If you'd like to work on something similar to that on Orphic Hymns, I'd be absolutely psyched to do so! It doesn't necessarily have to be in the CS1 format that prioritizes the recent dates first; I think you can add Harvard IDs to any citation you'd like to use short footnotes for. A garbage person (talk) 21:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. I would mainly be interested in getting the nice "linking" feature which you get from citations such as those here, for instance, but without needing to use any citation templates, such as Template:Citation, Template:Cite book, and so on – is this something you know how to do? Cheers, Michael Aurel (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The linked footnotes are products of either the short footnotes template or the Harvard referencing template; both of them rely on an anchor that is either automatically generated by CS1 & CS2 or created manually. The shortest way to make a manual anchor for non-templated citations is the SfnRef inline, which is the same as the "harvid" referred to in the Shortened Footnotes link from WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome in your earlier comment. So you can write your citations however you like and they should come out in shortened footnotes in a nice, standardized manner. I'll have to poke around a bit with it, but I think it would come out nicely. A garbage person (talk) 20:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, thanks! I wasn't aware of that template, so that's good to know – it seems it was created quite recently, but it's what I was looking for. I'll certainly look into that. – Michael Aurel (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing the changes you've made to Orphic Hymns, and they look fantastic! I'm so glad to have helped. A garbage person (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you sent me in the right direction there. ;) – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:56, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]