User talk:R. S. Shaw

Archives

/Archive 1, /Archive 2,

Hi. When you recently edited Squamous-cell carcinoma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epidermis (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) 20:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, R. S. Shaw. You have new messages at MichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Have you any idea how we can get the developers to address this issue? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know any way except giving feedback on Wikipedia talk:Page Curation. In my case, I cured the problem by closing the browser window containing the "new page feed" page and reopening it. It might also be good to try a "complete refresh" of that page and a reviewed page (complete refresh being shift-F5 on some browsers I think, and two successive CNTRL-refreshes on Chrome). I haven't been able to recreate the problem today. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 19:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried everything, including asking Keyes to look into to it. For some reason he declines to respond. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:19, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you'll note I've now responded asking for a screenshot or any additional information you might have :). In the absence of that, R. S. Shaw, would you be able to provide one? okeyeswikimedia.org. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 06:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• R.S., is this now solved? Re your message above that there's been no recreation :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  For me the toolbar has been working since before my previous post. I have not seen any further problems, although I have not used the feature heavily. All I can say is I'm not seeing the problem now, and I don't know a way of recreating it. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 05:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Great; thanks :). Kaldari is also reporting he can't recreate - Kudpung, is this still happening? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey R. S. Shaw. I'm dropping you a note because you've been using the Page Curation suite recently - this is just to let you know that we've deployed the final version :). There's some help documentation Wikipedia:Page Curation/Introductionhere that shows off all the features, just in case there are things you're not familiar with. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the phrase I quoted was just an example of the articles problems, the overall tone of the entire page, please either restore the tags or fix the page.31.52.137.42 (talk) 12:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted phrase indeed had inappropriate tone (and content), and needed to be removed; it was probably added by a young, naive contributor. The sentence containing it had just been added in the edit before your edit which tagged the article, and probably would have been fairly soon removed by someone. Beyond that sentence, the applicability of the tags probably isn't immediately apparent to many people, and so to be effective more details of the deficiencies need to be added to the talk page. Better yet would be to actually make the relevant improvements to the article itself. However, simply burdening the article with boxes at the top demanding that someone else make vague changes to the text of it does not seem helpful to me, and I'm going to decline to deface the article with such boxes. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 21:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		Holiday Cheer
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - MQS

I don't see why you reverted my edits here, I undid things that were obviously incorrect. Peter Flass (talk) 00:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see you got it all fixed. I don't understand what you did, but the result looks good. Ignore these comments. Peter Flass (talk) 01:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the mistaken revert. I somehow misinterpreted the changes wherein one piece of vandalism you had missed I thought you had made. When I saw my mistake, I reverted my revert, and then figured out the right thing needed and did that (what I should have first done). --R. S. Shaw (talk) 01:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, R. S. Shaw. You have new messages at Aggie80's talk page.
Message added 14:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Kmgray7/Marine Science Technician requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Technical 13 (talk) 14:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello R.S.Shaw, you changed the chart on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome#Human_chromosomes back to the original. I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with the numbers on the chart. For example the Y chromosome is listed at 100% of the Cumulative rate, which is impossible. If the listing started with the Y chromosome ( like chromosome 1) the number would be the real value percentage of the combined genes.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 13:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I tried to say on the talk page, I don't understand what issues you have with the table headings or entries. The Y entry has 100% because it is the last entry in the table; the value is not only possible, but it's required that the last entry in the table have a value of 100% since it completes the cumulative sum.

Now, I don't know why somebody put a cumulative percent into the table; it doesn't seem very useful. A better choice, in my mind, would have been to give the percentage of the whole of the "base pairs" column entry (not the "sequenced base pairs" used now for the cumulative %). --R. S. Shaw (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think you are correct in writing "why somebody put a cumulative percent into the table; it doesn't seem very useful." The order of the chromosomes is arbitrary, it could have started with chromosome X and Y, so the entire column is pretty much useless except for the first entry. I would remove it if I could, but I am afraid of damaging the rest of the chart.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I made the cum% to % change (moved % next to base pairs column because that's what it should be, and is, based on). I've done table things like that before, so it wasn't too hard. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the repair. :) --Mark v1.0 (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Iron loss. Since you had some involvement with the Iron loss redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so.

You created the redirected ten years ago, and the main discussion is actually at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Copper_loss, but since you are still active here, I thought I could as well notify you. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956 film) have been removed because you cited the information you added to IMDb. As discussed at WP:RS/IMDb, IMDb is considered a questionable source, and generally should not be used as a sole reference. You are welcome to re-add the information using a different reliable source, or with an additional source confirming the information from IMDb. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 18:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago: So be it. Since those locations are unsourced, I have removed the corresponding "shot in" Category lines from the article. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 21:46, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me. I don't know who added those categories, but they shouldn't have been added without any supporting text in the article. Thanks for your help! DonIago (talk) 21:50, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

		The Userpage Barnstar
		Dear R. S. Shaw, I came across your user page recently, and very much admired the wonderful index you assembled on it. Since I had always wanted to do something similar at mine, I hope you won't mind too much that I copied it, lock, stock and barrel! (I did own up to doing this, however, by giving you attribution via the {{copied}} template, now included at the top of my talk page .) Thank you once again, as well as for all your other contributions to our encyclopaedia! With kind regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(become old-fashioned!) 11:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pdebee:, Glad you thought it useful. No need for attribution as it's just links without creative content. Most of it was assembled quite awhile ago, so better choices for some things may be available now. Happy editing! --R. S. Shaw (talk) 18:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. You make a good point about attribution; I will remove the {{copied}} template, but would still like to give you credit for designing the overall structure of the index, and will therefore add a brief sentence to this effect at the top of my copy.  Done.
Thank you once again for the inspiration, and please keep well.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 20:18, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick thanks for the clarification of the ClueBot message against the History of Television page that I reported on the ClueBot page, and how I misinterpreted the message. Not sure how I missed it. Brain fade. RichKBF (talk) 07:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

List of deaths by motorcycle crash

added links pointing to William Dunlop, Jake Brockman, Vladimir Gerasimov, Paul Smart and Arthur Fox

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 04:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Producers (1968 film and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#The Producers (1968 film until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After doing yesterday's Redactle, Urban Agriculture, I noticed an opportunity for a little edit and made it. Today I saw that you also did an improvement and when I looked at your history, saw that you've done edits on a number of recent Redactle answers.

It's got me wondering if there's something of a "Redactle Effect" where Wikipedia is getting regular improvements because of the thousands of people who are focussing on one article every day.

Anyway, as a regular Wikipedia user but sporadic "editor", I thank you for all you are doing for this resource.

David Scrimshaw (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

David,

Yes, I'm sure there is at least a bit of a "Redactle Effect" as you say. Redactlers often closely read the text they're trying to uncover, and that does lead to noticing problems. Several times I have noticed that someone else had earlier that day made a small edit to the day's article before I got there; in most cases I've assumed they also were doing it just as you and I were. One time I did find that they had changed the very text that I came over to fix, which pretty much confirmed it in my mind. - R. S. Shaw (talk) 16:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Nothing from Nothing (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI: With this edit you removed the bold formatting from the target of a redirect against the guidance described at MOS:BOLDREDIRECT (After following a redirect: Terms which redirect to [a] ... section are commonly bolded when they appear ... at the beginning of another section (for example, subtopics treated in their own sections). As Connor James Sturgeon redirects to this section, it is customary to bold the name so our readers understand that they've arrived at the correct article. See also WP:R#ASTONISH. Please keep this guidance in mind in the future. Thank you! —Locke Cole • t • c 15:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! This already exists at John Coate. NotAGenious (talk) 20:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course it exists (in a later version). I'm just investigating what a past issue about it was. -- R. S. Shaw (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello R. S. Shaw, since your knowledge of the English language is much better than mine wondering if there is an -s- missing here: ...overly casual person who exhibit a lack of grace and refinement... Thank you so much for your time. Lotje (talk) 05:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, 'person' is singular but 'exhibit' is the plural form of the verb, so mismatched. I have fixed the instance in Low-life. Thanks for catching this. - R. S. Shaw (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]