User talk:Thumperward

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

This is Thumperward's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Thumperward.

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Star Trek race[edit]

Template:Infobox Star Trek race has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox fictional race. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Doctor Who race[edit]

Template:Infobox Doctor Who race has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox fictional race. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:26, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox D&D creature[edit]

Template:Infobox D&D creature has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox fictional race. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 13:15, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Primeval creature[edit]

Template:Infobox Primeval creature has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox fictional race. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 01:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Question[edit]

Hi, I want to emulate/copy Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Tab header for use at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Incubator/V-E Day but with different tab names. This is not a difficult task but I had one question. Can you explain to me the purpose of the first line {{#ifeq:{{ARTICLESPACE}}|Wikipedia| ? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 10:29, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

As you can see from the editing history of the transcluded page in question, it's a placeholder for occasional banners related to that WikiProject. It's unrelated to the template functionality. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:13, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Horizontal ToC[edit]

Template:Horizontal ToC has been nominated for merging with Template:Horizontal TOC. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 09:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

"Template:Cryptography" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Cryptography. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Cryptography redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Magioladitis (talk) 12:05, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

old maintenance template[edit]

Hello, I know it was over 5 years ago when you added the original research tag to Patch Tuesday but I was wondering, can you remember if it was for a specific reason or just in general? It has double the citations/references now and since I can't see any issues myself I thought about removing it, but there might be something I've missed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snizzbut (talkcontribs) 19:17, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Looks like the majority of statements are sourced now, so I've removed the tag. Thanks! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox3cols/row[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Infobox3cols/row has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 10:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Ageing of newspaper readership[edit]

Hi Thumperward. I've tried to revamp this article. Please take a look and see if you think the "copy edit" and "essay" flags can now be removed.---Ehrenkater (talk) 18:31, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Oh, wow. Great work, thanks! I've de-tagged. Still a lot of work needed but this article is a lot better than it was 24 hours ago. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:18, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of CS gas (data page)[edit]

Notice

The article CS gas (data page) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Why does this even need its own page when it already exists on the main page?

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. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 13:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

January 2020[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fulling. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. A plonker gave me a warning, so I should give you one too, to balance the fates Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 16:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Sopranos articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Sopranos articles that need to differentiate between fact and fiction requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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 "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 deleted 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Thumperward/tropes[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg User:Thumperward/tropes, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Thumperward/tropes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Thumperward/tropes during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 08:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TV Tropes[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:TV Tropes has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 08:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Inadequate lead[edit]

Template:Inadequate lead has been nominated for merging with Template:Lead too short. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

WP:WAS rule of thumb[edit]

Hey, there.

I noticed a small passage in the Manual of Style that I was sure was a recent addition, so I dove into the history and found that in fact the addition for the rule of thumb for MOS:TENSE is indeed fairly new.

I don't think that this is as helpful as you intended, and might actually be harmful. The preferred thing to do here, I think, would be to immediately back out the change entirely and then optionally work on coming up with a better way to put it. As it stands, though, it reads in a way that could provide fodder for folks incorrectly using "was" where "is" should be. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 19:56, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

See the MOS discussion. Thanks for not summarily backing it out (again) at any rate. Do you have any concerns that weren't raised in the discussion? It was intended as a simple way to stop people using "was" (having been inspired by a truly idiotic edit war), and I can't see any cases where one might use it to lawyer one in that aren't covered already elsewhere (e.g. WP:FICTENSE). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Chris, I understand that your goal was to stop people from using "was" where inappropriate, and with respect to that goal, I feel (strongly) that the edit fails. As I said before, I think the addition here is bad and that it will be fodder to people in arguing for "was" instead of "is". I've been involved in spats about MOS:TENSE, and the only thing that I feel with regard to your edit to the guidelines is anxiety at the thought of pissing away even more of my time with dipshits who argue for "was"—as a result of the addition of these new rule of thumb. I.e. the guidelines are worse off for having this blurb in it than if the text introduced in the edit were completely excised. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
How about we wait to see if that happens, and then there's evidence of it? No prejudice on a quick discussion to back it out should it cause more harm than good, and I'd very much take the side of avoiding past tense in any related discussion. But absent anything more than a gut feeling , which I disagree with, I don't think it should be re-reverted for now. Apologies if it does cause any hassle and feel free to get me to clean it up should that happen. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
How about, since you think the negative impact is zero and there exists someone who thinks the negative impact is non-zero, we just back it out since that's a course of action that doesn't conflict with either projection? -- C. A. Russell (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Is that how we improve things? Like, honestly, just let it simmer. Chew me out if it ruins the world later. I genuinely don't think it will. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 23:23, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Ping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#WP:WAS_and_defunct_magazines -- C. A. Russell (talk) 20:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. Replied. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 22:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Well thanks for nothing. As soon as the immediate issue (wrt magazines) has been neutralized, I'm making sure that the changes you made to MOS:TENSE back in December are backed out. You made the changes despite opposition from others. Additionally, I later raised the above concerns about it backfiring, and then I only gave it a rest because you insisted we should give it an opportunity to see if things turn out fine. And when just as predicted, it did have the opposite effect—people are now using it as ammo, arguing that it gives a mandate in favor of "was"—you've now dropped by to say exactly the wrong thing and that "was" is fine. What a friggin' mess this has caused. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 00:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
You're not even guaranteed to come out on top in that particular discussion to be honest, and having edit wars and throwing tantrums doesn't really help with that. But since you obviously care far more about this than I do, by all means continue to expend as much energy on it as you want. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox engineer[edit]

Template:Infobox engineer has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox engineering career. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox medical person[edit]

Template:Infobox medical person has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox medical details. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox theologian[edit]

Template:Infobox theologian has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox theological work. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 21:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy notification[edit]

Just to let you know that I mentioned you here. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Malcolm Reed's page[edit]

Hi, I noticed that the page for Malcolm Reed (fictional character) has been removed and he's now reduced to one line in the Star Trek characters list. I put a bit of work into his page and have found it very useful, and it's really a shame to see all that information wiped out. Could you please restore him to his own separate fictional character page? I saved all the text from the edit window for the article that he used to have, you can see how much research is here. https://pastebin.com/sEbDjxiS Please help, his page was a great resource for Star Trek fans. Judgmentfist (talk) 19:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi! Please feel free to add it to Memory Alpha or Memory Beta, the dedicated fan sites which permit significantly more in-universe material. Ensemble characters in TV shows don't generally need their own articles here unless they've had some significant real-world impact, which I would respectfully suggest isn't the case here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

"Microsoft Connect" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Microsoft Connect. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#Microsoft Connect until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of some foreign character warning box templates[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgSeveral foreign character warning box templates, some of which you created, have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Paul_012 (talk) 23:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox pirate[edit]

Template:Infobox pirate has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox criminal. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 11:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

U moved page Cassette and cartridge tapes to List of magnetic tape formats[edit]

While I can see merging the two pages I think we have lost something with the resulting title. The problem is there is an article Cassette tape which is limited to just one of the many cassette tape formats. When a reader lands there and wants more information they will now be directed to "List of magnetic tape formats" which really is misleading. I suggest retaining a version of the defunct article title would make things clearer as in keeping "Cassette and cartridge tapes." or even renaming it to "Cassette and cartridge tape formats." Also, FWIW, I don't think your removing the ambiguity text was particularly useful. Your thoughts? Tom94022 (talk) 22:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

The article is almost entirely useless as-is and ultimately will be removed. This was merely a fix to make it at least conform to our conventions. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 03:48, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Well since u think it will be removed then I take it you won't object to my renaming it to something that maybe subsequently removed. BTW I'm not sure what are the conventions you reference. Tom94022 (talk) 21:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
I would object to you once again changing it from a list article to a random-pile-of-stuff article. A list article has a defined purpose. "This is a word and here are lots of random things it could refer to" is not an article type with a purpose. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
You turned it into a list article when you deleted the information on types of cartridges and cassettes; a list within an article is perfectly acceptable. Or I can change the title to "List of Magnetic Cartridges and Cassettes" and restore the information you deleted. Tom94022 (talk) 20:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
It was originally a slightly ill-advised disambiguation page; it was then moved to be a list article, until you changed it. Given that you've been editing here for well over a decade, if you're still unaware of the distinction between list articles (which have a specific format) and other articles (which do not consist entirely of jumbled collections of single sentences and bullet points) then I'd advise you to avoid editing such articles. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 06:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
You are correct I changed it from a list article into a real article, albeit a stub, including a list to solve an ambiguity problem that was consuming a lot of editor's time at Cassette tape and likely to cause some reader confusion in the differences between cassettes and cartridges. That seems sufficient justification for such a conversion. You may not like the way the article looked but that is not a sufficient reason to remove the information and convert the article back to a list. Since I think you now admit what you have done that gives me reason to revert your changes and then lets see what other editors have to say. And please stop the ad hominem comments. Tom94022 (talk) 17:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
We do not have articles which vaguely explore what words mean simply because words sometimes have imprecise meanings. There is no rationale for this not to be a list, given that the only non-list content was a series of farcically over-linked sentences which all cite one museum collection's blog. In the case of a subject having some nuanced alternative titles, the approach we take is to note them in the lead of the main article, and possibly explore them further if there is adequate citation: not to spin up entire new articles which treat this ambiguity as a subject in itself. Let's be clear about the backstory here: Compact Cassette was moved in the past to cassette tape, per project consensus, and various editors opposed to that (for reasons which are perhaps valid, but lack consensus) have taken it upon themselves to circumvent that decision by creating other articles. This is not generally looked kindly upon, and you're not being as subtle about it as you think you are. So knock it off. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Well I pretty much disagree with most of your assertions above which pretty much seem to fall into IDONTLIKEIT. If you insist this must be a list article then I am going to change the title to "List of Magnetic Cartridges and Cassettes" and restore the "over linked" sentences which BTW are the reliable source for the "At least 142 ..." Also BTW the current title is incorrect since the list currently only deals with cartridge and cassettes and not other formats. If you don't like it please discuss in the article rather than revert yet again. Tom94022 (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't really care what the title ends up being (so long as it is clearly a list and has the right capitalisation): what I care about is that it is not an attempt to reclaim the title "cassette tape" following the consensus which led to that name being given to the audio article. I actually agree with you that there is significant ambiguity here which can lead to confusion, but the correct response to that is to persuade people to change their minds rather than creating new articles when move discussions don't go your way. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 18:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Not a reference desk[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Not a reference desk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Trialpears (talk) 12:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of List of software that supports Vulkan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of software that supports Vulkan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of software that supports Vulkan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ben · Salvidrim!  23:44, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Category:Foreign character warning boxes has been nominated for renaming[edit]

Category:Foreign character warning boxes has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. 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. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

October harvest[edit]

16 October
Apples, Mainz-Finthen.jpg

16 October memories - eight years that we miss Br'er Rabbit --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Beautiful Main page today, don't miss the pic by a banned user (of a 2013 play critical of refugee politics), nor a related video, interviews in German, but music and scene. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of 86 (term) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 86 (term) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/86 (term) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

a notice[edit]

"we can't devote 30% of every article to precursors" you can't "devote" you mean, by the way it wasn't "every" article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.251.211.194 (talk) 21:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

It literally is every article related in any way to gunpowder. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 23:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Signal lamp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spotlight. 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Template:Lead too short RfC[edit]

I guess I'd better notify you of the following RfC so you don't throw a hissy fit like last time:

Link: Template talk:Lead too short#RfC Should this template be repurposed to match its name?

CapnZapp (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

"Royal consort" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Royal consort. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 14#Royal consort until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 15:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)