User talk:Jonesey95

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 90 days will be automatically archived to User talk:Jonesey95/Archive2025.

Redirecting EngvarB

I'm bringing the discussion here in the interests of not blowing things up any further in a more public forum. I can drop back and withdraw my opposition to delete. and hope for the best, but knowing that attempts so far to delete have been met with fairly staunch opposition fills me with some apprehension. It may seem like a quick and easy win, but I think it will actually make the task of ridding the other {{use X English}} templates harder to achieve strategically. I'm fearing that such a merger may provoke a scattering of these articles tagged with {{EngvarB}} into the other {{use X English}} templates (although admittedly I don't know who might be bothered to do it). There being numerous entrenched interests to be softened up, so you/we really need a strategy of some sort, involving some coordination and tactics to soften up the opposition.  Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 15:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for this olive branch. I have tried to treat you as a good faith editor, focusing on your behavior and refraining from personal attacks. You have done the same for me, and I appreciate it.

I don't think that there is any real opposition to redirecting EngvarB to Use British English, except for your concern that it may detract from a long-term simplification of the Use X English template space. I do not share that concern. Some thoughts:

• Many (nearly all?) of the articles to which EngvarB is currently applied either have British ties or effectively use (or could use, or should use) generic British English spelling and vocabulary. After a redirect, nobody will need to bother retagging them.
• Articles about Moroccan or Zimbabwean footballers, or similar topics, should be able to live with a "British English" tag without reasonable people getting too worked up.
• Articles about subjects that have their own invalid (IMO) Use X English template won't be obvious retagging targets anymore, since they won't be tagged with a deprecated template.
• I don't think that there is a significant population of American English or Australian English articles that are tagged with EngvarB; if there are, we can still find them with searches and fix them.

As for the other templates in the family, you have watched me tilt at those windmills with little success, despite what I think are bulletproof arguments, namely that there is no such thing as a MOS:COMMONALITY-usable "X English" (choose your flavor) described at the "X English" article. Somehow, most of the nominated templates have been kept, so I have stepped back from that quixotic project for a while. I have no objection to coming up with a master plan to whittle them down to templates that actually conform to MOS, but you are right that we need a strategy. I don't know what it might be; maybe the wording I have been using is not persuasive, and different wording might work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

One idea that came to mind during the MOS discussion is to switch the emphasis onto Editnotice templates such as {{Australian English}}, essentially focusing on what matters most to editors (what they see on screen). The benefit of "EngvarB" is its cryptic nature, making it certainly less full-frontal than any {{Use X English}} template – it may encounter a little bewilderment but rarely fierce opposition. The presence of any subsequent {{Use British English}} template may induce a greater number of editors to change to another template than if it were EngvarB, but can be explained/justified (not as cinvincingly) as being merely an artefact for script maintenance of interest only to a minority of editors and therefore not contradictory). In any event, deletion is bound to ruffle feathers, so perhaps we could go the redirect route as a softer approach. Articles could then keep their {{Use Australian English}} template, and editors can continue to place it, but it is merely redirected (to wherever consensus leads us to). A combination of these might allow the goal to be achieved with less turbulence. Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 16:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

phew!  Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 17:41, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Interesting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Sandbox Issue (Minor)

Hii @Jonesey95, Thanks for your good faith cleanup in my sandbox. I noticed that adding "1=" here caused entire section to disappear from view unless in edit mode.
So as of now, i remove that part, assuming it was an unintentional error.
Kind regards. Callmehelper (talk) 12:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Callmehelper, my apologies. I did a quick fix that usually works, and it was wrong. I have fixed it in a way that works now. Multiple templates were misnested; I have put them in the right order. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Appreciate your time. Callmehelper (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

FYI: RFPP

Good luck! Nikkimaria (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

. Enthusiastic, but short on CIR. We were all newbies once. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

talk quote inline

My apologies if it's inappropriate to bother you here, you're just the most-recent template editor to have modified {{talk quote inline}}, and I'm unsure if anyone's watching its talk page. Would you mind taking a look at my inquiry there and see if it's possible/feasible? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I responded there. Thanks for the note; it wasn't on my watchlist. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh, thank you for taking the time! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Leave other people's sandboxes alone

Please do not come and edit my sandbox.--Kiyoweap (talk) 05:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Nonexistent templates on any page on Wikipedia cause entries at Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of non-existent templates. See WP:REDNOT for the relevant guideline. When you edit your sandbox, please ensure that "Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page" does not show any red links. That will keep helpful gnome editors away. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:HouseBlaster submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Jonesey95 is a gnome extraordinaire. During their time on Wikipedia, they spent an impressive seven years coordinating the Guild of Copy Editors, including 5+1⁄2 years as the lead coordinator. They spend time cleaning up Template: space, helping editors find the templates they need via template categorization and improving their documentation. They also have some coding creations of their own, most notably {{GOCE award}}, which helps coordinators hand out drive barnstars. I'd consider them to be our site expert on the various lint errors, and they are always happy to help identify and fix them when I am pulling my hair out. Jonesey is a key reason why Wikipedia has such modernized, document code—something too often taken for granted. And lest you think Jonesey is entirely back-end, they still spend a healthy portion of their time in mainspace, directly helping readers enjoy clean, typo-free prose. Thank you, Jonesey. This nomination was seconded by DreamRimmer, Vacant0, Gog the Mild, AirshipJungleman29 and TechnoSquirrel69.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Fifteen Year Society member

Jonesey95

Editor of the Week for the week beginning July 20, 2025

A gnome extraordinaire. They spent an impressive seven years coordinating the Guild of Copy Editors, including 5+1⁄2 years as the lead coordinator. They spend time cleaning up Template: space, helping editors find the templates they need via template categorization and improving their documentation. Their coding creations include {{GOCE award}}, which helps coordinators hand out drive barnstars. Many consider them to be our site expert on the various lint errors as they are always happy to help identify and fix them. Jonesey is not entirely back-end. They still spend a healthy portion of their time in mainspace, directly helping readers enjoy clean, typo-free prose.

Recognized for

modernizing document code

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 13:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Wow! I am stunned and flattered. I'd like to thank the Academy, and my family, and especially my agent, who gets 10% of all of my edits. Thank you to all of my nominators, and of course to my fellow nominees, whose performances were all excellent. Wait, no, don't start playing the music yet .... – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:23, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

July 2025

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Template:Jackson MS TV, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Re:Template:Jackson MS TV That's what these TV market templates are for. They are there to inform the reader. You would have to do this for every other template. Pinging @Sammi Brie: for her take. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

@Jonesey95 I think this is a project-level discussion. The way that the templates have been done, going back 20 years, is that they have the basic affiliation and subchannel information of the stations in them. Half the utility of this template is taken away if it's styled like you had it. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Doing it to every other template in Category:Mississippi mass media navigational boxes sounds right to me. Those excessive links go against the guidelines at WP:NAVBOX, specifically:

1. All articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject.
2. The subject of the template should be mentioned in every article.
3. The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent.
4. There should be a Wikipedia article on the subject of the template.
5. If not for the navigation template, an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles.

Linking to Grit (TV network), for example, in {{Jackson MS TV}}, renders the navbox out of compliance with items 1, 2, 3, and 5 (I am letting item 4 slide, even though this template does not comply with it either). The same goes for all of the other generic TV networks listed in the navbox. This version complies with most of the guidelines; the other templates in Category:Mississippi mass media navigational boxes should be edited to match the guidelines as well. P.S. When you template an experienced editor with boilerplate that says "Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines", I recommend that you actually quote or link to relevant guidelines that you used to justify your revert of that editor's constructive, good-faith, guideline-supported edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) As someone previously unfamiliar with the template, I find the current project-preferred version unreadable and inexplicable. Mackensen (talk) 19:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

For those just arriving, we are discussing whether this version or this version of {{Jackson MS TV}} should be preferred, based on WP:NAVBOX and other guidelines. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I do think there's room to cut down the link volume within the template. We've also had scope creep because of digital subchannels, which were not a major thing when these templates were conceived two decades ago. Go back to 2005 and you'll see far fewer links and items. I think station, virtual channel number (unlinked), primary network affiliation (unlinked) is reasonable to have in the navbox. See Special:Permalink/1301428473. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:59, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Note that some networks are so large that, even if one station carries two or more, they should be listed. The CW is the example in this navbox (it's a subchannel of WJTV). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 20:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Just did a pilot slimdown of {{Sacramento TV}} and {{Phoenix TV}}. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 03:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

That looks better. I think removing the channel numbers is the next logical step. Wikipedia is not TV Guide. The navboxes that have ".1" subchannel information are particularly noisy and I think are a net negative for readers. I also disagree with even if one station carries two or more, they should be listed. The CW is the example, per the guidelines above, specifically items 1, 2, 3, and 5. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I will push back on removing channel numbers and basic network affiliations for two reasons:

• Channel numbers are still a common aid to navigation. They are still a primary way that TV stations brand (especially in North America and Asia) and that people access them. Also, the items in each row are sorted by channel number, not call sign.
• People can get confused especially when two sets of call signs in a market are similar.

Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for engaging. I just can't see how a typical reader would find something like this helpful and easy to parse. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I created a similar concept at Special:Permalink/1301430774 given that the Cleveland television market has a lot more stations and quite a few of the "diginet trees" which barely meet notability. Compare with the current version of the template. Nathan Obral • he/him/🦝 • t • c • 20:21, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Updated link is at Special:Permalink/1300567696 as I forgot to jettison argle bargle like "Streaming" and "ATSC 3.0" which are personally unnecessary. Nathan Obral • he/him/🦝 • t • c • 20:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

The updated version is a step in the right direction as the current version is a nightmare, especially where WP:ACCDD is concerned. I would go a step further and bring the TV template closer to the radio template. IE: list by channel numbers, LPTV, translators, and call signs. Subchannels could be listed the same as digital are listed in the radio template. BlueboyLINY (talk) 17:25, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

The idea of a double sort a la radio to me makes the templates more complicated. And subchannels are way more prevalent in TV and are mostly national services. We don't need to go that far. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 17:34, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

• All 210 US TV market templates have been slimmed down and I think all in Canada as well. Thanks to @Bray0829, FreewayDan, Mvcg66b3r, Nathan Obral, Nino2017, OWaunTon, and Tvstation101: for joining me in doing this task. I still have a few in Mexico to do, but that's a lot smaller of a lift compared to the others. Thank you, Jonesey, for shining a bright spotlight on 15-plus years of scope creep that had to go. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  There are also Japanese templates of this flavor in Category:Japanese television navigational boxes. These are unique. They were ported from jawiki, still carry their template names from jawiki (e.g. {{TV-kinki}}), and use color for network affiliations. I'm considering scrapping the color as it works poorly in darkmode, and I suspect the colors plus links may not meet WCAG. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:53, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  Great work. I looked at a few templates, and the templates look much better, especially for the average reader. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:03, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  We've spent the last six years paying off our debt in terms of lag to policies and guidelines: incorporating TV channels in places that aren't North America into the task force, gaining proper tracking like article alerts, shedding MOS violations like ACRO and SMALLFONT that once were pervasive, improving accessibility across the board, overhauling bad templates that didn't follow infobox design best practices, and now this. Not to mention the massive increases in top-end content. We've gone from 29 GAs to more than 200 in three and a half years. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:10, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you for doing this thankless work. As a person who makes a couple thousand edits per month that mostly fix syntax errors, guideline violations, and other generally non-noticeable things, I value the work that you have done. Thank you for listening to my request, one that others might have reflexively rejected with the argument that "we have always done it that way". – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  I always like to start explaining how bad things were by starting with Talk:WNGH-TV, which contains an RfC on following the Manual of Style or not. We were a backwater of Wikipedia. We've come a very, very long way. (Also, Category:Philippine television navigational boxes has more of this type of navbox though the slimdown there is not as urgently needed aside from removing links to networks.) Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  I'd be interested in your thoughts on my first Japan slimdown (not in content but in color removal) at {{Kyushu–Okinawa TV}}: Special:Diff/1258176107/1303054390. I love good use of color, but with darkmode, I don't think this works like it used to. I've also changed the template name to be more in line with how others on enwiki are done. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 21:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

  Gah, I did that one on my ASU COI account (which I use in lightmode) by mistake because I was checking the color display on it. In darkmode, the "bullets" used in the old diff especially for multi-network stations do not display. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 21:29, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

User profile edit

Thank you for helping with my user profile's metadata syntax correction! Have a great day! David Osipov (talk) 14:56, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome. I enjoyed looking at your page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Tech News: 2025-31

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Weekly highlight

• The Community Tech team will be focusing on wishes related to Watchlists and Recent Changes pages, over the next few months. They are looking for feedback. Please read the latest update, and if you have ideas, please submit a wish on the topic.

Updates for editors

• The Wikimedia Commons community has decided to block cross-wiki uploads to Wikimedia Commons, for all users without autoconfirmed rights on that wiki, starting on August 16. This is because of widespread problems related to files that are uploaded by newcomers. Users who are affected by this will get an error message with a link to the less restrictive UploadWizard on Commons. Please help translating the message or give feedback on the message text. Please also update your local help pages to explain this restriction. [1]
• On wikis with temporary accounts enabled and Meta-Wiki, administrators may now set up a footer for the Special:Contributions pages of temporary accounts, similar to those which can be shown on IP and user-account pages. They may do it by creating the page named MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer-temp. [2]
• View all 21 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week.

Updates for technical contributors

• Detailed code updates later this week: MediaWiki

Meetings and events

• Wikimania 2025 will run from August 6–9. The program is available for you to plan which sessions you want to attend. Most sessions will be live-streamed, with exceptions for those that show the "no camera" icon. If you are joining online to watch live-streams and use the interactive features, please register for a free virtual ticket. For example, you may be interested in technical sessions such as:
  • Temporary Accounts: Enhancing privacy for our unregistered editors
  • Building a Sustainable Future for Wikimedia Contributors
  • A dozen visions for wikitext!
  • Coordinate Across Stakeholders with the Product and Technology Advisory Council
• The MediaWiki Users and Developers Conference, Fall 2025 will be held 28–30 October 2025 in Hanover, Germany. This event is organized by and for the third-party MediaWiki community. You can propose sessions and register to attend.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 00:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Unhelpful edit on magic square

Special:PermaLink/1303351713#Unhelpful edit on magic square

I tried to restore as much contents of Magic square as I could while keeping all new additions. It was quite of difficult task, and I could not handle everything. Some of changes were either splitting long paragraphs into shorter several-lines parts, or the other way around: gluing parts into big blobs. The Wikipedia built-in tool for revisions comparison copes quite poorly with this type of diffs. It was especially hard when differences were inside wikitables representing the magic squares – it's almost impossible to match such sets of lines without a wider context, and the tool leaves just one or two lines around differences.

Anyway, I'd be grateful if you can look at the result, compare it with old and recent revisions and point out any omissions I made during this repair attempt.

Best regards. --CiaPan (talk) 12:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Nice work! That looks like some back-breaking editing. I found a small handful of additional cleanup edits to make. Some were present before your edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Roll-backing

WP:ROLLBACKUSE gives us 6 "whens" for Rollbacking. None of these "whens" apply to my ISBN fixes. I contend that your rollbacks of the helpful edits sacrifice the baby. E.g., I spend time to look at the individual ISBN fixes, but you apply WP:IDONTLIKETHEM. – S. Rich (talk) 00:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

1. It’s not User:Jonesey95 who reverted your edits.
2. It’s not a rollback. Rollbacks are always marked as minor edits. However if it were, #5 would apply.
3. You are welcome to place the edits back once you have a consensus. Actually, I would be happy to do it for you.

Northern Moonlight 01:52, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that I do not have the rollback user right. I could be wrong. As far as I know, I have either never used rollback or have not used it in a long time. Feel free to provide actual diffs when making claims about my edits.

Northern Moonlight, please see the OP's user talk page for context. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:30, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

This is what I saw: [3]. I don't use Twinkle or RollBack, so the edits looked like Rollback to me. I apologize, but I think the concepts of "baby & bathwater" and "I don't like it" apply. Overall and over time I've tried to apply Consistency, which (as you know) is one of the 5 C's of copyediting. Presently, because Consistency is a WP:FA? 2.c criteria I'm looking at FA's in general to see where we have a mix of ISBN citation styles. I am fixing problems by straight-out citation edits and article talk page suggestions. – S. Rich (talk) 03:52, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I notice in that (now reverted) edit that you removed a space from "first=E. O." in a citation, contrary to MOS:INITS, another thing that you have been admonished for on your talk page in the past. I simply do not understand why you persist in making these edits that are objected to by so many people in the community. We'll see what happens at ANI. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:19, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

And edits that result in no change to the displayed article, with no errors fixed? It's a mystery why a person would dig their hole deeper while under scrutiny at ANI. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:54, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Srich32977: If it's not tagged as rollback, it's not a rollback. As an example, this is a rollback; note that it says "(Tag: Rollback)". What you have shown us says "(Tags: Twinkle, Undo)" - this is a straight undo, albeit assisted by Twinkle, something that anybody might do. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:26, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

I was mistaken and I apologize. I see you were using Twinkle, which "provides users with three types of rollback functions...". I know that Twinkle is most often very useful. But, with one click, it can "roll back" edits that are actually useful -- along with error corrections. In such cases Twinkle and the user perform error-correction and they wipeout (or "roll-back") actual useful edits. Also, thank you very much for the Biography guidance on initials on names. I was thinking that we say U.S.A. rather than U. S. A.. And thus removing the spaces was a good practice. – S. Rich (talk) 03:33, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Tech News: 2025-32

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Updates for editors

• Editors can now enable the User Info card. This feature adds an icon next to usernames on history pages and similar user-contribution log pages. When you tap or click on the icon, it displays data related to that user account such as the number of edits, reverted edits, blocks, and more. It's part of a broader project to make it easier for moderators to evaluate account trustworthiness. The feature can be enabled in your global preferences, and later this week it will be available in local preferences. [4]

[trimmed by Jonesey95]

MediaWiki message delivery 03:36, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Politeness

Hello! Please assume good faith and remain civil.

Specifically:

• You wrote in an edit summary: What the actual F? (which is rude) and Stop refactoring other people's talk page comments. This is twice now. (which implies I didn't see your message on my talk page when in fact I did)
• You wrote on my talk page: Are you OK? (which implies there's something wrong with me) and You refactored my talk page post TWICE. Once after the above warning. (which also implies I didn't see your message)
• In your message, you used the intro-level template {{uw-tpv1}}, but I've been on Wikipedia for 14 years and I have 8000+ edits; I don't need a "welcome". That comes across as condescending. Ref: WikiProject User warnings: If the tone or content of a template isn't appropriate, don't use the template

I understand you're frustrated, but please don't be hasty. See WP:No angry mastodons

Now, firstly, sorry for adding words to your comment. As I replied on my talk page: Sorry about that! I'm getting too used to editing on Stack Exchange, where adding related info to others' posts is actually encouraged.

Secondly, editing other people's comments to fix formatting is in fact allowed per WP:TPFIXFORMAT:

Examples of appropriately editing others' comments: Fixing format errors that render material difficult to read. In this case, restrict the edits to formatting changes only and preserve the content as much as possible. Examples include: Fixing indentation levels [...] Fixing list markup [...]

I assumed you were familiar with this guideline, which is why I redid the formatting fix immediately. (BTW, I just learned about WP:Assume no clue today, which could be relevant to both of us.)

Another of the entries there is Providing wikilinks if it helps in better navigation. Would you allow linking the word "this" to Template:single+space? I'll leave it up to you if you want to edit your comment; this is just food for thought.

Ultimately, I was trying to improve your reply by a) providing a link to the template you used and b) fixing the formatting. This is the "good faith" that we want to assume :)

All the best — W.andrea (talk) 19:36, 6 August 2025 (UTC) edited 19:59

I asked in good faith if you were OK, because your editing made no sense for an experienced editor. Sometimes I get tired and do silly or careless things, because I just need a wikibreak or an actual break. As for modifying my original talk page post, please don't. If my response is inadequate in some way, just leave a follow-up reply that further explains things. There is no need to format my non-broken response. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I asked in good faith if you were OK

Oh, I see. I didn't read it that way (tone is hard online) since the rest of what you wrote had an aggressive tone. Thanks for asking.

There is no need to format my non-broken response.

It actually is broken! The reply chain breaks at the blockquote then resumes below. It's invisible using the default interface, but I have a userstyle that shows reply nesting and that made it obvious.

If my response is inadequate in some way, just leave a follow-up reply that further explains things.

For me, it's a lot more effort to explain what's wrong with the formatting than to just fix it myself and possibly get reverted. I mean, what if the person doesn't know anything about web dev? Then I have to explain (or at least think through) how HTML lists work, how wikitext sort of kludges them, how markup conveys semantics, how talk pages sort of kludge that, what the actual code should look like, how to explain what to change... Too much to consider, and it's faster if I fix it myself.

— W.andrea (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2025 (UTC) edited 20:49

The reply chain breaks at the blockquote then resumes below.

I have a new edit in mind to fix that. It's a single-character change this time, so I hope you'll be amenable :) — W.andrea (talk) 20:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought I had asked nicely. Oh well. Water under the bridge. I hope that your special script is happy now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:38, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Notes

July 2025 GOCE drive award

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 23:32, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Removal of tags

Why would you remove tags useful for building an encyclopedia? He's literally a saint. Do you want some uninformed editor to propose this for deletion? Bearian (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

I explained it in my edit summary: use preview. Look at the version that you saved. It is severely broken. I didn't know your intent, so I reverted instead of trying to read your mind and fix it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

British Brigades gnomish edits recommended

The 133rd Infantry Brigade (United Kingdom) has similar problems. And with both we need the following: 1. spaces between author Beck and title of his books. 2. Italics in And We Shall Shock Them. 3. The other authors as listed First Name -- Last Name; David Fraser is listed Last Name, First Name. Thanks, – S. Rich (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I refuse to make solicited edits that you are blocked from making, per the English Wikipedia's blocking policy. Someone else will fix that ISBN independently; there are editors who go through those categories periodically, which is why their population is so low. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:16, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I think I misread this admonition. "Editors in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned or blocked editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits. Editors who reinstate edits made by a banned or blocked editor take complete responsibility for the content." I was not trying to direct you to do anything. My message to you was purely a suggestion which I hoped would lead to productive changes in the articles. Moreover, I'm very sure that nobody directs you in any ways. Same thoughts apply to my Market socialism message. It was made in the hope that you will not let Twinkle produce unproductive edits. – S. Rich (talk) 02:26, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Template:Script/Cyrillic

Hi - could you please either restore this or mark it for speedy deletion? Simply blanking it is unhelpful for everyone. Thanks. Theknightwho (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Tagged for speedy. I figured the creator would come back for it, but they didn't. Thanks for the notice. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:03, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Market socialism

Please take a look at my first edit on Market socialism. I shortened the WP:SHORTDES by 65 so that it would comply with WP:SD40. The Twinkle tool reverted this enhancement. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Twinkle edit on Market socialism

Please look at the diffs on [5]. I had gone through and made edits on about 30 ISBNs. I put all of the ISBN-13s into one configuration: a 978-1234567890 pattern. Using Twinkle you reverted this edit (and the previous SD fix). Now we have 9 ISBN-cites lacking any hyphens, 5 cites with 1 hyphen, and 17 with full hyphenation. Please consider that the earlier one-hyphen ISBN style was better because it was consistent. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 22:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Serbia route diagram template segments

A tag has been placed on Category:Serbia route diagram template segments indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:55, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Buriganga River

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Buriganga River, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jonesey, did you receive a notification for the bot's notice above? — Qwerfjkltalk 17:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

No. My two most recent notifications were:

‪Qwerfjkl‬ left a message on your talk page in "‪CS1 error on Buriganga River".

Hi Jonesey, did you receive a notification for the bot's notice above? —

‪Ohconfucius‬ left a message on your talk page in "‪Redirecting EngvarB‬".

phew!

The bot's message was posted between those two, which you can verify in this page's history. I vaguely remember a conversation about bot messages and notifications. If you can't find it, I'll try to dig it up. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Strange. I was under the impression that using bot=false meant the talk page edits would send notifications. If you can't find it, I'll try to dig it up. that would be helpful. — Qwerfjkltalk 19:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

T379149 is one such thread. Follow the links to other tasks. I don't know if it's the one I was remembering. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I managed to fix it with minor=False. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:34, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Would you like me to make another edit to see what I get? – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I did so - User talk:Qwerfjkl#CS1 error on Trophodiscus — unless you think it will depend on settings? — Qwerfjkltalk 20:41, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Tech News: 2025-33

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Updates for editors

• Editors on some wikis will see a new toggle for "Group results by page" on watchlist, related changes, and recent changes pages. This is an A/B experiment that is planned to start on August 11, and will run for 3–6 weeks on the Bengali, Chinese, Czech, French, Greek, Portuguese, and Urdu Wikipedias. The experiment will examine how making this feature more discoverable might affect editors' ability to find the edits they are looking for. [6]

[trimmed by Jonesey95]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Templates that wrap Cite tech report

A tag has been placed on Category:Templates that wrap Cite tech report indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

2c

In my experience saying "this isn't the right page" is not very productive when there isn't a right page, and ignoring some nonsense some dude made up one day is to Wikipedia's advantage. Especially since VPT is about 50% (technically) offtopic nonsense, and we all contribute to that. Volunteer "clerking" (especially on ANI, but also elsewhere) is usually counterproductive. Just my 2c, no need to start a whole debate. Polygnotus (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikispecies image template error

How would species:Template:Image/sandbox need to be changed so that if size and/or caption are not stated in this template's usage, it doesn't trigger empty image parameter errors? species:Template:Image/testcases has some examples of the usage. My initial thought of adding the if empty template to those parameters didn't satisfy linthint, so not sure what needs to be used/how this needs to be written for a "if I'm empty, ignore me completely" idea. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Like this. You test for the parameter, then only if it is present, insert a pipe via {{!}} followed by the parameter value. I've had to do this to a bunch of templates here on en.WP. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Same on species:User:Tungolen/Image, but I appear to have bungled it as species:User:Tungolen/Image/testcases is blank. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:32, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The thing to do there is self-revert with an apology. I have done so many times. I have no idea what you were trying there. I try to be extra careful in User space; people get touchy. The same fix was needed in the /main subpage. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I thought it was going to be a simple copy over, and got in over my head before I realized it wasn't. sigh. And looking at your edit, I see I had the wrong page; further embarrassment. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Happy to help. Be careful out there! – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Misnested bot run?

Also, do you happen to know if there will be a misnested tag bot run from the Sig submissions list coming up in the next month or two? I've noticed new additions to the submissions page have slowed, and I know I've waned on finding more since I kept finding ones already identified, so wondered if we had enough for a solid run. Looks like we've identified about 25k pages (ignoring the three User: (many) searches at the top), which will clear upwards of that since that's pages and not errors (might dip below 75k? Hoping). If it doesn't suit, no worries, just inquiring. Best wishes, Zinnober9 (talk) 18:05, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I've been lazy in submitting patterns to the bot, which takes a bit of text processing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

All fine, I've been lazy about some things this summer too. Certainly appreciate past efforts and runs, look forward to future efforts and runs as well. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I just submitted a set of patterns for the bot to process. We'll see if the operator is willing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The bot is running! It is about 1,200 edits into what should be about 30K edits. At the current rate, the run should take five or six days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Washington formation

sorry about my edits to the Washington formation, I'm not completely used to editing Wikipedia so I know it looks broken

but I must ask please don't remove it all, iff its not structured properly then please have someone who knows how to structure pages about formations do it for me. My source on the Washington's paleofauna is legit, it has such a cool biota that I felt it should be available for everyone to see. So at the very least dont make the page a stub again. Themanguything (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

You should stop adding unsourced material to Washington Formation. As for formatting, leave no more than one blank line between lines. If you want to make a list, use * with no spaces between the lines. See Cyrtandra (plant)#Species for an example of list formatting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Lint fixes

Hi, while fixing up various lint errors I reverted two of your recent fixes and then applied a different type of fix to each. See Special:Diff/1305576997 and Special:Diff/1305697651. I hope I got this right. Is there more to do? -- 92.18.74.149 (talk) 16:16, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I noticed similar on User:Sun Creator/Template:Listen300/core the other day.

For the first link 92, I believe this is better, since it clears the missing table opener/closer errors from that page. Table errors are still present at User:Panser Born and User:Panser Born/templates though, and look to be coming from using User:Panser Born/tables at /templates. I'd likely add a noincluded double set (each on a new line) to the templates page. I need to go do something else for a few hours, so I'll leave that for y'all. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for catching these. I look at most of the pages to see if they are transcluded anywhere and then check for new fostered content or other table errors elsewhere. I missed these or hadn't checked the Linter table yet. Teamwork is good. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I stared at the listen300 pages a few days ago and didn't know where to start. Thanks for fixing that one. Yes, the Zinnober9 fix to my two guesswork edits seems to be a better way to fix it. Thanks for those changes. Agreed. I'm not quite sure what the other suggested edits entail and would be happy for you to go ahead and make those additional changes. -- 92.18.74.149 (talk) 22:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Jonesey95 got both edits and everything appears to be squared away now for Panser Born. This was what I was suggesting but hadn't the time to make, and I hadn't processed where the stripped div errors were coming from yet, but that was fixed with this since there weren't any divs open by the time bottomcode was reached on /templates.

I didn't understand the User:Sussexonian/T3 page from your second special diff, so I've made no comment or adjustments on that. Zinnober9 (talk) 23:11, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I have amended the T3 page in the same way as you amended the other page and hope that's now a better fix than before. -- 92.18.74.149 (talk) 10:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Question on center

I saw you recent edit removing the < center > and </ center > from the article on Userkare as they were apparently generating errors. I would like to know what is the modern way of proceeding if one wishes to center something. Here the names of the pharaoh appear left-justified in the infobox (revealed when clicking on the [Show] button), but I would like them to be centered in the infobox. I am sorry if my way of doing is deprecated, I got into wikipedia in 2012 and have been using this way of doing since.Iry-Hor (talk) 16:28, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that the tag was made obsolete by the HTML gods, because it works so well in a variety of situations. Replacements are explained at mw:Help:Lint errors/obsolete-tag. The first one I always try is {{center|1= ... }} – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

@Iry-Hor: The <center>...</center> element was a feature of some early browsers, including Netscape Navigator 2+ (September 1995) and Internet Explorer 2+ (November 1995). Like several other browser-specific features, it was incorporated into the HTML 3.2 spec (January 1997), but unlike some of the others, it was deprecated in HTML 4.0 (December 1999). HTML5 (October 2014) made it formally obsolete. Since Wikipedia was launched in January 2001, i.e. after deprecation, the center element should never have been used in any Wikipedia page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

...alas many Wikipedians were launched before the deprecation and some of them stick to old habits, unaware of it. --CiaPan (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Template:Format linkr needs noinclude too

I can't do it because it's template protected. Thanks in advance —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 19:09, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Where is the tagging causing trouble? – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

You added noinclude tags to Template:Format link but not to Template:Format linkr, and apparently the second is the one used by Twinkle. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 19:15, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Done. The code at {{Please see}} was being very sneaky. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:31, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Very nice —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 19:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused

I'm confused by your edit. Your edit summary doesn't help. Should I not have used all those WikiProjects? Is there some other system that I should use? Bearian (talk) 01:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Look at your version of the rendered page, which is something that you should do either before or after saving the page. You added a template that did not exist, which is not allowed per WP:REDNOT and was a clear error. When I am fixing a bunch of pages with nonexistent templates, rather than try to read editors' minds and guess what template they were hoping to insert, I sometimes just revert so that the editor in question receives a notification and can try again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Well, I can't read your mind, either. Bearian (talk) 02:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

That's why I left an edit summary that said "Use preview". If you had used preview, you would have (or should have) seen the red nonexistent template name instead of a WikiProject box. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Ah, now I understand. I think I had a typo. Bearian (talk) 03:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Jason Stanley

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Jason Stanley, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

August blitz bling

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling over 2,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 19:19, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Berkhamsted

Hi. A page you have contributed to, Berkhamsted, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:17, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

thank you for cleaning up my user page

Hello, thank you for cleaning up my user page and removing the invalid userboxes. I am new here and still learning, and I appreciate your help and guidance. Na.234996.ouz (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Question about template ERs

Hi, I see you rightfully marked Template_talk:Pagelist#ER as done because there wasn't a working sandbox version. May I ask, how does a group of people who have reached a consensus to change a template (but that aren't actually able to implement it) usually proceed in this case? Where and how should one advertise the discussion to have someone that has the technical know-how needed visit the discussion and modify the sandbox as needed? Are the technical village pump and the wikiproject template the only places, or are there other ways?

Thanks. FaviFake (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

The next step is to edit the sandbox to produce the necessary code. Without that, the edit request can't be fulfilled by a willing technical editor who is unfamiliar with the code. If nobody in the discussion knows what to do to the sandbox, I recommend laying out exactly what the specifications are (i.e. we want the template to render like *this* under conditions a and b, and like *that* under conditions c and d). Then, create test cases on the /testcases page that will render as expected once the /sandbox code is changed. Then post a short note at WP:VPT with a link to the discussion and to the test cases. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I will do that for {{pagelist}} :) FaviFake (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done! See WP:VPT if you're interested FaviFake (talk) 21:32, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Sigh. I tried to give clear guidance. I clearly failed. Good luck. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:23, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Tech News: 2025-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Weekly highlight

• The Editing team wants to compile a list of templates, jargon terms, and policies used in edit summaries when a copyright violation is removed. This will help them identify the number of edits reverted due to copyright issues. We invite community members from the following Wikis to list these terms in T402601, or to share their list with Trizek_(WMF): Arabic Wikipedia, Czech Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, English Wikipedia, Spanish Wikipedia, Persian Wikipedia, French Wikipedia, Hebrew Wikipedia, Indonesian Wikipedia, Italian Wikipedia, Japanese Wikipedia, Korean Wikipedia, Dutch Wikipedia, Polish Wikipedia, Portuguese Wikipedia, Turkish Wikipedia, Ukrainian Wikipedia, Vietnamese Wikipedia, Chinese Wikipedia. This project is open until September 9th 2025.

Updates for editors

• The CampaignEvents extension has been enabled for all Wikisources. The extension makes it easier to organize and participate in collaborative activities, like edit-a-thons and WikiProjects, on the wikis. The extension has three features: Event Registration, Collaboration List, and Invitation List. To request the extension for your wiki, visit the Deployment information page. [7]
• The lists in the footer of the editing interface, such as "Templates used on this page," will now be organized into columns when there is enough space. This enhancement minimizes scrolling when editing lengthy articles on Wikipedia. [8]
• On September 3rd, 2025 we will increase the sampling percentages of our group by toggle experiment of the Special:RecentChanges, Special:Watchlist, and Special:RelatedChanges pages on the Chinese, French, and Portuguese Wikipedias to 100 percent, allowing more editors to be part of this experiment. This adjustment is intended to ensure we have sufficient data to make informed decisions when evaluating the experiment results. [9][10]
• Upon clicking an empty search bar, logged-out users will see suggestions of articles for further reading on English Wikipedia beginning the week of September 22. The feature will be available on both desktop and mobile. All non-English wikis received this change in June and July. The goal is to make it easier for users to find articles. Learn more.
• View all 37 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week.

Updates for technical contributors

• Detailed code updates later this week: MediaWiki

In depth

• Wikifunctions now has a new capability called "lightweight enumeration types", an enumeration type is simply a fixed set of values that's in the type's definition. This capability makes it quick and easy to define such a type, and allows for the reuse of values that are already present in Wikidata. Here is a newsletter to learn more.
• The latest Readers Newsletter is now available. This edition includes: the formation of two new teams — Reader Growth and Reader Experience; insights into declining pageviews and account creations; highlights from the Wikimania Nairobi panel on improving the reading experience; upcoming experiments to engage new and existing readers; and more.

Meetings and events

• Spotlight on some Wikimania 2025 Sessions:
  • Identifying AI-generated text by searching for ISBNs whose checksums fail: Mathias Schindler of WMDE shared tools to help communities search for these.
  • La durabilité du mouvement Wikimedia face aux défis actuels et futurs: This session explored how Wikimedia can stay a trusted source of knowledge in the age of generative AI, information overload, and disinformation.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 20:46, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Dab templates

As far as I see, they are not. I did it to remove them because they were a lot of them showing up. Unless, a tweak has to be done from the filtered and main reports. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Please link to the report that shows template dab pages. I am using User:Jonesey95/self-transcluded-templates because it can easily filter valid pages with no transclusions. (For page watchers, this is the relevant diff.)– Jonesey95 (talk) 20:25, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates. As of now Template:WiFi is one of those on the report. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Nobody should be using that report; it is not maintained, and the vast majority of its content is pages that should be excluded from such a report. See the note at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Templates/Unused_Templates_Task_Force#Wikipedia_Database_reports. That's why I made the report linked above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

I linked the wrong page. I meant Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates (filtered). WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:24, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

That report should be modified to exclude template disambiguation pages. It would help for it to be changed to use {{database report}}, so that anyone could edit the SQL. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:11, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The SQL is available at Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates (filtered)/Configuration#Source code if anyone wants to give this a shot, fwiw. — Qwerfjkltalk 12:27, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I used that SQL to build User:Jonesey95/self-transcluded-templates. I didn't think it was my place to adjust the /filtered report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:09, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl can the code from User:Jonesey95/self-transcluded-templates be used instead? That is the most fleshed out report without needing to do redundant work like adding pages in sub-categories of Category:Wikipedia transclusionless templates to that category. Gonnym (talk) 16:22, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Gonnym, can't you just copy that report? The only thing that might need changing is AND tl_from != template.page_id (which I think is for filtering out templates that don't transclude themselves). I'm not really familiar with SQL, though. — Qwerfjkltalk 10:13, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Deletion of upload "Historical documents" on 1 July 2025

Your total deletion of my upload to Wikipedia page 1816 in Canada leads me to ask: - what is a "text dump" and how is my upload a text dump? - what existing format does it not follow? - what errors does it have? I have reversed your deletion pending an explanation of it. Thank you in advance for helping me understand your 1 July 2025 edit. Man1t0ba (talk) 03:27, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

One discussion in one place, please, per WP:TALKFORK. Per WP:BRD, please see and respond at Talk:1816 in Canada, where I cited some guidelines that appear to discourage the type of edit that you made to that article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

{Infobox gridiron football biography}

If you have some time, could I enlist you to give me a peer review of {{Infobox gridiron football biography}}? I want to get another set of eyes on it before I get too far down the rabbit hole. I’ve got some good testcases going but could absolutely use more. Also some of the parser functions probably could use some cleaning up. Open to any thoughts you have and any help you can give. Thanks! —Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:16, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I didn't have the energy for this one. It looks like the merger is pretty much done. If not, let me know if you are having specific issues. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:52, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Only comment I have is to make sure you finish the cleanup after a merge. Categories, /sandbox, /doc, and /testcases needed to be deleted. Also, you left the documentation template on the redirects for some reason. Gonnym (talk) 08:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I was planning to copy some of the code from the /doc pages over which is why I had left them in place for now. — Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 08:21, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Gerber Scientific

I accidentally typed Poland instead of Polish, evidence that I actually typed it out, and didn't use all cut and paste. It doesn't really matter now. Bearian (talk) 15:37, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

I thought of that, but why Polish, though? Wikidata does not link to an article in Polish. In any case, please use Preview, or check your edits after publishing, or both. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:40, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Creating Templates

Maybe go easy just a little ? These are new templates used in just a single place so other editors can see them in use and make comment and give feedback... try not to bite the users ! Wibwob28 (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm assuming that you are talking about this revision of a template /doc page. The template showed up on a report of unused template pages, and the /doc page inexplicably had a single line of text instead of the boilerplate text that appears when you create a /doc page. I added the standard wikitext and cleaned up the misplaced TemplateData and the templates' whitespace for you. When you create live pages in article or template space, you should expect them to be edited so that they do not show up on error reports. If you want to create experimental pages, Draft and User space are good places for that; editors tend to be less fussy about problems with those pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Category:No local image but image on Wikidata

Thank you!

It's WONDERFUL that you added instructions to this category page! I AM a noob and I'm so grateful to find instructions on a category page so I don't worry that I'm getting it wrong, offending someone or breaking something. -=AND=- your instructions are clear, precise and gentle. (There have been times when I've nearly felt nausea at how confusing a help file was.) I keep saying how grateful I am. Let me say this: you made my day. Thank you! Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

You are welcome. I find it frustrating to arrive at a maintenance category to find zero documentation about why it exists and how to address the issues that it is tracking. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:00, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

GOCE CfD

Hello! Quick heads up that I just closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 September 2#Category:Pages with a stale GOCEinuse template on them as rename. Looks like it's a quick fix but I'm not that familiar with templates so leaving to you. Could be a bit before the admins (and bot) get to it though, so I could remind you later too if you'd like. Thanks for the work that you do at the GOCE ;). Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 03:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

I took care of the template and moving the category. Is there anything else I need to do to finish the CFD process? I don't frequent CFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks! GoldRomean (talk) 14:57, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

September 2025

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. While discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion, editing legitimate comments, as I did at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, is considered "appropriately editing others' comments". See these examples at WP:TPFIXFORMAT: Fixing format errors, Fixing indentation levels, and Fixing list markup (to avoid disruption of screen readers, for instance) Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. FaviFake (talk) 18:34, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

While this is a snarky response, I think there was no need for you to respond to my edit in this way. I even made sure to explain my reasoning in detail and ping you since I knew you didn't like editing of the contents of the text of your own comments. A simple "Hey, thanks but I also don’t like the colons being changed" would've done the job. FaviFake (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

You have a history of editing disruptively. Please stop. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:58, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Fixing someone's comment indentation in accordance with a policy page is "editing disruptively". Gotcha. FaviFake (talk) 19:02, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

I genuinely hope that "Gotcha" here means that you understand that what you did was objectionable and that you should not do it again. You have received many admonishments on your talk page regarding disruptive editing, and if you do not change your editing patterns, you will end up blocked. It is always sad to see a potentially productive editor end up having to leave the project. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

This is what I understand:

• What I did was not objectionable because a part of the guideline that you mentioned (WP:TPFIXFORMAT) specifically allows it.
• Since you have now warned me for the 1st time, I will not do it again to your comments, as the guideline says.
• I will change all the indentations of all the comments on Wikipedia that I believe to be incorrect, until the guideline that allows me to do that is modified.

This should clear things up. FaviFake (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

I understand your words. Good luck. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:48, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Convert module

Thought you might have some thoughts on this thread about making a new conversion module… Does something like what I’m talking about already exist? —Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:31, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

{{Infobox sportsperson}} does a rudimentary conversion of height and weight. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:03, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Tech News: 2025-38

[trimmed by Jonesey95]

• Users that search using regular expressions (regex) can now use additional features including:
  • for the intitle: keyword: metacharacters for start-of-line (^) and end-of-line ($) anchors [11]
  • for both intitle: and insource: keywords: shorthand character classes for digits (\d), whitespace (\s), and word characters (\w); and escape codes for line feed (\r), newline (\n), tab (\t), and unicode (e.g. \uHHHH). [12]

Your comment in the edit summary

First of all, thanks for catching the error in your edit here.

That said. The premise of your edit summary was false. Yes, of course I previewed and took a look; I just missed the problem, because I was looking at the original reference not the repeated version. However, you've now established it forever that I apparently don't bother with such things. The edit summary lasts forever barring something like oversight. I've written salty edit summaries before but generally regretted them. People make mistakes sometimes; it's not a big deal. Again, it's great that you're fixing these, but there's no need to shame people like this. If you wanted to bring it up, an "FYI" on my talk page would have been fine and appreciated. I don't think the edit summary is a good place, especially since per above you've assumed a "worse" case than was actually true in reality.

It's not a big deal in my case, but bringing it up in case a similar issue arises for a newer editor - I think a friendly talk page information is going to be better than the edit summary call-out there, as well. SnowFire (talk) 04:14, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

If you're reading "shame" into "please use Preview before publishing", I don't know what to tell you. I left a polite suggestion in an edit summary. The version you saved had a huge, red error message and was only 485 words, barely needing scrolling on my small screen to see the whole thing. I make mistakes too, and I am grateful when people correct them for me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:16, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

I am grateful, and I've caught other people's errors on this (some busted references that have stayed in articles over 2 months!). However, as I've already said, I did in fact preview, so your assumption was incorrect here. Yes, I missed the huge red error message, it happens once in a blue moon. Like I said, mistakes happen; the point I'm making is that this isn't something reminders particularly help on. It's like telling someone to preview so that they can catch typos. It's good advice, but sometimes diligent editors will preview and check and still miss stuff. SnowFire (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Template parameters

I recall that there used to be a report for identifying values in a template parameter across articles. Does such a thing still exist? Mackensen (talk) 11:50, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

If the template has a TemplateData section, click on the monthly report link. If it does not, one needs to be created, and then you need to wait until about the 10th of the next month for the information to be collected. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you! Mackensen (talk) 17:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hounding

Hi Jonesey95. Since you started replying to all my talk page discussions and editing most pages I create or edit soon or immediately after I edit them, I've started to feel uncomfortable, like you're stalking me. I've tried to distance myself, move onto other methods of contributing; but you've still followed me there too. This is my only warning. Stop stalking my edits, or else I'll have no choice but to report you for WP:HOUNDING as my quality of editing on enwiki is deteriorating because of your hounding/stalking. waddie96 ★ (talk) 05:11, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Without comment on the nature and content of your responses, they are always negative. Hence, I'd appreciate if you stop this behaviour immediately. You need not respond positively, I wish for you to desist from interacting with me. I will never stand in the way of an editor reverting policy issues, but your constant negative frivolous and meritless complaints constitute harassment waddie96 ★ (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I am not stalking your edits. You have the cause and effect wrong. You keep making errors in editing that draw your edits to my attention. Your edits have repeatedly shown up on previously empty or resolved sections of the Linter error table, on User:Jonesey95/self-transcluded-templates (untranscluded templates), and on Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized templates. When an editor causes repeated entries on such pages, it is natural to look through their other contributions to see if they are breaking anything else.

Our first interaction consisted of me giving you helpful advice. You have, until very recently, neglected to take that advice. Later asking me to "Fuck off" was not a good way to interact. You dug a deep hole there and have not managed to climb out. You have done better recently, which is why the above message surprised me. As for reporting me, that is your prerogative, but you might want to read WP:BOOMERANG first. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:38, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

You can clearly see if you look through all my contributions, every single revert you've done. Every single edit request I've made you've commented on and had issue with. Purposely had issue with. In fact, chimed in when another editor was dealing with the edit request. You have insistently made an effort to make my experience the past more than a month uncomfortable and frustrating. It's a terrible feeling having the notification icon pop up and feeling sick knowing it's you once again making sarcastic comments on my talk page. There's no use quoting them all now, it's an excessive amount that's all logged in our contributions. You persistenly target me alone to message consistently on my talk page about errors you are always fixing anyway. Yes, I lost my cool, and I apologise for that. There's no excuse for that language. It was a result of frustration, lack of sleep and irritation at feeling you persistently target me. And the way you go about addressing the issue is a problem. The talk page comments and their headings are sarcastic and belittling and it's demoralizing for an editor who isn't intentionally making your admin work increase on purpose or as you have claimed multiple times that I'm editing disruptively. I will escalate this further if you do not leave me alone. Other editors will likely be there to pick up the work you don't do, so use that as consolation to avoiding parsing through my contributions any further if you claim you've looked through them only once to see if [I'm] breaking anything else. Your threshold for breaking being linter errors of which there are 100s of thousands, and my 87 added in one instance is enough to type a huge essay as to why I'm so disruptive? And not once mention what a linter error is, how to address them, how to avoid them. But to remain belittling. Even after I reply saying I'll keep trying to read up if you don't explain, and to not explain but spend further effort simply 'shouting' as it were. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:23, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you feel this way. I am not targeting you. As I explained, I monitor various reports for errors. When they pop up, I work to fix them. When people post edit requests that are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable, I look at them to see if I, as a template editor, have the skills and knowledge to implement them. If the requests are incomplete, I say so; the instructions on the edit request form are pretty straightforward. If you do feel the need to report me, please ensure that you supply diffs that support your complaints, and be ready for other editors to supply diffs showing why you received the messages that you did. It will not be a pleasant experience for either of us. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:18, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

If you keep getting reverted, or asked to stop what you are doing, you should stop what you are doing. And not once mention what a linter error is, how to address them, how to avoid them, if you can't figure this out yourself (eventhough, I'm sure Jonesey linked to WP:LINTER as he does so in every single lint fix he does) then maybe you should stop editing the template namespace. Gonnym (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

@Gonnym Like I've explained above. It has nothing to do with legimate policy reverts. I've explained in detail what I'm trying to address here. Please re-read the chat, review both our contributions taking note of Jonesey95's interactions with pages I have edited, talk pages of pages I've edited (edit requests) and their associated /doc pages. As well as his posts on my talk page. and then your contribution would be valuable. waddie96 ★ (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

He never linked to that document, I'd like him to find that diff waddie96 ★ (talk) 16:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Jonesey did link to the linter page. Tenshi! (Talk page) 16:07, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I will thank you all to not assume that I use male pronouns. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:12, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

You help with infobox edit David Porter (naval officer)

It's simple when you know how. Many thanks for the speedy and efficient resolution!

I do have one further question, though. The article has been marked Use mdy dates|date=May 2021 and this makes sense to me. While mdy is widespread in the US, the format of dmy is of use in the contemporary US Navy.

Given that this relates to the past, ought it be the case that mdy should be used? As it happens, I am British, so am used to the use of dmy.Keith H99 (talk) 15:08, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood that you had changed from dmy to ymd, as well as the hyphens. No further action needed - PICNIC issue this end. Keith H99 (talk) 15:12, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

No worries. See MOS:DATEVAR for the murky guidelines on how date formats are chosen for each article. I did not research the history; I just made the formats more consistent based on the presence of the "Use mdy dates" template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:14, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed GoldRomean to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as lead coordinator, and Miniapolis and Mox Eden return as coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here. June 2025 blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 26,652 words comprising 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. July 2025 drive: 30 of the 54 editors who signed up for the July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited a total of 379,557 words comprising 151 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. August 2025 Blitz: 11 of the 17 editors who signed up for the August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 65,601 words comprising 25 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. September 2025 Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive. Progress report: As of 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 222 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,010 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Page ranges

In the ANI, I think you meant MOS:NUMRANGE/MOS:PAGERANGE rather than MOS:RANGE. Kanguole 11:06, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:19, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Big template bogey

Have a template error for you. On enWikivoyage the other week, they added Google Maps as a map option to one of their biggest templates, but it's giving a bogus image parameter error of "Google Maps directions" from en:wikivoyage:Template:Listing or en:wikivoyage:Template:Listing/doc. I'm also seeing that the new icon for this (on articles) is displaying a hovertext of "target=_blank", which leads me to suspect the hovertext wasn't identified in the correct way since OSM's map icon says "OSM directions" in that icon's hovertext. Got any ideas? Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 13:01, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

 Fixed with this edit to a new module. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:29, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Great, thank you so much! Knowing where to look is sometimes half the battle. Zinnober9 (talk) 12:35, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Jürgen Czarske

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Jürgen Czarske, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Only sort of guilty. The invalid edits were made by Zehuadou. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Infobox musical artist template website parameter

I think your latest edit of the Infobox musical artist template broke the website parameter due to a misnumbering of the labels, as website and module have the number 51. The template no longer displays URLs in articles, and in the case of modules being used, has that data in place of the URL. See Slipknot (band), where the band logo is in the website field. Miklogfeather (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you duplicated the data51 parameter. It's affecting more than 8,000 articles. It's an easy fix, but I can't do it because I don't have template editor privileges, although I would like to get that. Please fix it. Thanks. Ira Leviton (talk) 14:46, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Darn it! I worked hard to spread out those numbers, and I goofed right at the end. Terrible job by me. I have fixed it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Death cause…

Careful. [13], [14] & [15] introduced duplicate args. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:03, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, going too fast, and I broke {{Infobox musical artist}} (see above), which meant that I couldn't patrol the duplicate parameters category for new entries. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:05, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey if I had a nickel for every time I broke something… Script you might find helpful! User:Ahecht/Scripts/refresh. Allows you to essentially null edit an entire category. I ran it on the duplicate params category to clean out the Infobox musical artist issues. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:09, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I was running that or a similar script at the same time. It still took a few hours to clean it out, during which I was fixing infoboxen. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Right on. Keep up the good work! — Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:13, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

And now it is my turn… Absolutely BLEW UP the duplicate params category. And what’s worse, even though I’ve fixed it, the problem will get worse before it gets better with caching. Facepalm - Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:30, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

That's a subtle one. I'm glad you caught it before someone else got to trout you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:34, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Man I coulda used me some trout… Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:36, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

So any idea what is going on here!? This is like the 5th one of these I’ve seen… Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

What you do not smell is called "iocaine powder". If you copy and paste the version of the string from before you fixed it into this web site and click Convert, you will see that the Unicode version is JanuaryU+00A05,U+00A01795 when it should be January 5, 1795. "U+00A0" is otherwise known as a non-breaking space. Such characters are not permitted on Wikipedia pages, but they sneak in via copy and paste. When you replaced the non-breaking spaces with regular space characters (good instinct!), your script was able to parse the string. You may be able to find a module that converts all such invisible white space characters to regular spaces before the string is interpreted. I don't know why we don't have bots going around to change these invalid space characters, which cause all sorts of mischief. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

WOWWWW. Well you learn something new everyday… Thanks for the explanation. Is that something I can/should account for in Module:Person date? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:25, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

If you program the module to work around them, you will see fewer errors because the errors are hidden. It's up to you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:24, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Template:Post-palatal

Hello. Can you explain why you incorrectly though that Template:Post-palatal was a test page? BodhiHarp 19:55, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

It was created in Template space, but it had no template parameters, no documentation, no categories, and probably had no transclusions or incoming links from discussions when I found it, making it impossible to understand why it was created. All of that gave it every hallmark of being a test page. Test pages in Template space are almost always just text with no incoming links, which is what the page likely was when I found it. As it is now, it appears to be used to store article text, which is contrary to the template guidelines. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Center tags

Regarding your edit summary here I strongly suspect that content was machine translated from fwiki. The center tags appear in the French wikitext. Best, Wham2010 (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Yes, it looks like there are still many thousands of center tags in article space on fr.wiki. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Now we're colliding

I have a fix for Template:Infobox academic, let me try it out. — hike395 (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this message. I responded at the template talk page and will take a break from technical editing for a bit. Thanks for catching my errors and being willing to try fixes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:29, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for copyedit: Draft:Kratošija

Hello Jonesey95,

I know you do a lot of valuable work with the Guild of Copy Editors, and I really appreciate the time and effort you dedicate to improving articles.

If you have a moment, I would be very grateful for your help with a copyedit of Draft:Kratošija. The draft was recently moved to draftspace with the explanation "language/grammar problems". All statements are supported by reliable references, so I would kindly ask that references not be altered — I only need help with grammar, clarity, and encyclopedic tone.

Thank you very much in advance for your time and assistance! VitisArchivum (talk) 09:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I do not understand the guideline that led Joy to move this article to Draft space. The reasons at WP:DRAFTREASON do not appear to apply, WP:DRAFTNO item #5 appears to apply (you were actively working on the article), and item #6 appears to apply (you stated in an edit summary "meets notability and sourcing guidelines" when moving the article to article space). I object to this move and think that the page should be moved back to article space and should have a {{copy edit}} tag applied. This article is in much better shape than many articles we edit for the WP:GOCE. Nice work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

The reason I moved it was basically inside your cleanup edit, @Jonesey95 - for example, this article had the bold link to itself in at least half a dozen places. This indicated an obvious need to give the new editor some time to figure out how basic linking and formatting works.

At the same time, I think we still may have a problem with machine-generated text and/or the copyright policy, though, because the first paragraph in the Origin section is quoted. I've never seen this happen myself. It sounds like it was copied and pasted from somewhere. Especially because of the very intricate list of references inside it. @VitisArchivum did you get this information from somewhere else? --Joy (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I believe that your concerns do not meet the thresholds at WP:DRAFTREASON. I think that cleanup tags should have been applied instead. Please move the article back to article space, per the above links. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it doesn't make sense to me to publish an article in this state. If you want to take responsibility for it, please feel free to move it yourself. (If there's a technical limitation, there's probably a forum to request assistance about that.) --Joy (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for engaging. I have moved it back to article space per the guidelines linked above. I have tidied and tagged it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Meanderings on allocating responsibility

In this ANI thread you said.

I believe that it is better to leave a slightly broken ISBN in an article than to delete it without doing a bit of research. Someone who truly cares about fixing broken ISBNs while not introducing other problems or deleting useful information will look up the title of the book, notice that there is an ISBN that is one number off from the erroneous ISBN, and fix the ISBN.

That's an excellent observation worth further discussion. I'm commenting on your talk page rather than the ANI thread because I'm going to get a little bit off the main topic.

I'm reminded of Wikipedia:Link_rot.

At the risk of getting even further off-topic, I haven't looked at the link rot page in years and realized I misremembered it. I thought the advice was not to remove a dead link, but I see that the actual admonition is:

In general, do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. Tools, procedures, and processes are available as outlined in this document.

In other words the advice talks about the underlying cited information not the dead link itself. Curiously, the bulk of the page seems to address the rationale for not removing the dead link itself rather than the text purportedly supported by the citaiton itself, which may be why I misremembered it. Still, the general point has validity—the error itself contains information which might be helpful to some other editor with enough bandwidth to do some research.

The objection by @Salpynx: was flawed.

That editor's contention as noted in the edit summary is as follows: Undid revision 1164611993 by Srich32977 (talk) The invalid ISBN tag is correct here: it is printed on the book https://books.google.com/books?id=PvyfAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=ISBN Please stop removing ISBN information

It is not accurate to say that the ISBN value is accurate—if you go to the Google books you'll see: 0803764545

But the one introduced in the edit is a different value: 0-8037-6454-2

Still, there is merit to the suggestion that the mistyped ISBN may have useful information which goes away if it's simply removed.

This does bring me to a broader issue which is part of the reason I bring this up on your talk page not in the ANI thread.

Over the years I've developed a mindset that I don't believe is fully articulated in any written principles – it's my view, crudely stated, that an error by an editor should not impose an unreasonable burden on the reviewer.

The clearest example I can think of that it used to be the case if an editor mistakenly created an article in a language other than English, some editors would argue the proper response is to translate it rather than remove it. I haven't noticed that is much recently although I do see that CSD advice still says: An article written in a foreign language or script. An article should not be speedily deleted just because it is not written in English. Instead it should be tagged with {{Not English}} and listed at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English.

I think that's a modification of the original rules but I don't have the energy to track down the history.

Dealing with a bad ISBN is a similar issue although far less significant in terms of effort required. It's typically easier to track down the correct ISBN than to translate an article from another language into English.

When a reviewer finds a bad ISBN what's the proper response?

One potential response is:

• Correct it if the error and the correction is obvious
• Remove it if the correction is not easily identified

I think that's the way Srich approaches ISBN errors

Another potential response is:

• Correct it if the error and the correction is obvious
• Leave it for someone else if is not easily identified, and optionally send a note to the editor in question to ask them to look into it

I won't speak for you but I won't be surprised if you feel this is the better option.

I don't see this as a clear-cut question. If you push for the optional notice to the original editor, that imposes more work on the reviewer than the original editor. Recall that one got into this situation because the original editor didn't follow best practices. According to Help:ISBN: You can also manually enter an ISBN – but you should click the linked ISBN to WP:Verify that the link is good.

Almost by definition, the original editor did not do that or they would've clearly seen the error notice. They almost certainly are the editor in the best position to know what was intended and correct it. Arguably, removing the erroneous value will encourage the original editor to fix it to the extent the original editor has the page in their watchlist. There is some value in providing feedback to the original editor to encourage them to follow best practices which could be done with specific communication to that editor and more crudely by reverting blunders.

I lean toward putting more of the burden on the original editor than the reviewer but I concede that good-faith editors can have differing views.

However, I'm talking about nuanced issues which shouldn't rise to the level of blockable offenses S Philbrick(Talk) 18:54, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the long note. First, a response to your comment on User:Salpynx: you said "It is not accurate to say that the ISBN value is accurate", but that is a rebuttal to something Salpynx did not say. They said "The invalid ISBN tag is correct here". By "invalid ISBN tag", they meant the {{Listed invalid ISBN}} template, which I linked to in the ANI discussion in case you hadn't heard of it, and then followed that link with an explanation of why the template exists. Srich completely removed the listed (i.e. printed in the book) ISBN, which is not a valid action to take, per WP:SAYWHERE. It reduces verifiability.

As for ISBN-fixing options, I have fixed many thousands of invalid ISBNs (I used to ride herd over Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/ISBN errors until I got fed up with unfixed Visual Editor bugs that introduce ISBN errors and that the MediaWiki developers have not fixed after many years), and the "Correct it if the error and the correction is obvious" is the first and best option, as you suggest.

• My second and third options are "Correct it if the error and the correction is not obvious but requires a bit of research", and "check the article history to look for vandalism, editing errors, or typos".
• Another valid option that you do not list above are "Comment out, rather than delete, the offending ISBN and add an inline tag to draw other editors' attention to it". This option preserves the possibly almost-valid ISBN for other editors, including the editor who inserted it, to look up.
• Another good option, if the ISBN is hopeless, is "Add an OCLC value" so that the book is findable in a library database.
• {{Listed invalid ISBN}}, as mentioned above, is another possible option if you can find a scan of the inside of the book.
• {{Please check ISBN}} is available, though I do not use it. I'm sure there are more options.

I have found that communicating directly with most editors has a very low success-to-time-invested ratio. A lot of erroneous edits are made by editors with very few edits, some of whom are long gone. I have taken to pinging editors from my edit summaries, which is a lot less time-intensive than talk page posts. If I recognize an editor name, I will sometimes leave a User talk post. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:22, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

2025–26 FIS Alpine Ski World Cup

86% font is still more than 85% (as you said). Now at 100% size font page is unwatchable, nothing fits the line in standard width (most common automatic setting). If some people can't see it they can still enlarge it manually. There is enough maneuvering space (between 86% to 100% fonts). Sportomanokin (talk) 19:11, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

The tables where I removed the font-size=86% declarations also have <small>...</small> tags in them, which results in a font size of 73%. If you remove all of the <small>...</small> tags from those tables, you can restore the overall font-size=86% declarations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Module:Person date

I’m staying out of the discussion at Template talk:Infobox football biography because it is making me frustrated… But one thing you might add is that as a result of implementing this change, errors like this, also this one and this one (note dates were in article but not in the infobox) are being caught. These are just a few examples, if needed I can poll my contributions and find more. Hope it helps. You can also mention that I am monitoring Category:Pages using age template with invalid date (0) multiple times a day (see my userpage where it shows up in red if there are articles in it) to help flush out these problems. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm trying to keep my responses short and to the point, to avoid the discussion forking off in a dozen directions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:25, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I absolutely applaud you. I’m watching the discussion and you are doing a great job. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

With gratitude

Hello Jonesey95,

I want to thank you, respectfully, for restoring the article Kratošija to mainspace. I deeply value the way you support the community and assist editors with clarity and fairness, which contributes to objectivity and strengthens the overall quality of Wikipedia.

With sincere gratitude, VitisArchivum (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome. If you can address some of the tags I have inserted into the article, that will help. For the "disambiguation needed" tags, which might be confusing, click through the link to see that the link does not go to an article. Link to the appropriate article instead. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I’ll fix the links and will be glad to let you know when it’s done. I greatly appreciate your time and guidance. VitisArchivum (talk) 12:04, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Lifeboat pages

@Jonesey95

Thanks for the amendments

I used to put a br command to put a name on two lines, but I occasionally forget that now when using ubl, you need to put quotations on each part of the name that is split. As part of the RNLI Task Force, we are abandoning use of the br command, as apparently it causes havoc with screen readers, (so I'm told, I've never used one).

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 11:58, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

I suspect that {{ubl}} also causes problems with screen readers, since it would read out inappropriately as a list of items, as I indicated in my edit summary. I think that you should remove the ubl template entirely, and just let the text wrap normally. A wbr tag after the colon might also be appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Did you possibly mean [[Help:Line-break handling#<wbr> and soft hyphens]] → Help:Line-break handling#<wbr> and soft hyphens above? --CiaPan (talk) 19:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Sheesh, all I did was copy the URL text. Bad on me. Fixed, and thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Embedding HTML in URL sometimes requires a bit of acrobatics, and piping it additionally through a wikicode interpreter is close to wizardy. I had to compose three versions of the link above before the fourth one finally worked as intended. And even this is not displayed the way I expected. So don't feel bad, you're not alone. CiaPan (talk) 19:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Follow-up on Kratošija article

Hello Jonesey95,

I have corrected the issues in line with your suggestions:

- replaced bunch with Grape cluster and peeper with Black pepper, - added a reference (Robinson 2021) for the tag and removed the quotation marks, - I have not removed the tags yet, so that you can take a look first and guide me if needed.

I also worked on reducing repeated links (MOS:REPEATLINK), usually leaving only one per section. However, I have kept the cleanup tag in place so that you can check if this is sufficient.

Thank you very much once again for your valuable support and patience. VitisArchivum (talk) 20:05, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

I will let another editor take a look at it so that you can get a fresh eyes. A copy editor will probably visit the article in the next few months. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. So, I can move dn in the meantime, I hope :)

Thanks again.

All the best. VitisArchivum (talk) 09:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Code help

Something weird is going on with {{Infobox royalty}}. When |name=empty_string it is suppressing the default of PAGENAMEBASE. If you remove |name= entirely then it works… Is it something to do with the includeonly tags? Any help greatly appreciated!

Jonesey95
foo

foo

Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:26, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that is how template parameters work at Wikipedia. It is a perennial source of frustration and confusion. When |name= is present but blank, the empty parameter value is detected and passed by {{{name|}}}, so the second option, {{PAGENAME}}, is ignored. If you want to account for blank parameters, the usual method is {{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{{name}}}|{{PAGENAME}}}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:41, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Well that’s bullshit… thanks for educating me! - Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

[16] Facepalm —Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Apostrophe section head anchors

I don't understand your remark in this diff? 'Letters as letters' are identified as such using {{angbr}}, not quotes. So ⟨s⟩, not "s". The only issue was I had put the anchor (to the old name) after, rather than before, the new name (which makes it lot more editor-friendly but I accept the policy as it is). Another editor had swapped them around to the approved order. So what's the problem that justified a wholesale revert? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

That template inserts span tags within the span-tag-based anchor. That doesn't work. You can see the broken code on display in section 1.2.3 of the version before my edit. I did not do a wholesale revert; I went back to the last reasonable version and then tidied the anchors to match the template's documentation. If I made any errors, please let me know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, evidently I over-interpreted your reversion.

So if the normal {{subst:anchor|This is an "a"}} doesn't work, how do we get a correctly formatted section title? (is it the {{angbr}} that provokes the problem? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC) Ah... by "that template", do you mean {{angbr}}? Because I just assumed that it prefixed and postfixed anglebrackets. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

{{Angbr}} can't be used at all in anchors because of the span tags it includes. Your example has quotation marks in the anchor text, which are contrary to Template:Anchor#Limitations. {{subst:anchor|This is an &quot;a&quot;}} should work, according to the documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, now I understand. Does that restriction apply to all such 'convenience' templates? (I suspect that I have used {{ndash}}, for example.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

I think that one is safe, because its content is a single character, with no additional markup. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

I have redone the edit to apostrophe. I'd welcome your verification, please, if you have a moment or three. TYVM for your patience either way. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:35, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

One of the anchors is broken again. You can't use quote marks in the |id= portion of an anchor, as I explained above. That's why clicking on the "below" link does nothing. You need to replace the quote marks with " – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Add Template:Roh roster to your nomination

Hi. Thanks for starting this template discussion. Don't forget {{Roh roster}}. Cheers! --Mann Mann (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Oops, I missed it. I created a new TFD for it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Nomination for discussion of Template:Despite its name

Template:Despite its name has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Polomo (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2025 (UTC)