User talk:Anomalocaris

5522:

present on Knowledge. I'm not very skilled with all the tools, so please: help me. I have a few more days to create great articles, but I also want to include them in Wikimedia Commons, where I'll upload all available works of the Silesian School of Iconography. I created the category "Silesian School of Iconography," but it seems something is not quite right. Help me make such a category. I'm also writing articles about some members of this school, but I can't gather all the materials. Perhaps I'll create basic drafts for further development, which I believe is also valuable. Please, take a look at the links (note! some are drafts and I'll be modifying them), but most importantly, I care about the Silesian School of Iconography. If you can, please improve these texts. 1)

2915:

I believe it's been ok since then. Some experienced editors have agreed it's fine, but they can't move the article, as far as I understand. I would like to ask you to look at it now and if you agree, remove your comment and especially, if it is possible for you, move this article to the main space. I ask this because it has been some time that the article is in Draft, I had numerous discussions and help with about 8 Senior Editors who contributed much to the final result (talks on the page of Women in Red and other pages Usertalk), but no one with prerogatives to move the article to the main space has manifested with me. I don't understand this Knowledge process, but I sincerely ask for your help in this. Thank you in advance.

1486:: Thank you for your thoughts. I have edited thousands of talk pages, fixing lint errors, usually preserving the appearance exactly or very closely. I have received very few complaints and numerous kudos. In the past 4 months, I've received 5 notifications from users thanking me for editing their user page or user talk page. That's aside from older thanks, thanks in other ways, and thanks regarding edits of user comments on pages other than user and user talk. I do not agree that editors need to ask first, but editors should get their changes right on the first try, and if they mess up, they should fix it right away. 435:. (In preferences, on the Appearances tab, under Advanced options, check "Show hidden categories", and you'll see them too, which is helpful if you are editing.) Anything in the Draft namespace is fair game for anyone to edit, and if a draft or any other page is listed on a lint error page or any maintenance or tracking category, that will attract attention and someone may be motivated to fix the problem. Editors may be less likely to edit something in User space, but even there, lint errors and membership in maintenance categories will attract editors. There are 8 types of 2071:

style entries; they're generally unsourced, and often are more for "fun". We're working to add more content, with citations to sources, and May 1973 hadn't had much work done on it until recently. For the sake of consistency with the rest of hundreds of articles in this project in general, you can expect that the past tense will be used as the information from daily newspapers is added. To the extent that you have taken out non-verifiable or questionable sources, your contribution is appreciated. Best wishes to you for happy holidays and a prosperous new year ahead.

4407:, I thought of fixing the unnatural "That an article may occupy grey areas for inclusion, is not a valid reason" with the exact same wording you came up with, "Even if an article may occupy the grey areas of a category's inclusion criteria, that is not a valid reason". But then I went with "An article may occupy grey areas for inclusion, but this is not a valid reason". Now that you've changed it, I think my first instinct was better, so thank you for the long distance Vulcan Mind Meld and getting it back to that. <grin: --> 4732: 530:: My first edit summary was wrong, as I acknowledged right away. (I once saw somewhere that "th" at the beginning of words is voiced for grammar words and unvoiced otherwise, and I gave a bollixed version of that in my first summary.) "both thick and thin" is OK, but let's keep thinking and try to find examples without extra words. How about "both thighs"? There are 334,000 Google results for that, with quotes. Maybe we can find good international examples for voiced also, e.g. "lathe that" ... — 386:, but the decisions you viewed as errors, were intentional! As a result, I'm reverting it - and wanted to explain, at least in part - I use the archive bot to fill in the "archive-url" field at the end of my work on a draft so I don't need to run the bot multiple times. Intentionally including the 3 fields for archives, including url-status, when I paste in the source template I use, saves me from needing to go back to manually place them to direct the bot where I want them placed at the end. 22: 4191: 3821: 1292: 286:: In my opinion, it is OK to edit original userboxes in the user namespace. If there is a comment in the userbox markup asking others not to edit it, don't edit it. If the owner asks you not to edit it, don't edit it. I have edited thousands of pages where someone might claim ownership, and I would estimate that there are complaints less than 1% of the time. So go ahead and insert the missing apostrophes and use the subjunctive ("This user wishes the Bluebuck 1645: 3165: 2335: 5026: 2116: 4497: 1785: 3226:, you changed my style of having italics within the wikilink, to outside of the wikilink. Anyone should be able to format it as per their preference when they create the piped wikilink, but changing from one format to another is not really productive. In this particular case, since you made a lot more format changes in the same edit, I can understand it was a bulk change. Again, not a concern, but something to keep in mind. 2328: 635: 582: 2631: 5353: 5237: 5116: 4848: 4777: 4268: 4046: 3975: 3904: 164: 5619:. Now let's say in addition to citing the 2020 Jones study, we want to cite a 2022 Jones study. So the editor inserting the reference to the 2022 study first wants to rename the existing Jones reference to "Jones 2020", before inserting a new reference to "Jones 2022". Since the new name is going to need quotes, it's easiest if the existing names already have quotes. — 1480:: I am sorry I messed up your page in the first place, and I am sorry I didn't notice that I messed it up. I didn't reply right away because I wanted to do some further research about what happened and offer some additional thoughts, but I haven't had the chance to do that. But again, I am sorry, and I'm glad you were able to quickly revert. 4892: 5397: 5281: 5164: 4019: 4821: 3948: 4312: 1069:: My edit summary included "unify {{citation}}/{{cite}} to {{cite}}", which means, this draft used both, but only one or the other should be used, and I "unified" them to {{cite}}. (In an different edit summary I might say "unify while/whilst to while", again meaning that I chose one of the two words to use consistently.) See 4090: 5614:

I believe the original primary reason the quotation marks are preferred where they are optional is that the Wikimedia software processes things slightly faster with the quotation marks. But from my perspective, it's preferred because it's easier for editors to deal with ref names if they are all done

5538:

I also have issues regarding licenses and copyrights, as some images have been blocked. In the meantime, I'm sending images available on the website of the Silesian School of Iconography here under the "WORKS" section at the bottom of the page, and I don't know how to manage this. Please help me with

3332:

Sorry to drag this some more, but what you're saying doesn't seem to match what I'm seeing. There was one piped link with italics outside the link, one piped link with italics inside the link (mine), and two piped links with italics half outside and half inside. So if you are saying you went with the

2914:

Since that week I made the changes correcting what you pointed out - I was helped by Editors who collaborate with Women in Red Project discussions, both in what you pointed and in other issues of the article, and the errors were all corrected, we made style revisions in the narrative, references etc.

1533:

To all participants in this discussion: Lint errors are a big deal. They can result in bizarre appearances, for example, content nested inside tables, or inside the wrong table, rather than where it is supposed to be, and many lint errors can affect the display all the way to the end of a page. It is

1176:

Exactly what I need!! This look excellent editing 'habit." Thank you so very much for sharing. I know there is a lot in here but certainly I will go over the sections you edited and the ones not, to follow similar citation styles. I am still curious about the method you have used to "unify." I hope

554:

I find it truly astonishing that I had never noticed that the pronunciation of "with" with unvoiced "th" is the more common one among Americans, considering that I must have heard it countless thousands of times. Now that I think of it, I realise I had in fact occasionally noticed that pronunciation,

5695:

tags, and I kept going from there. I consider it worth spending time fixing lint errors in sandboxes because it helps create awareness about good and bad markup. Sorry, I don't know much about creating templates. I can create a template that's just a block to include in an article, but I don't know

5435:

A bunch of your edits are just masking a cewbot bug. In some specfic (but not yet identified) situation, the talkpage banners get relocated partway down the page, which obviously makes a mess of lots of things. Please don't compound/hide that by making a subsequent edit that merely masks one symptom

3633:

Sloan may be replaced in the MOS with one of the good ones you found. I don't disagree with your examples, and the high count you believe is there, may be because of bots or GNOMEs changing it to one kind of format. But as I said we can formalize this in a MOS or multple MOS with a reasoning. Even a

2736:

lint error, and second, the page displays with a leak that may go all the way to the end of the page, unless the two tags are contained within a table or div tags or perhaps some other markup that limits the scope of the leak. On your page, the leak was contained within the table cell that displayed

2687:. It is considered acceptable to edit user pages, user talk pages, and sandbox pages to fix lint errors, unless the owner asks you not to, but even if the owner ask you not to, someone else is likely to come along and fix it anyway. Most HTML and Wiki tags come in pairs, with an opening tag, such as 5728:

After going into the linked page above, i am surprised that there ONLY FIVE pages with the fostered content type of lint errors. I thought it would be much much higher. Although I'm not sure what my error was. I saw you changed my bgcolor=... to style="background-color:#..." and obviously the small

461:

so I think I'll take that approach. I appreciate the forewarning re: help from others, but as I'm not utilizing the AfC process and the articles I'm writing aren't that complicated, I'll take my chances at least for now. The articles I'm making, the bulk of the work is in the filmography, a process

439:

that do not currently exist in User space, and that is because Knowledge editors have eradicated these errors from User space. You are always free to develop drafts in your User space, but then you miss out on whatever help other editors may provide, and you'll have to move it to Draft space anyway

3590:

discourages defining rules for every possible mistake. As far as I know, you are the only editor who thought putting quotes inside song wikilinks is a good idea. There is plenty of contrary evidence all over Knowledge that we don't do it that way; therefore there is no need to modify the Manual of

2282:

to my Common.js page to give it a try, but I'm not seeing anything new when looking at pages. I've logged out, cleared my cache of this site, tried another browser, etc. Nothing so far. Is there a step I am missing, or is it not working due to the Knowledge Lint problem not updating? Do I need the

2070:

Actually, the vast majority of "months of the 1970s", and months articles in general, were written in the past tense, as seen with the 1900s through the 1960s and the ones for 1970, 1971, 1972, 1975, 1976, and 1979. While the "years" articles do use present tense, those consist mostly of headline

1993:

I find it very challenging to remember all of the dozens of ways to resolve particular Linter edge cases. Fixing center tags is a particular mystery to me: there are eight or ten ways to use markup to center something, and in some situations, some of them break things badly, and only one or two of

1870:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

5521:

Dear Wikipedians! I have a dream to create an article about the Silesian School of Iconography because I started it 11 years ago, and now I have some time since my children are on vacation, allowing me to devote myself to my passion. I once encountered this community and can't believe they aren't

1404:

to one of my talk page messages. You shouldn’t really edit other peoples messages even if you are trying to help as that could be seen as impolite. Judging by the comments above, you have been doing it in other places too, and as you can see, the user in question did not take kindly to it. If you

492:

The words "the", "that", "then", for example, do indeed start with voiced "th", but "thin", "think", "thistle", "theocracy", for example, don't. On the other hand "either", "brother", "bathe" etc have voiced "th", while "ether", "method", "bath", etc, don't. If you are a native speaker of English

392:

Wasting editors' time is something I try to avoid, and I can seem like an odd duck of a Wikipedian - as this is the first time a Wikipedian I'm not directly collaborating with has chimed in, over a silly nuance to my editing... to prevent this misunderstanding from reoccurring, I could utilize my

5677:

error. In a table, everything has to be in a cell, so, if there is something in the markup between the table start and the table end that is displayable but isn't in a table cell, it is considered fostered content, and it displays above the table. Fostered content is sometimes caused by careless

4413: 1437:

From Blanchey's comment it looks like they are refactoring other peoples' talk page comments as well so I'm not sure that would even be effective. It appears that this user is so focused on correcting lint errors that they believe it goes above the common courtesy of not mucking about with other

1367:

Did you even look at the how the page looks with your changes? It looks ridiculous, the userbox section is all down at the bottom for some idiotic reason. If you're going to fuck about with other peoples' user pages without asking (and why do you need to?), at least take the time to make sure it

544:

I agree that it's better to use examples without extra words, and on that basis just "both thick" would be better than "both thick and thin", but I liked the idea of one where "both" is actually relevant, because it refers to a pair of things or concepts. However, "both thighs" has both of those

511:

Having seen your subsequent edit summary, I have checked in a couple of dictionaries and confirmed that, very much to my surprise, the pronunciation /wɪθ/ for "with" is usual in American English. However, I suggest it is better to avoid using an example which depends on a particular variant of

1241:

Super helpful! Big thank you. I like to explore the Hidden Categories tip. Thank you for checking and confirming that the Draft doesn't have Hidden Categories as well. I appreciate the awesome job you did on {{citation}}/{{cite}}. So consistent conversion to (cite AV media}} and all the other

979:

I use that sort of syntax (page + another page or pages with links) for newspapers.com since you can't bundle clippings of parts of different pages that may contain the same article. I'm the third-largest user of newspapers.com on all of enwiki (behind two users who use it for college football

5323:

hasn't contributed to Knowledge since 21 July 2017 (six years ago), so there's no point asking them to fix their crappy reference. I did the best I could, intentionally using a generic title, intentionally creating an error message, so that, hopefully somebody with access to archives of

3059:

I figured. I did a panicked insource search to see if it had happened to many pages, but there were none out there. Relief. (I do wonder how many hundreds or thousands of little errors like this I have introduced while doing script-assisted and find-and-replace-assisted Linter edits.) –

5641:

You made a recent edit on my sandbox. Firstly, thanks for making the tables compliant with correct formatting. I guess I got lazy with closing bold quotation symbols as I was making lots of tables to see which actually looked best - they potentially will never see an actual published

1518:. In particular, when fixing lint errors involving user comments, I am scrupulous to preserve their actual words, except in rare cases where the obvious intent was to name a template rather than display it. I do not think it is fair to suggest, as you did, that I was "mucking about" 2806:(Aside: the article currently uses what Knowledge calls "American style" quote syntax consistently throughout. I am guessing this is much harder to fix by automation, so I'd prefer you left this be unless you can fix it across the whole article—in which case, of course, go for it!) 3128:, also in the table of contents where smaller headlines clearly differ non-bold --- and above all, the table of contents is automatically shown and arrested on the whole left side, no matter where you are on the page! (apparently prepared for future), but Knowledge rules here... 741:

line can be used to set up for a nested table. Anyway, I don't accept your theory that two pipes are required on the line before a nested table (except at the beginning and end of a line with style or colspan or rowspan markup in between). Your markup generates 2 lint errors: a

4880: 1242:

citation and typo edits too. I did some manually but ran into some errors so I had to leave some of them as-is for now. I submitted the draft today so I think I need to tap into editing other Drafts. Time to explore the Knowledge editor:). Thank you again for all the help!

5385: 5269: 3249:: The italics started outside the square brackets and ended inside the brackets; this is invalid formatting. You can either have the italics outside the brackets or inside the brackets (in the second part of the wikilink after the pipe), but not one of each. For example, 1194:

I use the regular Knowledge editor to edit articles, without any special tools. So, if I need to unify {{citation}}/{{cite}}, I determine which one I want to use, and then I change all occurrences of the other to the one I want to use, one at a time. In a recent edit of

843:

lint error, which I don't want here, but you can test that on your own. The fostered content, "row two cell one || row two cell two" isn't in a table cell, so it displays before the table. This confirms my position that you can't put any wiki markup on the line starting

957:

templates; in fact I knew I'd seen it all over, but I saw the misnested tag and a solution and I didn't analyze it further. So, thank you for fixing it correctly and thank you for notifying me. Just one favor, though: It would be helpful to mention the page in question

5152: 3936: 4473:

Hello! I noticed you fixed some of my coding errors on various pages in my user space. I wanted to say thank you ... I'm not the best with Wiki-markup, especially when attempting new things. Maybe someday soon I'll get those Sibelius LoC pages over to the mainspace!

4007: 4809: 3755:, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Knowledge. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on 1944:: Right. I thought it might have to do with deletion notices, but the template is written to hide the display, so I didn't see the notices and I found this one quite baffling. Mainly I was hoping it was on the list for deletion and I'm pleased to see that it is. — 4300: 2803:? Or else, if it doesn't require too much tech savvy, could you refer me to the app/tool/add-on/whatever and its documentation? Everything looks fine in the article (I think), but the underlying markup language is a mess, which sometimes makes it a pain to edit. 1199:, that meant changing {{citation...}} to {{cite AV media...}} with no other changes required, but sometimes, the parameters of the two template aren't the same and further changes are necessary. As long as I'm giving editing advice, I'd also suggest clicking on 1161:

can be used for magazines. When a news story title includes extraneous information, such as "News analysis" or the name of the publication or organization, it's best to use just the story title and not the extraneous parts. These are some of my editing habits.

1077:, which explains to use a consistent citation style. Some further points: I strongly believe that when a reference is produced by an organization, for example, Human Rights Watch, the organization's name should appear, not in italics, and not its website name ( 3189:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

713:, which shows a table with 5 nested tables. Markup for each of the nested tables starts on a new line. When a nested table is first item in a table cell (2 of the 5 nested tables), the line above the table markup starts with a pipe; the pipe is needed for the 750:. My theory is that somehow, this bollixed markup causes a display effect that you are trying to achieve. But it's not OK to generate display effects through error behavior. Please find markup that generates your desired display without lint errors. Cheers! — 1919:

are not required for TFD-related errors, since they are temporary. You can just let the TFD run its course after a week, or if the TFD'd template is not really used, you can wrap the notice in noincludes. One other method to get rid of some errors is to add

248:

Hi there. Yes, I completely reset my page and started adding all the userboxes back. It was edited before and I wasn't used to the syntax having not formatted tables for several years! I was going to fix it eventually, thank you for getting there before me!

4355:

I would be especially wary of doing this on user talk pages, which gives the users in question a big red notification that "Anomalocaris has left a message on your talk page" (but there is no such "message" to be found without looking at the page history).

4078: 1469:

specifically approves editing user pages and user talk pages for the purpose of eliminating lint errors. Knowledge editors routinely do this, without asking first, usually without complaint, and often with thanks after the fact. However, in the case of

1474:, I acknowledge that I didn't follow the instruction "Especially on User and User talk pages, try to minimize disruption by getting your fix right on the first try." Worse than that, after my edit, I still didn't notice that I had messed up the page. 100:

You commented on the lack of page numbers in book references (Thanks!). What can I do about book references made by other editors given that I do not have these books? Should I replace some of these by complete references from books in my possession?

3193:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

4973:

can't span multiple paragraphs—techically, it can's span a block or more than a block. Anything indented is a block, so it can't wrap lines that begin with colon, asterisk or number sign. It may look OK, but it still generates misnested tags for

737:) continues with other markup; each of these 9 times, the additional markup is row style markup that doesn't end with a pipe. I don't think table row lines ever need two, or even one, pipe at the end, or that any such pipe or pipes on the 3488:

piped link with quotes (which is outside), and which was added in 2011, whereas the Discographies manual has been referencing Sloan (band) from 2007. If we're going for quotes outside the link style, let us formalize it in the MOS with a

555:

but just put it down to an idiosyncrasy of the particular person. No doubt for such a basic and usually unemphasised word well over 99% of the time one hears through the sound to the meaning, without being conscious of the sound itself.

3861:

Yeah, there is probably a bug in there somewhere, but I've submitted so many bugs to phabricator that are much more important. Unfortunately, quirks like this prevent bots from mass-replacing center tags around tables. One by one.... –

3572:". This article has no songs with quotes inside the wikilink. These are just the first four articles I thought of checking. Again, I am confident that less than 1% of song wikilinks are piped to put quotes inside. I agree with you that 1260:

Hello. I want to share the good news- the article has been created yesterday with some encouraging rating. Thank you very much for your outstanding work editing the draft and ensuring quality. You are the best!! Have a wonderful day!

545:

advantages, so that's fine. "Lathe that" is OK, but it would be nice (although not essential) to find an example which is more of a natural expression, if possible. Since we agree on "both thighs", I will put that into the article

2695:). The slash is at the beginning of a closing tag. A slash at the end of a tag is a self-closed tag. A self-closed tag is a tag that opens and closes in one operation. This is usually an error, but it is allowed for tags such as 1223:, and if you set your preferences to display hidden categories, you will see such maintenance categories at the bottom of pages, and then you can fix whatever is causing the problem. I haven't seen any any hidden categories in 3483:

I'm all for consistency. I felt having double-quotes inside the link was consistent with having two single-quotes (italics) inside the link. I wouldn't consider highly of using Sloan (band) as a reference because it has just

3131:

Similarly, the usual English headline capitalisation looks also better; Could Wiki not be a bit more tolerant, as long as the presentation is improved in a reasonable way? Let me know why this stiff wiki policy... Greetings

1051:

You are awesome! Thank you so much for the thorough edit as well. I will need to carefully watch the example edits you have done- to understand what you mean by {{citation}}/{{cite}} vs {{cite}}... I appreciate your help!

5647:

Again, thanks for the edit - it will be useful in case I bring those tables across to published articles so that they are in a complete state. Also, you don't happen to have any experience with creating templates do you?

4876: 3445:

can be used as a model for styling singles. And in that article, we find several music singles in quotes with the quotes outside the wikilink, and none with the quotes inside the wikilink. I would guess that the reason

5381: 5265: 3368:

on italics outside the link." Knowledge style for quotes and external links is that article titles or page titles are in quotes and the quotes are part of the external link. Cite templates do this automatically, viz:

1405:

have an issue with other peoples messages/user pages, take it to their talk page and suggest that they change it. Please bear this in mind and feel free to contact me should you have any questions, have a great day!

5644:

Just wondering why and how you came across a sandbox of all places to edit? Especially considering they may never be published. Do you run scripts or something to alert. Genuinely interested as to how this all came

5148: 4433:

But I saw that edit and started to revert it. But then I saw how "clunky" the existing sentence was and looked at your attempt to fix it, and ended up with that result. So you definitely had an influnce to be sure

2476:

I've mostly finished off the fixable stripped issues in Template Talk pages, but I'm stuck on the remaining fixable ones. I have it down to 35 fixable, 4 questionable, and 19 to skip. If you want to take a look at

4383:, which are syntax errors that are currently worked around by the WikiMedia software but which may have their workarounds removed. Fixes like this are preventing erroneous image rendering now and in the future. – 4003: 4805: 3932: 4296: 2541:

I'm surprised that you thought most of those in the top table are talked about in their pages and not fixable. I'll go back and look at them again and see what I'm missing. As for tt fixes, I only stumbled upon

462:

I've made quite efficient for myself, and am only getting better at. The only area I really sought help was for the writing aspects, the biography writing - which I'm moving towards independence on, such as on

3436:

discusses styling for albums, without getting into the nitty-gritty of styling for singles. But it still provides guidance, saying, "A few examples of acceptable formatting styles, using the discography of

2659:

Hi there. First off, confused why you changed something from my sandbox, even though it was helpful, that's a given. Second off, what's the actual difference between adding a slash or not ( <small: -->

4074: 1688:

article from the plant to the fly genus. This was quickly reverted. The taxobox for the fly species continued to link to the plant genus until 30 January 2011, when a disambiguation page was set up at

5055:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2145:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 389:"use dmy" was also intentionally left without brackets, for an elaborate reason that is best summed up to be my latest attempt to develop a more efficient "process" for myself while writing a draft. 3584:, as evidenced by just about every article you can think of that includes quoted wikilinked song titles. There is no need to modify the Manual of Style because it never comes up. Nobody does this. 206: 202: 2955:

Thank you so much for making that comment back then, which helped me improve the references and thank you especially for your appreciation now, quite encouraging and meaningful to me. Regards.

2481:

and see if you can clear any, that would be great. You've cleared multiple lints I'd gotten stuck on in the past and thought you might be able to nab these. Completely at your leisure. Cheers,

1958:

The clue was that span tags were suddenly having block content inserted into them, when they were fine before. That is almost always caused by unmodified XFD templates being transcluded. I put

3314:, which I would not have done if italics in wikilinks had been marked up correctly and consistently throughout the page. But since italics with wikilinks were bollixed elsewhere, I standardize 717:

element. If there is also style markup for the cell containing the nested table (both cases in this example), there is also a pipe at the end of the style line, basically corresponding to the

3800: 3783: 5188:

I didn't change any references except minor details like fixing all caps. So don't blame me for any bare URLs or missing titles, they were already there and I had nothing to to with them. —

2581:

Thanks, I have referenced that page before for various things, but somehow overlooked mono on there. Very glad to see center was updated, I've run into some table centering issues lately.

1445:, specifically pinging you as you have not responded to this discussion in any way - can you explain why you think correcting lint errors is more important than respecting other editors? ♠ 4560: 1727: 2242:

picked up many of the fixes I made the first time, and made many additional fixes. Then I came back and made further improvements. This time I don't think I messed anything up. Cheers! —

3079:: Thank you for the follow-up search. Glad to know it came out clean. I usually Show changes before saving, looking for mistakes like this, but I probably skipped that step this time. — 5071: 2546:

recently, so I'll start using that more. I've been using code when the discussion is about code/parameters, and been using samp for the noncode stuff, like some user's tt signatures.

2161: 1534:

good to fix lint errors and one doesn't need to get permission first. However, if an editor has said, "please don't fix lint errors on my page," such requests should not be ignored. —

1121:

displays the name without italics. There are borderline cases that may be hard to decide, but mostly it's not hard to figure out. When a story appears on a bona fide news site, I use

2904:

Hi Anomalocaris, in April you made a comment on this article, leaving a flag there: "Comment: links with "publishing date" are messed up. I fixed a few of them. —Anomalocaris (talk)

2039:

To center text in a Tmbox or Editnotice: |textstyle = text-align: center; To center a tree chart: {{tree chart/start|align=center}} Other centering: <gallery class="center": -->

1215:. Then, when you preview or save an edit, you'll see certain hidden maintenance and error categories, if applicable to the page. For example, some pages have reference markup like 5040: 2895: 2130: 725:

tag. When a nested table isn't the first item in a table cell (3 of the 5 nested tables), the table starts right up without any pipes at the end of the previous line. The entire

5687:{| |Here's a table that has only one cell |- This is supposed to be after the table but somebody forgot the closing |}, so we're still in the table and this is fostered content 1697: 1652: 1638: 3649:

without touching upon the alternate style. But at the same time mentioning that quotes should be used within wikilinks for piping in disambiguation pages, such as described at

3170: 3155: 4578:

We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

493:

then just listen to the difference when you say "thin" and "think", for example, or "bath" and "bathe". Better still consider the pairs mouth/mouthe and thigh/thy, where the

3454:, doesn't explicitly say "Put quotation marks outside wikilinks" is it's just never been an issue in Knowledge, at least until now. You won't find articles with markup like 2999:: Glad to hear it! I write detailed edit summaries in part to encourage other editors to make the same fixes, or avoid making the same mistakes in the first place. Cheers! — 2459: 2452: 1701: 1681: 454:

I was aware there were maintenance categories - but never realized they were this extensive. Thank you for the information, and I'll do what I can to limit triggering them!

3752: 3737: 3185: 2409:

There's a blocked user using various blocked, but not TPA blocked, IPs to write the same "slanderous manafesto" (my words for that mess) against Bbb23, so I'd skip fixing

1217:{{cite web |title=Archived copy |url=http://mywebsite/lost.html |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20010401194058/http://mywebsite/lost.html |archivedate=2001-04-01}} 5132: 5108: 1570: 639: 627: 3153: 976:

I should have mentioned. Didn't realize there was a stray pipe—that'd easily cause a lint error and is an obvious fat finger. Guess I was typing a little too quickly.

304:

Now I look at it, the original creator of the userboxes in question has been permablocked and the userboxes in question are not transcluded on anyone else's page(s).

3850:

tags it's not necessary to explicitly left-justify the text in each table cell. It seems that in this instance, there is no simple replacement for the center tags. —

2450: 1337: 866: 3580:". But it has numerous singles links that could have been piped to put the quotes inside if that were the standard. They aren't piped to put in the quotes because 1305: 4380: 2205:

and I did not understand why the pictures were removed apart from the correction of grammatical errors. If you can give me a reason I would be happy, thank you.

2038:

To center a table cell's contents: |style="text-align: center;" | Content |colspan="5" style="text-align: center;" | Content <td style="text-align:center": -->

4535: 4504: 4490: 586: 574: 4485: 1773: 324:

Ok technical errors like that should be fine to edit on. Whoops on my part! I was not completely done but I was also not working on it for the time being too.

2511:, but I didn't succeed immediately and I don't want to spend any more time on it, at least right now. By the way, I noticed that somewhere you fixed obsolete 764:

P.S. I agree with you that my version was formatting differently, but my version did not conform to your theory about two pipes placed on the previous line. —

4932: 3387:

However, Knowledge style for quotes and internal links (wikilinks) is that the quotes are outside the link. It has to be that way. Otherwise, the markup for

2413:

specific selfclosing span errors for right now (the pages get deleted anyway). They've been popping up every few hours or so this evening. I've been letting

1633: 2905: 3650: 2733: 2680: 1326: 795: 779: 698: 684: 210: 136:

has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the

3124:

I have meanwhile noticed the difference between straight & curved quotes; As I use a word processor, it took a long time... Bold headlines would look

2924: 2827:: If there is a bot to standardize cite whitespacing, I'm not aware of it. As for logical quotations, as you say, this would be much harder to automate. — 5380:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 5264:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 4875:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 4804:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 4295:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 4224: 4107: 4002:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 3931:" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. ( 2042:{{Gallery|align=center}} Centering the content of a userbox, if the content is in |info = | info-op = text-align: center {{location map|float=center}} 1910: 625: 2036:

If none of the div tags work, you can hack it with a table: {| style="margin: auto" | To center an hr tag: <hr style="width:80%;margin: auto;" /: -->

903: 683:

A nested table should begin on a new row and the "||" placed on the previous line. Your edit also conformed to this, but it was formatting differently.

881: 466:. The benefits of draft space will be more useful to me once my editing focus shifts to more complex topics. Thank you for your time, I appreciate it! 5147:" 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. ( 4073:" 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. ( 3206: 2937:

looks pretty good! The publishing date errors were all cleaned up, so I removed the comment. I expect someone will approve the article soon. Cheers! —

3731: 1916: 2466: 1905: 1549:

Ok sure, what I wanted to do was display the template to show the editor in question what it would look like, the code code be found in the source.

5476: 2640: 2608: 1508:, because sometimes editors intend to mention rather than display templates. I don't know what you intended, so I offerered that as a possibility. 3333:

first proper style that was initially present in the page, I can understand. On quotation marks for the piped links, there was only one (mine for

1692:. At that point, the article about the fly species was edited to claim that it was a plant. That was an error. In May 2014, a disambiguation page 1592:

Hello Anomalocaris, please use the correct syntax for non-breaking spaces. It is "&" immediately followed by "nbsp;" and not "nbsp;" only. In

673: 4838: 2090: 572: 344:

has now been fixed from your recommendations. Do we know roughly when these pages will be created and moved? Thanks for your help, kind regards!

5098: 3768: 3673:

or the several pages where we have taken pains to document the usages. I don't think my formatting was a "mistake". It was just a different way.

2188: 5343: 2861: 2796:

page. I am wondering, it looks like you maybe used a tool to automate the work on the Reference list, removing all the weird spaces and stuff?

1356: 787: 773: 759: 237: 3105:

Anomalocaris, Thank you very much for your Copy edits to my draft article, Chimanabai Clock Tower. I express my gratitude for your kind help.

1841:

redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

1768: 1504:

is no longer indented; I don't think that should be an issue and I'm sorry if it bothers you, but in my edit summary I offered the suggestion

620: 5430: 4904: 4523:, 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 4516: 4512: 4230: 2499:: Good work. Most of the remaining Template talk missing end tag lint errors are discussions about linty markup. It might be possible to fix 475: 449: 218: 5760:

Outstanding work! A thanks-less task really. Mind you, I and see many others have thanked you, so maybe not that thank-less after all :-) –

5409: 3696:

to add two new sections, §Quotation marks and external links and §Quotation marks and internal links. It might have been better to start on

2054: 1933: 998: 971: 371: 5227: 4404: 3576:

might not be the best model to be mentioned in the Manual of Style, and you are correct that it has only one piped link with quotes, viz: "

1270: 1251: 1236: 1189: 1171: 1061: 1046: 270:, for example, are missing apostrophes and such. Userboxes aren't usually my area so I don't know how precious they are to the individual. 37: 5293: 4253: 122: 4549: 3779: 311: 299: 186: 118: 1962:

into both XFD'd pages that were transcluded there, and that seems to have solved the problem, even with the original syntax in place. –

431:. I fixed that error, and as long as I was editing it, I fixed other things, including the issue you noted that puts the page in hidden 5176: 1220: 647: 137: 3318:

on italics outside the link. This is also consistent with quotation marks outside the link, which also appears on this page. Cheers! —

3020: 1024: 353: 5106: 4928: 4031: 3174: 2890: 1875:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the 564: 539: 149: 128: 4833: 3960: 692: 330: 5488: 4915: 4351:

While this policy applies only to bots, human editors should also follow this guidance if making such changes in a bot-like manner.

4334:

Hi. I notice that on September 27, you made quite a few edits to user talk pages and the like, to fix a duplicate thumb in images (

4324: 2703:. It is not proper to close a tag with the same tag. In the case of the small tag, the second tag means "even smaller", like this: 1006: 861: 4349:. Given your rate of editing, I am convinced you are doing those fixes by hand (rather than running an unapproved bot) but still: 953:

to fix what was then the only such lint error in Article space. I did think it odd that page numbers couldn't be linked inside of

888:

of citations that use this, so any solution is going to require bot intervention across hundreds, maybe even 1,000 or more pages.

5548: 3965: 2934: 701:: Thank you for getting back to me. As an aside, when you comment on my talk page, it's helpful to mention the page in question, 335: 2224: 1593: 1033:: On talk pages, it's customary to add new sections at the end, not the beginning, so I moved your section to the end. I edited 402: 5018: 4767: 4486: 3894: 2741:)", so, effectively there was no leak, but there would have been if there had been anything in the table cell after the second 2235: 2202: 2108: 1774: 1748: 1499: 1453: 1391: 942: 743: 594: 5681:{| This one-celled table is missing a pipe character in column one that would turn the rest of this line into a table cell |} 1347:

Improved. While the suggestions I offer on drafts may be helpful, I am not on the committee that approves drafts. Good luck! —

178: 5615:

the same way, in quotation marks. Let's say, for example, that an article has a reference to a 2020 study by Jones, coded as

4258: 2637:

Thank you for the assistance. I'm still new n trying to learn how to give out info for article pages Wikipeda doesn't have.

1828: 1627: 658: 605: 497:

difference is unvoiced versus voiced "th". Alternatively, look a few of them up in any dictionary which gives pronunciation.

341: 95: 5424: 5337: 5197: 2410: 1341: 1317: 5746:: The reason there were only 5 pages with fostered content is that Wikipedians like me are constantly fixing lint errors. — 5094: 4216: 3373:{{cite news |author=Journalist |title=story |publisher=newsgatherer |date=July 3, 2023 |url=http://newsgatherer.com/story}} 2853: 2836: 2265: 2251: 2184: 1899: 1514:: Again, I'm sorry I messed up your page. Aside from that, I believe that I have consistently followed the instructions at 225: 5219: 4102: 2818: 2772: 2758: 4520: 3756: 3139: 2220: 2196: 1333: 938: 69: 65: 61: 57: 53: 49: 45: 41: 3036: 2964: 2946: 2800: 5723: 5628: 5377: 5261: 5144: 4872: 4801: 4508: 4292: 4070: 3999: 3928: 3748: 3088: 3069: 3054: 2555: 2536: 2444: 2426: 2399: 2003: 1988: 1971: 1953: 678: 319: 277: 1558: 5516: 5210:, which were erroneous side-effects of changing titles from all caps to initial caps, and broke two cite templates. — 3813: 3587: 3221: 2383: 2372: 1582: 1432: 1414: 521: 506: 133: 114: 5769: 5755: 5738: 5012: 4476: 4335: 4166: 3008: 2590: 2576: 2564: 2315: 5714:: contact me on my talk page for help with finding or creating a template. Explain what you would like it to do. – 4958: 4759: 4342: 4144: 3882: 3871: 3856: 3836: 3796: 2462:, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A11 is for mainspace only. Thank you. 2321: 994: 899: 377: 266:

Is it impolite of me to edit (the original versions of) userboxes for spelling and grammar? Many of the userboxes

154: 140:. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. 4460: 4443: 4392: 5090: 4864: 4840: 3709: 3684: 3664: 3600: 3500: 3478: 3424: 3408: 3348: 3327: 3014: 2180: 1752: 946: 747: 4986:

For block quotations on talk pages that break onto their own line, or contain paragraph breaks, editors can use

4554: 4362: 2034:(For non-text things. Sometimes doesn't work.) or this: <div style="margin:1em auto;text-align: center;": --> 1376: 642:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months 589:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months 5573: 4722: 3741: 3697: 3521: 3147: 2404: 1979:: Thanks for the tip and for inlining the transclusions. With my experience, I should have known this by now. — 1219:, where "Archived copy" is used in place of the real page title. Such pages are automatically placed in hidden 432: 5705: 4701: 4480: 3294: 3270: 5140: 4909: 4210: 3773: 2990: 2780: 2648: 1605: 1594:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Uranium-233&type=revision&diff=1108945796&oldid=1103648717

483: 267: 256: 4135: 1921: 5369: 5345: 5253: 5229: 5064: 4036: 3639: 3565: 3469:

Look around Knowledge. I am confident that less than 1% of song wikilinks are piped to put quotes inside. —

3334: 2154: 1794: 1526:

is unhappy that a formerly indented template is no longer indented. In any event, I don't think my edit of

1450: 1373: 983:

Appreciate the heads up—this might have gone uncaught for a while if not for the lint errors it generated.

2841:

All right, then. I appreciate the quick response. Also: extra thanks for actually doing all that manually!

1827:

disambiguates only one extant Knowledge page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a

1601: 1543: 817:{| class="wikitable" | row one cell one || row one cell two |- || row two cell one || row two cell two |} 5674: 5319:

which erroneously used the magazine name as the title, and lacked an author, an actual title, and a URL.

5076: 4370: 2519:

tags. That's totally correct in article space, but on talk pages, I usually preserve the appearance with

2490: 2166: 1740: 1704:, which claimed it was a fly from 2009-2011, and then incorrectly claimed it was a plant from 2011-2014). 1656: 1634: 1527: 1519: 1493: 1401: 1282: 840: 261: 5657: 4426:

Well, when I saw your changes, I decided not to quibble about which/that - more often then not, it's an

3413:

Can you point me to the style for quotes in piped links? If my style is incorrect, I won't use it again.

1684:

was created 15 April 2009, and a half hour after it was created, the creator changed the content of the

5544: 5305: 4980: 2670: 2102: 1872: 1744: 1325: 110: 4417: 3114: 2567:

and similar Linter error help pages for detailed instructions on how to fix tt tags and a lot more. –

4989: 4747: 4715: 4329: 3764: 3561: 3545: 3178: 3143: 2216: 1578: 1015:

article. I merged multiple reference to improve the section and wondering if you check it out for me

5535: 3240: 2296: 2075: 1466: 512:

English. Would "both thick and thin" work for you? To me, both "both" and "thick" have unvoiced th.

5405: 5289: 5172: 4900: 4829: 4320: 4204: 4203:

Hi Anomalocaris. so much thanks for your attention about my signature. i fixed it as you mention. —

4181: 4098: 4027: 3956: 3537: 3461: 3391: 2303: 1894: 1801: 1070: 916:, I correctly identified the bad markup, but I mis-identified the problem. The real problem was in 458: 2620: 5365: 5249: 5128: 4860: 4789: 4280: 4058: 3991: 3987: 3967: 3916: 3517: 3276: 2978: 2972: 2849: 2814: 2261: 1511: 1477: 1471: 1446: 1420: 1369: 783: 688: 214: 5511: 5466: 4155:

when the code in question happens to be Wikitext. Just an FYI in case it helps you in future. :)

2037:

How to center a table on the page: {| style="margin: auto;" <table style="margin: auto;": -->

2017:

I mean, look at this excerpt from my cut-and-paste cheat sheet. And this is just for centering.

1877: 1611: 1597: 412: 383: 5587: 5553: 4793: 4769: 3920: 3896: 3202: 2768: 2666: 2616: 1564: 1313: 1156: 1140: 1081:). The same applies if the organization is a news or media company such as Deutsche Welle (not 962:), because I didn't remember and I had to look in my contribution history to find it. Cheers! — 702: 5531: 4122: 3740:. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Knowledge uses a set of 416: 5540: 5052: 4931:, but it seemed to handle the bulleted list section just fine. Unless I'm missing something, 4376: 4346: 4284: 4260: 2142: 1867: 1810: 1778: 1693: 1429: 1388: 1224: 1196: 1148: 1034: 471: 398: 5454: 5670: 5063:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4588: 4583: 3760: 3553: 3549: 3533: 3135: 3110: 2960: 2920: 2867: 2625: 2500: 2208: 2153:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1574: 990: 895: 669: 616: 349: 106: 5499: 5462: 2414: 1573:

because i was having a lot of trouble (i’m also planning of retiring) so thanks for that.

8: 5719: 5569: 5559: 5446: 5401: 5357: 5285: 5241: 5168: 5120: 4896: 4852: 4825: 4781: 4709: 4388: 4316: 4272: 4094: 4050: 4023: 3979: 3952: 3908: 3867: 3832: 3807:, but I couldn't get the bottom table to display correctly. Is there a way to fix this? — 3266: 3065: 3032: 2644: 2586: 2572: 2551: 2486: 2478: 2422: 2311: 2292: 2050: 1999: 1967: 1929: 1882: 1764: 1756: 1266: 1247: 1185: 1057: 1020: 174: 5666: 5634: 4593: 3880: 3854: 3811: 3119: 2845: 2824: 2810: 2684: 2458:

Hello Anomalocaris. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of

2257: 2231: 2212: 1554: 1515: 1410: 1124: 871: 436: 325: 4175: 1852: 1097:), use the publication or website name in italics, and not some form of the URL, like 5747: 5697: 5620: 5583: 5507: 5416: 5329: 5211: 5189: 5034: 5004: 4452: 4409: 4345:

and as such should not be done on their own because they clutter page histories. See

4249: 4162: 3701: 3592: 3569: 3470: 3400: 3319: 3211: 3198: 3080: 3046: 3000: 2952: 2938: 2901: 2886: 2828: 2786: 2764: 2750: 2676: 2662: 2612: 2528: 2436: 2243: 2124: 2094: 1980: 1945: 1723: 1619: 1535: 1442: 1348: 1309: 1228: 1163: 1132: 1038: 963: 853: 848:

except style markup for the table row, and definitely not a pipe for "table cell" or

765: 751: 710: 531: 441: 363: 308: 291: 274: 253: 243: 229: 145: 5182:

As the edit summary (correctly supplied in the following edit) shows, all I did was

4171: 4147:(which I've already amended with the recommended markup). Aside from looking nicer, 1710: 802:? Refining my earlier point, I believe the only markup that goes on a line starting 5765: 5734: 5653: 5593:

Quotation marks are preferred but optional if the only characters used are letters

5536:

https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Like_the_dewfall/Dariusz_Klejnowski-R%C3%B3%C5%BCycki

5484: 5320: 5083: 5048: 5000: 4914:

Hi. Just seeking some clarification for future reference about an edit you made at

4427: 2986: 2738: 2471: 2463: 2173: 2138: 1856: 1838: 1669: 1483: 1424: 1383: 651: 598: 467: 420: 408: 394: 195: 3669:

Disagree with WP:Avoid instruction creep here for the manual though. Just look at

949:. HTML4/5 Misnested tags are under control in the Article namespace and I came to 931: 5441: 4755: 3700:, and very likely a discussion will start there regarding my additions. Cheers! — 3447: 3433: 3217: 3106: 2956: 2930: 2916: 2909: 1814: 1012: 984: 909: 889: 665: 612: 463: 359: 345: 4731: 4524: 4151:

tags automatically escape any embedded wiki markup, which obviates the need for

4129: 2238:

I unintentionally messed up the gallery. You properly reverted my edit and then

1871:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

1813:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

1709:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

5729:

as you stated. I didn't know that small couldn't cross two lines. Interesting.

5715: 5665:: For the past several years, I have edited a lot of Knowledge articles to fix 5579: 5565: 5458: 5393: 5277: 5160: 5060: 4888: 4817: 4598: 4384: 4308: 4086: 4015: 3944: 3863: 3842: 3828: 3693: 3451: 3262: 3076: 3061: 3042: 3028: 2582: 2568: 2560: 2547: 2496: 2482: 2432: 2418: 2307: 2288: 2239: 2150: 2082: 2072: 2046: 1995: 1976: 1963: 1941: 1925: 1760: 1673: 1587: 1423:

I guess we could block them from user pages although that would affect theirs.

1362: 1262: 1243: 1181: 1066: 1053: 1030: 1016: 170: 5562:. What is the motivation for adding quotation marks for <ref name=abc: --> 5523: 5392: