User talk:Walter Görlitz/Archived Talk to 2019-12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Walter Görlitz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello! This is a generic message created and copied to all editors using scripts that I have created. As I have recently changed my username from "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21", any scripts that I have created that are listed at your common.js page may, at the moment, no longer be working. To fix this, simply update all occurrences of "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21"; see here for an example. All the best! -- /Alex/₂₁ 11:07, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you have something against ISO dates? It doesn't really matter to me, but I find the df parameter a lot easier to use than doing the full month names. —howcheng {chat} 19:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Howcheng: No, but MOS:DATE (MOS:DATEUNIFY) suggests that there be consistency. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I get that, but that can be done with df. The MOS doesn't specify that the wikitext has to be consistent. —howcheng {chat} 20:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Redirects are cheap. Since you had some involvement with the Redirects are cheap redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Please, I need your input. There is a conversation about splitting an article because of its size, but I don’t care which way you would vote on if it should be split or not. My issue is that the other editor and a companion-in-arms are misusing, mistranslating Wikipedia:Article size. These two are reducing the size of the largest articles in Wikipedia, which sounds like a noble goal, but when I asked what limit there should be on an article size, the response was 100 kB characters. The Wiki-guideline does state that readable prose should be less than 100 kB, but readable prose is the article minus citations, lists, tables, footnotes, and images, so I find the interpretation dangerous. The other editor said to get articles down in size, a yearly list could be cut down in half, in quarters, or even monthly. I cannot picture the easy usage of lists that is divided by month for multiple years. The guideline mostly states lists and tables are excluded from the guideline, so my objection to the split is that there is no justification except a misused guideline.

Basically, I think these two editors are going beyond being useful in improving Wikipedia and are moving into damaging Wikipedia, so I would like you to come to Talk:List of 2017 albums#Request for comment, read the discussions in the two section above it, especially Talk:List of 2017 albums#Redux, and provide feedback. I do not care if you say split or oppose, but to me the discussion is not about the split but the misuse of the Article Size guideline, and I want your and others I respect feedback on the conversation and the proper use of the guideline. Mburrell (talk) 05:04, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Walter, you know a thing or two about music. Can you have a look at this article and see what you can do? There's a dearth of sources, and there's a few disputes about names and dating. Whatever you can pull out of your archives, whatever you can add to the article will be greatly appreciated. Drmies (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Drmies: Wow. The supplied sources include passing mentions of the project, but it might be better served with a section on Eminem's article, since most mentions are in articles about him, leaving a redirect (and one for Bassmint Productions). Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

I was thinking that too, but there were a few records (well, tapes...), and I thought maybe you can find some more information to solidify as well as clarify. But maybe you're right. Thanks for looking at it--I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

I'll leave all my main points on the thread, but one question regarding where you want to put it. Since this started on a song, wouldn't it make more sense to go over to WP:SONGS instead and just leave a note on the albums project to join us there? Sorry I didn't think of that sooner. dannymusiceditor ^oops 20:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: the reason I put it in the music project is that I felt that it applied to both albums and songs. A pointer to that discussion might make sense. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you so much for introducing helping me with Wikipedia on my talk page! Just4science! (talk) 03:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

fully understood and agreed. if you look at the previous edit there was an error in the formating change of the table that messed up the rest of the page. I made eddits to try and find the error, i should have put notes to what i was doing. please preview all edits before publishing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlater (talk • contribs) 23:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

How do you feel about me changing the "Discography" paragraph in Three Days Grace to have a sub-paragraph called "Studio albums as Groundswell" and including "Wave Of Popular Feeling (1995)" as a part of the discography? It's been days since I've applied the edit and you or any other editors haven't changed it. - User talk:Danielcool123 - 15:54, 7 March 2019 (GMT)

@Danielcool123: Sorry. I saw your message but had to start my commute. I'm fine with that option, but it has been removed in the past. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

But that album is not notable and should not have an article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Okay. Fine with that. What about the edits I made at the top of all existing TDG albums? - User talk:Danielcool123 - 7 March 2019, 18:04 (GMT)

They're a bit unnecessary, and similar edits have been removed in the past, but let's see what others think. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Per your edit on The Joshua Tree, did you see my explanation as to why I removed it? Template:Infobox album says that a microformat is emitted for the first duration detected if there is a recognised value. The duration template is only used because it emits a microformat for the length, so we don't actually need to use it when the album infobox provides what it does automatically. The template's documentation says to use the duration template for "more complicated values", and this is not a complicated value. Template:Duration itself also states: "In {{Infobox album}}, the microformat is added automatically if there is not one already. However, more complicated values might require this template." So it really doesn't need to be there and you didn't need to restore it. Nobody was disputing that the duration template is "correct", it's moreso that it's redundant. Can you please undo your own edit? You may revert this message if you wish, I don't really care, I just wanted to let you know because if you already did, I don't know why you restored it. Thanks. Ss112 08:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Walter Görlitz,

You've been identified either as a previous member of the project, an active editor on Apple related pages, a bearer of Apple related userboxes, or just a hoopy frood.

WikiProject Apple Inc. has unexpectedly quit, because an error type "unknown" occured. Editors must restart it! If you are interested, read the project page and sign up as a member. There's something for everyone to do, such as welcoming, sourcing, writing, copy editing, gnoming, proofreading, or feedback — but no pressure. Do what you do, but let's coordinate and stay in touch.

See the full welcome message on the talk page, or join the new IRC channel on irc.freenode.net named #wikipedia-en-appleinc ^connect. Please join, speak, and idle, and someone will read and reply.

Please spread the word, and join or unsubscribe at the subscription page.

RhinosF1^(chat)_{(status)(contribs)} and Smuckola on behalf of WikiProject Apple Inc. - Delivered 15:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Since the thread amounts to a bunch of people sniping at each other to no good result, and since it appears to be metastasizing to a general display of grumpiness to no useful purpose, I would appreciate it if the discussion, having made its point, would remain closed. But I'm not going to let it make me grumpy too. Acroterion (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Thanks for your involvement. I'm not sniping, at least I'm not trying to snipe. I'm actually trying to understand why one editor can remove another editor's comments on an uninvolved editor's talk page, and without a reasonable explanation. I'd also like to know why the other admin shut the discussion down so quickly. I'd be happy to discuss this in a more appropriate forum. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

As to the ANI discussion, I can't see that the affront rises to the level of ANI. I think you made the point that it's bad form to remove comments by another editor, but in this particular case, we have the equivalent of a long-established account. Would you template a regular for not using edit summaries? 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63's been around longer than many accounts, and gets fairly frequent warnings from editors who see an IP and assume a lack of clue. I'm not saying that's what you were doing, but it's getting into DTTR territory, and I've removed some warnings from editors who assumed 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 was just some random IP myself. Acroterion (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Thanks again for the discussion.

I would and I have used templates on the talk pages of established editors when they do not leave edit summaries. It's one of the only ones I would place on a regular's talk page. The only other templates I would use are edit warring and ANI discussion templates. This anon, in particular, is quite inconsistent in their use edit summaries. See 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I did read the notice at the top of the talk page and selected the notice based on that. The reverts and "protection" was uncalled for in my opinion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I find an absence of edit summaries annoying myself, and I kick myself when I don't leave one - a concise summary, even reply, is more helpful than many editors realize. But I really try to avoid templates for people who one might assume know better. Even a short "Hey, can you give us some edit summaries? - tks" is more likely to get a useful result than a template that's aimed at new users. About the only warning templates I use with anybody who's not obviously new or inexperienced are 3RR (when there's any doubt about whether they know about the policy) and discretionary sanctions notices. A note along the lines of "why template?" would be a more optimal response to a notice coming from an established user like yourself. It works both ways. The best response for all parties would be "meh" after one round, including 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63, who can just chalk it up to being an IP and blank as they see fit. I'm not a friend to recursive arguments about who's following the rules the best, or lengthy discussions about something that's merely sub-optimal. Acroterion (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Sometimes people (including me) find it hard to de-escalate. This event was a good candidate for breaking the chain of escalation. Acroterion (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I was just about to change it from "rock". As you can probably tell, I was copy and pasting from List of rock music performers -- and didn't do a good job of previewing. Thanks. But, I don't know what you meant by "many gospel acts were groups not individuals". What does that have to do with the changes? Musdan77 (talk) 04:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

The comment included "make sure it's an artist" implying an individual, which I changed to "make sure they". Feel free to modify the comment as you see fit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:29, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking you meant. But I'm surprised you don't that "artist" is an all-encompassing term in music to include soloists and groups. --But it's not a big deal. Musdan77 (talk) 17:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Is not a collective noun [1], [2] or [3], so to me it implies an individual. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

As I said: "term in music" that has been used for decades in books, magazines, etc. ("Best New Artist" Grammy) Another term is "act" - but for Christian/gospel music, "artist" is the preferred word. The term "performer" is also sometimes used for one or more people. Musdan77 (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

...at least that's how I would describe this. Do with it what you will, I suppose. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 03:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not the first time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Obviously another editor who's be wowed by your particular brand of courteous and collegiate editing. KJP1 (talk) 23:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, misread the diff somehow. Thanks for catching it. Meters (talk) 07:38, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Walter, I've just changed all the CanPL team articles to improve, IMO, the language around official colours. To use the example of FC Edmonton, I think it's more accurate (and encyclopedic) to say

The official club colours are blue, navy, and white (branded by the club as "prairie blue sky," "River City navy," and "white rabbit")

instead of

The official club colours are prairie blue sky, River City navy, and white rabbit

We don't need to go to that length to preserve their branding in encyclopedia articles.

Just letting you know since you're an active editor in the space. Let me know if you have any concerns.

Madg2011 (talk) 23:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Madg2011: I saw that and was going to fix the MOS:LQ issues. The commas are to go outside the quotes. Other than that, it looks fine and is a good change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

How do I upload The VeggieTales Show logo? The upload wizard said it is copyrighted. JATheEditor (talk) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@JATheEditor: If the logo has embedded exif information, you might have to remove that before uploading. I'd ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

What License do I use? JATheEditor (talk) 01:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@JATheEditor: No clue. We can't redistribute it. Maybe it requires a fair use rationale like File:VeggieTales 2014 logo.png, File:Jonah- A VeggieTales Movie.jpg or File:Pirates who dont do anything poster.jpg. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

How do I do that? JATheEditor (talk) 01:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Again, copyright isn't my main interest so I don't have much in the way of advice, but the Media copyright questions would likely be able to give you some options. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I tried that JATheEditor (talk) 01:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Ten minutes is not a long time to wait. Maybe give it a day and then ask again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:38, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

OK JATheEditor (talk) 01:39, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for following up about one of the edits I made yesterday while attempting to clean up the references in Alpha course. I thought that I'd checked the Wayback Machine for what the page looked like when that link was added to the article, but I guess I didn't. My mistake. Regards, --sanfranman59 (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any further comments or are you willing to fix this article up now that I've finished the review for it? If I don't get any comments in the next two days stating they're at least willing to work on it, I'm delisting it. It's just not there as it is right now. dannymusiceditor ^oops 17:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: That's an article that is on my watchlist. I'm not up on the band and have nothing that I could add to improve it. I think it should be de-listed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply here and on the re-assessment. You were the closest thing I could think of to a main contributor; the original one who got this promoted hasn't edited in a decade and there doesn't seem to be anyone who takes care of it anymore. Since what happened with Tim and all that, I can't say I blame them. Several of the articles the original guy got to GA have also been delisted (and I, too, was responsible for those reviews). dannymusiceditor ^oops 22:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Rocketman (film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for templating you like this, but doing so assures that I'm fair to the both of you, leave you both the same warning (the IP user was left this warning as well), and that I don't play favorites. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Just letting you know that I've blocked DrumSalad as a sock of User:Jkmarold55, who was previously blocked for running a paid-editing sockfarm. Sadly, this was more of the same. - Bilby (talk) 15:43, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Wow. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey there. I've noticed that the crest shown on the Reno 1868 page does not have the proper colors. I have a vector version of the proper version that could be replaced but I'm not sure how to go about uploading it to the Commons legally. I made the vector myself but of course I don't own the copyright to the crest, the team does. Any advice/help? Thank you! RaffOutLoud (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Figured I'd let you know that Almost There (album) is up for featured article. I nominated it a month or so back but you're welcome to give it a look if you want. No pressure at all, just figured you might be interested since you've done some cleanup around that area. Toa Nidhiki05 01:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

@Toa Nidhiki05: Thanks. I saw it come up on Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

...that quotemarks in song chronologies are automatic. Thanks! I was just trying to fix them from initially being italic (wrong). dannymusiceditor ^oops 16:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with image changes / reverts, etc. I'd changed some back because I thought it had been ME who forgot the locations (so, yes, kinda Good faith!). I'd have emailed, but I guess you've blocked that?

I'm learning, but it takes time! So all help v gratefully received.

Minnie Bannister (talk) 13:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)Minnie Bannister

You reverted a Christianity Wikiproject assessment with a question 'Why are we adding Christian music subjects to the Christian theology project?'. When doing the assessment for WP Christianity, I found out that any article assessment for the Christian music project is stealthily linked and presented as "Other" in the WP Christianity Assessment table. The successful solution (to classify based on the quality scale) is to add a separate assessment for WP Christianity in the Talk page of the article. Do you know any other way to solve this? Peace. JohnThorne (talk) 23:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@JohnThorne: I saw that Christian music was added to the other project after I reverted you. My preference would be to remove it from the second project. I'm not sure if there's a way to add one as a work group of the other. That would be my second choice. Adding more projects just means more places from which to ignore articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

WP Christian music calls WP Christianity as a parent. How to separate their assessments? Similar situations also happen with WP Anglicanism, Calvinism etc. which also add assessment to WP Christianity without transferring the scale (so they are listed as "Other"). JohnThorne (talk) 00:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@JohnThorne: There are sub-projects of the Christian Music Project (the albums work group for instance) and so if you look at Talk:Home for Christmas (Amy Grant album), for instance, you can see how that is broken out. I'm not sure how that works though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

How would CBC air all 18 episodes of Murdoch mysteries before the end of the year? Season 13 starts in the fall and will only air on Monday nights. I found your comment to be very strange.

Mickeydee15 (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mickeydee15: It's not impossible in sixteen weeks. They've been running a follow-up show after it for a while, Jekyll & Hyde, Frankie Drake, etc. They could easily run double episodes. Although it's unlikely, it's clearly not impossible. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't see that happening especially since season 7 onward aired from September to March/April. I would love it if Frankie were on longer. Maybe if they have a fourth season that will change. Mickeydee15 (talk) 20:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

On the WP:RFP article, what I believe I saw was a comment made to decline page protection to Matthijs de Ligt by the IP address with the signature of a user who has not been involved in any of this bunch of pages today. I was wondering - was that a good idea from me to remove that comment - what I think is that we cannot use another signature which links to user/talk pages which aren't ours and an administrator would have the final say, not the IP vandal. Iggy (Swan) 18:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan: I'm not sure. I saw the change. The same anon was making changes to the De Ligt article and the Ter Stegen article. I tend to agree that the level of disruption is lower on that that one. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

At least the IP address can't make any further disruption to the articles/being an imposter to another editor etc. I have checked the WP:Signatures page and it is clear to me that using other signatures will not be allowed. Iggy (Swan) 19:37, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I’ve stumbled upon what purports to be a complete database of every charting song in the history of CCM Magazine. It’s not a website, but I do have it in an access and excel document if you’re interested. It seems legit and is literally every chart they ever published - AC, CHR, Inspirational, Rock, Country, Southern Gospel, and a few more. Toa Nidhiki05 18:59, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thanks for all your hard work! You are a brilliant and dedicated editor. LearnMore (talk) 21:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you took this to AfD and it was closed "soft delete". This is just a heads-up that the article has been restored, so perhaps you'd like to re-nominate it, with hopefully more participation at the AfD this time around... --Randykitty (talk) 07:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey Walter, this is Pierce Morrison. I work with John Cooper and Skillet. I noticed that there are a few things that haven't been added yet, since you make the majority of edits on Skillet's page, I was hoping that you could help me out since I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. If I can I would really appreciate talking to you about those things.

Thank you for your time, Walter.

-Sincerely PierceVelvetKelm20 (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

He does the stylization on every page he can. Discographies, artists pages, record labels, etc. It’s really annoying and the fact he refuses to ever use his words makes it even more annoying. Toa Nidhiki05 02:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

@Toa Nidhiki05: I'm not sure if he IP-hops as well, but, yes, it's annoying. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:32, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey, could you keep an eye out for Richarddo1442's edits on The Search (NF album)? They seem to edit NF topics more than any other. I see you, like myself, had a back-and-forth with them on their talk page about another issue, so it seems likely they will return and taking issue with something else. They seem to think citing iTunes for genres is acceptable now. Ss112 19:24, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring the blackface link on the Sint article. I was merely correcting the sloppy grammar of a prior editor who changed it to "black or brown colored face." I didn't want to find myself in an edit war over it. Constablequackers (talk) 08:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

and ty — Ched (talk) 04:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ched: You're most welcome. It happens to us all. It's a lot of work putting all of those templates in. Thanks for doing that! Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:19, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

I am so glad you're not hammering me about it. I've done probably over 5,000 this month, and so far I think I've only messed up maybe 3 or 4 of them. One (admin of course) got really nasty about it - but anyway, thank you for understanding. It's nice to meet folks who aren't jerks on here. :-) — Ched (talk) 15:43, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Hiya! I was wondering the guideline with thumbnails. I know unregistered users will see a default size of 220px regardless. Does this mean using upright or anything ratio-based is more preferred versus anything that specifies the size to the exact px? I see a user reverted the changes as we do have the other Android articles set to 250px. Might as well ask to set uniformity and also because I have been editing a lot of articles without scaling. (or I think some infoboxes I have used did the scaling automatically) – The Grid (talk) 12:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@The Grid: Yes. Setting absolute pixel sizes is a problem for accessibility. It affects a very limited number of readers, but it does affect them. Most infoboxes use thumbnails. A few allow editors to set the upright parameter while others assume upright it by default and allow editors to set a landscape parameter. I have been thinking about how to raise this issue at a higher level. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! – The Grid (talk) 14:49, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

In my comment re: "half of North America", I noticed user Corticopia (talk · contribs · logs · block log) from way back. Do links between ancient and recent sockers get found out? Or are these two completely different? Shenme (talk) 06:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shenme: Good eye. Yes, they do get linked. That's what WP:SPIs are about and for. I recognized the behaviour from the editor's work on the Canada article. I then found the older account and followed it back to the master. I then reported the new editor as a sockpuppet of the sockmaster. You can see the history of the various puppets in the master's archive. Walter Görlitz (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Since another person commenting at SPI/Motivação#Comments_by_other_users mentioned the Vermont / New Hampshire association, I had noticed an oddity.

User:Two_reasons/sandbox is a draft for Vermont Psychiatric Care Hospital. Wondering about this, from mention "a replacement for" I ended up at Vermont State Hospital. Contributions there included 2601:184:300:B40D:EDB8:1D02:530:9883 (talk · contribs · logs · block log) adding the redlink to Vermont psychiatric care hospital. That was back in February, though.

Is this simply the socker's fixation on Vermont - trying to fill in a redlink - or could it be a slip revealing a geolocatable IP? Or... could this be another rabbithole so many deluded vandal/sock hunters fall into? :-) Shenme (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shenme: Not sure. Perhaps an admin could help with that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:46, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

BBC: "8 songs have spent more than 10 weeks at number one" New York Post: "both saw 16 weeks at Number One." Daily Express: "for most ever weeks at number one on the US" Forbes: "Nine weeks at number one." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.71.50.203 (talk) 00:25, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Walter. I removed some text from the middle of another report. Looks like you were in process of using Twinkle to file a report, but something went wrong? Can you refile your own report if necessary? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:52, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Hey Walter,

I have a question about Saint Louis FC(USL). They've been approved to join MLS and the owner is part of the ownership group of the MLS team. So on the MLS#Timeline shouldn't they also have the yellow notation indicating that they have come from the USL/USL Championship league? Just a thought...

Roberto221 (talk) 21:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@Roberto221: probably, yes. Seems to be the same case as Sacramento. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Hey Walter, just wanted to know what do you think of an election aftermath section for the 2019 Canadian Election. It was done for previous ones. (I'd prefer if you wrote the answer on the Talk page over there if it's possible)? MikkelJSmith (talk) 19:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikkelJSmith (talk • contribs)

@MikkelJSmith: This should probably be discussed on the article's talk page. Is there much to talk about for this election? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:30, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I wish to learn something new today. So please direct me where I can read the rule on that image size parameters must serve no purpose because we shouldn't be setting them. dannymusiceditor ^oops 23:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @DannyMusicEditor: MOS:ACCIM states Avoid sandwiching text between two images or, unless absolutely necessary, using fixed image sizes. It's an accessibility issue. Some visually impaired visitors have accounts that allow them to use their screen readers to read the text, but they can still see the image, if it's large enough. By setting an absolute size, it overrides the thumbnail size set in preferences. That's why we usually only use the size to make small images large, but not to reduce a full-size image. I should really just link to ACCIM (ACCessible IMage). Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

For once, that actually makes sense. Didn't know they could have size preferences. Thank you! dannymusiceditor ^oops 16:07, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

The setting is in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:28, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Walter Görlitz! First of all, hank you for you kind message!

Recently I made an update in Jean Dolabella article that you reverted.

I really want to became a wikipedia's editor! I have some new information that might be good to add at Jean's page, but the problem is that I'm not familiar with the tools, neither with the correct ways to do so. So instead of changing an entire article, I'll try to start small, step by step!

Here is the mini bio that I had just wrote:

Jean Dolabella is a drummer, multi-instrumentalist member of Ego Kill Talent, a band that inked a global recording partnership with BMG, which sees them become the first Brazilian act signed to the recently-launched BMG Brazil (1). He is also a music producer and one of the founders of Family Mob Studios, a professional recording studio, located in São Paulo, where he teaches, promote workshops and drumcamps. In 2004 he graduated at Los Angeles College of Music, and from 2006 to 2011 Jean Dolabella played the drums in the worldwide famous thrash Metal band Sepultura. He has played and recorded with several Brazilian famous artists such as Lenine, Milton Nascimento, Ana Carolina, and also with international artists such as Paul Di'Anno (Iron Maiden) and Mike Patton (Faith No More). He has worked with successful producers like Matt Wallace (Faith No More, Maroon 5), Thom Russo (Audioslave, Michael Jackson) and Steve Evetts (The Cure, The Dillinger Escape Plan)(2).

My sources are: 1 - https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/8540262/ego-kill-talent-sign-bmg-brazil 2 - https://zildjian.com/jean-dolabella.html

I would like to know how do I add the references, cause I think I haven't done the proper way.

Thanks in advance for you help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliuniverse (talk • contribs) 23:56, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, the reason I added those clubs after they were waived was because I noticed all the other season threads were done that way even if the player was waived and not transferred. I don't understand why its done that way for 2014 and beyond but not for 2013 and beyond. Shouldn't it be consistent for all. I assumed because the column said 'Destination Club' and not 'Transferred to' that the new club would get put regardless of the manner of exit given I saw the 2014-2019 articles edited that way. Even after my 'reverted edits', I still see players with clubs in those columns who were waived and those were from pre-existing edits not done by me, so again I updated to try and make it consistent both within each annual article and across the different annual articles. I wasn't trying to be a disruptive editor , if that's how my edits came across, I did all three at once because I believed it was the way it was supposed to be done, given the standards set on other articles for the same club. RedPatchBoys (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

@RedPatchBoys: A transfer (association football) is clear. It's "the action taken whenever a player under contract moves between clubs". When a player is waived, or no longer under contract and they land at another club, it's not a transfer. We should not, under any circumstance, indicate that being waived, having a contract end or other termination was actually a transfer just because they ended up at a club in a lower division or a different nation. It happens all the time with North American soccer team articles because we do not understand what a transfer actually is. I've been fighting against TFC fan editors in particular on this for about six years. So fix 2014 and beyond. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:50, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Walter, Just curious as to why you reverted my edit of Soccer Bowl '83. All of the information, line-ups, cautions, substitutions, etc. was there in the YouTube video of the match broadcast.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skL-NgaRY4I Much of it (other than the lineups) was supported by the box score in the Oct. 2 edition of the Montreal Gazette, page D-8 -which is used as the reference for the match stats. Did I not cite it correctly? Please advise. Cheers, Creativewill (talk) 14:09, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

@Creativewill: Per WP:COPYLINK: "if you know or reasonably suspect that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work." The "publisher" is not the original NASL and so it's a copyright violation. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm a little confused. Does the original NASL exist somewhere that I'm unaware of, that they would be able to publish this video (or allow others to do so)? If the answer is "it doesn't matter" would that then mean that the same edit would be ok on October 1, 2033 when the broadcast becomes 50 years old? A final question, regardless of the copyright, does the video "NOT CONFIRM" that these were the players that played in the match and the announcers that covered the match? I'm not trying to be a pest, I'm just wanting to understand all of the angles in play in a situation like this. Many thanks, -Creativewill (talk) 19:15, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

@Creativewill: yes, you are confused. Copyright exists and someone holds that copyright, and copyright is the issue, so whether it claims to confirm something (or not) it cannot be used as a source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:17, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Walter Görlitz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, ★Trekker (talk) 17:10, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

	Merry Christmas Walter Görlitz
	Hi Walter Görlitz, wishing you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year    – Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 10:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

I heard last week that Paul Roe had died earlier in the year, so I did some research. There were no news media mentions of it. Mutual friends have confirmed that he did in fact pass away in early October 2019. His family chose not to publish a public obit and without a proper source how do I handle something like this? Do we just leave it be, unless and until a good public source appears? -Creativewill (talk) 18:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know there is a new move request for that article, if you wished to participate and add your comments. Merry Christmas.— Crumpled Fire • contribs • 20:53, 24 December 2019 (UTC)