Wikipedia

User talk:Marek69/Archive 28

< User talk:Marek69
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Marek69 in topic Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 35

Hi

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. Leutha (talk) 18:43, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Leutha :-) Marek.69 talk 18:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 13, 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
 
The Gates of Hell sculpture by Auguste Rodin, an example depicting the concept of the gates of hell
Hello, Marek69.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Gates of hell

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Critic • Lunch

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions
Thanks, a good choice :-) Marek.69 talk 04:18, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #202

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Editing feedback

Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, Marek69, In doing edits such as these, where you change bare references to named references[1], it is more helpful for others if you make the names informative and easy to identify and Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).remember. Named references are hard for new editors to use, and this is especially so if all the names are permutations of pmid and a string of numbers. Secondly, I first noted your editing at History of South America where you introduced large amounts of copypasted content from other articles. I realize you were trying to improve the article, but in my opinion as an editor who specializes in content writing, I think it got worse (for reasons that I will describe), and that copypasting between articles generally does not improve the encyclopedia because it just duplicates contents. I think the basic requirement for adding valuable content to wikipedia is having knowledge about a topic. Knowledge is both a requirement for finding the information to put into the article and to organize and weight different subtopics against eachother. If one edits a topic about which one has insufficient knowledge, it is very easy to introduce misinformation, misrepresentations, inaccuracies and errors and other types of problems. Luckily lack of knowledge can be remedied by doing research and reading about a topic that one wants to write about. I thought many aspects of your edits to History of South America demonstrated that you had not done the minimum required background research before beginning to contribute material into the article - for example you were not able to distinguish between countries in South, Central and North America. I hope in the future you will begin your editing by doing a reasonable amount of reading and research about the topic you are writing about (preferably not on Wikipedia) or that you will focus your contributions to topics you already know about (and to your very helpful and useful formatting edits). That way you will be using your own efforts better, and also will not create unnecessary problems for others to clean up. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 23:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments Maunus, however forgive me for not agreeing with you.
I was in the middle of a major overhaul of History of South America when you interrupted and started criticising my actions.
Before I started the article had very few references and many templates. (version as of 18 March 2016)
I noticed that much of the article was repeated in the daughter articles, so part of my method of working was to bring in text from these articles (along with the references) This way I could sort out the referencing, then trim the article back down to size.
My intention was never to create a 'monster' article, just to temporarily expand for technical purposes.
I try to convey this to you in my edit summaries (i.e I hadn't finished this edit. Will trim asap, but you ignored this and continue to criticise, writing numerous times that you wanted the article 'nuked' [2], [3]
Again, I responded that I was still working on the article and would trim it...
Your comment above "for example you were not able to distinguish between countries in South, Central and North America." is borderline insulting to me. - As mentioned before, I imported some text (with refs) then edit and trimmed it. Some Central American countries slipped in, which I later edited out. Thank you for your assumption of good faith
I do not like your assertions/allegations of my 'stupidity'. I am not stupid.
Also your comment above "I hope in the future you will begin your editing by doing a reasonable amount of reading and research about the topic you are writing about (preferably not on Wikipedia)", I could read as a "Get lost!" - I hope you did not mean that.
I do not feel I "created unnecessary problems for others to clean up." as you describe - I started by saying, I was in the middle of a major overhaul of the article. I had not finished editing by any means
As you can see, I did clean up the article [4] with Simon Burchells help and advice. I also had Corinne from the Guild of Copy Editors lined up to copy edit the article as part of the process.
I personally think that the article in its current revision is quite an improvement on the 18 March version Its not perfect and has some way to go, but I notice Corinne has started copyediting, so I'm sure it will improve even more.
I am sorry you find my editing style (and indeed myself) so unpalatable. I have tried to answer your queries as best as possible. I'm not quite sure what you are looking for from me now.
Regards --Marek.69 talk 01:18, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
No certainly I didnt mean "get lost!" I meant that reading should be done in sources that are not wikipedia (because wikipedia is not a reliable source, and by copying between articles simply multiplies the problems that were found in the original article, while adding no new value). You are of course entirely in your right to disagree. I continue to think the article is not salvageable in your version which is not really about history at all, but simply an eclectic overview of "South America". I dont mean to suggest that your editing style is unpalatable, I think it causes some problems that you can correct if you want, and by offering my critique I simply meant to bring it to your attention - that is of course the necessary first step for any improvement. But of course you are free to take the advice or leave it as you see fit. Also note that I made no allegations of your being stupid. I claimed your edits suggested you lacked knowledge. We all lack knowledge about topics in which we are not well versed. I personally am not knowledgeable about English Cities or 17th Century literature which is why I dont edit about those topics (without reading first).·maunus · snunɐɯ· 01:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Maunus, you started your original paragraph above by saying "In doing edits such as these, where you change bare references to named references[5], it is more helpful for others if you make the names informative and easy to identify, etc. ..." - I would just like to point that I did not 'name' these references in any way. These reference names already existed in their current name and form. Also, I did not change them from 'bare' either. The program I use AWB simply reorganised the existing references into order. -- Marek.69 talk 03:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


Copy-edit

I've been copy-editing the article. It has required a lot more than simple copy-editing, but that's all right. However, I've noticed that I keep coming across material that has already been said (and not just in the lead). So I feel like I've been copy-editing the same material twice in some cases. I really think the article should be worked on first to reduce this kind of repetition, and then ask me to come back and copy-edit the article. I'm going to place a "Partly done" tag on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests page, and wait until I hear from you. One more thing: since in the first part of the article I saw "AD" and "BC" dates, for consistency's sake when I later came across "CE" and "BCE" dates I was changing them to "AD" and "BC", but then I realized most were in the "CE" and "BCE" format, so I stopped changing them. You have to decide which era style to use.  – Corinne (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for you feedback Corinne, I will endeavour to fix these issues asap and then get back to you. :-)
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 03:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Converted article to "CE" and "BCE" format. -- Marek.69 talk 03:50, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure by now you have seen the "Partly done" note I left on the GOCE Requests page and the accompanying note. I want to assure you that I made this decision completely on my own and was not influenced one way or another by anyone.  – Corinne (talk) 02:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Errors after adding "as of" template

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. Your edits of replacing the phrase as of with the {{As of|2010|lc=y}} template for several provinces in the Philippines (specifically under the administrative divisions table) broke the {{abbr}} template.

The original {{abbr}} template (under the Population column) was

{{abbr|%|Provincial population share as of 2010}}

and was supposed to display Provincial population share as of 2010, but now only shows the error:

''Provincial

Could you please undo the addition of those {{as of}} in all those provinces you have edited? Thanks. Sanglahi86 (talk) 20:21, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sanglahi86, thank you for this information. I'm sorry for the inconvenience. There is obviously a bug in the script I've been using. :-(
I will repair this error immediately.
Thank you -- Marek.69 talk 20:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
  Sloane Stephens (talk)   Add sources
  Peru (talk) Add sources
  Viceroy (talk)     Add sources
  World War I (talk) Add sources
  Causes of the Great Depression (talk) Add sources
  University of Al Quaraouiyine (talk)   Add sources
  Stephen Macht (talk)           Cleanup
  Spanish Empire (talk) Cleanup
  Provinces of the Philippines (talk) Cleanup
  Caerleon (talk)   Expand
  Historia Regum Britanniae (talk)     Expand
  Timeline of Gdańsk (talk)     Expand
  Pope Pius XII (talk) Unencyclopaedic
  Pontius Pilate (talk) Unencyclopaedic
  Vladimir Žerjavić (talk)         Unencyclopaedic
  Discrimination (talk) Merge
  Human gastrointestinal tract (talk)   Merge
  Amazon Stonehenge (talk)           Merge
  Belarus (talk) Wikify
  Convent Glen Catholic School (talk)     Wikify
  Dick Giordano (talk)   Wikify
  Fineos (talk)           Orphan
  Punta, Romblon (talk)           Orphan
  Politics of Gdańsk (talk)         Orphan
  Kneeslappers (talk)           Stub
  Cappy, Somme (talk)     Stub
  Dongsha Atoll National Park (talk)           Stub
  Furuta Oribe (talk)           Stub
  Island province (talk)         Stub
  Lindgren oxidation (talk)           Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:43, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Needs better Edit summary

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello. What did you do here. The Edit summary does not tell me. Thank you. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi BeenAroundAWhile, thank you for your message.
That's a fair point.
I've been using a number of scripts on AWB, (the addition of the {{As of}} template being just one). AWB also does a spelling check, updates references, converts some http: urls to https:, and various other fixes.
It is difficult to have a single edit summary to cover all of these actions when sometimes multiple items are fixed, and sometimes just one.
For example, when AWB fixes a spelling error it automatically produces a edit summary of: ("Clean up and general fixes, typo(s) fixed: native American → Native American using AWB")
However, when it adds the {{As of}} template, it doesn't modify the edit summary. - I'm not sure how to get it to add a description to the edit summary automatically (apart from overriding the settings and inserting manually) so it just returns as "clean up and general fixes". I am aware that this is not ideal.
I am currently researching more options of AWB and would love to fix this glitch.
I am sure you understand the reason for adding the {{as of}} template. (The template {{as of}} is used to mark potentially dated statements, and will add an article to the appropriate hidden sub-category of Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements. This allows editors to catalogue statements that may become dated over time.) and your question was "why is this not stated in the edit summary?"
The answer simply is: I wish I knew how to make this happen automatically like some other scripts do, but at the moment I would have to describe each action manually. I am sorry if I have caused any confusion by what I have done. I am doing research to improve this.
Thank you for your feedback. Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 15:51, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

History of South America

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Due to the article's instability, we're declining your request for a copyedit at this time. Please submit another request when the article stabilizes. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 23:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

OK, I understand.
Thank you Miniapolis
Best regards -- Marek.69 talk 15:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 14, 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Marek69.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Pecan pie

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Gates of hell • Critic

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 4 April 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wikidata weekly summary #203

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
 
 

March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!

May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis, and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 15, 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Various foods in a delicatessen in Rome, Italy
Hello, Marek69.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Delicatessen

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Pecan pie • Gates of hell

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wikidata weekly summary #204

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

This Month in GLAM: March 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 


Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this diff of Bunce Island as an example of how it is done. Please let me know if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 21:04, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I'm sorry, my bad. -- Marek.69 talk 15:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News
 
 

Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Coordinator elections: The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected. Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.

July Drive: Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

>>> Sign up for the July Drive! <<<

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 27, 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Marek69.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Answering machine

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Home page • List of aqueducts in the Roman Empire

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wikidata weekly summary #216

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

This week's article for improvement (week 28, 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
An ear of rye
Hello, Marek69.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Rye

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Answering machine • Home page

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 11 July 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Wikidata weekly summary #217

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Couldn't help but notice you didn't have one of these

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  Wikiproject Germany Barnstar
For the doubtlessly countless edits made to articles covered by WikiProject Germany. Vami IV (talk) 03:53, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


Hi Vami IV, thank you very much! This is a very pleasant surprise. It is very kind of you to think of me.  
Best wishes back to you Vami.  
Marek.69 talk 04:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Bonnevilla edits

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Marek69, I would like to know why you reverted the editing I did to this page bonnevilla, I am fairly new and would like to know where I can improve, specifically the orphan section for the article, I did link it to other articles in wikipedia, by clicking what links here on the page, as well the images that I added were removed by you as well, with much respect I hope to hear from you, thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herrkhor (talk • contribs) 00:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Herrkhor, I'm sorry, I was mistaken. I've self reverted that edit now. 
Apologies -- Marek.69 talk 00:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Oh perfect, good to know that I didn't make a mistake, I really appreciate your time!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herrkhor (talk • contribs) 01:00, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Parkmerced

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there, Marek. I am the head of marketing for Maximus Real Estate Partners, owner of Parkmerced in San Francisco. We updated our Wikipedia profile yesterday, but it was reverted back to the original version. In the history, it shows that you reverted it back to the original (which is very outdated and was not written by us). Could you let me know why you changed it?

Parkmerced2016 (talk) 16:58, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Laura

Hi Laura, thank you for your message.
In short I reverted this edit because to me it looked like a significant removal of content, i.e. 3,479 bytes by a new IP (198.27.231.2) editor.
I would also like to point out to you that the editing community strongly discourages contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, etc., which is covered in our conflict of interest policy, which you can read about in this article, so I would suggest (if you wish to maintain good relations with the community) that it is probably better that you do not try to edit the Parkmerced, San Francisco yourselves.
Instead, I would recommend that you post the information/text you wish to change (with corresponding references/sources) on the article's talk page and allow editors from the community to assist you by making the relevant changes.
I hope this explanation has helped.  
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 20:06, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Achilles

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

A thaobh dè sgrìobh thu mu dheidhinn air an duilleig seo airson Achilles, tha mi fo dheuchainn. Carson? Tha e ag ràdh gu bheil iad a dh'fhàs suas leis, bha iad na bràithrean. Thachair o chionn mhìltean bhliadhnaichean. Please, airson an gràdh nan naomh uile, a 'steigeadh gu dè an cinne-daonna a tha sònraichte. Chan eil ceist an càirdeas eadar na dà thachartasan ann an eachdraidh na Grèige. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.58.40 (talk) 03:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Scots Gaelic translated via Google translate

In terms of what you wrote about on this page for Achilles, I tested. Why? He says that they grew up with, they were brothers. Happened thousands of years ago. Please, for the love of all the saints, to stick to what the human race is special. No question the relationship between the two events in the history of Greece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.58.40 (talk) 03:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


Hello IP editor 76.0.58.40, I did not personally write the Achilles article. A list of the contributors can be found in the article's edit history.
Your edit deleted a significant amount of sourced content, with no explanation. That is the reason I reverted it.
If you wish to discuss the merits of anything in the article, I suggest you post a message on the article's talk page and have a discussion there.
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 23:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


Ceart gu leòr. Tapadh leat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.58.40 (talk) 00:43, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

{{wayback}}

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Re: this edit. Did checklinks do that? If so, it's not how the {{wayback}} template works. Template docs has instructions. Thanks. -- GreenC 01:48, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Green C, thank you for your message. The edit you refer to was indeed done using Checklinks. I do not remember modifying any of the wikicode of that particular edit. I simply added Wayback Machine to the software-generated edit summary.
Thank you for fixing this error and bringing it my attention. (I'm guessing that your edits have now fixed the problem and you don't need me to self revert)
I'm sorry for any inconvenience, I should have checked the page more thoroughly.
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 02:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguated cities

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

In this edit you disambiguated some cities. What are your sources that specifically those cities? Why didn't you indicate the sources in the article? Debresser (talk) 13:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the sources. Nice.
In this edit you removed Lakewood and Dupont, although the edit summary didn't indicate that. Was that a mistake, or did you remove those two cities on purpose? Debresser (talk) 19:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Debresser, thank you for your messages. I didn't realise what I was stumbling into with this list. At first glance it looked simple, but on further investigation I've realised that Haikou (city) and Hainan province have separate twinning agreements. The original refs I looked at were for the province. That's where Lakewood and Dupont came in the story. I removed them along with the reference for the province. Now I'm left with 20 cities allegedly twinned with Haikou. Tonight I've managed to reliably source 8 so far. So it's work in progress...  
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 19:49, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
10   Caribbean Institute for Meteorology and Hydrology (talk)           Add sources
1,020   Abortion law (talk)     Add sources
625   Augsburg (talk)   Add sources
4,518   Seven Years' War (talk)   Add sources
13,420   London (talk)   Add sources
1,301   Baltic Sea (talk)   Add sources
56   Dreher Brewery (talk)           Cleanup
75   Racial achievement gap in the United States (talk)     Cleanup
20   History of Hungary before the Hungarian Conquest (talk)     Cleanup
61   Ports of the Baltic Sea (talk)           Expand
1,721   GoPro (talk)       Expand
14   Index of Bahamas-related articles (talk)       Expand
513   Non-aggression principle (talk)     Unencyclopaedic
159   Courland Pocket (talk)     Unencyclopaedic
1,718   Riga (talk)   Unencyclopaedic
337   Brittany (administrative region) (talk)     Merge
180   Night-watchman state (talk)           Merge
196   Meninism (talk)           Merge
34   Gunnar Heinsohn (talk)       Wikify
24   Scottish Book (talk)           Wikify
3,498   Austria-Hungary (talk)   Wikify
5   Vieste Lighthouse (talk)           Orphan
16   Heart of the City (Kaliningrad) (talk)           Orphan
4   Umberto Menin (talk)           Orphan
7   Vigonovo (talk)           Stub
8   Kuusiku (talk)           Stub
14   PySol (talk)           Stub
48   Sagarmatha Zone (talk)           Stub
6   Grim (Kristiansand) (talk)     Stub
22   Felix Jacoby (talk)           Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Citation errors at Ballarat

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

It looks like you are doing great work cleaning up Ballarat, so I am hesitant to revert some of your most recent edits, which introduced many red error messages in the citations. Can you please clean those up along with your other helpful fixes to the article? Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:25, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Jonesey95, I'm on it.   -- Marek.69 talk 02:35, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Super. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:44, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
  Done Thanks for the 'heads up' Jonesey95   -- Marek.69 talk 03:50, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Dashes in ISBN (and other issues)

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

A heads up that this edit to Lech Wałęsa incorrectly changed hyphens in an ISBN to en-dashes. I've reverted that edit (by hand, before looking at the revision history, sigh) and left a note on the script's doc page, but you might want to keep an eye on that in the future, at least until the script gets fixed. Actually, looking more closely, this edit also mangled a file name and this edit mangled some references. Please remember that you are ultimately responsible for any bot/script-assisted changes, and you need to look at them -- particularly to see if they are introducing redlinks/redtext -- before saving. --Floatjon (talk) 17:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Floatjon, thank you for your message.
I am already aware that the script you refer to incorrectly changes hyphens in an ISBN to en-dashes. That is why I have been running AWB after it, as you can see in my edit history. Auto Wiki Browser automatically corrects this particular error (and many others, so I usually finish my editing with it). On this occasion however, I ran the two scripts the other way around.  
I'm sorry about the mistakes you had to correct, but this was an oversight.
Best regards-- Marek.69 talk 18:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Why the revert?

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Marek69, I'm sure you had a good reason, but as you did not give an edit summary for this edit, can you just describe your reasoning for me please. I explained why I made the change I did, and your revert puzzles me. -- de Facto (talk). 19:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I just saw your self-revert - please ignore my question. :) -- de Facto (talk). 19:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi de Facto
I'm sorry for the inconvenience. I have my watchlist on autorefresh and when I thought I was clicking on a diff, instead I randomly clicked revert. :-/
Marek.69 talk 01:16, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Gothic brick buildings

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Marek, I do not dare to ask you to translate the complete list into Polish. But I had even difficulties to accomplish the Polish parts of the list in pl:Dzieła gotyku ceglanego. If I try to write in Polish, I need quite a lot of time to produce very poor texts :)

Yours', Ulamm (talk) 12:21, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ulamm, thank you for your message.
I'd love to help translate List of Gothic brick buildings to pl:Dzieła gotyku ceglanego
However, asEnglish is my first language, I'm much better at translating Polish --> English, rather than the reverse.
I've now put both articles on my watchlist and will endeavour to help if I can. 
Best regards -- Marek.69 talk 12:59, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Amazon rainforest into History of South America. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your message.
It may appear (from your software) that I copied or moved text from Amazon rainforest into History of South America.
However, I actually copied text from Talk:History of South America/sandbox into History of South America.
Talk:History of South America/sandbox is actually a copy of History of South America as it was on 8 April 2016.
If you look at Talk:History of South America, in the 'Extended content' section (under the talk headers), there is a note that says:
Text and/or other creative content from Amazon rainforest was copied or moved into History of South America. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Amazon rainforest.
So, in effect, I copied back into the article, some text that had already been in that same article on 8 April 2016 (which had originally been copied from Amazon rainforest, yes). So hopefully this text is already covered by the above attribution. (I'm guessing)
I hope that this is OK practice, please let me know if there is anything else I should do.
Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 12:46, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
In the future you could also say in your edit summary where you got the content from, that would be great. If the material is coming from an old revision of the same page, attribution is not actually required, but saying in an edit summary where you got it from would help speed up the processing of the bot reports (https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol, which is how I discovered the problem). Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:54, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Diannaa, I'll make sure I include that information in my edit summary if I do this sort of action again. Thanks for the advice. 
Best regards -- Marek.69 talk 13:04, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marek69/Archive_28&oldid=1258093039"