User talk:Derek R Bullamore

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

Welcome!

WELCOME!! Hello, Derek R Bullamore! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself in the new user log and the list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. Wikipedia is held up by Five Pillars...I recommend reading about them if you haven't already. Finally, it would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. If that's confusing, or if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl^♪ 00:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing link rot cleanup) counter

You should note that I am using Category:Monthly clean up category (Articles needing link rot cleanup) counter to get each month below 100 articles needing link rot cleanup. I have left the Reflinks tag on some articles needing more attention.

Tell me, can Reflinks be started without using the article tag?--DThomsen8 (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, good news. Whilst the overall counter stood at 6,000 plus in early September (if I remember correctly), and thus 2,000 or so now is clearly the way forward, all hands to the pump are much appreciated. I am not too sure what you mean by 'can Reflinks be started without using the article tag?' How else could it identify what you/me/everyone is trying to improve ? I am not very technically minded on procedures/protocols etc !

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi

When you got time please check out the refs for Nour El-Refai. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Please check out the refs of Isabella Löwengrip, Murder of Joanna Yeates, Tia Sharp and April Jones. Thank you!--BabbaQ (talk) 09:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!--BabbaQ (talk) 11:33, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:50, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Could you please take a look at the McStay family murder. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

You seem to have a taste for the grotesque and gruesome ! Anyhow,  Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I have a interest in that.. ( not in a scary way ;) hehe. Take a look at Musikhjälpen, somehow not as grotesque... ;)--BabbaQ (talk) 13:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at the refs for Rebecca Simonsson. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 22:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Weldon Rogers

You tagged Weldon Rogers for clean-up, citing the need to use wikitables. Here's my question: I am currently building an article that does not use wiki tables. Moreover, it uses some coding. Would you mind taking a peek inside my sandbox and comment right on the page? In this particular instance, I think wiki tables would not work as well. By contrast I added wiki tables in Steve Turre's article, where I think it works very well. I hope to add pix in the next 24 hours, then take the sandbox article live in 2-4 days. You've written-up a lot of musicians, so I would appreciate your support. Tanx! Eurodog (talk) 03:42, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying - I forgot about your missive as I have been busy elsewhere. I presume it is the proposed article on Steve Weist that you are referring to. Firstly congratulations, as I can see that you have spent a considerable amount of time and effort, in gathering all the information together. In fact the article may be too long ! Perhaps the discography would be better as a separate article. Equally, the amount of intricate detail might draw some editors to place a {Too detailed} tag on the piece.

I am not aware of this musician, so can not really comment on the information as such. However, I notice that there are some bare URLs in the body of the text, and the Career section would be better as prose, rather than in a list format - see {Prose} tag. Also the effect of so many citations within the text means that the Inline citations section looks lightweight, given the size of the overall article. I will leave the question of using wikitables to your judgement. To my eyes the article is a little too lengthy and cluttered to make easy reading - although wikitables might not make much difference.

I am rather nit picking - frankly, the article as it stands would present on the main space as a better biography than 99.9% of those that do appear. I hope this helps,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:51, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Kokum oil

You were able to do two more references for Kokum oil with Reflinks. How is this done?--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Primarily by manual intervention. For instance, Reflinks does not pick up PDF files, so these need your own input. Alternatively, click on a reference link that Reflinks might not pick up, and see if it is a viable link. If so, create your own reference based on the information. Reflinks is great, but it does sometimes need the personal touch. I hope this helps,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Manual intervention does not seem to me to how Kokum oil history shows what you did for that particular article. You can see from my contributions that I did a variety of oils articles yesterday, and mostly left the Reflinks tags behind.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I am a little unsure what you mean. My edit simply identified one dead link; plus, by my intervention of exploring one PDF file link, added the relevant fuller reference for the latter. I simply used Reflinks as the starting point, but made the necessary manual edit to one cite that it does not have the capability to flesh out itself.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Can you always try to format date as 23 November 2013 rather than digits though, I believe the wording is far more common on here and looks tidier IMO. Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 00:11, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks for the barnstar - much appreciated. On the question of the formatting of dates, I usually simply allow the automatically generated format, created by Reflinks, to prevail. It would be even more time consuming for me to manually change all these. Plus the question arises of whether 23 November 2013, or November 23, 2013, should prevail. Again agonising over whichever would be appropriate would take more of my time, and possibly necessitate me revisiting the whole article's dates, and formatting thereof, to be consistent.

Having said that, I do personally prefer your suggestion as to it looking better and being more common in usage. Perhaps the powers that 'manage' Reflinks could be persuaded to look again at how dates are automatically formatted ? Far too technical for me - I just keep beavering away. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:29, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Mmm if Reflinks does digits automatically perhaps it's worth mentioning it to User:Dispenser who seems responsible for it and ask him if he can change to wording formatting. I've emailed him as he doesn't seem to be very active.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:36, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. Thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

"Wikimania 2014 London". Wikimania 2014 includes two days of a Hackathon before the rest of the meeting, at which questions like these can be pursued. I expect to be there.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:50, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour and locate the source which is causing the bot to put the blacklist tag at the top of Dolph Lundgren and remove it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Etaples art colony

I see you have been working on the Etaples art colony references, and probably at the same time that I tried to run Reflinks, which ran a long time without ending. I should look at the history first, and leave it to you if you have started on an article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

With hindsight I wish I had never touched the article. It was a real pig to try to sort out. On reflection, it might have been easier to strip all of the references back to bare URLs and start from there. Hey ho - it is done now.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:39, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Somebody must have said that hindsight is better than foresight, but your diligence made it happen. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Effect of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake on India

Hi, Derek. I'm in the middle of overhauling this article, since it had a {{copy edit}} tag on it along with a bunch of others. You tagged it with {{no footnotes}}; however, it does have inline citations (many of which are bare URLs, though, hence my {{bare urls}} tag). I'll be working on it for the next day or so (we just edit-conflicted), since it's a real WP:LINKFARM and is written in news style (so all the verb tenses need to be changed). After I'm done, you can do what you like with it. All the best, Miniapolis 21:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. I will leave it to you. I was primarily trying to turn bare URLs into fuller references, but your work seems far more wide reaching and relevant. Over to you.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:10, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

What I do (primarily copyediting) is not more important; that page has so many bare URLs it's not funny. But if you let me finish the copyedit and clean up the dead or irrelevant external links first, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 23:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes - that's fine with me. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

42!

Best wishes for your antipodean sojourn! (You have my contact details, so please don't hesitate to contact me should you so wish.) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:57, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Many, many thanks, and I may do so. I hope our lads make a better fist of it in the Second Test, otherwise Perth (WACA) may be more of a trial than a pleasure !

I'll be uncharacteristically polite by avoiding the topic and saying, "Bon Voyage", enjoy the wine, and try the beer. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:23, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Request for references help

I have been running Reflinks on a number of previously tagged articles, and also tagging some articles myself. I would appreciate your help on some articles that I was unable to finish checking on the unfinished articles.

Contemporary Saudi Arabian female artists

Indium gallium arsenide

Night of the Pencils‎

Virtual representation

Visor

Thank you for your great work. I will try to help reduce the lists.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Not the easiest cases to unravel. Anyhow, now  Done - I think ?!

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

The easy ones I do myself, such as 107th Illinois Volunteer Infantry Regiment. Harder ones are for the expert! --DThomsen8 (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice of you to think that I am an expert ! Thank you. Anyway, I do my best and leave others to judge. Just one point I would make is that I am away from 10 December 2013 to 25 January 2014, when Wikipedia will be far away from my thoughts. I bet the 'articles needing link rot cleanup' numbers will shoot up then. Whatever - keep up the good work. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Stekenjokk

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

cleanup-link rot tag and bare URLs

Derek, I see you're also working through the link rot cleanup backlog. Hooray!

It looks like you're removing the cleanup-link rot tag from articles where you've marked a bare URL as a dead link. Is that the usual practice? I'm sort of new at this, but I've been leaving the link rot tag in place if I'm not able to fill in more details for the dead link or exchange it for a reference that exists. I happened to find an archived page for 2012 Nova Scotia Men's Molson Provincial Championship just now, so I changed the dead link to what must have been an annual calendar to an archived page about the specific event. Hope that helps! Kjtobo (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello Kjtobo. The question of whether dead links are bare URLs seems to divide opinion. I say they do not, but others do not see it that way. What concerns me is that, if every article that contains a dead link is so listed, then the link rot cleanup category will host tens of thousands of articles - which would make clean up a truly massive operation. Your efforts, nevertheless, are much appreciated. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Derek. I think I've been working through the backlogs slowly, and tend to review and improve each citation in the article. Now I realize that others are using the backlogs as they were intended, to simply fix the bare URLs without checking for other dead links, lousy reference formats, etc. I suppose it makes sense to bust through the moldy, old backlogs quickly so we can get back to catching these issues while the original authors are more likely to still be around.

And now for an unrelated question: I see that many folks use the |publisher attribute to give the domain name of the URL. I prefer to give the common name with a wikilink. For example, |publisher=Dpsk12.org vs. |publisher=Denver Public Schools. I see you've been at this much longer than I. Do you know where this debate might be taking place? So far I've been quietly editing without really participating in the Wiki editors community. Kind regards, Karen Kjtobo (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Well done Karen. I admire your diligent approach to the whole question of referencing. In an ideal world every referenced source should be re-evaluated, dissected and corrected. Perhaps, as you are slowly discovering, this style of editing might be the way forward if Wikipedia was a finished project, and thus the opportunity was given for such analysis. However, my edict is that blasting through the minutiae and 'fixing' things is more immediate - otherwise we will end up with backlog lists that simply swamp the here and now. Another thought is that the whole art of referencing articles is likely to evolve as time passes. My approach is to tackle the present and let the devil hang himself.

Yes, I may well have been at this longer than you - possibly because I tend to shy away from the "studying one's own navel approach" (Wiki editors community). Purely my own preferred way of getting along. So I can not help direct you in that respect. My advice, for what it is worth, is to keep beavering away until someone tells you to stop. Then beaver away with even more intent - there are more sinners than saints ! Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Rorschach Test (band)

I do not see why Rorschach Test (band) appears in the linkrot category but has no tag.--DThomsen8 (talk) 03:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Look at reference number three, which has an individual clean up tag on it. This is sufficient to generate its entry in the overall linkrot category.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:11, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Now I see that. The URL says "Application Offline for Maintenance

This application is undergoing maintenance right now. Please check back later." I will check later.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for extensive article work, primarily related to music, specifically the blues and jazz. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

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

This experienced contributor has created over 300 music-based (Blues & Jazz) articles and 55 DYKs. Besides content creation, he works diligently in article maintenance by fixing and filling in references. This effort has helped many other editors (including myself) by identifying out-dated or incorrect references in a wide range of subjects. A couple examples of appreciation for Derek’s work are highlighted here and here. I ask that you kindly consider this editor’s history, attention to detail, and dedication to the project.

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

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 16:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)