User talk:Mandruss

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Florida 90

So can you tell me any similarities between TransAsia and Air Florida 90. Thanks JustPlaneEditing (talk) 12:51, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@JustPlaneEditing: Not this talk, article talk. Per WP:BRD, your change is disputed and cannot be made without consensus. Please don't edit war. Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 12:53, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Mandruss, with all respect, that's not exactly what WP:BRD says. Firstly, it's an optional way to resolve disputes, given that is an essay and not a policy. Secondly, the onus is not only on the editor; as the essay says: BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. Don't invoke BRD as your reason for reverting someone else's work or for edit warring: instead, provide a reason that is based on policies, guidelines, or common sense. Happy to further discuss in the article's talk page, specifically with regards to your reverts to my recent good faith edit. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 05:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

@DPdH: Well I guess different editors have different interpretations of BRD. Many of them don't like BRD at all, which is why it's still an essay instead of a guideline. It's unfortunate that the community can't agree on that, since it would eliminate an enormous number of conflicts exactly like this one. Literally thousands a day, I'm certain.

For my part, I choose to go with BRD, and I choose to go with the "This page in a nutshell" at the top of WP:BRD. The first revert is a very efficient way of challenging an edit, automatically notifying the other editor that you have challenged their edit, providing them a brief description of the reason for the challenge, and returning the article to the status quo until consensus is reached for the change. Mostly, the people who object are those whose adrenaline spikes whenever they get reverted, and that's because they don't understand the meaning of reverts and take them personally (I got the impression that's what you did, by your angry reaction).

I don't think we should clutter that content dispute thread with a discussion of proper editing procedure, but you're welcome to start a second thread if you think there is anything to be gained by that. ―Mandruss ☎ 05:42, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying your interpretation, which differs from mine. Please be sure that my responses are not driven by adrenaline, and certainly I didn't think that my response was "angry"; but a lot is missed in non face-to-face communication. Regards, DPdH (talk) 15:21, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

108.25.73.174

It seems this anon user lacks self-conscience and continues to make pointless edits to his own talk page like a child. If you're an admin, can you please take care of his childish demeanor? Thanks. 70.45.65.243 (talk) 15:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@70.45.65.243: I'm not an admin. He's close to being worthy of WP:AIV, but not quite imo. Except for that one article, he's only done minor damage to our talk pages. I don't care what he does to his own talk page, the warnings are still in its history. ―Mandruss ☎ 15:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Breaks layout

How does it break the layout? Alakzi (talk) 17:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Here's your version and mine.

• Which is more reader-useful right next to a description of the flight? A flight path map, or a map showing the departure and scheduled destination airports?
• I don't know about you, but for me your version pushes the External video box down into the Rescue and recovery section. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

The flight map shouldn't be separated from its source. This is a sketch on the basis of preliminary information released on 6 Feb. Layout issues can be ironed out. Alakzi (talk) 17:23, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome to copy this over to the article's talk page for feedback from other editors, if you'd like. Alakzi (talk) 17:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-10

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

Recent software changes

• A Lua function to use Wikidata has changed. You need to update the pages that use it. [1]
• You can use the Content Translation tool on Wikipedia in Uzbek and Minangkabau. You need to enable it in your Beta options.
• You can now hide banners if you don't have an account. [2] [3]

Software changes this week

• The new version of MediaWiki has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since February 25. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from March 3. It will be on all Wikipedias from March 4 (calendar).
• You can use the Content Translation tool on Wikipedia in Punjabi and Kyrgyz. You can ask for the tool in other languages.
• Editing the fake blank line in VisualEditor is now simpler. This change also fixed a few bugs. [4] [5] [6] [7]
• The TemplateData editor now warns you if a related page already has TemplateData. [8]
• The TemplateData table now tells you if a template doesn't take any parameters. [9]

Meetings

• You can read the notes from the last meeting with the VisualEditor team.
• You can join the next weekly meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meetings you can tell developers which bugs are the most important. The meeting will be on March 4 at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
• You can join technical meetings in France and Mexico this year. You will be able to ask for help if you can't pay yourself. [10]

Future changes

• You will be able to get a direct link for a section of a page. [11]

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

16:41, 2 March 2015 (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 your work on Wikipedia articles. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Editor Mandruss for the Editor of the Week Award. Signed up in May of 2013, he only became active in mid 2014 and has about 10000 edits under his belt with close to 38% in article space. He came to my talk recently and asked me to look into a "nit" situation he had uncovered. "Nits are my specialty", he claimed and I immediately started to look at his potential for the "Eddy" Award. When not working on articles, Mandruss can be found at the Help Desk, the Reference Desk and at the Teahouse. He fixes cite templates and references. All signs of a positive helpful editor. He is not immune to the calls of some controversial articles as is exhibited by his involvement at the article Shooting of Michael Brown. On his user page he says, "I am a middle-aged male who has nothing better to do than sit around editing Wikipedia articles. I like that about him.

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! --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 00:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)