User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2017 May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Previous · Index · Next


Jump-to links

2024   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2023   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2022   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2021   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2020   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2019   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2018   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2017   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2016   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2015   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2014   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2013   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2012   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2011   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2010   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2009   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2008   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2007   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2006   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2005   Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

2004                                                           Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec ·

Protected redirs[edit]

Hi Rich; see this edit - {{Redirect semi-protected}} is in twice, the first one is automatic so the second is redundant. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've made appropriate modifications, and will fix up those that have a redundant template. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Talk Page servicing[edit]

Hey there. I am just going to service your user/talk page and clean up a few things. If I do anything wrong, please let me know. This is in good faith. Have a great day! --Redwanf Tayho (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um thanks... please be sure to change the spark-plugs! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Paulie? Hey, you won't be seeing that guy again ;) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 21:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red[edit]

You are adding WIR templates to many talk pages, but it seems that this happens rather indiscriminately. The template claims "This article was created or improved in March 2016 [...]" even when the article was barely edited in that month, e.g. Judy Hoffman (artist) was not edited in that month, and Basang was only created in April. Mary Webb (artist) was only created in May 2016. Talk:Guan Zilan already had the March WIR tag, you added it a second time.

I notice you making many AWB edits and making request to start bot editing again: please make sure that this doeesn't mean that your long-gone problems don't start again as well. Fram (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WIR editathons have fuzzy beginnings and endings. Thus the pages you mention are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/8. As for Guan Zilan, you are quite correct, I was aware of that, and have taken care of it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Nothing against WIR, but the tag linking Phebe Watson to the campaign or any edit-a-thon is not accurate. But while I have your attention, would you mind reviewing Nora Burden? Though it demands little in the way of originality, stained glass iconography is not a trivial craft. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the template from that talk page. I left a note about copyright on the talk page of Nora Burden. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Bot-like editing[edit]

Hello. You recently made 70 edits within 60 seconds. I don't know how that is possible in a semi-automated method but either way it is MEATBOT. In the interests of accountability and to avoid flooding watchlists I ask that you gain bot approval for large-scale tasks like this. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are many ways of doing this without it being meatbot, including having 70 tabs open. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:23, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Rich Farmbrough, for replacing the rcat templates. I was wondering if you could mark these edits as minor, so I can filter them out of my watchlist, which they have totally overwhelmed? Thanks. – Uanfala (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just came here to request the same. Thanks for your edits! I am no longer watching this pageping if you'd like a response czar 01:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see if I can do this tonight. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 07:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
It's done. With a little luck Helpful Pixie Bot will finish the task. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]


Editing direct quote[edit]

In this edit [1], you modified text in a direct quote to remove the word "for" - I am sure you're aware of the importance of not modifying direct quotes. You also left behind mangled phrases such as Those at the meeting described "open source" as a "replacement label" free software. This seems to be related to the bot-like editing mentioned in a higher section of this talk page. It is not possible to simply replace "for free" with "free" without manually reviewing every change. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, in this edit [2] you changed the title of a reference which included "for free", making the title in the citation inaccurate. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:35, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for mentioning these. Of course it is not possible to simply replace "for free" with "free" without checking, in fact it is pretty slow work, partly because there are so many legitimate ways that "for free" can occur - false positives are currently around 40-60%, and when I am done they will be about 97-100%. In contradistinction the section you mention refers to a task with a fp rate (at least in article space) within an epsilon of zero.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:49, 23 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Syntax for redirects[edit]

Why are you going out of your way to change #REDIRECT to #Redirect (e.g. this diff)?

WP:Redirect#How to make a redirect shows that the convention is to use all CAPS for this keyword. We're working at cross-purposes as I often change them in the reverse direction as you. wbm1058 (talk) 20:04, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's simpler, and less magical than all caps. I like to make wikitext as simple as possible, to encourage those who are not familiar with it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Please stop this task immediately and seek bot approval for it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Helpful Pixie Bot 54, where you may provide your gracious assent. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Okay I have now commented there. Please wait for approval and stop making these on your main account. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English -or- table[edit]

Hello, I'm LakeKayak. I wish to inform you that your edits on the template English -or- table have been reverted because it did not seem to be a constructive edit. That's all.LakeKayak (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was a matter of WP:NOTUSA, if any TPS are interested. Should be settled now. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Text for AN[edit]

Primefac has opposed the use of a bot to make more intelligent replacements of the template than auto substing (note, Primefac crafted the subst version of the template) firstly by opposing the BRFA with dismissive language, and secondly by reverting my edit to prevent auto-substing while waiting for the BRFA "Auto susbting is pretty rubbish for this template." with the summary "has to be done". Primefac is clearly WP:INVOLVED
I have proceeded with process manually, albeit at a high rate, as WP:MEATBOT says "merely editing fast is not a problem", rather than engage in conflict with Primefac.
Today Primefac has blocked me with the block summary of "WP:MEATBOT" - which (after I proposed a mutually beneficial way forward) they replaced with the revisionist "this was fully automated editing" and escalated to AN with proposals for un-specified further sanctions.
This seems firstly a case of WP:INVOLVED, and secondly a lack of understanding of WP:MEATBOT. Upping the ante to an AN thread and "fully automated editing" rather than working on a collegial way forward seems unhelpful.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:20, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

User:Primefac said they would copy/paste the above to WP:AN, which they have failed to do. Unfortunately a lot of time has passed and many incorrect assumptions been made, which could have been avoided by my timely response there. However I would still appreciate the above being copied to the appropriate thread. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Done. Huon (talk) 21:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:25, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
My apologies. Real life stepped in the way; I didn't realize when I offered it meant I had to be immediately available. Primefac (talk) 22:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit requested[edit]

Please revert this edit, which is damaging to the encyclopaedia, causing notes about redirects to be lost. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:36, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

@Primefac:? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Please note, this page is not fully protected and does not require an administrator to update. — xaosflux Talk 20:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bot-like edits[edit]

You requested a BRFA. It's still waiting to be approved. You really shouldn't be doing bot-like edits on your main account. Primefac (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There would be no need to do this manually if you hadn't put {{This is a redirect}} back in the Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, knowing that the substitution is sub-optimal. Opposing the BRFA in the terms that you did was also a hindrance. I would be quite happy to pause until the BRFA is granted, if, in turn, you would revert yourself over the substituting. That way we can both have what we want, and get the optimal outcome for the encyclopaedia.
@Primefac:
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:55, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
I'm not sure my opposition to the BRFA is what caused it to be delayed. I'm pretty sure it's the fact that you hadn't marked it as being out of the trial period. Either way, your script editing is seriously out of line with the existing policies, and I've brought up the issue at AN. If you'd like me to copy/paste any responses I will do so. Primefac (talk) 19:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you decided to add a revisionist reason for the block, and to escalate to ANI and ask for community restrictions. And you don't see yourself as WP:INVOLVED here? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:20, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
So did you do this fully manually, then? I find that hard to believe, but perhaps you can explain how this was done without automation. Did you open up many tabs first or something? ~ Rob13Talk 19:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm using custom software so that I only need to check the edit. I'm sure I could go faster with some tweaks. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
You were editing at a rate of over one edit per second via the API. How do you check diffs involving template syntax (having to check numbers of curly brackets, etc) that quickly? I know it's something I'd be unable to do. ~ Rob13Talk 22:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rob, it's really not hard. These are visual patters that the human brain can cope with easily. In this particular case, almost all the redirects are very similar, so the changes are also very similar. I did try to download some screen capture software to make a little video, maybe I'll have more luck tomorrow. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Rich very nice job to help the project. On behalf of the community I thank you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked. Please wait for the BFRA, which, IMHO, should be speedy approved. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dirk. I am happy to wait for the BRFA to complete, provided that the template is kept off the auto-subst list in the meanwhile. The auto-susbting bots are substing about 8.5 k of these per day, which means that the whole thing would be moot in a week. It could easily take a week to pass BRFA, and do other administrative tasks.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 10:22, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Does the auto-subst make any mistakes? I know it is highly inefficient, it does not really harm either. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it fails to support parameters e1, e2.... or deal with any apart from 1-6, p1-6 and n1-6.
In addition it perpetuates obscurantism, mis-spellings and redlinks, does not follow the layout on the documentation page for the target template. These are "no harm" but conversely they are very easy for me to fix while replacing the template, and very hard once it has been replaced.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:02, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
So, basically, auto-subst makes mistakes .. User:Primefac .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:32, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issue is resolved now. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:44, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]


Don't get discouraged[edit]

We have to find a way that active editors do not get discouraged. I am keeping notes of behaviours and tactics that try to discourage editors from contributing. I think we have to work on the opposite directions. Imagine a Wikipedia that daily edits will be 10 or 100 times more :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:52, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! There are two ways this can go - either Primfac and I come to an amicable compromise, as I suggested above, or it is pursued in the usual manner, and when the policy is revealed not to be what they thought it was, they will insist on changing the policy. I wonder which is most likely. I wonder which is most desirable.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
I see no reason why we can't come to a compromise, but I do hope you see (even if you don't agree) that the policies were against you making these edits out of process. If you agree to wait until the bot task is approved, I see no reason to continue the block. Primefac (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you concur. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:20, 27 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Apparently you don't. Apparently I am to stop editing until all the remaining instances have been subst'd away. Apparently "compromise" means doing everything you want, regardless of the damage caused. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 09:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Protected pages with {{This is a redirect}}[edit]

Primefac@Paine Ellsworth Here are some of the protected pages with the template in them. They will need to be dealt with by hand. Anglo-Spanish War (1779-83) probably has a redundant ":" in the redirect line.

  1. XBIZ Award for Best New Starlet
  2. Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Gay Nigger Association of America
  3. Wikipedia:UPLOAD-P
  4. Wikipedia:SANDBOX
  5. Wikipedia:SAND
  6. Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Reviewer
  7. Wikipedia:RFP
  8. Wikipedia:NOTADVERTISING
  9. Wikipedia:Main page
  10. Wikipedia:Main Page
  11. Wikipedia:MOVP
  12. Wikipedia:HG
  13. Wikipedia:Featured article tools
  14. Wikipedia:Example of a double redirect
  15. Wikipedia:C
  16. Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense
  17. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GNAA
  18. Wikipedia talk:Test
  19. Wikipedia talk:TEST
  20. Wikipedia talk:Sb
  21. Wikipedia talk:SB
  22. Wikipedia talk:SANDBOX
  23. Wikipedia talk:SAND
  24. Wikipedia talk:Main page
  25. Wikipedia talk:Main Page
  26. User:DrKiernan
  27. Trouser
  28. Titanic (film)
  29. Talk:Jimbo Wales
  30. Talk:Al Gore controversies
  31. T:TDYK
  32. T:MP
  33. T:ITN
  34. T:AD
  35. Stalin
  36. Sociopath
  37. Sir Daniel Fortesque
  38. Retard
  39. Rainbow Dash
  40. Qu'ran
  41. Prince Henry of Wales
  42. Portal:Main page
  43. Pope Francis I
  44. Perry Belcher
  45. Obama
  46. Naruto: Shippūden
  47. Nail polish remover
  48. NRL
  49. Miserable failure
  50. Manhood
  51. Mainpage-url
  52. Main Page/Tomorrow
  53. Main Page.
  54. Lourinha
  55. List of terms in Xenosaga
  56. List of philosophical theories
  57. List of Internet slang phrases
  58. List of C.I.D. episodes
  59. Kentucky Fried Chicken
  60. Jimbo Wales
  61. Janet Allison
  62. J-Hood
  63. Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
  64. Imo state
  65. Help:A Day in the Life
  66. Halo Waypoint
  67. Giants
  68. English English
  69. Eben Pagan
  70. Dolphins Stadium
  71. Do not want
  72. Disney Family Movies
  73. Destiny Hope Cyrus
  74. Democratic People's Republic of Korea
  75. Darko Trifunović
  76. DO NOT WANT
  77. Creating a new page
  78. Create pages
  79. Create article
  80. Create an article
  81. Create a wikipedia page
  82. Create a bio
  83. British Student Television
  84. British India
  85. Brian Chase (hoaxer)
  86. Brian Chase (Wikipedia prankster)
  87. Brian Chase (Wikipedia hoaxer)
  88. Boston marathon bombings
  89. Baby 81
  90. Archimedes Plutonium
  91. Anglo-Spanish War (1779-83)
  92. American Sniper (film) controversies
  93. Alfred Matthew Yankovic
  94. Al Gore controversies
  95. 9/11
  96. *NSYNC

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #261[edit]

June 2017 offerings @ WikiProject Women in Red[edit]

Welcome to Women in Red's June 2017 worldwide online editathons.

File:Nefertari.jpg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Invitation to comment on Template:Link language RfC[edit]

I saw that you once commented in relation to this matter, so I wanted to invite you to comment at Template talk:Link language#Request for comment on formatting, which (in my mind) is criminally underattended.

A L T E R C A R I   19:17, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have commented there. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #262[edit]

Draft RfC: Wikimedia referrer policy[edit]

Could you take a look at the draft RfC at User:Guy Macon/sandbox and edit/improve it as you see fit? You know how it goes; you write something and then find that you are blind to any errors or stupidity in it. Another set of eyes would be a big help. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 18:43, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: tps: The glaring hole to me is the status quo. What is the status quo? --Izno (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug BellDennis BrownClpo13ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusBYandmanBjarki SOldakQuillShyamJondelWorm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elias Beckingham has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]

Hello, Rich Farmbrough. Elias Beckingham, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you knowDYK comment symbol. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How delightful! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:53, 1 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #258[edit]

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors![edit]

please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2016 Cure Award
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Gastropod Barnstar[edit]

The Gastropod Barnstar

For your good work on organzing templates of external links in gastropods articles, I award you this Gastropod Barnstar. Congratulations! --Snek01 (talk) 11:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing! I never knew there was one! Thank you. Rich Farmbrough, 11:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Would you be so kind and could you realize few more gastropod related tasks, please?

1) Add proper wikilink:

sea [[slug]] -> [[sea slug]]

This is usually in the introductory sentence of the article.

2) If there is a code like this:

[[slug|sea slug]] -> [[sea slug]]

3) Remove Category:Nudibranchia from all articles. (You can keep the sole article "nudibranch" there.) It is container category. Per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Gastropods/Archive_6#Category_Nudibranchia. Thank you. --Snek01 (talk) 15:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems straight-forward. Doing 1 now. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:06, 7 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
1 and 2 -  Done. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
3 I have left Dexiarchia and Euctenidiacea although they are members of Nudipleura. The rest are  Done All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wonderful!

4) In articles within category gastropods and its subcategories:

land [[snail]] -> [[land snail]]

5) In articles within category gastropods and its subcategories:

freshwater [[snail]] -> [[freshwater snail]]

Thank you very much! --Snek01 (talk) 08:32, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'tis done! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
The Gastropod Hero Barnstar

Thank you for holding the whole Wikipedia on your shoulders. --Snek01 (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Position of table of contents in List of botanists by author pages[edit]

Hi, the logic behind the position of the ToC in the "List of botanists by author" pages is that if you click on a letter (e.g. N) any ToC above the section heading (to which the link leads you) isn't visible unless you scroll up. So it's more reader-friendly to have a ToC below every linked section heading on every page. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:34, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Peter coxhead: I assume that you mean List of botanists by author abbreviation (K–L). Placing the TOC anywhere other than immediately before a section heading creates an accessibility issue. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: Ah, right. So would there still be a problem if the links in the ToC went to an anchor above the ToC instead of to the section heading? I can't immediately find all the discussion that led to the currently agreed design, but I remember that the problem of not seeing the ToC was considered important.
Whatever design is adopted, it should be the same for every one of the 16 pages. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Linking directly to section headings is perfectly fine - indeed that is precisely what the default TOC does. The problem comes when there is text between a TOC and the next heading. Screen reader users such as Graham87 (talk · contribs) simply won't hear it. More at WP:TOC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:03, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: linking directly to a section heading is not "perfectly fine" if the ToC may not be immediately below, since, as I tried to explain before, if the ToC has to be above the section heading, then when the reader jumps to the section heading, the ToC is not visible without scrolling, and the reader may not know it's there. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You can have a link back to the ToC at the top of each section. Having said that I'm not sure that these ToC's have the issue RR describes, since they are simply templates, linking mainly to other pages. I would have thought that
a) If you go to "L" the chance you want to navigate straight to "C" is pretty small.
b) As the list grows the number of letters per page will tend to one or less. This makes the ==A-G== ==H== ==I-Z== division a little odd. Dividing the page into navigable chunks, indpendent of the top-level navigation seems the way to go:
S-Sd
Se-Sh
Si-Sp
So-Sz
perhaps.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
You could model it like this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:08, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They are almost one per page now, so I agree that in the end there will be one per page for most letters (not Q I suspect) and the pages will need subdividing.
However, this list isn't like stations, because it gets used both ways: to look up the botanist corresponding to the abbreviation and to look up the abbreviation for the botanist. The latter may require two steps, since if a botanist's name were "James Wilson", the abbreviation could be found under "J" (e.g. "J.Wilson") or under "W" (e.g. "Wils." or "Wilson"). So easy jumping around is useful. There were objections when what was originally one page was divided up because editors were previously able to search for a surname. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #259[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #260[edit]

DYK for Elias Beckingham[edit]

On 21 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elias Beckingham, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 13th-century English royal justice Elias Beckingham was described as being one of only two honest judges in the kingdom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elias Beckingham. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elias Beckingham), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017 offerings @ WikiProject Women in Red[edit]

Welcome to Women in Red's June 2017 worldwide online editathons.

File:Nefertari.jpg

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Invitation to comment on Template:Link language RfC[edit]

I saw that you once commented in relation to this matter, so I wanted to invite you to comment at Template talk:Link language#Request for comment on formatting, which (in my mind) is criminally underattended.

A L T E R C A R I   19:17, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have commented there. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #262[edit]

Draft RfC: Wikimedia referrer policy[edit]

Could you take a look at the draft RfC at User:Guy Macon/sandbox and edit/improve it as you see fit? You know how it goes; you write something and then find that you are blind to any errors or stupidity in it. Another set of eyes would be a big help. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 18:43, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: tps: The glaring hole to me is the status quo. What is the status quo? --Izno (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]