User talk:Jonesey95

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 90 days will be automatically archived to User talk:Jonesey95/Archive2026.

Archives

2009–2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 20.

Tech News: 2025-38

[trimmed by Jonesey95]

• Users that search using regular expressions (regex) can now use additional features including:
  • for the intitle: keyword: metacharacters for start-of-line (^) and end-of-line ($) anchors [1]
  • for both intitle: and insource: keywords: shorthand character classes for digits (\d), whitespace (\s), and word characters (\w); and escape codes for line feed (\r), newline (\n), tab (\t), and unicode (e.g. \uHHHH). [2]

Request for copyedit: Draft:Kratošija

Hello Jonesey95,

I know you do a lot of valuable work with the Guild of Copy Editors, and I really appreciate the time and effort you dedicate to improving articles.

If you have a moment, I would be very grateful for your help with a copyedit of Draft:Kratošija. The draft was recently moved to draftspace with the explanation "language/grammar problems". All statements are supported by reliable references, so I would kindly ask that references not be altered — I only need help with grammar, clarity, and encyclopedic tone.

Thank you very much in advance for your time and assistance! VitisArchivum (talk) 09:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand the guideline that led Joy to move this article to Draft space. The reasons at WP:DRAFTREASON do not appear to apply, WP:DRAFTNO item #5 appears to apply (you were actively working on the article), and item #6 appears to apply (you stated in an edit summary "meets notability and sourcing guidelines" when moving the article to article space). I object to this move and think that the page should be moved back to article space and should have a {{copy edit}} tag applied. This article is in much better shape than many articles we edit for the WP:GOCE. Nice work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I moved it was basically inside your cleanup edit, @Jonesey95 - for example, this article had the bold link to itself in at least half a dozen places. This indicated an obvious need to give the new editor some time to figure out how basic linking and formatting works.

At the same time, I think we still may have a problem with machine-generated text and/or the copyright policy, though, because the first paragraph in the Origin section is quoted. I've never seen this happen myself. It sounds like it was copied and pasted from somewhere. Especially because of the very intricate list of references inside it. @VitisArchivum did you get this information from somewhere else? --Joy (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that your concerns do not meet the thresholds at WP:DRAFTREASON. I think that cleanup tags should have been applied instead. Please move the article back to article space, per the above links. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, it doesn't make sense to me to publish an article in this state. If you want to take responsibility for it, please feel free to move it yourself. (If there's a technical limitation, there's probably a forum to request assistance about that.) --Joy (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for engaging. I have moved it back to article space per the guidelines linked above. I have tidied and tagged it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, in the meantime I noticed that this whole series of edits happened - @DalidaEditor basically ripped that new article to pieces as a WP:POVFORK, instead including a mention of it in the Zinfandel article with this edit. --Joy (talk) 11:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and then there was also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unilateral redirect and removal of verified content without consensus (Kratošija → Zinfandel). --Joy (talk) 11:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inflation calculator template

Sicne you wanted to delete the template, I moved it to User:JPxG/Inflation calculator. Since this caused a bunch of the code to break, is there anything that can be done to fix this? jp×g🗯️ 06:26, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have fixed it. I think the new RFD nominations broke the template after it had been moved. Waiting for the TFD to finish, or transcluding the template anywhere, would have been other valid choices. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:54, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to not work; the buttons are no longer functional. I don't know why this is the case, since I have not edited it since its creation. Is there a way for you to make it work again? jp×g🗯️ 09:48, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you create this category?

I created a category that you redirect to. Can you create these categories? วรุฒ หิ่มสาใจ (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You created Category:2025 Thai films and similar categories. We do not have categories for "[Year] [Country] films". We group countries' films by decade, like Category:2020s Thai films. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks วรุฒ หิ่มสาใจ (talk) 00:11, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-42

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

Weekly highlight

• Last week, improvements to account security and two-factor authentication (2FA) features were enabled across all wikis. These changes include user interface improvements for Special:AccountSecurity, the support of multiple 2FA methods via authenticator apps and portable security keys (previously users could only enable one method), and a new Recovery Codes module which facilitates fewer account lockouts due to lost two-factor apps and devices. As part of the Account Security project, work is continuing through the rest of 2025 on further user experience improvements, and support for passkeys as an alternate second factor.

Updates for editors

• Another part of the Account security project is making 2FA generally available to all users. Along with editors with advanced privileges, such as administrators and bureaucrats, 40% of editors now have access to 2FA. You can check if you have access at Special:AccountSecurity. Instructions for activation are on the linked page. The plan is to continue increasing availability if it is determined that the user support capabilities are able to support global usage. [3]
• This week, users at wikis where talk page Usability Improvements are already available by default (everywhere except the 12 wikis listed in T379264) will gain the ability to Thank a comment directly from the talk page it appears on. Before this change, Thanking could only be done by visiting the revision history of the talk page. You can learn more about this change. [4]
• Users who have not verified their email address will soon be receiving monthly Notification reminders to do so. This is because users who have verified their email can more easily recover their account. These reminders will not be sent if the user is inactive or removes the unverified email from their account. [5][6]
• View all 21 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a fix was made for an occasional error with saving translated paragraphs in the Content Translation tool, and the related error messages are now easier to see. [7]

Updates for technical contributors

• The Unsupported Tools Working Group has chosen Video2Commons as the first tool for its pilot cycle. The group will explore ways to improve and sustain the tool over the coming months. Learn more on Meta.
• Detailed code updates later this week: MediaWiki

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

MediaWiki message delivery 18:56, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noble

Would you mind updating {{Infobox_noble/Wikidata}} to onlysourced? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. That was a little tricky. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:03, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October blitz bling

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 1,999 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE October 2025 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 15:47, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Second order quotations

Arising [very loosely!] from your work on quotations in the MOS, may I ask a favour? [This is a rather arbitrary call for volunteers and, given the subject area, I won't be at all surprised if you decline because it is a morass and even I am close to tip-toeing quietly away.]

The question is how close to the original must an editor's summary of a BLP subject's statements be? Is it legitimate for an editor to apply their own "interpretation" when doing so?

If you can spare a few minutes, might you look at talk:Jo Phoenix#Transgender Women in Women’s spaces. to give me your opinion on the structure (not the detail) of my contention that editors cannot reinterpret unduly what the BLP subject said. The issue for me is BLP compliance but there is no obvious policy that I can cite.

The point of this contact is to get a second opinion on whether my position (that no, they can't, that would be WP:SYNTH) a reasonable one in this case. (Part of the problem is that I have no "skin in the game" for either POV and I can see myself getting sucked into a culture war that is of no interest to me. I only watch the article because the original cause celébre happened in my home city.)

This is not a WP:canvas to take sides or even contribute to the discussion, that would not be helpful. Again, feel free to decline without a moment's hesitation. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's too much gender guideline parsing for me. My quick take is that if there is a dispute over how to describe someone's stated position, it may be best to use the person's original words, in an appropriate context, and let the words speak for themselves (or whatever possessive pronoun the words prefer [<-- a gender joke!]). Or report what reliable sources say the person's position is. We should not be doing SYNTH or OR here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, much obliged. At least I'm not being wildly unreasonable. (And yes, direct quotation [though not in a quote box ] would seem to be the way to resolve the dispute but the other editor seems intent on WP:RGW and disinclined to compromise.) It is interesting that in all my years editing, this is the first case where I've encountered this kind of dispute so am not really equipped to handle it.

Thank you again. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:50, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend making a final post stating your position, then removing the article from your watchlist and walking away. If your temperament is anything like mine, you'll be bothered by continued fruitless discussion, and it won't be worth it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more engaged in the question of POV and loaded language paraphrasing, in effect putting words in the mouth of the blp subject. I'd like to use it as the inspiration for an added section to WP:BLP. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:50, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of closing brackets.

When this was added, the closing double bracket was moved down into the new section.

Should the same have happened for this recent addition?

There was a set of double brackets originally added there (but without removing the set in the section above), but were removed due to this creating lint errors on ~50 pages (see intervening edit). -- 92.29.27.47 (talk) 11:36, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you are asking me here instead of asking Beetstra or asking on the template's talk page. I don't think I have ever interacted with that template. I see that nobody has edited the template's sandbox or testcases page in a while; that is probably a good next step if something appears to be broken. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:46, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beetstra own edit summary was a question mark, perhaps suggesting they aren't sure that their edit is correct; and I thought I remembered from a while back you were a bit of a whizz with template logic. The template talk page has seen no action for 4.5 years, my hunch was that posting there would see no reply. -- 92.29.27.47 (talk) 23:06, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, I originally just copied a line, and then noticed displaying broke. After removal the display was correct and I thought that it was just a counting error on my side. Now I saw the original reason of the double brackets (test and template does not make that abundantly clear, I may edit that in the comments) I have moved them as happened in an earlier edit.
The lint error on the other template was another copy-paste error - the templates are not consistent resulting in copy-pasting giving inconsistent outputs. Thanks! Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 00:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good outcome. -- 92.18.76.179 (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Script for you...

Thought you might find this script interesting/useful. It looks like you currently use Frietjes's version. Mine is based on that but with a few improvements that I list in the documentation. Shameless self promotion ... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 09:04, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll take a look. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm Re Bilovodsk Raion... Thanks for fixing that and appreciate you tagging me in the diff. Gotta be more careful in the future.... How did that last nearly a month!? Must be a low traffic page... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 00:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of non-existent templates used to be patrolled daily, I think by myself and Frietjes primarily, but it has gotten stale over the past few weeks. Patrolling it is (mostly; present company excepted) a thankless task, since it repopulates with 50 to 100 new instances of nonexistent templates daily, and there is nothing in the software that prevents insertion of such template pages. Also, resolving each one often requires about five to eight clicks (e.g. click link, click page, click History, click diff, undo if appropriate, type edit summary, save). It's not one of the more fun chores around, but clearing the report is momentarily satisfying. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I TOTALLY get you! My passion project in CAT:UNKNOWN. I wrote a custom module to poll all the Infobox unknown param cats and display them if they contain over 100. Slowly working my way through them until they all reach zero then the threshold will drop to something like 5. But that satisfaction of reaching zero is VERY real. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 00:12, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the heads-up :)

Just wanted to say thank you for reverting the template - I really need to slow down when assessing these. Hope your doing well :) RossEvans19 (talk) 01:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Pages with nonexistent templates show up on a report that I monitor; I wasn't tracking you in any way. It's always useful to use Preview and check your edits after saving the page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:09, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Smiley template links

Why would this have started the smiley template appearing within external links to now be wikilink in external links errors? I've seen about 7 so far, and generally think they should be rewritten so that it's EIS with the link within, but kinda also don't care which way it goes so long as it's errorfree. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:58, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Our fellow gnome Anomie removed the empty |link= as the default for all of the images, because some of the images are not public domain and therefore require links to the File: page for copyright reasons. I have added an empty |link= to the default smiley, since it is public domain. That should fix most of the errors; if other flavors of the image cause link-in-link errors, check the corresponding File: page; if the image is public domain, you can add |link= after that file name. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:47, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the non-PD/CC0 ones are . Also, if you want an easy way to identify unlinked images that shouldn't be, my user script User:Anomie/unattributed-image-finder highlights them. I finally realized how to get it working reliably a few weeks ago, after wanting such a script since 2011. Anomie⚔ 02:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Was initially more asking about the technical why for the link parameter removal caused it, but the social reason is good to know since I wasn't aware of that. I'm seeing a few pages for {{smiley|#}} appearing, but I've been converting to those specific images in EIS based on the index in documentation. Thanks for the info. Zinnober9 (talk) 22:36, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The technical reason is that there is a wikilink inside an external link, as the Linter is trying to tell you. It doesn't look like a normal wikilink, but images without a blank |link= always have a link to a File: page built-in. Removing that blank |link= caused there to be a new wikilink inside those external links. Adding a blank |link= to Template:smiley for the default image, which is public domain, causes the wikilink to go away, fixing the Linter error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:54, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WP Gymnastics Invite

Please review your recent edit(s) to {{WP Gymnastics Invite}}. Your documentation editions seem to be following the template erroniously, as can be seen here. GauchoDude (talk) 16:28, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I have fixed it. Thanks for letting me know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:12, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What does the self-closed ~~<noinclude/>~~ in the source code do? -- 78.151.51.244 (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It inserts your signature automatically when you subst the template. It is typical code used in invitation templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:09, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for review – Zinfandel / Kratošija proposal

Hi Jonesey95, I hope you’re doing well. Some time ago, you kindly helped me restore a draft that had been prematurely removed — and I truly appreciated your fair and balanced approach back then. I’d like now, if I may, ask for your brief review my new proposal, before posting, on the Talk:Zinfandel page, related to the structure and sourcing balance concerning Kratošija (the Montenegrin grape variety genetically identical to Zinfandel / Primitivo / Tribidrag). For context, the original Kratošija page was redirected to Zinfandel on October 12, unilaterally, without prior discussion, following a POV fork claim raised by another editor,(she redirected it). Although editor Liz initially reverted the redirect, and advised that a discussion should be opened, the page was later left redirected without a proper consensus. The redirect, therefore, remains in place, grounded only in that earlier POV fork assertion, rather than in an established community agreement. I contacted ANI, and they redirected me to the Talk:Zinfandel page for discussion.

My intention, for now, is not to reopen that past issue. I uderstood that this subject is not very familiar to many independent editors, who have no regional bias, so my current goal is simply to introduce these important scientific findings and the confirmation of historical heritage, by improving the existing article Zinfndel, in a balanced and verifiable way. I’d be very grateful if you could take a quick look at the text, before I publish it on Talk:Zinfandel, just to ensure that it’s neutrally written and consistent with Wikipedia’s standards. Truly appreciate ,again, for your time and for all the work you do across Wikipedia.

The text is:

Proposal: Improving structure and sourcing consistency regarding Kratošija (synonym of Zinfandel)

Hello everyone, I’m a relatively new editor and prefer to work in consensus with experienced and objective editors. My intention is to help by making the article more complete and verifiable, while fully respecting Wikipedia’s core policies — WP:NPOV and WP:V. While reading through the Zinfandel page, I have noticed a few areas that could (or should) be improved with additional reliable sources — especially newer peer-reviewed studies and well-documented historical materials. This addition is in line with WP:CSB. Since the Zinfandel article already presents the Croatian and Italian aspects in detail, there are also peer-reviewed and historical references that document Kratošija (Kra-tosh-ee-ah) — the Montenegrin grape variety which is confirmed by DNA studies to represent the same cultivar as Zinfandel / Primitivo / Tribidrag.

Knowing the significance of the Kratošija name and its connection to the Zinfandel story, as well as the importance of new scientific findings that support historical records, I believe this information deserves inclusion — supported strictly by reliable sources.

Another subject I would like to point out is the matter connected with the structure itself in the “Distribution and wines” section. I have noticed inconsistency between the title and the accompanying text. I also noticed that both the historical reference to “Cratosia” and the genetic identification of Kratošija currently appear in this section. These details don’t actually relate to that section, which focuses mainly on modern wine production, vineyards, and the types of wines produced across regions (California, Italy, Croatia, etc.). Montenegro is currently listed under “Other regions” with non-specific data, and the content there refers more to historical documentation (not entirely accurate) and DNA research than to actual vineyards and wine production. Finally, the current title “Distribution and wines” might also be reconsidered, since it primarily evokes commercial distribution and, to be honest, may not fully match the content that follows (wine regions, vineyards, and the descriptions of wines). Perhaps a title like “Vineyard regions and wine” or “Zinfandel wine regions and wine characteristics” could fit better — though of course that should be open for discussion and consensus. Therefore, for better logical flow and accuracy, and considering the significance of Kratošija, it might make sense to:

• Move Kratošija out of the “Other regions” section and assign a separate subsection. Kratošija is the most important and indigenous Montenegrin grape variety, accounting for around 90% of the vineyards in the Skadar Lake Basin region, although it is present across all viticultural areas of Montenegro. Numerous scientific papers (verified data and references are available), as well as the renowned wine writer Jancis Robinson, also confirm this. On her educational website Terroirs du Monde Education, it is stated, among other things, that: “Kratošija is the main and probably the oldest Montenegrin variety. The grape variety is dominant in all vineyards older than 60–70 years. Furthermore, it often represents about 90% of the grape varieties in the Skadar subregion, and is even more prevalent in the coastal area.”
• Second, move the historical note about Kratošija to the “History” section (with appropriate, verified and verifiable references, along with a suitable brief explanation, since those are not fully correct). I will return to this subject as a separate issue later. Also, in this section, add appropriate data that belong, in terms of meaning, to this section.
• And third, move (integrate) the DNA identification of Kratošija into the section “Relationship with Primitivo, Crljenak Kaštelanski and Tribidrag," with reference examples:

- Calò, Antonio; Costacurta, Angelo; Maraš, Vesna; Meneghetti, Stefano; Crespan, Manna (2008). "Molecular correlation of Zinfandel (Primitivo) with Austrian, Croatian, and Hungarian cultivars and Kratošija, an additional synonym." American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 59 (2): 121–127. [8] - Maraš, V.; Popović, T.; Gazivoda, A.; Raičević, J.; Kodžulović, V.; Mugoša, M.; Šućur, S. (2015). "Origin and characterization of Montenegrin grapevine varieties." [9]

Several other reliable DNA sources also exist, which will be addressed later on the talk page.

These adjustments would improve structure and factual consistency, while adding verifiable and scientifically supported context. If editors find this relevant, I can provide full reference details, original quotes, and short example wording for each section, so we can review and refine it together.I’d prefer to start gradually and work toward consensus, inviting feedback from neutral editors, interested in the subject. My only goal is to support a balanced, well-sourced, and verifiable presentation of this topic, in line with Wikipedia’s encyclopedic standards. I believe that for any content, the type of source, is of crucial importance. You know, a newspaper article, no matter how reputable it may be, just can’t really be compared to a scientific paper, a doctoral dissertation, or experimentally verified research. For Wikipedia, such sources are far more reliable and should not be overlooked, ignored, or omitted in any way, as this seriously affects the accuracy and verifiability of the article. And, of course, science moves forward and new discoveries are constantly emerging… We have to stay in line with that. I’m sure you’ll agree with me on that. With sincere respect and appreciation for your work. VitisArchivum (talk) 09:27, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above looks fine to me. It's much longer than a typical talk page post, but I think that is OK in this case. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, that means a lot — I’ll post it on Talk:Zinfandel shortly. If you happen to check that discussion at some point, your perspective would be greatly appreciated. — VitisArchivum (talk) 09:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confused

This edit... "Same reason"?? What'd I miss. I'm assuming the mistake is mine... But what was the problem? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 14:59, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See the edit summary in the history. Some fix is probably needed in one of the subpages of {{Needs IPA}}, but I didn't take the time to puzzle it out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AH! Gotcha. Sorry when I saw "same reason" I assumed you had undone multiple of my edits for the same reason, but then couldn't find any others. Didn't think to check that pages edit history. Thanks for the explanation. :-) Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated to above, but if you have a chance... can you figure out why this isn't working?! i've tested it in my sandbox (with {{user other}}) and it works fine! I'm totally lost. Probably something really obvious. I do want the count at 3, not 4, despite there being 4 total params. That is not a typo. But any help would be appreciated. 🤓 Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tested it at Montgomery, Alabama by adding all four parameters with values, and it assigns the category just fine. The category has six articles in it. What is the error that you are seeing? – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tested it on Vancouver and it didn't work so I assumed I was doing something wrong. :-( Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 14:58, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It works for me at Vancouver if I add |mapframe=yes. Go figure. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. It's got 3 images so it should be triggering the {{if all}} since count is set at 3... oh well. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The third example under "Other examples" at Template:If all#Usage may be relevant. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Son of a biscuit... Thank you. Sorry for the late response. Been at work all day. Thank you, once again for helping me. Much appreciated. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Late response

In this edit of yours: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sea_Lapland&diff=prev&oldid=1293119775 you indirectly asked me where I got an "invalid syntax" from, referring to center. The answer is that I copied them from the Finnish language page Meri-Lappi. Mustakahvi (talk) 17:20, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Obsolete tags do appear to be coming from other-language Wikipedias that have not been cleaned up yet, but I keep wondering if we have left behind any instruction pages here at the English Wikipedia that have obsolete tags on them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The <center>...</center> element has been obsolete since the release of HTML5 in October 2014, although it was already deprecated (since the release of HTML 4 in December 1997). The proper way of centring an image (whether in a table cell or elsewhere) is by adding the |center option to the image specification, per WP:EIS#Location. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why the dead link was restored back in QtWeb.io and web archive link was deleted

What was reason why the dead link of QtWeb.io was restored back on QtWeb page and working web archive link was deleted, here, this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=QtWeb&oldid=prev&diff=1319628993 Minas-A (talk) 05:40, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REDNOT. Templates that do not exist are not allowed in articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Minas-A, Template:Webarchive might be the template you were aiming for, but "{{Template:WebArchive of Official website qtweb.net}}" doesn't exist and was not a functioning link in your edit. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New RFC re: too many maps

So I'm working on another RFC regarding the issue of too many maps in settlement pages... If you are so inclined, I'd love to hear your thoughts on my rough draft. Thanks! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:13, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for discussion of Template:Use Malaysian English

Template:Use Malaysian English has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Renerpho (talk) 14:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diffs requested

Per your request -

• Phil Murphy
• Tahesha Way
• Glenn Youngkin
• Winsome Earl-Sears

GoodDay (talk) 22:48, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, no diffs, then no edit summaries, now WP:TALKFORK. You're not making it easy to find you a sympathetic character.

Thanks for the diffs. It looks like your reminder has worked, since the current versions of the articles do not have "elect" in the infoboxes. If the problem recurs, you can just report this person to WP:ANI. Make sure to link to the diffs in question, and the previous notices they have received on their talk page regarding problems with following this RFC (and with not using edit summaries). You'll have to dig through the user talk page history, because they delete instead of archiving. For my talk page watchers, this is a follow-up to this dicussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:41, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. GoodDay (talk) 00:53, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why removal of paragraphs.

Good afternoon Jonesey95. I am reaching out to you regarding the removal of my paragraphs on the "Elizabeth Bathory" wikipedia page. Nothing that I wrote down was based on speculation, and is based on the book "Infamous Lady" by Kimberely L.Craft. I even provided a quote by Bathory on the night of raid that proved that she committed the crimes.

If you want more explanation as to why I edited the article please view the 'talk page' under this article. In this talk page I provide lots of background on this case based on newly found information regarding the translations of the trial testimonies. I would not have edited the page if I wasn't sure of what I was saying.

Did you read the trial testimonies? I highly doubt it, but somehow you feel its right to remove my edits which are based on the historical records. Keep in mind that Craft has been the only person who has published multiple books on Bathory with the original source material. All other scholars and authors have not cited the source material in their work.

If you guys want secondary sources, how can one provide secondary sources when there is no one to provide the reliable secondary sources. Yes, there are some complications to this case. But after reading Ms.Crafts books you won't have much doubt about her guilt.

Please reinstate my paragraphs, if you can, since the article on wikipedia is not accurate right now. Again, please read the talk page as I explain much more on there. ~2025-31596-73 (talk) 17:38, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me as though you need to cite your source(s) properly. - Denimadept (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for communicating. I removed your additions because they were a formatting and prose mess. Please look carefully at how existing text is structured, including the use of <ref>...</ref> tags. You should also run your proposed additions through a spelling and grammar checker, if possible, to catch easy-to-fix errors such as "disfurged" and non-sentences such as "It should be noted, that prior to author: Kimberely L. Craft publishing of "Infamous Lady" on October 27, 2009." – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK Jonesey95 I will admit when it comes to formatting citations I didn't know how to do it. I assumed you guys you would have an issue with the content itself, but if that is not the case I would like to offer my apologizes. If its just with formatting citations properly, I don't really know how to do that.

If its possible, could I send you the citations and you could add it in to the article? And I could rewrite the sentences you deleted? Or do I have to do it? Sorry, I am new to wikipedia and am just learning how things operate.

Have a good day! ~2025-31596-73 (talk) 19:29, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We were all new here once. There is definitely a learning curve. One good way to learn is to examine the existing wikitext (the underlying code) on a page, then try editing bits of text yourself. Always use Preview to check how your edit will look; if it looks like it matches the rest of the article, only then should you click "Publish changes". I recommend asking for further help at Wikipedia:Help desk. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:26, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are several instances of "it should be noted"; they read like statements of opinion, to be avoided. See also the policy on neutrality. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Emmanuel Anyama

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Emmanuel Anyama, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:42, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The things we do for fun...

You left a nice cheat sheet on my user talk page at User talk:Anomalocaris/Archive 2022#Linter fixes not required for TFD-related errors in a {{cot}} box titled "The things we do for fun..." Today I learned (maybe not for the first time) that the HTML5-compatible version of <table align="right"> is <table style="float:right">. Any idea why they didn't allow <table style="float:center">?

Tiny float right table

Tiny uncentered table

—Anomalocaris (talk) 01:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've never understood why, but there is no such CSS property as float:center. You get none left right initial inherit as options. That's it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:55, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it's because it would need text to flow round both sides of the floated box. If you're happy to have blank spaces instead of text, use margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto; which will centre the box between whatever is to its left and to its right. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny float right table

The quick brown fox on the left looks at the tiny floating table on the right

---

Redrose64 seems to have the right answer, and if you don't want text to float to the left of a right-aligned table, it's pretty obvious what to do:

Tiny float right table

The quick brown fox on the left is below tiny floating table on the right, helped by "clear"

Or, you could do it this way:

---

Tiny margin-left:auto table

The quick brown fox on the left is below Tiny margin-left:auto table, with no "clear" required

By the way, margin:auto centers with less bombast. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonesey95: I see you updated mw:Help:Lint errors/obsolete-tag in 2023 to add more on centering. Now I've updated it with §Right-aligning tables. —Anomalocaris (talk) 23:47, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that the new section is not relevant to a current Linter error. It would probably be better to avoid confusing the issue by adding different kinds of updates; it's confusing enough already. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We included stuff just above it on table cell alignment and color, which is also obsolete HTML not detected by the linter, so people who fix {| align="center" should also have advice on how to fix {| align="right". —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:38, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see the "As of" notes now. I don't think any of it should be on that page; it just muddies the water. I won't get into a big fight about it though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:15, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox aircraft

Any idea why the nowiki is appearing to be ignored causing table to be deleted errors on Template:Infobox aircraft/doc for the multiple cases starting with

<table><tr><td valign="top">{{demo|sep=</td><td valign="top">|<nowiki>
{|{{Infobox aircraft begin
...

I'm aware the Infobox aircraft things are undergoing a merging/reconfiguring, but I don't believe this error is directly due to that. I was suspicious of the sep parameter entry from demo, but removing that doesn't change anything when tested. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:53, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that these errors, and the failure to display the templates correctly, and the unknown parameter errors, are due to the recent merge done by the hard-working HouseBlaster. I expect that more cleanup is forthcoming. A big project. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:06, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I'll first note that I do not deserve credit for making the merge happen—that would be @Zackmann08, ZLEA, and Phuzion. But those lint errors do appear to be my fault, so don't blame them for that! Let me see if I can pull off some magic and update the doc to tell people who to use the new formatting. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should be sorted now. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:41, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, and thank you @HouseBlaster, you've gotten them. I apologize, I asked Jonesey95 first since Jonesey is regularly better than I with understanding template related errors, and I didn't want to interrupt you with the merge cleanup since I wasn't aware of your knowledge of lint and I didn't think I could be helpful to you if I needed to explain both the error that I didn't understand and what lint is.

The two test pages Template:Infobox aircraft/testcases and Template:Infobox aircraft begin/testcases also have this issue, but since they'll likely be merged to or deleted after completion, I'm not concerned about them, just mentioning so they aren't overlooked.

I knew Phuzion was a driving force on the merge due to the documentation related to their bot's task 4, (which did an unexpected edit resulting in a few errors on an article I spotted the other day), and saw that you were also connected from one of the discussions linked to within that BRFA. I appreciate everyone's efforts in this cleanup and general getting away from the confusing mixed look of "table bracket, template start, template other bits, closing bracket(s)" for some of the air and ship related infoboxes. Simple to understand and use templates that do their jobs effectively are always appreciated. Thank you again, Zinnober9 (talk) 05:03, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize! Thank you for looking out for these errors :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 13:12, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about Template:Hockey color

I saw that you wrote about this particular template at User talk:MikeVitale#Plans for Template:Hockey color?. I want to notify you that Template:Hockey color, Template:Hockey color cell and Template:Hockey color cell2 were nominated for speedy deletion per CSD G4 (G4. Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion), because all three were previously discussed and deleted at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 November 30#Template:Ice hockey color cell. – sbaio 11:03, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:All Wikipedia articles written in Malaysian English

A tag has been placed on Category:All Wikipedia articles written in Malaysian English indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for guidance regarding ongoing Zinfandel / Kratošija issue

Hi Jonsey95,

I’m reaching out because I genuinely value your judgment, and your previous reply helped me more than I can say. As a beginner who is still learning how to navigate Wikipedia’s processes, your guidance means a great deal to me — especially now, when I feel unsure how to proceed. I have been trying to propose a small, sourced addition to the Zinfandel article, based on established international and regional ampelographic and genetic literature. I followed the advice previously given at ANI and moved the entire discussion to Talk:Zinfandel, especially since Dalida had unilaterally redirected the Kratošija article — an issue I have not abandoned, but I am approaching it step by step, respecting all policies, starting with smaller, fully sourced and carefully argued improvements within the Zinfandel article. I announced all intended edits in advance, provided full sourcing, and avoided re-adding anything that had been reverted. However, Dalida has continued to revert every contribution I propose with edit summaries such as “NPOV and misinformations,” but without explaining on the talk page what exactly is considered incorrect. Some of the material she added in place of my text is factually incorrect, and I pointed this out on the talk page — but that explanation was ignored. I opened several detailed sections and pinged Dalida, yet there has been no engagement. The reverting simply continues without clarification. This pattern of reverting without discussion appears to conflict with several core policies, including WP:CONSENSUS, WP:TALK, WP:BRD, WP:BURDEN and WP:OWN, since there was no attempt to specify what exactly was incorrect, no examination of the sources, and no effort to work toward shared wording. I respect Wikipedia deeply and I care about verifiability and accuracy. I am completely open to valid counterarguments supported by policy or sources — but I cannot accept continuous reverts without explanation, or the avoidance of discussion. It feels discouraging, especially after the unilateral removal of the Kratošija article, and now not being allowed to make even sourced improvements to Zinfandel. Because you have previously offered guidance in good faith, I would be very grateful for your advice again. I am not asking anyone to take sides — only to help me understand what the correct next step is in this situation. Should I open a DRN case, start an RfC, or is there another venue that would be more appropriate? Here are the relevant links: • Latest revert by Dalida:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zinfandel&oldid=1322708866

• My previous edit that was reverted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zinfandel&oldid=1322707166

• Talk page posts where I explained everything in advance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zinfandel#Proposal:_Improving_structure_and_sourcing_consistency_regarding_Krato%C5%A1ija_(synonym_of_Zinfandel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zinfandel#Implementation_note_%E2%80%93_History_subsection_update
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zinfandel#Clarification_%E2%80%93_Budva_and_Venetian_administration

Thank you very much for any advice you can offer. It truly means a lot to me. VitisArchivum (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Third opinion and also WP:LLMCOMM. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:20, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sierra Leonean English

Hi Jonesey95, please would you share your view on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 November 14#Template:Sierra Leonean English which I have nominated for deletion. It is an obscure one that has slipped through the net as it doesn't have a corresponding Use Sierra Leonean English template. Dgp4004 (talk) 17:02, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm glad to see some progress on this front... Is the dam about to burst, I wonder? -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 22:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• After what I've seen, I refuse to get my hopes up. I'm glad that there are other windmill-tilters around here, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Jonesey95 and Ohconfucius, I must apologise for dragging you back into the brambles of spelling tags! I'm afraid that ever more spurious templates have been proposed to take the place of those deleted. This time 'Use local English (Kenyan)' and 'Use Commonwealth English (Singaporean)'. They may not go any further as they're only at the Village pump (idea lab). But nonetheless, I thought I'd best flag this with you both as these are basically proposals to go against consensus at TfD. Dgp4004 (talk) 01:53, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  "Use Commonwealth English" has been deleted in the past, for good reason, and should not be a viable option. Stay the course. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:51, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Another obscure one which has slipped through. Dgp4004 (talk) 09:28, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Next de-linting-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:LintErrors/misnested-tag?wpNamespaceRestrictions=1%0D%0A0%0D%0A4%0D%0A5%0D%0A6%0D%0A7%0D%0A8%0D%0A9%0D%0A10%0D%0A11%0D%0A12%0D%0A13%0D%0A14%0D%0A15%0D%0A100%0D%0A101%0D%0A118%0D%0A119%0D%0A126%0D%0A127%0D%0A710%0D%0A711%0D%0A828%0D%0A829%0D%0A1728%0D%0A1729&titlecategorysearch=&exactmatch=1&tag=blockquote&template=all

Blockquote? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, like this. Like div tags, blockquote tags almost always need to start and end at the same indent level. That usually means either:

1. put the opening blockquote tag on a new line with no indenting, and put the closing blockquote tag on a new line with no indenting, or
2. put both the opening and closing blockquote tags on the same line, with no line breaks.

So you can write

::Foo bar <blockquote>baz etc.</blockquote>

but not

::Foo bar <blockquote>baz etc.
</blockquote>

I hope that makes sense. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them are a little stranger. Do the easy ones first and then come back for more advice if you need it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:10, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't dealing with these, lack of experience, feel free to commence efforts yourself though. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, hoping to assign me some work, I see. I'm currently focused on finally trying to clear up article space, doing 50 or so a day. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm coming for you.

The race is on.... Have a great day! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good thing for me that you took a multi-year break. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA! right?! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:49, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You zoomed right past me! You were just a blur. I didn't even see you go by. Keep it up. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HAHAH!!! That made my night... JWB tasks help a lot... The real work is in the testing of those regexes which can take hours to perfect. I really should resurrect my bot account. Frankly I abandoned it because I found the BRFA process to be such a pain. I know they try their best, but I had at least 2 requests that sat for over 2 months waiting for approval: no comments, no questions, just no one with the free time to approve it. Ultimately I found it was just easier to perfect my regexes and then run the scripts manually.

In any case, thanks for the laugh! Keep up the great work yourself.

Also, script you might find useful... AddCheckForClobberedParameters. Based off the idea Frietjes came up with. Check it out!

Happy holidays and all that jazz. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:12, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User hiding unused templates status

Take a note, that Grufo has been marking all their creations as subst templates, which hide their unused status. Some will also need to be evaluated if they even make sense being subst and not transclusions. Gonnym (talk) 11:44, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A fun development. Editors are endlessly creative. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:39, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm Why?! These templates are such nightmares... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:13, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NatHaddan

Hi, I started an ANI thread here re LLM use Kowal2701 (talk) 23:58, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple language tags

Hi Jonesey95, I've worked my way through the articles reported as having multiple language tags. However, new ones keep appearing, like Province of Quebec (1763–1791).

The common factor seems to be EngvarB. As inexperienced editors don't know what it is, they don't seem to recognise it as a language tag and are adding conflicting tags in good faith.

As EngvarB now redirects to Use British English, I wonder if it would be possible to run a script to replace the EngvarB tag with Use British English. Editors who object to the new tag will no doubt discuss and amend the tag on those respective articles.

Unfortunately, I've no experience or knowledge of running scripts. I don't suppose you do, or perhaps know a technical editor who can help please? Dgp4004 (talk) 11:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are not very many pages on that report. I would just revert the good-faith edits one by one and replace EngvarB with Use British English manually. Leave a good edit summary. Mass-replacing a redirect with its target is generally frowned upon by people who dislike noise in their watchlists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are so few because I already fixed them the other week :D FYI, I have raised another at TfD. Dgp4004 (talk) 00:03, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You could maybe remove the redirect and make it a wrapper template with {{Always substitute|auto=yes}} after replacing all current usages (which will require probably a bot request because the number is high, 85,359). You could maybe also get it deleted in RfD after replacing all current usages if you can convince the others that the name "EngvarB" causes more harm than good. Gonnym (talk) 19:49, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I daren't as I'm afraid of creating 85,359 errors! :D Incidentally, another has appeared in the report today: Daruvu. I might raise it at EngvarB talk. Dgp4004 (talk) 13:02, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

Hi, Jonesey95. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 16:58, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the unhelpful boilerplate that didn't link to the page in question. And since you didn't undo my edit, I didn't get a notification. So it goes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:16, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not like the wording of the canned message decided upon by community consensus, feel free to propose changes to it. If you believe no wording could ever be appropriate feel free to list it at WP:TFD. The edit was automatically tagged with undo, though I edit-conflicted and so was not the one under whom the revision was completed. Nonetheless the failure to receive a notification regarding the revert of the improper tagging should still have occurred so you should consider reviewing your preferences. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are responsible for your edits. The message above, and your reply, failed to link to the deletion request that I allegedly made. The instructions for {{uw-csd}}, the template that you used here, clearly explain that you should put the page name into |1=. Your neglect of the template's instructions is unhelpful in that I have no way to examine my edit to learn why it might have failed to meet your standards. I urge you to communicate more effectively with your fellow editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template discussion

Hi Jonesey95, you may be interested in this discussion at TfD. Dgp4004 (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Građevni kombinat 'Međimurje'

Hello, Jonesey. Could you please explain me what exactly should I do in the article. I don't understand what you mean with the words: article currently links to a large number of disambiguation pages (or back to itself). Please help direct these ambiguous links to articles dealing with the specific content intended. Is it problem that the company carries the name of the county of Croatia in which it was based, or something else? Thanks in advance for your answer. --Silverije 01:52, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The links to Croatian, INA, and installation do not link the pages you intended. Also, we do not link years on the English Wikipedia. Also, "Vejzagić 2025" is not a source that exists in the article. Also, please pay attention to the "cite journal" errors, and fix them by reading the text at the "help" links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:44, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the things you mentioned. I admit that yesterday I didn't do a final check of the text before publishing, so there were too many mistakes. Still, I'm not sure what I should fix regarding grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling, since English is not my native language. I would appreciate if you could do that. Thank you again, --Silverije 19:59, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A copy editor will visit the article at some point in the next 12 to 16 months, maybe much sooner, to clean up the prose. You are not expected to be able to do everything. That's why it's the encyclopedia that everyone can edit! Thanks for creating the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:17, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image class parameters

I implemented this at {{Infobox radio station}}, {{Infobox television station}}, {{Infobox radio station dual}}, and {{Infobox television channel}}. Can you just check if I made any mistakes (beyond not adding TemplateData for the new parameters)? I notice that the automatic white background on logos is gone. (Seems to still be there, just not on the one page I looked at.) Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 17:51, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Just realized that that's because the fallback class results in a duplicate parameter. How should this be handled? Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 17:55, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sammi Brie: Please see the message I left on your talk page. You need to be much more careful when you are editing templates like this. You dumped thousands of articles into CAT:DUPARGS. What is the problem you are looking to solve here anyway? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:06, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Some logos are one-color and are best presented in darkmode by skin-invert classes, but doing that means fairly ugly code requirements (e.g. look at KEXP-FM). I was interested to see that applied directly at the template level and thought it might solve the issue. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:08, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sammi Brie: Saw your response on your talk page. I agree this needs to be fixed... However, it seems to me that this would be a MUCH larger issue than just a few tv/radio infoboxes. Any infobox with a logo potentially has this issue unless I'm missing something... Without looking to much into it, adding a |logo_class= seems to me to be a bandaid on a larger problem that should probably be addressed higher "upstream". Perhaps at Module:InfoboxImage with a check for dark mode? I'd need to do a deeper dive than I have time to do at the moment...

  TLDR: This definitely should be fixed and is a good find by you both. However, I would encourage you not to do a piecemeal fix of a couple of Infoboxes but instead try to fix it from the top so that it can be resolved site wide. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:11, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Responded on Jonesey95's talk page! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:12, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sammi Brie, thanks for asking for help. The root of the problem you created is that you made the module have two |class= parameters. You could easily have detected this error in the first template by using the /sandbox page to make your edit, adding |logo_class= to a test case on the /testcases page, and looking for error messages and error categories. Not editing {{Infobox radio station/sandbox}} at all was your biggest procedural error. Always do that in the future, and please be more careful in editing live templates. OK, criticism over (and I just made a dumb mistake in a live template today, so I know what I am talking about here). This is the way to fix the error. Test it in the /sandbox first to ensure that it works the way you want it to.

  I do not share Zackmann08's confidence that this can be fixed upstream. The module only knows about the parameters that you pass to it. I could be wrong, though. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I will do so sometime in the next few hours. I thought this would be a smaller change than it was. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 21:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Jonesey what I'm suggesting is that maybe/hopefully we can solve the larger issue by adding some code to Module:InfoboxImage so that we don't have to fix it one at a time... Again, I haven't done a deep dive and really don't have time to, but if it is in anyway possible to solve the problem at the source that would be ideal. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:39, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I need help!

Hey, you have the WP:TPE right, correct? When you have a moment, would you please review my proposed edit changes over at Module talk:Gridiron color and implement my changes for me? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 00:30, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit request template means that someone will get to it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:31, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but so far, no other editor has gotten to it yet. I even left a talk page message on Dissident93's talk page. Am I being intentionally ignored? If so, why? If you have a moment, would you please get to it for me? Also, how much more time should I give to wait to re-apply for the WP:TPE right again? CharlesEditor23 (talk) 02:54, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're in the queue at User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable. You are not being ignored. There is nothing personal going on, as far as I know. The queue is long and contains some complex requests. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hey

here's a cfd you may be interested in Oreocooke (talk) 08:27, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vulpes bot

Hi, Vulpes, this isn't really that relevant to Dr Vulpes or the VP discussion, so I thought I'd leave a note here: telling a bot operator to run a task,[10] while neglecting to mention an ongoing community discussion about potentially revoking the bot's authorization,[11] doesn't seem very fair to the operator. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 00:02, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when there is a discussion about that bot task at the relevant bot operators' talk page. I don't see any change in consensus yet. I also don't see any notification of Dr Vulpes on their user talk page letting them know that their bot task is being discussed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November drive bling

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 22:05, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Miniapolis! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors – December 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2025 Newsletter Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist. Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors experienced in drives or blitzes and in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor (with their permission, of course) to be a Guild coordinator until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June 2026. September Drive: 43 of the 63 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive edited 693,541 words in 265 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. October Blitz: 14 of the 15 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz edited 75,108 words in 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. November Drive: 38 of the 65 editors who signed up for the November Backlog Elimination Drive edited 590,816 words in 240 articles. Barnstars awarded are posted here. December Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 14 December (UTC) and will end on 20 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here. Progress report: As of 01:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 293 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 1,730 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, GoldRomean, Miniapolis and Mox Eden. To stop receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A question regarding template documentation

Hi Jonesey, thank you for looking at the templates I just have created as translations from the German Wikipedia, which I need to translate de:E1 (Tastaturbelegung) to “German extended keyboard layout“. For some of the templates, I still have to do the translations of the documentation; the last one I have worked on was Template:German E1 keyboard symbol box/doc. How do I get rid of the text “This is the TemplateData for this template used by TemplateWizard, VisualEditor and other tools. See a monthly parameter usage report for Template:German E1 keyboard symbol box in articles based on its TemplateData. TemplateData for German E1 keyboard symbol box”? The German equivalent de:Vorlage:TemplateData to template:Format TemplateData does not insert such a text. Thank you for any help. Karl432 (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is the standard text used here at the English Wikipedia. You should leave it there. Editors are accustomed to seeing it at the top of the TemplateData section. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:41, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then, of course, it is OK for me. Thank you. -- Karl432 (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Knight's & Magic

Hi Jones Ey95, I'm glad you mentioned me. I wanted to take this opportunity to personally thank you for fixing my mistake in the Knight's & Magic episode template. Sorry if I've given you extra work to do. Pazio Paz (talk) 00:28, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. That is a tricky template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for re‑review

Hello @Jonesey95, I hope you are doing well. Thanks for your earlier edit on the Accolade Global Film Competition article. The "Showcased projects" section has since been rewritten for clarity and supported with multiple independent sources. In addition, coverage from American Public Television, RTÉ, and Deutsche Welle has been added to the lead to strengthen the article’s neutrality and reliability. If you have a moment, could you please take another look? I believe the clarification issue has been resolved. Also, please review the maintenance tags in the article, as they may no longer be necessary. I am glad to be learning from you as an experienced editor. Best regards,-- Vodnir (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The table in the "Showcased projects" section has four rows. The rows are not labeled to indicate why the items are in each row. You may want to create simple bulleted lists using * characters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:03, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again @Jonesey95, thanks for your earlier feedback.

I have reformatted the showcased projects table with hlist lists and added row labels for clarity, as per your guidance.

You can see the changes here: diff.

Best regards, -- Vodnir (talk) 21:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that there were curated sets has no reliable source to back it up, as far as I can tell. Keep working to ensure that all claims made in the article are verifiable. Also, the article is missing any references to the years when specific events happened. It appears to mix together events from different years, which is not usual for articles of this type. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Jonesey95, thanks for your guidance. I’ve applied your advice and added a timeline table with accurate years to make the article clearer and verifiable. I’ve also kept your recommendations regarding sources in mind throughout my edits. Many thanks, -- Vodnir (talk) 16:40, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should explain whatever "invalid formatting,"

Or better yet, just fix it. ~2025-39376-32 (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The missing small tags were fixed for you at least once. You can look in the edit history to see the fixes. Editors are responsible for their own edits. Anyway, there is no need to fix giant blocks of text that are better removed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:14, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They were not missing if they don't do anything.

Was your other problem the single link to Balin instead of Sir Balin? Seriously?

It is needed but also is optional. But I will post it on talk page to see if anyone objects for a couple days. Okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-39376-32 (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Missing end tags need to be cleaned up by somebody, as do disambiguation links. It's like you're taking a walk through my neighborhood and throwing trash on the ground. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:42, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Very Merry Christmas to you!

Hello there. 'Tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! Your contributions to Wikipedia in 2025 are greatly appreciated! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas, and here's to a happy and productive 2026! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:10, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dr. Blofeld. I fixed some missing markup in the above message. You may want to fix your original template and file an AWB request to fix the 173 pages that have this error. How about that for some coal in your stocking? – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:29, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Urgh. Next year remind me to run a check in advance and see if you can spot anything. I see I missed the italic bold at the end is that it? I will ask Ser Amantio to help fix it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:36, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you missed five ' marks at the end, before your signature. Activating the Syntax highlighter gadget in Preferences - Gadgets can help you catch these basic typos. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:38, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated, ta. Quite a few more gadgets have been added there since I last looked! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes/navboxes

Regarding your post to this thread, while the general confusion was ultimately cleared up I didn't address your point about Infoboxes and navboxes being different. For the point I was making, they're the same i.e. "neither required nor prohibited for any article. Whether to include ... is ultimately determined through discussion and consensus." That principle is ultimately derived from the 2013 Arbcom Infobox decision and applies to Infoboxes and Navboxes equally. DeCausa (talk) 00:37, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 15:34, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2025

Hello, Jonesey95. I hope you are well.
This is just me gently reminding you not to overping
Others may find it okay, but I find it extremely annoying. for future reference, Please only message me once and leave subsequent comments as replies.
P.S. I am not accusing you of anything. I just felt upset about the multiple pings on my talk page :)
Happy Holidays, r f q i i ^talk! 00:22, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide one example of where I pinged you so that I can understand what you are talking about. I don't see any mentions of you in my recent edit summaries, and I do not recall pinging you on any talk pages (that's a search link with no results; I always use {{U}} instead of {{Ping}}). – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just meant that you left messages that my stuff was being deleted, and you could have just replied to that :) r f q i i ^talk! 02:21, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first message was an automated message about a test page that you had created. It would not have made sense to "reply" to that message when I was posting to your talk page on a completely different topic. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:22, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That page was accidental! Sorry! r f q i i ^talk! 02:33, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Understood. Thanks for the advice. No need to prolong this discussion. Merry Christmas, r f q i i ^talk! 02:35, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Sinners (2025 film)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sinners (2025 film), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons greetings!

Wishing you and yours a fantastic Christmas (or holiday season for those who don’t celebrate) and all the best for 2026. 🎄 ❄️☃️ Here’s to a collaborative, constructive year ahead — with good faith, good edits, and just enough discussion to get things done! (and here's Sir Nils Olav inspecting his troops... one of my favourite POTDs) Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December blitz bling

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 1,999 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE December 2025 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 21:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Guangzhou–Huizhou intercity railway linter errors

Sorry, I was tired when I was editing it. Useddenim (talk) 03:25, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It happens. I recommend the syntax highlighter gadget. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cr-PAK

Curiosity since finding (and since fixing) an issue on 2014–15 Quaid-e-Azam Trophy with Template:Cr-PAK after it had some codenames changed. For example, {{cr-PAK|wapda}} ie, "error in {{Cr-PAK}}: invalid abbreviation" was changed to {{cr-PAK|wap}} ie "Water and Power Development Authority", but if they won, and had been bolded, you'd get the bolditalics' error. Or if an article used that template to name the team at the start of a sentence, it does

this

for that sentence. Would it be possible for an error message to display on invalid team codes rather than being blank/null values?

Zinnober9 (talk) 04:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added an error message and created Template:Cr-PAK/testcases. Feel free to add more test cases to that page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you so much! Zinnober9 (talk) 16:37, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template interaction errors

Got a headscratcher for 500 stripped div errors for you (250 transclusions, 2 per) if you are interested. Found an interaction error on {{hst}} with "Main other" containing "Hidden begin".

Thought it might clear if I were to add 1= and 2= to the Main Other parameter fields, but it did not.
Did a test with Main other and trying all the 1= with/without 2= cases, but those are all linter free, and are all error free otherwise, barring the first three cases don't show, and barring case 2 stating "you have two 1= values stated".

Got any ideas? There's no apparent functional issues with hst in the wild, so not a top priority, but I'm stumped.

Regardless, happy safe holidays! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:36, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this might be a false positive, if I am remembering correctly. Please link to a page where the use of hst causes Linter errors. Check for actual Linter errors there (on Page information), not just errors reported by LintHint in Preview mode. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:20, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... yup, my error. Done too many simple mainspace errors that I forgot to check against LintHint being wrong. Thank you to reminder. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RNZAC was Disbanded on 5 December 2025

RNZAC was Disbanded on 5 December 2025, check the former Regimental Colonels final statement all Regular Army RNZAC personnel Are members of the 1st Bn RNZIR, please desist in changing the RNZAC, this has been reported on in the Newspapers, Defence Journal and reported on TV 3 Exsap (talk) 02:30, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:V and WP:RS. It is each editor's responsibility to provide readers the means to verify claims in articles. You can't just add a bunch of text to an article because you think or know that something is true; you have to back it up with a source. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:32, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Jonesey95, 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 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cockroaches of the superorder Turkey

Do you know what is going on at User:Krishna Kotagiri/sandbox with the empty header errors and the truly bizarre statements created from the Q# usage? Do the Q# links change content ever? Nearly all of the Q# I click on (even ones that state content at this sandbox) state on Wikidata that "this entry doesn't exist", so I'm trying to figure out if this is intentionally bizarre or due to things shifting, and whether to just comment it all out and leave a message for the user, or fix it (and how). Do you know what is going on here? Zinnober9 (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a sandbox, so a lot of latitude is allowed for things that are experiments. I have worked around the failure of {{Label}} to provide output. I posted about it at Template talk:Label.

It's good to see someone working on empty headings. I've knocked out a hundred or so, mostly repeated patterns, in the last couple of days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:38, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't mean to imply any accusation of problematic editing, I haven't seen any problematic intent from them. I meant to only be describing the unexpected contents that read a bit like a madlibs game that had me laughing from the absurdity for a good long while today. The madlibs element was why I was wondering if the values for the Q# links changed after time since it looked like a reasonable draft in the source editor. Your additions of IF statements is a good solution for the null values these are giving.

Yeah, with Empty headers numbering only a few thousand, it made sense to go after them next since we all cleared Main. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:04, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandboxes can be crazy places where a wide variety of nonsensical situations are tolerated. I try to preserve as much of their craziness as possible while fixing errors unless the person has been gone from Wikipedia for a while, in which case I blank the page and use an edit summary like "Blank stale page instead of fixing Linter errors. Feel free to revert, especially if the errors are fixed." – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Jonesey95!

Happy New Year!

Jonesey95,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ^☎ 05:17, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Volten001 ^☎ 05:17, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:18, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrate Wikipedia's 25th anniversary in Portland!

Hey Jonesey95,

You're invited to the celebration of Wikipedia's 25th anniversary in Portland, Oregon! Join us at the Rose City Book Pub at 2:00 PM on Sunday, January 18.

Please RSVP at the link above, even if you might be interested, so we can let the Pub know how many people to expect. Hope to see you there!

(To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:59, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Baird's Manual and Templates

Not sure if you saw my response on Template Talk:Bairds13, but I would like your help as described there. It appears that the overwhelming majority of the Greek Letter Organization templates (both earlier on Baird's and other sources) are going to have both a page number and a doc page number where the page number is human readable, and the doc page number will be affixed to the hathi trust url to place the viewer on the correct page.Naraht (talk) 14:48, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it and will have some time to work on it in a few days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:18, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Naraht (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

finding redlink templates

thank you for fixing the {{Baird91 to {{Baird19}} is there an easy way to find redlinked templates for fixing?Naraht (talk) 02:34, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I monitor Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of non-existent templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Naraht: See also links to Template:Bairds13ba, from the same report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:00, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx. Fixed. Will monitor there as well consider the number of pages affected by the standardization of the references from those books. For some of them, it was standardized enough I was able to use AWB with some creative regex.Naraht (talk) 04:22, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Special:WantedTemplates. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 09:11, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64 Not sure what the difference is between the list at the Database report vs the one at special wanted templates. Also, for the special wanted templates, is there any way to filter them to only those where the non-existent template is in mainspace?Naraht (talk) 13:54, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The WantedTemplates page is updated once a month, and is not configurable. "The following information is cached, and was last updated 17:00, 19 December 2025." Neither of those is helpful. The database report is customizable, user-refreshable, and excludes nonexistent templates in User space because there were too many complaints from editors about gnomes messing with their sandboxes just to clear a report (which was a fair complaint). – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:01, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]