Robby.is.on

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

List of Star Trek Deep Space Nine characters

Where is the OR? Fictional elements are supported by the series itself, and pretty much everything else is sourced. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: I think you're right, I've self-reverted. The article lacks plenty of inline citations but nothing stands out as being obviously OR. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Use of slash

It is not forbidden and sport positions are not a situation where its use is unclear. You are taking MOS:SLASH to apply to all situations, which is not how it is written. Rikster2 (talk) 10:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Rikster2: "Generally, avoid joining two words with a slash" is unambiguous to me. As far as I can tell most athlete's infoboxes use commas to list positions. So far you have only repeated why we could use the slash, claiming it is not unclear. It would be constructive to state a reason why using a slash would actually be preferable over a comma. My impression is that your insistence on using a slash is based in some personal aesthetics or habits, rather than a rational assessment. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Ozil honours

hello Robby I know all sources regarding ozi's assist record but can't attach the source as I don't know how to add source to an edit. If you tell how to attach source it will be very helpful Psrpen00 (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Psrpen00:. See Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor. Let me know if you have further questions. :-) Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 08:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 18:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, @Doug Weller:. Could you point me to the articles in question? Robby.is.on (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

The Federalist website. Just routine, no complaints about your edit. You might want to use DSaware, I do. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah, yes, thanks. Oh I know, I've seen this alert elsewhere. Thanks for the suggestion, right now it might be overkill as I usually don't edit very contentious topics. Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 18:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, probably easier to do nothing. Doug Weller talk 19:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Tweaks to Omer Nir'on

Hey mate, just saw your tweaks. Thank you! I just published the finished product to the mainspace. I'd be glad if you could have a look and do any copyediting and upgrades. --SuperJew (talk) 11:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. Looks great! Thanks for your great work there and elsewhere. Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 11:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Alphabetizing categories on sportspeople pages

Hi. Yes I am aware of the MOS:CATORDER text. It does not ban alphabetization of categories. I am employing the alphabetizing of categories (with the exception of keeping the Living people cat at the top next to the individual's birth year), which is an extremely common convention and practically universal on, for example, NBA player pages (see Giannis Antetokounmpo). There is no problem to alphabetizing categories, and unless you organize the categories in another reasonable/sensible form, I don't understand why you would revert my edits to have them reflect a previously unorganized listing. Soulbust (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Soulbust. Thanks for reaching out. If editors of NBA player articles agree with alphabetisation, that's fine. At Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, we don't do it. If you look at a couple of footballer articles, you'll notice the pattern. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

You told me to "have a look around" when you reverted my categorization on Jules Koundé a second time. Maybe you should do the same. The most popular footballers (such as Lionel Messi and Neymar have a mostly alphabetized categorization. I do not know if the categories after the initial alphabetization are unalphabetized because they are recently added, but nevertheless they still instill some sort of organization beyond that). Again, after looking around, the alphabetized categories formatting is commonplace on NBA player articles (see Giannis above, see LeBron James, see Tim Duncan, see Michael Jordan); it is commonplace on NFL player articles (see Tom Brady, see Patrick Mahomes, see even retired and not really star player Ronnie Brown); it is commonplace on NHL players (see Wayne Gretzky, see Mario Lemieux). This alphabetization convention is commonplace across a variety of sports, with the only real exception coming with pairing the Living people cat at the top next to birth years. Soulbust (talk) 21:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you should do the same. Of my 190,000 edits most have been on footballers. I have done my bit of looking around. Again, after looking around, the alphabetized categories formatting is commonplace on NBA player articles, it is commonplace on NFL player articles That's immaterial. I informed you of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football project consensus. Messi and Neymar are exceptions to the rule. If you want to alphabetise categories on footballer articles, you'll need to convince people at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. Robby.is.on (talk) 21:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, if you wanted to just revert the edit I made to Koundé, with the impression that footballers have a different convention (which since/if that's the case, that's fine and I of course would defer to that convention), it doesn't explain why you reverted the alphabetization of categories I implemented on Alina Hartmann.

I further looked around. Iga Świątek (tennis), Lewis Hamilton (F1) follow these conventions.

I looked at Paul Pogba. I don't understand why football doesn't utilize the Eponymous cat then birth year then living people cat, then full alphabetization formatting that every other sport (at least ones I checked) uses. I would suggest that maybe some sort of overhaul be done to make footballers consistent with athletes of other sports, but I figure this would be contentious because of MOS:CATORDER. So I only ask that you don't revert on non-footballer articles as you did with Hartmann, since it seems that after looking around football player articles are the only ones that follow a different convention. I'll make myself aware of conventions of players of sports I haven't checked right now if I edit them in the future.

Best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 21:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Would like to note that I said maybe you should do the same just as a dry mutual suggestion. Didn't mean it to be taken in any sort of slight. I was aware of the amount of edits you have made, and I also don't have an insignificant number of edits on sports pages either. Again, best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)