User talk:Tony1

• Bulleted list item

During my years at the Signpost I authored or co-authored 266 articles. But I recommend no one bother subscribing to it now—the standards are very low.

Self-help writing tutorials:

• Exercises in weeding out fluff from article text
• Advanced editing exercises
• Spot the ambiguity
• Build your linking skills
• Using hyphens and dashes
• Copy-editing essentials, part of the Military History Academy

edit

... Italics for emphasis Italics may be used sparingly to emphasize words in sentences; boldface is normally not used for this purpose. Generally, the more highlighting, the less effective it is. Read more ... Add this to your user page by typing in {{Styletips}}

September 2023 at Women in Red

Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283 Online events: New: Alphabet run E & F | Women writers & their works | Geofocus: Celtic nations Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: The books she wrote might be notable, too; learn 5 quick tips about about book articles. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Undiscussed page move

Why on earth did you move List of programs previously broadcast by ABC (American TV network) to List of programs broadcast by ABC (US TV network) without discussing the move? The new name is inaccurate, as this page is only for previous ABC programming and we already have List of programs broadcast by ABC (American TV network) for current ABC programming. Not only that, the name also goes against WP:TELEVISION disambiguation guidance at WP:NCTVUS. Nisf (talk) 23:48, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Choose whatever name you want; but the "previous" is a bad word to use. What else could have been broadcast but previous broadcasts??? Contrast with "List of programs to be broadcast ..". Please don't reinsert that redundant (actually confusing) word. Tony (talk) 07:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the redundant "previously", but mistakenly removed "broadcast" too. Now it won't render the correct title; so please do that WITHOUT "previously". Tony (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Again, you are moving WITHOUT DISCUSSION or WP:CONSENSUS. You seem to have moved the page without understanding the content nor discussing with any of the contributors to the page. "Broadcast" is both a present-tense verb AND a past-tense verb, so it is not obvious whether the page is about currently broadcast shows or previously broadcast shows that are no longer broadcast. The page until recently previously included both, but had to be split due to size constraints. I assume whoever created the new page did so to match the wording at List of programs previously broadcast by NBC. We can discuss a more grammatically correct title, but the point is that it must be clear that one page is for shows that are currently broadcast for the network, and one page is for shows that were canceled, ended, or one-time events for the network. Nisf (talk) 12:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Editors are allowed to move pages without discussion beforehand; that's a core part of WP:BRD... Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed. Now, Nisf, you have quite a problem with redundant wording: "The page until recently previously included both ...". NO: don't use "previously" there. Tony (talk) 05:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Flags

Hello. First, you delete flags from an article [1], explaining that flags should not appear in infoboxes - although in the article, they were NOT in an infobox. As this was an obviously ill-conceived edit, I reverted it. However, you might have a point that some of the flags used in 1946 are not easily recognizable by readers - therefore, I add country names after surnames [2]. Now you come and revert it all back to your previous version [3], thus ignoring the changes that were made (not only by me) after your edit. This time, you have a new explanation: "flags were pure decoration, which is discouraged". With this idea in mind, you might as well delete flags all over Wikipedia - why on earth have you chosen this particular article? In particular, flags are widely used in articles devoted to international politics, including the United Nations, even when the persons concerned do not, technically speaking, represent their countries or their governments but serve in an individual capacity. See Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1981 United Nations Secretary-General selection, Judges of the International Court of Justice, or, for that matter, List of judges of the European Court of Human Rights, Chairperson of the African Union, United Nations Statistical Commission etc., or else, from a broader range of topics, List of cities in Africa by population, List of busiest airports by passenger traffic... According to the very first sentence in MOS:FLAGS, Flag icons may be relevant in some subject areas, where the subject actually represents that country or nationality – such as military units or national sports teams. The nationality of judges in the main international court (traditionally elected through a highly politicized process between countries and on the basis of allocation of seats between world's regions) is definitely an important issue in this subject area, nothing makes it less relevant than the nationality of a military unit or a sports team. If anything, NOT having flags in such an article would be against the Wikipedia practice. Anyway, I am open to hearing reasons, but please refrain from across-the-board deletions without discussion. From your discussion page, I note that this is not the first time that you do so. Ivan Volodin (talk) 11:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

The inbox thing is automatically generated. My point is that the flags have no informational content—or if they do it should be textual. Very few readers can recognise most of the flags. And they clunk up the table so that readers using small screens (most views of en.WP) have difficulty reading up–down and left–right. I don't care if you want to degrade your article for readers, for the sake of what you see as pretty decorations. Also, you could improve your English if this thread is anything to go by. Tony (talk) 13:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

"You could improve your English" - thank you very much, what a useful and pertinent advice, and very revealing too. I would be more than grateful if you improved English in the article, if what you care for is indeed the quality of the encyclopedia and the convenience of the reader. Ivan Volodin (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

When you stop plastering flags everywhere I'll take a look at what you ask me to. Tony (talk) 04:37, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Fostoria Shade and Lamp Company

Hello Tony1 - Thank you for the cleanup on Fostoria Shade and Lamp Company. Maybe you could look at Nickel Plate Glass Company too? A few questions: 1) Why was the wikilink for natural gas removed? It is very important in the article, since natural gas is the fuel the company used, and lack of it eventually caused the company to move. 2) Why were some of the other wikilinks removed, such as French, German, United States, and 20th century? and 3) the wikilink for France was removed, but not Austria and Belgium—does not make sense. Anything I should know? TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

OK, I'll got there and relink "natural gas", given what you say. Commonly known country-names, and chronological words/dates, are not linked without very good reason; yes, patchiness is an occasional problem. I'll take a look at the Nickel Plate Glass Company article. Tony (talk) 04:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks — all good. TwoScars (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

"Analytical Procedures" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Analytical Procedures has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 4 § Analytical Procedures until a consensus is reached. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Josef Peer revision

Hi - Just letting you know I undid your revision on Josef Peer. As far as I can tell all it did was remove sourced information from the article and infobox deliberately put by the editor(s) working on the article. Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 22:58, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Carole Tarlington revision

Hi there! Could you please explain why you've removed the links to other Wikipedia pages from the Carole Tarlington page? (I believe they're called wikilinks.) I thought it was important and useful to wikilink, especially when it concerns ambiguous words, such as "plays". I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia so I'm not a pro but I've still got a fair amount of knowledge about how it all works. Furthermore, the Wikipedia editors who have contributed to the page also thought that it was a good addition, and even added more of them. Thanks in advance for your explanation!

User:CanadianRocky69 CanadianRocky69 (talk) 23:13, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

• Please read WP:OVERLINK. The editors involved are 14 years out of date. Tony (talk) 23:14, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  I'll keep your revision, thanks for explaining and for your useful contribution! I will still wikilink the word "plays" though, as I feel it's important to explain the word to non-native speakers or people who are unfamiliar with the term. Have a great day/night! :) CanadianRocky69 (talk) 23:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  Plays? WP is not a dictionary. Tony (talk) 23:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  It's not a dictionnary, true, but I've found that well-placed wikilinks help with the understanding of an article. CanadianRocky69 (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  That it needs to be a balance was established by the community long ago. The negatives in overlinking are "the sea of blue", which makes reading a little harder and looks patchy and unprofessional; and the dilution of the linking system (it's up to us editors to choose only the highest-value links in each circumstance). We assume that readers know English. Tony (talk) 23:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  I completely get it. The "sea of blue", lol! Love the expression. I'll start linking to a minimum from now on and only keep the highest-value links. *Virtual hug.* CanadianRocky69 (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

  Boquets to you, CR69! Tony (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red October 2023

Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286 Online events: New: Alphabet run G & H | Women in STEM | Geofocus: Sub-Saharan Africa Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman See also Women in Green's "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article editathon Tip of the month: When creating an article, check to see if there is an entry in the sister project Wikidata. If your subject is listed, the Wikidata information can be useful Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Script-assisted style fixes

Good to see some unit conversion templates, but something went wrong with your regexp here, with both replacements breaking the template. Belbury (talk) 12:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; alerting @Ohconfucius:. Tony (talk) 00:29, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I want to add that your use of that template also had the undesired side effect of placing the inches-to-cm conversion template onto numbers that were in the article to represent years, not inches, and thus had no business having the template placed on them — and even more importantly, in a couple of cases it did that to "YYYY in [subject]" categories, thus generating extreme nonsense redlinked categories for Category:2,098 inches (5,330 cm) science (which was supposed to be the year 2098, not 53 meters) and Category:2,020 inches (5,100 cm) the Philippines (again, the year 2020, not 51 meters). So, again, please be more careful in the future. Bearcat (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry guys. I'm not using the script until Ohconfucious can find time to fix it (probably by removing the conversion function). I'm going back to fix a few myself. Tony (talk) 00:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Script-assisted style fixes - I see that you made a lot of edits after me. I'd like to use the style script, but I can't find a description of how to use and customize it, could you tell me? MaxBokstf (talk) 00:54, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I've notified User:Ohconfucius. He's not on WP much nowadays, but built and still maintains the scripts. I think you probably need the composite script—the one I use. Tony (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Need help

Hello Tony, I've once asked you to install an archiving bot on my talk page and it was working just fine until someone tempered with my talk page and removed all the content, I reverted their edits of course but i don't think the bot is still working, it used to archive after a day or so but it doesn't do anything. Would you please check if it's still okay Thank you. dxneo (talk) 11:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry Dxneo, I don't have the knowledge to do that. I "archive" this page by simply deleting all but the most recent threads: you can easily find the deletions on your view history. Tony (talk) 11:16, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - November 2023

Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289 Online events: New: Alphabet run I & J | Geofocus: Indian subcontinent | Women in Politics Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman See also Wikipedia Asian Month November Contest Tip of the month: When translating articles from another language Wikipedia, don't forget to include attribution in your first edit summary. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Suggestions for an article I've been drafting up

Hello, I noticed you worked on a few articles, making great additions; I would like to know if you would mind looking at an article I'm working on. Draft:James Naleski JoeK2033 (talk) 16:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@JoeK2033 (talk page watcher) I notice you give his date of birth in lead and infobox but not in the body of the article, and with no clear source. Your citation style is unconventional, and you do not show the "Date retrieved" for web content. PamD 17:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@PamDGood call. I added a citation in the body of the article from AllMusic. JoeK2033 (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

No, you added the citation to the lead. The date of birth should appear, with ref, in the "Early life" section : the lead should only include material which is in the body of the article, sourced there. PamD 06:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Quick question

In your edit to Video game culture, your script changed Super Columbine Massacre (a redirect to Super Columbine Massacre RPG!) to Super Columbine massacre. Your edit summary linked to User:Ohconfucius/script, which includes 7 scripts. Could you tell me which script you were using so that I can send a suggestion to Ohconfucius? Thank you! QuietCicada - Talk 13:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It was probably my own manual edit as I ran the script, so no need to contact Ohconfucius. I'll go there now to correct it (if you haven't already). Tony (talk) 04:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

November 14, 2023

Hello, this is Winter. I have noticed that you have made an edit to Samsung Electronics that negatively affected the infobox. You made the company type go from Public to just Public company. I don't understand why you did that. If this is a mistake please tell me. WiinterU (talk) 16:57, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

It's not an intuitive piping of the link. Reinstate if you wish. Tony (talk) 01:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Ulu

Just curious about the "Demonstrations and tutorials" in the external links section in this edit. You removed the YouTube links but left the wording. Why not remove the wording as well? There is no benefit to a line saying "YouTube video of an Inuit person skinning seal with an ulu". Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

CambridgeBayWeather—thanks for pointing that out. I've reinstated the external Youtube links. Tony (talk) 23:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I was going to remove the wording but thought I would wait. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Heavy Metal Request

Could you change the Heavy Metal template to look more like this?

Documentation[create] [purge]

Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox (edit | diff) and testcases (create) pages.
Add categories to the /doc subpage. Subpages of this page.

2601:CC:C100:CA90:959B:7D57:C8DD:D63D (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

As such ...

Hi Tony1. Over the years I have found a score or more of examples of entirely satisfactory sentences that have been corrupted by adding the words “As such …” at the beginning. I have usually erased these two words with an edit summary saying “Erased redundant and unencyclopaedic words” or similar.

Today I again erased these words. See my diff. To my surprise my erasure was reverted with the edit summary referring to “… proper coordinating words that explain the why.”

Am I missing something? Is there a legitimate place for the words “As such” at the beginning of a sentence? Or are they a classic example of a redundancy? ~~~~ Dolphin (t) 10:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

It's one of those meaningless nervous twitches. Removed. Tony (talk) 10:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks! Dolphin (t) 10:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Script-assisted style fix in error

Sir: In the article Salt Creek (Pueblo County, Colorado), your script changed

 west of Pueblo near [[Florence, Colorado]]

to

west of Pueblo near [[Florence]], Colorado

causing the article to link to a populated place in Italy rather than to a sleepy town in southern Colorado. Because you are concerned with quality and precision, I thought you would like to know. Best wishes, Jeffrey Beall (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC).

Thanks, Jeffrey; I'll fix it now if you haven't already. Tony (talk) 23:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Flags in article

Hi Tony, thanks for your contribution to my newly created article of Economy of Victoria (state) especially in regard to the formatting and styling. I really appreciate that!

But I have one concern to do with the flags in the article. In the original article, I have added flags before the country names when describing the import and export partners of Victoria. Then you have deleted all flags and left a summary of "avoid flags". I have also mentioned some related discussions here in your talk page.

My reasoning for having flags there is this is a common practice for writing such "economy of country/region/state" article, as in almost all such articles (Economy of United States, Economy of New York city, Economy of Australia, Economy of New South Wales and so on). The purpose is to make the illustration of partner countries much clearer.

So can I ask you about why you have tried to avoid flags in the article especially in such economics-related one?

Thanks for helping and have a good day! HolyCrocsEmperor (talk) 02:17, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

The flags were purely decorative. Tony (talk) 02:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Links on Egan conjecture

Hello! Could you explain to me, what was wrong about the links you removed on the page I've created on the Egan conjecture? I'm pretty clueless for a potential reason why you've removed them and it would be good to know for future contributions. Thank you! Samuel Adrian Antz (talk) 12:38, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Samuel Adrian Antz See WP:OVERLINK: major places like Australia, and common words like mathematician, author, science-fiction, should not be linked. That last one is perhaps border-line, to my mind, but still unnecessary: anyone wanting to read about Nolan's SF writing will go to the article about him, rather than about the genre. PamD 16:51, 4 December 2023 (UTC)