User talk:Matthewrb/Archive/2014/January

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Traffic report: A year stuck in traffic

Arbitration report: Examining the Committee's year

In the media: Does Wikipedia need a medical disclaimer?

Book review: Common Knowledge: An Ethnography of Wikipedia

News and notes: The year in review

Discussion report: Article incubator, dates and fractions, medical disclaimer

WikiProject report: Where Are They Now? Fifth Edition

Featured content: 2013—the trends

Technology report: Looking back on 2013

Read this Signpost in full
Single-page
Unsubscribe
EdwardsBot (talk) 06:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello Matthewrbowker, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition began on 1 January. There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 20:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

FaoPFC→WP:FaoPFC & FaoPFC sockery→WP:FaoPFC sockery ... retrofitted but loose ends

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi - Happy New Inter-Solstice!

Help, please! ... You recently deleted two x-namespace redirects that I'd created. I've no dispute with the deletion (just my 1st of the kind) – One lives an learns! %)

Repairing the aftermath of WP:EASTEREGGish redlinks (EEiRL):

I've replaced them as above and
retrofitted for all in their What links to here.

So far, so good.

However, I'm left with one piece of EEiRL residue, for which I don't know of an elegant remedy/work-around. There's now EEiRL in my edit annotation (e.g. title=T-ara&diff=curr&oldid=589682079). So I'm seeking advice on how to patch such up, so that such redlinks go away and're replaced by routing as, e.g. WP:FaoPFC sockery.

Thanks in anticipation. – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hiya, DjScrawl! Nice to meet you.

I did indeed request that those two redirects be deleted. I'm glad you're OK with that.

Thank you for fixing all the links. Unfortunately, it is impossible to change edit summaries after they've been saved, so I'm afraid that will have to stay a red link. If an administrator is really interested, they can view the deleted page to see where it goes.

Sorry about the confusion... ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Poke me} 21:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I moved this thread from a talk subpage to my main talk page. Nothing wrong with that, I just get notifications here. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Poke me} 21:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Likewise. I've seen Template:Disambiguation-pages with trans-namspace hat-notes: Is such not a kludge within etiquette? i.e. A FaoPFC sockery dab-page, hat-noted to WP:FaoPFC sockery? ... or something like that.

Sorry to not be more familiar with WP-wiki-specifics. Most of my wikiing has been elsewhere, such that – although I've also done heaps here – I generally stay out of trouble by way of prior osmosis. Thus, getting an occasional inappropriate corner knocked-off is all part of the WP:BOLD+WP:AGF road :D With generally a more immediate payback than herding cats (assuming you read some of my WP:FaoPFC verbiage).

My concern's not interested administrators, but more so general editorial readers, first. And, also non-(esp-self-)propagation of WP:EASTEREGG-ishness, a congenital fetish of mine (I'm aspie).

Vis discussion-move *blushes* It seems to've ended-up where I'd intended to write (trying to have a wiki-break, so above was emergency handling, may've rushed it). Onward and/or upward! – Ian DjScrawl (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@DjScrawl: It's OK, I understand where you're coming from.

You know, I'm not totally sure in this case, as it is against the norm. I suppose you could Ignore all rules... or maybe ask at the Village Pump (Policy)... bit I don't know what to say.

I'm sorry I wasn't of more help. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Poke me} 22:50, 14 January 2014 (UTC)