User talk:Blue Square Thing/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Speedy deletion declined: Thomas Chambers (cricket patron)

Hello Blue Square Thing. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Thomas Chambers (cricket patron), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Having been discussed at RFD would make this redirect inelgible for speedy deletion as it has substantial edits by others. Thank you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

@Callanecc: Thanks - I did wonder about that; I'm learning a lot about CSD just now! I might take it back to RfD given the socking, we'll see. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

"List of early English cricketers to 1786" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect List of early English cricketers to 1786 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 17 § List of early English cricketers to 1786 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 17:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Lucknow super giants

I have made an edit of current squad of lucknow but you have revert my edit once check the edit i made and revert it Sridharsana (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I left a message on your user talk page explaining why your edits were not appropriate. It would be easiest if you read that and then probably easiest if you replied there in order to keep the conversation in one place. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit revert on Women's Premier League

You just reverted my edit on Women's Premier League (cricket). I just updated logo and there has no relation with spamming. I always respect Wikipedia edit policy and never did any inappropriate edit. If there is something else please let me know. Thanks and have a nice day. Gorav💬 13:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

For starters, the logo was massive. I removed another link that seemed to be spammy and have since removed others that I pretty much consider to be the same. I'v eno idea if you added those links or not - you might have done, someone else might have done. I'm sure that we can find better links in all cases to reputable news media sources.

The file you uploaded for the logo also has issues with regard to the size and its non-free nature. The one Joseph uploaded is a better choice for now because of this. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

But Joseph’s one is screenshot from logo reveal video with unpleasant background and useless stuff like celebration cracker and blue hue accordion to theme of that video[1]. And I was about to change the size to 250px by using imagesize = 250px. If you still think Joseph one is suitable because of copyright related issue, I’m ok with that. Thanks for clarification and have a great day ahead.🥂 Gorav💬 13:21, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The size of the image that's been uploaded has to be changed to comply with copyright restrictions. Perhaps you need to look into that first. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Again thanks for highlighting mistake. I have updated that image with lower resolution to comply with copyright restrictions. Now I have green signal to put it on Infobox? Gorav💬 13:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk to Joseph - they know more about logos and copyright that I do. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Virat Kohli

The article have lost of problems, some section looks like essay, some one messed up popular culture sect, by adding media comments/designation. You'll know once read, just wanted to take this thing to your notice.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 12:03, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I tend to avoid that article. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Add Last champion in CLT20

In the Champions League T20, we need to add Last champion as Chennai Super kings. Can you kindly add. Ashokkumar047 (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

We can't. No such parameter exists for the infobox. We don't need to add it - it's a league that happened a long time ago and no one really remembers or talks about now. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverted the edit (8 to 10 teams in IPL 2022 line), please consider this!

Hello Dear,

I noticed you reverted my edit mentioning "IPL 2022 was upgraded from 8 teams to 10 teams". I think it was a major difference and worth mentioning. Because it never happened before.

I think you should allow this! HridoyKundu (talk) 19:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello. So, a) did you read the following paragraph of the article, because it literally says the same thing; b) there were 10 teams in 2011. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

IPL 2023

Hi, you removed a lot of material for this article's lead. If it shouldn't be there than you should move it in sub sections without removing it. We can expect this from experienced editors like you. I hope you'll fix your mistake.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure we need most of it at all - and it certainly doesn't belong in the lead. The article's going to be a cluster* for the next three months - it's honestly not worth considering until the dust has settled. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I read [IPL]], its broadcasting section lots of outdated/mis-information such table say Viacom18 Broadcasting IPL in S Africa but presently Super sports is airing it here. One line say Hotstar have online streaming right but Viacom18 have. It say Pakistan is broadcasting IPL but the leauge was prohibited there. Grammar is also awaful.Rock Stone Gold Castle (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

PollyErn53

I think we may have the same concerns about this editor. Something seems fishy to me, as if they are making edits to meet some minimum requisite number. BD2412 T 22:42, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, possible - but if they are I'm not sure they've done it very frequently before; the date stuff is an obvious flag that someone was going to spot. Blue Square Thing (talk) 05:56, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Cricket coach lists

Hi any reason you're mass deleting these sections? I'm happy to work my way through and add sources but they're pretty useful so it would be better to use an unsourced tag rather than just delete them. Beeeggs (talk) 09:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

The ones I’ve done anything with also seemed to be very incomplete- to the extent that they seemed misleading as well. That’s the primary reason I removed them. If you can find complete lists of everyone who coached a side then I’m happy with a list. Otherwise a brief prose section of highlights might be better? Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Updating Surrey cricketers' articles

Thanks for your work on this, and in particular the removal of the spurious Test careers that someone has put in the infoboxes of a number of them. When that happened to cricketers whose articles that I follow, I don't know how I failed to spot it. I think it must have been done when I was away on holiday and so not keeping an eye on my watched articles. JH (talk page) 08:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@Jhall1: Hi. I think it happened a long time ago in an old version of the infobox - lots of them date from pre-2010 iirc. I think it was deemed the way to record first-class careers back then? When the infobox was updated or things moved over they didn't get removed so we ended up with all sorts of stuff in there I think. I'm just working through some lists from the parameters to try to reduce things down so that it's easier to spot vandalism really. On the way I come across things like Bomber Wells who I didn't know about and made me smile. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Further on this - on Ted Pooley, what seems to have happened is that an old infobox - Old Cricketer - was done away with at some point. That had debut date and so on - but not for internationals. When it was done away with it was merged with Cricketer and the old debut date values were deemed to be Test debut dates in every case by the looks of it. That means that the values that were there (and in that case added by you) were moved across to the international section and he suddenly became an international! That seems to have happened at some point in 2010 when about four temples were merged together. It's a shame it was done in a way that created something that caused odd looking infoboxes, and I'm not sure there's an easy way to pick them all up in some form of query. Be nice if there was. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the esplanation. I see there are also one or two cricketers whose articles I watch where you've removed their places of birth and death from where they weren't supposed to be but they aren't present anywhere else, so I'll try to put them either into their infoboxes or else in a more appropriate position in their articles. JH (talk page) 15:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that - it's a bad habit that I've been trying to kick but have ended up working quite quickly the last few days. I keep on trying to remember to deal with them properly... Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

AWB

I see you are doing a lot of housekeeping to clean up infoboxes and external link sections. Have you thought of using WP:AWB to assist with that? You can set search parameters that will operate across several related categories to identify suspect cases. You still have to deal with them individually but it takes much less time, especially if you can incorporate an edit command in your search to change a value if found, though I think that could be difficult with the sort of changes you are doing. AWB isn't cutting edge but it might be worth considering, and the site does have other seek-and-find functions. 92.31.4.56 (talk) 09:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Not usable by me I'm afraid. Tbh although there are similarities, each one's a bit different anyway so I'll probably not use anything automated. But thanks for the thought. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

No worries. It is something you need to feel comfortable with. 92.31.4.56 (talk) 08:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your fine work in saving Douglas Godfree with thorough research and well considered prose. Bungle (talk • contribs) 19:54, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I enjoyed discovering this interesting chap - literally the first one I clicked on on the list! I suspect there will be less interesting people, but it was a fortunate first click Blue Square Thing (talk) 22:46, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I spent some time during 2021-22 developing some Lugnuts microstubs, albeit from sportspeople much later in the 20th century with better coverage, but still it is refreshing to see that some of the early 20th century ones can be viable. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:43, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

NZ cricketers

Hello, BST. Thank you for your work on NZ cricketers in general and Arthur Symonds in particular. I just wanted to note that the book, New Zealand Cricketers 1863/64–2010, is available online, so perhaps consider adding it to each article. I've already added it to the Arthur Symonds article. 47.72.214.158 (talk) 11:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I should really work it into the ref I copy across. Thanks for the reminder. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Help

Can you kindly participate in the discussion taking place in the talk page of Jasprit Bumrah? জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 13:57, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:PROSPLIT

When you "created" this article, your comment was "moved in from sandbox", as if you had built the article there by means of your own research and development. You did not attibute the material to its true source which is the original (to 1786) version of List of English cricketers to 1771. See this edit in which you removed the entries from 1772 to 1786, saying "to new article".

That action constituted a split and was fair enough providing you had WP:CONSENSUS. Did you? What is not fair enough is the effective theft of someone else's work, which is the whole point of attribution. Or are you saying that you studied all the books which provide reliably sourced information about each of those people and built the "new article" by yourself on the basis of that research? No, you removed the credible citations from first-rate sources like Haygarth, Buckley & Co. and replaced them with what you can see on a highly questionable database site.

I'll give you until the weekend to rectify your, er, "oversight". Failing that, it's off to the Privileges Committee to see what they think about your deliberate breach of WP:COPY. 2.99.208.127 (talk) 05:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

The problem is that I did't copy it, I developed it from scratch iirc - almost certainly using a filtered search at CricketArchive with player name starts with used and limited to first-class matches between the 1772 and 1786. I might have cross referenced to check nothing had gone missing, but it would have taken far too long to use the original list and try and turn it into a reliable alphabetical list. The original list was a little unreliable in places when it comes to actual matches deemed first-class wasn't it? People such as John Gouldstone were on it, for example.

I think, on the whole, that it's best you raise this formally now. Please. That way this dispute can be resolved one way or the other. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

The split was raised formally and no one objected if that helps. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:15, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi BST. I hope you don't mind but I have reverted the latest post by this banned user, per WP:BANREVERT, before this escalates further. I suggest they contact ArbCom if they so wish. Regards, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 09:21, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for these: [2] and [3]. The issue was flagged by one of my ACS friends, btw, and a few people urged me to act on it. I've been advised that, legally, the onus is actually on you to confirm attribution although, as you said, any other site member could have done it.

Wikipedia isn't very popular at the ACS and among other cricket researchers and the like. Hardly surprising when the site is overrun by ruleswankers like Mather who haven't the first clue what an encyclopaedia is about. I'll give the site another five years at most before it collapses, assuming AI doesn't nuke it first. Anyway, thanks again and I'll leave you in peace now. 79.73.31.57 (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

2023 Cricket World Cup

"This will be the last time the competition will consist of 10 teams at the finals stage; in 2027 the it will feature 14 teams." Please could you correct the mistake that you made. Regards... 2A02:8388:293E:3400:3162:F244:1E08:422A (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

I opted to just remove it - it's not needed anyway Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it looks better like that 👍🏼 2A02:8388:293E:3400:3162:F244:1E08:422A (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

FYI

The annoying earth cricket sock is now blocked, and 3 of the pages they've frequented have been semi-protected, so hopefully they'll get bored and go away now. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SMUTSS/Archive Joseph2302 (talk) 08:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - much appreciated as I'm unlikely to be around much for a fortnight or so. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:41, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Venue Map

The Qualification section of the article "2023 Cricket World Cup" uses a global map "Take a look" with a similar outline of India. All World Cup articles uses the same global map.

Also the Clickable Global Map I used in the "Venues' is widely used across Wikipedia articles related and non-related to India. So it is an accessible feature map of Wikipedia. If you are concerned about projection of border outline of India in it, you have to raise it in the main page dedicated to that clickable map, not in a singular article using that map. Hope you understand. Awaiting your reply. Editor8220 (talk) 01:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

The world sag map doesn't come anywhere close to showing the politically contested areas that India claims from other countries. That's a false analogy.

I didn't raise it - others have. Someone else then initiated a discussion. Whilst that discussion is ongoing standard practice is to revert to the previously stable version of the section. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Your revert

You may want to check your revert to an unsourced IP edit. According to this source Rumman Raees is not the bowling coach of Quetta Gladiators but Umar Gul. Dewritech (talk) 13:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I checked one lot of sources and could find nothing and probably made an assumption about the other edits. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Bad edit on Matthew wade

You seemed to remove the nicknames of Matthew Wade on his Wikipedia page. You also did some other pretty weird things. I have reverted your edits. I kept the one where you changed t20I to "twenty 20 international". Get back to me. Thanks, FlagPies23 FlagPies23 (talk) 08:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I've only just seen this. Sorry. So, by "pretty weird things" you presumably mean "formatted the infobox the way that it should be formatted? :-) There's documentation on the infobox that tells you how to do that. I appreciate that you've not edited many cricketer inboxes so you probably don't realise that, so I'll take you through the relevant points one by one:

• the use of the ubl template in the family section (unbulleted list) is generally preferred to using a break tag - there are some technical issues with break tags and browsers. Ubl is just a better way to do it - some people will use a plainlist template instead; I prefer ubl;
• the teams list can preserve the chronology, which is easier to read. In Wade's case he's pretty old - the chances are that we won't get to 17 teams (the maximum that the infobox can handle) so we can preserve the chronology instead

Does that help?

Now, on nicknames - the guidance on these is on the infobox documentation and essentially says that they need to be really commonly used. The two that are on the article are simply corruptions of his name and don't really count - you might need to read MOS:NICK as well btw (we have all sorts of guidance - it takes years to even begin to get the hang of it, so don't fret - you've not been here long enough to find all of these yet. "Wadey" is, however, cited on CricInfo, which is the infobox source, so can probably stay, although I have some concerns; I can't find "Wado" on either CI or CricketAustralia, which is unusual. In any case it's a hypocrosim really, which we don't tend to like. But it's uncited so unless you can find multiple cites for that it'll need to go. Hope that all helps explain the "weird" stuff Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok. I have actually edited a few infoboxes. Maybe about 20-30. Wade should also be a nickname instead of saying Matthew wade? FlagPies23 (talk) 20:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean? Where abouts in the article? Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

nevermind. But on domestic team information it says Tasmania twice and does not link to Tasmania cricket team on 2017/18. FlagPies23 (talk) 20:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Because it’s already linked once WP:OLINK applies. No need to link the same thing multiple times in there Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok FlagPies23 (talk) 21:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

David Warner PSL

Yes you're correct, he didn't play in the PSL, although he did show a desire to do so, he was warning a Peshawar Zalmi shirt, but I think that was for a promo, but he didn't play Steve Smith did play, but that's a different subject, thank you for verification. -- UserHerName (talk) 19:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

2023 CRICKET WORLD CUP CONTEXT

You have removed my edit on the world cup page; editors had removed it due to it not having any references. Have worked all morning to add them, there seems to be no other problem. Please do restore it. Pharaoh496 (talk) 06:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

See the article talk page and, given that there are concerns in general that have been raised about the amount of material on the page in other sections, discuss it. It's possible there may be consensus for adding it - or a version of it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, for some reason I cant reply to you there so I have edited your source and written my message alongside. Please dont mine, I havent deleted anything you have said. Pharaoh496 (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

2024 Indian Premier League

Don't erase the information. Be careful before editing. P J Chatterjee (talk) 12:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I was careful - I quite deliberately removed it because there wasn't anything in the article other than an infobox. I'm going to leave a message on your own talk page regarding this as well as I imagine there's the potential for this to become an ongoing issue. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Shami and other Indian articles

Thanks for pointing out that the Bengal table is better unsorted. I should have thought about testing it! Very unprofessional of me. As regards Shami and Indian articles generally, it seems a case of all hands to the pumps. I have just "rescued" Shami again and I see you are dealing with Virat's ton. I suggest we work together and help each other out. Batagur baska (talk) 15:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I doubt I'll have the time to. I'll keep an eye on the lists, but other than that have other things to focus on Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Radio Rights CWC 2023

I recently made an edit in the broadcasting section of the article 2023 Cricket World Cup, adding information about the radio broadcasters. However, you undid my edit, stating that the reference doesn't have information about the radio broadcasters. I'd like to inform you that the reference actually discusses the radio rights. I advise you to take another look at the cited website. Cited website-[4] VK wiki100 03:03, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

You're right, it does - I think I was looking at another source. Of course, it also means that our table is essentially a copyvio of the table there doesn't it? There's already been some suggestion that these tables are unnecessary - they also, fwiw, are often subject to vandalism and generally silliness. The question we need to be asking is whether we should have them at all imo. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

We have seen similar tables in previous World Cup articles, but I believe the discussion should take place about these tables on the article's talk page. VK wiki100 08:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Virat Kohli

Why do you keep deleting the paragraphat Virat Kohli? If anything necessary then add it , don't delete Indrajit675 (talk) 15:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

It's totally unsourced and not really very interesting. It falls mould of WP:NOTSTATS and has no context. I could give you other reasons but those are my first reaction Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello sir

I Don't know User:9 SAGAR I'm Not Mentor 9 SAGAR this user edit my Talk Box Please Block 9 SAGAR Hain9 (talk) 07:41, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

1975 Cricket World Cup Groups

I reverted the redirects of 1975 Cricket World Cup Group A and 1975 Cricket World Cup Group B as they are being used for translusion to International cricket in 1975 and Pakistan at the Cricket World Cup. I'm not sure which information is needed exactly, is there a particular section from 1975 Cricket World Cup that could be transcluded instead? Best, CMD (talk) 07:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know, I'll have a look and sort things out. Thanks for the heads up - didn't notice that. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:23, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: So, I've solved this by simply copying the tables across because there's not - I think - a convenient section. I *think* transcluding would bring across the results as well wouldn't it? Which is probably not what we want. I have no idea if this is the best way to do this or now - I guess back in the day I'd have created a template for it. If you can find a better way of dealing with this let me know. I'll revert the edits on the two group articles - if they were better articles or added anything I'd have kept them in the first place. I probably screwed this up - don't deal with transcluding in general. Any help you can provide would be good. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:39, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Transcluding would bring over the whole section, I do agree that duplicating or templating are the best options (for a start it avoids this situation). Happily, looking at the What links here doesn't show any other obvious problems. I do note that other year group stages also appear transcluded if you are doing a more general cleanup. Best, CMD (talk) 07:59, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that - fortunately the articles start to get a little more helpful by the 90s I think Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Edits

You are repeatedly removing material from the 23 wc and 25 ct pages as clean ups, which is removing important information. Add references or citation needed and someone will add them. Please stop Ipad4444 (talk) 15:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Those aren’t removing anything important. They’re almost all dealing with MOS issues - flags, colouring etc… If there are specific examples of edit’s that you believe remove “important information“ please list them here or the article talk page so that we can consider them properly. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

2024 T20 World Cup

Trust me, what you wrote made no sense, and reverting what I wrote that actually made sense is absurd, just as removing the map was.

You originally wrote that the Americas qualification was in october, but also in november because you didn't check what you wrote.

If you're going to revert things, check what you actually wrote first. Basetornado (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, kept on meaning to get back to you on this and failed to remember every time I've been near a proper computer. Apologies. You're quite right - I did screw the months up. Mainly because the date field in the cite web was saying November to be fair, but I still screwed it up. The flow, and lack of repetitive sentence starters, however, was probably better than yours, but there you go. It happens. I try to acknowledge it when I make a mistake - either in an edit summary or elsewhere. I don't always remember to because I screw up on that as well. But I did here. Thanks for the opportunity Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:14, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Choosing your battles

It may be wise of you to think a bit before reverting benign changes like the two today regarding date format auditing. I recall similar unnecessary reverts on your part in the past. Dawnseeker2000 23:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello. The first line of WP:CITEVAR is my justification for reverting your change of consistent date formats today - as it probably was in the past. In both cases that I reverted back today, the first citation style which was introduced into the articles used YMD dates. CITEVAR is very clear that we "defer to the style used by the first major contributor" and it seems clear, from the ARBCOM ruling back in 2006, that this includes date styles. I suppose you could argue that in the case of the Unstead article that there really hasn't been a major contributor, so if someone came along and worked the article up in more detail then I'd be perfectly happy for them to change the citation and date styles - I might get around to that one at some point, but feel free otherwise.

I imagine that the semi-automated or automated process that you're using might need a touch of a tweak to pause on dates in references perhaps? Tbh I'm not really sure what the recommendations are on using tools like that, but isn't it the user's responsibility? I'm also not really sure what the benefit of changing the date inside the use dmy tag at the top is, but then all of us have things that we like to do in our own ways.

I'm not sure about the "choosing battles" bit though you know - or what you meant by it. I know that I spend a lot of time adding references to articles and try to ensure the styles are as consistent as I can. I'm sure I fail at that at times, but I do try. Could I ask that you respect that if there is a consistent date style that it's not changed in a way that would seem, to me, to be really quite unnecessary? Thanks Blue Square Thing (talk) 23:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Really, sir? Dawnseeker2000 00:09, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, really. It would be awfully helpful if you could explain to me which parts of WP:CITEVAR, WP:CITESTYLE, and MOS:DATEVAR I've misinterpreted. I'm particularly interested in how you think I've misinterpreted MOS:DATEUNIFY - specifically the third bullet point in the section beginning "Access and archive dates...". Your two word response here followed within minutes by this, this and this diff - your next three diffs for the record, two of which are articles that I introduced the first sets of references on using YMD - might appear to others to be verging on the POINTY. Perhaps.

It might be that I'm misinterpreting things, I don't know. But I've cited guidelines and the MOS above. I have no doubt that you must disagree with my interpretation of those, but your response here doesn't help me understand how you disagree with me or what your interpretation is.

As it happens I'm just about the archive this page - a little earlier than normal this year due to some really obvious SOCK activity that I've no doubt means that I'll receive messages in the next couple of days. I'll leave this discussion here of course, and I expect to be largely away from this place for a few days or even weeks. But I will try to keep a eye out for your response here. Thanks for that. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:37, 16 December 2023 (UTC)