User talk:Michael!/Archive

Welcome!

Welcome, Michael!!

I'm Riley Huntley, and I noticed that you haven't been welcomed yet, so I thought I'd drop you a note. We do have a lot of users, and are currently working on 6,911,733 articles, so things can be a little intimidating... but don't worry! We love to help out, and we'll try our best to make your stay here as comfortable as possible.
Here are a few links I found useful when I first arrived here:-

Be Bold!
Don't let grumpy users scare you off
Policies, guidelines, and rules
How to create a page, edit a page and write a great article
Who, what, why?
A handy tutorial, and a picture tutorial

You should sign your name on talk pages, discussions and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. Also, if you don't want to jump right into editing articles right now, why not check out the sandbox? Feel free to make test edits there.

I know it's a lot of information, but there are two more things I recommend you take note of while editing Wikipedia - cite references wherever possible, and avoid allowing personal biases interfere with your editing.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian - I definitely do. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or problems, leave me a message on my talk page, and I'll try my best to help. Otherwise, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We hope you stick around, and make sure you enjoy yourself! Cheers, -- Cheers, Riley 15:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, Michael!/Archive. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 18:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Michael!, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 21:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michael!, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Michael!! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Atlas Van Loon

{{cvn|Atlas Van Loon}} Sonty (overleg) 11 dec 2012 20:49 (CET)

Beste Sonty, bedankt voor je bericht. Deze tekst laat ik zo niet staan, ik neem het enkel als uitgangspunt om het vervolgens grondig te herschrijven. Michael! (overleg) 11 dec 2012 20:53 (CET)

Het is niet toegestaan zulk auteursrechtelijk beschermd materiaal op de Nederlandstalige Wikipedia te zetten, ook niet als kladversie of onderlegger. De tekst herschrijven of toestemming vragen voor hergebruik en dan pas plaatsen, is de oplossing. Meer info staat op Wikipedia:Auteursrechten. Mvg Sonty (overleg) 11 dec 2012 20:57 (CET)

Excuses daarvoor. Ik zal het nu direct gaan aanpassen. Michael! (overleg) 11 dec 2012 21:15 (CET)

Artikel is nu grondig herschreven. Goed genoeg? Michael! (overleg) 11 dec 2012 21:32 (CET)

Ik heb Atlas Van Loon doorverwezen naar het reeds bestaande artikel Atlas van Loon. Mocht je tekst willen overhevelen naar dat artikel, dan vind je hier de versie voor ik de doorverwijzing maakte. Mvg Sonty (overleg) 11 dec 2012 22:49 (CET)

Bedankt, zo is het beter. Ik had het NL artikel "Atlas Van Loon" aanvankelijk aangemaakt vanuit Commons, zonder dat bleek dat er al een artikel "Atlas van Loon" bestond. Nu verwijzen de artikelen op commons, NL en EN onderling naar elkaar; ik heb het net gecontroleerd en het gaat goed. Michael! (overleg) 12 dec 2012 00:14 (CET)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Atlas Maior, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Gordon and Mercator (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two GA reviews

I commented to your two reviews at:

Please review. --ColonelHenry (talk) 17:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick reply. I was already reviewing Talk:Casper Shafer/GA1. Michael! (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More will follow. Michael! (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it's any consolation, and evidence that I don't take things personally...this reflects a lot of my Wikipedia philosophy:

Most people's superficial notion of "teamwork" is that it is equivalent to some namby-pamby consensus and bogus good cheer.

The only consensus worth having is a creative one achieved in the combat of fully engaged intellects.

— Jim McCarthy, Dynamics of Software Development (1995)

You probably won't have as contentious a GA review next time...but despite all, it does make for improving the project.--ColonelHenry (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words. I fully subscribe to this philosophy.Michael! (talk) 11:41, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Casper Shafer GA1

I believe I've resolved issues raised during the review. Are there any further concerns? --ColonelHenry (talk) 22:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Eagle (Roman military standard)#Second survey

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Eagle (Roman military standard)#Second survey. —Sowlos 09:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Inaccurate relief map?

Hello Michael.
Thank you to call my attention on that point. I checked again both maps and they overlap exactly so these displacements can't be because of them.
There must be an error in the geolocation template or in its use. You can notice that the farther south the cities, the worst the displacement. Please check these points. I don't have time right now to check your template but I will try to take it the coming week and I'll come back to you.
Greetings. Sting-fr (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Sardinia

Hello Michael, my name is Mauro (robur.q) and I am updating and completing these items. I totally agree with you: I am new in wikipedia and I found this situation, with two articles that has no justification in the history of the institution; I know that in the past there have been hot discussions, due to the fact that the Kingdom of Sardinia becomes a protagonist in European history with the Savoy dynasty that were previously only Dukes. Previously the kingdom was one of the many kingdoms of the Hispanic monarchy, but that did not change anything in the form of the State, which retained the its own institutions. I do not know how to merge the two articles, but I am obviously willing to cooperate. See you soon. Mauro Podda 18:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Location map templates of Italy

Hello! You can find all available templates at Category:Italy location map templates. Right now there is no template for Tuscany and for Bozen-Bolzano you have to take Template:Location map South Tyrol relief. You have to create the missing templates if you want to use them. Regards, NNW (talk) 12:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine Empire

Removing redirect

A lot of people do this, removing redirects as if they're a broken mechanic. They do serve a purpose. WP:R#NOTBROKEN
Out of curiosity, what do you find inherently wrong with redirects? —Sowlos 01:46, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick reply:

isn't there a MOS which says useless redirects should be avoided and direct links are preferred (because of the Wikipedia servers and their limited capacity)? For instance, Byzantium under the Justinian dynasty redirects to Byzantine Empire under the Justinian dynasty. I don't see why this redirect should be kept.
overlinking and repeating links should be avoided as well. That's why I unlinked the second occurrence of Basil II in the same paragraph. Michael! (talk) 11:27, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I just looked at MOS:LINKS#Redirects, but it references the same section of WP:R that I linked to above. I've often wondered about server loads in the case of transclusions, but practically every article uses those. It simply seems Wikipedia is designed with a heavy dependence on server side functions (as are many websites these days).
[[Byzantium under...]] redirecting to [[Byzantine Empire under...]] can definitely be argued to as redundant. My assumption is editors use links like that for literary reasons, while avoiding increasing an article's byte-count with pipe-links. However, [[Byzantine Greek]] redirecting to [[Medieval Greek]] and [[Decline of the Western Roman Empire]] redirecting to [[Deposition of Romulus Augustulus]] can be seen to act as placeholders. Such redirects are using terms which may conceivably be expanded into there own articles. For example, Deposition of Romulus Augustulus shouldn't deal with the "fragmentation and collapse" of the Western Roman Empire as much as deals with the events around one person during that period. An article titled "decline of the Western Roman Empire" would. Although, it may simply have been pointing at the wrong place. There already is Fall of the Western Roman Empire.
You're absolutely right about over-linking. I wasn't commenting on that. Although, Attila may be a good term to keep linked. Many readers may not know who he was. I'd be willing to bet everything I own most US readers don't know more than his name if they even know that much.
As I said, I'm asking out of curiosity. I see these sorts of edits a lot, but don't feel the impetus to contest them. I just find it interesting to see a Wikipedia policy so often overruled or so unknown. —Sowlos 14:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Longer reply:

Actually, I was quite surprised when I clicked on fragmentation and collapse and was redirected to Deposition of Romulus Augustulus. Out of the blue, magic, an Easter Egg, what do you think? However, since every single word in the lead seems to be thoroughly discussed, I imagined it was decided to link this event to RA on purpose, so I removed the redirect instead of pointing it towards a more relevant article (such as Fall of the Western Roman Empire). I wouldn't dare to change anything in the lead without discussing it first!
Byzantine Greek and Medieval Greek is the same. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Byzantine Greek isn't the Greek dialect spoken in and around Byzantium - it's the dialect spoken in the Byzantine period, i.e. the Middle Ages, and hence completely equivalent with Medieval Greek. I don't think these terms will ever be separated. In my opinion, it should link to Greek language, because people spoke Koine Greek in the eastern part of the Roman Empire in antiquity. It would even be better to unlink Greek completely.
Attila appears three times in the article - and all three occurrences are within a short piece of text of less than 100 words. Nevertheless, I do get your point. I've thought about maintaining every East–West Schism, but I decided against it since WP/MOS explicitly advises to link a term at most once in the body text (excl. lead, notes, and figure captions), so I unlinked all subsequent occurences.
If I remember correctly, this is what I've done yesterday:
1. Roughly half of all redirects I've "fixed" were names of princes/kings/emperors, such as "Alexios IV Angelos"/"Alexios Angelos"/"Alexios IV"/"Emperor Alexios IV"/etc. (those articles are named quite inconsistently, by the way.) This also includes spelling variants such as [[Sophia Palaiologina|Sophia Paleologue]].
2. Another third were minor redirects such as East–West Schism vs. East-West Schism, Byzantine-Arab vs. Arab-Byzantine, A Certain war vs. A Certain War, and Siege (612-613) vs Siege (612-3), and minor redirects such as Byz->BE (under a certain dynasty).
3. I guess I've unlinked roughly a dozen repeated links
4. I've also unlinked a second occurrence of a name (was it Cyprus?) and wikilinked the previously unlinked first occurrence (there are probably more of these, I didn't look for them)
5. Furthermore I wikilinked a few things like Outremer and Vlachs (which weren't linked at all!)
6. There are only two wikilinks I've pointed towards another location: Gallipoli (the peninsula) to Gelibolu (the city), because a certain building in the city was destroyed, and Crusader states to Crusader states instead of crusades
7. By the way, I kept inconsistent linking unchanged (examples: "Malta (island)", but "Sicily" and "Cyprus" (=the republic); "Dalmatia"/"Dalmatia (region)", "reconquered Mesopotamia/Mesopotamia (Roman Province)", Bulgar vs Bulgarian, and various Slavs). Nor did I remove the redlink in "The very last holdout was Salmeniko, in the Morea's northwest. Graitzas Palaiologos was the military commander there, stationed at Salmeniko Castle."

To conclude, I think most of my redirect-edits were and are uncontroversial and of minor importance, therefore not noteworthy enough to discuss them beforehand (although fragmentation and collapse might have looked differently). Michael! (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: what happened to Talk:Byzantine Empire? It has been quiet over there for more than 24 hours, while a few days ago, there were sometimes only a few minutes between subsequent posts ... Michael! (talk) 18:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

… I removed the redirect instead of pointing it towards a more relevant article (such as Fall of the Western Roman Empire). I wouldn't dare to change anything in the lead without discussing it first!

… :$ …fair enough. *lol*
"Byzantine Greek" is indeed a term for Greek as it developed during the Medieval period. That is to say it was the dialectal category produced during Medieval Byzantium. I included that as an example because I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future someone creates an article devoted to Greek as it was used throughout all of Byzantine history.
Oh my! I wasn't asking you to inspect all your changes and account for them. I was just wondering about disapproval redirects tend to receive. "Easter egg" links obviously need "fixing", but a lot of people seem to go beyond that. —Sowlos 19:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I didn't inspect all of them. But since you posted such a long reply (with examples) to my quick reply, I thought you deserved a thorough explanation. "The Byzantine Greeks spoke Byzantine Greek" seems slightly tautological, don't you think? Although I wouldn't claim it is a tautology. :) Michael! (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do that sometimes. Text is so prone to miscommunication, I sometimes overcommunicate. Well, when you put it like that, "tautological" sounds apt. —Sowlos 20:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, most of that was due to Athenean enthusiastically replying to me before I finished working through all the new posts on that talk page. ::refresh page:: … "Oh, a new post" … ::refresh page:: … "Oh, another!" … ::refresh page:: … *gasp* "Moar!" Unfortunately, the ensuing conflict ultimately had an negative effect on activity.
I'm actually in the middle of writing a post at Talk:Byzantine Empire right now. —Sowlos 19:18, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning [[Deposition of Romulus Augustulus|fragmentation and collapse]]? :) Michael! (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, we have a funny man, here. Funny man! You should sell tickets! :D —Sowlos 20:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I don't mean to say that I'm blaming anyone, just that a few of us happened to be active at the same times. —Sowlos 19:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I can't even post on my own talk page. Three edit conflicts in several minutes. Please allow me at least to read your posts here. :) Michael! (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. I don't think I will. ;) —Sowlos 20:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice lengthy post at Talk:Byzantine Empire. Let's hope people return and discuss it in a productive way. Michael! (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC) I could (and did) read my own talk page when you was writing that post! :)[reply]

Indeed; and thank you for trying to lead the pack. —Sowlos 20:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I was slacking off! —Sowlos

The intro

Replied to your comments at User talk:Sowlos. —Sowlos 21:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again! —Sowlos 21:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relief map

Hello, I've noticed you're changing the way relief maps display. They'd been fine, but you're simply changing the syntax to make the map display as relief rather than the standard may. Is this necessary? Why fix it if it's not broken? Curious, Dawnseeker2000 22:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Separate location map templates for relief maps are no longer necessary. The correct way to use a relief map such as "France relief" is "map=France|relief=1" and not "map=France relief". In general, the relief maps are not SVG files and therefore are less suitable for geo-location purposes. They are sometimes less accurate. Have a look at User:Michael!/Gallia. The image above is the correct usage ("map=France|relief=1"), the image below is the incorrect usage ("map=France relief"). I noticed that many (if not all) locations on the map below are shifted; some end up in the sea (Ajaccio etc.), others appear the wrong side of a border (Maastricht, Vaduz, etc.). That's why I prefer the "relief=1" usage; although the alternative is not completely broken, it is slightly broken, so therefore I decided to start updating the relief map display. Michael! (talk) 22:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the details and for all the work investigating any possible shortcomings of the existing system. Perhaps adding a short note in the edit summary explaining the changes would be beneficial to other editors who are also interested in following your improvements. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 16:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my late reply! I probably missed your message because I was busy with several other issues. Anyway, I would be grateful if you and others would always use Template:Location map France, Template:Location map USA California, Template:Location map Argentina, etc. instead of Template:Location map France relief, Template:Location map USA California relief, Template:Location map Argentina relief, etc. Michael! (talk) 22:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, and if there's any other map changes that need attention or that we might need to know about you can always ping us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Earthquakes. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 18:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've put a note over there. Michael! (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox

I'm not sure I really see the point, but if you are doing this you need to ensure that you update documentation correctly. At Template:Infobox hut/doc you added |relief= to the infobox skeleton, and to one of the examples, but you didn't change the corresponding example text and there's absolutely no documentation as to how to use relief. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Setting the relief parameter to any value (such as "relief=1") loads the relief version of a location map, if it is available. It's as simple as that. It is used in many templates and infoboxes, such as Template:Infobox mountain. However, I encountered several other, less wiudely used infoboxes which didn't use the relief parameter yet, so I've updated those as well. Here's a list of the infobox templates which are changed, corrected, and improved by editors more experienced than me:

Adding a working relief parameter to these templates is relatively easy. I tried to update the documentation as well, but I probably did that wrong. Those documentations are quite confusing to me. I would really appreciate it if you could improve the documentation. Thank you in advance! Michael! (talk) 13:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing that relief has any effect in {{Infobox hut}}:

In all three of the infoboxes above I'm seeing the relief map version. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem is that the parameter used has to be |map_relief=, not |relief= and when used, |map_relief=0 has to be used to avoid the relief map:

no map_relief

map_relief=0

map_relief=1

Use should default to the normal map, not the relief version. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for calling my attention to this problem and apologies for my late reply. Since you've posted those different maps, I've been experimenting in my user space. The hut template loads a Template:Location map, so I thought everything should work correctly when I would add a relief parameter (documentation here), but it turned out it doesn't work correctly. I'm now experimenting at User:Michael!/Template:Test and User:Michael!/Test and it seems part of the solution is to use "|relief = {{#if:{{{relief|}}}|{{{relief|}}}| }}". Michael! (talk) 15:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After some more experimenting, I am quite confident the correct usage is:

  |relief   = {{#if:{{{relief|}}}|{{{relief|}}}| }}

and | relief = {{#ifeq:{{{map_relief|}}}|0||1}} I used initially is clearly wrong. Michael! (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following shorter usage seems to be correct as well. Michael! (talk) 18:23, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

| relief = {{{relief|}}}

PS: User:Michael!/Template:Test and User:Michael!/Test are now cleared.

Gallery

no relief
no relief
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

relief=
relief=
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

relief=0
relief=0
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

relief=1
relief=1
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

no map_relief
no map_relief
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

map_relief=
map_relief=
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

map_relief=0
map_relief=0
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

map_relief=1
map_relief=1
Coordinates	67°0′30″S 142°39′40″E / 67.00833°S 142.66111°E / -67.00833; 142.66111

For comparison the standard location map of Antarctica below:

Michael!/Archive (Antarctica)

relief=

relief= (Antarctica)

relief=0

relief=0 (Antarctica)

relief=1

relief=1 (Antarctica)

relief=no

relief=no (Antarctica)

relief=yes

relief=yes (Antarctica)

Location map Italy North relief

I've commented at the deletion request page, pointing out that it's not entirely accurate that such a map is unlikely ever to be used as I have relatively recently used it three (I think) times for earthquake articles. Although I know that you've changed those to Italy relief maps, they are in my opinion less useful. Also what has happened to the template that's under discussion? It seems completely messed up. Mikenorton (talk) 13:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you for your reply. You're right on this one, Italy North hasn't got a relief map, my mistake. However, the other Location map templates I nominated are obsolete, redundant, and replaced by Template:Location map Italy and Template:Location map Italy South Tyrol, aren't they? Michael! (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I have no idea why the {{subst:Tfd}} template is so disruptive on location map templates. It should have generated a non-interruptive banner like the one at Template:2013 Palarong Pambansa infobox.

Thanks for the response, I have no problem with the other ones where a relief version exists. Mikenorton (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing it out to me! By the way, I would also appreciate it if you could comment at the other nominations over there. Michael! (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented on two of them, but it's a little difficult to see what the others are about as they are similarly messed up. Mikenorton (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! These are the other maps in question:

I think you'll understand why I've nominated these templates for deletion, especially if you compare these maps with those of Template:Location map Italy. Michael! (talk) 18:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS:For clarity, these maps will stay at commons, even if the Location map templates on the English Wikipedia are deleted.

OK, comments added to all. I know that the Italy North relief map is just a straight enlargement of part of the full Italy map, but it's still clearer for things like earthquake epicentres, even as it stands, in my view. Mikenorton (talk) 19:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! Ideally, a new relief map for Italy North should be created, but until then I think Northern Italy relief could be kept. Michael! (talk) 19:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, isn't Template:Location map Alps a good alternative? Michael! (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's even better than the original, well spotted - I'll update the articles accordingly - thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of guessing

I see that you're trying to get relief maps in many infoboxes. That's a good thing, I think. But, it seems that many of your edits are not having the results that you want. See, for example, Mariposa Grove.

By reading your talk page, above, it seems like you are treating the infobox templates as black boxes, and guessing at the parameters. Instead, let's pause and look at the code for each infobox you want to change, carefully. For example, at {{Infobox mountain range}}, the code has been changed and doesn't always work. {{Infobox mountain range}} calls one of {{Locator map}} or {{Infobox map}}. Only {{Infobox map}} takes a {{{relief}}} parameter, {{Locator map}} does not.

Let's do things systematically. Which type of infobox would you like to work on first? —hike395 (talk) 21:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox settlement. Thank you for your message! I hope you could help. I would really appreciate it. Michael! (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Let me take a look, and I'll see what's what. —hike395 (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox settlement}} takes two parameters: {{{pushpin_relief}}} for the first map, and {{{pushpin_relief1}}} for the second one. These parameters need to be non-empty for the relief map to work (if available). I'm not an admin: I can't change {{Infobox settlement}} myself. Many infobox templates take incompatible relief parameters. For example, {{Infobox mountain}} takes {{{map_relief}}}, while after the edits of today, {{Infobox mountain range}} takes {{{relief}}}. I think it may be a lot of work to make these parameters compatible (because we need to check all of the pages that call the templates). How about if we just live with the incompatibility?

How about if you work on adding {{{pushpin_relief}}} to settlements for a while? Are there other infoboxes that you need to know about? —hike395 (talk) 21:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All of those infobox templates essentially use Template:Location map, so ideally, the syntax of all of them should be the same. However, I can imagine this'll be a lot of work to achieve.

I didn't have had any problems with the articles that use the Template:Infobox mountain; the "|relief=1" (without "map_") seems to work. I agree that it would be better if Template:Infobox mountain range (and Template:Infobox glacier) work in the same way as Template:Infobox mountain. After today's edits by User:Frietjes the "|relief=1" parameter seems to work with all of them.

"|pushpin_relief=1" seems to work and provide relief maps in articles that use Template:Infobox settlement. I could live with that. Nevertheless, I think it would be better if you (or anybody else) could create a better version of that template at Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox, Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox1, or Template:Infobox settlement/sandbox2 and make an edit request so an admin could easily swap the old version of Template:Infobox settlement with the new version in one of the sandboxes.

Anyway, thank you for your help. Michael! (talk) 21:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that there was a bug in {{Infobox mountain range}}, which may also be in the glacier infobox and others. I think it was always the consensus to make relief=1 be the default for all of those infoboxes, including {{Infobox mountain}} The bug prevented that. So, there's no need to change the relief parameter -- it is just useful to turn it off (which it sounds like you don't want to do). The reason why relief=1 "worked" for mountains is that the relief was the default and it should have worked anyway.

Check out Alabama Hills. All you need to do for mountain ranges is to set the map parameter to the appropriate locator map (i.e., "California"), and everything else will just work. If you would like to go through and fix mountain ranges, I would be really grateful. Or, I have access to AutoWikiBrowser, I can try to make it work. —hike395 (talk) 21:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your research! Great that you could find and fix those bugs.

What I've been doing is working through Category:Location map templates to clear it up. In principle, all relief location maps (such as Template:Location map France relief) are obsolete, since those relief maps can and should be loaded by using the default location map (such as Template:Location map France). In fact, the relief templates are slightly less accurate for geolocation purposes, even though they generate the same image! (have a look at User:Michael!/Gallia). Therefore I used the "What links here" toolbox to find all pages where the relief template is used or transcluded and "relink" them to the standard location map template. So I'm busy with clearing up the usage of location map templates (by the way, locator maps aren't location maps).

So you mean neither "relief=", nor "map_relief=", nor "pushpin_relief=", nor any other "relief" parameter should be specified in articles that use mountain infoboxes? That would be great. I don't have any preference whether a relief parameter should be used by default or not, as long as "Location map USA California" is used and never the obsolete "Location map USA California relief".

I could work through my contribution list of the past few days to remove all relief parameters from the mountain articles if necessary, but I won't work through the "What links to" Template:Infobox mountain lists. Michael! (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: As far as I know, I don't have access to AutoWikiBrowser or something equivalent.

Yes, for mountain and mountain range and glacier articles, no need for any {{{relief}}} parameters. You should get the relief map by default. If not, something is wrong. You don't need to remove relief=1, it will just sit there unused (perhaps confusing a few editors, though).

Right when you called, I was investigating this. It turns out that {{location map+}} calls {{Location map California}} with the image1 parameter set. It does not call {{Location map California relief}}. Now, some location maps don't have image1 set (like Washington, trying to fix that now). But, none of them should call the corresponding relief template that is wrong. —hike395 (talk) 22:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your help! I'll leave it for today and continue to work on Template:Location map Colombia relief etc. tomorrow. Michael! (talk) 22:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you have a look at the following templates? These seem not to load a relief map either. Thank you in advance! Michael! (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox museum

This requires a non-empty {{{pushpin_relief}}} or {{{map_relief}}}

Template:Infobox mine

This does not accept one.

Template:Infobox military installation

This does not accept one.

Template:Infobox hotel

This does not accept one.

Template:Infobox hospital

This does not accept one.

Template:Infobox archaeological site Didn't this template work properly yesterday?

This does not accept one.

Infobox Australian place

Please have a look at fr:Modèle:Infobox Commune de France. That infobox allows to switch between several administrative and relief location maps. It would be great if we would have such infoboxes on the English Wikipedia as well.

As far as I know, Australia is the only nation which has both administrative and relief location maps for all of its states. It would be great if Template:Infobox Australian place allows to switch between them. I already started to experiment here, but I'm not certain how to achieve it. Could you check what I've done and correct any mistakes? Thank you in advance! Michael! (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it be great? WP:IAP is transcluded to over 7,900 articles and there has never been a need to do this. If you want this change you really need to propose it at Template talk:Infobox Australian place. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:32, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick reply!

I would first like to get it working in that sandbox, before I'll propose on the talk page (and on the project's talk page) to implement it. Michael! (talk) 15:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

you might start by just adding the relief map option by changing

|label = {{{name}}}
|lat = {{#if:{{{latm|}}}| |{{{latd|}}} }}

to

|label = {{{name}}}
|relief = {{{relief|}}}
|lat = {{#if:{{{latm|}}}| |{{{latd|}}} }}

as you have done with the other infoboxes. as for a more complicated switch for selecting the map, you will really need to nearly start from scratch since the French template is going to use French names for all the localities. Frietjes (talk) 15:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian location maps

Please don't change location map images without discussion. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 05:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Australian place

Thanks for your suggestion about adding |relief= to {{Infobox Australian place}}. My previous thoughts have changed regarding this. You were correct, it is good idea and I've found a few places where the relief maps are a better option, such as in Top End. Implementing the parameter into the new code for the infobox was relatively simple. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Could you teach me ...

Hello Michael.
About how to create maps you can take a look at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Resources/Tutorials. These tutorials were made by contributors from the French graphic lab. Their equivalent in French is at fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/Didacticiels cartographiques.
For the specific case of the location maps the process is the same but in order to work for the geolocation templates you'll have to use an equirectangular projection, centered on the center of the final map. Be aware to be very precise on the final limits (coordinates) of the map so the template will be precise as well.
Greetings. Sting-fr (talk) 13:56, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Louis Couperus/Gallery

Wikipedia:Louis Couperus/Gallery, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Louis Couperus/Gallery and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Louis Couperus/Gallery during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aeolic verse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adoneus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Michael!. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lethe and Styx

I think you have a point in that. I will make Styx part of the Oceanids because it was mentioned in sources and for Lethe I will delete in the list of Potamoi because their was not enough sources that can proove it. Thank you. --Markx121993 (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agamemnon (Seneca)

Thanks for creating this. Could you please add your sources? The WP:BURDEN is on the creator to do so. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 09:57, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Fabula praetexta) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Fabula praetexta, Michael!!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this; can you please add your sources?

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:13, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Fabula togata) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Fabula togata, Michael!!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add your sources

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Hercules (Seneca)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Hercules (Seneca), Michael!!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add your sources

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Hercules Oetaeus) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Hercules Oetaeus, Michael!!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add your sources

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Phoenissae (Seneca)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Phoenissae (Seneca), Michael!!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add your sources

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 10:21, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Subgenre section removed

What the hell is wrong with you??? Why did you remove the entire "subgenre section" of the "epic films" page???? You eliminated important informations!!!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Michael!. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Michael!. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

		The Half Barnstar
		Thank you for cooperating amicably with the 3rd opinion process. It was one of the most pleasant 3rd opinions I've mediated.Dig _deeper ^talk 01:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Murus Mediae listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Murus Mediae. Since you had some involvement with the Murus Mediae redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:23, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pantelleria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]