• Templates used by Twinkle
• Template:PD-x

User talk:Mlpearc/Header

User:Mlpearc/I'm human

My Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Hello,

I am not certain which source you find unreliable or what information in the edit was not properly sourced. If you could direct me to the proper location, then I will gladly provide additional information.

Thank you, and have a good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3B2F:C830:11E4:692A:9BED:7E73 (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are re-adding edit made by an COI editor, which is highly discouraged, not to mention the peacock terms included in those edits. The references are from books and such, I highly doubt that those references backup the newly added text. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:14, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Great job! †2†ťəäçħ†4†ӛṿəř 18:10, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx :) Mlpearc (open channel) 18:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! :-) ^†2†ťəäçħ^†4†ӛṿəř 21:37, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit induced a citation error. Also, it seems you are using |year= incorrectly, when you should be using |date= (though I did not check each instance). Please review the documentation, thanks.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  13:56, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius: There seems to be an issue with "Fix SOURCES" script. Just wanted to ping you as I wasn't aware the script was making incorrect edits. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:07, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I left a msg at Wikipedia:Date formattings/script/MOSNUM dates/bugs#year vs. date citation usage after my post here, and I just left one at User talk:Ohconfucius/script#year vs. date citation usage just in case.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  01:45, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could there be an issue with interpretation of the documentation? I'm sorry, but I still don't see any instances where |date= is incorrectly changed to |year=, as there is no "date" but only a "4-digit year" in all of those instances changed. So, AFAICT, the changes are all in accordance with the documentation as well as Help:CS1. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 04:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tom.Reding: Could you please clarify your point regarding |year= and |date=

The first edit here was made to a {{cite web}} and doesn't use |ref=harv. Per Template:Citation Style documentation#date, it should use |date=, but the script changed it to |year=. I don't know what can be more explicit than a binary logic tree.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  13:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius:, @Tom.Reding: The full parameter set of {{cite web}} below shows the use of both |year= and |date=. The edit in this case were all years ie. 1975 or 2015 not, December 6 or 17 March.

{{cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |author= |authorlink= |last2= |first2= |author2= |authorlink2= |date= |year= |editor-last= |editor-first= |editor= |editor-link= |editor1-last= |editor1-first= |editor1-link= |editor2-last= |editor2-first= |editor2-link= |editors= |website= |series= |publisher= |location= |page= |pages= |at= |language= |script-title= |trans-title= |type= |format= |arxiv= |asin= |bibcode= |doi= |doi-broken-date= |isbn= |issn= |jfm= |jstor= |lccn= |mr= |oclc= |ol= |osti= |pmc= |pmid= |rfc= |ssrn= |zbl= |id= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |deadurl= |accessdate= |quote= |ref= |separator= |postscript= |subscription= |registration=}}

Mlpearc (open channel) 19:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would you simultaneously use |page= and |pages= because they both appear in the full parameter list?   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  19:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• NO, that's silly to use the same parameter twice but, that's not whats happing here. We have date= & year=. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mine was not the best example. The best example is the documentation, which clarifies any naïve usage. Page/s immediately comes to mind because most people put |pages=[first page]-[last page], and not the precise location of the information in the document. This, too, comes from a lack of reading the documentation before using it. I am previously guilty of both.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  19:57, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I still say that the template handles both parameters, date & year and that they're two different things. So it seems to me the script is working fine and is safe to use. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll continue the conversation at/with User talk:Ohconfucius/script. For me, replying there will be more time-efficient, visible, and relevant to changing/pausing the script's year/date behavior.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf)  21:46, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thank you, Mlpearc (open channel) 21:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the problem. I changed the genre to Doom metal and left a note as reference but received a warning about messing with the genre. I mean I genuinely went scouring the internet for backup information and reliable resources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.107.16.119 (talk) 21:50, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talking about your concerns of the genre's is your best bet, and I see that you've started just that. It's a good idea to add your sources to the discussion also. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:57, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MichaelatHebertResearch is acceptable — Preceding unsigned comment added by HebertResearch (talk • contribs) 22:49, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

renaming to either user name is fine with me thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by HebertResearch (talk • contribs) 22:53, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]