Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Hello, Miniapolis -- I wanted to ask you about something. I thought that, when there are more than one person in a photo, and the caption mentions the names of one (or more) of the people in the image, it is a good idea to indicate which one is which with at least one word, "right" and/or "left". I also thought that normally, those words ("right", "left") are in italics. I thought I remembered seeing that in art books and catalogs. I don't understand the reason for using regular font for "right" and "left". See MOS:CAPTION, the section "Formatting of captions", third bulleted item:

The text of captions should not be specially formatted, except in ways that would apply if it occurred in the main text (e.g., italics for the Latin name of a species).

Compare:

Which looks better to you? An editor removed the italics from "right" that I had added. See [1]. According to MOS:CAPTION, he's right, but I prefer the italics.  – Corinne (talk) 02:37, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you; italicizing "right" makes it easy to see that it's a "stage direction" and not part of the caption itself. My interpretation of MOS:CAPTION is that entire captions shouldn't be italicized. These things aren't carved in stone; you could discuss it with the editor who removed the italics or start an RFC on the MOS talk page (if you do, please let me know so I can weigh in). All the best, Miniapolis 03:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#How to indicate which person is which in a caption.  – Corinne (talk) 03:29, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Miniapolis -- I just made a few edits to Hull (watercraft). There were large sections of inexplicable italics, which I removed, and some odd indentation. Now that I look at the article again in regular view, I see that there are quite a few bulleted lists, and I remember that the MOS discourages the use of bulleted lists in articles. Can you take a look at this article and tell me whether all of the lists should be changed to prose, or just some of them – and if so, which ones – or none of them?  – Corinne (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Corinne. I'd leave the first list alone, because each item has several names. The second list could be a {{glossary}}. I find that template very helpful; it seems complicated at first, but is easy to use once you get the hang of it. The third list (of chined-hull shapes) can be prose, as can the appendages section. "Terms", again, is ideal as a glossary. Metrics can stay as is, without the bolding, and that animated image is cool :-). Are you standing again for coordinator? Have fun and all the best, Miniapolis 19:55, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks, Miniapolis. I'll work on the article after I complete a request I signed up to do on the requests page. I'd be glad to continue as an assistant coordinator, but I don't know anything about what I need to do, and where. Can you tell me?  – Corinne (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The link to the election page is in the ombox at the top of the requests page (and elsewhere), under the tabs. All the best, Miniapolis 14:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!  – Corinne (talk) 14:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2016 News Hello everyone, and welcome to the December 2016 GOCE newsletter. We had an October newsletter all set to go, but it looks like we never pushed the button to deliver it, so this one contains a few months of updates. We have been busy and successful! >>> Sign up for the December Blitz! <<< Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: Nominations are open for election of Coordinators for the first half of 2017. Please visit the election page to nominate yourself or another editor, and then return after December 15 to vote. Thanks for participating! September Drive: The September drive was fruitful. We set out to remove July through October 2015 from our backlog (an ambitious 269 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of oldest articles to just 83. We reduced our overall backlog by 97 articles, even with new copyedit tags being added to articles every day. We also handled 75% of the remaining Requests from August 2016. Overall, 19 editors recorded copy edits to 233 articles (over 378,000 words). October Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 October; the theme was Requests, since the backlog was getting a bit long. Of the 16 editors who signed up, 10 editors completed 29 requests. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part. November Drive: The November drive was a record-breaker! We set out to remove September through December 2015 from our backlog (239 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of old articles to just 66, eliminating the two oldest months! We reduced our overall backlog by 523 articles, to a new record low of 1,414 articles, even with new tags being added to articles every day, which means we removed copy-editing tags from over 800 articles. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from October 2016. Officially, 14 editors recorded copy edits to 200 articles (over 312,000 words), but over 600 articles, usually quick fixes and short articles, were not recorded on the drive page. Housekeeping note: we do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your Watchlist. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk. >>> Sign up for the December Blitz! <<<

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I need your help. I'm copy-editing Shaikh Abdallah Mazandarani, here. I made all my copy-edits, then went back to read the article before I saved them. I decided to move his dates to right after his name, but somehow I ended up pasting them right after "Persian" and before the name in Persian letters. When I tried to highlight the dates to move them to after the name in Persian letters, I couldn't. I didn't want to lose all the work I had done by not saving, so I saved them. Then I tried again, but I still can't move the dates. I even tried highlighting all of it, beginning with "Persian", but couldn't. Do I have to undo my edits and re-do all my copy-edits? Can you help?  – Corinne (talk) 02:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me, unless I'm missing something (won't be the first time or, alas, the last :-)). Sometimes non-Latin scripts get wonky in edit mode; I've had trouble with Arabic. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 02:28, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to ask—do you use Visual Editor? (I don't.) Miniapolis 02:29, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't. I just have WikEd enabled. I tried Visual Editor but didn't like it. Do you mind if I ask the technical expert Redrose64? Redrose64, the double pairs of birth-death years are in the wrong place, but I don't know how to move them to after the Persian letters.  – Corinne (talk) 03:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Miniapolis, I forgot to thank you for your reply. (If it looks all right to you, then something is wrong with either my eyes or my computer.)  – Corinne (talk) 03:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Without first looking at the edits concerned, I can say that this is a common problem where right-to-left (rtl) text (such as Farsi) is used in a Wikipedia that mostly comprises inherently left-to-right (ltr) text (such as English).

When both displaying and editing, your browser knows how to display most of the text since the actual words are detected as implicitly ltr or implicitly rtl. However non-text characters - these include figures and punctuation - are implicitly directionless, which means that they take on the direction of whatever text that they are closest to - even if that is text that is in a script other than the "normal" script for the page.

For any short piece of text, you can make the direction explicit instead of implicit by the use of one of the following, in increasing order of usefulness:

1. wrapping the Farsi text in <span dir=rtl>...</span> which specifies direction only: <span dir=rtl>عبدالله مازندرانی</span> → عبدالله مازندرانی
2. specifying the language and direction with <span lang=fa dir=rtl>...</span>: <span lang=fa dir=rtl>عبدالله مازندرانی</span> → عبدالله مازندرانی
3. a template like {{lang|fa|rtl=yes|...}}: {{lang|fa|rtl=yes|عبدالله مازندرانی}} → عبدالله مازندرانی
4. a template like {{lang|fa|...}}: {{lang|fa|عبدالله مازندرانی}} → عبدالله مازندرانی

If all the non-English text is marked up like this, any figures and punctuation outside of such markup will inherit the default for the page, which is English and left-to-right.

If VisualEditor is used later on, it will probably screw it up again. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Redrose64; I never realized that the problem was the reversal in text direction. Corinne, I used to use WikEd until it went bad on me for some reason (which tells you everything there is to say about how technically-adept I am :-)) and now use the standard-issue editor. All the best, Miniapolis 14:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting! Thank you, Redrose64, and Miniapolis.  – Corinne (talk) 15:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64 It looks fine now, but it doesn't explain why I can't cut the years and paste them after the template. I wanted to add "AH" (for Hijri year) after the first pair of dates (separated by a space), and link "AH" to the Hijri year article, but I can't. Can you take all those years out and paste them after the Persian?  – Corinne (talk) 15:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Think I may have fixed that; I went to Template:Lang#Right-to-left languages, changed the template and inserted an HTML left-to-right mark (‎) to force the change. Apparently it's a browser thing (mine's Firefox 50.0.2, the latest, on Windows 7), and the original template ({{lang}}) should also work with the LTR mark. What a bear. All the best, Miniapolis 16:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks great now. Thanks to both of you!  – Corinne (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you are copy-editing, when you come across a century written out in full, as in "seventeenth century", do you as a matter of course change it to "17th century", or are there times when the fully written out version is appropriate? If you would leave it "seventeenth century", would you use that throughout the article, or switch to "17th century" after the first instance of "seventeenth century"? If you would leave it as you found it, "seventeenth century", then any other centuries would also have to be written out in full, and it could look a little wordy.  – Corinne (talk) 20:11, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I checked MOS:CENTURY, and both are okay; however, you're right that "17th century" looks less clunky. I play it by ear, according to the type of article; if it's an isolated occurrence I leave it alone, but if it's repeated (especially if it's mixed in with numerical spellings) I'll change it for economy and consistency. All the best, Miniapolis 20:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It'll taste good in this weather :-). Happy holidays and all the best, Miniapolis 16:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, Miniapolis/Archives/2016! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

	Wishing you a very happy holiday season and a fulfilling 2017. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas Miniapolis/Archives/2016!!
	Hi Miniapolis/Archives/2016, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!    –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 20:23, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--Tito Dutta (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	We wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2017!
	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas, and a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 11:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Two years ago ...

create drive
... you were recipient no. 1078 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda! Happy New Year and all the best, Miniapolis 15:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]