Test--Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 03:29, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Globalwheels (talk) 12:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Could you lease help the coordinates for The Longford Trust are appearing on the left of the article not the right why is this?

Kind regards --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 19:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ratio, I fixed the coordinate location, you have to put "display=title" at the end of the coordinates, like this: {{coord|51.535931|N|0.194735|W|scale:500|display=title}} If you need anymore help, feel free to use the {{helpme}} template. -- Luke (Talk) 19:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will do thanks.--Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 23:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I have just created this Navbox template Template:Navbox The West Wing episodes. How do I make it appear as auto hidden on article pages as otherwise it takes up a lot of space as can bee see here Pilot (The West Wing) (scroll to bottom) where it is in use.

For example in this article Pilot (House) there is a Navbox (Template:Navbox House episodes) for House episodes which is auto-hidden allowing the reader to expand it. How do I achive this?

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 23:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, with this edit. For future reference, many templates, and especially meta-templates like navbox, have documentation at the template page which provides information on customizing the template and other features—in this case there is a detailed explanation on the various collapse options in the documentation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ratioscripta - one of the most useful series of essays I have digested on wikipedia is the following - see User:Tony1/How to improve your writing - if you look at how I have edited the Edward Fitzgerald (barrister) you can see how it works. Succinct crisp prose can be very effective in making prose easy to read. When in doubt, understatement often works better than hyperbole - why not have a read and try on the Longford Trust article while I keep on Fitzgerald :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 23:25, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking but I have not reviewed at DYK in well over a year. I am pretty busy in real life, and so doubt I can review in the next several days - sorry. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on this article; it's great to see good writing on somewhat obscure but important topics. Thanks! Skomorokh 10:51, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Could someone please help me upload this movie poster to accompany the article Gerrymandering (film) which I published. The image can be found here http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3684402688/tt1241319 or here http://www.comingsoon.net/gallery/69834/Gerrymandering_1.jpg. In particular will uploading it bring up any copyright issues. I do not want to upload it for it then to only be deleted. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Kind regards --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 18:18, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Wikipedia:Upload makes it a bit easier to upload such files but in this case I did it for you. Regards SoWhy 18:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Would it be a copyright violation if someone were to upload the Logo of The Longford Trust to accompany The Longford Trust article. The logo can be found at http://www.longfordtrust.org/img/thelongfordtrust-logo.png or here http://www.longfordtrust.org/. I wouldn't want the logo to be uploaded only to be then removed. Thanks

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 22:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In some instances, it's OK to upload low resolution copyrighted images, such as company logos, under our Non-free content guidelines. I've uploaded the logo at File:The Longford Trust Logo.png and also added it to the article. I hope that answers your question. ^Avic_ennasis @ 00:32, 2 Elul 5771 / 00:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What was the purpose of this edit? The DYK instructions clearly say (in multiple places) that when you nominate an article you are supposed to place it at the top, not the bottom, of that day's section. Please stop changing the order of nominations. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Apologies my mistake.--Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 09:36, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi there,

I uploaded a image today to accompany an article I wrote West Wing Week (see image in article), I was wandering why does the image not show up in "files upload" when i do a user search here http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&format=html&img_user_text=RatioScripta. It is not urgent I am just curious as to why it doesn't show up, can anyone help?

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 23:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simple. You just uploaded it today and it has not been indexed yet by the software. The index is typically updated every morning GMT. By the way, please upload future public domain images to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). The Commons is a sister site of the same foundation that owns Wikipedia but is for all manner of free media files. Anything there can be used here natively, i.e., the same image code to add an image uploaded here will work for images at the Commons (and the majority of images you see on Wikipedia, are in fact images from the Commons). The only reason we allow uploads here is because unlike the Commons, we allow some non-free media files under a claim of fair use, which could not be uploaded there. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great. There's a whole cadre of editors who spend time moving images to the Commons and deleting them from here and it's good not to give them extra work. One thing to note: Local images by the same name override Commons images. This means that if there are two images with the same name, one here and one at Commons, the one here will display in an article, and the one at Commons will only display once the local image is deleted or retitled. Since here you will be uploading the same image, you won't see any difference, but you should ask for the local image to be deleted once you upload there. You can do this by going to the local image, editing the page and placing at the top {{db-self}}. In the interest of completeness, note also that if you were not the uploader but a third party finding a duplicate image here and at the Commons, you would tag it instead with {{db-f8}}.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:57, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have entered in a reference on the article West Wing Week and it come up with...

Cite error: Invalid < ref > tag; invalid names, e.g. too many; see the help page

Please see article scroll down until you see red reference error tag.

I have reentered the reference three times the same way i have every other reference in the article (all 147 of them) yet this one comes up with an error message when i save the page.

I have absolutely no idea how to fix this, can anyone help me thanks.

Kind regards --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 23:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was fixed by a bot. When you give a reference a name so you can use it again, you can't (and there's no reason to) use a complicated name. Just use something easily understood and unique, e.g., if the citation is to a book, just use the author's last name. The problem you had here was that you used: <ref name=West Wing Week: 4/23/10 "Competing the Old-Fashioned Way" > when probably a good name here would have been <ref name="Whitehouse">. Hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Bot didn't resolve issue made things worse

The bot did more bad than any good on the West Wing Week article.

• Thanks for taking a look, but that reference for "Competing the Old-Fashioned Way" was perfectly fine and working. I do not know why the bot corrected that. but when it diet it broke about 5 other references on the bags by linking to them. You must have looked at the page post the bot revision and assumed (as the bot corrected it) that my issue was with the reference concerning "Competing the Old-Fashioned Way" but is was not. I have absolutely no ideas why the bod would correct section which were working fine.

• (when bot made edit it id broke 5 links as it redirected 5 references to reference number (16) See page version below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=West_Wing_Week&oldid=448312620 (post bot revision page)

• (Original query)

Below is the version of the page which i had a problem with. You must have gone to the page post the bot revision which somehow corrected "Competing the Old-Fashioned Way". I had a problem for the reference on the notes section for the episode "It's Alive!" which is much further down the page just after ref (110). http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=West_Wing_Week&oldid=448297335 (scroll down to episode 38 "Its Alive!" and you see the reference error message I originally had a problem with. Any Ideas?

• I have currently reverted the bots edits because of the links is messed up. Which has brought the page back to the state of the original query. (hopefully the bot does re-editi until you have seen it)

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 06:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the problem. When using <ref name='Something'>, with single quotes around the Something, then the Something must not include any single quote characters. I don't know why this confused the bot. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:37, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Please see discussion in the above section User_talk:Ratio_Scripta#Refrencing_problem_on_West_Wing_Week. It details the technical editing problem relating to the referencing in the article West Wing Week which is currently unresolved.

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 06:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See above. (BTW, for technical questions, {{helpme}} would be a better tag than {{adminhelp}} ) -- John of Reading (talk) 07:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist (talk) 08:02, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikipedia Administrator or Other Wikipedian,

• Would someone help me test out the referencing guide for the article West Wing Week which can be found in the first section of the article talk page Talk:West_Wing_Week.

• You could possibly add the episode summary and events for the first episode (episode 42) of 2011 (if its already done the next undone episode) as all the 2010 episode are already done.Alternatively make any suggestion to improve the guide. Just follow the How to guide and let me know if there are any issues. Thanks. It would be much appreciated.

Kind regards,

--Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 09:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to help, Ratio, but I've never heard of this. Good luck with your project! onyx³²¹ 12:08, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What is your motivation or goal in providing this proprietary "referencing guide"? The community already provides ample information and guidelines for accurately citing articles, keeping in mind the collaborative goals of the project. Other editors are not bound to edit or source this article in deference to your wishes. Honestly, this looks an awful like you're asserting a bit of ownership with this article, regardless of your disclaimer. I highly recommend that you remove this guide in its entirety. What are your thoughts here? Cind.amuse (Cindy) 17:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

why is this error (link below) appearing on a search for files uploaded by me. It only shows one image I have uploaded six. Anyone got any Ideas. Thank You

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Gallery.php?wikifam=commons.wikimedia.org&since=&until=&img_user_text=Ratio+Scripta&order=img_user_text&max=25&order=-img_timestamp&format=html

Kind regards, --Ratio:Scripta · ^{[ Talk ]} 22:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be happening with everyone. And it looks like this error (or something like it) was already reported here. ^Avic_ennasis @ 04:59, 6 Elul 5771 / 04:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ratio Scripta, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/West Wing Week and I have an issue that should be addressed. Please see my comments at the nomination page. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist (talk) 08:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see The Longford Trust and Talk:The Longford Trust urgently. Thank you. Bencherlite^Talk 14:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was also very concerned about User:Ratio Scripta/Bar Public Access scheme, in which all four sentences had copyright violations. As a result, I have deleted it.

Article	Source
first two sentences The Bar Public Access Scheme allows members of the public to [missing word] directly to a barrister without having to have and instructing solicitor or other intermediary acting on their behalf. Prior to the Bar Public Access Scheme it was necessary for clients to use a solicitor or other recognised third party through whom the barrister would be instructed.	Members of the public may now go directly to a barrister without having to involve an instructing solicitor or other intermediary. In the past it was necessary for clients to use a solicitor or other recognised third party through whom the barrister would be instructed. (Source)
Second two sentences The Bar Public Access Scheme is subject to the case being suitable for Public Access, the barrister may accept the instructions to provide legal advice or to represent the client in court. The client is then advised and guided through the legal procedure by the barrister.	Subject to the case being suitable for Public Access, the barrister may accept the instructions to provide legal advice or to represent the client in court. The client is then advised and guided through the legal procedure by the barrister. (Source)

You can't simply cut-and-paste whole sentences, change the odd word and hope for the best. Adding the source at the end of the sentence is not enough either. You need to read up very quickly on the rules of copyright within Wikipedia. WP:Copyvio and WP:Close paraphrasing are good places to start. Mind you, you're not even at the level of close paraphrasing yet: it's more serious than that. Copyright violations like this ought not to be in userspace or the history of an article if moved to mainspace, even if rewritten, so I have deleted it under WP:CSD#G12. If you have written other articles, or added content to other articles, using this method of cut-and-paste with minimal changes, you need to sort them out very quickly. Bencherlite^Talk 18:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Longford Lecturers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 10:45, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]