User talk:Macdonald-ross/Archive 15

← Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16 →

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Because you are always on the new changes page, reverting vandalism!Amanda Atom 13:35, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! It's a new one for me. Macdonald-ross (talk)

It's always a pleasure to give rewards to those who deserve it! <3 Amanda Atom 13:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Rollback

@Glaisher and Auntof6:Hi Macdonald. I have read and I understand what rollback is. Rollback is a tool that allows users to revert vandalism easier and faster. I know that with rollback, I could play a significant part in the fight against vandalism. I also understand that rollback is not and right but a privilege. I understand that if I misuse rollback, I can get it removed and I can also be blocked from editing.Amanda Call Me 16:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Since you pinged me, I'll just comment that you should make this request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, not on an individual admin's talk page. That is especially true if you're going to try to get other admins to reply. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

By the way, the ping to me didn't work. I only saw it because this page is on my watchlist. I'll try to remember to look at the template later to see if I cam fix it. I suspect what doesn't work is pinging more than one person at a time. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I had read Wikipedia:Rollback feature and it said that you can either place a request at permissions, or you can place a request on an Admins talk page. Should we take that out?Amanda Call Me 18:43, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Kit Carson

Hi! I've sent Kit Carson to Good Article nominations. Would you/could you give it a glance as a prelude to the more intensive reviews? Thank you! SeeSpot Run (talk) 15:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Raccoons

Hey, Mac, your changes to Raccoon not only put back some complex words, but undid some disambiguating and added incorrect links to Commons and Wikispecies. When you make changes, especially when you undo changes made by responsible editors (if I do say so myself), please pay attention to what you're doing -- there is often a reason certain changes are made. I have re-fixed the things that your changes broke. Please don't break them again. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I shall try not to annoy you again. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Species standard for cat articles

This is not a complaint, only a tame question. ツ Because I really do notice what happens in the articles I create after the fact, I understand the moves for American bobtail and American shorthair, because of species standard capitalisation on Wikipedia. Two questions: first, should I now change these caps within these articles? The lede bold and in article names still have the incorrrect style. This should be apparent, I suppose and I shall gladly do so; it is just that you made the page moves and I am timid here, since I don't like scoldings for doing something out of turn. ツ Secondly, I also created Oriental Longhair, which seems to need the same correction. Would you mind doing the move? I think I tried one once and totally botched it with leaving a redirect. Again, I will change the text within. Please forgive the rambling comments here; I have difficulty in being concise due to a neuro disorder. Thank you, respectfully Fylbecatulous talk 15:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Your question is just fine. I change the titles of common names to lower case a section at a time when I have a gap in other kinds of editing. The text should read the same as the title, but sometimes there are twenty or thirty mentions in a single article, so that may get to wait a while. A point to note is that En wiki are using lower case also for the first word of a common name if it is not the first word in a sentence, unless -- like American bobtail -- it starts with a proper noun like 'America'. Official latin titles like Felis cattus are always done like that; it is just the common names we are talking about.

In short, yes I will move pages, leaving a redirect from the old title. I follow up by checking a) no double redirects, and b) no recursive links: they are links which return to the same page, of course. It is a great help that En wiki has at last made its mind up, because a standard method stops any arguments. Yes, the body of the article should follow the new title format, and anything you can do in that direction would be welcome.

Although any reliable user can move pages, sometimes you will run across the "can't move over a redirect" thing, which needs an admin to do it. Thanks for asking. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Addendum. On checking, I discovered En wiki was not doing this for breeds officially listed in the American cat & dog societies. So, whatever I think about it, we should leave the official breeds as they are with caps as the societies decide, but go with lower case for common names for animals and plants in the wild. My apologies for the mistake. I have put the breed titles back where they were. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Way cool, then. No apology needed. Thank you again for your help. Fylbecatulous talk 14:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Having a little trouble?

I fixed up the RfD you recently closed and moved it to the "closed" section. In case it helps, here are the steps for closing an RfD:

• Click on "close request" for the one you want to close. This makes sure you are editing the whole page.
• Put {{archive-top}} at the very top of the RfD page.
• Put {{archive-bottom}} at the very bottom of the page, after the note about when the RfD closes.
• Remove the noinclude tags from around the "in progress" template.
• Replace {{in progress}} with {{kept}}, {{deleted}}, or {{merged}}, as appropriate. You can add a note inside these templates if you want, such as if you didn't do a regular keep or delete (for example, the article was redirected, QD'd, or closed early). Adding a note here is preferable to adding a comment in the discussion section, because at this point you are talking about an admin action, not further discussion.
• Add your signature after the kept/deleted/merged template.
• Save.

That's it. Maybe someone with more template smarts than I have will automate some of that for us someday! --Auntof6 (talk) 15:18, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks indeed. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Peace Service at St. Nicolas Church

Mac, I restored this page because the QD option for notability is only for "people, groups, companies or websites". I don't see that any of those is applicable to this page. Note that the page had already been put up at RfD. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

And now I have restored Superhero Registration Act for the same reason. Please review the quick deletion criteria to make sure you understand them. Those criteria are very specific. If an article does not exactly fit any of them, it has to go to RfD to be deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:22, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

About your revert,

Dear Ma'am,

Greeting from Janagewen.

I've found you've reverted my changes on the article about Chinese language. I wish you are not one of them, in en.wikipedia.org, against me. Anyway, Chinese is my first language. So if you are interested in Chinese language, you are welcome to talk with me in my talk page. I don't want to involve argument and edit war, so I let it alone as it likes, but does not mean that I compromise what you reverted.

Wish you have a good day. Janagewen (talk) 10:25, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not against anyone. The reversion to that page followed a general policy. Changes to an established page need to be either a) an obvious improvement; and/or a change supported by a reliable source. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:36, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

OK, I've also made modification the article about x86, please review it! Janagewen (talk) 10:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

A-B-C

Whatever did you reverted this for? https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Endangered_species&oldid=4920706&diff=prev --I put them in alphabetic order and you go revert it to the mess it was before. Windell (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks like a mistake, so it's back in alpha order. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:10, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, good. Have nice day. --Windell (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Really?

Mac, you are an administrator. When dealing with vandals, please try to keep a more appropriate tone than this. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I changed that block back to one week. Going from 72 hours to a month is too much. Try not to let them get your goat. You and others are keeping on top of the vandalism, as annoying as it is. Remember that we can't go overboard when blocking IPs. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe this person has given clear evidence that normal handling will be ignored. Also, it looks as though only one person is using this IP address. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

That may be, but we do the normal procedure anyway. A week is a long time. Keep calm and let the process play out. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Human

Not entirely sure why you reverted my edits to the "Human" page. You did say that the edits needed discussion, but I'm not sure why this is necessary, who I should discuss it with, where I should do it, or what this discussion would involve. 2.222.120.54 (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Many pages need improving, but a long-established page like Human has already been through a lot of editing. In such cases, changes should be clear improvements, not just "I would have said it differently". To help this happen, it is usual to give a reason for the change. If brief, it can be done in the edit summary box at the bottom. If longer, it should be done on the talk page of the article concerned. Also, important changes may need references to reliable sources. This wiki is not about what an editor personally thinks, but about what is the case, as supported by reliable authorities. It is an encyclopedia. Finally, this is Simple English, and rewording our phrasing into more complex language goes in the opposite direction. You can find some helpful ideas in our Main page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 21:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Domestication

Hey, Mac, I agree with your assessment that there was too much in this article. Just in case you hadn't noticed, your changes left some format errors in the tables. I suspect it has to do with needing to change the value in "rowspan" parameters. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Jack Russell Terrier

Thanks for your additions and corrections to this article I started. It looks really nice now. MySweetMelissa (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked it. They are great dogs who like to give their owners plenty of exercise! Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

redirecting Sneakers to Athletic shoe

For what reason was Sneakers redirected to Athletic shoe? Angela Maureen (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Athletic shoe is the overall term for these shoes. Other terms like sneaker are culture-limited. There are at least a dozen terms which all come down to the same thing. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:46, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Marble

When I made this I was thinking about that the beginning should contain all the possible definitions. I think I read that somewhere. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marble&oldid=4988741&diff=prev

I was also concerned about that the section description is so far below under. Shouldn't that be a bit more higher? Before all the varieties, what do you think? --Windell (talk) 17:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Referring to Athletic shoe, that is perfectly OK now. Macdonald-ross (talk)

Referring to Marble, the point is that we have another perfectly good page for the toy marbles. When different terms go on a single page it is because they are different names for the same thing. Here they are not. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I get the impression that you don't like my edits. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oil_paint&diff=4988731&oldid=4988686 --Windell (talk) 12:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

When a page is established, and is in a good state, then changes need to be improvements. Reasons need to be given, either in the edit summary, or on the talk page of the article in question. If an editor just makes changes without good reason, then those changes may be reverted. That keeps the page in good condition. It sometimes takes a bit of time for new people to get into our ways. If others change what you do, that is nothing about you personally. It is about making sure that pages improve or at least stay as good as they are. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Mac, it might help this user if you point to the relevant policy or guideline that says this. In fact, it would help me, too, since I don't see anything wrong with this user's edit. I actually think it brightened up the page. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

THANKS, Aunt of! You give me the right kind of support to feel much better about this place. --Windell (talk) 15:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Reply

We -in Arabic wikipedia- Make bot welcomes new users as soon as they register, I think that's better. But no proplem, I'll review new users' edits before welcoming. Thanks --Mohamed^Talk 21:36, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Warnings on user talk pages

Hey, Mac, when you leave warnings, would you please add the standard month/year heading? It would help keep all the warnings together and make it easier for people looking for previous warnings. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes I just want to cry

Mac, again I come respectfully, because I really need to keep editing here. I love it and my cognitive ability needs the exercise. For some reason I understand that I am only tolerated here and not really liked. I have noted your instructive edit summaries before and learned better. And thanked you for at least one. [1]. But so far as I know I have never made a bad edit here. I contribute to be an asset. I have written articles that at least I am proud of.

This: [2]? Well, I could say it is because I am busy simplifying the article you mostly copied and pasted: [3]. I gave you grace because I do respect you as an admin and editor and this was in 2012. Please give me some grace in return. In advance forgive me for this post. If you wish to block me, my mitigating circumstance is that I am truly having the most terrible day already. Family tradegy. All the best as always. Fylbecatulous talk 15:09, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm very sorry to hear of your family trouble. At a time like this don't think about our little wiki: real life is so much more important. Even if I sometimes make a different editing decision from you, it does not mean I have less respect for you. You are an editor in good standing, and we are happy to have you with us doing useful things. I hope your work here gives you some comfort in a difficult time. Regards, Mac. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: Titles

For the titles, I used the names in the template Italian Prime Ministers and after I created the redirect pages with the names by which those politicans are more famous in Italy. --Malemar (talk) 00:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please be sure that the template has the name of the actual article, and not the name of a redirect page. This is so that when the template is used, the name of the current page is in bold type and is not clickable. If needed, you can change the template to match article names. I just changed it to bypass the two entries that linked to redirect pages. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 02:10, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Hurricane Grace (1991)

Would you mind simplifying/fixing clumsy language used in the article? Regards, Eurodyne (talk) 02:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

One reason I don't work on GAs is that I just don't have the time. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. Eurodyne (talk) 15:18, 10 February 2015 (UTC)