Jump to content

User talk:Hmains

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hmains (talk | contribs) at 17:12, 23 December 2014 (→"Category:Islands of the Maluku Islands"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

Policies and guidelines (list)
Principles
Content policies
Conduct policies
Other policy categories
Directories

   Discussion Conventions

  • Please post new messages at the bottom of the page to prevent confusion.
  • Please sign your comments. Type ~~~~ after your text or use the edit toolbar.
  • Please use section headings to separate conversation topics.

See: Welcome to Wikipedia, FAQ, Wikiquette, Be nice, and Talk page guidelines.

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Welcome!! --Gurubrahma 19:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

info

Wikipedia:Lists

Categories are a tool for browsing: they function as a table of contents, leading users to the articles on a specific subject. Categories are a means of classifying articles Categories are an index of a subject Categories are a database search: Many categories are in essence the intersection of two or more larger categories. Categories are an index of other categories: There are many categories that function simply as an index of other categories.

June 29

Human trafficking

Maintenance note

I maintain this page by deleting items after a week or two. Hmains (talk) 16:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Monobook

You may wish to make use of a 'Dates' tab in edit mode that will help with unlinking unnecessary date links. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Then follow the instructions in your monobook to clear the cache (i.e. press Ctrl-Shift-R in Firefox, or Ctrl-F5 in IE) before it will work. It also provides a 'Units' tab. If you know what you are doing, you can copy and modify the subfiles as you wish. I just thought you might be interested. Regards. bobblewik 20:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it fails is because you refer to User:Hmains/monobook.js/dates.js and User:Hmains/monobook.js/unitformatter.js and these articles do not exist. You have two options:
Try again. I am happy to walk you through the process. So feel free to ask me again. bobblewik 12:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hold for cat discussion until find example

There are some categories that are used only for categories, and never for articles. Some of these categories have been made into 'hidden' categories, and yet they are never in fact 'hidden' since the hidden feature only applies to articles and not categories. So the hidden category always displays on the category screen as 'hidden'--which is obviously a contradiction. I suggest, that category categories not be classified as hidden. When I have tried to remove the hidden classification in such cases, someone always just adds it back in. Without something said in this categorization guideline I have nothing much justify my removal.

etc

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories

user:dagosnavy

user:Markussep

info

Wikipedia:Categorization Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes Template:Americans WP:BLPCAT WP:LISTPEOPLE

  • 12 to 12 handled by find/replace table; not by module

public public

to fix

to avoid disambiguation pages use: |{{.*dis}}

Autofill

  • to auto fill edit summary: "I haven't found a way to get autocomplete in IE at https with the current setup on Wikipedia's side. If http is acceptable to you then you can disable "Always use a secure connection when logged in" at Special:Preferences, log out, close IE, start IE again and log in at http://en.wikipedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)"

it may also be necessary to force the WP address to be http: instead of https:

bot

Reviewer Right Granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Helpful One 17:59, 28 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Autopatroller

Hi Hmains, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature should have little to no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — ξxplicit 21:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


etc

talk) talk talk

Allincluded

Linking Dates (centuries, decades, years, months, days, etc)

Delink dates per WP:DATELINK, WP:YEARLINK and MOS:UNLINKYEARS

As always, the content of the linked-to article must provide substantive content to the linked-from article. The MOS decided most dates do not do this. Hmains (talk) 03:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what links here

filter by name:

  • calendar|day|week|month|year|decade|century|millennium|Showa|Shōwa|Meiji|Taisho|Taishō| in |Other events|(number)|(disambiguation)|Aught-|SO 8601|Timeline|acronyms|initialisms

skip:

  • {{Decadebox|{{Year dab|{{Year nav|{{Month header}}|{{Day}}|Category:Days of the year|{{Portal:Current events/Events by month}}|{{Months in the|Eastern Orthodox liturgical days|#REDIRECT|disambig|{{events by month links}}|month category|Months of the|The following events occurred in

Web page has expired

I follow the directions in the message shown on the screen.

"Click on the Refresh button on the toolbar to reload the page. After refreshing, you might need to navigate to the specific webpage again, or re-enter information."

On my computer I have to remember that "refresh" looks like a circle with an arrow at the top, and it's the fourth of five icons to the right of the URL. I don't even know what the others are. Then a box pops up and I have to click on "retry".— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Since you are very active in the project, would you like to be an administrator? Do you need tools to move/delete pages for example? Are you active in WP space, involved in xFDs or something similar? -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second Magioladitis here. I think you'd do fantastic as an administrator. The choice is entirely yours, but just know that should you ever submit an RfA, you'll have my support. Kurtis (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable. Do whatever you feel comfortable doing, it's not my place to pressure you.
But in the off chance that you ever change your mind, know that I would feel confident in entrusting you with the tools. =) Kurtis (talk) 04:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

Hi Hmains. I would like to thank you on behalf of the WP:WPSCH for the 100s of AWB cleanups you have been doing to school articles. Such articles are a regular problem area, so if you come across any redlinked alumni, please don't hesitate to remove them, and fix any obvious vandalisms. Also, if the article talk pages don't have the {{WikiProject Schools |class= |importance= |needs-infobox=}} you may wish to add it so we can assess them and keep a track on them. Thanks again, and happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well thanks. Working on all the school categories has been a hard/exhausting task. The article fix up is just something that comes along with AWB general fixes, nothing I specifically targeted. Hmains (talk) 01:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delinking

  • The delinking of dates was exhaustively discussed by WP prior to the current wording of WP:DATELINK and WP:YEARLINK and MOS:UNLINKDATES being agreed upon. Days, months, years, decades, centuries, etc were all included in the long discussion.

WikiProject Cleanup

Hello, Hmains.

You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

problem

Whatever it is, this problem has not been fixed and there seems to be no activity by the people responsible for this mess to fix it. Hmains (talk) 02:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC) Hmains

I'm sorry that you're still having this frustrating problem. BJorsch named above the three different places where this problem may be caused: 1.your own computer, 2.the WMF's servers, or 3.a server in between you and the WMF's servers.

Each user is necessarily responsible for cacheing problems that appear in his own browser. Please follow all the steps at WP:BYPASS and let us know if that (hopefully!) solves the problem for you. If the problem is the WMF's caches, then it will likely be fixed relatively soon. If the problem is at a third-party server in between you and the WMF (e.g., on your corporate or university network or your local ISP), then I'm afraid that there is often nothing that either you or we are able to do about it except wait for the third-party server to update its cache. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:53

AWB: mass category creation

Can AWB create mass categories? E.g. i need to create categories from ”Football clubs established in 1900” to ”Football clubs established in 2020”. Each category must have 2 categories- parents, one stable ”Football clubs establishements by year” and second incrementable ”Establishements in {{year}}", where {{year}} has value from 1900 to 2020, for each new category incrementation +1. Its possible to do that with AWB? XXN (talk) 19:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN:, yes, check out CSV Loader. You will need to file a BRFA and get approval before you start creating the categories. — Ganeshk (talk) 22:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but i dont understand how to use your plugin)) I know about bot policy, i will work on ro.wiki, i have already submitted an request for approval. XXN (talk) 23:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please follow the steps in this walk through. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or run into any issues. — Ganeshk (talk) 14:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Bodies of water categories

Hi! Would you mind not emptying out the county-level bodies of water category, please? I think it's sufficiently broad enough that they aren't "nearly empty" and I'm working on populating them with more articles. I think it's better for bodies of water not to be lumped in with landforms when there are so many bodies of water. For instance, Category:Bodies of water in Columbia County, Pennsylvania has nearly 30 pages. Thanks, --Jakob (talk) 13:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the category structure and in the Landforms article, bodies of water are just another landform. While the types of water bodies can be categorized as such at the state and national level, there is no reason to do so at the county level just because it can be done. To have an article categorized by its being a river or a lake in state xxx and being a landform in county yyy is completely sufficient for navigation. I am still working on getting all the landforms into county level categories instead of being in geography county level categories and I am doing this for all 50 states. You are adding an unnecessary and unneeded set of categories. Your example of a county with many water bodies is very rare across the entire set of US countries. Even if not very rare, the county water body categories are not necessary or helpful to WP. Hmains (talk) 01:48, 4 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]
  • It's certainly not that rare in Pennsylvania counties. And it's easier to navigate categories with ten articles instead of categories with hundreds of articles (state-level bodies of water categories) or tens of thousands (national-level bodies of water categories). Perhaps as a compromise though, I'll stop creating more county-level bodies of water categories without WikiProject approval if you'll stop removing article from the existing ones without WikiProject approval. Thoughts? --Jakob (talk) 02:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can stop but what WikiProject? As you must know, such projects are not authoritative over anything in WP and are often dominated/controlled by a small number (even 1) editor who have already established exactly what they want/not want in WP and will fight by any means to achieve that ownership. As to how to navigate: categories are not for doing finds against specific names of objects (search is for that) but for finding objects related to something else that you already know about. I believe if you look at national categories, for example, you will not find the thousands of articles you claim are there: the structure (most of which I established) is not set up that way. The county level landform categories are sufficient and will not overwhelm anyone looking around for related items within a county. Hmains (talk) 02:16, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you set this up as you go? I am still working my way though county landforms categories and still have a dozen or so states to do. When you create a county bodies of water category, can you put it into the parent categories (and sort order) as shown in Delaware? Can you create new Category:Bodies of water of xxstate by county categories as needed and also can you put it into the parent categories (and sort order) as shown in Delaware? Hmains (talk) 18:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I use AWB to move lots of things and I can certainly move these if you want me to. The manual effort (I have no idea how to make AWB do such things) is to create all the necessary categories and put one article in each one. This is what takes so long in all my endless category work. Hmains (talk) 00:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jakob: I created the parent category Category:Bodies of water of Pennsylvania by county and moved all the county bodies of water subcats in it. I also changed the parent of each of the county bodies of water from 'Geography of xx county' to 'Landforms of xx county'--all as discussed above. If you can create all the 'Bodies of water of xxx County, Pennsylvania', then I can AWB move ALL the Pennsylvania bodies of water to those new categories, emptying the 'Bodies of water in xxx County, Pennsylvania' as discussed above. Hmains (talk) 16:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, that was helpful. BTW are you aware that the page move function has been extended to categories? I'll get to that as soon as I finish repopulating the categories. --Jakob (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell Falls

Thanks for the new category - I've been there several times. Dougweller (talk) 08:00, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! You do have an exclusion list for articles where dates should not be unlinked, correct? If so, could you please place the Pervomaysky, Russia article on it? I see you have done two AWB edits in the past few months, unlinking May 1, but that link is there as a part of an explanation of the etymology, not a random remnant from the days when all dates were linked. Explanatory date links are permitted by WP:DATELINK; this one seems to be an oversight. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); August 7, 2014; 12:09 (UTC)

United States police

The United States Police are a gang. They all wear the same color based on their location or division, they control territory, and they traffic narcotics. They carry out intimidation tactics to make sure they're the only ones capable of operating in a certain area, and use excessive violence to uphold their 'turf'. They are, by all definition, a gang; a group of criminals. Their favorite method of intimidation is restraining the victim, then circling and kicking the restrained victim, they fire guns in the streets at innocents, and maintain that they're helping their neighborhoods when their mere presence escalates violence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.62.3.160 (talk) 18:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you or I my think about a subject has no relevance to what gets placed into Wikipedia. Wikipedia requires documentation and references from reliable sources for text to be placed into Wikipedia. Hmains (talk) 02:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For keep giving us feedback for AWB :)

Magioladitis (talk) 18:04, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

You've recently edited a number of pages in the Lakes in Waldo County, Maine category, adding them also to the Lakes in Maine category. I thought WP practice was to put pages in more specific categories and usually not also put them in more general categories that also include the more specific category. Has that practice changed? Jbening (talk) 16:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added the all included template. There are exceptions and I would particularly make an exception to have a category match the rest in all other US landforms by county, which generally do not break out county landforms to subcats unless there are a great number of articles in each--which is certainly not the case here. Hmains (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting--thank you. Yes, just having checked three other states at random, I see they all categorize landforms by county but lakes statewide. So should the lakes-by-county categories for Maine be undone, to make that state consistent with others? Jbening (talk) 20:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Once categories are created by someone, it is difficult for someone else to get rid of them. I just work around them. Hmains (talk) 21:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the articles on lakes in Maine were systematically removed from by-counties categories, and if no one objected, then the categories would only have a shadow existence, wouldn't they? I'm concerned that, as is, someone like me will think it was inappropriate to categorize pages with a more general category as well as an included more specific category, and will end up reversing your recent work. Jbening (talk) 23:40, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will not object, but some of my work yesterday has already been reverted by one editor who owns all things regarding Washington County, Maine and insists on having his county level landform categories for that county. Hmains (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've raised the question here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Lakes_of_Maine) and asked Nambia their opinion on the subject. If you know someone else with an interest in Maine and/or Lakes, I'd be interested in their input too. Jbening (talk) 03:33, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

bad bot edit

In the celestial pole article, your Hmainsbot1 recently changed "3rd" to "3nd". I have changed it back. --Lasunncty (talk) 18:34, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello HMains! Same thing happened on Lugal. Should I undo your revision? Philosp (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your timely contribution to the history of the McNeil Island prison complex, both Federal and State. Birdymckee (talk) 14:21, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We need help for science matter: "The Murder Game" 1965

Hello!

We are writing a film almanac/book an searching for "The Murder Game" from director Sidney Salkow in 1965. It was impossible to find the film until now. Do you own it or know how to get it?

Please write to me: 12481632@gmx.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.188.52.94 (talk) 01:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Def.B.Star

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
You may need it with all the rioting Gregkaye ✍♪ 09:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Z147

also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=race+riot&fulltext=Search  :)

Proper names at WP:RMTR

Please see Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests#Contested technical requests for some responses to your move proposals. One way for admins to close this would be to move back those articles where a specific comment has been made but leave the rest for a future discussion. See the notes added to the list by User:HughD, who identifies two articles that he thinks require capitals. EdJohnston (talk) 02:18, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ed, but actually I was trying to flag what looked to me like typos in two of the move request templates. Hugh (talk) 02:35, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Hugh corrected my entries. Hmains (talk) 03:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please exclude pages like List of days, list of years, list of decades, list of centuries and list of millennia from its remit? Thank you. Serendipodous 13:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet, as far as I'm aware, but I'm not familiar with its programming. Serendipodous 12:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Seas of Norway

Category:Seas of Norway, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 07:28, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Move-multi

Hello Hmains. This template is supposed to work, though setting it up with all the right keywords is laborious. It is supposed to create a central discussion on the talk page of the first request. A bot will put notices on the individual talk pages pointing to the central discussion. An example of its use is at Talk:Robyn#Requested moves. If you tried out move-multi and couldn't get it to work, perhaps I could assist. This template is not for use at WP:RMTR, it is only for a move through regular discussion. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:06, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It seems that this work has already been done. Hopefully, I will not see this work to do again, but it all depends on whether some editor wakes up some day and decides that articles with proper names (due their being specific events) all need to be lower cased because of his failure to read the MOS and just thinking it agrees with whatever he has already decided to do. Hmains (talk) 03:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • And thanks for all effort Hmains (talk) 03:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed the Osceola category edit, have question

Have you found a reliable source for categorizing Sack of Osceola as a massacre? If so, it might be best to place a quote in the article. It appears to be on the margins for the massacre definition. I could make a case either way. There are some modern authors or bloggers that romanticize Quantrill's guerrillas that seem to be calling it a massacre recently, but they tend to be reliably partisan types rather than mainstream. Are actual named historians of the opinion it was a massacre? Or was it widely condemned as a massacre by the press of the time? I've been looking but haven't found a reliable source for it yet. Castel in the Missouri Historical Review didn't name it that. Gerteis seems silent on the matter. I don't have Collins' book on Lane handy anymore...I don't recall him being kind toward the man.

I wouldn't be surprised if Sunderwirth's book did, but when I looked through it at a library in the region a few years ago it was kind of hysterical in tone and I couldn't find the info I was looking for easily...so I didn't buy a copy. IIRC he is an amateur local historian, so while the source mat'l should be superb, interpretation would be suspect unless backed by better established authors/historians.

Without the "drumhead court martial" (although I've not seen a description of their supposed offenses, nor any list of names) the killings would better fit the definition of a massacre, although the number is still on the low side. By comparison, the Palmyra Massacre had a similar number and fits because of contemporary description, plus the retaliatory nature without benefit of even the most dubious "trial." Another problem is that it appears that only a select few were executed, considering the size of Osceola and the destruction of the entire town. Red Harvest (talk) 10:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't seen that list. The inclusion there is dubious: it was added without reference by an IP editor originally, then a reference to Sunderwirth by another editor the next year in mass addition of refs. I notice that the link is to a page that doesn't call it a massacre in summarizing the book. I would really like to see a reliable authority confirm it as a "massacre" rather than the internet echo chamber. Red Harvest (talk) 18:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

your cpydits

re: [1]:

Thank you for fixing my lazy editing. However please be more careful and don't delete interwiki links. Let the bot do this. -M.Altenmann >t 07:17, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perry Race Riot?

Hi, I mostly like your work, but I notice a slew of article title moves you've made that upcase multiword titles for events. Could you please stop and discuss this, as I don't believe there's any basis for those changes. Thibodaux Massacre? Burntollet Bridge Incident? Tony (talk) 08:12, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, but this has been discussed in several places already. The basis of my changes is capitalization of proper names per the first sentences of WP:NCCAPS and its included reference proper noun. I understand WP:NCCAPS was changed several years ago to include this capitalization, but not everyone has caught up with this change. Hmains (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmains, some of your intended moves are opposed at WP:RM. I don't see that they're based on an understanding of how proper names work. Have you read the article? On what evidence do you base your many claims that certain phrases count as proper names? Tony (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • A proper name is the name of a particular/certain/specific name, place or thing. So it is in the English language and the article proper noun says so. And proper names/proper nouns get capitalized in English and the article. Hmains (talk) 04:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the move of Perry race riot, and agree with Tony that your assessment of what is a proper name is going against consensus and sources. Most of these titles are descriptive, even though they refer to particular events. One needs evidence in sources that a proper name has been accepted and used as such before capitalizing a title. Dicklyon (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, it looks like you were a very bad boy while I was away for a few weeks, declaring dozens of descriptive titles to be proper names, without consulting sources to see. I have undone a few, but it's more than I can handle. Dicklyon (talk) 06:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • A user was lowering casing many article names of long standing. His reason, when he gave one. was the MOS. When asked, he could not find anything in the MOS to support his actions; then, he just started looking for made-up reasons from here or there to justify his prior actions. He could not justify them so I went to the place to go for this work: RM. The posters at RM thought I was right in upper casing these names and reverted this user's edits. After that, I continued to do so. No one at all gave the type of reasoned explanation you have now provided. I maintain that there must be something very wrong in this MOS (all its pieces), RM, and WP editing in general if all this confusion here (and many other places) continues to occur and waste the time of all of us. But I don't think looking up popularity of this or that capitalization on various external sources is any way to decide anything. The results are not thereafter documented and so can be readily ignored in the future and there is no way for most other editors to inspect the popularity results in any real way. The net result will just continue to be users coming along saying editing whatever way they want, giving flimsy or no excuse for doing do, and rarely if ever with research. Hmains (talk) 03:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that MOS:CAPS could be more clear about what should be our strategy for deciding what to capitalize. But the basic strategy of avoiding unnecessary capitalization is sound, and your changes based on unsupported "proper name" claims was not. Some editors, including myself, do go around looking for non-MOS-compliant things to improve; let it happen. I'm not sure who you refer to in this case. Dicklyon (talk) 04:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was not you. Hmains (talk) 04:16, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories in Mississippi

Hey there. Being the master of categories, would you have a moment to look at the edits of User talk:Futurewiki. If they seem a bit odd, please also look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonrap2. I've been trying to get help regarding this editor for months, with no luck. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

architecture

had wandered into the project territory and noticed that the categories (project) didnt have project tags on talk page (typical of most projects) but some bright spark had put project tags on the main page presumably as an example of what the tag looks like - initially I removed, but then reverted myself...

I notice you dont seem to be interested in project tags from your cat edits today, but am curious about your reaction to finding the architecture pages with examples of the category on the main page - do you think it is a good or bad idea? I remain undecided, and would be interested in your opinion... not sure whether it is really a good idea myself... satusuro 03:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, I don't know much about project tags. They see to go on talk pages and I understand project people put them there to assess article goodness. Don't know about them on categories. That's all. Hmains (talk) 03:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep at it, so few people understand categories at the best of time... maybe the very few who actually try to keep up with your volume of category creation might find such an answer really really funny... To me it is like a mechanic who only does the radiator and doesnt really go anywhere near the oil lubrication in a car, but hey that is a fantasy - that one day there will be better explanations as to why both sides - the talk page and main page of categories need attention.... maybe one day someone will get the idea that new category creators will be obliged to add project cats... a dream at this stage, category talk pages dont need assessment - so its not hard.... satusuro 03:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

River naming

I've only just started looking at this and spotted the same thing: Portugal and E European countries are following a convention that is probably unjustified. Also there some countries where most of the rivers are called "Foo" and just a few are called "Foo River". Mostly this is to disambiguate the name but "Foo River" is a proper name not a disambiguator. See Category:Rivers of Finland which is a mess. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia genealogy project

Just wondering if you have any thoughts re: the idea of WMF hosting a genealogy project. If so, feel free to contribute to this discussion. And apologies if I have made this request before. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crimes?

Re this edit and this one (both of which I have reverted): Huh? What do either of these two buildings have to do with crimes? And even if they were the locations of serious crimes, since when do categorize buildings that way? Is something wrong with your AWB install? Because it seems that this pattern of similarly inexplicable edits has been repeated on a number of other articles tonight (and ECHO tells me you just reverted me). Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK then. See this edit summary (if you haven't already) for why I reverted. I'm not really sure that "crimes in X" as a category should be stretched to include "buildings where arsons occurred" Not in the least when we already have a category covering that. If you must, consider breaking down the "buildings damaged by arson" category geographically. Daniel Case (talk) 03:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You know, there is Category:Arson in Colorado, if you want to categorize it that way. I'd have no objection. Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know, I just created it. Now will you allow Arson in xxx categories and stop reverting without reading. Hmains (talk) 03:34, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Iranian stock exchanges to Category:Stock exchanges in Iran & Category:Stock exchanges of Pakistan to Category:Stock exchanges in Pakistan Hugo999 (talk) 11:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of state and local political scandals in the United States

Hi. I would be grateful to know your objection to this edit, which you have undone with this edit. My change fixed a CS1 error, and did not alter the content of the citation. Regards,  GILO   A&E⇑ 18:52, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • My mistake and apology. I was reverting another editor who is trying to change the purpose of this article and your edit got caught up in this. Since you best know what you edited, would you like to make your change again or should I? Hmains (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem – done.  GILO   A&E⇑ 19:04, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

quite a lot of eds for indonesian things. appreciate the effort.

however at the geography category In addition to specific subcategories, articles are placed into by-province and by-island categories--where province and island are identified in the article is a bit of a no-whatever. Every article in the Indonesian project is by virtue of the geography of the complex of islands and provinces - speicifically identified as such, which is why container was placed at the head of the category - the lack of anything that identifies island/province is simply the geographically challenged editor, not the over-all intent of the project. Where a challenged editor puts larger generic 'in indonesia' style category or descriptor, in most cases when found, it is narrowed down to island/province, and if it cannot be it is put up for deletion. The number of xx, indonesia stubs - still exists, but over time is being cleaned out. Have a good christmas anyways, and thanks for your efforts on indonesian things. satusuro 23:35, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I wasnt clear, (a) I was going to re-insert container on Geography catgeory main page.(but wanted to explain first) (b) I am strongly against any stub that is over-categorised (Pono River is classic case) (c) didnt want to ask you to change anything, if you want to do your editing the way you are doing, thats great, just expect me to go around tweaking after you. As to 'wrong', that is either a long coffee/beer on a warm afternoon somewhere, in this lifetime, but who knows? satusuro 23:59, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you are just going to say that Category:Geography of Indonesia should be a container category, then that is fine. I only removed the container marker because the category already had articles directly in it so container did not seem appropriate. I don't think I added anything there and do not plan to do so. Hmains (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I think a number of other similar categories may become container as well, once items are separated out into either province or island level sub categories satusuro 00:35, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know that the end result will be I will look later and of course there will be future articles to place. You do understand that I am placing each possible article into "both" an island category and a province category as they are different in reality (landforms vs government) in the category tree here. Hmains (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC) .[reply]
Sorry, I do have a thing about parent and child cat combined appearances - Landforms of Central Java, and Landforms of Java - on the one category, I may have missed something. I know you might have a good reason for it, but on first view it doesnt look right satusuro 00:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
my apology, it may well end up being a redundant point, but when looking at [2], however your explanation is quite clear, it is just the immediate view, sorry. satusuro 00:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, you provide no example - what changes? satusuro 01:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry; I know; I was getting it. See Kedu Plain that I just reverted. An item must directly or indirectly be categorized by province, by island and by Indonesia. If none of those have a specific landform, then also at the Category:Landforms level which in this case is Plains Hmains (talk) 02:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
my apologies - we had an edit conflict

I created the article. Your encouraging the added crap since I created it, is a misunderstanding. It is in effect a small bit of land between two volcanoes, where my wife did her fieldwork, I did mine nearby. Indonesian editors regularly add weasel flowery language with no WP:RS, and always over-categorise with parent and child cats mixed. Also the usage of 'indonesia-stub' is basically redundant since all stubs can be actually tightened into province level stubs. It is not a landform of indonesia, it is a small insignificant part of central java which most locals wouldnt even call it that. It is no longer a stub, and is part of central java - will try to adjust your adjust if that is ok with you satusuro 02:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, I know nothing of all that so good going with any and all content work. I just work on categories, based on article content, and then on category structure. That's all. Hmains (talk) 02:14, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And very good on you for that, my sincerest apology for mucking around with it (I need to brush up on the various province/island stub thingoes to get rid of 'indonesia stub' it irritates the hell out of me). If you would have had your email enabled, I would have given a more specific explanation of the problem of dealing with non native english speaking editors and the problems they have created for indonesian project article content - but hey! thank you so much for what you have done with the indonesian categories, my apologies that i should hound you so. satusuro 02:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

no hounding felt. Given the current article content, I have done about all that I can do anyway. I don't create categories when only a few items exist and did not plan to subcat the province categories as the island level or country level have the needed specific landform info. Hmains (talk) 02:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ok thanks for that, I do feel that plain/plateau and a few other landforms do deserve cats - even if they have solitary candidates at this stage - maybe the day of the 'popcat' posters has passed - but i do think they are vital parts of the larger picture satusuro 02:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Category:Islands of the Maluku Islands"

Hi, thanks for your work in this area. However, I wonder if we need the word 'islands' in this cat name twice? How about just "Maluku Islands" or "Islands of Malucu"? We could just call it "The Moluccas" ;-) or something. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hmains&oldid=639359887"