User talk:Hhfjbaker
The Bugle: Issue 228, April 2025
[edit]
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 229, May 2025
[edit]
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Pending changes
[edit]
Hi Hhfjbaker, I don't know if any of the pages you currently watch are under pending pages protection, but if you haven't already encountered it you probably will in the future. So I have set your account as a "pending changes reviewer", allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. Any such edits to pages on your watchlist will be highlighted, there is also a list of articles awaiting review at located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
If you'd also like WP:Rollback, read the guidelines and tell me when you would and wouldn't use it.
ϢereSpielChequers 06:35, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate it. I have just noticed recently (since the start of the year) a slight uptick in vandalism where a word here or there is changed with the justification of "removing partisan" text without any source or justification. I hope I have been doing it correctly. Boo Boo (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I would tread very carefully with edits that might be the removal or rephrasing of partisan text. Happy to look at some examples if you can show diffs, but we do have a policy of neutral point of view. However one person's idea of partisan text can be another's idea of neutrality. It isn't just the Israel/Palestine topic where different world views clash. ϢereSpielChequers 07:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- These are just two examples:
- 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bernard_Kerik&diff=prev&oldid=1293609122
- 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Orleans_in_the_American_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=1274217675
- In the first instance, the anonymous editor wrote, "Removed partisan bullshit," yet failed to provide sourcing for factual basis for edits. In the second, the anon. ed. wrote, "Edited the racist anti white racist narrative of the previous liberal leaning writer of the article," while the actual souirce texts cited (written by the veterans) noted the difference of the race. If they could have provided reliable sources to support their edits, or shown where cited sources are wrong, I'd be singing a different song.
- Cheers! Boo Boo (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- OK I've set your account as a wp:rollbacker, if you find a page is a repeated target for vandalism you could consider taking it to WP:RPP. ϢereSpielChequers 18:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, most of the time any back and forth stops when I request citations or point tyo sources. Will do if it gets too bad. Take it easy! Boo Boo (talk) 20:22, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- OK I've set your account as a wp:rollbacker, if you find a page is a repeated target for vandalism you could consider taking it to WP:RPP. ϢereSpielChequers 18:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I would tread very carefully with edits that might be the removal or rephrasing of partisan text. Happy to look at some examples if you can show diffs, but we do have a policy of neutral point of view. However one person's idea of partisan text can be another's idea of neutrality. It isn't just the Israel/Palestine topic where different world views clash. ϢereSpielChequers 07:33, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 230, June 2025
[edit]
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:40, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
I was wondering if you have any of the Sfn error widgets installed? At the moment this article has 31 Harv warnings for errant cites so it is in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. I'll take a stab at trying to fix some of the issues but wanted to make you aware of the warnings since you have been working on improving the article. The problem usually is that the sfn cites exist but somehow aren't tethered to the complete references. - Shearonink (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I am in the middle of adddressing them. Boo Boo (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, wait you mean the sources that do not have any citations yet? Boo Boo (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Take a look. The Sfn errors are now down to 19, from over 30 when I started a little while ago. I have a widget installed that can "see" if there isn't a target for the Sfn cite. Just a sec, let me find the installation page, etc. - Shearonink (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Here you go: User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors - great explanation & how to install on your common.js page. - Shearonink (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- I guess I do not have the widget. Would you please point me to it so that I can prevent this? Thanks, much! Looks good by the way. Boo Boo (talk) 21:44, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Boo Boo (talk) 21:46, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Am taking a break. Only 16 Harv warnings left. All the references are intact. All I did to the unused ones was put "ref=none" at the end, sometimes instead of the sfnref that was sitting there. The references that are in the article are still available to be used if necessary. - Shearonink (talk) 22:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Boo Boo (talk) 21:46, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Take a look. The Sfn errors are now down to 19, from over 30 when I started a little while ago. I have a widget installed that can "see" if there isn't a target for the Sfn cite. Just a sec, let me find the installation page, etc. - Shearonink (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, wait you mean the sources that do not have any citations yet? Boo Boo (talk) 21:27, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 231, July 2025
[edit]
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)