Hello, Ciphers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Meno25 (talk) 13:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):
User agrees not to run the script without checking edits. I would prefer he talk to the bot people to verify this is something that should be done on en:Wikipedia, but this seems adequate.
More than 10 edits per minute generally indicates a bot.
The edits where you change a redirect or replace an article by a redirect are almost certainly errors.
The rest of the edits may be redirects from other languages, which should not, in general, be automatically created, at least according to this Wikipedia's guidelines.
I checked the errors. you are right! i can not promise of stop using the script (because it was created in order to be used) but i can promise to use with much care, and on lower frequencies not to be mistaken as a bot.--Ciphers (talk) 09:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to delete the negative numbers, as well. We had someone do that before, and consensus is that -10 (or −10, to be more precise) should redirect to 10 (number), if at all; but it should only be created if there's a specific reason. — Arthur Rubin(talk)09:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As i mentioned in my previous reply, i would not use it on high frequency as i did before (it acts like a bot just because i am fast in saving pages ;) ). I over trusted the tool, but now i am checking the terrible edits ( i did not know it writes over existing pages). it should really be used with care. sorry for the troubles and thanks for your attentions and the revert as well. --Ciphers (talk) 09:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but one or more redirects you created, such as with pdfTeX, have been considered disruptive and/or malicious, and have been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Oneiros (talk) 11:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you seem to be quite a language genius! I have started to learn Arabic, so I was wondering if you could recommend any method to learn it quickly and efficiently?
Thanks in advance,
Thanks for the message. I am not a genius, in fact it is just i have a plenty of time to practice languages :) . Arabic is just the same, you may learn reading and writing in a short time, however speaking it needs a lot of practice, and plenty of brave to practice. best luck. --Ciphers (talk) 05:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just curious as to why you deleted my entry on Mughal Gardens. Was it somehow in error? I felt that the subject deserved more attention so I added some of my 8 months of graduate research on the subject.
Leverett.lisa (talk) 00:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Yes you are true, the reason that led you edit to trigger the abuse filter was using (<ref>Insert footnote text here</ref>) without actually putting a reference. Good that you reverted my revert and i removed the test phrase anyway. best --Ciphers (talk) 06:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Ciphers/Archive 1! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
AFT5 newsletter
Hey again all :). So, some big news, some small news, some good news, some bad news!
On the "big news" front; we've now deployed AFT5 on to 10 percent of articles, This is pretty awesome :). On the "bad news", however, it looks like we're having to stop at 10 percent until around September - there are scaling issues that make it dangerous to deploy wider. Happily, our awesome features engineering team is looking into them as we speak, and I'm optimistic that the issues will be resolved.
For both "small" and "good" news; we've got another office hours session. This one is tomorrow, at 22:00 UTC in #wikimedia-officeconnect - I appreciate it's a bit late for Europeans, but I wanted to juggle it so US east coasters could attend if they wanted :). Hope to see you all there!
Page Curation update
Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome.
Hey all :). A couple of quick updates (one small, one large)
First, we're continuing to work on some ways to increase the quality of feedback and make it easier to eliminate and deal with non-useful feedback: hopefully I'll have more news for you on this soon :).
Second, we're looking at ways to increase the actual number of users patrolling and take off some of the workload from you lot. Part of this is increasing the prominence of the feedback page, which we're going to try to do with a link at the top of each article to the relevant page. This should be deployed on Tuesday (touch wood!) and we'll be closely monitoring what happens. Let me know if you have any questions or issues :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Development
Deployed new code on wikidata.org with a lot of bug fixes and a new Special:EntitiesWithoutLabel (all changes here)
http://test2.wikipedia.org now uses Wikidata (click “edit links” at the bottom of the page), and we are working to enable the synchronization of changes to test2 and display links from the repository
Added wbsetqualifier API module
Added wbremovequalifiers API module
New JavaScript wb.Api now used for labels, descriptions, aliases and sitelinks
Improved Selenium tests and PHPUnit tests
Selenium tests now independent from ULS
Selenium tests for statements UI
Existing statements can be edited now
Filtering anons and Wikidata in RecentChanges on client now works correctly
Added extra checks on client RecentChange save point to avoid duplicate entries
Started an experimental branch with API methods for claims
Link to Commons Media displayed for Snak values of related data type
Improved styling of statements in JavaScript mode
Improvements in templating engine
Started working on adding Statements to existing section of Statements
http://test2.wikipedia.org now uses http://wikidata.org for getting language links and wikidata.org edits affecting the existing articles on test2 show up in RecentChanges (if they are not hidden)
Statements (think of “population: 2.000.000” and similar things) are taking shape in the interface. They are still pretty buggy though at this point.
It is now possible to link to images on Wikimedia Commons in a statement (think of “image: sundown_at_the_beach.png” for example)
No longer possible to create new items and set labels when database is set to read-only
Added more tests to the GeoCoordinate parser
Make use of EditEntity in removeclaims API
Removed many singletons to reduce global state
Made SpecialSetLabel work with non-item entities
Improved settings system
Improved options of ValueFormatters
Improved options of ValueParsers
Moved label+description uniqueness check out of transaction to avoid deadlocks and changed it to only be enforced for edits changing any violating values
Fixed serialization of SiteArray
~=[,,_,,]:3
Had to fix reporting of aliases in wbsearchentities again
Implemented integration of baserevids for statements UI API calls for editconflict detection for statements/claims/snaks
Universal Language Selector fallback fix for Selenium tests
Report URL to entity in wbsearchentites API module
Moved the demo system to a larger server
Fixed several bugs in Statements user interface, most notably, adding Statements to existing sections and layout fixes
Added wikibase API module on the client to provide information about the associated repo (e.g. url, script path, article path)
A bunch of messages for autocomments were fixed (they are automatically added as an edit summary for edits on items and co in Wikidata - for example: “Changed [en] description: Finnish rock band”)
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week. It's rather short this time because pretty much everyone enjoys some well-deserved vacation.
Development
Some of us unwrapped gifts (-:
Started working on supporting different kinds of Snaks in the user interface
Fixing support for PostgreSQL in core, which was broken with introduction of the sites stuff
Code reviewing of changes in MediaWiki core
Adding watchlist filter in client for Wikidata changes
We have an intern for a week, Marius aka User:Hoo man. He’ll be working on the wizard for linking a new Wikipedia article to an existing item or creating a new item for it if none exists yet. (the first two stories here)
Refactored sites code to improve design
Changed item datatype to use entityid as datavalue rather than string
Added lots of new Selenium tests
Changed AbuseFilter so Wikibase can hook into it
Implemented new change dispatcher script
~=[,,_,,]:3
Working on combining successive changes to avoid watchlist clutter
Claims error handling (i.e. they now show error messages when needed)
Implemented initial version of Solr-based search for Wikidata in extension WikibaseSolr
Started investigating use of Lua/Scribunto for the Wikibase client
If you're not already aware, a Request for Comment on the future of the Article Feedback Tool on the English-language Wikipedia is open; any and all comments, regardless of opinion and perspective, are welcome.
Our final round of hand-coding is complete, and the results can be found here; thanks to everyone who took part!
We've made test deployments to the German and French-language projects; if you are aware of any other projects that might like to test out or use the tool, please let me know :).
Developers continue to work on the upgraded version of the feedback page that was discussed during our last office hours session, with a prototype ready for you to play around with in a few weeks.
Deployment of first parts of phase 2 on wikidata.org are planned for February 4 and deployment on English Wikipedia for February 11. See this blog post for details and more dates.
Open Tasks for You
Test statements on the [demo system before the roll-out to wikidata.org on February 4
Support for enhanced recent changes format in client
There are automatic comments for statement edits as well in the history now
Special page for unconnected pages, that is pages on the client that are not connected to items on the repository
Added permission checks for statements, so a user that can not edit will not be able to edit or that only a group can be allowed to do some changes like creating statements
d:User:PinkAmpersand is looking for someone to write a script that once someone has been made an autopatroller, retroactively patrols all of their prior edits
Note: changed day of next German office hour to March 8
Other Noteworthy Stuff
We have a time scheduled when Wikidata will be read-only for a database migration. The window for that is Feb 20 19:00 to Feb 21 2:00 UTC.
New features and bugfixes on Wikidata are planned to be deployed on Monday (Feb 18). This should among other things include:
Showing useful diffs for edits of claims (they’re currently empty)
Automatic comments for editing of claims (there are currently none)
Ability to add items to claims by their ID
Better handling of deleted properties
More results in the entity selector (that’s the thing that lets you select properties, items and so on) so you can add everything and not just the first few matches that are shown
We’re still working on the issue that sometimes editing of certain parts of items or properties isn’t possible. If you’re running into it try to reload the page and/or change the URL to the www. version or the non-www. version respectively.
Deployment on all other Wikipedias is currently planned for March 6 (a note to the Village Pumps of all affected projects will follow soon)
New Article Feedback version available for testing
Hey all.
As promised, we've built a set of improvements to the Article Feedback Tool, which can be tested through the links here. Please do take the opportunity to play around with it, let me know of any bugs, and see what you think :).
A final reminder that the Request for Comment on whether AFT5 should be turned on on Wikipedia (and how) is soon to close; for those of you who have not submitted an opinion or !voted, it can be found here.
Lots of discussions about certain properties and how they should be used. Current state is at d:Wikidata:List of properties and new ones are being discussed at [d:Wikidata:Property proposal]]
Rollout of phase 1 (language links) on all remaining Wikipedias is still planned for March 6
Next update on wikidata.org is also planned for March 6. This will have bugfixes and if all goes well string as a new available data type.
Proposal was made to the Hungarian, Hebrew and Italian Wikipedias to be the first batch to use phase 2 of Wikidata (infoboxes). Scheduled timeframe for this is end of March
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Development
More work on widget to add language links on the Wikipedias directly without having to go to Wikidata
Bug fixes for Wikipedias, including:
don't show edit link when noexternallanglinks magic word suppresses Wikidata links (bugzilla:45037)
use Q## links instead of linking to Special:ItemByTitle for “edit links” link (bugzilla:44536)
preference for showing Wikidata edits by default in watchlist (bugzilla:44973)
Catching up on writing tests for untested functionality
More work on the Lua support for accessing data from the repository (wikidata.org) on the Wikipedias
Updated Wikidata’s Vagrant development machine
Created initial QueryStore interface
Created initial setup code for the SQL QueryStore
Discussed and created initial schema for the SQL QueryStore
Simplified code for client settings, including which namespaces can have Wikidata links. The default is now all namespaces, without needing to explicitly specify them in the settings
Improved code for sorting interwiki links in the clients, with step towards allowing the communities to specify custom sort orders per Wikipedia
Improved handling of deleted properties
Further work on replacement for current search box
More work on improving error reporting and edit summaries in the API
Tim and Aaron killed the mystery bug that caused corrupt login tokens (bugzilla:41586)
Asked the Italian, Hebrew and Hungarian Wikipedias if they want to be the first to use phase 2 (will ask a few more to join the first batch later today)
Is a specific bug report really important to you? If you have an account on bugs.wikimedia.org you can easily add yourself to the CC list of the bug and then receive updates about its status via email
You recently reverted my deletion of the Biohydrology section of the article on Dysart Woods. I started to revise this section, but since the whole section is essentially a very poorly plagiarized version of the Abstract of my MS thesis I felt uncomfortable with the amount self citation involved and decided the specific details presented are not useful without more background information. I don't have time to write this material or figure out how to format it for wikipedia. If someone thinks this specific information is notable they should take the time to get it right.
Specifically:
sentence 1 is factually incorrect
sentence 2 is plagiarized, with words rearranged, but is unclear because the previous sentence claims there has been no mining. Does not mining cause changes in hydrology?
sentence 3 is plagiarized and out of context
sentence 4 is vague and adds nothing meaningful
sentence 6 is incoherent, and incorrectly defines volumetric water content
sentence 7 is plagiarized verbatim
sentence 8 is incoherent
Wikidata weekly summary #258
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Worked more on support for lexicographical data (specifically support for lexicographic category and statements on forms)
Dealt with issues after the deployment of automatic interwiki links for Wiktionary
Worked on constraint violation user script based on your feedback (improving messages to make it more understandable, layout, etc)
Add support for the following new language codes for monolingual text properties: brx, chn, cop, gez, quc, kjh, nr (will become available in a few days)
Past: WikiCite, May 23rd-25th in Vienna. Documentation will be available soon, in the meantime you can check on Twitter and the video streams to see what happened
MySociety (Q10851773) are publishing a "five part series examining how to use Wikidata to answer the question: 'What is the gender breakdown of heads of government across the world?'".
Data donation: following WikiCite, our friends at DBLP (Q1224715) have begun to donate data, with >4,800 values in the first batch, including >1,300 DBLP ID (P2456) plus assorted aliases, and values for VIAF ID (P214), GND ID (P227), ORCID iD (P496), ACM Digital Library author ID (P864), zbMATH author ID (P1556), & Google Scholar ID (P1960).
MySociety (Q10851773) have now completed publishing a "five part series examining how to use Wikidata to answer the question: 'What is the gender breakdown of heads of government across the world?'". Here is the full set:
Due the necessary time for people to get visas (about 3 months), we changed the deadline for the scholarship applications. You can apply for a scholarship before July 16th. We will then make sure that the applicants receive a response on July 25th.
WikidataCon: We reached 100 registrations, the event is complete for now. More tickets will be released in September. You can still register on the waitlist.
Newest gadgets: Units converter converts from 20 currencies to a selected currency. Converts metric units (mass, dimensions, area, temperature, speed) to/from United States units. The currency amounts are inflation adjusted if data is available.
Development
Worked more on support for lexicographical data and Wiktionary. The focus was on creating a necessary new datatype to link to Lexemes as well as making Glosses and statements on Glosses editable.
Getting ready to migrate the constraints definitions from templates on the property talk page to statements on the property.
Citation management tool Zotero can now read data from Wikidata, and can write data from other sources to Wikidata via QuickStatements. See Wikidata:Zotero for details.
The scholarship process is now closed. Recipients will be informed around July 25th.
You can still suggest ideas for the program, or submit a project until July 31st. The program of the conference is made by the attendees, only what you bring will be in there :)
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Boston, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Please refrain from marking all your current edits as minor, when many of them appear to be extensive and complex. Thank you.Hertz1888 (talk) 01:22, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Kolkata, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 22:09, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ciphers, did you have particular reasons for removing maintenance templates such as {{Use dmy dates}}, {{Use British English}}, and {{Pp-pc1}} from pages? I've restored several of them since they generally shouldn't be removed without good reason, and the reasons weren't clear to me from the edits. If you object to their presence in those articles, please remove them again. A rationale in the edit summary would also be helpful to other editors. Cheers.—Laoris (talk) 21:17, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the above, I have concerns about some of the changes you've made on many pages you have edited:
The first time the article title is used in the lead sentence, it doesn't need to be capitalized if it's not a proper noun. WP:LEADSENTENCE gives some examples of this.
Metadata templates such as {{taxonbar}} and {{Authority control}} should appear after the last section and navboxes, and before the categories, as indicated in their template documentation and as outlined at MOS:ORDER.
The {{DEFAULTSORT}} template should appear directly before the list of categories, not after, per its template documentation and as outlined at MOS:ORDER.
Categories whose name matches the article title are known as eponymous categories and when used in their eponymous article, should be sorted with a space so that the article appears at the beginning of the category. For instance, at the Verona article, the Verona category should be used as [[Category:Verona| ]].
The Manual of Style indicates the accepted placement for many of these templates, and each template typically has documentation indicating its correct use. Consistent use and placement of these templates help other readers and editors find them more easily.—Laoris (talk) 22:32, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ciphers, I just wanted to again encourage you to use the Wikipedia style guidelines as you edit, especially those mentioned above. While I am pleased to see that you are taking time to contribute to Wikipedia, and although it is not required to know and follow every guideline, since you are making significant contributions I think it would be even more beneficial to follow the guidelines above to help promote consistency and intuitiveness. Thanks for your time! —Laoris (talk) 17:01, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ma Commune Wikipédia is a website developed by Wikimedia France to give information about the state of the Wikipedia articles for every French municipality and encourage people to edit the Wikimedia projects. It uses Wikidata to identify the communes.
The wbEntity JavaScript variable will not miss elements any more but contain empty arrays instead (gerrit:365604). Please check if this affects your scripts, and have a look at the wikibase.entityPage.entityLoaded hook as a possible replacement.
Thanks for your change to Gender dysphoria. It was mostly pretty good and I liked the direction you were going, but I reverted it because of a couple of miscues here and there (e.g., not "a transgender", and something else). But since this is the lead of a controversial article, you have to tread very carefully. Either go to the Talk page and discuss, or else just try your same change again, but instead of all at once in one edit, break it up into five or more very small edits, each one doing just one, very specific thing: change or add one infobox param; change or add another infobox param; add the part about "as a result of a mismatch", and so on; just going a few words at a time, or a single thought at a time, and for each one add a complete explanation in the edit summary. If you have to write two sentences of Edit summary about why the six words "as a result of the mismatch" is better, than do it (I agree with you, it is better, but you're going to have to show you've put some thought into this, and why it's better.) If you break up your edit this way, then if someone comes along and has a quarrel with a couple of words or a param here or there, they can just revert or change that one, instead of the whole thing. In general, I like your changes, and I hope you will try again. Mathglot (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you for your 'thanks' for my recent edits to some of your recent work. I hope you won't mind if I mention that I had my attention drawn to a few of those edits vie Recent Change review, and, in the main, I can see you've made some really useful contributions to a wide range of articles. Thank you, though it might help if you gave some more edit summaries when you're done. May I urge you also to show a little more restraint at times when adding wikilinks to some articles, please? I realise you're trying to add clarity, and that really is most welcome, and in most cases youi've done just that. I'm sure you'd agree that it's also a good idea not to link to the very obvious words if, in so doing, it fills the article up with too many blue links. You might find WP:MOSLINK of relevance here, especially the section on overlinking. By way of example, part of your recent edits to Gravity might be said to fall into this category though, to be fair, they only added to an already over-linked page. So, none of this is cause for reverting the edits you made, and I only draw your attention to it in order to help you contribute even more effectively in your future editing. If you're interested, there's a nice bit of script one can add to one's side toolbar which highlights duplicate links within an article. You can find it at User:Ucucha/duplinks. Please accept this feedback in the positive spirit in which it is intended. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're still overlinking. And you're changing correct English to incorrect. If a word or phrase is unfamiliar or new to you, don't assume it's incorrect or that it should be linked. Magic9Ball (talk) 18:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikidata weekly summary #271
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Wikidata Constraint Violations tool visualizes changes in constraint violations for last few weeks. Some of constraints produce millions of violations (marked as red).
Doing last polishing on the Lexeme entity type and cleaning up the demo data for the demo at Wikimania
Improving the dispatching of changes to Wikipedia and co to cope with the increased demand that lead to delays in Wikidata changes showing up in Wikipedia watchlist and recent changes
Among other problems, your recent edits dont' follow WP policies about people's names. We don't refer to them by their first names, unless it's necessary to distinguish them in that sentence from other people with the same last name. Neil Armstrong is "Armstrong", not "Neil". Harry Elmore Hurd is "Hurd", not "Harry". Magic9Ball (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We don't? :) You know .. I've spend a long time on those edits, so I'd appreciate if you could fix them for me instead of reverting them. Thank you. --Ciphers (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't. It's WP-EN policy.
It's unfortunate that you've spent (not "spend") time making those changes to Apollo 11, but the effect of them was to reduce the quality of the article. Using first names instead of last names was inappropriate. MDY format on an article about the US space program is correct. The "nbsp" character between numerals and units prevents them from being broken up, which can confuse the reader. Your phrase "the lunar orbit" would refer to the orbit of the Moon around Earth; simply "lunar orbit" refers to any orbit around the Moon. The word "broadcasted" might seem logical, but it's incorrect; it should be "broadcast". Why? Because that's how English says it. These are subtle distinctions, and they may not make sense to someone who didn't grow up speaking the language, but they make a difference in the readability of the article. Your user page states that you have "near-native" fluency in English, but I think you're over-estimating yourself a little there. Regardless, someone with "near-native" fluency should not try to correct editors who speak and write the language natively. Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You read and write English well enough to make worthwhile contributions to the English WP, and I encourage you to keep doing it. But you are not fluent, and you should not be trying to change the wording of people who are. For example, "in the meanwhile" is a phrase that doesn't work in English: it's either "in the mean time" or "meanwhile". "Consensual" is the adjective form of "consent", not of "consensus"; they are different words with different meanings. A "licence" is awarded to a "licensee". These are mistakes that someone who speaks English natively wouldn't make... but you are. And worse: these are things that were correct before you changed them. You are wasting your time – and others' time – by introducing these changes. Stick to fixing the things you know better than other editors of the English WP. English grammar is not one of them. Thank you. Magic9Ball (talk) 15:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Ciphers. Please stop vandalism on Wolf Warriors 2
Hello admin,
Please stop this random IP from vandalizing the page.
Hi there, I have just seen your recent addition of an article about dinner tables. It seems a similar article for Dining table previously existed and was merged into Table (furniture). I believe the same may analogously be valid for this new article. Similarly, Kitchen table seems to redirect to Kitchen, so it may be an idea to redirect to Dining room if the main focus is the cultural significance of dinner rituals as opposed to the funiture. Regards pseudonymJake Brockmantalk12:40, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Jake. You're actually right. The original purpose was to focus on the metaphorical aspect of the dinner table (i.e. buffet), rather than the physical table itself, so perhaps we should move the page to "Dinning Table" instead? any other suggesstions? Best, --Ciphers (talk) 02:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the cultural aspect is covered in the article Dinner, though that one could use some work to highlight different regional aspects and go a bit deeper. This is a bit western-hemisphere-heavy right now. I really struggle with an article about "dinner table" or "dining table" as it will inevitably overlap with Dining room, Dinner and Table (furniture) - without adding anything unique that cannot also be logically found in any of the others. pseudonymJake Brockmantalk07:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jake. I appreciate the detailed feedback, and I understand your honest angle of the subject. With that being said, it is indeed hard to constantly generate new contents for creating new articles given the high complexity of our modern world which occasionally results in combining multiple -or otherwise distinct- things into a fewer number of abstract concepts or things, the fact that sometimes overshadow some of the details and might result in clouding our judgment to what or what not should be included in the final copy of the article. Please feel free to move, merge or otherwise split the Dinner table's content into however you see fit, or otherwise like. Please feel free to reach out in case you have any further questions. Thank you. --Ciphers (talk) 22:07, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikidata weekly summary #273
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Working on making constraints work on qualifiers and references (phabricator:T168532)
Working on making it easier to see when input in property or value fields is not recognized/wrong (phabricator:T170531)
Added new language codes (eya, fuf, ood, pjt, yap, zun) for use in monolingual text values
Fixed an issue with badges not being shown next to interwiki links on Wikipedia and co (phabricator:T172592)
Worked on showing labels when linking to a redirect (phabricator:T96553)
Worked on making change dispatching to Wikipedia and co work better so changes made on Wikidata show up there in a reasonable time. There were issues because of significantly increased edit activity on Wikidata.
Two other editors have noticed (as have I) and discussed above, that your level of English fluency is not as high as you think. The userbox you set, en-4, "near-native", is obviously incorrect and I have taken the liberty of reducing it to a level I feel is appropriate. Please take a look at WP:Babel/Levels, which defines the levels of language proficiency intended in the userboxes. The purpose of these is to enhance collaboration among Wikipedia editors by informing them of your capabilities. I do not speak Japanese and thus have no idea what your fluency in it is, but I would also be surprised if it is "near native", and I would ask you to consider if ja-3 would be more appropriate. JustinTime55 (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Justin, I understand what you're trying to say, but please do not alter my userpage without asking for my consent first. I guess you wouldn't like anyone doing the same to yours, now do you? --Ciphers (talk) 17:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether or not I would like it, the fact is, our user pages do not belong to us. Please read WP:UP#OWN: ...pages in user space belong to the wider community. They are not a personal homepage, and do not belong to the user. They are part of Wikipedia, and exist to make collaboration among editors easier. Bots and other users may edit pages in your user space or leave messages for you, though by convention others will not usually edit your user page itself, other than (rarely) to address significant concerns or place project-related tags. I felt I was within rights to edit your page to address a significant concern: your userbox misleads the Wikipedia community by overstating your English fluency as near-native. These userboxes are used to generate lists used to direct editors to people with a given skill level. I will not edit war, but I ask you to consider changing it yourself. JustinTime55 (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ciphers, maybe you can use this as a learning experience: How do you think another editor feels when you "correct" their perfectly good English with your mistakes? Your self-evaluation is incorrect; please change it, and more importantly, leave the English (and Japanese?) corrections to people who are truly fluent. Magic9Ball (talk) 21:26, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Justin, Ball; who said anything that I should care about what either of you has to think or say? More importantly, how can I tell that either of you is actually a native speaker, not to mention having any ability to assess other's language skills? I am a scientific researcher, and I'm here to enrich Wikipedia with my skills and knowledge, not to nitpick other people's grammar or syntax. Do either of you know anything about Quantum physics or high-dimensional geometry?
The bottom line is, if you see something I've edited that you think is wrong you've got three options, fix it, revert it, or leave it. I prefer the third. Otherwise, I'm more than happy to file a complaint against any user comes to my user page or talk page to harass, or intimidate me. You are free to reference, cite or otherwise recite all the policies you like, but I think I made my point clear here. --Ciphers (talk) 23:37, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ciphers, speaking as another native English speaker, and one with unusually good proofreading skills, I must say that I concur with the other editors. After reverting your recent edit to Cryptography, which consisted mostly of incorrect English changes (along with a serious language-neutral error), I took a look at your list of recent edits. Examining the diffs of two of your edits at random, on Acne and 1912 Detroit Tigers season, I found that in both cases you had changed correct English to severely incorrect English, and I have now reverted these changes.
Unfortunately I don't have time to go through the rest of your voluminous edits, but from what I've seen so far, and bolstered by the other editors' comments, I expect a large percentage of them involve changing correct English to incorrect English. You claim you're here to enrich Wikipedia with your scientific research skills and knowledge, not to attempt to fix other people's grammar or syntax, yet all of your edits I've looked at so far consist mostly or entirely of the latter. Some of your English errors have been so bizarre that I must concur that you are objectively not "near-fluent" in English, especially when it comes to copyediting.
Personally, I'm not overly concerned about what you claim your language skills are on your user page, but I am concerned about you spending lots of time making articles worse with your faulty English proofreading skills, and in turn wasting the time of other editors that need to clean up your mess. I would urge you to try to stick to factual changes, rather than laboring under the incorrect assumption that you have the ability to copyedit English like a native speaker. I would also note that your attitude in your last comment is inappropriate. Wikipedia only works when people cooperate, so rejecting the observations of native English speakers, accusing them of misrepresenting themselves, and saying you don't care about what they have to say or what Wikipedia's policies are is not a good way forward.
You have a userbox on your page saying "This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know." I would suggest you try to actually adopt said attitude rather than forcing things to escalate needlessly. --Dan Harkless (talk) 09:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Dan. I guess your argument makes more sense to me than the above two. I'll try to be more cautious in my edits moving forward. Thanks again for the note. --Ciphers (talk) 03:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]