Re this undo's edit summary, you are not mistaken that the name of the Church as shown here is a wikilink to an article that uses the capital "T". But where you say Based on my understanding of wikilinks, the first letter of any article is always capitalized, that's not the case. E.g. if you write about a pineapple in the middle of sentence, you don't capitalize it, even though the article title is Pineapple. The particular case of initial "The" in names of institutions is covered at MOS:THEINST, and recently re-affirmed for the LDS at an RFC at WT:MOSCAPS. Cheers. Dicklyon (talk) 06:13, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP BYU Invite
BRIGHAM NEEDS YOU!
Hello, Brother Brigham here.
I couldn't help but notice that you've made some edits to articles about Brigham Young University and thought you might want to become a member of the BYU WikiProject. We're reviving the project and would love your help! To join simply add your name to the participant list and start working on something from the To-do list. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask another project member.
Jmjosh90, thanks for the invite. As you might have seen, I accepted it. I've worked with Rachel Helps (BYU) on articles relating to the Church before, and it will be good to work with both of you on this project. Would it be problematic if I extended an invitation to a few other editors I know here who might similarly be assets to the new project? I can give you or Rachel the list of names I have in mind, but I figured there's no harm in asking. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed in Richmond Virginia and other recent temple templates, you place a reference in the status field. The field is used by other templates such as Template:LDSmap and cannot support referencing. Most LDS Temple/ fields can support referencing, but the status field cannot. Thanks! - Dmm1169 (talk) 12:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Going along with topic of #Temple status field, the Yigo Guam Temple was given a status that was not recognized. One must match a phrase specifically listed in Template:LDSmap, otherwise it will be given the default icon instead. Other statuses can be added to the template if needed, but I believe "Closed for repairs" would still fall under "Closed for renovations". I put the "Closed for repairs (due to flooding)" in the notes section. Notes do appear on the extended templates (infobox for each temple page, LDS Temple list2-used for state/country pages). Dmm1169 (talk) 10:03, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dmm1169, I apologize for adding a status that was unsupported by the template syntax. Interestingly, Yigo Guam is not the only temple that will have a unique situation that is not currently covered by the template. The Yigo Guam Temple is closed for repairs, but my understanding is that the Church doesn't count it as a temple undergoing renovations. The same is true for the upcoming closure for the Toronto Ontario Temple. In both of these cases, the Church is using the skills of local members to perform the necessary labor, which eliminates the need to have a rededication for both temples. Is there any way we could add to the allowed fields for such anomaly situations? We'd probably have to add a new field anyways for the Anchorage Alaska Temple since the new edifice will be built while the current temple remains open. Just my thoughts. Thanks again. Jgstokes (talk) 01:47, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There should be such a parameter. They have been coaches all along. It's not my fault an incorrect parameter and term has been used this whole time, so the onus is not on me to fix it. If you can produce one source that refers to them as judges, that parameter can stay as is. But since all cited sources about the show refers to them as coaches, that needs to be corrected. And that's not my responsibility. Wikipedia always goes by what the sources say. And all sources call them coaches, not judges. I trust you'll take the appropriate action. Thanks for reaching out. Jgstokes (talk) 22:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Template:LDS Temple/Tegucigalpa Honduras Temple, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.
The Show preview button is right next to the Publish changes button and below the edit summary field.
How exactly am I supposed to know that an image has been deleted? I'm not a mind-reader, and that's never been how Wikipedia has worked in the 15 or 16 years since I started editing here. The onus for explaining information removal has always been on the person removing said information. If your original edit summary had bothered to explain the image was deleted, I would never have reverted the image removal. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The onus is not on me to check categories. Again, that's not the way Wikipedia works. And when I see multiple edits from an editor I'm not familiar with, especially when they've not shown up on my watchlist before, the alarm bells go off. Those pages you edited have been vandalized repeatedly by people who don't regularly contribute to them, so almost every other time there's been an unexplained edit on the page, my first thought isn't to check the credentials of the editors in question, nor is it my first thought that someone is just doing their job. Again, I'm not a mind reader, and generally when I've thought to check first-time edits to pages in this category, they've generally been bogus. While it's true that I failed to assume good faith on your part, again, if you had explained the files had been deleted, I would never have assumed the edits were the work of vandals. I have also experienced harassment on and outside of Wikipedia by editors who don't explain their edits and who mess with page content just to mess with me (which has, at times, included posting accurate personal information about me as an attempt to troll or intimidate me), which has led to me being even more suspicious of unexplained edits by individuals that haven't shown up as contributors on my watchlist before. I apologize for my misguided actions in this case, but hope this detailed explanation clears up where I'm coming from on this. Jgstokes (talk) 05:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You had no way of knowing my Wikipedia history, and I certainly wouldn't have expected you to check my editing history or the history of the pages in question. Over the last 15 years, I've tried to assume good faith to the extent I can, but with repeated vandalism on pages I edit, I tend to be overly suspicious when edits aren't explained. I know more than a few editors who have expanded responsibilities, including admins, and I have the utmost respect for them all. You will now be counted among them. Thanks for opening this dialogue with me. I appreciate you! Jgstokes (talk) 06:33, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I need help with Lista de templos d'A Igreja de Jesus Cristo dos Santos dos Últimos Dias (Portuguese version)
Sorry. I don't speak Portuguese, nor am I familiar with Wikipedia guidelines that specifically apply to articles on the Portuguese edition of Wikipedia. A couple of things I can suggest is that you consider adding the HELP ME template to your talk page, where someone with more knowledge on the matter can advise you further, and that you may want to remember Wikipedia's policies relating to assuming good faith on the part of those with whom you are having this disagreement. I hope that these suggestions are helpful. In the meantime, please feel free to approach me again with any questions you have about this English edition of Wikipedia. Best of luck to you in this situation. Jgstokes (talk) 23:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: I've been assisting with this to some degree and have made a few comments and reasoning to support keeping the page. I don't know Portuguese either but been able to assist with online translators. How I've been able to manage this is to use Google Translate and then try translating it back. If it comes back differently, I would change my wording until it came back with the same message I sent. These translators are not perfect so I hope my messages and arguments are coming out correctly, but it does appear they at least understand what I'm saying.
In summary, there's a deletion request due to WP:V. I recommended reliable sourcing is needed for the header paragraphs, and that {{primary source}} banner (portuguese version) was more appropriate than going directly to a deletion request. Dmm1169 (talk) 04:46, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for adding the additional information! When I added the coord info, I noticed the status wasn't updated, so I added that in the meantime, but lacked time and thought to handle other fields at the time. I don't think this interfered with any functionality with any templates. I've yet to see coord info updated when location is announced even though temple location becomes known at this point.
"site_announced" and "site_announcement_link" are not lines on several of the templates. These lines will need to be added so other users can see and add info on lines you're looking for.
Wikipedia allows multiple contributors for this reason. In this case, I added the Georeference and status. You corrected the case (although the template multiple ways of displaying cases), and added size, dates and address. I've regularly have added/corrected map data when site is announced. Also, at least two of these was located in a nearby community and not the actual city it's named after -Thanks Dmm1169 (talk) 18:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. No problem. I apologize for lashing out. I had no idea you were the one who made the partial edits. Usually when partial edits are done on those templates, that's been the work of anonymous editors who have no intentions to do the full update, and I was having an off-day personally. Again, my apologies. I am satisfied by your explanation. Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 03:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine. I don't request any special treatment.
Talking about templates. Template:LDSmap allows for the following statuses: operating, Operating, dedication scheduled, Dedication scheduled, Dedication Scheduled, dedication postponed, Dedication postponed, Dedication Postponed, Completed, completed, under construction, Under construction, Under Construction, groundbreaking scheduled, Groundbreaking scheduled, Groundbreaking Scheduled, site announced, Site announced, Site Announced, announced, Announced, closed, Closed, closed for renovation, Closed for renovation, Closed for Renovation, closed for renovations, Closed for renovations, Closed for Renovations, rededication scheduled, Rededication scheduled, Rededication Scheduled, operations suspended, Operations suspended, operations Suspended, Operations Suspended, temporarily closed, Temporarily closed, temporarily Closed, Temporarily Closed.
You brought up a point when you corrected the capitalization. Should we eliminate incorrect or nonstandard capitalizations? This would allow faster recognition to see and correct the miscapitalization (default red pog would load up instead for icon). Also with fewer status options, pages using this template may load slightly quicker. Also, do you know any status that is missing or could be used? If so, you can let me know at any time so I can add it. However, I think the main ones are covered.
FYI: "Temporarily closed" I've used for non-permanent closures other than renovations (ie. disease control, military conflicts, local government restrictions, etc. that causes the temple to close for the time being). These will vary and very situational so I figure listing status as "Temporarily closed" and explain why its closed in the notes. Hopefully, this doesn't get used very often.
FYI: Permanent closures/Efforts suspended are either not placed on maps or manually given a color (typically green on most maps that use them) rather than using this template since the status will no longer change for the foreseeable future. Dmm1169 (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, is "Closed", "Closed for renovations" or "Operations suspended" Status needed? No temples are currently using these status and I'm not seeing any legitimate reason for these statuses to be used in the future.
"Closed" or "Operations suspended" As mentioned above for closures, only non-permanent closures are needed, as permanent closures don't use the LDSmap Template.
"Closed for renovation" is used for those undergoing renovations. The plural form is not used.
some of these statuses are likely included because someone had used them before. I'm making a table for acceptable status for the template discussion page.--Thanks. Dmm1169 (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that reducing and simplifying would be best. I think the statuses should have the first letter of the first word capitalized, then use the lowercase for any other words. But we can get community input on the List of temples talk page. Also, I had a quick question for you: I have an updated list of all current areas seventies, but haven't had time to fully update the area seventies list here. If I email that list to you, could you help me get the Wikipedia page updated? Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 00:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and made the changes. I think consensus in this case would have to agree. I have removed "Closed for renovations", but have so far left "Closed" and "Operations suspended" as status options in template functionality but not in either description. A wrong status input would place a red ball looking icon instead of the buttons currently used. This will make it easier to target miscaptializations, and other errors in status input.
In addition, I've added "Limited operation" as a status option. I don't know of any temples meeting this criteria, but have added as an option in event temples fall into this option.
Sounds good. For what it's worth, if "Construction completed" is a recognized status, that would apply currently to the Red Cliffs Utah, Layton Utah, and Puebla Mexico Temples. Feel free to answer my inquiry about the area seventies page here or by email when you have a chance. Thanks again. Jgstokes (talk) 02:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can work on area seventies page next week.
"Completed" was listed on Template:LDSmap but not on some of the other templates, and I added it as a status option while or before the status was being discussed in 2022. It was also brought up in a discussion in 2021. In both cases most were against a separate "Completed" temple section and my adding that status was without thought of discussion outcomes.
If it's just a status indicator, no new section or renumbering will have to be made. There has been not discussion on this detail. However, I don't know if it provides what Wikipedia considers meaningful content and with the discussion already shooting down the "Completed" section idea, a status change may hit the same fate. Churchofjesuschristtemples.org is classified on Wikipedia as a "fan site" and cannot be used for referencing and I don't know how you're going to get a reliable source accepted by wikipedia policy for most temples with this construction status.
The Churchofjesuschristtemples.org lists the status as "Major construction completed" rather than "Completed" and lists it on the "Construction Status" page. I think there's a difference there as there's typically still either work being done (ie. furnishings and decorations) or something else is blocking it (ie. obtaining occupancy permits, health restrictions,...) from making it ready for tours/dedication.
"Site announced" seems to be more significant milestone. It gets more coverage, the announcement determines what part of town and in some cases what city its going to be located. Size and property data, renderings has also been released with most recent site announcements. However, general consensus I've seen from the few that responded didn't feel it was significant enough to have its own section and numbering, which is why it has its own status but not its own section. Temples under renovation likewise are still listed in a section (included in Operating section) and numbered according to its original dedication.
As I mentioned, we probably need some discussion on this, but because of previous discussion results, I'm going to go ahead and remove it as a status option for now to be compliant to similar discussions. Thanks! - Dmm1169 (talk) 01:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmm1169, there are a few discrepancies in the Church's area seventy list (for example, the list still shows Henry J. Eyring as serving in the North America Central Area, but the CDOL indicates he was released as of August 1. I have an updated list of area seventies listed alphabetically by Quorum that is current, if that would help you. It also looks like the location and/or area and/or Quorum, which is reflected on the official list. Let me know if my documents could be helpful to you with the updates. I know the documents may be OR, but there are only one or two differences in my list vs. the Church's lists. Just let me know either way. Jgstokes (talk) 03:34, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2023 Oct General Conference temple updates
I'm watching this october General conference away from home and away from my computer. Consequently, I will likely not be able to update this on a timely manner this time. I've been putting in the new announcements for the past general conferences.
I typically like two references for the announcement; one first party (ie. Newsroom or Deseret News) and one third party (ie. Salt Lake Tribune, local newspaper, tv, etc) that has a list of all temples announced. I personally prefer primary sources, but banners have been erected on a number of pages stating too much reliance on primary sources.
The easiest way I know is to take a template from the previous general conference that has no site announcement. Change the info to temples in this conference the use it as a template for all temple announced for the conference requiring only name, number, and location change as the date and references would be the same for all new temples.-Thanks Dmm1169 (talk) 18:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up. I'll take care of it since I know what I'm doing when it comes to temple templates. Any fixes needed would be appreciated whenever you have time. Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 03:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ground will not be broken for the Fort Worth Texas Temple until late October (Saturday October 28, if you want to be exact). So that temple will not be listed as "under construction" until the groundbreaking takes place next month. See this page for confirmation of the groundbreaking arrangements. That's why that temple is listed as "Groundbreaking scheduled". Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 22:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your (now deleted) comment about Modesto. I assume you deleted it when you realized that ground will not be broken for the Modesto California Temple until October 7, the Saturday after General Conference weekend. As a Latter-day Saint blogger and Wikipedian,I track temple updates extensively and am well aware of when updates need to be made. Just today, there were 3 new temples dedicated. So there's not a lot going on in terms of temple events that I'm not aware of. I will make updates accordingly, so no need to worry about that on your part. Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 20:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Im just trying to keep the page updated, im member of the church (mormon), but maybe modesto temple have changed the groundbreaking date and i didnt notice Joaosilva2000 (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. The Modestdo groundbreaking date has always been October 7. See this announcement for verification. And a member of the Church would know that, per a request from President Nelson, the Church and its' members have been discouraged from using "Mormon" to describe themelves. See this link for more information. Jgstokes (talk) 06:10, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am a lifelong Church member too. Also, I saw your updates to the templates of the Brasilia Brazil, Bentonville Arkansas, and Moses Lake Washington Temples. I know ChristensenMJ very well, and the reason he reverted your change to those templates is that you didn't cite a source to verify the dedications had taken place. "It's September 17, broh" was not the appropiate reply. If you cite a source to verify the changes you are making, they won't be reverted. So I also want to remind you to always assume goood faith on the part of other editors. Thanks. Jgstokes (talk) 06:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bro that means Brother in the church you have sisters, brothers, elders etc, i dont see any problem while using term "bro". I also did my part in keeping the page updated even if it doesn't included sources, so I also think this should be read in good faith, as you said. Joaosilva2000 (talk) 06:46, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing my point. The point was not your "broh" reference. The point was that you added information without sourcing. That's exactly why ChristensenMJ reverted your edits. And, for the record, I have been assumming good faith this entire time. The reason I put those tools on your talk page is the same reason I am trying to offer you helpful advice on this issue. You didn't include a source to verify the changes you were making. On Wikipedia, that's a problem. I'm sorry if my replies to you came across as not assuming good faith, but assuming good faith is a two-way street. I hope you'll take good advice offered in good faith. But the choice is up to you. Jgstokes (talk) 23:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since some of your edits were undoing overlinks, partial reverts would be better. I am already working on that. If you'd like to help, I'd welcome that. Jgstokes (talk) 21:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Devokewater, I have noticed that you linked to some names that don't have an article. I've been working to revert the redlinked names, per the applicable policy, but wondered if you would mind helping with that as well. Several years back, we did have articles for many of the GA Seventies whose names you linked, but they were subjected to mass deletions over time due to insufficient sourcing that was independent of the Church. So if you see any redlinked names in your edit summaries on any temple template and could help me revert those, I'd appreciate it. Jgstokes (talk) 00:01, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to assist on getting these pages updated? I prefer to have it done within 24 hours of announcement. due to my schedule, I'm not going to be able to do so.
Area (LDS Church). This would involve adding new temples
I will help with what I can. I'm not currently following some of the pages you mentioned. I can update the Area page for sure. Thanks.--Jgstokes (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have looked over the other pages and am not exactly sure how to do what needs to be done. If it's simply a question of adding the newest temple templates to them, that's something I can handle no problem. If it's something else that needs to be added, it may be outside my skill set. Jgstokes (talk) 21:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think everything is done. I'm almost finished updating ordinance rooms. As far as site announcements, simply changing status and coordinates is generally enough unless other pertinent info is given. There's page or template that I'm aware of that uses site announcement date or link.
I use Google maps to grab coordinates. This is done by right click on location in Google Maps and select coordinates to copy into clipboard. Then paste it into {{Coord|lat|long}} in the respective LDS Temple template. Round lat/long coordinates to nearest ten thousandths (0.0000) for site location in temple template. This will place a map in the expanded temple list template found in temple section in state/country pages.
For multipin maps such as those in Geographic list, it takes more effort to set up. Coordinates typically only has to be changed once. Thanks- Dmm1169 (talk) 20:30, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
List of temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by geographic region
List of temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by geographic region has exceeded its memory limit causing templates at the bottom of page to not function. This can be solved by either reducing the size of the page or splitting the page. It needs to be a significant enough of a change to not have to revisit this next year if 35 more temples are announced.
I brought up a discussion to find out a solution, and because it's already an issue, would like to find out the solution quickly and not wait till before conference. In particular,
1) Is there a way to reduce the memory within the page without reducing content? or if not, what content would you prefer to be removed? The page is run almost exclusively on templates so the large majority of the memory usage is the templates. I've tried to simplify some where I can without reducing functionality, but it's obviously not enough. The issue particularly arouse when I added links to all the temples in Template:LDS Temple Map World. There are 335 temples so every time a template is used for each temple, its 335 times the memory used for each template. The individual temple template is generally used at least 3-5 times for each temple (more if you include its usage in subtemplates). LDSmap is used 2-4 times for each temple in the page although that template is simply a "switch" command. There's a template for filling in the lines of a table. There's other templates used and mentioned in the discussion. Early last year I resolved the memory issue for List of Temples and Comparison pages by using a fresh new simplified table that still suited the page.
2) If not, or even if so, do we want to split the page? This is becoming my preferred alternative as I don't know of anyway to simplify the page without changing the functionality I would like to see. It will also shorten an already lengthy page.
a)If we split how? My thought is to create a page just for US Temples (there's 136 of them) and provide links back and forth from the main page in appropriate locations. Horse Eyes Black suggested to split by continent, or do we do both (split by continent and pull US temples out of North America), or something else.
b)If its split by continent, how will the main page look or would it be a disambiguation page and how would other pages link to it?
3) Any other issues/solutions you see with this page?
You'll already be aware of most of the following content. Rollback is a permission often requested early after joining Wikipedia by people focusing on recent changes patrolling (like me back then!). So half of this is advice about rollback, and half of this is advice about Wikipedia in general, I guess. I customized it at User:ToBeFree/rollbackgiven because none of the existing "rollback given" templates contained the advice I wanted this to contain.
And I'll add it here despite your experience in the hope that it may be amusing or helpful or both. :)
Hi Jgstokes,
After reviewing your request, I have added your account to the rollback group. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:
Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Users should be informed (or warned) after their edits have been reverted. If warnings repeatedly don't help, WP:ANI is the default place to go. In cases of very clear ongoing intentional damage to the encyclopedia, WP:AIV can be used.
Reverting someone's edits may confuse or upset them. Whenever other users message you on your talk page, please take the time to respond to their concerns; accountability is important. For most users who message you, the tone and quality of your answer will permanently influence their opinion about Wikipedia in general.
Because the plain default rollback link does not provide any explanatory edit summary, it must not be used to revert good faith contributions, even if these contributions are disruptive. Take the time to write a proper summary whenever you're dealing with a lack of neutrality or verifiability; a short explanation like "[[WP:NPOV|not neutral]]" or "[[WP:INTREF|Please provide a citation]]" is helpful.
Rollback may never be used to edit war, which you'll notice to be surprisingly tempting in genuine content disputes. Please especially keep the three-revert rule in mind. If you see others edit warring, please file a report at WP:ANEW. The most helpful essay I've ever seen is WP:DISCFAIL; it is especially important for those who review content regularly.
If you encounter private information or threats of physical harm during your patrols, please quickly use Special:EmailUser/Oversight or Special:EmailUser/Emergency; ideally bookmark these pages now. See WP:OS and WP:EMERGENCY for details. If you're regularly patrolling recent changes, you will need both contacts sooner or later, and you'll be happy about the bookmarks.
To try rollback for the first time, you may like to make an edit to WP:Sandbox, and another one, and another one, and then revert the row with one click. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about rollback. Thank you for your time and work in cleaning up Wikipedia. Happy editing!
@ToBeFree, thank you for granting me these permissions. Thank you also for the advice you provided. I will keep that in mind, and will let you know if I have any questions for sure. I will likewise take your advice about user talk page warnings. If you see any issues with anything I use rollback for, please let me know, especially since I'm new to this. Thanks again. Jgstokes (talk) 22:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ToBeFree, I did actually have some questions for you: I have used the rollback tools several times now with success, and I'm pretty confident about them. When I've reverted an edit in the past, I'm usually able to add an explanation in the edit summary field. However, I'm not seeing a similar field in which to do that when rolling back edits. I'd like to be able to explain my reason for rolling back the edits, so where can I enter that explanation? Also, I understand what you said about issuing a warning after rolling back edits. Does a warning need to be issued for edits I've rolled back that aren't vandalistic in nature? For example, I recently rolled back an edit on this page where the editor in question merely listed the wrong name for one of the sketches they described in their edit. In my mind, an honest mistake (which is what that was) doesn't merit the kind of warning you were talking about, since I wasn't reverting vandalism or intervening in an edit war. And I wasn't able to explain that because I couldn't see how to add that to my edit summary. So any answers you can give me on those two questions will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Jgstokes (talk) 23:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for asking! I'm happy to hear about the positive experience you've had with the tool. By default, it doesn't offer a way to provide an edit summary, which is why WP:ROLLBACKUSE understandably limits the default use. There are two ways to overcome this limitation:
Using Twinkle (and, if you like, copying the content of Special:Permalink/1091039537 to User:Jgstokes/common.css to limit its flood of mostly unnecessary links): When you view a diff, you'll then have two rollback options, a comment-less default rollback you have seen already, and a new bold-text sky-blue "rollback" link in brackets that allows you to specify a summary.
Using User:Writ Keeper/rollbackSummary.js by Writ Keeper to modify the existing rollback link, removing the option to quickly rollback without providing a reason. I have not tested this option because I personally prefer having both options.
Regarding warnings, I'd say literal "warnings" are only one of many types of messages you can add to a reverted user's talk page. And the default templates from WP:UWARN are just a subset of these too. When using a template wouldn't be helpful, or when warning at all isn't what you want to do, simply create a new section on the user's talk page and tell them about your concerns. The classical way is sometimes the best one. If their IP address keeps changing or a longer discussion might be helpful, a message on the article's talk page may be a better option – in that case, though, of course remember to focus on content rather than conduct. That all said, an additional edit summary is of course desirable and can be provided using the options above.
All rollback tools aside, you can of course always just click the timestamp of any revision in the article's history, then "Edit", and then publish the old revision with any summary of your liking.
Thank you. I successfully enabled Twinkle and will use that in the future. I appreciate the additional advice and pointers you gave me and will take that under advisement. Thanks again. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 04:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ToBeFree, I had another concern. For a long time now, a certain editor at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force has engaged in what I would term as disruptive editing, a clear failure to assume good faith, and, in so doing, may have violated Wikipedia policies. It's all there in the history of that page. I have avoided naming that editor to not tip them off to this comment here. Unfortunately, this editor has been having this problem for a very long time. I tried at one point to warn the editor against that (this was before I got the tools) but, as that editor observed, I had no authority or special tools to merit issuing such a warning. THe failure to assume good faith on the part of this user has continued on that page. Given my past history with the user, I don't feel right about taking any action on this matter myself. Would you be able to look that over and intervene if you feel it is warranted? I completely defer to your judgement here. Thanks. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 05:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Well, if resolving the conflict with the user without intervention isn't an option, I'm afraid there is no way around having a central behavioral discussion at WP:ANI, where the user is notified and given a chance to explain the situation from their point of view too. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no stake in the current conversation, which is why I've steered clear of doing anything about it, especially given my previous interactions with the editor in question. I will let others invovled in the conversation determine whether or not to file a claim at ANI, as I know they will make the right call on this. I have a good working relationship with a few of those involved, so I have no doubts this will be resolved the right way when necessary. Thank you. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 22:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is 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.
Is it possible to update coordinates when updating status to "site announced"? The church is getting better on listing addresses when announcing temples. Because of this, going to address, verifying that it's the same as the announced image than right clicking on the map and select copy coordinates (if using Google maps), gives the lat long. in template {{coord|lat value|log value}}. For example for Harrisburg Temple it's {{coord|40.2839|-76.8029}}.
In maps it's {{Location map~|Pennsylvania|lat=40.2839|long=-76.8029|... Note: budlings are rounded to the fourth decimal place (x.xxxx) in Wikipedia.
I don't know how much editing I'm going to be able to do in the future as my new job and callings are going to limit my ability to have time to edit. If you need help, I've made notes in Template:LDSmap. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! - Dmm1169 (talk) 01:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, The "Address" field and "ISO_3166_1_Region" field aren't used in any templates or pages to my knowledge. I don't think there's need of using these fields either - especially the ISO since no template I came across had a value for it, nor do I see the need for the field. I'm not sure why "Address" field isn't used. Is it a Wikipedia policy for it to not be used in the infobox? I've eliminated those fields with the newer templates, but can add them again if needed. Another issue with having extra fields is that it adds memory to those that use it. The Geographic page pulls each temple template at least four times requesting various info from the template. That adds up with how many temples currently exist or announced to exist. Thanks! - Dmm1169 (talk) 01:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dmm1169, congrats on your new job and calling. I wish you well with that. I'm probably not the ideal person to add geographical coordinates. As I like to joke, in the Boy Scouts, I earned my orienteering merit badge on accident, and it wasn't the usual sort of accident either. I could give it a shot, but where I'm not good with that type of thing, I'd be a little worried about messing something up. I would say that when it comes to geographical coordinates, there's no rush to get them in. I may or may not be able to find someone who could take this on going forward. I'll let you know here when I can. Thanks. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 02:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I could try to help but as you can see by my recent history it goes in fits and starts based on my job and calling, and my need to do something else occasionally. I'm currently afraid to kick off a rename debate from The Carpenters -> Carpenters because I don't know if I'll have time to respond to the nonsense reasons people have given in the past to oppose this obvious change. I agree with dmm1169 that we should remove extra fields from the data templates - many got added over time and some like the ISO one I don't even know what it is supposed to do.
If I had the time, I would try to put together a module that would solve the data problem using wikidata rather than the data templates, but I don't have time and it's been at least 20 years since I did any real programming (although the programming for the modules doesn't appear to be too bad to learn). It really is the proper way to handle what we have been doing for 15 years. Put the data in Wikidata and use a module to generate the infoboxes and rows of tables in the list templates. --Trödel22:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Site announced info in LDS Temple Templates
Is there a reason that "Site Announced" date and link need to be listed in LDS Temple Template?
There's no pages or templates that use this information that I'm aware of. If there are, let me know. I don't see a need to list unused data in this template. More data means more time scrolling when going into make changes, so my thoughts are to keep excess data out.
It seems quite insignificant of an occurrence without sufficient notability. I'm ok with it being as a status, but I see no real significance for the date. If the status needs to be referenced while it's "Site Announced", it can be done in "notes".
I noticed you added field "dedication_link" field in Template:LDS Temple/Okinawa Japan Temple and other pages. Can you please add proper citations to "announced by", "groundbreaking_by", "dedication_by", "rededication_by"... as these fields support citations and show in page?
It's best if Template:Citation (or similar) is used to reference as simply providing a link does not explain much about the reference. In addition, "dedication_link", "groundbreaking_link" or any other "..._link" are not supported by most, if any, applicable templates and therefore does not appear in page.
The "notes" field also allows referencing if you wish to reference "site announced" for the time it's listed under that status since there's no "Site announced by" field. That way it still appears in page. Please do not hide these references. Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 10:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In a recent edit you wrote, "This content has been challenged. Discuss this matter on the talk page, but DO NOT restore this challenged information unless and until there is consensus approval to do so." To be clear, I only re-added that one line in line with what the previous editor had said, that it was "undue weight for the subject" and that "the Development/Preproduction/Filming/Post-Production sections are chronological in order, this breaks the format." Hence, that's why I added it and in that sub-section. I completely stand by my addition of the content.
At this present time, I see no point in discussing it on the article talk page, as my three attempts (each time, reducing the number of lines, as you can see from the article's history) to add the content were rejected, each by a different year. The message I'm getting from the edits is that I should wait until the film comes out on Feb. 14, 2025, in line with what the first reversal said (that it was undue weight until the film's release), before re-adding it, which is unfortunate to say the least. I may change my mind on this, but I seriously doubt it, after three wrongheaded reversals by different editors, including yourself, which I thoroughly disagree with. Historyday01 (talk) 00:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thank you for clarifying your edit in question. What you said makes sense now. But the intent of the edit wasn't evident when I looked at it. All I could see at the time was that an unexplained edit significantly changed the content of the page. If I had known what you explained to me above, I wouldn't have felt a need to revert it. And unfortunately, in my time here, unexplained edits have become somewhat of a red flag. I apologize if I was out of line. Thanks again. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 07:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Address field
I noticed you added the Address field on recent "Site announced" temples. As far as I'm aware, this field is not used. If so, do you know where it's used? Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 05:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmm1169, I apologize for my delay in getting back to you. The address field is used in some templates and not in others. I think that in some templates, the geographic coordinates replaced the address field. I have no knowledge as to which pages use which fields. But it should be uniform across the board. So we may want to look at using both, since address information is specifically listed in the announcements. This could be worth a wider discussion on the list of temples talk page. Thanks. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 06:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The delay in getting back to me was fine as I'm now just getting on, but briefly. 2 concerns:
1) Where is the address being used, and why keep it if mainspace is not using it? Why is the address not mentioned in any of the individual temple pages I've looked at? Doesn't meet notability guidelines? If it is necessary, please explain why.
2) It's taking up space. The geographic list pages uses templates that pull info from the temple field template probably about six times for each temple. Removing unused content could prolong the need of having to split this or other pages in the future.
Agreed that a larger discussion is warranted. I don't have strong feelings about keeping fields or getting rid of them. But we do need uniformity across the board, and maybe others have more knowledge than I do on this subject. For the record, I said that the site announcements included addresses. I thought I saw addresses included on other pages and templates here, but I may be misremembering. I've not been at my best the last couple of weeks as I've been working through some new health challenges. Anyways, I would support a discussion on template and page fields and getting more input there. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 04:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!
Hello Jgstokes, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Season's greetings, Jgstokes! I hope you enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world. It's always a pleasure working with you. Thank you for your continued effort to improve the project.
Thanks for your message. I apologize if I was out of line. I have been editing Wikipedia about as long as you have, and I am very well acquainted with talk page protocol at this point. The comment in question seemed to imply that the death of an actor this year meant he should be excluded from the cast list of the show in question for the seasons in which he was billed on the show, which, according to my understanding, is not the way Wikipedia works, per MOS:CASTLIST. The nature of the claims made by the editor in connection to what I believed he was suggesting were not sourced. Hence my rollback. In retrospect, I should have engaged with him on this issue instead of using rollback. Your warning was warranted, appropriate, and appreciated. I just recently was granted rollback permissions. Not trying to excuse myself here, just trying to demonstrate it was an unintentional misstep on my part. If after reading this, you still feel like my conduct in the matter constitutes abuse of the rollback permission, I'll consider this strike one against me and be more careful in the future. Thanks. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 03:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
