User talk:TheDaveRoss/Archive-2017-November

TheDaveRoss blanked own talkpage

@TheDaveRoss: you blanked your own talkpage. Did you mean to do that? 130.105.196.148 12:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes? Not a lot of love for Flow, and it was starting to annoy me too. - TheDaveRoss 13:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is that a question? Did you blank the page because you didn't like public access to that discussion? 130.105.196.148 13:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

It was because the Illuminati told me to. - TheDaveRoss 13:45, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The ... the Illuminati. Which alleged Illuminati are you talking about? 130.105.196.148 14:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I have already said too much. - TheDaveRoss 14:38, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I hope everyone knows I don't believe in the Illuminati. The Illuminati is just an art motif, not a secret society. I thought that was clear. You were joking about the alleged "Illuminati". Do you want to get serious and say something? 130.105.196.100 14:11, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

"Later, his erratic love-life made him neglectful, and as Weishaupt passed control of the Munich group to Zwack, it became clear that Massenhausen had misappropriated subscriptions and intercepted correspondence between Weishaupt and Zwack." You couldn't have chosen a better secret society to make fun of. 130.105.197.39 11:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

"musici"

Hi, please don't change {{lb|xy|musici}} to {{lb|xy|music}}, unless the definition isn't about a musical instrument. The former categorizes entries into "Category:xy:Musical instruments", and the latter categorizes into "Category:xy:Music". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I saw that it was deprecated but I missed the categorization. I will change it to 'musical instrument'. Thanks for letting me know. - TheDaveRoss 16:43, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was deprecated. Thanks for letting me know! :) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, as far as I know there isn't a great mechanism for communicating what labels are good and what are bad. - TheDaveRoss 18:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

why did you revert my edit

I dont think was cool to revert my edit Munaah eleven (talk) 19:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Because it was poorly formatted, had spelling errors, and looked protologistic. - TheDaveRoss 15:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Email

Hi TheDaveRoss. I've send you an email. Please take a look and reply. Thanks! Trijnstel (talk) 21:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Module Error in Wiktionary:Wikimedia Tech News/2017

I believe the cause is things like {{#time:j xg|2017-03-21|{{#if:{{#invoke:Template translation|getLanguageSubpage}}|{{#invoke:Template translation|getLanguageSubpage}}|{{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}}}}}. It looks like #time is eating the error message so it's not visible on the page, but it's still cluttering up CAT:E, which is amassing quite an assortment of misfit odds and ends even without this. Is there anything that can be done about this? Chuck Entz (talk) 03:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure why the WMF sent messages which included module errors (or if the module errors are due to something local here)... I removed the calls to the modules, since they aren't necessary. - TheDaveRoss 11:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Good-frigging-goddettes

Daily tech news?

Nevermind. Freenode (so very oddly) hates TOR, and I am bored whilst watching system downloads and compilation. <sigh> - Amgine/ ^t·e 19:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

In today's tech news, tech continues to progress at a pace roughly comparable to the long term trend of tech progression. - TheDaveRoss 20:02, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

In a related story, tech news archives grow at the same rate as tech news output, a ratio which "Needs study," says tech news reporters. - Amgine/ ^t·e 20:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Squires

Also the plural of the surname Squire. Several such surnames (ending in "s") are also plurals (mine included). SemperBlotto (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

• p.s. And if you are interested in English surname stats as well as US ones, then [1] is the place to look. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@SemperBlotto: good point, I will have to loop back and look at names for which that is true. I haven't gotten to your name yet, looks like it is 31,833rd on the list for the US, without the 's' not being common enough to make the list at all. Also thanks for the link to British surnames, I'll take a look. - TheDaveRoss 18:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:surnames-us-census

Please put the rank and numerical information in a module, so it can be easily updated when new census data is released. DTLHS (talk) 19:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

What did you have in mind? As in store all of the data in a module? I was going to use a module to add the ordinal indicators, and perhaps to order the demographics data, but I haven't gotten that far yet. - TheDaveRoss 19:18, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

It's not necessary to update surname statistics. They change very slowly. Checking up every 50 years is enough. TheDaveRoss has got a brilliant idea of adding statistics to new surname entries so there will be at least some information for anyone who looks up the name. Entries saying only "A surname/A male given name" are practically worthless, in my opinion. The entries by User:173.67.107.198 are a headache, for example. I've sometimes added given name statistics in ===References=== but I'll use ===Statistics=== from now on. Requests for surname etymologies are not likely to be answered soon...--Makaokalani (talk) 09:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

That's totally untrue. Surname statistics can change rapidly during periods of immigration or when certain subsections of the population have high birth rates. The census is only taken every 10 years, and in that time changes can be noticeable. --WikiTiki89 20:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't mind wrapping this data in a template, but I am curious about what @DTLHS had in mind re a module. If the suggestion is to store the data in a module then I am skeptical, but if it something else I am all ears. - TheDaveRoss 20:15, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

If the data is in a module, when it is updated we only have to edit 1 page instead of thousands. This also seems like a perfect use for Wikidata, which would mean other projects could also use the data. DTLHS (talk) 20:36, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Totally agree that Wikidata would be a great repository for this information, I am still looking into how that whole thing might work. While housing the data in a module might make updates more rapid, it would be a constant drain on performance. I would rather write a script to update all of the Statistics sections to add the 2020 data when that comes along. Or better yet, update all of these surnames to point to Wikidata data. - TheDaveRoss 20:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I doubt any of the surname pages are anywhere near the size of water. Don't worry about performance unless it's actually an issue. --WikiTiki89 21:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

It is not that the page size would be large, it is that the 11mb module would have to be fully loaded and read each time the page was generated. And since there are hundreds of thousands of surnames, there are potentially a lot of page generations. If there was some non-trivial gain from using a module I would consider it, I don't think there is. Modules are not a good solution for data storage. - TheDaveRoss 11:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying the page size would be large, I'm saying that we can make even large pages that use lots of modules work fine. What is the per-page RAM limit anyway? --WikiTiki89 13:53, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

50mb is the limit. The standard I am using is not whether or not it can work, but whether or not the cost is worth the benefit. - TheDaveRoss 15:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Surnames

Hi there. Do you think you could add {{also}} templates to entries where an uncapitalized form exists (as, for example (deprecated template usage) Pitcher / (deprecated template usage) pitcher? SemperBlotto (talk) 19:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@SemperBlotto, I just spotted you doing that on pitcher; I'll try and catch those as I can. - TheDaveRoss 19:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss Also, as a reminder, especially when writing English entries of anglicized surnames, please add the {{also}} above the page to link to the unaccented form. Looks like you forgot that for many surnames which are of foreign origin (especially those of Spanish/Hispanic origin, where some are written with accents). One surname entry I dealed with is with Aguila (Hispanic surname, but also a common Filipino surname), which has its original Spanish form: Águila.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 09:32, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

yung

Redirects won't work if there's something else on top of the page. DTLHS (talk) 17:02, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS, thanks for fixing that, I thought I had a check in place to see if the target page was a redirect and not update in those cases, but it appears that was an intention that I hadn't implemented yet. I have fixed that problem. Shocking that "yung" isn't a word in any languages though! I will also try and go back through to see if I messed this up anywhere else. - TheDaveRoss 18:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing - SemperBlotto

How rude. - [The]DaveRoss 18:00, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Signature

I for one do not think your signature change to be an improvement: red foreground on gray background is less than ideal. Obviously, there is no signature policy and it is questionable whether I should be bugging people about their signatures like this. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I changed it. I am not beholden to a particular style, I just want it to be slightly easier for me to find the things I have commented on. - [The]DaveRoss 12:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

In that case, you can (and should) wrap you signature in spans with classes and apply styles in your common.css. You are going to be happy we are going to be happy everyone's going to be happy. --Giorgi Eufshi (talk) 12:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Whoa, whoa, whoa, I didn't say I wanted everyone to be happy... - [The]DaveRoss 12:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

If you want to make the community happy, you might consider not having your sig be a template, which is explicitly disallowed at Wiktionary:Signatures. We've enforced that for non-admins, so it seems hypocritical for an admin to flaunt it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Has that policy ever been discussed anywhere? All of the discussion on the talk page seems to be opposed to various parts. - [The]DaveRoss 19:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Not really, though it's certainly not a priority, either. But there are some reasons given. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:00, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Redirects again

Your bot inserted a space in the redirect syntax at quem não tem cão caça com gato while removing interwikis, which made it not function. DTLHS (talk) 20:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS Thanks for pointing that out, I had an error in my lookahed which was supposed to ignore #REDIRECT. I believe it is fixed. - [The]DaveRoss 20:44, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Bot request: delete "Old request categories to be deleted when they are empty"

Hello.

Could you please delete all the categories that are members of Category:Old request categories to be deleted when they are empty, but (naturally) only if they are empty?

Reason: As per Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May#Category:Requests for attention in Proto-Indo-European entries, the top-level requests categories (as well as the attention request categories) were renamed to versions without the word "entries" at the end, because the requests are not always concerning the language of the current entry.

I kind of feel bad about renaming the same type of category again in a short period of time. Hopefully the "requests" categories renamings should settle down, if nobody finds any problem with the current names.

I figured it should be easy for you to make the bot do the same thing again, like you did that day with "Translations to be checked". Let me know if you can do it, thanks.

(Today I also asked @DTLHS to do a separate bot job about requests categories at User talk:DTLHS#Bot request: create "requests" categories, which is a different thing entirely.) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I can delete those. - [The]DaveRoss 20:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. :) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Bot speed

How do you edit so fast? Is there an API query that lets you edit multiple pages? DTLHS (talk) 17:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS Not that I know of, I was just lamenting that fact to Amgine. I am making use of multi-threading, I have one thread reading the dump, one thread reading from Wiktionary, and then a variable number of threads writing since that is by far the slowest part of the operation. - [The]DaveRoss 20:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

TheDaveBot and unbalanced headers

You should not be automatically fixing these (see babán)- it's impossible for a bot to tell whether the header has extra ='s or is missing ='s (level 3 vs level 4). DTLHS (talk) 17:50, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@DTLHS Since the header presents whatever level is indicated by the opening equals signs it is safe to force the closing set to match. You are right that the bot has no idea what level something should be (although it could infer in almost all scenarios) but the worst case is replacing one problem with another problem that presents in exactly the same way. - [The]DaveRoss 17:54, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

It isn't safe. You're replacing a problem that can be detected and fixed by hand with a problem that can't be detected at all. DTLHS (talk) 17:58, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that the header being the wrong level is any easier or harder to detect or fix, and it has the added benefit of fixing the problem half the time. - [The]DaveRoss 18:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Headers being at the wrong level is extremely difficult to detect. Do not apply a fix automatically that works half the time when you could just look at a report such as User:DTLHS/cleanup/unbalanced headers and edit the page yourself. DTLHS (talk) 18:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Pinnix etc

Wouldn't these surnames take -es in the plural? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:59, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Ugh, yes. I'll add that do the list of things to fix. - [The]DaveRoss 17:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Bot inserting bad spacing

On diff, your bot inserted an additional empty line before the first heading. Per WT:NORM, this should not be done. Can you remove it again please? —CodeCat 12:15, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Gross, that is a terrible decision. - [The]DaveRoss 13:13, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

For the record, we have consensus for that decision as voted and approved at the proposal 10 of Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-11/NORM: 10 proposals. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:16, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

That was clear based on what CodeCat said, it is still a terrible decision. - [The]DaveRoss 13:17, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

What's more is that WT:NORM is mandatory for bots to follow. If your bot fails to do so, it will be blocked. --WikiTiki89 20:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I noticed this as well, and also think the whitespace was bad. I hadn't commented because I assumed it was a bug and hoped the bot that maintains {{also}} would (or could be asked to) remove the whitespace. - -sche (discuss) 22:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I'll fix it. I am first making sure that I didn't misread anything else in the NORMs. - [The]DaveRoss 12:45, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Removal of spaces from templates

Would it be possible for your bot not to make this sort of edit? It is much easier to read some templates with many parameters if the equal signs are aligned. — SMUconlaw (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

@Smuconlaw: See Wiktionary:Normalization_of_entries#Templates. —suzukaze (t・c) 21:10, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about undoing your changes before replying to this message, I didn't see it until after the fact. But what Suzukaze said is the rationale. - [The]DaveRoss 21:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I can see how that makes sense for a template with a small number of parameters which are on a single line (like {{cite-book|entry=|title|page=}}), but this makes more complex templates with many parameters that are set out on multiple lines harder to read:

{{multiple images
|direction=vertical
|image1=Obverse of 50 ₨.jpg
|image2=PKR Rs 1000.jpg
|image3=25 Seychellois rupee banknote.jpg
|footer=Rupee banknotes from ''(top to bottom)'' [[Nepal]] (50 {{w|Nepalese rupee}}s), [[Pakistan]] (1,000 {{w|Pakistani rupee}}s), and the [[Seychelles]] (25 {{w|Seychellois rupee}}s)
}}

{{multiple images
|direction = vertical
|image1    = Obverse of 50 ₨.jpg
|image2    = PKR Rs 1000.jpg
|image3    = 25 Seychellois rupee banknote.jpg
|footer    = Rupee banknotes from ''(top to bottom)'' [[Nepal]] (50 {{w|Nepalese rupee}}s), [[Pakistan]] (1,000 {{w|Pakistani rupee}}s), and the [[Seychelles]] (25 {{w|Seychellois rupee}}s)
}}

— SMUconlaw (talk) 21:21, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I would support changing NORM to allow aligning the equal signs with spaces like that. Naturally, it would require a vote. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:46, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Could you start one? I have no experience with creating votes. — SMUconlaw (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I could do it. But maybe you could try this procedure to create the vote yourself: at WT:V, click "Start a new policy vote!", write the proposal and save. Then if needed I'll help to edit and further improve the page.

The thing is, I created 4 of the 10 currently active votes. Some people already said to me in the past: "Daniel, you create too many votes!" and I've been trying to lower my number of created votes. If you create a vote out of your own free will, with your signature, it should be alright for me I guess. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:36, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

OK, let me read WT:V and see if I can figure it out. — SMUconlaw (talk) 15:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

We already voted on not allowing it. What makes you think the situation has changed enough to override that vote? --WikiTiki89 18:47, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Because the specific situation of templates in which the parameters are placed on separate lines was not considered? — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

It was in fact considered (see here). --WikiTiki89 19:14, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hmmm. The Beer Parlour discussion seems to have been primarily about {{quote-book}}, and I agree that for citation and quotation templates there is no particular benefit to setting out parameters on separate lines or aligning the equal signs using spaces as it makes it less convenient to see what the definitions are in an edit box. On the other hand, it intuitively seems to me that for some templates like {{multiple images}} that I gave as an example above, it is useful to do just that. There doesn't appear to have been much discussion of spaces in templates at "Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-11/NORM: 10 proposals#Proposal 8". — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't see much of a difference between those situations. Honestly, I don't see any problem with first spaceless example you gave above. --WikiTiki89 19:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Apart from that, WT:VP says: "The failure of a vote does not mean that it cannot become a new vote in the future." (to be exact, this exact proposal never failed, only an opposite proposal passed, but the spirit of the law is the same... even though that's not a voted policy, just a "think tank" thing) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

The failure of a vote is a totally different situation. But anyway, I'm not saying that a vote can't undo a previous vote, but that there has to be a good reason to believe peoples' opinions have changed. --WikiTiki89 19:14, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Smuconlaw: I created Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-06/NORM: allow multiple spaces to align equal signs in templates. Please check if everything is OK. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much, that looks fine. I've been a bit quiet as I'm currently on an overseas trip. (Also, I have changed my user name as I am changing jobs.) — SGconlaw (talk) 04:35, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw congratulations on the new job! And safe travels. - [The]DaveRoss 12:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

"Applying NORMs (testing)."

Please do not use the bot to place the trailing }} of {{zh-pron}} on the |cat= line (e.g. diff, diff). This is the current consensus practice in Chinese entries. Thanks! Wyang (talk) 06:22, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wyang I have updated the bot to leave all linebreaks as they are in templates. Thanks for the message. - [The]DaveRoss 12:50, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

"Applying NORMs" = removing blank lines from redirects with templates?

Before bugging you about the NORM edits, let me say thank you for doing the job of applying NORM in entries, that is appreciated. :)

Now let's get to business: diff is interesting. You did that in a number of redirect entries. What NORM rule were you applying there? I could be wrong, but I think NORM does not allow or deny doing it. It's just something we NORM editors had not thought yet.

If it were up to me, I'd probably propose allowing the line break between the "#REDIRECT ..." and the template. It would look better in my opinion. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:52, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Daniel Carrero: It is doing that because it removes all blank lines before the first language section (first L2 heading) and since there are no L2 headings it removes all blank lines. I think I am going to make it ignore redirect pages altogether for the time being, since they don't really conform to normal NS:0 rules at all. Thanks for pointing that out. - [The]DaveRoss 19:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I think that rule only means blank lines immediately before the first language section. —CodeCat 19:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree, it was just my implementation of the rule that was causing the issue with redirect pages. - [The]DaveRoss 19:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Unlock Template:trans-see

Hi, can you unlock this template temporarily? I need to add tracking categories to it and then update it to use ids. —CodeCat 18:16, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat I have changed the protection level. - [The]DaveRoss 18:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat Are you all set with this template? - [The]DaveRoss 15:07, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Not yet. I still need to empty out Category:trans-see with invalid page name by replacing the embedded links with senseids. —CodeCat 15:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done. —CodeCat 16:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss, CodeCat: One of this template's features has stopped working, but I can't edit this template because it is still locked. Can we fix this problem so that the section links will work correctly again? Jarble (talk) 22:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Overuse of rfe

By indiscriminately placing the {{rfe}} template on every single entry you create, you are swamping the requests that people actually put for a reason. Every entry that lacks etymology ought to have it; that is self-evident. However, not every entry ought to have the rfe tag. Moreover, it takes very little effort to add the etymology in a wide range of cases; the etymology of Chinese surnames, for example, can be quickly checked off Wikipedia, which has excellent coverage of them. If you're going to continue adding the tag, the least you could do is add the etymology yourself when it only takes half a minute to do so. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:48, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Your implication is that I am not putting it there for a reason, which I am. There is very little which is of lexicographic interest with regards to surnames, save etymology. I put the tag there because I would like someone who knows the etymology of each name to add it, which is the whole purpose of the tag/category. - [The]DaveRoss 15:59, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want to know the etymologies, then why do you not make any effort to add them? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Because Wiktionary is a team sport, we don't require that each editor add everything possible to each entry they work on or create. I am adding the information I have, and noting that there is highly relevant information which is lacking. I do the same thing if I am unsure of a plural form as I am adding a noun, etc. I get that you use the RFE category differently, and if the consensus only "special" requests are valid there then that is fine. That is not my understanding. I consider requests made in the Scriptorium to be the special ones, the category as a repository for all entries which are lacking. - [The]DaveRoss 17:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The fact that Wiktionary is a team sport is the very reason that I, as a person who likes to add etymologies now and then, am asking you to approach this differently! I'm the sort of editor that will pop in to etymology request categories looking for things that people wanted explained. If you are not actually interested in surname etymologies, and don't want to be involved in them, please don't add requests en masse. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree. The RFEs aren't going to be resolved straight away if ever, and the RFE box is an eyesore. DonnanZ (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I am interested in the etymologies, I think they should be added. I can't add them myself, thus the request. If the box is an eyesore, change the box. If the information will never be added, what are we doing here anyway? My hope with the template is that someone will come along and see the box, realize that there is a quick and easy piece of information they can add, and add it. Just like the many thousands of empty translation sections and requests for translation. There is value in keeping track of missing information. - [The]DaveRoss 19:53, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we could have a search mechanism to locate pages with no etymology, rather than explicitly dumping rfe on every page. Equinox ◑ 19:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

We already do have ways of generating lists of pages lacking etymologies. Dave, you're not stupid. You can add some yourself, but you choose not to. That's okay, but then you should respect the wishes of those who do use the request category. And bringing up requests for translations reminds me that multiple users have been criticised in the past for overapplying those as well, and have thankfully stopped. The same applies to rfe. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:05, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Three (or four?) is a crowd, I'm removing {{rfe}} from the surname entries I have created lately. - [The]DaveRoss 13:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, thanks for adding the etymologies which you have. - [The]DaveRoss 14:49, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Unusual edit

diff DTLHS (talk) 03:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that is not how it is supposed to handle unbalanced brackets, I'll take a look. Thanks. - [The]DaveRoss 13:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Null edits

Edits like this don't change anything about the article or how it displays. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:16, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

See the edit summary. —CodeCat 17:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

I saw it. Edits like this still don't actually change anything. What is their purpose supposed to be? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:27, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

The edit summary linked to WT:NORM. Please read the policy intro and also the rule "(Headings - 6): No blank lines between the first language heading and any preceding content." --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:31, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Another unusual edit

Similar to #Unusual edit above, see this edit. --Wytukaze 13:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. For some reason searching for the hammer and sickle character to try and find any of those errors isn't turning up results via search or the API. The problem with the bot has been fixed. - [The]DaveRoss 13:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I just ran through the 6/20 dump and fixed all of the remaining errors as of that point, which should be all of them. - [The]DaveRoss 14:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Garciarodrigue

This surname doesn't exist [2]. The US Social Security computers obviously won't accept more than 14 letters, any more than any diacritics, gaps inside a name, hyphens, periods, apostrophes. So how can poor Mr. García Rodríguez write his name? Soon enough you'll come across Rodriguezgarci too. I don't think these attempts to write Spanish compound surnames in English should be entered in this dictionary, even if they are short enough like Lopezmartinez. English hyphenated names might also crop up: Smithjohnson, Johnsonwilliam (14 letters, no place for -s). I've had problems with Dangelo -type given names. Computers are a good servant but a bad boss, or however this proverb goes in English. --Makaokalani (talk) 09:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll clean these up. - [The]DaveRoss 12:43, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of entries of surnames you created

Thanks for creating entries of surnames recorded on the 2010 US Census, but many of the foreign surnames you created lack etymologies, that I am adding. Many are Hispanic (Spanish) or Asian (Chinese, Filipino) surnames that you created. Is that great to add etymologies of surname entries you created? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko Absolutely, thank you for adding etymologies! - [The]DaveRoss 13:47, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss Plus, many surnames I'm working on, especially Spanish, usually those without the accented letters or the "ñ", are also common in the Philippines, and uses the same forms like those in the US, save for the "ñ", which are still used there. Plus, the naming order of "first name[s]-middle name-surname" (like Juan A. Dela Cruz or Maria Soledad S. Lopez) are the same with the US, but keeps the Spanish order of "first name"-"father's surname" y/e "mother's surname" (like Juan dela Cruz y Abueva or Maria Soledad Lopez y Salvador), but usualky only for formal documents (like police records or court cases).-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Enhancing surname entries

I noticed you've been adding many surname entries because they require me to insert a parameter "nomul=1" in any instance of {{taxlink}} that links to it. I'm not complaining. But at Grice, I added a link Grice (disambiguation) on Wikipedia.Wikipedia that, IMO, makes the entry better. Consider making such links part of whatever you using to systematically add such entries. DCDuring (talk) 13:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

@DCDuring I can certainly add a link to Wikipedia when the disambiguation page or plain page exist. Re the "nomul=1" part, I am editing the existing lower-case version of the surname to create/modify the {{also}} template, so I could potentially edit the {{taxlink}} template as well if it is as simple as it sounds. Are there cases where that shouldn't be updated if the uppercase is added? - [The]DaveRoss 13:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

If you would like, you could add a basic Translingual section, but I think it makes more trouble for you than it would save for me, since a useful taxon entry requires some lookup to make the entry valuable. I have scores of links to taxonomic sources that I use. Most of these genera are not very commonly used, certainly not common enough to be any kind of priority. I was sincere in saying that I was not complaining. I think you can leave it to me to add the Translingual section in due course. DCDuring (talk) 08:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Although it goes beyond the purview of this project, it would be nice to have a Wikipedia article on the surname, Grice (and surname pages generally). bd2412 T 15:59, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Notice of removal of CheckUser rights

Dear DaveRoss,

I am sorry to say that, but just wanted to let you know that I have removed the CheckUser right from your account based on this request, as per m:CheckUser policy#Removal of access, considering that the other local CheckUser has been inactive on this wiki for over one year. Therefore, since the number of local CheckUsers must be at least two, your CU permissions have been suspended. Thanks for your service.

Warm regards, RadiX∞ 12:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

<poke>

IRC - Amgine/ ^t·e 19:33, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, shortly after you left, shifan and no one is talking about it. I laughed anyway. - Amgine/ ^t·e 22:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I am on vacation! - TheDaveRoss 17:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, as long as you're vacationing:

   Processing archive: /home/amginette/tmp/enwiktionary-20170901-pages-meta-history.xml.7z

   Extracting  enwiktionary-20170901-pages-meta-history.xml

   Everything is Ok

   Size:       250792585718
   Compressed: 3946874711

Got script? I have storage, and cpu cycles going to waste, if you would like to try Lars's question(s). - Amgine/ ^t·e 14:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

About foreign surnames in English

I have seeing you many foreign surnames with entries in English, randomly. While stats you provide to them, such as those from the 2010 US census, may determine what ethnicities where they are used, adding an etymology should be better (if you do know them). I am creating entries and appendices for many Filipino surnames, but some, especially the most common ones in the Philippines, are already in English as those listed in the 2010 US census, mostly created by you. I would thank that (Filipinos are also a few of the immigrant population in the US), but if possible, add the etymology if you know them. I am not ranting on your mass creation of English entries for foreign (i.e. immigrant) surnames, but, I'm saying this as a friendly reminder. Someone has already reminded you about that in one thread.TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

As mentioned in the linked conversation, I don't have a resource which provides etymologies, so I will not be adding them. - TheDaveRoss 13:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss Taking regard surnames from foreign languages, they can be found on their articles in Wikipedia, or a corresponding entry in the version of Wiktionary in their local language, or based on the stats you provide (some surnames can be associated to a certain language or ethnicity). But, more reliable outside source may be used. If you can research for surname etymologies, why not?

Most surnames coming from Spanish (including those from Basque, Catalan, and other Iberian languages, typically common on Hispanics or Filipinos) can be traced back to their entries in the Spanish Wiktionary entries, where their references can be traced. But, some forms are considered anglicizations or Filipino forms (almost the same, but the difference is that Filipino forms preserve the "ñ", unlike in the anglicized form, where it becomes "n") , and why not add an {{also}} linking the anglicized form to the accented form (one good case will be between Lopez and López and Garcia and García)?

Yes, many foreign surnames in English you create are from those in the US Census. I am busy on working on adding also a lot of Filipino and Hispanic surnames (for Tagalog, Cebuano and other languages, in the Philippines, and also Spanish, in the Hispanophone world ), and adding appendices for Filipino surnames. What interests me is the vast majority of Spanish surnames. A lot of them are those you created, yet, does not have an entry in Spanish or other language where they occur, especially the Philippine languages (owing to Spanish colonial influence). Also the same is also the case of surnames from the indigenous languages of the Philippines (like Manalo, Galang, Mallari, Pangilinan, and Marasigan), Filipino surnames from other Iberian languages, like Basque, Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese (like Tamayo, Espina, Paez, and Veloso), and also Chinese. Many of those have an English entry already, but not in the languages where they are native to or present. Fortunately, I already added a lot of those in languages where they occur (my emphasis is on Filipino and Spanish ones), especially those that are very prevalent.

I'm amazed about your mass creation of surnames in English, but if you still don't know the origins of English surnames from foreign languages, you leave it to the others, like me. So does you, as you said in the thread I linked here, when you create a surname entry, you leave it to the others who know their origin, and languages where they are present. -TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 09:21, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss And you can thank me back again for determining the original or most associated language of the surnames, at least, if you can't add it yourself. My main focus is on Filipino, Hispanic, and romanized Chinese surnames, and they really should have entries in their language of origin or languages where they are most associated, whenever possible.

Fortunately, several Filipino surnames I created en masse have not been created yet with an English entry, but if you can, you may add the English entry for them with the stats per the 2010 US census data (many Filipino surnames can be spotted also, given the Filipino diaspora). I am slowly adding Tagalog entries (with their stats for the Philippines) for the other Filipino surnames already having English entries, with entries in other Philippine language where they are commonly associated with (through their native speakers) or native to.

For Hispanic surnames already in English, it is just a look on its corresponding Spanish Wiktionary entry that proves it is Spanish (though not all of them are purely Spanish in origin, but may be from other Iberian languages), and anglicized forms can be traced with that manner also. -TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

History at zoosexuality

There are at least 3 IPs deciding to creatively alter this article. Lots. - Amgine/ ^t·e 23:27, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

heteroclite

Hi, Dave. On Oct. 18, your bot broke this quote while applying NORMS. I don't know what the norms were, but I put the quotes back as they were. If the norms still need to be applied, you might need to do it again. —Stephen ^(Talk) 14:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know (and fixing it). That is some very unusual punctuation in the quote "----", I'll make sure to check that the horizontal line syntax isn't within text before adjusting it. - TheDaveRoss 14:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Your bot changing borrowing etys

What's supposed to be better about "Borrowed from {{bor|en|fr|soubrette|notext=1}}"? You're suppressing the text with "notext" and then writing it back in as literal text! Surely better to use the natural template? Equinox ◑ 20:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Equinox, see this discussion; it was a bot request that I did for Daniel and Rua. - TheDaveRoss 20:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)