User talk:Primefac

Lennon-Picasso Basin

I see you redirected the article Lennon-Picasso Basin to List of geological features on Mercury, I assume because it has only one reference. But you didn't include the feature in the list. Jstuby (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Primefac (talk) 11:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about alternative accounts

Hi, I'm Neuropol. I'm starting up my CVU academy program, and as a module to training, I'd like to have "live" or "hands-on" training. For this, I was wondering if it would be within policy to create an account which could act as a "CPR dummy" for trainees to interact with. I would be the only one using it, and, of course, it would not be used to vandalize mainspace articles, only interacting on its own talk page and on designated training pages within my userspace. Thanks,Neuropol^Talk 15:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

As long as you're abiding by WP:LEGITSOCK I don't see any reason you can't create a second account. Primefac (talk) 15:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. Thanks,Neuropol^Talk 15:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... but why doesn't this show up in the article's text? SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Because the change is inside of a <ref>...</ref> tag, so it is in the references section. Primefac (talk) 13:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section <1>

Re-indent, yes these are out of order. So what. Primefac (talk) 16:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section 1? Primefac (talk) 15:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Add new comment (see edit summary). Primefac (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Test section >2<

Test section 2 Primefac (talk) 15:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, try that again. Primefac (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Question about removal of RFC

Hi, I'm just wondering about this edit you made, what's the reason for the removal of the RFC template? Thanks. A Socialist Trans Girl 06:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

As I said in my reply, there hasn't really been a ton of discussion about his name, and what little discussion there has been has generally found consensus rather quickly. In other words, this is not an intractable issue (yet), so per WP:RFCBEFORE I removed the RFC tag as being unnecessary. Removal of the tag doesn't mean that discussion can't happen, just that it won't be broadcast around Wikipedia that all and sundry should come and give their opinions. Primefac (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay, so try regular discussion first, and if there's nobody/no consensus, then start an RfC? A Socialist Trans Girl 07:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Pretty much; you could also cross-post to Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics about the discussion to see if anyone there has opinions. Primefac (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks. A Socialist Trans Girl 07:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Captbloodrock

FYI, this user is an AfC reviewer. CNMall41 (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Huh... no reviews. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I saw them move a couple to mainspace but didn't use the AfC script. One of which went to AfD and with other socks and SPAs resulted in keep (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chip Merlin) but have asked the admin to re-open. The others do not appear to be an issue from what I saw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CNMall41 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Template: Infobox Fraternity

When you have a chance, could you please work on the addition of the Status flag there, I don't have enough confidence in my template programming to pull it off. Everything that I can find, the tests are whether a parameter/value pair exists, not the value of the value half.I believe that what had been decided is if the value of Status = D, M, Defunct or Merged that the entry in Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing website would not be generated. Thank you.Naraht (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, been meaning to look at the latest discussion at WT:FRAT but haven't had the time. Will take a look in the next few days. Primefac (talk) 18:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank You. I *think* Template:WikiProject_Canada_Roads tests values to determine what to do (so that multiple provices can be displayed), but I'm not sure. Is [[Template:#invoke:If any equal]] the path to go down? Wish I could plagarize from an Infobox looking to do closer to what is desired. :)Naraht (talk) 18:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

ArbReq

I didn't know you were an arbitrator. But how did you konw -- in two minutes -- that my request was in the wrong venue? Also, I am currently banned from raising this issue in, as I understand it, all other fora, and I can't appeal at ANI, like you say, for six months. Surely, if I disagree with all of these decisions, then my only appeal is to ArbCom? Thomas B (talk) 16:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I am in the process of writing out a response to you on your own talk page, since that is where the primary discussion is happening. Please be patient. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Error in Template:Infobox rugby biography

A duplicate parm error (label31/data31a/data31b/data31c) was introduced into Template:Infobox rugby biography by this edit, which affects Category:Articles using duplicate arguments in template calls. Who knew there were so many rugby players? Davemck (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I think I have fixed this problem. It will take a bit for the articles to leave the category. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Ooft, thanks for the note and the fix. Genuinely can't believe I missed something that obvious. Primefac (talk) 06:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback

Hey, I think you are good. Can you give me feedback on my edits, AfC reviewing, AfD, and CSDs? Am I going in the right direction to become a New Pages reviewer? Here is my previous request for The New Pages Reviewers right. It would be very helpful to get input from an experienced admin like you. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 11:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

FPER

Why are we replacing all these template transfusions with a redirect and an acronym that people are unlikely to know ? Was this decided somewhere ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I can replace them with the full template name. The original redirects are vague terms and I have retargeted them, meaning that the original uses (pointing at fprot requests) should be updated. If you are formally contesting my retargeting, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I am formally contesting it: WP:NOTBROKEN applies to template transclusions just as it does to page links. Unless the redirect Template:Editprotected is the subject of an ongoing TfD, it should be left alone. In addition, edits like this are compromising the structure of a page by changing intentional code demonstrations into invalid unclosed elements that were not intended. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Technically it would be RFD, since it's a redirect, but sure, I'll send them all to RFD. Fair point re: the formatting; when this eventually goes through again I'll make sure genfixes are turned off. Primefac (talk) 11:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Now at RFD. Feel free to vent your spleen there.​ Primefac (talk) 11:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

On another note, this edit and many like it replaced {{edit protected}} with {{FPER}}, but the template in question is template-protected. I think I would have used {{TPER}} or {{Edit template-protected}} for accuracy. It appears to render the same, but if people are counting transclusions, the data might be misleading. Or something. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned it in the RFD, but at the time these were used the templates were fully-protected, so if anything replacing them with FPER is keeping the historical accuracy; from my time at TFD I know that some folks just can't stand it when the historical record gets changed more than it has to. Primefac (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that replacing old closed FPER templates isn't really useful unless that template is being deleted - perhaps enjoin the RFD next. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Retargeting {{Editprotected}} without replacing the transclusions will result in {{request edit}} appearing in thousands of pages. I'm all for "not changing old discussions" but having a dab transclusion appearing all over the place is probably not what anyone is intending. Primefac (talk) 14:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Primefac's explanation makes sense to me. This looks like standard thankless post-TFD/RFD work, except for the bit where a redirect is being used instead of the canonical template name. No good deed goes unpunished. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Deprecated parameter removal request

Hey Primefac, I hope you're well.

I wanted to see if you'd be willing to use PrimeBOT to remove five deprecated parameters from the infobox of just under 24,000 articles. I would be requesting the removal of |nfl=, |nflnew=, |nfl-new=, |nflwd=, and |nfl-wd= from {{Infobox NFL biography}} based on this discussion. The parameters have already been deleted from the template by Eagles247 here. This would save loads of manual work for us if you'd be able to lend a hand. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, can probably sort this out at some point. Primefac (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Fantastic, I appreciate it. Of course there's no rush at all. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Good revert

Thank you, sorry! Hahaha Zanahary (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)