This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Peaceray

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Peaceray
home
Barnstars,
Badges, &
User Boxes
Talk to meNowhere, in
particular

Referencing Dead Link[edit]

Hello! I'm relatively new to editing here (know how to basic edit, more familiar with the magic words over on FANDOM's platform). On the Charlie Dimmock article, I've added a link to a Wayback Machine article as the website it is from technically no longer exists (redirects to something else). Is there a way to mark the "original" as a dead link? Thanks. EmmerdaleFan1972 (talk) 10:11, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

EmmerdaleFan1972, hello! The citation templates do this implicitly.
For example, your code is:
{{citation |url=http://www.hollyoaks.com/article.asp?a=06/08/02 |title=Official Hollyoaks Website |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020819042700/http://www.hollyoaks.com/article.asp?a=06/08/02 |archive-date=19 August 2002 |date=6 August 2002}}
which produces:
Official Hollyoaks Website, 6 August 2002, archived from the original on 19 August 2002
So implicitly, the archived URL appears first if |url-status=dead or if this parameter is not set, & the original URL appears second. Generally it can be assumed that the user will click on the first link. If for "fun & giggles" or by mistake one clicks on the original link, one quickly learns the convention when one fails to retrieve the target page.
Under Template:Citation#URL, it states:
  • url-status: this optional parameter is ignored if archive-url is not set. If omitted, or with null value, the default value is |url-status=dead. When the URL is still live, but pre-emptively archived, then set |url-status=live; this changes the display order, with the title retaining the original link and the archive linked at the end. When the original URL has been usurped for the purposes of spam, advertising, or is otherwise unsuitable, setting |url-status=unfit or |url-status=usurped suppresses display of the original URL (but |url= and |archive-url= are still required).
There are situations in which it is good to present the archive link even when the original URL is live by using |url-status=live. I would recommend this in particular for links at television or radio stations, because they often seem to change their website structures, so that the original URL will change to something else or disappear altogether.
I believe it good practice to set |url-status=dead rather than to depend on the default.
I do not recommend using the |url-status=unfit or |url-status=usurped values. I have seen them cause errors. I believe that |url-status=dead suffices for all situations when the original URL is unavailable.
I hope this answer is good enough. It is uncustomary to further mark a URL in a a citation template as dead.
Please let me know if you have any further questions. Peaceray (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Dear Peaceray,
Thank you for your assistance. I have done as recommended, and added "|url-status=dead" to the citation. I had expected that "|url-status=dead" may have done something with the "|url=" field. In the late 2000s, the Official Hollyoaks website was closed and redirected to network Channel 4's page on the site (which displays significantly less information), therefore removing all information from that site.
Thanks again,
EmmerdaleFan1972 (talk) 08:53, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-02[edit]

15:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Friday Jan 15: ONLINE Wikipedia Day NYC[edit]

January 15, 6pm: Wikimedia NYC celebrates 20 years of Wikipedia
WP20 mark example.png
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

Wikipedia Day is always a big day for Wikimedia NYC. While we cannot meet in person, we still have something special planned. We will begin the event with the debut of a new video celebrating our community. This will be followed by a panel discussion with some of the people you'll see in the video talking about Wikipedia's 20th anniversary, Wikimedia New York City, and the amazing work they do on Wikimedia projects.

The event will be broadcast live via YouTube. Feel free to ask questions for the panel through the chat!

We will also have some NYC wiki trivia you can participate in, with confectionery prizes.

6:00pm - 7:00 pm online via Wikimedia NYC on YouTube

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 14:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Thomas Jefferson Ramsdell on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination, and at Talk:2012 Istanbul suicide bombing on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:41, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Removing edit on Margaret Sanger's page[edit]

Hi, so I don't think there's anything wrong with being honest and including "eugenicist" in her bio. This is a site to teach people and anyone who doesn't scroll down to the eugenics section, might not be aware of her history in the subject. If you look at any politicians or doctors who have dabbled in this area, they're regularly branded "white supremacists" however while that title could be applied to her too, I thought that might be a bit harsh and used the more restrained term of "eugenicist." This really shouldn't be a problem for someone who legitimately believed in eugenics LetMeSeeYourBones (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

LetMeSeeYourBones, (talk page watcher) comment: Please review the previous discussions at Talk:Margaret Sanger in which editors have discussed this suggestion. (The archives of the talk page have older discussions about it.) If you have new arguments to make in support of your edit, you should start a new discussion and see if you get consensus from other editors. Schazjmd (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
LetMeSeeYourBones, the question is about what are the things for which Margaret Sanger is notable.That is what should be in the lead sentence. Advocating eugenics is hardly high up on the list. There are many influential eugenicists that do not have "eugenicist" in the lead sentence; there is no reason why we would make an exception for someone for whom eugenics was not a primary focus.
My suspicion is that by adding the eugenicist label to the lead sentence is in reality an attempt to denigrate the progress that she made with birth control, Planned Parenthood, & women's rights. Please see WP:LABEL in this regard.
I would invite you to open a discussion on Talk:Margaret Sanger if you feel otherwise. That way other editors could see & comment the discussion. First, I would advise you to read or review MOS:LEADSENTENCE, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, WP:UNDUE, & WP:EDITCONSENSUS. Peaceray (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Hello! I just wanted to thank you very much for reaching out to me with such helpful information that I really needed... Have a wonderful day and Stay Awesome

Sincerely AnestisM. Greetings from Greece 🇬🇷 Anestis99 (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-03[edit]

16:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)