User talk:Niceguyedc/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Niceguyedc. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi, I started to revert your edits on the Kapellen series of pages, where you replaced the Kapellen link with the redirect Kapellen (disambiguation). I reverted my reverts after (finally) reading WP:INTDABLINK ... :-) Thanks for the good work !--LucVerhelst (talk) 07:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Me again! Please could you put the accent over the word "nee" in the article page - Potternewton Thanks so much Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.148.129.227 (talk) 10:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

You can put the accent on Née by:

• copying the character: é
• using this code : é
• on Windows, typing ALT+130 (keep the alt-key depressed and type '130' on the numeric keypad)
• clicking on "Special characters" above the input field (where you type the text) and choosing the right character.

It's bad form to ask another editor to perform such a simple task.

@Niceguyedc: sorry to abuse your talk page like this...

--LucVerhelst (talk) 11:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Niceguy Thanks so much for your work again and I hope I am not imposing on you when I ask if you are able to put in photos on the pages/articles 1) Potternewton and 2) Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge Both pages - we feel strongly - should have the photo of Potternewton Hall (which appeared in the "Press" (York) article 17 March http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/11860310.Kate_s_links_to_North_Yorkshire_revealed/) inserted if possible. I think the photo of the Hall is from the "Leodis" Archives - Leeds Cheers again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.36.6 (talk) 23:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Those images don't appear to be free images. I don't know about Potternewton Hall, but there should be many free images of the Duchess of Cambridge that can be used. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 03:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Niceguy This image of Potternewton Hall below is on the Leodis website which would be "free". http://www.leodis.net/display.aspx?resourceIdentifier=20081113_167864 It is hoped that it can go onto the "Potternewton" page and also the "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge" page in the section "Early life". Thanks again for your help and I hope we can get this happening Cheers Mike Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.162.194 (talk) 03:44, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

That image of Potternewtown Hall is on a website that is selling the photograph. There's no way that it is free. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 03:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

You are very helpful Would a photo from google images (birds eye view of an building) be free? The photo was published in the UK Daily Telegraph in 2013. Please do let me know M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.162.194 (talk) 04:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

There are many ways for a photograph to be free. I should mention that a photograph does not need to be free, but it must meet the criteria laid out at Wikipedia:Image use policy. That page describes the situation better than I can.-Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 04:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again niceguy We have read the page - and believe that the photo of "Beechwood" in this article-http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/kate-middleton/10135251/How-the-family-of-commoner-Kate-Middleton-has-been-rubbing-shoulders-with-royalty-for-a-century.html - would be for free

Could it be placed on the Lupton family"? Cheers M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.162.194 (talk) 04:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

There's no way to determine who owns the copyright on that photo. I don't see any information on that page that would let us use any photo there. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 04:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The photo of "Beechwood" can be seen when a person does the "Google Earth" search. Does that help? Thanks again for being patient Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.162.194 (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't think that anything owned by Google would be free. They like their money... -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Amakuru, George Ho, GregKaye, Unikalinho, In ictu oculi, Philg88, Anthony Appleyard, EdJohnston: At the recent move discussion of Lithuania national basketball team to Lithuania men's national basketball team, there was mention of making a similar move to all other countries that need a similar move. I agree that the moves should happen, but can I ask (I've pinged the people in that discussion, and the three admins I see the most at WP:RM/TR) that only one of these types of moves be made per day? Turning the "national basketball team" (with no gender) article into a disambiguation page creates a large amount of pages with links that need to be fixed (Lithuania created 487). If only one is done a day, I should be able to keep up. :) -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 04:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

487 teams sounds like a lot! But why not start with the sports for which Lithuania has a national women's team. Some are listed in Category:Women's national sports teams of Lithuania. That is less than a dozen teams. EdJohnston (talk) 04:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: This isn't about the Lithuanian teams. This is about basketball teams. For example, the teams for Poland are at Poland national basketball team and Poland women's national basketball team. If the men's team is moved to Poland men's national basketball team and Poland national basketball team is turned into a disambiguation page, there will be 329 pages with ambiguous links. To be clear, I have no problem with the base national basketball team article being a disambiguation page (and the men's and women's team articles being similarly titled), but it takes time to fix those links. I'm just asking for the movement to be done a little slowly so that I have time to fix the links (since I'm the one that fixes most of the new ambiguous links (by choice)). -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Duly noted but how are we admins supposed to know if the day's "quota" of one team has been done or not short of analysing the page history every time? Why don't you just file one request per day or am I missing something? Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 05:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Philg88: I have no idea how you would know. I wasn't planning on being the one to make the moves, but I guess I can be that person. I just didn't want to see 20 of these moves happen in the next 24 hours and have them all show up at once on the lists. I've looked at a few of these situations, and I'm not sure what to make of it. United States national basketball team is a redirect to the men's team, as is Spain's and Canada's article. France and Argentina are at the base title, with the men's title redirecting to them, and the German article is similar to Poland, with the men's team at the base title, and the men's title a redlink.

Unfortunately, I imagine that consensus might be different for each country, so I don't know that a large WP:RM with all of the changes would work. What do you all think? -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I suspect that getting a consensus on a single set of global rules might take some time and inevitably stall the process. It's probably best to go for say ten moves at a time until (if it happens) someone raises an objection. Hope that helps.  Philg88 ^♦talk 08:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I've created a profoma for moves at Wikipedia:Request multiple page moves, extended blank which might be useful. GregKaye 10:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

		The Civility Barnstar
		For your kind, patient and generally civil way of dealing with fellow editors. LucVerhelst (talk) 06:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 13:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I undid your edit because one of your two corrected edits were invalid (the one for American Author Robert Greene). Thank you though for the edit for NBC Studios Chicago Smooth (talk) 12:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

… is a typo. (Notice the x?) I’m not sure why you later stated “not a typo”. —Fitoschido ^[shout_track] @ 24 March, 2015; 09:59

@Fitoschido: With the x (instead of a c) it was a typo. However, the link still needed to be piped through a (disambiguation) redirect per WP:INTDABLINK. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 16:18, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello! I'm new here and was reviewing Wikipedia's core content policies when I noticed that an unconstructive edit was made over at Sophie Hunter's page by Lady Lotus (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sophie_Hunter&diff=653358418&oldid=653281992). She has restored an edit that mislabels a production and removes a credit. User Corsican Honeymoon's edit should be restored due to the following reasons:

• Calling the production Lucretia an installation is mislabeling the production because installations are inanimate and Lucretia has movements from performers, so it should be properly called performance art. Installation and performance art are entirely different things.
• Putting the timestamp "(2011)" after Rape of Lucretia suggests that Rape of Lucretia was done in 2011 when it isn't. It's the performance art Lucretia that was produced in 2011 not the opera which was first performed in 1946.
• Deletion of Magic Flute as credit when the provided reliable source explicitly says that Hunter has directed it. Per core content policy "No original research", an editor can't just remove a credit because she thinks the production didn't happen at all. That counts as vandalism.180.191.218.159 (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Niceguy If it is not too much trouble - could you please do the accent over "nee" on the page "Wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton" - (nee Lupton). I find it really hard to do. Thanks again M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.63.12 (talk) 00:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC) It's all OK now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.63.12 (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

hi just viewed the Lucy Hatton athlete page ,just need to make a couple of corrections . my name is actually spelt Alex Clark ,Lucy was coached by myself and John right through 2014 Jerzy ( George ) did not start working with Lucy until January of 2015 . The big improvement and breakthrough in 2014 by Lucy was under the coaching guidance of John and myself . All of this can be confirmed on the power of 10 web site .Regards Alex (Unsigned 7 May 2015)

(Go Seahawks). Apparently I'm creating work for you all by making these links. FYI, here's my thinking on that:

I like to have more information rather than less. So sometimes I enjoy checking out different meanings of a word or acronym. Then I can click on the appropriate meaning. So I have a minor disagreement with policy on this point. Whatever. Thanks for your hard work, and sorry about that. lifeform (talk) 05:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

This automated edit of yours created a broken link. Th4n3r (talk) 15:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

That was a typo by me. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 09:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I undid a bunch of your edits, disambiguating links to Motorist. There wasn't anything wrong with your edits in themselves, but a better fix to the situation was to revert the recent change of Motorist from a redirect into a disambiguation page. The page's WP:PRIMARYTOPIC was the target of the redirect, and neither of the other two terms listed on the page was actually ambiguous with "motorist". I have (hopefully) put everything back the way it was.--Srleffler (talk) 01:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

WALE should not be lumped in with the word wale because it is a callsign, something that is not a word nor an acronym. The letters are said individually when given aurally, and the W series is assigned by the I.T.U. to the United States. What could exist on the WALE disambiguation page is a link to the word wale, as has been done with other callsigns that look like words. But, WALE, is neither a word nor an acronym.Stereorock (talk) 05:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

In the Seattle area? You are invited to the Seattle Wiknic 2015 on Sunday, July 5, 2015, 11am to 2pm at the Washington Park Arboretum, in the meadow area to the south of the Graham Visitors Center, approximately at 47°38′15″N 122°17′38″W / 47.637435°N 122.293986°W / 47.637435; -122.293986. Click here for more details!

Dear User,

As you are one of the contributors to Tunisian Arabic. You are kindly asked to review the part about Domains of Use and adjust it directly or through comments in the talk page of Tunisian Arabic.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 12:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I only disambiguated a couple links on the page. I'm not a "contributor" to the article. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 14:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I stumbled across an interesting comment of yours:

Mrtvica (disambiguation) → Mrtvica (move · discuss) – The disambiguation page should be at the base title per WP:MALPLACED (Mrtvica redirects to Mrtvica (disambiguation)). – Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 03:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Now it has always been my understanding that the disambiguation page can not be the primary topic if there is only one existing article by that name (assuming the other entries are red links). Which is logical in itself, as there is no other article that could contest the primary location. I can't immediately find where that was written down, but are you in disagreement with such a statement ? --Midas02 (talk) 17:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Midas02: A disambiguation page is never a primary topic, but it can reside at the "base" title (in this case, Mrtvica). There are situations where a disambiguation page might be deleted because it has only one blue link on it, but if it exists, it can exist at the "base" title with only one blue link. In this specific case, the three articles are linked by 3, 2 and 3 other articles, so I would suggest that Mrtvica (Vladičin Han) is not the WP:PRIMARY topic, even though it is the only blue link. One thing is clear, though, the "base" title (Mrtvica) should never redirect to the (disambiguation) title (Mrtvica (disambiguation)) - this is what WP:MALPLACED is all about.

So, in this case, either:

the disambiguation page is at Mrtvica (no WP:PRIMARY topic), or

the disambiguation page is at Mrtvica (disambiguation) and Mrtvica (Vladičin Han) is moved to Mrtvica (the village in Vladičin Han is the WP:PRIMARY topic)

These are the only two situations that can exist per the disambiguation guidelines/policies (a possible third option of deleting the disambiguation page and moving the village to Mrtvica seems to be unhelpful, as the two red links are equally viable topics per the link statistics). My view is that the first option is the correct one, but if consensus is for the second option, I would have no issue with it. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 18:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, but that's an opinion and not policy. It would be best if this case was described in the guidelines, there are too many of these pages. I've opened a discussion here. --Midas02 (talk) 03:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure you were right with this edit,[1]. In this instance the 'dab page' starts with a simple definition of 'emphasis'. I leave it to you as to whether the 'dab' or the 'wikt' is more helpful.Pincrete (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I normally link to the wiktionary when that definition is the best fit. It is unusual to have that definition copied to the top of the disambiguation page, so I'm not sure why it is there. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 16:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Niceguy, I have reverted your edit on 28th Indian Brigade. The link to the Frontier Force dab page is intentional. 19:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Very well. I have modified the link (per WP:INTDABLINK) to show that it is intentional. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 19:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for that, Niceguy. I note the correct methodology for future reference.

Also, thank you for tidying up "13th Cavalry Brigade" links - did not finish off this aspect earlier on. Hamish59 (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

In order to resolve the current dispute over these redirects, I have opened a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 July 9#African to determine if there is a consensus to change the status quo. Please feel free to participate in this discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Can I ask why you deleted my name from this page??? Cullen1987 (talk) 00:32, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I've not sure what page you are talking about, as I've edited quite a few pages recently. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:39, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

The Starting over (2007) page it's a TV film that I was an extra in, I put my name up on it and now it's gone says you edited 2 hours ago Cullen1987 (talk) 00:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

The cast lists for movie articles are only for main cast members. The articles do not list every single person who was in the movie, otherwise movie articles would just become long lists of names. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Still though don't understand why you felt the need to delete it Cullen1987 (talk) 01:00, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Movie articles generally do not list extras in their lists of cast members. Additionally, the link pointed to the James Cullen disambiguation page, not any particular person. That's why I saw the link in the first place. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 01:05, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Right I just don't no why you felt the need to delete it... Not going to argue about it though just voiceing my opinion that I don't think it's right you just delete something that someone's put up if it's not offensive or disrupting the page Cullen1987 (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I wanted to mention a correction to the Beverly Hills 90210 franchise. If you remember correctly, Beverly Hills 90210 had five spin offs, not 4 like stated. Technically, "The Heights" featuring Donna's boyfriend Ray was in fact, considered a 90210 spin off as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.102.165 (talk) 00:33, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't remember that show (I stopped watching the original series in the mid 90s), but I am not sure what this is referring to. I haven't added or removed any information on any 90210 related pages recently (I might have disambiguated a link or two, but that's it). -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:39, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

It really didn't last long, which is actually why he came back to the original 90210. Below are the Wikipedia and IMDB pages for the series.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heights_(TV_series)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103439/

I don't really know how to edit actual pages, plus I would rather go to you directly. But please feel free to use any information. I'm happy to contribute. ☺Misty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.102.165 (talk) 01:27, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I decided to log in if I was going to keep making suggestions. ☺ BTW, thanks for responding so quickly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MistyRoseNC (talk • contribs) 01:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't look to me like it was a spin off of the 90210 series, but if you can find a source, you can update the article to mention it. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 01:46, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey I saw in the past you edited this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_University_of_New_York_Buffalo&action=history (back in 2012) From a disambig to a redirect. Which I agree with because the University's official name is the State University of New York at Buffalo , and is also known as SUNY Buffalo or University at Buffalo. And the page has a disambiguation to Buffalo State College on top of its page already.

Now for these pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUNY%E2%80%93Buffalo and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_University_of_New_York%E2%80%93Buffalo there has been some discrepancy (as noted on the talk pages). I'm hoping you can shine some insight. Most phrases currently searched like "SUNY Buffalo" or "State University of New York Buffalo" or "State University of New York at Buffalo" all redirect to the University at Buffalo no problem, but these pages with added dashes go to the disambig page. I feel your assessment back in 2012 when you edited that page made the most sense. Thanks for your time. §AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 06:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks like a mess to me. In my opinion, all of the redirects should go to the disambiguation page (wherever it actually is), and any links should be fixed to go to the actual titles of the correct pages. It's possible that a title might only have been used by one of the two colleges, but to eliminate confusion, it would be easier if none of the redirects were used. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 06:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response. I agree those two pages should be deleted. The two schools have two different names and are known by different names also. So in the end it's easier to just have the disambiguations on the top of the university's pages only. As for redirects I think the current ones are fine and make sense (SUNY Buffalo goes to University at Buffalo. Buffalo State goes to Buffalo State College, and so on.AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 06:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for disambiguating the links to Spring Awakening, after I moved the article. I was thinking about doing that but it looked a bit overwhelming.... I'm really glad someone with semi-automated tools could do it. Thanks again, nice work! Softlavender (talk) 06:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for disambiguating links in the article Andrew Dalby. I wanted to add internal links to articles that explain the languages studied by this expert. --Gilles2014 (talk) 17:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Niceguyedc, I see you keep reverting my changes to the hatnote for John Hunt (publisher). The way you keep changing it back, it ends up that if you click on the link John Hunt, it sends you to a page "John Hunt (disambiguation)" which then redirects you to the page John Hunt. John Hunt is the disambiguation page. I keep trying to avoid the needless redirect, and you keep restoring it. I have trimmed the hatnote template down again. If you know a better way to change this so that you are not sent to John Hunt by way of a needless redirect, good. It doesn't have to be the way I did it. I am just trying to avoid doing something that is wasteful and looks bad. (Not that this is serious enough that I expect to lose sleep over it, but still ....) You may well come up with something better, as I see you specialize in this kind of thing. But please don't just keep setting the template so that clicking John Hunt sends you to John Hunt (disambiguation), which sends you to John Hunt (the real disambiguation page). It just doesn't make sense to me. Thanks. --Alan W (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alan W: Actually, when intentionally linking to a disambiguation page, piping the link through the (disambigaution) redirect is policy (WP:INTDABLINK). It helps those of us at WP:DPL (and the bots that create lists for us) know that the link is an intentional link to the disambiguation page. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:00, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, I see. It doesn't really look that great to me, but since this is policy, and I do see that there is some justification for it, I am not going to argue any further. I have reverted my last edit. I have been contributing to Wikipedia for over ten years, yet I keep learning sew things all the time. Keeps me on my toes, I suppose. Seriously, I am grateful that there are those like yourself who worry about all these details. Otherwise, things would be even more chaotic around here than they are already. --Alan W (talk) 00:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Transbay (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Widefox; talk 08:48, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for finishing the rest of the Chipmunks dab fixes. I'd had enough of it. Seems they covered half the pop hits of the early 80s, plus more, and someone had to make a mention of that in the articles about each of the songs they covered. Glad it's done now. OK! :) Wbm1058 (talk) 03:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

From the links, they did seem to be everywhere in the 80s and 90s. Funny that I don't remember them all over the place then... -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 03:34, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

thanks for your advice. Today I have finished the text. I do hope it is all right. If not, please have a call. I do hope to solve the problem with the names in the next week.

--Hirschfeldt (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that edit on Fictional diseases. I thought I fixed it, but I must have forgotten to hit the Save Page key. I'm afraid I haven't read that book you mentioned, The Immortals.

--Maedar — Preceding undated comment added 22:34, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up the incoming links to the new DAB page. I had it somewhere on my todo list but you got there first. I guess that makes us quits for all the move requests I've actioned at RMT on your behalf. Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 09:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

@Philg88: Most of the links were caused by one template. There were only 8 or 9 other links, so it was easy. Thanks for all your help with the moves! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 09:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

In the Seattle area? Edit Wikipedia or Wikimedia sister projects? You are invited to help. Come to our first Meetup to revitalize & prioritize WikiProject Seattle on July 27, 2015, 6pm to 9pm, at Café Allegro

Yours, Peaceray

To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list. -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

As I consider you the guru on all matters of disambiguation, I'd like some advice. We have a main article SARSA, and there are at least two Indian villages with the same name. Should "Sarsa" be a disambiguation page or should I create Sarsa (disambiguation) with an {{other uses}} template hatted to the affected articles? I guess it comes down to whether SARSA is considered the primary topic. Thanks in advance for any input, Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 20:24, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

The guidelines suggest that the disambiguation page should be at Sarsa (disambiguation), but in looking around, I examples of both positions (PETA is a redirect to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the disambiguation page is at Peta / NAFTA and Nafta are redirects to North American Free Trade Agreement, the disambiguation page is at Nafta (disambiguation)).

At this point, without any other articles existing, I would put the disambiguation page at Sarsa (disambiguation), create Sarsa as a redirect to SARSA, and make sure that both the disambiguation page and SARSA have links to each other. Eventually, if enough Sarsa topics exist, it could make sense to move the disambiguation page to Sarsa. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 20:44, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(pinging Philg88 because I forgot) -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 20:46, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for that. A quick count here shows at least 19 Indian towns/villages called "Sarsa", Sarsa, Bhiwani already exists and no doubt more will follow. Sooner or later we will have a reader questioning whether a seemingly obscure machine learning article is the main topic and I'd rather preempt that. Thoughts?  Philg88 ^♦talk 22:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Philg88: Ah, I didn't see that article (putting Sarsa in the search box doesn't show it in the top 10 entries - adding a comma shows it). With one existing article and a bunch more possibilities, I'd put the disambiguation page at Sarsa. It might even be better to move the machine learning article to State-Action-Reward-State-Action, or State Action Reward State Action, or another appropriate title, and have SARSA redirect to the disambiguation page at Sarsa so that the difference in capitalization makes no difference and everyone entering Sarsa or SARSA goes to the disambiguation page. There are only 6 incoming article links to SARSA and the page view stats show 1295 hits this month (with today's spike presumably caused by us), so it's not as if that many people would be inconvenienced by it. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 22:18, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks for the input. Shiny new DAB page created. Best,  Philg88 ^♦talk 07:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

-Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 07:43, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

D'oh! Thanks for the cleanup on Bill Plympton. You are indeed a nice guy! --Tenebrae (talk)

It looks like that film has been added a couple times. It's an unusual word (that is a disambiguation page), so I'll remember to check the film status the next time I see that page pop up on the lists. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 19:07, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

See my comment on the Talk:Centennial --Zeamays (talk) 23:43, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Zeamays: If you feel that Centennial should be a disambiguation page, then you can start a requested move discussion to move Centennial (disambiguation) to Centennial. Please don't change the redirect target at Centennial to the disambiguation page (per WP:MALPLACED). -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 02:28, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

This approach seems totally unnecessary because the disambiguation page Centennial (disambiguation) is already in use and just needs the redirect to it, but I have followed your request in the hope of a reasonable and painless resolution. --Zeamays (talk) 05:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Zeamays: The move discussion is necessary because the current primary topic for Centennial is the meaning that points it to Century. If consensus is against that, the discussion will bear that out. If it is a clear consensus, it will only take a couple days.

Incidentally, the move you have is backwards. You'll want to change the move to Centennial (disambiguation) → Centennial. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:54, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I had a massive typo while I was explaining why I reverted your edit on the link that redirects to the disambiguation page on Tropical Storm Dolly. So, I am going to make myself clear, in case you didn't understand why.... I purposely deleted the '(disambiguation)' tag on the title because it does not need to be placed, as there is no other page with the same title as Tropical Storm Dolly. So therefore there is no need for placing the (disambiguation) tag on it, and that is why I reverted your last edit. CycloneYoris (talk) 00:53, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@CycloneYoris: Your reversion of my change means that the link on Hurricane Dolly (2008) now links directly to the disambiguation page. There have been many notable storms named Dolly. Since the link is clearly meant for the disambiguation page, it should be piped through the (disambiguation) redirect (per WP:INTDABLINK). This is to let those of us at WP:DPL who fix ambiguous links (and the bots that help us) know that the link is intentional. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 02:35, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

But the problem is that the '(disambiguation)' tag is not included in the original title, and if you include it then the correct title will appear at the top of the Tropical Storm Dolly (disambiguation) page stating that it has been redirected from another different page. CycloneYoris (talk) 08:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@CycloneYoris: That's correct. All intentional links to disambiguation pages go through that type of redirect if the disambiguation page is at the base title. There is nothing wrong with a redirect note at the top of the page. There are links throughout Wikipedia that redirect to other pages. In this case, linking to the (disambiguation) redirect helps those of us who fix ambiguous links know that we don't need to fix the link. This is spelled out at WP:INTDABLINK. Please note the use of the word policy in the text behind that link. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 08:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

		The Super Disambiguator's Barnstar
		The Super Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to the winners of the Disambiguation Pages With Links monthly challenge, who have gone above and beyond to remove ambiguous links. This award is presented to Niceguyedc, for successfully fixing 3901 links in the challenge of July, 2015. Also, you are eligible for a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation. Message BD2412 if you need the details for claiming your prize. 'Rcsprinter123 (announce) @ 20:28, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

		The Super Disambiguator's Bonus Barnstar
		The Super Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to the winners of the Disambiguation Pages With Links monthly challenge (bonus list section) who have gone above and beyond to remove ambiguous links. This award is presented to Niceguyedc, for successfully fixing 3795 links in the bonus list challenge of July, 2015. Rcsprinter123 (announce) @ 20:28, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

For helping out with the links that escaped my purview yesterday! Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

No thank you, we will keep my better and more correct disambiguation page. In addition, this was not a copy and paste move. The content of the new page is different. Thanks in advance for understanding. Eightball (talk) 19:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

While your plot synopsis for Ouija is thorough, I think it should stay the way I edited it, with the studio released synopsis. Just to keep it from being bloated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colbsterking (talk • contribs) 05:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Colbsterking: It appears that you are referring to Ouija (2014 film). I've only edited that page twice, and both times were to change [[Douglas Smith]] into [[Douglas Smith (actor)|Douglas Smith]]. I haven't added or subtracted anything from the plot of the film. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, not sure if you can help me out with this, but I see you edited the article in some way and I Really want to find the citation for the following two sentences:

The writings of Alexander Gode suggested that Leibniz' characteristica had a metaphysical bias which prevented it from reflecting reality faithfully. Gode emphasized that Leibniz established certain goals or functions first, and then developed the characteristica to fulfill those functions.

Really want to know where in Gode's writings this appears! Any help seriously appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoenborges (talk • contribs) 14:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll have to take a look around to see if I can find anything. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 16:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Greetings, Niceguyedc! You seem to be an experienced Wikipedian so I was wondering if I could seek your opinion on an issue of concern to me. Recently, User:Flusus has carried out some dramatic revisions of/additions to several Ghana-related articles, including Kumasi, Obuasi, Ashanti people, and Ashanti Region. To be honest, the scope of his/her changes are a bit hard to take in at one go, but I'm noticing that these additions seem to be written pretty consistently in an ungrammatical, idiosyncratic English; a highly promotional and adulatory tone; and with apparent misconceptions of how wikilinks work. For instance, the user refers to the "Ashanti people ethnic group"; the "Kumasi metropolis megacity" (rarely just "Kumasi", almost always "Kumasi metropolis" or "Kumasi metropolis megacity"; NB: Kumasi is not a megacity by most definitions); the user refers to Obuasi as a "gold bar mining mining community", etc. The articles are also riddled with run-on sentences that start and stop without reason.

Now, you might be wondering why I don't just attend to this myself, but (a) I'm usually reluctant to make major changes without consulting others first and (b) I think it's possible that Flusus has added a fair amount of substantive information, the only problem being that it's buried beneath language and formatting issues. Now, looking briefly at your edit history, I see you're a very busy Wikipedian, so if you don't have the time to take this up, no worries, but if you could take a glance at the effected pages (I see you've already reverted some of Flusus's edits, but s/he has since added more) or at least give me some guidance on steps I should take myself, I would greatly appreciate it. Best wishes, Tigercompanion25 (talk) 17:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_most_populous_cities_in_India#Requested_move_16_August_2015. Thanks. Vin09 (talk) 11:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Niceguyedc, Can you explain, why you prefer the link to Ole Sørensen (disambiguation). This page is just a redirect to Ole Sørensen and I do not see a reason why Sørensen should link to Ole Sørensen (disambiguation). Inwind (talk) 10:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Inwind: When intentionally linking to a disambiguation page, the link should go through the (disambiguation) redirect (per WP:INTDABLINK). This helps those of us at WP:DPL (and the bots that help us) know that the link is intentional. Every link that goes to a disambiguation page that doesn't go through the (disambiguation) redirect is assumed to be incorrect and needs to be fixed. With the link to Ole Sørensen (disambiguation), the link shows as intentional and we can move on to other links that need to be modified. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 10:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for Your help with Borisoglebsk 2, especially since weapon systems isn't my cup of tea. I just was surprised we lacked an article. Thanks again ! Boeing720 (talk) 15:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello just wondering why you removed the YouTube video as a source, it helps keep the view count more updated as the other source only states 103 million? Regards, Lucky102 (talk) 19:45, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Lucky102: I didn't remove the YouTube source - that was Fideliosr. I only changed [[Moroccan]] to [[Moroccans|Moroccan]], as Moroccan is ambiguous. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 20:21, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but I believe that links that lead to redirects are to be avoided. And you keep creating them. TrueCRaysball | ^#RaysUp 01:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@TrueCRaysball: A couple things:

• As far as I know, there is no issue in linking to a redirect (see WP:REDIRECT and MOS:RDR)
• If you are referring to the redirects that I link to the most, the (disambiguation) redirects in hatnotes, those links are not only allowed, but required when (by WP:INTDABLINK) when intentionally linking to a disambiguation page

Is there a particular redirect that I'm linking that you are questioning? -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 02:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Need your help. Not sure how to clarify your "record producer' edit at Justin Guarini page. He is not only a record producer, he's also a Producer for various types of entertainment such a B'way show, the Times Square Tonys, various ClearChannel projects (example: ComiCon event), etc. (see article) Thanks.(Bkstone (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC))

@Bkstone: You can add text to describe the types of producing that he does, or just talk about what he's done the most. Producer is a disambiguation page. It's generally not helpful to link there, as there are many types of producer that he's not. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 20:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Niceguyedc, thanks for correction in above. I forgot it. Now my question: I corrected the dates in the infobox as 2013-12-31. Shown is 2012-12-31. Can you correct this or is there a problem with WP-EDV? Other dates ar also wrong and I used always the appropriate talk site. Everytime no answer...Unfortunately no reaction or correction. Regards -- Sweepy (talk) 21:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@Sweepy: It appears that the population value (and the date and reference) in the {{Infobox German location}} template comes from {{Population Germany}}, which copies data from the German Wikipedia. It doesn't appear that manual changes to the population value/date/reference in the first template actually do anything. If you don't speak German, the best talk page to ask is at Template Talk:Infobox German location. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 21:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

First, thanks for above. The wrong dates are not only at German locations but rather Austrian and others. I will use the Template Talk:Infobox German location to your advice and I hope somebody can correct it. Unnecessary edits/corrections cause more working and time. Furthermore the en-WP works with wrong dates and this is unhelpful for users and readers...Thanks once more and regards -- Sweepy (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The best example is my sort at States of Germany (disambiguation). Here I sorted for logical reasons only after years...Regards -- Sweepy (talk) 23:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorting that page by years makes sense. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 23:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

In your recent edit of the Nahuel 1A article, you moved the link on thrusters from Thruster to Rocket engine. This is incorrect. Thrusters are the engines used for station keeping, as defined at the top of the Thruster article. The fact that it is arranged as a disambiguation page only shows the issue with that particular article. The conceptual separation between main orbital engine and thruster is important in satellite technology, and has implications about thrust, performance, dwell time and rated life. That's why I undid your edit. I would rather delete the link than link to the wrong concept. Baldusi (talk) 14:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Very well. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 18:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I want to edit the of mice and men band on Wikipedia bc I found valuebal information Tayla bands (talk) 16:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Then go ahead and edit it. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 17:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

		The Disambiguator's Barnstar
		The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators. This is for fixing 1661 ambiguous links during August 2015. Rcsprinter123 (comment) @ 16:49, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

		The Super Disambiguator's Bonus Barnstar
		The Super Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to the winners of the Disambiguation Pages With Links monthly challenge (bonus list section) who have gone above and beyond to remove ambiguous links. This award is presented to Niceguyedc, for successfully fixing 1608 links in the bonus list challenge of August, 2015. Rcsprinter123 (comment) @ 16:49, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks as always! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey Niceguyedc, just giving you a heads up here. Links in wikibooks are done differently than in articles, just so you know. Hope you understand now. Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

@Discographer: If I may ask, is there a guideline/FAQ/document anywhere that describes the linking or typesetting conventions for WP:Books? -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 23:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Here at Help:Books/for experts. The reason for this is that when downloading a book, the function of italics and "quotation marks" will work. For it to work though, they must be included inside of that particular link. Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 00:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

ml:തുള്ളൽ (വിവക്ഷകൾ) ?Xx236 (talk) 09:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

@Xx236: Yes, that page in the Malayalam wiki looks like Thullal (that's what my machine translation shows, as I can read Indic scripts). -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 09:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Stephanie Synclair requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

@Piotrus: I didn't create the article, I only disambiguated a link meant for Amazon.com and moved a comma before a reference. Delete away! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 04:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Ooops, sorry, misclicked in history. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:06, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for improving my Hurtworld page!

Catmando999 (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the kitten! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 10:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

My pleasure.Catmando999 (talk) 10:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bronymadness70 (talk) 19:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 21:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		For a pattern of consistently excellent clean-up, review and anti-DABing. LavaBaron (talk) 22:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 22:28, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Atlanta (version 2). Since you had some involvement with the Atlanta (version 2) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. JMHamo (talk) 23:45, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Niceguyedc. You have new messages at Walter Görlitz's talk page.
Message added 04:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Responded at WT:D. If you would like me to add to the discussion at your talk page as well, I'll be happy to jump in. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 04:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	I want to thank you for disambiguating all the many links to washboard. You even managed to distinguish the laundry one from the musical one. I do not know how you did that. Did you build a special bot? IAC, Nice Job. Foobarnix (talk) 22:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! No bot here, I just looked at each link. There's still a couple that are referring to a "washboard"-like shape, so they could be referring to either. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 22:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

The article Permanence (No Devotion album) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This has had a {{notability}} template since July.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 06:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I only created the page as a redirect to No Devotion. The IP who expanded the page has already removed the PROD. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 17:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Niceguyedc. Since you've edited one or more of List of current members of the British Privy Council, British Government frontbench and Official Opposition frontbench in the last six months, I'd like to invite you to a discussion about the use of honorifics in those lists. The discussion is happening here, and I look forward to a helpful and robust discussion. DBD 21:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Not sure if this happened anywhere else but you changed {{For|the oil tanker|MV Frigg}} to {{Other users}}. I'm guessing you meant {{Other uses}}. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@CambridgeBayWeather: Yes. That was a typo. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 18:02, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I am curious as to what drove or influenced you to edit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eligible_Receiver_97 an event that happened 18 years ago . . . Capt Spock (talk) 18:30, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

At the time I edited it, root access was a disambiguation page, instead of a redirect to superuser. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 18:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, thats exactly what I intended noq (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Noq: Excellent. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 06:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

You wrote $13, but it was $0.13. Magyaruser (talk) 13:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

@Magyaruser: On Martin Shkreli, I did not write $13 or $0.13. I only changed [[Bloomberg]] to [[Bloomberg News|Bloomberg]]. You'll need to look for the edit in the article history to figure out who made the change you are talking about. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 18:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)