User talk:El Nero Diablo
Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer be able to have them marked as minor by default. For more information on what a minor edit is, see WP:MINOR or feel to get in touch.
Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
RfC: New helper policy[edit]
Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".
To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c)
List of Extra Credits episodes[edit]
Please give the guideline or policy that allows external links to be added as such, as you have apparently assumed is allowed at List of Extra Credits episodes. Alex|The|Whovian? 06:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- I note your request for protection and await your response to this discussion. Alex|The|Whovian? 06:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Those external links are direct to the episodes in question the article is listing, without which it's otherwise useless to direct to the content in question for each episode listed or the page would be bloated in the footnotes if the links were relocated there. If you have a problem with the direct linkage to the videos in question you should at least have attempted to use the article's talk page before appearing to vandalise by blanket-deletion of the links and thus waste the efforts of everyone else that has been put into the article since it was split off from the main Extra Credits article back in May 2012. El Nero Diablo (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I know they're to the episodes in question. However, according to Template:Episode list, the "Title" parameter's documentation is "
The title of the episode. The title will appear in "quotes" when rendered, so it is not necessary to place them in quotes beforehand. Only link to an episode article if it has already been created.
" That third sentence means that the only thing that should be linked is to the episode's article should it exist. If the links to the episodes are necessary, then perhaps try using the "RTitle" parameter as a reference. By the way, accusing one of vandalizing when they are simply the guidelines for a template that was created in 2006 (i.e. 6 years before your date) is a serious accusation that can allow for a report into the action of a user. Just an FYI. Alex|The|Whovian? 06:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)- If all that would have needed to change to keep the links to the episodes paired with their titles was changing of where the link is located or reference parameter, then why didn't you say as such using the talk page or otherwise just do the change yourself and mention it on the talk page and in the edit description, instead of the blanket deletion of the as-is links as was done? El Nero Diablo (talk) 06:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Because the template's documentation then goes on to say "
nformatted parameter that can be used to add a reference after "Title", or can be used as a "raw title" to replace "Title" completely. Future episodes should include a reference in this field to comply with Wikipedia:Verifiability.
" Future episodes only. However, I put the suggestion across because you seem glued to the idea that the links must remain for whatever does-not-contribute-encyclopedic-information reason. Alex|The|Whovian? 06:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)- YOU never bothered with the common courtesy of even using the article's talk page and asking WHY the page was formatted the way it is in the first place, NOR it seems did you bother looking at the history of the page. A quick glance at the edit history of both the episode list article and the article of the Extra Credits series as a whole would show that the episodes were linked first to the official episode articles on the Penny Arcade site, then updated to the episode articles on Extra Credits' .net site after the split from PA, then directly to the videos on YouTube which is the ONLY way to link to their official source now since the official EC .net site shut down back in Jan 2016 (thus why the main EC article links to the UNOFFICIAL .org fan site now).
- On top of that you seem to have read the part of the documentation to ONLY mean "only make an episode name in a list a link if it's to a page elsewhere here on Wikipedia", which comes across as "screw you if you're linking directly to the episode's freely accessible and official source", along with "we don't care if you're linking to the official source, we don't want you to bother updating the list if you do that", when it's just as valid to read that as "if the episode has a page here on Wikipedia feel free to link to that instead of the official source".
- Combine the lack of common courtesy to find out why the page was coded the way it was along with the out-of-the-blue blanket deletion of the direct links and it easily comes across and you vandalising the page. You wanna know why few other episode lists link directly to the episodes they list? Most other series with episode lists here don't have free easy legal and official access to said episodes to link them to, unlike with the series by the Extra Credits team.
- Because the template's documentation then goes on to say "
- If all that would have needed to change to keep the links to the episodes paired with their titles was changing of where the link is located or reference parameter, then why didn't you say as such using the talk page or otherwise just do the change yourself and mention it on the talk page and in the edit description, instead of the blanket deletion of the as-is links as was done? El Nero Diablo (talk) 06:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I know they're to the episodes in question. However, according to Template:Episode list, the "Title" parameter's documentation is "
- Those external links are direct to the episodes in question the article is listing, without which it's otherwise useless to direct to the content in question for each episode listed or the page would be bloated in the footnotes if the links were relocated there. If you have a problem with the direct linkage to the videos in question you should at least have attempted to use the article's talk page before appearing to vandalise by blanket-deletion of the links and thus waste the efforts of everyone else that has been put into the article since it was split off from the main Extra Credits article back in May 2012. El Nero Diablo (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- If your attitude towards editing pages like the EC Episode list basically comes across as "This pages doesn't fit my specific perspective about how to apply guidelines and use templates" and you not bothering to ask WHY it was being updated the way it is that causes this sort of 'discussion' (and I'm hesitant to even call it that), then kindly don't bother working on such pages and disrupting the efforts of others working on it, and don't bother me here again. El Nero Diablo (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- First and foremost, Wikipedia is not a TV Guide, so you want to list the "freely accessible" episodes is totally against that. We are here to provide information, not places where people can watch episodes. It doesn't fit Wikipedia's perspective of guidelines and template usage. And keep accusing my of vandalism - we'll see where it gets you. At least when I do discuss it, I don't insta-revert it, unlike some other editors (you). Alex|The|Whovian? 22:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- I hope that my most recent edit is a more agreeable and acceptable layout. Alex|The|Whovian? 02:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- It does have the effect of making a giant reference footnote that I was worried about, but it does at least provide the appropriate links for the episodes near the titles. The next problem updating the page will be updating the list of Season 9-onwards episodes I have sitting in my sandbox (since seems I was the only one willing to do the leg work to start adding them in, as-of 8 months ago) to fit the new style, but that can come later when I've chilled out and feel like editing again. El Nero Diablo (talk) 02:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- I hope that my most recent edit is a more agreeable and acceptable layout. Alex|The|Whovian? 02:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- First and foremost, Wikipedia is not a TV Guide, so you want to list the "freely accessible" episodes is totally against that. We are here to provide information, not places where people can watch episodes. It doesn't fit Wikipedia's perspective of guidelines and template usage. And keep accusing my of vandalism - we'll see where it gets you. At least when I do discuss it, I don't insta-revert it, unlike some other editors (you). Alex|The|Whovian? 22:10, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- If your attitude towards editing pages like the EC Episode list basically comes across as "This pages doesn't fit my specific perspective about how to apply guidelines and use templates" and you not bothering to ask WHY it was being updated the way it is that causes this sort of 'discussion' (and I'm hesitant to even call it that), then kindly don't bother working on such pages and disrupting the efforts of others working on it, and don't bother me here again. El Nero Diablo (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)