User talk:GhostInTheMachine

It is 7:51 PM where this user lives.

This user knows that it can be a challenge to keep AGF in mind.

This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies.

Hi @GhostInTheMachine, I see that you are changing all the short descriptions of European political parties, which I had set to draw from wikidata. I would be grateful if you reverted those changes, as this makes it easier to harmonise and translate these descriptions. Thanks! Julius Schwarz (talk) 13:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also see that you are removing former European political alliances from this category to add them instead to the category of current European political alliances. Could you please let me know why this is more appropriate? Julius Schwarz (talk) 13:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, please stop, now you are changing labels in manner that is not accurate. European political parties are called as such officially, they have not been called "political parties at European level" since 2014. There were discussions on the matter and this was resolved a long time ago. Please hold off on further changes and discuss. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read these messages, stop mass editing, and discuss. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GhostInTheMachine please note that by reverting edits, you do not merely change the short description but you removed a lot of useful changes. Please discuss before reverting changes. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Short descriptions must be plain text and may not include any templates. I routinely fix any short descriptions that use templates — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly explain how the short descriptions you changed were inadequate -- why it is not possible to call to wikidata for descriptions, insofar as the content of the description is valid? Also you reverted A LOT of important changes. If you have a problem with the descriptions, do not revert changes that affect more than the descriptions. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, many of these descriptions have been too long – the current guidelines at WP:SDSHORT advise a limit of around 40 characters. The full guidelines are at WP:SDCONTENT — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dispute that these descriptions were too long. Maybe with the exception of European political foundations, but including the name of the affiliated party is highly relevant. You cannot simply take an axe to everything. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Short_description#Why_not_simply_re-use_Wikidata's_item_descriptions? indeed says that descriptions on Wikipedia and Wikidata are "very often" different. But this is not the case here and the capitalisation issue is sorted out. There seems to be no objective reason to remove the calls to Wikidata in this case, let alone reverting changes on a massive scale. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Ok, point taken about the fact that short descriptions must be in plain text. However, please revert all your reverts and edits, and only proceed to changing the short description itself. Your reverts have way more far-reaching consequences than just the short descriptions. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Short descriptions must be plain text and may not include any templates. This is a simple technical issue and nothing to do with the chosen text. As such, I routinely fix any short descriptions that use templates. In this case, a simple revert was the "cheapest" method for any articles that had not been edited any further. In those cases, I did not use a simple revert, but manually fixed the short description with a further edit. You are free to edit the text of a Short description just as you are free to edit the text within an article. Other editors also have the same freedom and will seek to reduce the length of any Short descriptions that are too long. — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but you reverted many, many changes that went far beyond the short description and which impacts categories, phrasing, characterizations and more. Please revert these. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not aware that I altered any categories. Which articles need to be re-edited? — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 15:02, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please just revert all changes and I will personally change the short descriptions by removing the call to Wikidata. Then you can always check what you believe it too long. Julius Schwarz (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, my error scan reports that there are no articles in this Wikipedia that include a template in the short description, which is as it should be. If you need some help with editing a specific article, please get in touch again — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 15:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I am sorry but I am going to revert your edits and then manually change the short descriptions. It does not matter what your scan report tells you, it matters that you deleted a lot of important information. Julius Schwarz (talk) 15:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I reverted the changed and kept the plain text descriptions, so let's consider this conversation closed. For the record, you clearly did far more changes than you seem to understand. I believe your intentions are good, but you do not fully master the tools you are using. This has led to a lot of needless confusion and time wasted. Please be more careful in the future. Julius Schwarz (talk) 16:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Japanese companies disestablished in 1973 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 02:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming what happened at Therapeutic use is that you went to add an SD, but the page had been moved in the meantime, and that race condition caused you to inadvertently recreate it? For future reference, CSD G4 doesn't apply there, but G7 does; or, if you see someone else do it, G6 as an unambiguous error or A3 for no content. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That is about it. The browser still held the page while it was being moved. I will use G6 if there is a next time — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 19:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]