User talk:Dicklyon#March 2016

{{Styletips}}

File:Ivan Sutherland at CHM.jpg

{{The Original Barnstar|For your improvements to the Centrifugal force articles. Your common sense approach of creating a summary-style article at the simplified title, explaining the broad concepts in a way that is accessible to the general reader and linking to the disambiguated articles, has provided Wikipedia's readership with a desperately needed place to explain in simple terms the basic concepts involved in understanding these related phenomena. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)}}

File:Convict Lake Pano.jpg]]

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

:It is said by many that A picture is worth a thousand words. Wikipedia articles are vastly improved and enhanced by the use of images. Dicklyon's user page displays just some of the over 500 images he has added to Wikipedia articles making the articles more enjoyable and interesting for our most important commodity, our reader. WP:Photography. He is a long-time veteran editor with over 137000 edits (58% in mainspace) who always uses the edit summary to clarify his edits and communicate his intentions to following editors. He also participates in various timely and important WP:Manual of Style discussions to improve what and how we do things around here. A trusted, productive and helpful editor that deserves recognition as an Editor of the Week.

that's for these hacks:

File:Permutation test example animation.gif|Permutation test

File:Correlogram example.png|Correlogram

File:Correlogram samples.png|Correlogram

:There we go again, commenting on the quantity of my edits instead of the quality. But minor thanks anyway. Dicklyon (talk) 00:23, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

;Add new topics at the bottom please.

File:Sydney welcomes 2025.jpg

To all my talk friends. Dicklyon (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Panthers

(you had experience with user who does not understand ref policy) 93.143.126.159 (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

:I don't understand why you object to having a ref on that final sentence of the paragraph, or what policy you think is being violated there. Dicklyon (talk) 00:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

In regard to the Talk:Cherokee freedmen controversy RM, I wonder if Cherokee Freedmen could be considered the name of a group of people, sort of as in MOS:DEMONYM. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 14:59, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:Sure, it could be, but I don't see compelling evidence for capitalization of that usage. Dicklyon (talk) 21:29, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

The NFL Honors pages you moved should have been kept capitalized as Annual as it's a part of the proper name. Your reasoning doesn't seem to apply to other similar ceremonies like the 67th Annual Grammy Awards. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 02:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

:I haven't looked into the Grammy Awards, but it's very clearly not part of the proper name of the NFL Honors. Most sources (and our articles) either drop "annual" or use it as lowercase. See [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=60136f8a4720c294&sxsrf=AHTn8zq0GMYjj_7efCfkf2DbhrSBDSBuOw:1739415413555&q=%22annual+nfl+honors%22&udm=36&source=lnms&fbs=ABzOT_CWdhQLP1FcmU5B0fn3xuWpA-dk4wpBWOGsoR7DG5zJBnsX62dbVmWR6QCQ5QEtPRqut5gkyra9fZFbsKm1oGezOI6DQjxNKZ2V8dXgJRWA_TJMoTMoaAT3sFlmqfwsFU7xKyaCESU9pcEBIOWtbh8Q57l_jotrwukFQfQsaj_ShBIVC3RtBGfnv0evqLdoaTjhVTpVso9nbb1qUVYZwxrh2LzRlg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjTy92u07-LAxUPTmwGHZNhDwEQ0pQJegQIZhAB&biw=1378&bih=761&dpr=2.4 books] and [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22annual+nfl+honors%22&client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=60136f8a4720c294&tbm=nws&sxsrf=AHTn8zrfUOTGz9znO6lqeCuJxQM4UApXaA:1739415418019&source=lnms&fbs=ABzOT_CWdhQLP1FcmU5B0fn3xuWpA-dk4wpBWOGsoR7DG5zJBnsX62dbVmWR6QCQ5QEtPRqut5gkyra9fZFbsKm1oGezOI6DQjxNKZ2V8dXgJRWA_TJMoTMoaAT3sFlmqfwsFU7xKyaCESU9pcEBIOWtbh8Q57l_jotrwukFQfQsaj_ShBIVC3RtBGfnv0evqLdoaTjhVTpVso9nbb1qUVYZwxrh2LzRlg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjx9-2w07-LAxWTSGwGHaw6C1sQ0pQJegQIAhAJ&biw=1378&bih=761&dpr=2.4 news]. Dicklyon (talk) 02:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

:I see you've suggested just omitting "annual". I agree. If you'd like help doing those moves, let me know and I'll work on it. Dicklyon (talk) 04:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

::Yeah, if annual is not considered a part of its proper name for events like this then it should be dropped per WP:CONCISE. I'll try and take care of the NFL Honors this weekend if you don't get around to it first. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 01:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

:::I'll do some if I find time. Dicklyon (talk) 04:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

::::I've moved them all and updated their links within navboxes. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::Thanks. I'll work on updating links to the capitlalized ones. Dicklyon (talk) 01:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

An alternative to downcasing "Award" in titles might be to remove "award" altogether per WP:CONCISE. See {{section link|Talk:NBA_Finals_Most_Valuable_Player#Requested_move_11_October_2024}}. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 10:15, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

:I agree. I'd have no objection to further moves along those lines. They often get piped that way anyway. Dicklyon (talk) 10:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

::This was already brought up above (which you agreed with) so I'm not sure why you did it this way. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

:::I often take the simplest path, just fixing case errors instead of looking for other names. There are not a ton of these, so it would be straightforward for you or Bagumba or someone else who has a preference to do the moves. In most cases, there are redirects there, so some would require page-mover rights or a request at WP:RMTR. Dicklyon (talk) 01:37, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:::If you prefer that I do it, I'll put a bulk request at WP:RMTR for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=intitle%3A%2FNFL+.%2B+award%2F+-intitle%3A%2F+awards%2F&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1 these 11]. Dicklyon (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

::::Did that. Dicklyon (talk) 02:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

:OK, "Award" is now removed from all of those I touched recently (there are others to do still). See also new RM at Talk:Newspaper Enterprise Association NFL Defensive Player of the Year. Dicklyon (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of business and finance abbreviations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Follow-up.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The file :File:Fritz Pfleumer.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article already had picture of subject, inclusion feels unneccesary.

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Roasted (talk) 23:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I looked for how a particular phrase made it into MOS:MILTERMS and was surprised it seems to have been from [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AManual_of_Style%2FCapital_letters&diff=prev&oldid=906009357 your edit]. (The phrase was referenced in a post-RM comment at Talk:North Yemen civil war#Requested move 28 November 2024.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:Yeah, not great. Even getting that much in there got a little pushback. Dicklyon (talk) 05:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::Yes, I noticed it was a step toward MOSCAPS and there was opposition. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::You may be interested in these [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1553544/][https://go-gale-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&retrievalId=73e21969-a9ef-4aa5-96bb-2bae267d53e2&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm¤tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA200506495&docType=Article&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZONE-Exclude-FT&prodId=AONE&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA200506495&searchId=R1&userGroupName=wikipedia&inPS=true&aty=ip][https://www.englishoutsidethebox.com/2017/09/30/adverbs-of-frequency/#:~:text=almost%20always%20%E2%80%93%2080%2D90%25,sometimes%20%E2%80%93%2050%25.] and how "usually" is most usually interpreted quantitatively. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Interesting, indeed. The second link doesn't work for me. The first one seems higher quality than the third, and I notice that the third provides a strangely high estimate of sometimes. Although described as a synonym of occasionally, it provides a percentage estimate of 50%, which seems too high. The first one's estimate of 11–33% seems better. They closely agree about usually. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::I don't disagree about the quality of the third. The second, I had to access through the Wiki Library. It is: "Clarification of terminology in drug safety", Jeffrey K. Aronson and Robin E. Ferner, Drug Safety (Vol. 28, Issue 10). It is a full paper that reproduces the same table as in the first link but with citation detailed for the individual terms. From what I have gleaned, the sources cited are linguistic studies that capture how these terms are understood by a sample population. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry to bother but there appears to be an edit war in MOSFET article regarding Atalla contribution. If you have some time I would like to know your opinion what to do. I think we can add Atalla contribution into the lead as his demonstration that semiconductor surfaces problem could be solved is very important. The previous version however in my opinion was exaggerating his contribution by relaying on non-academic sources which themselves seems to be influenced by Wikipedia(mainly by Maestro2016). I started discussion here DMKR2005 (talk) 01:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Automatic_lubricating_cup&redirect=no Automatic lubricating cup] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 7#Automatic lubricating cup}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 07:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

As previously discussed, on far too many occasions, the usage of "NFL Draft" is VERY CLEARLY not an error in capitalization. As we've repeatedly discussed, the NFL and all 32 NFL teams follow a style guideline that treats it as a proper name. I recognize the result of the RM that moved NFL Draft articles to "NFL draft", but to repeatedly add a template that states that it's an error in capitalization is clearly inappropriate and disruptive, and you've been doing so for over a year now. You have not been able to justify labeling it as an error, and I'm growing quite tired of your obsessions with labeling everything you don't like as an error. If you continue to do so, I will bring it to ANI, because I'm just exhausted by the petty obsession and bull shit, and it's so discouraging to continue to fight over something so stupid and insignificant with you that it's just easier to air it out there if it continues. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:And then there's the changing of capitalisation in references[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Branch&diff=prev&oldid=1289369124] (compare e.g. the first one to the actual title[https://thecitizen.com/2023/05/10/sandy-creek-alum-brian-branch-picked-in-nfl-draft/]). Not a one-off but common practice apparently[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Mingo&diff=prev&oldid=1289367683][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jaylon_Jones_(American_football,_born_2002)&diff=prev&oldid=1289367355] and many previous edits in the same run. How long has this disruption been going on now? Fram (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

::Far too long... Based on their block log, I'm not sure they'll take criticism and grow from it either, which is basically the reason they were banned from using automated tools, and their appeal on such ban was denied. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:I don't mean to pile on Dicklyon, but could you please not change NFL Draft Scout to NFL draft scout. "NFL Draft Scout" is the name of an actual website that's been around for decades. I don't see any evidence it is commonly lowercased. Thanks! ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 15:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

::Unfortunately, it's one of the problems with blanket downcasing references when you're not familiar with the subject matter, you end up missing what's obvious to some when you implement your preferred capitalization styling. In this case it absolutely makes sense to keep that upper cased, and downcasing cannot be carelessly applied (nor is it an improvement in the examples). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I had actually checked the linked pages (e.g. [https://draftscout.com/dsprofile.php?PlayerId=1040862&DraftYear=2023 this one]) and found that "NFL Draft Scout" appeared to be part of a made-up title ("2023 NFL Draft Scout Jaylon Jones College Football Profile"), not part of the title of the linked articles. It would be best to move it to the publisher field if it's the proper name of the nfldraftscount.com site, and best not to set made-up titles in title case unless that's the consistent style in the article (which it's not). In spite of what Josh claims, there was no consistent reference title style on these articles, and I moved them to be closer to consistent sentence-case for article titles. Not sure why he's bitching about that. Did I miss a few over-capitalized words perhaps? Dicklyon (talk) 18:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Excuse me? I showed you dozens of links to demonstrate that the NFL and the 32 teams are very consistent in their capitalization. Would you like to check the NFL media guides? Those are extremely consistent in their usage. It's clear, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it's not a mistake, and it's an intentional effort. As such, it's clearly inappropriate to repeatedly state that those capitalizations are errors in capitalization. I'm bitching about your inability to WP:DROPTHESTICK. I'm bitching about your lack of care (which is what led to your ban on usage of automated tools) to properly assess the context and the references, and do your due diligence, before just downcasing anything and everything because you prefer it that way. THAT'S what I'm bitching about. Move on and work to be productive instead of disruptive, it's been over a decade and you're being bitched at for the same stuff you were over a decade ago. The community WILL run out of patience eventually, and I think you've burned far too many bridges to continue to act the way you have been. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Last warning Dicklyon, you continue to disruptively change the rcats on NFL Draft pages, as you did {{diff2|1290086683|here just now}}, I will be going to ANI over the disruptive behaviour. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

::Alright, and with the {{diff2|1289373046|continued intentionally disruptive activity}}, adding a template which states this is an error in capitalization, I'll start gathering diffs and I'll be posting at ANI. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Square root of 4, I think that we should have articles at Square root of 8 and Square root of 10, and content at 2 and 3 addressing the characteristics of these numbers as square roots (specifically, as the square roots of the smallest even and odd number to have another whole number as their respective square roots). Since you seem to be interested in these topics, can you help? BD2412 T 21:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:Yes, maybe I could help, though my articles on square roots were really pretty much in jest, to poke fun at Square root of 3 and Square root of 5. I've since become fond of them. Dicklyon (talk) 03:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

:: I've just found your Draft:Square root of 4, and I must say, it is brilliant. I had never thought of 1.999... being an equivalent. BD2412 T 03:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I had a lot of fun with Square root of 6 and Square root of 7, too. Silliness, but well sourced and well illustrated. Dicklyon (talk) 05:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

:::: I have started Draft:Square root of 8, which is of course exactly twice the Square root of 2. BD2412 T 17:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::Cool. I didn't know there was a modern reprint of the hexaflexagon book. I've made a lot of those; also tetraflexagons. Dicklyon (talk) 17:36, 16 May 2025 (UTC)