• 21 Aug, 2019

• By, Wikipedia

User Talk:Plastikspork

Archives:

$, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

---

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Plastikspork is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries on this talk page. If you wish to obtain a more prompt response, please send an email.

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

{{Admin dashboard}}

19 October 2024
News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins! Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night Book review: The Editors Humour: The Newspaper Editors Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Dear Plasticspork,

Thank you for your interest for the defunct {{Worldcat id}} template, which authenticated bibliographies, etc., by referring to Worldcat by OCLC (Online Computer Library Center). Sporkbot removed the reference to Worldcat altogether, where a simple replacement by a reference to Worldcat without LCCN would have been more appropriate, leaving at least a reference?

For instance,

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Douglas_Rimmer&diff=1152161602&oldid=1138168869

replaced

<ref>{{worldcat id|lccn-n81038728}}</ref> by (nothing at all), instead of by something like <ref>{{Cite web url=Worldcat.org |website=search.Worldcat.org |access-date=28 April 2023 |title=Search}}</ref>. Thank you, Hansmuller (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus was that "worldcat id" is of dubious quality, lack of sources, so continuing to use it as a source seems incorrect to me. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 13:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there – how are you? Just reaching out regarding this TfD discussion, which is still open and hasn't been edited by anyone other than me since September 19 – the other threads for that date are closed and wasn't sure why this one was being kept open, that's all, so thought I'd reach out in the hope of getting this one resolved so that we can continue editing without having a bunch of ‹See Tfd›s everywhere, etc.; thanks. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 02:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like that discussion has been closed. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 13:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. An IP is creating a bunch of navigational templates that you deleted because of a TfD discussion (example: Draft:Template:1995–96 Toronto Raptors, among others). I was wondering if you (or any of your talk page watchers!) knows of any change of consensus that would allow the templates to exist. Thank you in advance! I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no change in consensus as far as I know. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 13:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Plastik. ‘Recently active admins’ says you’re around?

What do you make of this? Seems like garden variety vandalism to me, but cooould be RevDel territory.

Cheers. MM (Give me info.) 15:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MM, RevDel is pretty easy, so I did that. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 15:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! Blast from past: Thoughts on re-redirecting Template:... now that it errors when used in mainspace? Was thinking of adding to it to help "raise awareness" of MOS:ELLIPSIS, also to enable some stuff for use outside of main like repeating the characters. --Slowking Man (talk) 23:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slowking Man, I really don't have a strong opinion on redirecting it to Template:Ellipsis. The place where we still see it being used incorrectly is when people translate pages from the French WP where it means "empty section". But, if the general feeling is to not care about that case, then redirecting it to Template:Ellipsis seems fine. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 13:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hope you're well. I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 October 19#Template:WPMASSACHUSETTS as delete and redirect, and the related discussions below it as just delete. However, one of the !votes in that first discussion extended to the related discussions below it. I freely admit that's a little unusual, but shouldn't the discussions all have shared the same result? Thanks for any clarification, Cremastra (u — c) 13:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cremastra: I didn't feel as though a redirect for a US state was necessarily the same as the other cases. But, feel free to create redirects if you think they are useful. If someone disagrees, a discussion will be opened at WP:RFD. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 14:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have. Cheers, Cremastra (u — c) 14:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Pages using infobox mountain with potentially incorrectly plural labels 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. Liz 19:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]