Hi Croftmire! I noticed your contributions to Michael McDonald (musician) and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! ChromeGames923 ( talk · contribs) 00:03, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maud le Vavasour, Baroness Butler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglo-Norman. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 05:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
As explained at Template:Death date and age#Background, please do not use the template for dates before 1582, or 1752 for British topics. Celia Homeford ( talk) 09:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maud of Gloucester, Countess of Chester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King Stephen.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sudeley Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard, Duke of Gloucester.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 05:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Croftmire,
Welcome to Wikipedia. Nice work on things like catching grammar errors (e.g. "the the") or adjusting capitalization or the like. However, some of the changes in your recent edits don't seem to be actually adding value. Notably, I see you're also removing double spaces (a style that is harmless and allowed) and "fixing" redirects. Please read WP:NOTBROKEN: there's no need to change links to from a redirect to the target directly, barring certain rare cases (e.g. a misleading or misspelled redirect, or article moves that have left the redirect ambiguous). Not sure if you're using a script to do this or just doing it manually, but it's usually just churn that doesn't add value and can obscure the relevant changes to an article. SnowFire ( talk) 17:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi SnowFire,
- Regarding your stance on the fixing redirect, I understand the guidelines on WP:NOTBROKEN state that redirects should not need to be fixed (because it will link to the right article, anyway), but there’s no stipulation that the existing piped redirect must be kept in place (if there are more than one extant); e.g. why should [[King Henry VIII of England|King Henry VIII]] not be changed to [[King Henry VIII]]? Either way, both direct to Henry XIII, yes, but at least the latter example provides less "link clutter".
- And I don’t know what your specific idea of "value" is, but I remove unnecessary links and characters (as long as it’s not against the guidelines) not only to de-clutter, but also, amongst other reasons, for clarity and consistency. That, to me, begets value. (If you want to call it “churn”, that’s fine—it’s your opinion.) Also, I’d like to point out that none of my edits are obscuring any relevant changes; any relevant changes I make I try to point out in the edit summary for transparency’s sake. Some editors don’t even do this. Thanks.
Croftmire (
talk) 23:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Well, it's good you're using expressive edit summaries. What I'm saying is: if you happen to be making a significant edit (i.e. one that the end user will eventually see) and you want to also adjust where exactly a redirect points, go ahead. Please don't just adjust the redirect barring the rare cases of an actually misleading redirect. And to be clear, yes, this is actual Wikipedia policy made for good and proper reasons, not my opinion. I'm also skeptical of your spacing changes. What you see as "removing clutter" is actually not non-controversial; there's no benefit to the end user, readers, based off the spacing used in the wikitext in references, templates, sentence ends, and so on. There isn't any standard to keep, so this kind of change doesn't matter. Again, if you happen to be rewriting a paragraph or the like, feel free to use whatever style you like, but it's not worth going through random other articles to "fix" this - these are merely editor styles.
- I hope I don't come across too negative here - some of your changes are clearly good. And hey, it'll be less work for you! I'm just saying that you can probably skip the spacing & redirect updating. It's even less work. SnowFire ( talk) 01:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Croftmire,
I notice that in several of your edits, for example on
today's featured article, you removed nonbreaking space code ({{
nbsp}}, {{
nowrap}}, {{
nobreak}}, or , to name a few examples of what you might find on Wikipedia) in the name of "removing nonessential characters".
Nonbreaking spaces are quite essential; they serve an important purpose in that they prevent a phrase from being separated into two pieces from a line break. Common items that need a nonbreaking space are the units following a number (e.g. 40 USD), AM and PM after times, the days of dates (e.g. 7 August 2021) and names that include small suffixes (e.g. Henry IV, Martin Luther King Jr.).
I manually reverted your changes to the Henry IV article with respect to nonbreaking space code. Please refer to MOS:NBSP, and in the future, I suggest to leave the nonbreaking space code you encounter alone. Thanks. Thrakkx ( talk) 03:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 | Hello! Voting in the
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All
eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |