User talk:78.32.143.113

You have found my Talk: page. If you are considering leaving a message or comments for me, please: (a) Post new messages to the bottom of this talk page, (b) Use sub-headlines (click on "new section") when starting a new talk topic, (c) If you want to comment about the content of a specific article, use the Talk: page of that article, (d) Do not use this page for harassment or to make personal attacks. Comments which fail to follow the four above rules may be immediately archived or deleted. Thank-you for visiting.

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Heliport, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 05:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Respectfully, the ORIGINAL edit was in BRITISH ENGLISH! So kindly get your facts correct. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. However, it would have been helpful if you had stated that in your edit summary when you originally made the change. We get many users on here who change the English variant simply because that's what they are familiar with who haven't checked to see which variant was originally used. BilCat (talk) 22:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Touche BilCat, but you could have also checked for yourself the original version before insisting on it being American English, when you actually had zero evidence to support your edit. Furthermore, the vast majority of 'global English' derrives from British English, which then went to the various Commonwealth countries all following British English. Anyway, my apologies for omitting that point in my edit summary - it was late at night for me! Kind regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 23:05, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

You're right, and I often do, but it usually involves a lot of checking through diffs, as many times it's not made in the first edit. Since it was late for me too, I didn't check. On Wikipedia, the use of American vs. British/Commonwealth English is probably evenly split, especially since the US has the largest population of speakers of English as first language. We get many users who think Wikipedia should only use British English, and had Wikipedia been founded by British people, that's probably how it would be. But it wasn't, so we have ENGVAR instead. BilCat (talk) 23:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think you forget about those pesky Indians (and other former British south Asian countries) who all use British English (or which their own variation is based legally on British English) (that is a 'tongue in cheek' comment, with humour, but also food for thought). Furthermore, the entire European Union, the United Nations, and the ISO are all using British English (albeit with Oxford English grammar). But yes, I accept that we all make mistakes sometimes, and I also accept that it is too easy to hide behind our blinkers sometimes! Anyway, best regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 23:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

No, I clearly specified first language speakers in my comments, which aren't that high in India yet, but could have been but for anti-British shortsightedness when India gained its independence. If you want to include non-first language speakers, then countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and those in South America need to be included on the American English side, not to mention that Canada is bi-variantal! BilCat (talk) 01:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Citations

Please stop adding capitals to the URL |url= parameter in citations I suspect for grammar such as News.BBC.co.uk. A URL is in lowercase. The |website= parameter in Template:Cite web is not for a partial URL it is for the "Name of the website" and "having both |publisher= and |website= is redundant in many cases". This is not correct citing |website=Forces-War-Records.co.uk|publisher=Forces War Records and |website=RAF.MoD.uk|publisher=Royal Air Force. The Template:Cite news uses |work= for the "Name of the work containing the source" such as a newspaper or website and doesn't use |website= like in Template:Cite web. This is not correct citing |website=News.BBC.co.uk|publisher=BBC News and |website=HerefordTimes.com|publisher=Hereford Times. In Template:Cite news, |publisher= is for the name of the company, organization or other legal entity that publishes the work being cited not for the |work=. Please stop changing the named references syntax WP:REFNAME. The correct syntax is <ref name="name"> not <ref name=name>.--Melbguy05 (talk) 15:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you very carefully read the MediaWiki handbook, especially the section on wikitext, and the differences between it and HTML.

And for the record, a URL in both wikitext AND HTML can include all uppercase, all lowercase, or a mixture of upper and lowercase! And for MANY YEARS, Wikipedia, and MANY other wiki sites have used mixtures of upper and lowercase URLs. You are just displaying your lack of knowledge on this issue!

As for the |website= field - yet again, that has long been used for the actual URL of said website, and is useful to readers to determine exactly WHICH website is providing citation (without actually clicking on link). Not everyone uses a PC or laptop whereby they can hover over the URL to see its exact structure (which is critical to prevent fraud, scams, and fake websites). Your comment on the |publisher= field is also your own personal opinion; critically because the name of the website might not be the actual publisher. There are thousands of instances whereby a totally incorrect publisher has been entered. As for Template:Cite news, its fields are identical to Template:Cite web, and indeed, many uses of Template:Cite news are NOT official 'news sources'!

Finally, you are very wrong, and again demonstrate your lack of understanding of wikitext. <ref name=name> - WITHOUT quotes it totally acceptable for WP:REFNAME (provided that the actual name is just one single word, or a hyphenated word, or a compound word). However, of course I accept that <ref name="name"> - WITH quotes is required when the ref name includes two or more words (with one or more spaces). So not only is <ref name=name> perfectly acceptable; it has been used for MANY years here on Wikipedia, and every other wiki site I use (and not just MediaWiki, many different wiki engines).

In your defence, I do know that UseMod Wiki (the software which originally powered Wikipedia in 2001), and the VERY EARLY versions (2002 and 2003) were very fussy (less flexible) with how they handled HTML to generate wikitext, and then rendered the actual page. But most of those issues were eliminated from around MW v.1.4 (though please don't take that as gospel). Sadly, some folks still think Wikipedia needs to be edited using extremely early versions of HTML. MediaWiki is fully compliant with HTML5, and backwards compatible to the very first HTML (except for a few minor deletions of early HTML tags).

Anyway, best wishes and kind regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 20:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

|URL= Your edit to Stirling Lines and edit to Joint Special Forces Aviation Wing changed the URLs. The actual URL addresses were all lowercase and the citations before your edit were all lowercase. You added capitals to the URLs for example https://www.army.mod.uk/aviation/30331.aspx changed to https://www.Army.MoD.uk/aviation/30331.aspx. Why did you capitalize letters in the URLs when there were none in the actual addresses?

|website= in {{Cite web}} is for the "Title (name) of the website (or its short URL if no plain-language title is discernible)". Help:Citation Style 1 advises that the parameter "is the name of the website (as usually given in the logo/banner area of the site, and/or appearing in the <title> of the homepage" and "If no clear title can be identified, or the title explicitly is the domain name, then use the site's domain name".."Capitalize for reading clarity, and omit "www.", e.g. convert "www.veterinaryresourcesuk.com" to "VeterinaryResourcesUK.com". The citations before your edits contained the titles of the websites. There was no need to change the entries to a short url/domain name for example |website=Royal Air Force without |publisher= changed to |website=RAF.MoD.uk|publisher=Royal Air Force.

|publisher= in {{Cite news}} and {{Cite web}} is for the "Name of publisher" and editors are advised "Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a website, book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, etc.)". In {{Cite web}}, editors are advised that "Having both 'publisher' and 'website' (a.k.a. 'work') is redundant in many cases". HELP:CS1 advises for the work/website parameter that "If the work title as given by the site/publication would be exactly or substantially the same as the name of the publisher, do not use the "publisher" parameter" and that "The "publisher" parameter should not be included for widely-known mainstream news sources, for major academic journals, or where it would be the same or mostly the same as the work". You commented that the "name of the website might not be the actual publisher". You changed the citation for the Hereford Times from |work=Hereford Times without |publisher= to |website=HerefordTimes.com|publisher=Hereford Times. The Hereford Times is published by Newsquest.

Your peculiar use of the |website= parameter, and as a consequence the |publisher= parameter, is your way of negating mobile browser (phone/tablet) inability to display the URL of a link. The Safari browser provides a user with the ability to preview a link by a long hold on a link with a user then able to copy the URL if required without opening the link. A long hold on a link in the Chrome browser enables a user to copy the URL without opening it and also provides the user with a option to preview the link.

<ref name> You're right that a named reference doesn't need double quotes and works fine without them. WP:CITE "If spaces are used in the text of the name, the text must be placed within double quotes. Placing all named references within double quotes may be helpful to future editors who do not know that rule." The example WP:REFNAME in Help:Footnotes used double quotes but didn't say double quotes were only required if there were spaces. Why did you remove the double quotes from the citations?

|work= in {{Cite news}} is an alias for |website= and is for the "Name of the newspaper, magazine or periodical". When I said {{Cite news}} doesn't use |website= like {{Cite web}} I was referring to the Usage and Examples sections in {{Cite news}} that use |work= not |website=.--Melbguy05 (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Joint Special Forces Aviation Wing, you may be blocked from editing. @Mark83: this IP is repeating behaviour for which you've warned them of before. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 00:17, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Concern regarding Draft:Template:British-Army-stub

Hello, 78.32.143.113. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Template:British-Army-stub, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Template:British-Army-stub

Hello, 78.32.143.113. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Template:British-Army-stub".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

---