User talk:Isaidnoway

It is 10:31 PM where this user lives.

A television station is a publisher, not a work: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hackney_Diamonds_Tour&diff=next&oldid=1225407935 Please undo this. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin - No, I will not undo a valid and legitimate edit. The work parameter is an acceptable use for the cite news template, as shown in the template documentation, and I have used the work parameter thousands of times in the cite news template when creating references. Additionally, the work parameter is an alias for the website parameter, and the source for the information comes from a website. You had no cause to change a valid citation in the first place. Moving it to the references section per WP:LDR is fine, but you had absolutely no reason to redo a citation to your personal preference. Please leave it alone. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did have a reason, which is that the news station was the publisher, so I listed it as the publisher. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you just needed to add a ref name and move it to the references section. Instead, you changed the citation to your personal preference. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote that I had no cause and that is untrue. I had a cause. The news station is the publisher, not the work. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, what I wrote is that you had no cause to change a valid citation, and it was a valid citation because the work= parameter is a valid parameter for the cite news template. If you don't like the fact that a news station can be used in the work= parameter as a valid use of that parameter, then you need to take your complaint elsewhere, because you repeating the same argument over and over here on my talk page is getting tiresome. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a valid parameter, but you put in inaccurate information. A TV station is not a creative work, it is a publisher. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already told you it is a valid citation, and I will not undo my edit. Your refusal to drop the stick is making me uncomfortable. Please leave me alone. Isaidnoway (talk) 05:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Isaidnoway! Thank you for your work fixing references.

I wanted to let you know that your edit here (presumably redundant ref in your edit summary referred to "JRLObit") removed a reference that was not redundant. I re-inserted & re-enabled "JRLObit" because this citation establishes that Joseph Russell Lynes was his father & died in 1932. This information is not contained in the skimpy "NYTObit". Peaceray (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Giridih, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I came here for something else but I saw, "Folks, it is 2024, there is nothing wrong with using LGBTQ as an acronym on Wikipedia" - what's that about? I've noticed it seems to usually be LGBT, I personally prefer the Q included or just "queer" though the latter is a bit controversial. MWQs (talk) 07:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about there is nothing wrong with using LGBTQ as an acronym on Wikipedia. Thanks for asking. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've figured out the reason that the Kanye presidential campaign article got messed up when I attempted to edit it. I have a Windows computer and thus flag emojis do not appear for me, instead they appear as regional indicator characters (such as 🇺🇸 for the American flag). I installed the browser extension Flagmoji to make flags appear for me. This causes flag emojis to be replaced with the flags in appearance but they are actually searched and replaced with the long string of code "<img src="https://flagcdn.com/us.svg" alt="<img src=" https:="" flagcdn.com="" us.svg"="" style="width: 0.9em; padding: 0 0.05em">" style="width: 0.9em; padding: 0 0.05em">". There were US flag emojis in the Kanye West article and the web extension searched and replaced the emojis, breaking the code. I will disable the extension so that this doesn't happen again, deepest apologies. ARandomShyGuy (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the future use Show preview and check your work for errors. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 21:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I appreciate what you do fixing ref names. There's been a few times I've mistakenly copied over content without double checking if there's stuff like "refname0" in there and I apologize for creating more work for you! Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Isaidnoway, what was the reference error on the South Yorkshire page? The infobox shouldn't be pulling any data for metropolitan counties using the GSS code so I'll need to fix the infobox code but I can't identify any errors? Thanks Dgp4004 (talk) 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page listed at pages with incorrect ref formatting - a list-defined reference has no name. When I changed it back to just one GSS code, the reference error disappeared. Could have been a glitch maybe, don't know, but the ref error went away when it was changed back to one code. I'll keep an eye out and see it it re-appears in CAT:REF if you reinsert the codes again, and let you know. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 23:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, there are also three other UK ceremonial county articles listed in CAT:REF - Northamptonshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire, but I'm not see any cite errors visible in those articles like there was on the South Yorkshire page. Isaidnoway (talk) 23:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Isaidnoway. I have added it back. I can't find any cite errors. Is it back in the list? Dgp4004 (talk) 06:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not back on the list, and the other three mentioned above are gone as well. I sometimes wonder if it is the BOT that checks for ref errors on pages that has a glitch once in a while and incorrectly adds pages to that cat that don't actually have ref errors. Anyway, thanks for reaching out. Isaidnoway (talk) 08:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]