Jump to content

User talk:Flix11: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 171: Line 171:
:::::{{ping|SLBedit}} We go by vector colors. Pictures may look different to the real color because of lighting, camera quality, and other factors. But the kit maker, {{user|JonasBR}}, is one of the best maker in the entire Wikimedia and he made mistakes sometimes. However, I think his mistake here is only at the socks. [[User:Flix11|Flix11]] ([[User talk:Flix11#top|talk]]) 14:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|SLBedit}} We go by vector colors. Pictures may look different to the real color because of lighting, camera quality, and other factors. But the kit maker, {{user|JonasBR}}, is one of the best maker in the entire Wikimedia and he made mistakes sometimes. However, I think his mistake here is only at the socks. [[User:Flix11|Flix11]] ([[User talk:Flix11#top|talk]]) 14:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::How is [https://i.postimg.cc/mDksbK76/IMG-20200802-154257.jpg this] black? [[User:SLBedit|SLBedit]] ([[User talk:SLBedit|talk]]) 17:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::How is [https://i.postimg.cc/mDksbK76/IMG-20200802-154257.jpg this] black? [[User:SLBedit|SLBedit]] ([[User talk:SLBedit|talk]]) 17:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

== Your complaint at [[WP:AN3]] ==

Hello Flix11. Regarding
[[WP:AN3#User:SLBedit reported by User:Flix11 (Result: )]]. Do you agree with SLBedit that a consensus has now been reached at your talk page? [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:08, 3 August 2020

"I've seen it done like this one other pages so my preferred way must be right" isn't a particularly compelling argument. I would ask, why should the infobox heading be different to that of the article title? Mattythewhite (talk) 13:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattythewhite: It is not my preferred way, because I have seen it nearly anywhere else (e.g. Manchester United F.C., Manchester City F.C., Newcastle United F.C., Arsenal F.C., Chelsea F.C., Liverpool F.C., Bradford City A.F.C., Tottenham Hotspur F.C., Leicester City F.C., Everton F.C., Leeds United F.C., Blackburn Rovers F.C., Sheffield United F.C., Swansea City A.F.C., West Bromwich Albion F.C., Wigan Athletic F.C., Nottingham Forest F.C., Portsmouth F.C.; A.F.C. Bournemouth has it "AFC" on infobox. The only articles I found by random selection are in Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C. and Sunderland A.F.C.) I feel that it is a consensus. I do not know whether there is a consensus or MOS about this. If you think it should be the same, why wouldn't you change them all? Flix11 (talk) 13:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There wouldn't be much point in me changing them, when I'd probably be reverted without any explanation. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:42, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesia COVID-19 Map

Hi. Thanks for creating the recovery map with the new color scheme. I noticed a small mistake: East Nusa Tenggara has 54 recoveries, hence hasn't passed 100 yet.

I also made a new color scheme for deaths map to split 1-49 into 1-9 and 10-49. It is because too many provinces are in that range. Thank you once again. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just want to notice you about Jakarta's deaths. It has passed 500 deaths but on the map it applies 100-499 color.

And also can you try to create the confirmed cases map with new color scheme? Thank you in advanced.

I think what MRZQ's edit meant is from the template data of Indonesia's cases. Once you change it from there, it will be automatically updated on the infobox (I tried and it worked). Just want to let you know in case you want to do so. Hope you have a nice day, buddy. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 11:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Can you give the link to update it? And thanks for notifying me. Flix11 (talk) 12:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was from the medical cases data but it wasn't. My bad. But I found this link and I'm pretty sure it's this: https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q86913546. Hope I'm not wrong. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 13:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Yes I have found it before. What made me upset is he (MRZQ) told me to study while not giving me the way (the link you gave me). I called the WikidataIB (which was there) and it came back nothing, hence I insisted to revert. Now that I have found it I will rv back to his edit and encouraging him to get back from retirement. Will you help me Chris? Thanks. Flix11 (talk) 15:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized he decided to leave Wikipedia. How can I help? HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 16:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Message him on talk page, or if possible, e-mail him here from Wikipedia. Can you? Flix11 (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try my best to reach him out. Are you able to edit the link I gave you?

In the meantime, can you help me creating the confirmed cases map with the new color scheme? I'm trying to find the best and most suitable color scheme for both desktop/web and mobile phone version but it's not easy. I'd like to look if it works or not. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 17:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a message on his talk page, Flix. Hopefully he'll reply soon. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 02:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Thanks for your help. As for the map, keep trying Chris. No need to rush. 50K cases is still a long way, hopefully things will slow down in a couple of weeks. As Aceh is nearing 100 cases, perhaps the color scheme can be pushed so that all 100 to 499 will have current Aceh's color. But this only after Aceh passes the 100 mark. Flix11 (talk) 03:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know. It's just that I found out there was a huge gap between two colors on desktop version (though it was perfect on mobile phone version). But I just fixed the colors so I hope you can fix them on the map too. Thanks.

And yes, we can do like what you said when it's due. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 04:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And please fix the recoveries map too, Flix. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 05:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Flix. I think since Aceh has passed 100 cases, we should delete the lighest color instead (unless there's a province passes 50,000 cases, we can put the color back - but I don't see it happens anytime soon).

The same thing with other maps. Delete the lighest color but we can add them back when there's a new number range needed. Deleting the darkest color would make a specific province doesn't look like having a lot of cases/recoveries/deaths. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I clearly meant Paul Pogba, not Didier Drogba, yikes! Dwscomet (talk) 21:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV

@Materialscientist: Because their only contributions are vandalism? Flix11 (talk) 07:56, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have to disagree on that and ask you to reconsider. Further, lumping 3 different criteria like "actions evidently indicate a vandalism-only account; account is evidently a spambot or a compromised account" does not read well, especially when none actually applies. Materialscientist (talk) 07:59, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Materialscientist: I saw them on WP:UAA. If they are not vandal, just decline these requests. Flix11 (talk) 08:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. One more tip: if you see a UAA report, you don't need to copy it to AIV, unless urgent action is needed. Vandalism/spam and username issues are often unrelated. Materialscientist (talk) 08:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:2022 FIFA World Cup logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Yogwi21 (talk) 07:47, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I restored your version. Please don't uploading new file, for continuity of the file name of previous World Cup edition. Yogwi21 (talk) 07:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yogwi21: OK. Thank you. And sorry about that. I just think that even though raster and vector versions have differences, it should not be that obvious. And I have told you to make that less white yourself before taking any actions. Flix11 (talk) 07:56, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TNI AL Insignia and Flag.

Hey to avoid edit war, please go to Indonesian Navy talk page. --EvoSwatch (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Population changes

Hi, Flix. I noticed MRZQ has edited the population data on Indonesia's COVID-19 table and it caused several provinces to have changes as well. For example, now Central Kalimantan has less than 500 cases per million. Should we revert it to the old data or keep the current data and change the map? Oh, just fyi I also darken the map colors to standardize with other countries although I don't see any big differences. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 02:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Which map did you change? Flix11 (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cases per million. So shall we change the population data too? HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 03:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Yes. And Chris which provinces are affected? Flix11 (talk) 03:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked and it seems that only Central Kalimantan is affected. It has less than 500 cases/million now. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 03:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was about to reply your messages but you deleted them. You can find the number of cases by province on KawalCovid's twitter too, Flix. It doesn't only post the graphs. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Restore it and move the convo there will you? Flix11 (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SC Heerenveen

What's your app to make a football kits on wikipedia?? Agijt89 (talk) 12:08, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring over a copyvio?

Don't even start. It's not going to fly. There's a version without a logo so if you want to update the patter, do it without a logo from the outset. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:14, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Please update {{Cases COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia}} cases by province. --MRZQ (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MRZQ: What for? To avoid miscalculation? If the template editor made a mistake it is pretty much useless. But the workload for me and HiChrisBoyleHere will be doubled. And the numbers will only used in the table. Nowhere else like say the tests numbers or others. Flix11 (talk) 05:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it's up to you, please edit yourself and be with him, I will say for sure it will be abandoned. ありがとうございました. --MRZQ (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. May I know why there are two templates of 'cases by province' now? What's it for? I'm kinda confused now. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 05:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: It is up there Chris. I do not exactly know the purpose of this. I understand the reason he made such in IDWIKI but not here since there is no edit warring about it. @MRZQ: Please do not say you will leave Wikipedia. Please read WP:CON and WP:COOL to understand that Wikipedia is not about winning. Flix11 (talk) 05:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too much edit sources (first from Wikidata and now this) could cause confusion. I can help updating it but for what purpose? @MRZQ: HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 05:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: I don't want to make this problem long. I've returned it as before, and in the wikidata I w'nt update it, please update it yourself, or just remove {{wdib}} or (#WikidataInvoke). 幸運を. --MRZQ (talk) 07:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Y, I'll back away from editing it, let this crazy rich Surabaya, Felix, edit it. MRZQ (talk) 07:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MRZQ: No, I do not want you to leave. You can help to develop this in other COVID-19 articles. Flix11 (talk) 08:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MRZQ: Any idea if your template used, to count the percentage (cases per million, recovery, death) or will it still counted from the table? If you can make the template to count this as well, your template WILL BE USED. I am challenging you. Flix11 (talk) 08:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
hi, i've tested it, then why did you return it? it's to make it easier on the table, you update at intervals of several hours, very long, please don't fulfill my notifications. --MRZQ (talk) 08:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MRZQ: OK your edits have been reverted. You will update those, right? And sorry again. Flix11 (talk) 08:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MRZQ: Hey, if you want to use your template please make sure ALL PROVINCES are the same. I found some provinces use your template and some don't which is CONFUSING. Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 09:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Yes, already if it wasn't reverted by the owner of this talk user, please don't fulfill my notif. --09:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MRZQ: @HiChrisBoyleHere: Since I no longer object the template, please move this conversation to other place. And MRZQ, I have accepted your template. Chris have not. So please stop insulting me, OK? Flix11 (talk) 09:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I accepted it but like I said, please make sure ALL provinces use your template and not only some. And also can we just use the template and not wikidata again? Thanks. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Why about Wikidata, Chris? I think it is necessary for cross-Wiki update. Flix11 (talk) 09:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay if you insist. You can update all (the wikidata and the template) right? Or do you need any help? I just hope it's not too confusing for you. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 10:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: You can edit the graphs and charts as usual. If I need help on provinces I will let you know. Don't you want the Wikidata? There are 2 used in COVID-19 and population for tests. Flix11 (talk) 10:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@HiChrisBoyleHere: Why don't you want wikidata? There are approximately 20 wikis that use that data, do you want to make a bot or something, like tawiki or arwiki to update it? Is not it? For sources why should you be confused? Right? --MRZQ (talk) 10:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Flix11: @MRZQ: Okay. Thanks for contributing to the article, you two. 😀 HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 11:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiChrisBoyleHere: Wait. Do not tell me you are leaving Chris. You have the weekly charts as your responsibility :( Flix11 (talk) 11:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Flix11: @MRZQ: Oh and why does not the table use the data from the template? Can somebody do it for all provinces? It would take too much work on mobile version. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 11:28, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No I won't leave Flix. No worries. HiChrisBoyleHere (talk) 11:28, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Europa League

There's only been 3 other Premier League seasons in the last 15 years where my way of ordering the Europa League teams (by round of entrance/access list order) results in a different order than your way of doing it (by league finish): 2007–08, 2010–11, and 2012–13. In two of those articles, we used round of entrance (my way). In only one, we used league finish (your way). In other words, my way has been used 14 out of 15 seasons (and probably more if I looked back further). So claiming "precedence" or "keeping the status quo" doesn't really help your argument here. We've done it my way more often than yours. Simple as that. Bmf 051 (talk) 08:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not sure what you're going on about with alphabetical order. No one's talking about ordering them alphabetically. Bmf 051 (talk) 08:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd appreciate a response. Your explanation that "this is how we've always done it" was wrong. Are you going to revert me if I change it back? I'd like to sort this out without an edit war. Bmf 051 (talk) 08:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bmf 051: Let it be right now. Your way (14 thing) I believe many were when the FA Cup winners finished inside European zone and would have gotten the same (ELGS) or higher qualification (CL) even if they are not winning the cup. Otherwise the CWC era that only let in the FA Cup winners/runners-up if the winners were also the CWC holders. So just let it like the 2013 edition as both are special editions. Flix11 (talk) 08:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So now you want to do it your way because it's "special"? Just a second ago you were saying the opposite: that you were doing it "the way we've always done it". How is 2013 any more special than 2011 or 2008? Portsmouth won the FA Cup in 2008 after finishing in the relegation zone (like Wigan did in 2013), yet they're still listed at the top. Birmingham City won the League Cup, and were higher on the access list than Stoke City, so we listed them ahead of Stoke in 2011 despite Stoke having a better league finish. And we listed Stoke ahead of Fulham that season despite Fulham having the better league finish, since Stoke was higher on the access list/entered at a later stage. How are those any different than 2013? Bmf 051 (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Bmf 051: Portsmouth won the FA Cup in 2008 after finishing in the relegation zone. Not. They were relegated 2 seasons after. Even if we sort them based on the furthest starting round (Birmingham > Stoke > Fulham), Arsenal still have to be listed under Leicester in last season's article. Flix11 (talk) 10:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Flix11:That's besides the point: Portsmouth finished lower than Everton, yet are listed first that season because they are higher in the access list due to winning the domestic cup. Arsenal still have to be listed under Leicester in last season's article. I think you're misunderstanding me here (this is a lost in translation moment, which is fine). I'm not saying to list them by the stage they're entering, then by league finish if the stage is the same. I'm saying list them by the order they appear in the Europa League access list which is established by UEFA regulations (i.e. in the order that they appear here 2020–21 UEFA Europa League#Teams). That is Arsenal, then Leicester, then Tottenham. This is also the reason you need to quit flip-flopping Everton and Portsmouth here. Bmf 051 (talk) 10:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much...

Thank you so much for your enlightenment at the Vice Governor of Jakarta. I'm improving Deputy Governor of Jakarta right now.--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 10:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benfica away kit for 2020–21

Where are you getting the information about the kit? The kit (in the background) isn't black, its's gray,[1] and the socks are mostly white.[2] SLBedit (talk) 13:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SLBedit: LOL. The grey kit is a GOALKEEPER SHIRT, like the one I add below! The second one is indeed the away kit and it can be said as a black if not a very dark grey, maybe a 080808 in RGB or so. Flix11 (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Team Mid Grey / Glory Green
Yes, the away kit is dark gray and has white socks. SLBedit (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SLBedit: Do you have any closer detailed photo of the away kit, maybe the socks sides? Also I went to SLB official online shop selling the away shirt and I saw on line 2840 at the source that the available color is "black", indicating the color box is indeed symbolizes black. I have as well took a screenshot on the box and test the color. The code is RGB 000000, means pitch black. How? Is there any argument left? Flix11 (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe because they at Benfica site are incompetent? In several pictures, it looks dark gray. Anyway, judging by this picture, socks are white, and this is why I reverted your edits. SLBedit (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SLBedit: We go by vector colors. Pictures may look different to the real color because of lighting, camera quality, and other factors. But the kit maker, JonasBR (talk · contribs), is one of the best maker in the entire Wikimedia and he made mistakes sometimes. However, I think his mistake here is only at the socks. Flix11 (talk) 14:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How is this black? SLBedit (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your complaint at WP:AN3

Hello Flix11. Regarding WP:AN3#User:SLBedit reported by User:Flix11 (Result: ). Do you agree with SLBedit that a consensus has now been reached at your talk page? EdJohnston (talk) 18:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]