User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2012/May
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Mistake in moving page
Hello!
I've seen you have done my renaming request, but why did you add ‘2’ at the end of the new title? The correct name for this icon is ‘BSicon WBÜCKEa-L.svg’. Can you move the file please?
Sincerlely, Pic-Sou (talk) 16:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- I tried that and got "The name you have specified exists. Choose a new name, please." and "The specified target file exists." You appear to have created File:BSicon WBRÜCKEa-L.svg[1], so you have standing to request its deletion via {{speedy|author request to make way for File:BSicon WBRÜCKEa-L 2.svg}} and wait for an admin to help. Not being an admin here (yet), I'm sorry, but I can't fix this myself. — Jeff G. ツ 17:29, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Er, ok ... I will ask a sysop to move the file. Excuse-me --Pic-Sou (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:BSicon_WBR%C3%9CCKEa-L.svg&action=history){kind=link}
Jeff, why this move? Materialscientist (talk) 22:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Per the request, I agreed (IMHO the "1" stuck out like a sore thumb, potentially misleading the reader into believing there were more in the series). I'm sorry if you consider such reasoning too flimsy. — Jeff G. ツ 22:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's not about me - there is no policy supporting such move reasoning (cosmetic changes). We do lose images during moves, substitution get delayed, and original file uploaders might have their naming reasons - you know all that. My advice is less AGF to the requesting editors. Materialscientist (talk) 23:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. Please feel free to revert that move and similar ones requested by that user. Any comments on the GF of move requestor DragonflySixtyseven, whose agenda is blatantly obvious per their userpage and who refuses to use the new rename template syntax? — Jeff G. ツ 23:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- He has his (stubborn) ways and I bear with him, retyping his justification summary (copy/paste a specially crafted phrase from a text file :-). Most of his move proposals are constructive - fixing ambiguities and typos, but many do not follow policies (cosmetic changes) and should be declined. Quite often the old name in his requests is well acceptable, and his proposed one is too unwieldy and need trimming. Materialscientist (talk) 00:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. Please feel free to revert that move and similar ones requested by that user. Any comments on the GF of move requestor DragonflySixtyseven, whose agenda is blatantly obvious per their userpage and who refuses to use the new rename template syntax? — Jeff G. ツ 23:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's not about me - there is no policy supporting such move reasoning (cosmetic changes). We do lose images during moves, substitution get delayed, and original file uploaders might have their naming reasons - you know all that. My advice is less AGF to the requesting editors. Materialscientist (talk) 23:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
File moving improvements
Finally I got it managed to create some smart client side code that is supposed to catch most errors thrown by the servers during moving files.
If you are interested in the code, it is located at MediaWiki:Gadget-libAPI.js.
If you still encounter errors, (especially if they are not reportable), please let me know. Thank you. -- RE rillke questions? 19:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll let you know. — Jeff G. ツ 21:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Automatic renames work about half the time (when I manually compensate, I use Edit Summary "removed template or cat; rename done"), automatic removals of rename templates work infrequently. :( — Jeff G. ツ 13:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)