User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2014/Jan

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Epicgenius. 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.

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for great your contributions to the world knowledge base. Danguard.co (talk) 05:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 09:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Epicgenius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of KA3AXCTAH, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Redirect is in another language. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:55, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

@Malik Shabazz: May I ask in which language this redirect is in? Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)It's that country's name for itself, so in Kazakh. See the first line of Kazakhstan, where the redirect goes.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 00:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, but its name for itself is in the Cyrillic script; the above is in the Latin script. Epicgenius (talk) 01:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Then it's how it's typed when someone wants to write it their native language but only has a US keyboard. Probably happened quite a lot when the first computers appeared, may still be necessary for some people stuck with old OSes/hardware. Redirects are cheap and it's usual to have them from common and even uncommon but plausible misspellings, nicknames, formal/familiar names etc.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 01:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining this to me. At first, the above redirect seemed implausible to me because it was in another script. Guess not. Epicgenius (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Epicgenius,

I started a new page Westchester Square but I made the mistake of not using the proper format of Westchester Square, Bronx since it is a neighborhood in the Bronx. Would you be able to redirect the page so it says Westchester Square, Bronx.

Thank you for your time and effort

TheBronxNYC (talk) 05:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

TheBronxNYC, Y Done. Use the move button to change titles of articles. Soham 09:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I think your programming idea for the terminal layout template was a great. It inspired me to create a common template for four track local stations, with the hope of just using one template for all local stations instead of having so many templates floating around. It is set up the same way as the terminal layout, but it is not working properly. I was wondering if you knew what was wrong. Attached is the template. Template:NYCS Platform Layout Local Station/4 Track/Underground Thank you. Mysteryman557 (talk) 06:04, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

@Mysteryman557: Let's not replace all of the existing 4-track templates just yet, as there are a lot more issues to be solved with the template than with the Terminal Stations template.
First, some of the local 4-track stations have varying services (and thus varying colors) throughout the line.
For some of the local 4-track stations, the southbound tracks are supposed to be on top (this can be solved by making {{NYCS Platform Layout Local Station/4 Track/Underground/flipped}}).
Additionally, I still have a lot of work to do to the existing next-stop templates to make them work on this template.
I've fixed the default text for the Northbound Local row, but I suggest you move the templates into your sandbox for now. Epicgenius (talk) 14:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Okay, fair enough. Ill halt my production of this template for now. I might continue to experiment, but will not replace it with any existing template just yet. Mysteryman557 (talk) 15:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Manhattan neighborhoods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chambers Street (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Template:Bronx Streets has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 12:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles which already have the "Ethnicity in NYC" navbox don't need to have the "Ethnicity in NYC" sidebar as well, since the navbox is more extensive then the sidebar. BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 01:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, in case you were unaware, editing Wikilinks to avoid redirects, as you did at List of Manhattan neighborhoods, is officially discouraged - see WP:NOTBROKEN. BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 03:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, got it. I was just trying to find some new articles to try to expand the sidebar. Epicgenius (talk) 13:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I have also only included the template in the actual enclaves. Epicgenius (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Why are you re-adding the sidebar to articles that already have the navbox? And, indeed, since the navbox is much more compresenive, wouldn't it be best for articles that have neither to have the navbox added to them? Could you please undo the re-adds of the sidebar? Thanks BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I have left a message on your talk page. And yes, I will undo them. Epicgenius (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Check my edits please here and here. How many levels are there at these stations? Vcohen (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

• I'm not so sure myself, if the BMT Nassau Street Line southbound platform is at the same level as the IRT Lexington Avenue Line and the IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line platforms. However, the southbound Nassau Street Line platform seemed to be directly under the street, last time I went there. Epicgenius (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. If you think my edits are wrong, revert them. Vcohen (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I think you tried to have the page Psybient deleted back in nov 2013 according to your talk page archive. I wonder why this failed just because it failed to live up to WP:A7? That page still fails to list any WP:RS or to live up to WP:GNG. I mostly ask because I seek advice, tips and experience on having pages deleted. For instance that page. AadaamS (talk) 13:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

actually what I actually want tod o is to redirect to some other genre of electronic music and use the Psybient text to create a subsection there. The "keep" criterion for individual sections is much lower than for whole articles. AadaamS (talk) 13:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I think you will have to ask Darkwind, the declining admin, if you want this deleted. A redirect is fine with me, but to which article would you like the redirect to go? Epicgenius (talk) 13:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Epicgenius. Since the band "AES Dana" is listed as one of the main artists and the Aes Dana (ambient group) article says that their style is ambient music, I was thinking a redirect to Ambient_music#Related_and_derivative_genres. Creating and editing the Psybient page on 15 nov are also the only activities by user Auralove. AadaamS (talk) 15:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done I have redirected Psybient to the ambient music page.Epicgenius (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks. AadaamS (talk) 18:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

...that you have apparently decided to take a negative and confrontational attitude towards myself and my edits in several venues on several occasions in recent days. I won't provide diffs, because you know where they are. Considering this, please consider our r'approchment to be once again null and void. You are again banned from posting on my talk page, and I will no longer explain to you with specificity why I have reverted your edits when you make errors. I'm sorry you felt it necessary to take this WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude towards me once again, but each of us is responsible for their own behavior, and yours has resulted in this. Good luck in the future with your editing, I hope you will continue to learn from your mistakes when other editors point them out to you. BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: I apologize for my behavior, as I was pointing out to you what was wrong with your attitude, but it seems that you don't want to hear it. I really hoped to keep that agreement, but if that's what you want to do, it's fine with me. Epicgenius (talk) 23:47, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

No, kid, this time your apology is not, and will not be, accepted. You stuck your nose into something that didn't concern you, you tried hard to get me into trouble, and you were wrong about it to boot, and this is the result of that behavior. You reap what you sow -- if you don't know that by now, I hope you'll learn it eventually. So far, you have received very little blowback from your poor behavior here, but that's not going to last forever, so you might want to consider changing your ways in the future. Please don't ping me again. BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 23:53, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: "You might want to consider changing your ways in the future" rings a little hollow when you have repeatedly violated policy. It was your continued behavior that caused this, and even though you agreed to change your behavior, you did not. Stop trying to blame me, and learn from your own mistakes. Stop being condescending toward me and other users, because actions speak louder than words, and your actions don't speak very loudly of who you are. I suggest that you act upon these points instead of trying to get me blocked again. Epicgenius (talk) 00:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

You pinged me again, after I asked you not to. Please don't do that again. As for the other, you have been told quite clearly that I did not violate WP:OWN. Although I have disagreements with certain Wikipedia guidelines, which are not mandatory, I follow Wikipedia policy as best as I can, and when I don't, I am taken to task for it by admins and editors I respect, so I don't need your assistance, and, frankly, don't appreciate it.

Now, once again, you are asked not to ping me in this discussion. Violation of this can be considered to be harassment (see the recent discussion regarding MilesMoney's multiple "thank you" pings to an editor after been asked not to post on their talk page, which got him blocked for 48 hours). In the words of Stephen Sondheim's brilliant Pacific Overtures, "Please, goodbye." BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 00:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Once again, you are being rude. Please stop. I follow Wikipedia guidelines as much as possible, and it seems that many of the faults are with you. And as for the being " taken to task for it by admins and editors you respect", that happens a lot, doesn't it? Epicgenius (talk) 00:39, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

	A Tesla Roadster for you!
	Thank you for editing Wikipedia! Gg53000 (talk) 16:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Though I prefer the Model S, I'll gladly take this! :-) Epicgenius (talk) 16:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I prefer the Model S too, but this is all I could get my hands on! :-D Thanks!--Gg53000 (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi epicgenius, I'm new and trying to start small, just wondering why you reverted my edit on the Pretty Little Liars (TV series) page when it was just one minor correction to grammar which also made it consistent with the rest of the list - "plays" ... "Is" makes no sense? Any tips on how I should have done this better are welcome. Thanks. Melcous (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I have reverted. Epicgenius (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Just an FYI that I have reverted your reversion, per WP:BLP. The sentence about a marriage was unsourced and has been disputed in an e-mail to OTRS.--ukexpat (talk) 17:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for notifying me. Epicgenius (talk) 17:50, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar (my first real barnstar)! If you wanna contact me about anything Wikipedia-related, drop me a message on my talk page. Happy editing! K6ka (talk | contrib) 02:28, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Epicgenius (talk) 13:39, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I was in correspondence via OTRS with the editor who edited Konark Sun Temple. I provided some advice, which was ignored.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:49, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Are there any specific things that you would like me to do in this instance? Epicgenius (talk) 18:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

No, I'm just miffed that I took the time to provide some good advice and it was ignored. Sort of a heads up in case the editor claims the edit was checked with an OTRS agent. Yes, it was, but I specifically advised against what was done. So you did the right thing (IMO).--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:50, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: Thanks. By the way, which editor are you referring to? If you don't want to tell me, you don't have to. I'm just interested. Epicgenius (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Praajesh. I see you fixed the display, but I counseled for a name change of the image. I also urged asking at the talk page before replacing the main infobox image.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:07, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I will let you handle this file renaming, Sphilbrick, since this is confusing for me. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Not expecting you to do anything. I suggested that a rename was in order, but was ignored. --S Philbrick(Talk) 01:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the explanation. Epicgenius (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

See my most recent edit on D with stroke (disambiguation) regarding your most recent edit there. Do you speak Vietnamese? I don't, you might be right. And do you speak Icelandic (that uses Ð)? comp.arch (talk) 10:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Comp.arch: Đ and đ are definitely used in Vietnamese. I don't think the eth is used in Vietnamese, though I believe some writings show the lowercase version as ð. Epicgenius (talk) 13:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Epicgenius, when you run into edit conflicts on pages like ANI (I assume that you did) the best way to proceed is to open a new window, with a fresh ANI, and re-insert single sections. I don't know if you already did that, but if you didn't, that's probably why you removed my section, which was restored by another editor who also removed your section, which I just reinstated again. Ha, to keep matters simple. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Drmies: My apologies for removing your section. I had an edit conflict and re-pasted my comment, not knowing that you had also edited the page. I'll do that. Epicgenius (talk) 18:28, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

[ec with editor below--on the same subject!] No apology necessary--I have found that a new window is the best way. Did you notice that the editor who reverted you stuck your comment back, after I had done that, but in the wrong section, and that this was corrected afterward? Good thing ANI doesn't see more traffic. Drmies (talk) 18:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I noticed that. If ANI was more heavily-trafficked, we'd have edit conflicts everywhere! Epicgenius (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey Epic, you made a comment at ANI like "Yeah… either semi-protection if it's just these articles being vandalized, or blocking if it's just these IP users who are abusive. Or a combination of these, if it's a whole range of users vandalizing a lot of articles." and put it at both the University of Adelaide section and the one below it regarding an IP. I'm pretty sure you only meant it for the Adelaide one, so I removed it from the IP one below it... please correct me if I guessed wrong! Zad68 18:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

It was for the Adelaide one, in fact. Sorry for the confusion, Zad68. Epicgenius (talk) 18:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hardly your fault! When are we getting WP:FLOW for ANI anyway?? Zad68 18:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

They should preferably do that soon. *chuckle* Epicgenius (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Ha, another comment of mine got lost in the mix. Perhaps it's a sign I need to stay away. Drmies (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps we could use comment boxes at the bottom of article pages, instead of talk pages. (Just kidding.) Epicgenius (talk) 18:57, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

With regard to your revert at Defying Gravity (TV series), please note that Wikipedia is not censored. "Friends with benefits" is a bowdlerization of casual sexual relationship, the latter being the title of our article about the topic. The idiomatic phrase is also problematic because it may not be immediately intelligible to non-native English speakers. --89.0.255.116 (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

By all means, revert my edit if you think it's wrong. Epicgenius (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Sure, but I'd rather you learn the underlying reasons for my edit. --89.0.255.116 (talk) 17:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know that "friends with benefits" was slang for "causal sexual relationship". I thought they were two different things. My apologies. Epicgenius (talk) 17:11, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ahl al-Hadith. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

On 12 January 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Death and state funeral of Nelson Mandela, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the sign language interpreter for the state memorial service of Nelson Mandela made meaningless hand gestures that did not reflect established signs? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

• WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech

There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

I made a small addition to your page regarding calstock viaduct. Basically adding the fact that it was built from concrete blocks. I thought this addition was relevant and would be of interest to anyone reading about the viaduct.

I just wonder why this addition was deleted.

Please let me have your thoughts.

Kind Regards

Lee Lamble The Old Bakery, Calstock, Cornwall. E-mail ; (Redacted) Tel (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.175.69 (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I removed that sentence because the grammar was wrong. I fixed it now. Epicgenius (talk) 18:50, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. You recently removed my changes on the Roundabout article. I don't understand why. As stated in the article, vehicles can yield and the vehicles don't always need to do a full stop. It is common sense that if they don't make a full stop, and thus don't need to fully regain their speed by accelerating a lot: they keep their momentum. Do I really need to reference basic physics laws to prove that? That's ridiculous. Also, regarding the noise pollution, it is obvious that vehicles generate more noise when they accelerate than when they're not accelerating. Conclusions based on obvious and commonly admitted facts don't need to be referenced. Unless you reverted my changes for another reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzander (talk • contribs) 17:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the sentence, but you need to add references supporting that claim. Epicgenius (talk) 18:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I reformulated and added a reference to an external website regarding the noise pollution and added a link to Work (physics) for those that don't understand that accelerating requires energy. Xzander (talk) 19:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

The reference that you added looks good. Epicgenius (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Brooklyn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gowanus

Washington/Wells (CTA station) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Clinton (CTA station)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Your continued insistence to add station layouts to MBTA stations with only one or two platforms, despite the September discussion in which you were told not to add them, is extremely worrying. The diagrams take up a great deal of space on the page, yet add nothing of value, and WP:NOTTRAVEL very explicitly notes that Wikipedia is not a travel guide. You have offered no reason why you chose to blatantly disregard consensus - and warnings - against the addition of these templates. That is, frankly, unacceptable behavior. I want to discuss this with you before I get other editors involved, but I also want you to understand, in no uncertain terms, that our editign is problematic.

Your diagrams contain numerous errors and false information, which you need to be more careful about. The MBTA does not publicly use designators like 'G' and 'L1' and 'B2', not do the (modern) plans I have for several show any in-house indication of this. Adding them is obvious original research. The third track (#1 on track diagrams) on the north end of the Orange Line has at no point been used as a northbound track in regular service; calling it that on the diagrams is confusing and incorrect. Your track diagram for Back Bay was just plain wrong; you did not even read the existing prose to see what trains use what tracks. Relying on other editors to correct your mistakes is not a good way to go about things.

Your diagrams are nearly impossible for other editors to easily work with, because they're raw HTML rather than wikitext. Before you add even one more diagram, you need to learn some template syntax and create a set of generic templates that take parameters. Adding things that are difficult for others to edit goes against the open-editing model that Wikipedia is based on; the generic indicators that have become accepted in rail articles are those like the s-rail templates that have been turned into high-quality generic templates.

Your edits have also been messing up formatting in the articles. Several times, without any explanation, you have changed {{reflist|3}} or {{reflist|2}} to {{reflist}} on pages with a number of references; this introduces a great deal of whitespace. User:Reify-tech has spent a great deal of time cleaning up formatting problems like this, and it is very strange for you to reintroduce them without consulting anyone.

If you want to keep diagrams in articles, then you need to make several changes. First, forget the levels - the only potentially useful information is the actual track layout. Second, change them into generic templates that anyone can edit. Third, make them able to fit neatly into a standard 300px infobox. A miniaturized diagram - platform levels only, no listing of the next station (that's what the s-rail templates are for), etc - might actually be useful to add just below the s-rail, so long as you can keep it to about 120x300 px for simple stations.

Frankly, though, there are so many more useful things to be doing. Wikipedia is fundamentally an encyclopedia, not a railfan site - thus, what is really needed on station articles is prose. History, future plans, and perhaps the introduction of some higher-quality images as well. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

It's not WP:FANCRUFT – it's showing useful information. And honestly, the station layouts look much better now than they did in early 2013, when I started doing them (with broken syntax and incorrect formatting, of course). Is there a reason why the platform layouts have to be in the form of templates? I will do it, of course, but I need an explanation why the raw HTML isn't sufficient. Epicgenius (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

HTML is very bad from the point of view of editability. I learned HTML many years ago to create web pages, but since then HTML has become far more complex while tools (including Mediawiki) have become much better, and its rare now for someone to know HTML markup. At best some people know and can use a few simple markup tags. So significant HTML in articles makes them uneditable by most editors, and breaks our promise to be the encyclopaedia that "anyone can edit".

So if you find yourself adding HTML to an article it's almost always better to use a template. If it's something being added across multiple articles then it clearly makes sense to use a template. If it's for only one article then look for an existing template - many exist for creating tables, timelines, galleries, image maps. Even if none exist it may still be worth creating a template, to improve the editiability of the page and encapsulate the feature for use on other pages.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 21:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

That sounds good. I have already created a new template for the layout at Back Bay, and will make more template layouts when I have time.

And one more thing: Pi's suggestion for me to remove the next-stop links just because they're already in the infobox is really not practical. According to Help:Infobox: The information should still be present in the main text, partly because it may not be possible for some readers to access the contents of the infobox. This includes next-stop links. Also, it's a station layout, and preferably should also include levels (but not too many details about them, so as not to violate WP:NOTTRAVEL. Vcohen has a collection of platform templates, in the way that Pi described, here for New York City Subway articles. Perhaps I shall modify these instead. Epicgenius (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

You have failed to address the most significant point: that you were explicitly told to stop adding these diagrams, and yet you still have been. Until you can explain why you have violated the community's wishes, none of the rest of what you are saying even matters. I will be removing every template that you have added to MBTA articles in violation of that.

Your Back Bay template shows that you do not have enough knowledge of the system to add diagrams with any degree of accuracy. Back Bay does not have a below-ground mezzanine; putting it in your template means that you are making unfounded assumptions. More original research.

The Back Bay template is just as useless from an editor standpoint - it still requires editing raw HTML which most editors do not know. A proper system would involve using templates that look something like:

 {{station levels |name=Ground level}}
 {{station levels |name=platforms}}
 {{station track |direction=southbound |line=Chartreuse Line |destination=Townville}}
 {{station platform |type=island |doors=left}}
 {{station track |direction=northbound |line=Chartreuse Line |destination=Bigcity}}

That syntax is easy to learn and edit, and familiar to anyone who has used templates before. Generic templates like that are easily adapted to any system, rather than requiring a custom HTML job for each station. Generic templates also mean that a change can be pushed out to every single use of the template with one edit, rather than requiring dozens or hundreds of individual edits.

There is no reason to have the next stop listed in the main text - that is navigational information only. Most British articles put the s-rail templates at the bottom of the article as a separate navbox; US articles have the s-rail moved to the infobox but it is still acting as a navbox, not as a regular part of the infobox.

Vcohen's templates are designed for use on the New York City Subway, where many stations have numerous tracks and platforms, often with multiple services arriving on every track. Many are also station complexes combining several separate stations. The MBTA has none of that complexity. There are seven downtown transfer stations, two stations (Kenmore and JFK/UMass) where services use different tracks, eight stations (Malden Center, Oak Grove, Porter, Ruggles, Forest Hills, Back Bay, Quincy Center, Braintree) with subway and commuter rail platforms, three (Community College, Sullivan, Wellington) with the third track, and three stations (Ashmont, Silver Line Way, Boylston) with odd arrangements where custom SVG diagrams are probably superior. Besides those at-most-23 stations, every single other MBTA rapid transit station has exactly two stopping tracks and one or two platforms - information which is better and more efficiently communicated in prose form.

Additionally, some stations are not possible to make correctly with rectilinear diagrams, and are going to require custom SVG images no matter what. Government Center, with its triple-sided Green Line platform, is a prime example. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

(Note: I changed this to {{Station levels}} because {{Station level}} is already in use) Okay, I will experiment with doing just that. I'll do that on a few stations as a test. Probably Mattapan (MBTA station) or Government Center (MBTA station). Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

By the way, the designations for the levels, "G", "M", and "P" (which I acknowledge are not official descriptions) are descriptive code letters which are used in the first column, in order to prevent the first column from becoming too wide. I will also stop adding platform layouts to the MBTA system, for now. Epicgenius (talk) 00:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (I see Pi.1415926535's is thinking along the same lines as me)

You misunderstand my suggestion. Rather than one template per station you should consider making a template usable for stations. If that is unwieldy consider multiple templates which combine to give the desired result, such as the ones that make up route maps. But with Lua now preferred to parser functions far more complex templates are possible and complex templates are much easier to create. The long term benefits of doing this are significant, not only in reducing the amount of work but making the layouts more maintainable and consistent.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 22:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

You continue to add incorrect information. Your diagram for State is outright wrong; the Orange line platforms are on the same side of the tracks and are not on the same level. This information is available in the article itself, and on images on Commons. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I've fixed it, and anyway, it is not "adding" any info, it is already there, I just moved it to a template. Epicgenius (talk) 21:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. You did not address what I said in my above comment: "the Orange line platforms are on the same side of the tracks and are not on the same level". The northbound platform is stacked under the southbound, as is described in the article. This is not the first time you have made errors like this - you need to read the articles more carefully before adding (or modifying) diagrams. Unlike New York City - which is largely constructed on grids - and simpler or modern systems with obvious layouts, the whole MBTA system is a legacy mismatch of lines constructed around the traffic engineer prank that is Boston. Everything is as it is for completely backwards reasons - try tracing how the Old Colony Lines and the Red Line weave around each other through Quincy and Dorchester and you'll get an understanding of why you can't assume anything.

Additionally - and this is a complication that I will concede you couldn't have found out from the article - the fare mezzanines are weirdly placed and there may be one more level from one entrance that another. The arrangement of the station is wholly nonstandard for multiple reasons - the two lines were constructed at different times, the Orange Line tunnel twists to fit down the narrow street, the Blue Line was retrofitted for heavy rail in 1924, and there was a big accessibility refit a few years back. Frankly, regardless of correctness, I'm not convinced that a linear diagram is a good choice for State. There are too many levels that aren't level.

What this is coming down to is that diagrams are only useful when they display information that isn't implied. The diagram at Myrtle Avenue (BMT Jamaica Line) is useful for showing which services use which platforms at which times - that takes a whole lot of prose to characterize. Saying in prose that an island platform, or two side platforms, serve a line's two tracks is plenty - the diagram adds no information that is not in the single sentence. There are only a handful of MBTA stations - Park Street, Kenmore, Back Bay, Canton Center, and Providence - where different services on the same trunk line use different tracks. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I have ceased to work on the MBTA layouts for now. I think that the layout before (prior to my addition of the extra levels) was sufficient, and I'll be restoring it shortly. Epicgenius (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your message on my ip talk page. I have now explained at Talk:Eurythmy#Other meanings of eurythmy some of the reasons why I think that particular disambiguation may be potentially helpful to Wikipedia users. Regards, 81.147.162.97 (talk) 00:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem, though I think that a Wiktionary definition would be better placed toward the bottom of the article. Epicgenius (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I left you a response to your question here. Leoesb1032 (talk) 16:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the heads up I am new to wikipedia.

I didn't save it, could I have the text that was removed?

Hghenson (talk) 20:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

The revision is probably here. Epicgenius (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, can you please leave the changed text? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivdboogaart (talk • contribs) 15:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

@Ivdboogaart: Which article? Epicgenius (talk) 16:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

the " van 't Wout" Page. This page is about a family, and one of the family members wanted to change the information. Its really necessary to keep it like this :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivdboogaart (talk • contribs) 16:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The edits that you made had removed the references and most of the content. That is usually not recommended on Wikipedia. In regards to your "family member" statement, please read WP:OWN. Epicgenius (talk) 16:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brooklyn may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• //colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-north/page+2} Regional University North Rankings | Top Regional Universities North | US News Best Colleges].
• *May 4, 1894). "[http://eagle.brooklynpubliclibrary.org/Default/Scripting/ArchiveView.asp?BaseHref=BEG%2F1894%

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Automation of the New York City Subway may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[G (New York City Subway service)|G]] train (([[R68 (New York City Subway car)|R68]], [[R68A (New York City Subway car)|R68A]])

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:18, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to East Tremont, Bronx may have broken the syntax by modifying 8 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
*{{NYC bus link|Bx15: to [[Fordham (Metro-North station)|Fordham Plaza]] or [[Manhattanville, *{{NYC bus link|Bx17: to [[Fordham (Metro-North station)|Fordham Plaza]] or [[Port Morris, Bronx|Port *{{NYC bus link|Bx19: to [[New York Botanical Gardens]] or [[Riverbank State Park]] (via Southern *{{NYC bus link|Bx36: to [[Castle Hill, Bronx|Castle Hill]] or [[George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Washington Metro rolling stock may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 0.25|in|mm}} closer than standard gauge. The platform height is said to be {{convert|38.5|in|mm}}) above top of rail (ATR) and rolling stock floor height is also <span style=white-space:nowrap>38{{

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:14, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to East Village, Manhattan may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Place]] ({{NYCS trains|Lexington local}}), and [[First Avenue (BMT Canarsie Line)|First Avenue]] ({{NYCS trains|Canarsie}}
• Place]] ({{NYCS trains|Lexington local}}), and [[First Avenue (BMT Canarsie Line)|First Avenue]] ({{NYCS trains|Canarsie}}. On bus, the nearest buses are {{NYC bus link|M8}}, {{NYC bus link|M14}}, {

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked mostly minor features and fixing bugs. A few significant bugs include working around a bug in CSSJanus that was wrongly flipping images used in some templates in right-to-left (RTL) environments (bug 50910) a major bug that meant inserting any template or other transclusion failed (bug 59002), a major but quickly resolved problem due to an unannounced change in MediaWiki core, which caused VisualEditor to crash on trying to save (bug 59867). This last bugs did not appear on any Wikipedia. Additionally, significant work has been done in the background to make VisualEditor work as an independent editing system.

As of today, VisualEditor is now available as an opt-out feature to all users at 149 active Wikipedias.

• The character inserter tool in the "Insert" menu has a very basic set of characters. The character inserter is especially important for languages that use Latin and Cyrillic alphabets with unusual characters or frequent diacritics. Your feedback on the character inserter is requested. In addition to feedback from any interested editor, the developers would particularly like to hear from anyone who speaks any of the 50+ languages listed under Phase 5 at mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts, including Breton, Mongolian, Icelandic, Welsh, Afrikaans, Macedonian, and Azerbaijani.
• meta:Office hours on IRC have been heavily attended recently. The next one will be held this coming Wednesday, 22 January at 23:00 UTC.
• You can now edit some of the page settings in the "options" dialog – __NOTOC__ and __FORCETOC__ as selection (forced on, forced off, or default setting; bugs 56866 and 56867) and __NOEDITSECTION__ as a checkbox (bug 57166).
• The automated browser tests were adjusted to speed them up and bind more correctly to list items in lists, and updated to a newer version of their ruby dependencies. You can monitor the automated browser tests' results (triggered every twelve hours) live on the server.
• Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide was updated recently to show some new and upcoming features.

Looking ahead: The character formatting menu on the toolbar will get a drop-down indicator next Thursday. The reference and media items will be the first two listed in the Insert menu. The help menu will get a page listing the keyboard shortcuts. Looking further out, image handling will be improved, including support for alignment (left, right, and center) and better control over image size (including default and upright sizes). The developers are also working on support for editing redirects and image galleries.

Subscriptions to this newsletter are managed at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter. Please add or remove your name to change your subscription settings. If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 20:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Epic Genius. I was checking some stats for my account here and noticed that 3 of my edits have been deleted. Am I wrong in assuming that it has been deleted as I made some mistake? If yes then how do I find out what wrong did I do so that I don't repeat that in future. Please assist. Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 08:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

@AKS.9955: I'm assuming that these "deleted" edits have occurred because a page that you had edited was subsequently deleted. According to WP:EC: Note that this 'server count' [which you can see at Special:Preferences ] also includes deleted edits; if an edit is deleted (for instance, the user tagged an article for speedy deletion and the article was subsequently deleted), the server count continues to reflect that edit having been made. Have you nominated any articles for deletion recently, by any chance?

You didn't do anything wrong, it just means that these edits are no longer recorded in your log of contributions. Epicgenius (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, as a matter of fact I did (one yesterday or day before) and that explains then. Even before this incident, I had one deleted edit and now it is three, so got worried a bit. Thanks for the guidance.14:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		Did I receive a barnstar from you and never really repaid the favour? Shame on me, really. Maybe you'll accept this shiny barnstar as a token of appreciation for hard work on improving the encyclopedia. K6ka (talk | contrib) 20:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't be an epic jackass. By tying together the ends of other lines shown on the diagram, you are implying that they run non-stop between the points shown, which is not the case. I'm bringing this to your attention on your talk page first, to give you the opportunity to self-revert, since you've gotten into disputes before over controversial edits. Useddenim (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, so? This implies that the two segments are part of the same line. I'd hardly call my edits "controversial", by the way, since I have gotten into relatively few disputes thus far. Which brings me to WP:NPA, and by calling me an "epic jackass", you have just violated that. --Epicgenius (talk) 21:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, you almost got yourself blocked over the platform layout issue. And if you’re going to choose an ID that suggests that you’re superior and know it all, well then you’ll just have to expect comments once in a while… But I do appreciate that you reconsidered and restored the previous design. Useddenim (talk) 13:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. Hope you're well. It appears we are at odds as to what should go on Trevor's wikipedia! I am a biographer who has been researching Trevor's life and career for some time now with the aim of eventually writing his biography. I have spoken to Trevor directly and can confirm the information I write on this page is 100 percent correct. Let me know your thoughts, it would be great to reach a compromise on this to save us both a lot of time! Thank you for reading this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophieskan (talk • contribs) 10:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

@Sophieskan: I think the issue is that you need to add a citation to what you are adding. Otherwise, it will be removed as poorly sourced information. Epicgenius (talk) 13:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Not trying to knock on you are anything, but how come I don't see the NYC Subway service listing on the List of New York City Subway services page anymore? Reply ASAP. --Roadrunner3000 (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

@Roadrunner3000: Sorry, I must have broke it when switching the function to {{NYCS const}}. It is fixed now. Epicgenius (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Epicgenius, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! AdmrBoltz 15:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick. Thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

You undid 142.164.182.215's 06:16, 24 January 2014‎ submission on the January 24 page that was factually accurate. Why? Just curious. XercesBlue (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I didn't check twice. My apologies. Epicgenius (talk) 21:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for the reply. I appreciate it.XercesBlue (talk) 22:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I see you tried to rename 145th Street (IND Eighth Avenue Line), and then reverted it. I understand why you wanted to do so in the first place (the connection to 145th Street (IND Concourse Line)), but wouldn't it make sense to rename the article 145th Street (New York City Subway)? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 21:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it would make sense to do that. However, 145th Street (IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line) and 145th Street (IRT Lenox Avenue Line) also exist, so 145th Street (New York City Subway) is currently a disambiguation between the three articles. The links to the current 145th Street (New York City Subway) would have to be redirected to 145th Street, the dab page that 145th Street (New York City Subway) currently redirects to. Epicgenius (talk) 23:46, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for having a look at some of the Japanese Keikyu station articles, as many of them are in need of updating and a general cleanup. If you have time and are looking for a job to do, could you go through all the Keikyu station articles and change the line colours from "Red" to "DeepSkyBlue"? Presumably the person who first created the articles thought red seemed a good idea because that's what colour the trains are, but Keikyu's corporate colour and station branding is all "DeepSkyBlue" - as can be seen from the official website and corresponding Japanese Wikipedia articles. And if you have time, you could also change any occurrences of "Keihin Electric Express Railway" (the old name) to "Keikyu" (its new name since 2010). Thanks. --DAJF (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

@DAJF: Alright, I'll do that as soon as I can. Epicgenius (talk) 02:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! --DAJF (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, before mass editing dozens of pages in future, it would be preferable for the problem to be discussed in the Talkpage of a particular page and linking common editors to the discussion. We had agreed in the past to keep "to Changi Airport" on all the pages as it's on every station's signboard, not just Tanah Merah. Thank you. Seloloving (talk) 08:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

@Seloloving: Okay, I will hold a discussion on that. Is there a particular WikiProject that I can post this to? Epicgenius (talk) 23:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Epicgenius, was curious if this edit at Christopher Dorner might've been a mistake. There was a citation request template in place, and the sentence didn't seem confusing to me. Danke, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Cyphoidbomb, that was not a mistake. The phrase "New York" is confusing and can refer to either the state or the city. In both cases, the place mentioned is too ambiguous, and so it needs clarification. But I'll remove it anyway. Thanks for asking. Epicgenius (talk) 13:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, good point. I didn't think of that. Thanks for the explanation! Sorry to bug. :D Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi EG, I think I fixed it. Added a cite, clarified location and such. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Seems good to me. Epicgenius (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I noticed the automated rollback of the addition I made.

I feel that this passage is crucial in order to have a complete understanding of WHY John Ziegler is so ardent in his defense of Joe Paterno. Ziegler's view of Jerry Sandusky, and Sandusky's innocence in relation to these specific charges is a cornerstone of the reasoning for his defense of Joe Paterno and his role in the 2001 incident at Penn State.

The two citations are sourced directly from John Ziegler. TreySuevos (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

@TreySuevos: One source is YouTube, which is not a reliable source. I will restore the other source. Please read Wikipedia:RS on what reliable sources are. Epicgenius (talk) 00:57, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Thanks for taking a look at it and reverting it. I had the YouTube citation included as it did allow Ziegler to explain his viewpoint, but I understand the reasoning on excluding it as a reference. If I can find a more suitable reference I can add it at a later date. Thanks again. TreySuevos (talk) 15:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I think you were right in the first place. When I read it properly, I realised it was an attack page. Deb (talk) 18:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Although, when I read it at first, I didn't realize that it was an attack page, but I did see that the person was not notable, so it would have been deleted anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 18:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

This revert appears to be incorrect. This source confirms most of the changes and I'm not sure what triggered the claim of vandalism here. The user has made other legitimate edits, including to this article. Am I missing something? Alansohn (talk) 20:32, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I've self-reverted. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Epicgenius (talk) 20:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I believe this edit was a mistake. It appears to be legit (e.g., http://www.bearguide.net/disprof.php?name=NABWEEKEND), and I think it's okay for the page.

I haven't followed the page that closely, though, so I might be the one mistaken. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention in case you did err. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 23:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Seems like the sentence already has a lot of list items. Although this edit is legitimate, it seems like there are a lot of list items in that sentence already, without this list item making it even longer. If you want, you can add in the list item and the ref. Epicgenius (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay. Makes sense. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 00:19, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Jwpetty1951 isn't a vandal. Just a currently somewhat inept new user who inadvertently stuffed up the formatting on a previous attempt. No doubt will improve with experience. Amandajm (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

My mistake. Maybe I should slow down a bit with the STiki... :( Epicgenius (talk) 02:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I translated, duck attack on the German Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Epicgenius (talk) 13:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

You reverted my edit to 'George Strait' without providing a reason. As I said in the comments, I fixed a line to make it provide the same information as the reference article. Did you look at the reference? I think your reversion of the article made it worse by re-inserting incorrect information that contradicts what is in the reference article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.73.162 (talk) 02:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I have reverted my edit. Anyway, I couldn't provide an edit summary at the time, due to the fact that I was doing multiple reversions at once. My apologies if you have been offended by this. Epicgenius (talk) 02:49, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Epicgenius,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged International Cruise Terminal Station for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Tonia Todman's date of birth is published as 1935 on the wiki page for her. Her father has a birth year of 1922 ( I know her father, Mr A Barker). A birth year of 1935 for Tonia is unlikely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.136.134 (talk) 12:17, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Then why did you put "19xx" there? if there is not a specific year, it should be removed. Epicgenius (talk) 13:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)