User talk:Muhandes

TUSC token e80b809c8cc344eed212d9db46506234

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Reverted edit over on template talk page

Hello! Thanks for reverting that edit over at Template talk:Infobox India university ranking/Archive 1. I didn't even notice it was an archive page ... and that you made the comment more than two years ago. Why is it, though, that Wikipedia only notified me of your comment today? see here -- mikeblas (talk) 21:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mikeblas: I have no idea why it pings when I archive. Muhandes (talk) 22:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Now I'm getting notifications from you about a "TUSC token". Do you know what that is? -- mikeblas (talk) 23:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mikeblas: that would be the failure of the Convenient Discussions script, also beyond my control. Muhandes (talk) 07:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology University logo.png

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

• File:Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology University logo.png

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete or generic. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact source (such as the web page, or printed document) where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the direct/bare URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 21:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iruka13: The source is the organizations home page. The URL I provided is https://www.thapar.edu/images/logo-ft.png and the home page where the image exists is https://www.thapar.edu. Do you think it is a better source? Also, this is a fair use image, the copyright stats doesn't matter, does it? Muhandes (talk) 22:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

It is preferable to provide a link to the page where the image is located, rather than to the image itself.

Didn't understand the last question. — Ирука¹³ 22:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Iruka13: Done. Muhandes (talk) 22:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Muhandes This logo do not qualify for copyright. It do not meet the threshold for originality needed for copyright protection. It is a trademark. I have reverted your edit on the college's wikipedia page, to its simple logo as is used in its annual reports. VeritasVanguard "Seeking truth in every edit" 11:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@VeritasVanguard: I agree the image you used is not eligible for copyright, thought I'm not sure about the one I use as it has some complexity. I care very little either way. I also care very little about which image you choose to use for the page, but I thought the purpose of the image is to identify the organization. Wouldn't the organization be better identified by the logo on their home page, rather than on their annual reports? Please take this into consideration when deciding which image to use. Muhandes (talk) 15:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Muhandes, If you ever got to visit this institution, the logo they use offline, has no complexity in 'ti' they use. Neither there is any "complexity" in any of its forms, or notifications. the one you are referring is only used online on their website. (on thapar.edu), their branding is somewhat inconsistent as they use different version of their logos on different websites of theirs. but they use same on every offline things they do. VeritasVanguard "Seeking truth in every edit" 05:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That's certainly a valid argument. Muhandes (talk) 07:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Muhandes Since the file you uploaded is not used on any page on Wikipedia, it will be deleted per Wikipedia:F5 on November 18. VeritasVanguard "Seeking truth in every edit" 07:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

@VeritasVanguard: I know. I usually go WP:G7 in such cases but I am not the sole author, so we will let it die of WP:F5. There is no need to ping me on my own talk page. Muhandes (talk) 07:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Cite certification

User:Muhandes and User:Anomie: The two edits here Special:Diff/1253576690/1257464120 caused a flood of tracking category entries in Category:CS1 errors: archive-url as can be seen in 2 Times cite #62. I'm not expert enough to figure it out. Can you take a look? -- GreenC 00:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

My edit had nothing to do with it. It was just fixing a similar flood of entries in Category:Articles with dead external links by adding a date to the {{dead link}} included in there. Anomie⚔ 00:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

OK. Started a discussion at Template_talk:Cite_certification#Tracking_category_problems, follow up there. -- GreenC 01:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@GreenC and Anomie: I believe the issue was resolved; see details at Template talk:Cite certification#Tracking category problems. Let me know if there are any problems and, of course, feel free to revert. Note a related request to resolve the dead link issue at Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests#nztop40.co.nz redirect and restructure. Muhandes (talk) 15:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

OK thank you. I'll probably never understand how this caused the effects at Category:CS1 errors: archive-url ie. populated with 4k members, plus the creation of a sub-category under the "O" heading (the letter), which was also populated with the same 4k members. It was a head twister. But anyway glad the fix works! The cat looks normal now. -- GreenC 18:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@GreenC I suppose what caused the category flood was this. It added an archive-url without archive-date, which I should have anticipated. I'm not sure how a sub-category was created. Anyway, lesson learned. Muhandes (talk) 23:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I see. If you still want to use the same date for every URL, that is possible. Like you could use a snapshot date of 20200101010101 and archive-date of 2020-01-01 and it will redirect to a nearby working snapshot date. -- GreenC 01:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

These are 4k different links and I don't know if they all have archives. I rather we resolve this properly, when you get to it. Muhandes (talk) 08:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Temp.

Coincidentally, there's something about {{Cite certificate}} above. Anyway, is there a way there can be a {{Cite single}} or {{Cite song}}? Open for suggestions/discussion if anything can be done. dxneo (talk) 13:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo: I don't understand what you are proposing. {{cite certification}} is a template used to ease the citation of the various certification authorities in different regions of the world. Developing it (together with {{Certification Table Entry}} and the rest of the certification table mechanics) took about 8 months of my time if I recall correctly, but it was worth it for a template now used in more than 38,000 articles. What would the proposed citation templates do? Where would they be used? Muhandes (talk) 13:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

8 months? I don't think my idea is worth that much time. The template would work just like Cite certification, but for charts. If {{Cite certification}} goes with {{Certification Table Entry}}, then {{Cite single}} would be a companion of {{Single chart}}

Let's say I'm writing about We Don't Trust You. "" Like That" peaked at #1 on the Hot 100", instead of using the Billboard URL to create a ref, I use {{Cite single}}

If it were to happen, it would be way more complex since not every chart site got simple archives like Billboard, and there are way more charts than certifications. So, let's forget I ever mentioned this. Thanks for listening. dxneo (talk) 20:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo: What you’re suggesting essentially amounts to re-creating {{single chart}} and {{album chart}}. I’m not saying it’s unnecessary—those templates are poorly written, predate my involvement, and I’ve wanted to overhaul them for more than a decade but never found the time. However, there are significant challenges. First, there has never been much demand for such an update. The existing templates already handle reference reuse within articles, which covers about 90% of cases. Second, a project like this requires someone willing to maintain the templates long-term, and with my uncertain health, I can’t take on that role. Third, this isn’t something that can be done alone. When I developed {{cite certification}}, a collaborative community was there to help troubleshoot and refine it, but that kind of support network no longer exists.
I’m not entirely opposed to the idea—it’s something I’d still consider—but now isn’t the right time to pursue it. I’m sorry if this response is disappointing. Muhandes (talk) 12:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I understand. So sorry about your health. I'll try to gather a team of template editors and see if they are interested. Off topic, for months I have been planning on nominating you for adminship, your work around here and the way you interact with people is nothing short of amazing. Take care! dxneo (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo: If you can find another template editor willing to collaborate on this endeavor, it would address most of my concerns. As for adminship, I appreciate the thought, but the process demands significant time and effort from both the nominee and the community, making me question whether pursuing the mop is truly worthwhile. Muhandes (talk) 16:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Oggy

Iin12 (talk) 12:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Important eclipse!

My edits are not disruptive! The eclipse is a monumental occurrence. Liamlalaliam (talk) 19:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Liamlalaliam: Please read WP:BRD. If someone reverts you then you discuss it with them. Repeating the edit without discussion is disruptive. If you want to discuss it, use the article's talk page. Muhandes (talk) 07:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I repeated the edit because I couldn't find the message box. I apologize. Liamlalaliam (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)