Redrose64

Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Oxford

Great to see you again in Oxford yesterday, thanks for organising! I hope the rest of your journey home was smoother than mine: we all got kicked off at Reading due to "staff shortages" and then of course the next train along was too full to get on. Fortunately didn't have to wait very long for another. the wub "?!" 13:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for coming! The staff shortages began in the morning, a lot of trains running through Swindon either terminated short or were cancelled. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

@The wub: I forgot to give you a link like this, showing how passengers had a view through the driving cab of a Class 108, as used on the Blackburn-Bolton-Manchester route. The second-class car at the other end of the unit had a better forward view, because the lack of armrests meant that you could position yourself behind the middle of the right-hand window without having to lean sideways to avoid the window frame. Other classes used on that route were Class 104 and Class 105, but they all gave a view through the cab. Class 105 gave a wider field of view, as they had two large cab windscreens instead of three smaller ones. At this time (early 1980s) there was still one Class 100 car in service (M53355), coupled to one of the last Class 105 cars, but I don't remember ever riding on that one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh wow, that's quite a view! I was expecting maybe a window on one side of the cab, not being able to see out the whole front. Sadly never travelled on any of these, but one consolation is there's plenty of cab ride videos available on youtube now. the wub "?!" 17:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

@The wub: The last time I rode on a DMU with a view through the cab was a Class 121 during its final weeks of service on the Princes Risborough-Aylesbury branch in May 2017. If you want to experience something similar, there are several preserved lines with pre-1980s DMUs - classes 100 through 127 inclusive are the ones to look out for. Your closest preserved line will be the Epping Ongar Railway who certainly had two or three DMU cars a few years ago, but I'm not sure if they have one any more. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Blackrod station

In either the Historical Railways or the Disused Railways boxes at the foot of the article, would it be proper to show a link connection to the LYR Hindley to Blackrod Branch where the first station is that of Hilton House. If you thibk it is worthwhile to do so, can you please add this information on.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 17:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 21:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Shall we do that properly? There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Unilateral removal of RfC tag. Thank you. That done, where's my boomerang? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Reversing lever and reversing rod

About https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232074251.

I found it strange that the link pointed to itself, then even inferring that these were the same. Would there be a way to resolve this? Øyvind Teig (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Aclassifier: You can unlink it if you like. What I was concerned with was the use of an incorrect term: the reversing rod and reversing lever are not synonymous, but they have a common pin joint. In this diagram the reversing lever (right) is labelled, as is the weigh shaft (upper centre). The reversing rod is the one connecting these two, shown partially cut away. The curious thing about that diagram (which is the only one that I could find that showed the reversing lever) is that the reversing lever is drawn at the cylinder (front) end of the loco, instead of at the other (rear) end. There are labelled diagrams in

• Semmens, P.W.B.; Goldfinch, A.J. (2003) [2000]. How Steam Locomotives Really Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 112–132. ISBN 0-19-860782-2.

showing the reversing rod as the horizontal (or nearly so) rod reaching from the driver's control (which could be either the reversing lever or the reversing screw) to the weigh shaft. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that exhaustive explanation! I unlinked "reversing rod" Øyvind Teig (talk) 13:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Maybe it's a good idea to add the figure Redrose64 mentions at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stephenson_link_valvegear_(Army_Service_Corps_Training,_Mechanical_Transport,_1911).jpg into the article, with a proper explanation? Øyvind Teig (talk) 08:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Misusing table markups

Hi there. I recently was tagged in an edit you made regarding adding notional results for the 2019 UK general election. In the edit(s) in question, you said "don't misuse table markup - accessibility". I have absolutely no idea what that means, and it seems the edits you made to my edit didn't actually change anything with the table I was using, visually. Could you care to explain what I should/shouldn't be doing and how, exactly, I was misusing the tables?

Thanks
Into oblivion (talk) 07:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Into oblivion: Accessibility refers to the design of products, devices, services, vehicles, or environments so as to be usable by people with disabilities, and web accessibility is a more specific form of this. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility describes the various ways of ensuring that accessibility is achieved, and in that, MOS:DTAB concerns tables.

A table has a caption and one or more rows; table rows have one or more cells of two types - header and data. Screen reader software announces the various table components in different ways, and also varies its actions according to the element type that is being read out. If you style a data cell to appear the same as a header cell for a sighted reader, it will still be treated as a data cell by the screen reader. Cells that are used as titles for a row or column must be marked up as header cells; and those that are titles for rows must also have the scope=row attribute. Similarly, the name of a table belongs in the table caption, and not in a full-width header cell.

If you have questions about accessibility, you may ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hi Redrose, A number of years back I remember being informed by yourself about keeping citations on a single line, instead of inserting a new line for each parameter - I don't have much background knowledge on this subject, other than it helping with reading and interpreting diffs - would you be able to provide clarity as a third party at User talk:Danners430? Apologies for trying to drag someone into this, I just don't want to enter into an argument, and I remember it being yourself instilling this knowledge into me all those years ago! Danners430 (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

What you've actually done is to create a whole glaring, yet content-free, change into the edit log.

If your diff process can't handle separate lines, then fix your diff process. It's actually easier (much) for a diff filter to work on inputs that have clear linebreaks. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Redrose64:, any chance you could take a look at this? I'm about to go to ANI regarding this user, but I really want to avoid it - if there's somewhere I've gone wrong, I'd be more than open to correction by WP admin. Danners430 (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I left for work at 07:35 (UTC) and didn't get back until 16:40 (UTC), so quite a lot has happened in the meantime. For my TPWs (and TPSs), this is now at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Andy Dingley. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Request for administrator attention

Hi Redrose64, I'm a newish Wikipedia editor and style learning the (many, complicated) rules.

I have noticed an issue with a reverter / possible vandal on the Project 2025 article. User:Skyerise keeps adding a See Also section to Project 2025 with irrelevant links, including Liber OZ and Universal Declaration of Human Rights; undoes revisions to remove the irrelevant links or section.

It's unclear to me how to proceed though; I've looked into reporting vandalism, but it seems like that should only be done after 4 edits and several warnings. Can you tell me what the appropriate level of escalation for the situation is at this point and how to do it? Mosi Nuru (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@Mosi Nuru: First off, have you brought up the matter at the article's talk page? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I have not yet, no. I take it that's the first step?

I have added a topic on the talk page, does it look like it contains the essential things I need to say to you?

Talk:Project_2025#See_Also_section_contains_only_irrelevant_links_such_as_"Liber_OZ" Mosi Nuru (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

First stage is indeed to discuss on the article's talk page. If Skyerise doesn't comment there within, say, a week, drop a note on their user talk page inviting them to the discussion. Templates such as {{fyi}} and {{subst:please see}} are available for this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks like he has replied and a couple other editors have jumped in, so this was the right approach (I was a little doubtful if anyone read the Talk pages, but I see I was wrong!).

Thanks for your help! Hopefully this will be the end of it. Mosi Nuru (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

You've already helped a bunch, but would you be willing to do me one more favor when you get a chance?

Could you take a note at the Talk Page (Talk:Project_2025#See_Also_section_contains_only_irrelevant_links_such_as_"Liber_OZ") and at how Skyerise is interacting with me, and advise if there is anything I should do?

I don't want to get into a flame war with someone on the internet, but I feel pretty strongly that he is arguing in bad faith (implying insult where none was meant, not engaging with the argument, etc.), and I'd like to know how to proceed that doesn't just involve arguing online. Mosi Nuru (talk) 20:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps you should directly ask the question "Is calling an editor 'obsessive' a personal attack?" Redrose & I don't always see eye to eye, but I suspect we agree on the answer to that. Also, whenever you discuss another editor on a third-party talk page, it is polite to ping them, like this @Mosi Nuru:. I shouldn't be finding conversations about me where I wasn't pinged. Skyerise (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

WIkiProject Doctor Who Newsletter: July 2024

The Space-Time Telegraph Volume II, Issue I — July 2024 Brought to you by the editors of WikiProject Doctor Who Okay–ooh. New teeth newsletter. That's weird... Hello! Welcome to the first regenerated issue of The Space-Time Telegraph, the official newsletter of WikiProject Doctor Who. We hope it finds you well in your safe travels across the Whoniverse! This newsletter was founded in 2008 and seemed to get lost in the time vortex quite quickly. Thanks to the Doctor dragging Sutekh through the time vortex and bringing life by bringing death to death (yeah... I'm a little confused too), it seems to have regenerated. The writing staff hopes to bring you future editions quarterly. For this first edition, we have created an updated version of our mailing list that includes any active editors who previously had their usernames included in our participants list. If you do not wish to receive future editions, please remove your name from the mailing list. If you no longer wish to participate in the project, please also remove your name from the participants list. I think that's enough about the newsletter for now. Let's dive into interesting things happening within the Doctor Who side of Wikipedia. Geronimooooo..... Big Spike in Productivity During 2024, the project has scored 8 GAs, 2 FLs and a GT, up from last year's 4 GAs and a GT. Several additional things are in the pipeline, with a bunch of things currently having been nominated with some mix of OlifanofmrTennant, TheDoctorWho, and Pokelego999 having their names attached to them. Allow me to look into the nominees. Series 14: As of July 18th, every single episode has been sent to GAN, with "Boom", "73 Yards", and "The Devil's Chord" having made it to GA. 2023 Specials: Early in the year, as part of trying to not lose the WikiCup, Ollie sent "The Star Beast" (still salty about the move) to GAN. It was reviewed by frequent collaborator (fly high) of hers, but failed. She then fixed it up and sent it back where it passed. Later "The Giggle" was expanded and sent to GA, followed shortly by "Wild Blue Yonder". WBY received help by JustAnotherCompanion, a pretty fresh user. This other companion chose not to be listed as co-nom. A page was created for "Destination: Skaro" and quickly got GA status. The Daleks' Master Plan was also sent to GAN by Rhain. It passed to join Rhain's other First Doctor content, being the fourth season three article to get the green check. Peter Capaldi: The filmography and newly created awards of Capaldi were both sent to FLC and passed. Capaldi's main page was sent to GA, though due to some minor incompetence on the part of the nominator it was failed. Proposals to the WikiProject A recent proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who suggested potential improvements and suggestions for the main page of the project, as well as discussions about the project overall. The proposals are as follows: The Task Forces section should be removed due to inactivity in the Torchwood Task Force, and a lack of significant interest in creating further Task Forces. The freenode channel no longer works and should be removed due to most discussion taking place on site. Due to the low quality of Lungbarrow and Jubilee despite being sample articles, these articles should either be removed as samples or improved. Additionally, the "sample device" has a very small application field, and should be removed from the sample articles section. An updates infobox should be included, similarly to those used by Wikipedia:VGCHAR. Radio Times's Doctor Who sections should be included in the references section due to their benefits for the project sourcing wise. The Deletion Discussion archive should be removed, or have work invested in updating it, due to its lack of updates. If you feel you have any thoughts or suggestions on these matters, or on any other matters pertaining to the project and its main page, feel free to chime in the ongoing discussion. Discussions of Note A move discussion is currently underway on whether or not Doctor Who series 14 should be moved to Doctor Who season 1 (2024). The discussion also involves conversation on a few other adjacent articles. If you have an opinion on the matter please read over the discussion or leave comments. Contributors TheDoctorWho (talk) Pokelego999 (talk) Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) If you wish to contribute to future editions of the newsletter, leave a message on the WikiProject talk page or reach out to one of the current contributors listed above. If you do not wish to receive future editions of the Space-Time Telegraph, please remove your name from our our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

DX 9048

Yes. File:Super sentinel waggon DX 9048.JPG among others (although that may be the only one on commons). Problem is that its been modified a fair bit (it wasn't originally a bus).©Geni (talk) 18:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

RfCs at Talk:Jinn

This was first time helping some one initiating RfC that too after long time, sorry for inadvertent technical goof-up and thanks for helping in sorting out.

As such a help was requested at WT:RFC.

1) Any ways after your help, I suppose listings are working properly, so there is no immediate need to dismantle collapse templates - since those help in better content organization and presentation.

2) This is first RfC in this series, more from the planned series would come after some period, as discussed at WT:RfC. The RfC question series is presently listed at the user sandbox talk, may be you have a look, your advice will help not repeat the mistakes. Bookku (talk) 14:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bookku: Most of it is covered at WP:RFCBRIEF. The main thing to remember is that the RfC statement runs from the {{rfc}} template (exclusive) to the next valid timestamp (inclusive). What happens after that timestamp won't be noticed by Legobot, so can be as lengthy and complex as you like. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Now I explained other editor too on their user talk page. I hope accident won't be repeated from our side. Bookku (talk) 04:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Jinn has been rescinded (temporarily withdrawn - shall be restarted later in simpler format to facilitate better user participation) after a discussion at WT:RfC by removing {{rfc|reli|soc|hist|rfcid=CE36F56}}. Bot related template is still there, I hope I have done that in right way. Bookku (talk) 17:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bookku: per its documentation, please do not use nowiki tags around {{rfc}}, because Legobot ignores them. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay noted. Thanks Bookku (talk) 17:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

List tag query

I now understand the use of HTML list tags isn't standard for Wikipedia and have ceased using them. However, I don't know how to implement a numbered list with wiki-markup. How do you do this? Svampesky (talk) 01:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svampesky: See this edit, also Help:List. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:11, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Svampesky (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Template:Atop

I forgot to use Template:Ping there, so: Hello. You have a new message at Template talk:Archive top's talk page. Ursus arctos californicus (talk) 00:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Spike Milligan

My edit was not an unsourced opinion. Just look at the photo of the gravestone. The Irish word for "was" is clearly missing from the inscription. Kindly restore my edit.

GeiknarF (talk) 12:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Redrose64's edit summary included if you want to comment about the accuracy of the article, please do so on the talk page. You made a comment in the article, so {{Uw-talkinarticle1}} applies. Please confine commentary about improving the article to the article's talk page. Peaceray (talk) 16:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Redrose (do you mind if I call you Rose?) I wanted to thank you for answering one of my Mentees' questions (even if the question was as moot as that one) -- Grapefanatic (Talk) 18:50, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Grapefanatic: I guess you mean User talk:Grapefanatic#Question from Ujwala9 (05:50, 4 July 2024) - I really don't recall how I found it in the first place. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:IP editors are human too

I've reverted your edit on this page... as the IP correctly identified, the title was in error. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 21:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Catfish Jim and the soapdish: No, the IP is wrong: it's a list of misconceptions (in boldface), seven in all, each of which is followed by a longer comment (in normal type) to either refute that misconception or show why it applies much less often than some people would like to believe. The IP's edit changes it from a misconception to a truth, which goes against the purpose of the section, hence my revert.

The entry in question was added on 17 May 2018 with these two edits by Just Step Sideways (talk · contribs), who I have informed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

What Redrose64 said, this is a list of wrong ideas, followed by refutations of those ideas, therefore the previous wording was correct. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, okay, thanks for the clarification. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Help: Section, revert

Hi Redrose64, You just reverted my edit to Help:Section and I don't understand what's going on. Have I set a preference somewhere that's forcing my sections to say "[edit source]" rather than "[edit]"? It changed a few months ago and I hadn't done anything to change it, so I assumed it was just a wiki thing. I've brought it up as an edit request on the Help:Preferences talk page, so I wonder if anyone will be able to explain the anomaly for me. Regards, Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Rodney Baggins: I wasn't sure so I logged out (in order to get the default settings for the majority of readers and many editors), went to the Main Page, clicked an article link (such as migratory in the TFA blurb) and looked at the section headings. They all have "[edit]". If you are seeing "[edit source]" when logged in, I guess that it's one of the settings at Preferences. If you are seeing it when logged out, I can't explain it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm always logged in (via a laptop) and seeing "[edit source]" when logged in. Have thoroughly checked all preference options and can't find it, so I guess I'll just have to live with it. Not a problem in the grand scheme of things, just another one of life's great mysteries... Thanks anyway. Rodney Baggins (talk) 21:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2025 disestablishments in North America

A tag has been placed on Category:2025 disestablishments in North America indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Locomotive infoboxes

Is there a limit on the number of operators in locomotive infoboxes? Am considering adding "Bluebell Railway (replica)" to the LB&SCR Class H2 article. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mjroots: There isn't, but we don't normally do it for preserved locos or replicas - see for example LNER Class A3 4472 Flying Scotsman and LNER Peppercorn Class A1 60163 Tornado. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

There's a difference though, the replica is not mainline certified, so will be on the Bluebell for the forseeable future. Mjroots (talk) 19:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I would still leave it out; other Bluebell locos such as BR Standard Class 5 73082 Camelot don't have it. LB&SCR A1X class 55 Stepney does, but that may be Thomas-fan cruft. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

About noinclude

You're generally correct here, but in this case it doesn't matter too much, since documentation pages are not typically transcluded anywhere. I'll skip the newline from now on, but it's not something worth fixing imo. Nickps (talk) 20:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Reopened 2021 RfC for Heterodox Academy

Hi Redrose64. I don't believe I've ever seen a RfC reopened other than when it was closed too quickly. There's no time limit if it wasn't formally closed? - Hipal (talk) 17:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hipal: I didn't reopen it. Is your question about my only two edits to that page? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes. From my perspective, your edits changed it from a discussion about an old RfC to reopening the RfC. Better if I check at Talk:RfC? --Hipal (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hipal: My first edit removed a duplicate signature, and replaced a faked timestamp with a genuine one. My second edit removed the extraneous code that is added by {{subst:unsigned}}, which causes difficulties for Legobot when it builds the RfC listing pages. How could either of those edits be construed as having changed it from a discussion about an old RfC to reopening the RfC? The RfC was reopened in this edit by Aquillion (talk · contribs), specifically by adding the {{rfc|pol|soc}}. Why would you think that was my doing? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I apologize. My mistake. I didn't see that edit by Aquillion. Thank you for digging into the chain of events and finding what I overlooked. --Hipal (talk) 22:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

It's all in the page history. This shows who made edits and when they were done; the "prev" links reveal exactly what was done in any given edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes. As you can see from it, I did some cleanup after the RfC was first copied to the page. There was a flurry of activity and I overlooked it when trying to catch up on the 57 subsequent edits. The page doesn't usually have such activity. --Hipal (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

How did you get the special colour name?

I’m guessing you need to be really special for it but I’m wondering because EENg has it and others. Mcflurry2212 (talk) 09:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

What special colour name? Valid colour names are described at web colours but only one of them is described as a special color - it is transparent. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mcflurry2212 are you referring to the colours in Redrose's signature? There's no special requirements, anyone with an account can customise their signature by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature. the wub "?!" 21:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Template:Cite xxx/doc

Can this revert be explained please? 142.113.140.146 (talk) 11:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

It's a convenience link, mainly used in help, project and discussion pages, its only use is as {{cite xxx}} which provides a link to examples of cite template usage. The template has no other purpose. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Protocol?

I went to leave you a message here, as you requested, but the above tells me to leave it on my talk page - so I have done.

I'll try to see if I can "add it to my watchlist" but I'm not a user of chat pages - I only joined Wikipedia to rectify a defect! Ryderailer (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)