The importance of User talk:DuncanHill in today's society is undeniable. User talk:DuncanHill has long been a topic of interest and debate among experts and ordinary citizens alike. Whether due to its relevance in popular culture, its impact on the economy, or its influence on people's daily lives, User talk:DuncanHill has proven to be a topic of great importance. In this article, we will explore different perspectives and approaches on User talk:DuncanHill, with the aim of better understanding its role in society and its impact on our lives.
SEMI-RETIRED
This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.
Fixing citation errors
Regardless of what other editors say fixing citation errors is clearly not a violation of CITEVAR per the fourth point of 'Generally considered helpful', and the per the last point of the same section if they don't like that LDRs are used to fix the error then they can change it themselves. I just wanted you to know you're 100% not in the wrong here. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested«@» °∆t°13:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
@Engineerchange: Hi, look at the article history and you will see your edit tagges "harv-error". In addition, the link in the article does not work when clicked. I also have Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors watchlisted, and your edit added the article to the category. In addition I use User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js and that also marks the sfn as faulty. Another point to consider is WP:CITEVAR - the article does not use sfn refs so you shouldn't really be adding them even if they do work. If you really insist on using sfn then you would need to edit the citation template containing the Glaser work to use last = Glaser instead of name = David Glaser, and then move it from "Further reading" to a new section called "Sources". DuncanHill (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
The source was 2024 when it was added . Is this going to cause a mess that needs to be fixed every year because it's an online source or was that just because the timing was New Year's Eve/Day? Clovermoss🍀(talk)19:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: A lot of online sources contradict themselves about the date of publication. Citation bot gets its dates from metadata (I think), and it often breaks sfn/harv references by "correcting" dates, which is what happened here. If we look at the source itself here it says "Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2024" which any normal human being would take to mean it was published in 2024. However, scroll down and it also says "Print publication: 31 January 2025", and if you click on "Cite" it says 2025 whichever format you choose. So I don't think it will change again for this source, but you'll certainly see Citation bot going around breaking harv/sfn cites, and you'll see sources that contradict themselves about their publication dates. DuncanHill (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Rejection of Message
@DuncanHill, thank you for messaging me, TheChosenContributor. Unfortunately, I rejected your message as it used a template. Feel free to resend it, but without the template.
@TheChosenContributor: I gave you a formal warning for your vandalism. If I see you committing any more vandalism I will give you a further warning or warnings as appropriate. You cannot "reject" warnings for your vandalism. DuncanHill (talk) 19:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
HIS Wikipedia page has the "Frederick", as does his orbituary and knighthood, and the F is in his papers. Wikipedia convention is to use the full birth name even when that is not how they are referred to by colleagues. While I don't like that, it is the convention so your change may get reverted... Ldm1954 (talk) 11:18, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
@Ldm1954: No, Wikipedia does not use the full birth name, it uses the WP:COMMONNAME, plus a disambiguator where necessary. The ODNB clearly says "he never used the forename Frederick", the Britannica article is at "Sir Charles Frank". His books say "Charles Frank" on the cover. DuncanHill (talk) 11:21, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
@Ldm1954: No, but the ARTICLE is at Bill Clinton, and in any other article we call him Bill, not William Jefferson. So with Frank, the article should be at Charles Frank (physicist), and mentions of him in other articles should call him Charles, not Frederick. DuncanHill (talk) 11:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the ref. I'm old enough that find cite templates very confusing. ps, you user-page statement "Some people just want to spoil it for everyone else. They are succeeding" is depressingly true over the last few weeks :( Ceoil (talk) 12:15, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Citation problems for Dracula's Guest
Hello there
I have added a new section to the article Dracula's Guest. However, the short footnotes don't work for this section. I am not technical and have no idea what I have done to break the short footnotes. Could you have a look and see if you can fix it? If you can let me know in layman's terms what went wrong and how I can fix it in future that would be great.
I am working on a PC. When I hover my cursor over a footnote in the first section I get the short reference and a link to the full citation. When I do the same thing on the footnotes in the section: Critical Analysis, I only get a link to the short citation in the reference section rther than the full bibliographicval details in the sources section. I don't know why this is happening. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 11:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
@Aemilius Adolphin: Hmmm, I just get the short reference anywhere in the article, which is what I would expect. I think this may be something to do with a setting in your preferences or a user-script. I think the best thing to do is ask at the Village Pump/Technical. Describe the problem there, and say what browser you use and what Wikipedia skin you use. I always find people very helpful there. DuncanHill (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) @Aemilius Adolphin: It all Works for me, but I think that I know what's happening for you. When you are at the "Critical analysis" section, I suspect that you have some or all of the "References" section visible. When this is the case, hovering over a ref marker like can behave in either of two ways - (i) if the matching ref in the references section is off-screen, you get the usual popup box; (ii) if the matching ref is above the bottom of the screen, no popup is shown, although some browsers will highlight the ref with a pale blue background. Try scrolling the page downwards so that the "References" section is completely hidden, then try hovering the ref marker again. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, DuncanHill. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 13:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I'm doing what I can to create new lifeboat pages, and bring the older ones upto date as fas as I can, so thankyou for your edits.
Fighting a (sometimes losing) battle against a previous editor, who for a spell insisted on citations from a 15 year old reference work, and who has systematically removed all my updates from the lifeboat Stations in the southwest, but done strategically over a number of months, then it can't be classed as editwaring.
NB: Lifeboat Area of Operation cannot be cited, as there is no documentation, but I'll sort that out one day!!
Martin Ojsyork (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
sfnm anchor not working
G'day DuncanHill. I was hoping I could pull you from semi-retirement and help diagnose an issue.
Thank you for pointing out how to identify empty "sfn" targets. I recently adopted the "sfn" template because it makes editing easier since the "sfn" citations take less space in the text compared to <ref>. However, it is a little challenging to see if a reference still has a target after heavy editing with things added and others removed. The tools that you pointed out are of great help.A.Cython (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
@A.Cython: Thank, you, I'm glad you find them useful. All the best, DuncanHill (talk) 23:58, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Abraham Lincoln edit
Recently you deleted a "ref=none" code for a reference at Abraham Lincoln. I've been told that using "ref=none" is the way to retain a possible reference without deleting it from the article. When you deleted the "ref=none" from the unused Randall/Current citation you introduced a Harv warning where none was before...
Yes, actually, looking at your edit summary I do already have the Trappist the Monk Harv errors code installed, it's been part of my editing since May 2020 and before that (from 2018 until 2020) I used Uchuca's script. Am slightly confused by your actions, but I don't understand everything around here so would appreciate learning your why etc. (It seems to me that the Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors possibly has an inclusion bug? - but maybe I am mistaken...) Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 18:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
@Shearonink: I did not remove ref=none from the Randall/Current citation, I removed it from Meacham 2022, which is called by refs 65 and 320. My edit did not introduce a Harv warning where none was before. DuncanHill (talk) 19:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Hi, DuncanHill. Please wait just a bit before fixing harv errors in articles, if the last edit was minutes ago. I quadruple-edit conflicted with your edits to fix citations at Raymond Poincaré, because while I was improving references in two adjacent edits, you found citation inconsistencies in the few moments between my two edits (presumably from the category), and leaped on it to 'fix' it, which caused my second edit to fail. And then again, and again and again, for a total of four failed attempts. In the end, I finally got it, and the good-faith effort you spent to maintain verifiability at the article was wasted, and my improvement took around twelve times longer than expected. Probably a two-minute wait would have saved you the trouble in this case, but sometimes it takes longer; I would wait an hour, say, and then if the malformed citations are still there, either ping the editor to see if they are still working on it, or just do it yourself. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
@Mathglot: Any further edits after the one that caused the error make it drop off my watchlist. In most cases (I would reckon over 90%) the editors who introduce the errors do not fix them. So, I leave it an hour, the editor makes further edits, and it no longer appears on my watchlist as an addition to the category. It gets buried in the thousands of others, many several years old. So it's best to fix them as soon as I see them. DuncanHill (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
@Mathglot: You say "Probably a two-minute wait would have saved you the trouble in this case" well as my edit was seven minutes after yours I really don't think there was anything precipitate about my edit. DuncanHill (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
I can believe it's well over 90%. Maybe the easiest thing then, is just whenever you see it's my edit, just leave it and go to the next one. You can be sure I will get to it, and if by some rare happenstance I don't, eventually someone else will. As far as how long it took, I was composing my second edit seconds after my first one, while you were doing that. I don't want to get into a quibble about the number of minutes involved. The fact is, I am very experienced with references, have disentangled horror shows involving many dozens of hinky citations in multiple scripts, languages, and referencing styles, and have written or improved some of the referencing templates. So it's just a shame to have to waste your time fixing citations I am adding, as I will surely get to it very shortly.
As far as your watchlist, I assumed you were monitoring the category directly, but if not, there might be a way to whip up a gadget that will pop up a box on your user page or user talk page whenever the category is non-empty, with a link to the category, that won't go away when the user makes further edits, but only when the category goes empty again. In any case, what is certain, is that we are at cross-purposes, both trying to improve references, and both wasting time doing so due to unnecessary edit conflicts. And that's not counting the time discussing it. The easiest thing I think, is to just ignore all my citation edits. I will get to them; I promise. Thanks for your efforts to improve verifiability and citations; I wish more people did what you are doing. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
@Mathglot: The Category is NEVER empty, exactly because "eventually someone else will" get to it. It's gone down a lot, only just under 4000 articles in it nowadays, I can remember it being 25,000+ when I started fixing no-target errors. A handful of other editors also put a lot of effort into it. I'll try to remember you'll fix your mistakes. What would be best would be 1) Wikipedia stops making error categories invisible by default, 2) talk-page message (like the ones about dablinks) when someone does cause a no-target error (and refname errors, and for that matter all the other ref errors we have categories for). But people would complain about pages being filled with ugly error categories, and usertalk being full of messages about mistakes, instead of ego-stroking "ooh you are wonderful" shizzle. Hey ho. Those ships sailed years ago. DuncanHill (talk) 00:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Hey, Duncan, sorry about the confusion. I've been working to get these species moved to Polybius after Liocarcinus recently got ransacked in a 2024 paper, and several of them needed a technical move due to existing redirects. It completely slipped my mind for these to add the WoRMS citations. Getting those added now. 00:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC) TheTechnician27(Talk page)00:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
Here I put more value on immediately correcting outdated information than I do on consistency with the title, but I have since placed an 'Under construction' tag on each of the three pending ones. TheTechnician27(Talk page)21:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
Douglas Day
Thank you for correcting my sfn errors in Douglas Day. I've copied your template for further use. I hate to see you retire, since I have no one to learn these things from. I spent hours yesterday trying to make |ref={{harvid}} work in a different wiki, but now I'll use your method. ( I also hope I replied in the right place.) Vidamasvida (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you for noticing and quietly repairing my many careless citation errors. I know you're sick of me. I do promise I don't leave them there just to lure you into my web, I'm just a bum who makes up author names, and confuses years when stuff happened and years when it was written about. Anyway you are an absolute mensch. Thank you. jengod (talk) 14:43, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Ren & Stimpy edit
Recently you added the Thad Komorowski book as a source. Yes that does take care of the Harv error BUT it does not fix the fact that the page numbers are needed for those cites. If you have a copy of or access to the book it would be awesome if you could verify the statements:
Originally, a scene where George Liquor leg-wrestles with Ren and Stimpy was going to be in this episode, but never got past the storyboards.
Ultimately, legal troubles with John Kricfalusi's ownership of George Liquor (they had sold him the rights to George at his firing) prevented them from ever airing the footage.
Hello DuncanHill. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mayuno Yasokawa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Decline A7 - mutiple roles in notable works is a credible claim of importance. Use WP:AFD if you feel deletion is needed. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
CS1 maint: date and year
Hello DuncanHill! Your reversion of my edit here, has restored multiple errors on that page: CS1 maint: date and year as logged at Category:CS1 maint: date and year. This produces multiple error messages for anyone editing that page. I'm not seeing the same alerts for the Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errorserrors you mention (I'm assuming some script changes are needed to see the errors you mention?). So it seems more likely the error messages from the faulty year/date settings would take precedence. Does not seem right that the fix for the Sfn errors is to keep faulty year= settings. If those errors are mitigated by those additional a/b/c on the ends of years, perhaps those can instead be moved to the year in the date fields? Then both fixes could remain. Seems wrong to leave a page with glaring error message alerts at the top of the article whenever anyone edits it, they tend to be quite off putting. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 12:27, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
@LooksGreatInATurtleNeck: To see the Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors install User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js. I don't see "glaring error message alerts at the top" - is that a script you use? As to which takes priority, the date + year error does not prevent the link between short form ref and source actually working, but the no-target error does, and the duplicate error can make it impossible to tell which source was meant - If there are two or three "Smith 1990" sources, then it is useless referring someone to "Smith 1990". Anyway, your edit here fixed it. DuncanHill (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Hello DuncanHill! "I don't see "glaring error message alerts at the top" - is that a script you use?" No, it's normal for anyone editing a page. For example go to Duane Eddy, edit the page (no need to make an actual edit), then click "Show Preview" as you would before publishing an edit. You will see the bright green Script warnings from the date/year errors at the top of the page (looks like there's also a url-status error too, I'll fix 'em both after you see this example). Same for any page with those, for any editor regardless of CSS scripts. As I say, those errors are very off putting to editors who may believe they caused a problem with their edit & decide not to publish. Hence why I've been taking time to fix lots of these different script errors. Those year= entries are not even being shown, they are overridden by the date= field. Seems like there's more of an issue with how Sfn differentiates sources if it gets confused by not having that appended letter on the end of a year. Anyway, at least my second edit fixed the problem so both errors can be removed. If I see the appended letters in future when fixing the date/year error, I'll move it to the the other field so as to avoid disturbing the Sfn/Harv issue. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Installing code for harv/sfn reference errors
Hey there, saw that you edited Defense of Azakh to fix the harv/sfn reference errors present, and suggested installing a script. I'm not familiar with how to install scripts and I just edited an article that contains harv/sfn errors after my edits. If you know how to install the script I'd appreciate any help, but otherwise thanks for the edits on the Azakh article! Surayeproject3 (talk) 23:27, 6 April 2025 (UTC)