User talk:Erick Soares3

Archives

2019 • 2020 • 2021 • 2022 • 2023 • 2024

Warning: Since I can't know if an IP address is being used by the same person, I will not reply to anonymous replies anymore. Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Erick Soares3, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like Wikipedia and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! - Ahunt (talk) 16:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, content you added to Kirlian photography appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint, and appears to have given undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ixocactus (talk) 22:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for resolving the unlinked citation issue at Alberto Santos-Dumont

Erick, thanks for spotting the non-working citation link at Alberto Santos-Dumont, which you worked around in this edit:

This helped expose a bug in {{sfnlink}} involving a rare edge case where there is italic markup in a citation author or last name field. The citation in question is this one, which is defined in the lead section of the article with an incorrect |ref= param containing italic markup around the term 'CENDOC'. The bug involves some technical details of short citations, and I'm not sure how much sense this will make to you, but here is a copy of that ref:

<ref name=CENDOC2021>{{Cite book|url=https://www2.fab.mil.br/cendoc/images/Revistas/livrosd2021.pdf|title=E o mundo falava de Santos-Dumont...|language=pt-br|publisher=Centro de Documentação da Aeronáutica |location=Rio de Janeiro|year=2021|isbn=978-65-994256-0-8|page=104|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220301113520/https://www2.fab.mil.br/cendoc/images/Revistas/livrosd2021.pdf|archive-date=2022-03-01|url-status=live|ref={{harvid|''CENDOC'', Rio de Janeiro|2021}}}}</ref>

Notice the italic markup (two single-quotes, fore and aft) around 'CENDOC', which I've bolded in the ref so it stands out. That is not a normal way to create a targetable address in a citation (and neither is the comma, or the city name) but it is apparently not illegal, as both {{sfn}} and {{harvnb}} can link to it. As you discovered, previously template {{sfnlink}} could not link to it, but this has been fixed, and now it can: sfnlink now handles unusual markup in |ref= tags or author names as well. Unlike {{harvnb}}, you can even use {{sfnlink}} from talk pages, like this one, as an illustration, which is why we can use it here to code the link {{sfnlink|''CENDOC'', Rio de Janeiro|2021|article=Alberto Santos-Dumont}} to generate this link: CENDOC, Rio de Janeiro (2021), which as you can see if you click it, targets the full citation in the article, even from here on your talk page.

Apologies if this got too far into the weeds, but I just wanted to say thank you for discovering that edge-case bug, inadvertently or not. Going forward, please feel free to use {{sfnlink}} when applicable, or {{harvnb}}, whichever is more suitable for the occasion. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: wow! That's a lot! I only “discovered” it because since it was I who read the book to add its info in the article, I immediately knew something was wrong when I saw your edit. The single-quotes around CENDOC was something I got from an editor in the Portuguese Wikipedia (which usually follows the style: "author-last, day-month|year" when citing newspapers or journals). It always seemed to work, but since the references positions in the article have been changed a couple of times since I added the book (I like to add the Cite book in the bibliography section), I can see why something like that can happen. Thanks! Erick Soares3 (talk) 10:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erick, it was really interesting reading about this early aviation pioneer, who I had never heard of. I will probably change the short citation to remove the italics, the comma, and the city name to make it look more the way the {{sfn}} template recommends with just author + year (i.e., {{sfn|CENDOC|2021}} ), and then it won't even need the |ref= parameter anymore because author + year is the sfn default format and it will link the full citation automatically without jumping through any hoops in the short citation as it does currently.

Going forward, please ignore style (and also policies and guidelines) from Portuguese Wikipedia; they make their own rules, and so do we, and they are somewhat different. At English Wikipedia, short citations have author surname(s) and year; no italics, no quotes, no city names, and no punctuation like commas. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:39, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Santos Dumont is quite unknown outside Brazil, despise being highly popular worldwide in the turn of the 19th to the 20th century (there's a HBO miniseries, if you're interested). All right! I don't think that the ref style is a guideline in the Portuguese Wikipedia, but it seems to be something I incorporated after working with pages like this one. Nowadays, I'm more focused on Wikisource, but I will keep it in my mind. Thanks! Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:23, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And just for note, I've created those two pages about his work:

Brésil (spherical balloon), his first balloon;
Santos-Dumont's experiments in Monaco - it could be argued that it would be better to merge it with Santos-Dumont number 6, but it could make the reader think that the airship was mostly used in Monaco.

There are still a lot of unknowns about Santos Dumont work, and according to some researchers, we aren't even sure of how many aircrafts he developed during his active years. Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: I forgot to ping! haha Erick Soares3 (talk) 11:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added something to the article that everyone else missed (at least, partly). He even had an influence on men's fashion which started out for very utilitarian reasons. A fascinating figure. Mathglot (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]