User talk:BrownHairedGirl: Difference between revisions
→A brownie for you!: reply @User:FlawlessViper -- please use WP:RFPP |
m Reverted edits by BrownHairedGirl (talk) to last version by FlawlessViper |
||
Line 182: | Line 182: | ||
::::Thanks again! [[User:EvergreenFir|EvergreenFir]] ([[User talk:EvergreenFir|talk]]) 06:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC) |
::::Thanks again! [[User:EvergreenFir|EvergreenFir]] ([[User talk:EvergreenFir|talk]]) 06:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC) |
||
:::::Hello! Do you think you could also give these 3 pages permanent semi-protection? :) They are always getting vandalized and it really irritates me. [[List of current champions in WWE]], [[WWE World Heavyweight Championship]], and [[List of WWE World Heavyweight Champions]] These pages have needed protection for a long time. [[User:FlawlessViper|FlawlessViper]] ([[User talk:FlawlessViper|talk]]) 10:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC) |
:::::Hello! Do you think you could also give these 3 pages permanent semi-protection? :) They are always getting vandalized and it really irritates me. [[List of current champions in WWE]], [[WWE World Heavyweight Championship]], and [[List of WWE World Heavyweight Champions]] These pages have needed protection for a long time. [[User:FlawlessViper|FlawlessViper]] ([[User talk:FlawlessViper|talk]]) 10:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC) |
||
::::::Hi [[User:FlawlessViper|FlawlessViper]] |
|||
::::::I am happy to respond quickly to a request here if the situation is urgent, as it was with [[Battleground (2014)]]. |
|||
::::::However, in other cases I prefer that pages get listed at [[WP:RFPP]], where the request can be more widely scrutinised. |
|||
::::::The problem you cite here is non-urgent, so [[WP:RFPP]] is the place to go. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#663200;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 09:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC) |
|||
==DYK for James Balfour (died 1845)== |
==DYK for James Balfour (died 1845)== |
Revision as of 09:34, 2 July 2014
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Richard Newdigate 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:
- * [[Sir Richard Newdigate, 1st Baronet]] (1602–1678, MP for Tamworth 1660
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bussy Mansell 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:
- * [[Bussy Mansel, 4th Baron Mansel]] (died 1750, Welsh peer, MP for Cardiff 1727–34, for Glamorganshire 1737–45
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Charles Spencer, 3rd Earl of Sunderland 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:
- married an Irish lady of fortune, Judith Tichborne (d. 1749), daughter of Sir Benjamin Tichborne (younger brother of Sir Henry Tichborne, 1st Baron Ferrard, (Irish cr. 1715) and Elizabeth Gibbs.
- {{s-bef | before = [[Thomas Bere]]<br />[[Sir Anthony Keck (MP) |Anthony Keck]]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Johnstone (East India Company) 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:
- Baronet|Sir James Johnstone, 4th Baronet]] (1726–1794), the wealthy lawyer and politician William (later [[Sir William Pulteney, 5th Baronet]] (1729–1805), and the politician and [[Royal Navy]]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eustace Balfour 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:
- {{reflist
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Great Britain by-elections (1715–34) 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:
- Burghs]]||u||[[William Dalrymple (politician)|William Dalrymple]]||[[John Dalrymple (died 1742))|John Dalrymple]]||Chose to sit for Wigtownshire
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/John Johnstone (East India Company) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 04:37, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks! Now fixed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I love you!
File:Corazon, I love you..gif | You are fantastic!!! |
I love you!!!!!!!!!!!! LZNQBD (talk) 20:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC) |
I am not sure what prompted that (and it did make me think a little of this) ... but thank you, LZNQBD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Youtube is filtered in my country. I can't see this video.LZNQBD (talk) 06:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
I love u too cheater Sablondee (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
John Baring (1730-1816)
Late yesterday, I made two changes to the John Baring (1730-1816) article. The first was to link "Larkbeare" to an article in nl:Wikipedia on that small Devon village. The second was to remove the "II" from the article title.
Looking at the article history today, I see that in my first edit I apparently made very extensive changes, mostly deletions. I can believe that I may have made deletions through incompetence; but I am also credited with adding material, e.g. "son of clothier", which I am sure I could not have added.
As you also worked on the article yesterday, and are an admin, I am hoping you may be able to understand, and if appropriate reverse, the changes which have been credited to me. Maproom (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Maproom
- Mistakes happen!
- The simplest way out is to revert your edit, which I have done. That restores all the deleted material. Feel free to edit the article again to add other the other material.
- Note that I have moved the page to John Baring (1730–1816), using an endash for the date range.
|Good luck. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for repairing the damage. Thank you also for your non-judgmental "Mistakes happen!" Maproom (talk) 10:22, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 26
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.
- James Balfour (died 1845) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Annuity and Haddington
- Geoffrey Drage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hatfield
- John Johnstone (East India Company) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Dysart
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
- All now fixed. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
DYK nomination of James Balfour (died 1845)
Hello! Your submission of James Balfour (died 1845) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! I am One of Many (talk) 21:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
DYK nomination of James Blair (MP)
Hello! Your submission of James Blair (MP) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! czar ♔ 03:25, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
A person called chasewc91 claimed there had been a consensus before I joined the discussion "Idina Menzel's single. However there is no one there who agrees with him. Still he abruptly edits the infobox to the form he likes. Could you please tell me if his claim is valid? (P.S. Quenhitran, one of the users who discussed with him prior to me, agrees with him that the claim is false.) Thanks.Forbidden User (talk) 08:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Forbidden User
- First point is that it seems that an edit war may be developing between you and chasewc91. If that continues, then both of you risk being blocked. Either of you can stop it, and I suggest you do so.
- The dispute appears to be about whether to use {{infobox single}} or {{infobox song}}. There has been at least one case recently at WP:ARBCOM about infoboxes, and you may find that special sanctions apply to them. So best to act very cautiously, and remember that there is no deadline: it needs to be right, but it dosen't need to be right right now :)
- I suggest an WP:RFC to resolve this. Ideally, you and chase should work together to develop a neutral summary of the dispute. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. By the way, there is an inactive discussion about whether to retain Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion as a guideline at its talk page. When will it be closed?Forbidden User (talk) 13:45, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- If you think it needs to be closed, you can list it at WP:AN/RFC. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:47, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. By the way, there is an inactive discussion about whether to retain Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion as a guideline at its talk page. When will it be closed?Forbidden User (talk) 13:45, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey there
In case you are interested in this CFD (Massacres of men). I voted to delete and cited your long experience with the use of subjective terminology in categories dating back years now, which, btw, we have usually won the debates. So, take a look, if you like. Yours, Quis separabit? 00:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi RMS, thanks for the notification.
- I don't have time to weigh on that topic at the length it deserves, so I will probably give it a miss.
- FWIW, my initial reaction is there a bundle of inter-related complexities in that discussion, and that good points are being made on both sides. You make a good point about the subjectivity of the term "massacre", which is a highly-loaded word. (Is it in WP:WTA? If not, it should be.) However, I think that an even more critical point is whether it is viable to try to enforce a distinction between massacres of men and massacres targetted at men because of their gender. Without that distinction, the category is useless; but unless a boundary can be reliably and objectively determined, then we are back in the old problem of subjective categorisation. As you and I have repeatedly argued, that's a place to be avoided.
- However, I do think it is important that new angles of scholarship, such as research into gendered violence, are included in Wikipedia. Doing so is difficult, because definitions remain fluid and contested (and often highly politicised), and in those situations lists are a much better device, because they facilitate better referencing and explanation of any inclusion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- OK, Thanks for the insight. I always like learning new things, or at least new ways of looking at things, from you. Quis separabit? 01:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Rms, and thanks for participating, and thanks BHG for your thoughts above. Just a few thoughts - 1) We have a whole Category:Massacres tree, and a Massacre article, I don't think ultimately that massacre is that subjective, or at least it hasn't prevented us from having oodles of massacre categories, so using that word as a reason to delete this one category isn't quite fair, IMHO. 2) As to BHG's point, I agree, it is important to not just have massacres where men were killed. Instead, as the inclusion criteria states, this is for massacres where men and boys are explicitly separated from the women prior to being killed - thus their gender is the main determining factor, and the literature calls this gender-based violence. The literature also calls these incidents sex-selective massacres or gendercides, and if you search for that term you will find a number of sources that discuss this and the particular risk men are exposed to in conflict zones (plenty of sources on the talk page of the category). There is even a book published on this subject specifically. It's actually rather rare to have a sex-selective massacre of women, on the other hand, and amongst all massacres that I've looked through in the wiki, most of them aren't sex-selective, so at least in our coverage it's a tiny minority that fit in this category. I only found around 20 instances that fit the category for now, and that have the distinctive trait of men and boys being separated from the women and then massacred, many of them are well-known instances, and defined as such in the lede (e.g. The massacre of X was the killing of the entire male population of village Y). It was a common technique in the Kosovo mess, and we're now seeing it used by Boko Haram (although, sometimes they just kill everyone). Anyway, if you do choose to weigh in would love your thoughts BHG, as you know I always like your input, even when we disagree :)--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Obi, and thanks for your kind words. You give good debate, and I too enjoy those debates, whether or not we are on the same side.
- Problem is, I am up to my neck in content. I hadn't been doing enough content creation recently, so I have been busy trying to create stubs on British MPs again. Unfortunately, too many of what I think are gonna be obscure lobby-fodder turn out to be rather more complex characters, with a lot more to say than born elected, died.
- For example, one turned out to be an unscrupulously successful nabob who bribed his way into Parliament. Another turned to be a nabob who founded a minor dynasty, and had a brother who was an mildly interesting B-grade architect. Another one loomed up into prominence as a record-holding state-subsidised slave-owner, and the latest turns out to be a noted Edwardian imperialist with some unstereotypical ideas.
- Damn these people for having such interesting lives ;)
- Gotta wrap that latest one up before my browser explodes again from too many open tabs, and then maybe I'll weigh in at CFD :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Rms, and thanks for participating, and thanks BHG for your thoughts above. Just a few thoughts - 1) We have a whole Category:Massacres tree, and a Massacre article, I don't think ultimately that massacre is that subjective, or at least it hasn't prevented us from having oodles of massacre categories, so using that word as a reason to delete this one category isn't quite fair, IMHO. 2) As to BHG's point, I agree, it is important to not just have massacres where men were killed. Instead, as the inclusion criteria states, this is for massacres where men and boys are explicitly separated from the women prior to being killed - thus their gender is the main determining factor, and the literature calls this gender-based violence. The literature also calls these incidents sex-selective massacres or gendercides, and if you search for that term you will find a number of sources that discuss this and the particular risk men are exposed to in conflict zones (plenty of sources on the talk page of the category). There is even a book published on this subject specifically. It's actually rather rare to have a sex-selective massacre of women, on the other hand, and amongst all massacres that I've looked through in the wiki, most of them aren't sex-selective, so at least in our coverage it's a tiny minority that fit in this category. I only found around 20 instances that fit the category for now, and that have the distinctive trait of men and boys being separated from the women and then massacred, many of them are well-known instances, and defined as such in the lede (e.g. The massacre of X was the killing of the entire male population of village Y). It was a common technique in the Kosovo mess, and we're now seeing it used by Boko Haram (although, sometimes they just kill everyone). Anyway, if you do choose to weigh in would love your thoughts BHG, as you know I always like your input, even when we disagree :)--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- OK, Thanks for the insight. I always like learning new things, or at least new ways of looking at things, from you. Quis separabit? 01:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
400,000 edits!
I know editcountitis is so 2005, but still, this is your 400,000th edit. Which either means a lack of life or commitment to the project. :P Sceptre (talk) 05:04, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Sceptre!
- I think I will pass on which of the 2 options this is :)
- But look at which page was changed in that 400,000th edit. Eek! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:04, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- A large star-shaped barn to you. Victuallers (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, Victuallers. That's very kind.
- My existing barn has an infirm roof, so I can make good use of the new one :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- A large star-shaped barn to you. Victuallers (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- 400K?! Wow, I was excited that I was closing in on 50k. Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 16:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
DYK for James Blair (MP)
On 29 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article James Blair (MP), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when the British Slavery Abolition Act 1833 compensated slave-owners, the largest single payment went to Tory Member of Parliament James Blair for his 1,598 slaves in British Guiana? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/James Blair (MP). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Eustace Balfour
Hello! Your submission of Eustace Balfour at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yakikaki (talk) 09:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
RPP - Urgent Request
Battleground (2014) is being heavily vandalized. There's an WP:RPP already, but we can barely keep up with the vandalism. Thought I'd ask an admin who's currently online to step in. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:01, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Fully protected for 1 week. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
Thanks for responding so quickly to my request! EvergreenFir (talk) 06:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC) |
- Thanks, EvergreenFir! It will make a tasty addition to my breakfast :) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:10, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- If you have a chance, WWE Battleground could use a PP was well. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done, in these 2 edits. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:35, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hello! Do you think you could also give these 3 pages permanent semi-protection? :) They are always getting vandalized and it really irritates me. List of current champions in WWE, WWE World Heavyweight Championship, and List of WWE World Heavyweight Champions These pages have needed protection for a long time. FlawlessViper (talk) 10:24, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done, in these 2 edits. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:35, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- If you have a chance, WWE Battleground could use a PP was well. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
DYK for James Balfour (died 1845)
On 1 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article James Balfour (died 1845), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1826 the Scottish nabob and Tory politician James Balfour was elected to Parliament with a total of three votes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/James Balfour (died 1845). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Gatoclass (talk) 19:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Please help
Please have a look at this and help if possible, I have no idea who to turn to with this so I'm trying to contact more experienced Wikipedians.
--Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 22:51, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message, Samotny Wędrowiec.
- I read it, but read no further. I am sure than you mean well, and what you have written may be a great summary of the situation; I will reserve judgement on that. But unless you provide more specific examples of what you think is going wrong, and who exactly you think are this "Polish Wiki mafia" are, then it's really just a rant. That is very strong language to use about other editors, and I hope that you have evidence to justify it.
- May I suggest that you take the time to write an explanation of what has been happening, with less rhetoric and name-calling and more specific examples? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:08, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Alexander Mackay (British Army officer)
On 2 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Mackay (British Army officer), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Colonel Alexander Mackay was appointed commander of British forces in Boston, Massachusetts, in summer 1768, but did not arrive until April 1769 and stayed for just five months? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alexander Mackay (British Army officer). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |