User talk:Graham87: Difference between revisions
Gerda Arendt (talk | contribs) →In Todes Banden: 19th century and popularity vs. 20th and printed |
→Whistleblower Protection Act: new section |
||
Line 169: | Line 169: | ||
:{{replyto|Gerda Arendt}} I don't have any strong opinions one way or the other. '''[[User:Graham87|Graham]]'''<font color="green">[[User talk:Graham87|87]]</font> 09:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC) |
:{{replyto|Gerda Arendt}} I don't have any strong opinions one way or the other. '''[[User:Graham87|Graham]]'''<font color="green">[[User talk:Graham87|87]]</font> 09:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC) |
||
:: I think it should not be our opinions. The Luther hymn has [[Christ lag in Todes Banden, BWV 4|two words]], the [[Bach Gesellschaft|Bach-Ausgabe]] (19th century) had one, the [[Neue Bach-Ausgabe]] (20th century) returned to the original, and I believe so should we. Unfortunately, Amazon shows one word next to the title page with two words. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 09:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC) |
:: I think it should not be our opinions. The Luther hymn has [[Christ lag in Todes Banden, BWV 4|two words]], the [[Bach Gesellschaft|Bach-Ausgabe]] (19th century) had one, the [[Neue Bach-Ausgabe]] (20th century) returned to the original, and I believe so should we. Unfortunately, Amazon shows one word next to the title page with two words. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 09:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Whistleblower Protection Act == |
|||
Thanks for your contributions. I'm doing this for a school project so I added better and more relevant information under the "Legal Cases" section. |
Revision as of 19:34, 26 April 2016
If I have left you a message: please answer on my talk page, else inform me. If you leave me a message: I will answer on your talk page, unless you request otherwise. Please click here to leave me a new message. |
Disambiguation link notification for March 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colossus of Ostermunzel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nienburg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar | |
because i can and also, nice AMA you did on Reddit a while ago. Winterysteppe (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC) |
March 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Triangular trade 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:
- triangle to this, called the ''[[volta do mar]]'' was already being used by the Portuguese, before [[Christopher Columbus' voyage, to sail to the [[Canary Islands]] and the [[Azores]]. Columbus
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:57, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 18 March
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Battle of Glorieta Pass page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
sorry for mistake
Ok buddy , you are welcome , thank you for message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedzc (talk • contribs) 14:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Wind power boom
Thanks, Graham, for your recent note. The wind power industry in Texas also has a very long history and renewable energy is displacing fossil fuels. I thought this could have been worth a mention at the very end of the article. But it probably wasn't as well-written as it could have been, and I'm happy to defer to you in this case. Happy editing, Johnfos (talk) 07:01, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Article: Laurent Grison
Thanks, Graham, for your recent note. I have added many things to improve the article. Is that alright now? Thanks again. --A. Sise (talk) 07:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
TFA
For your album: Wikipedia:Main Page history/2016 March 27, with thanks (you are #8 in the contributors' stats)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Wow, cool! Graham87 06:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 30 March
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Marble Bar, Western Australia page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you!
Many thanks for transcribing the interview with Katherine! --Ori Livneh (talk) 05:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Potions in Harry Potter
The article Potions in Harry Potter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Was deleted years ago for failing WP:FICT and WP:PLOT, among other reasons (see discussion). I prompted editors to improve the article back in November 2015. No improvement since. Still suffers from exactly the same problems today. Not precisely a candidate for CSD, so using PROD as the least painful method of deltion.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Hammersoft (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- I expected the prod would be denied, but felt it had to be done. I intend on AfD'ing the article. I'll pause for now. But, if you want this article to sustain, it needs a complete, massive rewrite. As is, it's nothing but fan fiction. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Hammersoft: Thanks. As you know, I wouldn't mind if the content was merged somewhere else, as I mostly care about link integrity; that's why I wanted to have an official discussion about it. Graham87 02:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- It's not the location that is the problem. It's the content itself. It so intensely violates writing about fiction that merging it beyond the bare mention of the names of the potions and a slight description of their intent would be just moving the problem elsewhere. This problem has existed for a decade now. It needs to end. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Hammersoft: Thanks. As you know, I wouldn't mind if the content was merged somewhere else, as I mostly care about link integrity; that's why I wanted to have an official discussion about it. Graham87 02:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Attention: Potions in Harry Potter will be placed for AfD on June 4, 2016
(You are receiving this notice due to your having made some edits to the article discussed or its talk page sometime during its history)
In November of 2007 Potions in Harry Potter was deleted as a the result of a deletion discussion due to its failure of WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, WP:WAF, and other issues. On June 4, 2015 the article was recreated from content then currently existing on the Magical objects in Harry Potter article. A discussion followed regarding the appropriateness of the recreation. An attempt was made to return this article to a redirect, which was undone a day later. Some months later, a notice was placed on the article's talk page indicating the article would be placed for deletion. A few days ago, the article was placed for proposed deletion. This too was undone.
Throughout the history of the article, which spans more than a decade, it has never had any references. It has always been written in in-universe style. No outside universe perspective has ever been provided. As of June 2016, it will have been tagged for both of these problems for a year. I have asked, begged, and pleaded with people to rewrite this article to no avail. As the article stands (and has always stood), it continues to fail WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, and WP:WAF. There have been suggestions to merge the content back to Magical objects in Harry Potter, but this completely fails to address the failures noted. Where the content exists, either in its own article or as part of another, matters not. The issue is the content itself.
Barring a massive rewrite of the entire article into something that is encyclopedic in its treatment of the subject, I will be placing it for deletion on June 4, 2016. This notice is being sent as a last ditch attempt to find one or more people willing to do something to fix the serious problems extant in this content. Thank you for your attention, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Yehudi Menuhin
Thanks for the message about the recent updates to the Yehudi Menuhin page. I was aware of the previous edit, but was not sure if it was vandalism or not – eventually I took a decision I was not quite happy about (which was the wrong decision). I am aware of the problem of vandalism, which particularly affects high-profile pages. AtticTapestry (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
This one's for you!
Thank you for looking into the archiving-conversion issues at User talk:Chicbyaccident and placing that code for the archive box there. I think it's all good now! Shearonink (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC) |
- @Shearonink: No worries, and thanks for the barnstar! Graham87 09:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
import of a german article
Dear Graham87, I would like to import the German Wikipedia-article "Erich Kirchler" as I like to translate it in English (I'll receive the native translation of the text within the next days). Can you please tell me how I can arrange this?! Best wishes, Schätzchen277 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schätzchen277 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- (watching:) There is no Import procedure. You write the article Erich Kirchler in English and use {{translated}} on the article talk page, - for an example see Philipp Wolfrum, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Yes there is; in fact I created it. However I'm most interested in importing edits from places like the Nostalgia Wikipedia, and not so much from other language Wikipedias, but I don't mind doing the latter every now and then. The use of {{translated}} is fine though. Graham87 14:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, always learning! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Auxiliary label
Hello. Thank you for your help with Auxiliary label. However, I see you applied the Pharmacology stub. Wouldn't this be more under Pharmacy rather than Pharmacology? -- TOW 07:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Tow: No worries. Re the stub tag: I was thinking that myself, but Template:Pharmacy-stub redirects to the pharmacology stub template, so that's why I added it. Graham87 07:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- I am gonna see if I can request a stub template specifically for Pharmacy. -- TOW 07:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Thank you so much for all your amazing work on Wikipedia. TOW 06:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
- @Tow: Thank you very much. Graham87 06:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
In Todes Banden
What do you think of the move from Christ lag in Todes Banden, BWV 4 to "Todesbanden"? "Todes Banden" is by Martin Luther, the printed edition of the Neue Bach-Ausgabe, Dürr-Jones. See article talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I don't have any strong opinions one way or the other. Graham87 09:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- I think it should not be our opinions. The Luther hymn has two words, the Bach-Ausgabe (19th century) had one, the Neue Bach-Ausgabe (20th century) returned to the original, and I believe so should we. Unfortunately, Amazon shows one word next to the title page with two words. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Whistleblower Protection Act
Thanks for your contributions. I'm doing this for a school project so I added better and more relevant information under the "Legal Cases" section.