User talk:Ritchie333

Keeping an eye on stuff. Meanwhile, here is some music.

It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.

A word from the special one:

I roll my eyes
At all the socking (wooah-oah)
They all need blocking (wooah-oah)
Page protection too

When they return (when they return)
They are so fickle (wooah-oah)
Had to install Twinkle (wooah-oah)
Any 'dmin will do

(from José and his Amazing Technicolor Comic-Sans signature)

Thank you

Hi, Ritchie333. Thank you for your wisdom at Josh's AN/I report.

I thought you might be interested in a few more GAs I've worked on recently and an FAC.

Caitlyn Jenner
Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard – got promoted about the same time Josh's AN/I report was winding down. You may have never heard of this case but I just crunched the numbers and the page views near 1M per year. Can you look at it and give me an idea for a DYK hook? What is not obvious about a kidnap victim?
Michael Laucke – this one is from a new editor Natalie.Desautels who has been onboard since November of 2015. This is her first article. It is now at FAC but not progressing there. I hope she does not get too discouraged if it fails to progress. She has a super attitude. She is pulling the train on this one but I have kept her between the rails and I have a ton of edits on the article. Over 60 other editors have participated, some with a single edit. I believe Natalie is over 5000 edits know and has a lot of Wiki competencies. For one thing she is so gracious. Too bad ML is turning out to be a low traffic article. Natalie has hundreds of hours into it or more. She will probably learn to put less time into articles going forward, but maybe not as the article she was able to craft with all her research (she has done 99% of that) exceeds by far what the Canadian Encyclopedia was able to dig up for their half page version.
Persoonia terminalis – this was the 5 millionth article on Wikipedia and I happened to be up when it popped out as a stub just after midnight my time. With a team effort we were able to build out the article to GA then FA. Casliber graciously gave me co-credit for the GA promotion. Casliber did say later that he had a bit of an agenda to prove that an article could go quickly from stub to GA to FA.

You already know about Planned Parenthood

Three of those are controversial topics and not recommended to attempt for GA or FA but I am willing to make the effort.

I have nominated four articles for DYK and been credited with a few more.

I answer a few questions at The Teahouse.

I write and edit a lot of tips for the Tips-of-Day project.

I review pending changes. I try to do a few a day. Usually the submission needs an tweak so I accept it then fix it. Only vandalism gets rejected by me. I feel that every editor is entitled to submit a good faith edit and have it approved even if it is imperfect or wrong. My job is to make sure it is not vandalism, but if I see a way to make their submission better I do it.

I am on the TAFI mailing list but many of those article really do not have a good way to build them out so not much gets done on them. In spite of that I am considered an active and productive member of the project.

The most exciting thing lately is helping Ben Creasy, Pete Forsyth, Stephen LaPorte and many others launch the Bay Area WikiSalon series. We have our third event at the WMF HQ on June 29.

I have participated in four onsite local edit-a-thons. One was Art-and-Feminism and another was held at an all-woman run hackerspace/makerspace but key card members are allowed to invite folks of any gender. I am a cisgender white male. Two were at a private high school for kids of rich families.

I was nurturing another editor recently for two months who did a lot of good work for the project but they got run off by a small group of coordinated bullies. It was painful to watch. They fanned their own flames a bit and they did not actually need to leave but they did. In two months they left behind 10 articles, 4 DYKs, and 15 articles rescued from AfD.

As far as article creation I know how to create an article but I am not a writer per se. My first article I had vetted through AfC, they held my feet to the fire and I followed their suggestions. It passed muster in the end. After three years of no complaints, no edit warring, and no maintenance tags Drmies got wind of it and successfully nominated it for deletion. It was about a web site that had won a prestigious press club award and it had tons of reliable sources. It is even used as a story starter for all the big national and local news stations. But, this was not good enough for Toykogirl, etc. and they killed it off. My other articles are low traffic stubs that have stayed that way. I really do not have an interest in creating a masterpiece of my own. There are enough other things to do on the Wikis. The original AfC approver would not even support keeping it. I think he swallowed a pin that day or got up on the wrong side of the bed. He had no explanation for his lack of continuing to support it. It was discouraging because even a simple article takes a mind boggling amount of effort.

I have over 2000 edits on Wikidata which is all manual work and very tedious; many on Wiktionary; a few on Wikivoyage; Commons; meta; Phabricator; etc.

I have created some helpful templates.

I have created a lot of helpful redirects.

I categorize redirects. Paine Ellsworth is the category master so he is my wingman when I cannot figure out a category.

I archive a lot of dead links. That is a manual process to insert them.

I am an avid Wikipedia reader.

I try to praise acceptable behavior and not give the appearance of praising unacceptable behavior or tolerating it.

I do not have a focus and enjoy the forks in the road. I am not trying to boast or hat collect here. I just have a lot of curiosity and I let it lead me where it goes. I learn something new every day. Too bad the old mind leaks a bit too. If you have read this far you will be receiving a door prize shortly. LOL. Please forgive any misspellings or grammar issues. No way am I scrolling up to see what I have just created here.

What is your story on the Wikis? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I read through Kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard this morning. I took out two lengthy quotes that I believe are copyright violations; even if the transcripts were released CC-BY-SA, I don't think the prose is of the right house style for an article here. You should always watch out for copyvios, as we have to aggressively remove them whenever we find them (and the message above the text window tells you this every time you edit). Yoninah is pretty good at spotting a copyvio from 20 paces, and tends to pop round DYK nominations checking for close paraphrasing every now and then.

Michael Laucke looks good for GA aside from two minor quibbles; the quote in the middle is a bit too much like close paraphrasing again, and the last section is a list, which I'm not sure meets the guidelines for list incorporation (one of the few bits of the MOS that is required for a GA - I don't know about you, but when people talk about the MOS I go and hide under a sofa until they go away again). I see Natalie.Desautels is getting a bit of a grilling at the FAC, which is kind of expected (remember that FAs are supposed to be the best writing on Wikipedia full stop and can hold their own against critically acclaimed books and journals). This topic is right up Dr. Blofeld's street to get through FAC (I GA reviewed Paco de Lucía for him years ago) , and after I ripped him a new one on Cary Grant (sorry!) he could do with some cheering up I think. It might be worth regrouping with Blofeld, setting up a PR and copyediting the article carefully, then go for FAC round 2. The important thing to remember is that FAC isn't personal. Just food for thought.

I assume re Drmies you're talking about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claycord.com. I think your problem there is that just asserting the site has fed news stories to CNN and Fox isn't really enough, unless it's doing it regularly and all the time, or if the site has become caught up in some major news scandal (well, plus the golden rule that 1) Drmies is always right and 2) When Drmies is wrong refer to rule 1)

"it popped out as a stub just after midnight my time" - that's what I said when I my youngest son was born (actually it was 8am but meh, I'd been up all night) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:46, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Ritchie333. Thank you for looking around and for your edits. I am honored. Where is the CC-BY-SA you mention? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

The text is at the bottom of the edit window above "Save page". It's the bit that starts "By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use....". The full legalese of CC-BY-SA (which stands for "Creative Commons - By Attribution - Share Alike" ... I think) is here, but if you can't face going wading through that (and who could blame you if you didn't?) it basically means all text on Wikipedia can be re-used and even sold commercially. It's why you can see crooksenterprising businessmen sell bound copies of Wikipedia articles for $50 online - it might be a waste of money to you or I, but it's not violating the licence. Since most websites and news feeds don't want this, we can't copy text wholesale from there, as it would violate their copyrights. It's one of the most confusing concepts on Wikipedia - see any complaint along the lines of "why was my picture deleted?" Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

This discussion is going nowhere. Please read User:Sven Manguard/Failed RfA Advice Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:32, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi, Ritchie333. I did not get the copies there. Statements made in open court are not copyrightable. Any works by the State of California are not copyrightable either. Furthermore, to accept your copyright vio premise would effectively give court reporters a "copyright" in a mere transcription of others' statements, contrary to black letter copyright law. See 2 William F. Patry, Patry on Copyright, Ch. 4 Noncopyrightable Material, § 4.88 (Updated Sept. 2008) (court reporters are not "authors of what they transcribe and therefore cannot be copyright owners of the transcript of court proceedings"). Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC) @Checkingfax: The problem is, the article does not cite that, but instead refers to an ABC News piece, which is copyrightable. As I said earlier, even if it could be proven that the text has a compatible licence, wholesale copying of quotations is generally discouraged, as the text does not fit our house style. In particular, verbatim court transcripts should be avoided on BLPs (see WP:BLPPRIMARY). As it goes, I think we have consensus that the quotes should not be in the article, so let's draw a line under this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:21, 3 July 2016 (UTC) Hi, Ritchie333. I have not objected to your removal of the content nor have I tried to revert it. Where is this consensus you speak of and what is the basis for it? Those victim impact statements are powerful ephemera and cannot be trimmed. The citation proved that the words exist. If you had a better way to cite it then mentioning that would have been helpful. The spoken words are not copyrightable as you opined. You said that I could be brought up at arb for this and you cited this example as a major copyright violation, but I have shown that you are incorrect. That is what I am addressing. You also left a snarky edit summary when you made that charge, plus you stated that I "[passed] a GA with copyvios in it" (I did not pass it, the GA reviewer did) and made other charges: "The ANI trips, disruption at Cary Grant". The ANI happened while I was asleep; I barely replied to it before the filer withdrew it as being "over-hasty". I have been completely exonerated in every other ANI so there are no "ANI trips" (plural) to write home about. I did not have unlimited space to make a laundry list of every conflict I have been in. I looked at the RfA question carefully and it asked me to share ones that caused me stress. The recent ANI did not cause me any stress. I was prepared to answer questions about it when asked. But no questions came forth. You did not ask any questions. Nobody did any due diligence on the ANI, Cary Grant, or the copyright issue you raised. As for Cary Grant I made minor edits that are completely supported by our MoS guidelines; guidelines reached by wide consensus. You had a question on the talk page about why and I engaged you politely and matter-of-factly. I did not change any content. I did not revert anything. Your comments at my adminship nomination swayed a lot of !votes. It is not supposed to be a vote (exact words: "This discussion process is not a vote"), it is supposed to be a consensus discussion. The only thing brought up in the Oppose section were the three things you brought up, all were hollow, and none was questioned or discussed as required by the RfA guidelines. The only question I got is where I got the idea that BRD was optional. From the WP:BRD essay. D'oh! That editor voted Support. In summary, 1) There was no copyright vio. 2} Nothing I have ever done is arb or ANI actionable 3) I did not disrupt Cary Grant. You deemed me "not suitable" and "not happening" for three hollow reasons. I am sensing a systemic bias here and I need you to explain it away. If you disagree with any of this, please be specific. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:12, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

That's alright, I don't wallow in self pity. Even a minor amount of positivity and article support/constructive criticism is enough on such a site for me to remain positive, it's just at times multiple people seem particularly hostile and fail to encourage others. A lot of people forget that we're volunteers and not working professionals... If people genuinely want to improve the encyclopedia, why not work with people and move forward instead of assuming a hostile position and going against them?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:25, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Dr. Blofeld. I am here to improve the encyclopedia and have fun doing it. See you around, hound. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Creating a page that is protected pre-emptively

Hi,

I am e-mailing regarding creating a Wikipedia page. Our organisation, a multi-award winning charity, works on sensitive issues such as Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG)and Counter-terrorism and therefore requires pre-emptive page protection rather than create a page and then request page protection.

I have been informed that the official position of Wikipedia is that you never do preemptive protection. However, I was also told that there have been some rare circumstances where it has been done. I was told by the Wikipedia information team that we don't quite fit those circumstances but rather than simply turn us down they pointed us to the place where protection is requested.

I was also told by the Wikipedia information team that as a technical matter they don't think there is a way to create protection ab initio. However, if one of your editors with expertise in protection policy is sympathetic to our request, we can coordinate with them and ensure that the protection is added within minutes of the initial creation.

Kind regards,

JAN Trust — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have no idea which article you're talking about, as and the only edit from this IP is to this talk page, there's not much I can go on. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

The simple answer is no. We do not protect a page pre-emptively because the creators feel it involves "sensitive issues". We do not protect any page upon creation, nor "within minutes of creation". We do not protect a page simply because its creators request it. Protection is used only if it turns out to be needed because of inappropriate edits, and then only for long enough to stop the inappropriate edits. If your charity "requires" such protection, then you should not be contemplating a Wikipedia page. Sorry. --MelanieN (talk) 15:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Melanie. I will let the Director of our organization know.

Ritchie - We have not yet created our page on Wikipedia. I was asking whether or not you could enact page protection pre-emptively (either before we create our page or immediately after). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The best thing to do is to create the article as a draft first - CLICK HERE to go to the Article Wizard and follow the instructions carefully towards creating a new article. Be sure you have the appropriate reliable sources for the organisation, such as news reports in local (or even better, national) sources. A dedicated piece in BBC News would be ideal. When you have created the draft and are happy with it, you can submit it for an experienced reviewer to look at. If you get any stability problems with the article, you can file a request at Requests for Page Protection, but it won't be accepted unless there is clear evidence of excessive disruption. On a similar note, I had to protect Violence at UEFA Euro 2016 because some Russian Nationalist IPs took exception to the content, but I couldn't do it until after the article had been created. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:27, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Additional comment: In order to create an article, you will have to register a username. Don't use "JAN Trust" as your username; see Wikipedia:Username policy. You can't use the name of an organization as your username, for several reasons. If you want you could use something like "John at JAN Trust", which makes it clear that you are one individual and not the whole organisation. Or use anything that makes sense to you. It's probably best not to use your real first and last names. --MelanieN (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Ritchie for your help. Another question - If we were to create a page, does Wikipedia alert you every time your page is edited and if so how (for example, by e-mail?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.30.202 (talk) 08:27, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

See here for my answer. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Hannah Beachler

On 3 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hannah Beachler, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that production designer Hannah Beachler based some outdoor scenes in the Miles Davis biopic Miles Ahead on old silent footage somebody had posted on YouTube? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Beachler. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hannah Beachler), 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.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for another good one! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Another one in the eye for over-hasty delentionists, pfffthfthfthf. By the way, P. S. Burton, I had to revert your edit because it didn't cite a reliable source and contained personal information that wasn't obvious (eg: see Elisabeth Sladen, where her date of birth was wrong for years), which our biographies of living persons policy say we must do. This is especially important when an article is linked from the main page, as people may have filed a report at WP:ERRORS, complaining about it. If you can let me know where you got the information from, I'll re-revert and add the source in. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whitehall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Downing (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) 09:59, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Stick it up your Junta. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

A7 for Purnima Hembram

How does "She has participated in 2015 Asian Athletics Championships" count as a credible assertion of importance or significance? I don't really see the point of the essay you linked. You didn't comment on my talk page comment. PamD 15:46, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Since the 2015 Asian Athletics Championships is a bluelink, that's enough. As for WP:HOLE, the point is something like this; if the article had said "Purnima Hembram is an Indian athlete" and nothing else, then it's harder to save the article. In any case, since I tend to defer Indian subjects to other people, I just left it with the BLPPROD on, which is enough. Aside from copyvios and libel, Wikipedia is not a contest to see how quickly we can delete other people's work. Chill. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

for your support in this astonishing situation. (If I dare,) I just want to know whether this is the usual way of admins greeting people who're (yet) new to meta-chatter on en.wiki. Frankly, I had plans to write a handful of articles on Siberian topics, but, as of now, I ain't sure of my pushing through without facing further accusations. You don't like {{talkback}}? Me neither. :) Regards, Qweedsa (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I think Kudpung was just having a bit of a grump about the state of RfA, rather than anything specifically to do with you. I have stated my view that your question was innocuous and that's been left at that. I wouldn't worry about comments like this; I find ignoring them and getting on with content (such as my long-haul project to get every street on the British Monopoly board to GA status) is the best thing to do. The encyclopedia ain't going to write itself! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Mlpearc

To continue tolerating this editor's nonsense is unreasonable. You seemed to support the idea that he is a chronic edit war-starter and merits a block (per the comment you left on my talk page). Here are some recent examples of his ridiculous disruption 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Furthermore, he characterizes this change as "controversial and defamatory" which is an outright lie. When a year of birth is already present in the article and I insert a date as well, Mlpearc reverts, completely mischaracterizes it and then uses his action to build an agenda for himself to misrepresent me. That aside, he has no cause to revert such edits. All he should be allowed to do is put a "citation needed" tag next to it. The problem with this editor is that he will revert any added content from me without a citation; I don't know if he does this to other editors, but Mlpearc's abuse is unbearable and he is impossible to communicate with on a reasonable or civil level. Also, when he pretends to be using some kind of guideline to justify his changes, he's not even doing so properly as evidenced in these edits 1, 2, 3 where he just erases the presence of one's name from an infobox if there's no WL; the correct way to do this is insert a number "including" only those who have their own Wiki page. Iistal (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Iistal: Blanking your talk page continuously does not negate the dialogs placed there, just so you know. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:18, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Iistal: Let me backtrack a second. Firstly, while I might have warned Mlpearc about skirting close to WP:3RR on some article, I have never blocked him - in general I find blocking established editors to be risky with a danger of having a net rise in disruption (after the blocked editor's friends turn up to complain vociferously), and it's best to "talk before you block".

The other problem is that while Mlpearc tends to just hit a button on Twinkle and revert, which isn't a very good way of communicating, he seems to be acting correctly in accordance with the biographies of living persons policy on every diff you listed above. Our policy is that any contentious information (and dates of birth are contentious - if you ask a woman directly how old she is you're likely to get a slap!) must be cited inline at the time it is added. If the dates of birth and family relationships are not in the article, there may be privacy-based reasons for them. Perhaps things would have been better if Mlpearc had calmly explained BLP in depth to you, and we could have avoided some silly edit wars, but as far as adherence to policy I'm afraid he's spot on in this case. Sorry. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:58, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Michele Abeles

Hi ritchie333, thank you for kind and thoughtful response to my question about the page created for me. I really am flattered that someone took the time to add me to wikipedia. I understand the complexity of deleting my page within the realm of wikipedia. My wish not to be included is more a push against the internet at large. Before I continue talking more- could you let me know I am writing the correct person in the correct area of wikipedia?! thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma343678 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

@Ma343678: It depends what you're looking for. If you have general complaints about biographies, then the BLP noticeboard is the place to report them, though I've already reported this article there so that's covered. If you have a specific complaint about your article, such as something being factually incorrect (we can only write about what we read in the press and books, and they do sometimes get it wrong), the best thing to do is start a conversation on Talk:Michele Abeles and explain what's wrong. If you just want to ask general questions about Wikipedia works, this talk page is okay for those (if I'm not around to answer, there are a bunch of regulars here who drop in to answer things every now and again).

The advice I have received from people who have an article on Wikipedia about themselves or their business is to ignore it and assume it is harmless, which it probably is. Most small biographies aren't allowed to have any strongly negative or confrontational information unless it has been excessively documented in the broadsheet press or books, and even then we err on the side of caution (Christopher Jefferies, notoriously arrested on a murder charge with no evidence and picked apart by the gutter press despite being completely innocent, has no standalone article on Wikipedia). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Pall Mall, London

On 6 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pall Mall, London, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that London's Pall Mall owes its name to a 17th-century ball game similar to croquet? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pall Mall, London. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pall Mall, London), 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.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Reverted good faith edits by.....

Congrats! Hope the nomination process wasn't too much of a drag. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Come here with a bad pun like that, Mr 123, and expect to be clubbed. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:03, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Ah, "Kensitas"! (the noo). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

I miss you, master of the bad pun lines, - with The Quixotic Potato gone for a long vacation, Ritchie, you and Montanabw are my sole sources of expected humor, - and now I come here and find more serius bizines ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Jazz in der Kirche

Gerda, if you pick through the nuclear warfare below this message, you will find an unloved stub - I don't know how you are on jazz or if Mönchengladbach is a nice place to visit, but if you could expand Jazz in der Kirche even a little, I think both myself and Dr. Blofeld would be eternally grateful and share a DYK barnstar with you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:02, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

There's now more jazz in churches. I translated most of the German, - now it's lacking sources, of course, which needs to change before any DYK. It seems to be biennial and in several churches, - correct me when I'm wrong. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

That's great Gerda, thankyou. The problem I had with analysing sources was using creative search queries, and "Jazz in der Kirche" appears to be a general term outside of the original festival, which meant many false positives when I looked at it. Hopefully, by taking the German keywords now in the article, we may be able to edge a bit closer to DYK. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Ritchie, Did you get the document I sent over to you yesterday - 22 news reports on Jazz in der Kirche. All in German, so I have only a little idea of the content, but they look useful enough for Gerda to have a look through. - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I did, but I struggled to parse it into citations for the article and my head hurt. I've just forwarded to Gerda to see if that will be useful. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

LOL - they look as if they should be useful (to someone who speaks German, obviously). - SchroCat (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

It is general, for whatever jazz performed at church. I think just adding the town's name will edge closer. wonder if you can find specific churches (which should have articles). - Unfortunately I don't see interior images of those churches, which might show some atmosphere. - The name should be translated, but I don't know what's best: Jazz at Church, Jazz in the Church (that's literal), Jazz in Churches? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, as precedent (eg: see Kattenstoet,^{(Opabinia regalis, we have just worked out your 2018 vacation for you)} Oktoberfest), if something is what Germans call a "Eigenname" and what the English call a "proper noun", then I would say per WP:COMMONNAME we should use the German (ie: Jazz in der Kirche, Mönchengladbach), unless there is a better-known translation in English, which in this case there isn't. We need to give the article a title that people expect to find, and without an official or de-facto English translation, we don't have it. Still, if the smoking hot and talented beyond belief Barbara Dennerlein has played there, this has got to be worth saving. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:00, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Sure we should use the German, but I would still try a translation in brackets. I didn't translate Rheingau Musik Festival, but readers may not know Kirchen. - Thanks for the documents, - I see in 2011 news that it had to be interrupted (when? will read more), due to a lack of sponsoring, but think we don't need to report all ups and downs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, those were the latest news, and the current website of the town doesn't know the festival any more. We probably have to rely on other sources for 2016 - which may be the first after 2008 - and drop the link which causes 404 anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

The closer I look the more I see that the festival took place exactly three times and is not expected to be revived. What should we do? This link still has it, but may show how up-to-date the DB is ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I'd put the festival in the past tense, and just document what we have. I think we have enough to keep an article, or possibly redirect somewhere. But thanks for all you have done so far on this up until this point. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Sounds perfect! Unless... I don't know, you get the sense that if cats were that size, they'd give up begging for breakfast and just eat you? ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

• Observing this discussion, I have started a page for Ealing Jazz Festival which may benefit from parallel development. Andrew D. (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Meri Hasraton Mein

Please read Amika Shail.Xx236 (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

@Xx236: I was hoping to get another London street article to GA next on my "todo" list, but in the meantime I see four news hits on this artist, so it should be relatively easy to retrospectively source and improve to stop the BLP PROD. I see other editors have told you stop biting newbies, so the next time I see you filing an obviously bad speedy (not a borderline case), I will be starting a thread on ANI requesting you be banned from New Page Patrol. (Also pinging @Kudpung: for a second opinion). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:06, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

IN cases of repeated sub-standard patrolling (I'm generalising here) it is not necessary to involve the the peanut gallery. A couple of polite requests to desist - with a link to WP:DE together with a reminder that blocks are preventative rather than punitive - should do the trick. If it doesn't, then that's what admins have the block button for, and it doesn't always need a community consensus. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Cassianto

We regret to inform you that the conversation on this talk page has had to be cancelled. Transport for London sincerely apologise for any inconvenience caused, and wish you a pleasant onward journey...
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am a little surprised by your message. It was I who was accused of something, I don't think it unreasonable for me to ask about it. Considering I was the one being talked about I fail to see how I "inserted" myself. I suppose I could have opened another thread, but it was rather relevant don't you think? If another admin had responded to the comment I likely would not have. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 15:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I have moved my request to another thread. As for the watchlist, it is not why I went there. I went there to ask for the accusation to be substantiated, only to find another persona asking the very same thing. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 15:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC) @HighInBC: As I hope you aware, it is not in my nature to be blunt. However, I drop in on Cassianto's talk page from time to time because he is helpful at copyediting articles (in particular our joint work on getting Cary Grant past GA and well on the way to FAC was great) and I think I've seen one too many messages from you there that are, in my honest opinion, patronising. Please don't get me wrong, I do not think it's acceptable for editors to throw around mild insults (and most of the conversations I see are pretty mild, there aren't any threats of violence or harm, or racist / sexist / antisemitic behaviour and reminds me more of "grown men with handbags"). I'm also sure you have had the best of intentions when trying to calm Cassianto down both now and in the past. However, I notice you have posted to his talk page 66 times, including this, this, this, this and this, not to mention the times I have seen the pair of you banging heads on ANI. I honestly think things have deteriorated to the point where pretty much any conversation you have with Cassianto is going to increase disruption. I'm not saying that to be nasty, or to stick up to Cassianto, that's just some straight facts I see from simple observation. I do have "quiet words" with editors from time to time, but I tend to do it off-wiki via email and only then when I am reasonably sure I have gained their respect to start off with (generally by doing lots of mainspace edits). I'm writing this with the upmost respect and concern for your well being - Rhonda was very happy about the vandalism you removed from her page the other day and thinks you're one of the good guys. I'd hate to see the pair of you (Cassianto, not Rhonda!) slug it out at ANI and something stupid happen to one or both of you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC) The first link I am commenting on a block and recommending Cassianto be unblocked. The second one was me enforcing our no personal attacks policy. The 3rd link is regarding a block I made for edit warring. The 4th link is the exact same issue just a bit earlier. The 5th link is a about a block for yet another person attack. It seems you have demonstrated that I have acted as an admin. Frankly I am not the first admin they have reacted badly to. They accused @Mike V: of the same thing. Frankly any admin that dares ask them to follow the rules is accused of all manner of things. I have great respect for your opinion but frankly I think you need to consider that each of those diffs you linked too was an incident where Cassianto was the one causing the trouble and I was responding per community expectations. I don't know if you have encountered the phenomenon where you do what an admin is supposed to do and you get baseless accusations in response, but hang around long enough and you will. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) And as far as the "patronising" comment goes, if I am anything but incredibly polite with them they accuse me of incivility. So I am as polite as I can be, even if I am telling them not to do something. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 16:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I've got to nip out now, but I'll try and explain two things quickly. Firstly, communicating by text-only is perilous as so much subtleties in language are lost. Secondly, having relatives on both sides of the Atlantic, and a partner who has spent her adult life in the US and the UK, I can say that the cultural backgrounds of both are wildly different and there is a great danger of respect being lost and offence being accidentally taken from both sides. The worst mix on the internet I have seen is Midwest American middle-aged female versus young British male, which is as potent as matches and gasoline; the American will feel offended, the Brit will feel patronised. (Okay, BC is a little more relaxed than the midwest US, but the principle holds). You have to recognise both cultures exist, and accommodate for them. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC) (edit conflict) x3 And as an example of potential cultural differences in interpretation, "hang around long enough and you will" comes across as very patronising (it normally does when someone tries to say someting extra "sincerely"). - SchroCat (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I will confess, while I respect Ritchie333 a lot, that was a not so subtle jab. I was not meant in a mean spirit. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 17:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I am Canadian. We use a polite tone even when we are asking someone not to do something, and we use that tone sincerely. Just because people are at odds is no reason to throw civility out the window. If that is alien to someone that is unfortunate. I am not going to start being rude to people from the UK because bluntness is the fashion there, I know this is not exactly what you are suggesting but the implication is there. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 16:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC) (edit conflict) x2 "I am not going to start being rude to people from the UK because bluntness is the fashion there" I have no idea how you got that from Ritchie's comment... If I can interpret and paraphrase slightly: what you consider to be 'extra-rude' isn't. What you consider to be actionable, possibly isn't (and possibly is). Two countries divided by the same language etc... - SchroCat (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC) HighinBC, that is not true. Ritchie, not so long ago, told me to knock it off with regards to a dispute I was involved in; as has Bishonen, and Floquenbeam, and Casliber. Each time, I did, and respected their wishes. There were a couple of times that I sought advice from Bishonen who advised against doing something, which I had already done. I was quick to self-revert though when she's bollocked me. All four of these people I have an excellent relationship with. I also hold the utmost respect for them as administrators, chiefly because of their approach to me. Has it ever occurred to you that If you conducted yourself a bit better (see the outing of my private emails to you as an example), then I might actually listen to you too? Has it also ever occurred to you that a quiet, friendly word might have more of an impact than a block? Unfortunatley, it appears that it doesn't; you ride in on your civility horse, throw your weight around, block on sight, and then bugger off back to the admin's mess where you receive high-fives from the rest of the civility brigade, including MikeV, MSG and others. CassiantoTalk 18:47, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I have given you a word instead of a block more times than I can count, I generally get abuse as a response. As for your e-mail, if you think I violated the expectations of an editor or an administrator I welcome you to gather evidence and present it against me at the relevant forum. Frankly if any of your accusations against me had any merit I think you would have done that already. You already know from past discussions I disagree with your interpretation of that incident so I will not reiterate that here. If you really do wish to discuss the e-mail issue yet again you are welcome on my talk page. I am having a very reasonable discussion with Ritchie333 and I prefer to keep it separate from discussions in which we have already determined we do not agree on. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 19:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Your a liar as well as a bad administrator. At no point have you sent me a friendly nudge to tell me to knock it off. If you had've done, I would've done, and respected you more than I do now. CassiantoTalk 20:36, 6 July 2016 (UTC) All are welcome on my talk page, as long as they do not vandalise or otherwise alter other people's edits. "I have given you a word instead of a block more times than I can count, I generally get abuse as a response." - that reminds me of that old joke, "Doctor, it hurts when I do this!" "Well don't do it then!" The above discussion put to one side for a mo, HighInBC, the simple and obvious fact remains that your communication style to Cassianto does not work. I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that all I can do is tell you that in plain speaking and hope it will resonate; calling for an interaction ban on ANI would lead to massively long thread that would drain my enthusiasm, and a block would probably motivate another admin to respond in kind and I don't fancy being blocked myself. I realise this usually comes across as an exercise in futility, but why don't the pair of you try working on an article together? When I've seen people collaborate on content, you get a great sense of teamwork and accomplishment that just does not happen doing grunt admin work. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC) With respect I disagree. I also think that an interaction ban will fail the laugh test, look at my talk page archives and you will see that Cassianto has no objection to talking at length with me when it suits him. I have been polite and patient with this user. You have provided me with a pile of diffs where I am explaining Wikipedia policy in a polite fashion. I have at worst exposed a bit of cheek on occasion to a user who does not hesitate to show naked hostility. I have gone out of my way for weeks now to not be the admin that deals with Cassianto. Look here: User_talk:HighInBC/Archive 78#SMcCandlish where I outright refuse to be the one to deal with their one of their more recent tiffs with another user. I have been taking a very intentional break for a long time now mostly due to the level of abuse I get when I do respond. I am one of 6 administrators who has felt the need to block Cassianto. I have done 2 out of 10 of their blocks, 20%. I am also responsible for 1 out of 5 of their unblocking, also 20%(me directly unblocking, I also supported unblocking for at least one of their unblocks). You say my way of communicating does not work, but none of the many admins who have dealt with Cassianto have gotten them to change their behaviour. If you pay close attention you will see that Cassianto is not exactly avoiding me. They have quoted me out of context to support positions they know I do not support, they have accused me of abusing my admin tools. That is just in the last couple of days. You stepped in here when I asked about that abuse of admins tools. WP:ADMINACCT says I need to take that sort of accusation seriously, but you rebuked me for that. If anyone ever makes such an accusation against you I hope that you follow up on it. I don't think your view will enjoy consensus if put to the test. That being said I am really sick of the whole situation. Perhaps admin #7 or admin #8 will be more suitable for the task. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 20:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC) HighInBC, As I pointed out to you before, you couldn't take action against Cassianto in the Mcandlish matter, given how of a tendentious troll he has been recently. Any action you took against Cassianto would have been flipped fairly quickly once the diffs were lain out at ANI. (There are a stack of edits where Mcandlish has been trying to bait people recently and this pointless and pointy nonsense from this evening is just the latest. If anyone needs a word in their ear to find a different toy to play with, it is the baiter... – SchroCat (talk) 21:47, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Yes, Chillum has a clear grudge against Cassianto which is getting disruptive. It seems have extended to me now. I noticed Chillum of all people deleted Jazz in der Kirche which I started and didn't even have a chance to be expanded. Has an article on de:Jazz in der Kirche. Again seems a very strange cooincidence that Chillum was the one who deleted it. I would guess as revenge for me opposing his Canadian "friend" at RFA ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC) The entire content of the page was "Jazz in der Kirche is a jazz festival in Germany." You know our CSD criteria, I welcomed you to recreate it within our standards. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 21:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Well it had existed for a few years, I'm sure you could have waited another couple of hours until it was expanded. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Feel free to recreate it in an expanded form. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 21:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I'm knackered and off to bed - but here are some sources you can use : [1], [2], [3]. At the very least, you could have parked the sources on the talk page and declined the deletion, which is what I do when I think something shouldn't be deleted but can't make head nor tail of the subject matter. So yes, HighInBC, that was a poorly called A7 - let me tell you that an abusive out-of-process speedy back in 2008 cost about 25 would-be Wikipedia editors and was indirectly responsible for me getting more involved in Wikipedia to fight back against this. I do this stuff all the time, y'all know. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:24, 6 July 2016 (UTC) I really did not expect you to accuse me of bad faith Ritchie. Whatever disagreements we have about how things should be managed I did not expect you to accuse me of abusively using my tools. That article had no substantive edits since 2011 and its entire contents could be written on a fortune cookie slip. It was the textbook definition of A7 and I immediately welcomed the author to recreate it and I offered the text to them. If you want to see dastardly deeds hard enough you will see them. It really hurts to think that you would believe I am some guy getting his jollies deleting articles. How many people do you think I am in a feud with? I am taking a wiki-break, I am sick of making an honest effort and getting kicked in the teeth for it. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 21:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC) @HighInBC: I went to the German Wikipedia article that had not been deleted. I noticed the festival was in Mönchengladbach and that gave me a good search term. I then typed "jazz in der kirche" "Mönchengladbach" into Google, clocked a local news piece (not a brilliant source, but good enough to clear WP:RS), cited it, and confirmed from the source that a notable musician - Markus Stockhausen - had performed there. At this point, we're only working with names, so I didn't even need to translate German in my head. I then undeleted the article, removed the PROD tag, added the source and the link to Stockhausen. The article now does absolutely not meet CSD A7 and it took two minutes to do the above. This is standard triage that all administrators should do as well-documented on Template:db-a7 vis : "Administrators: check links, history (last), and logs before deletion ... Consider checking Google: web, news.". Frankly, anyone who cannot be bothered to spend two minutes fixing up articles that only meet the letter of CSD A7 but not the spirit should not be working in an administrative capacity at NPP, and I ask questions at RfA to test for this. Enjoy your wikibreak. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:10, 7 July 2016 (UTC) At this point I have lost respect for your judgement. Take me to WP:DRV of you think your interpretation has a farts chance in a wind storm of being accepted by the community. If your goal is to bring that article up to our inclusion standards you have a ways to go, like demonstrating why it is notable. I am done listening to your take on things, you can drag me to AN or arbcom if you think I am out of line. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 14:20, 7 July 2016 (UTC) HighInBC, I'm not sure anyone is saying that you are not making an honest effort, but that, from time to time, your radar is a little out of kilter. It happens—errare humanum est and all that—but when the pattern is clearly and constantly against one editor it may be time for you to move on to other challenges (feel free to stop this ridiculous harassment, for example) and let others pick up the reigns. Is the stress of it really worth it? - SchroCat (talk) 07:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC) It looks very much (to me at least) as if Cassianto is possibly the cause of a lot of ill feeling between admins and other users. There comes a time when in spite of other useful work , one has to consider if a user's presence is a net positive towards our collaborative spirit. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:50, 7 July 2016 (UTC) Kudpung, in betweentimes Cassianto has done loads of content work and collaborated with other editors happily. Hence I'd say even at very lowest ratio, that means constructive >90% of the time. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:09, 7 July 2016 (UTC) ...and here come's Kudpung, chief of the civility warriors, being reminded of the civility warrior motto before he goes back out on patrol. -- CassiantoTalk 07:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC) Whatever you might think of Kudpung, he was instrumental in getting my RfA through the door, and for that, homage must be paid. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC) I have no opinion of him. He doesn't like me because of my block log and that's about it really. We've never fallen out anywhere, unless I'm mistaken. But yes, I agree; thanks must be paid for seeing great potential in you. CassiantoTalk 07:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Why admins should create content.

Just letting you know that I have dropped a link or two to this, including on my own RfA criteria. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I wrote that essay (and indeed most of the others) to save saying the same thing again and again, so hopefully this will make it resonate with a few more people. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:20, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Page removal

Can you please fully remove the page 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_Joseph_(Personality)' from Wikipedia itself. Or retitled the page and delete all information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markjeeditor (talk • contribs) 10:23, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) I've received a similar request on my talk page and have answered.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:21, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Note Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Letterboxtv _Muffled ^Pocketed 11:25, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

All under-18s involved in Darien Joseph, please read Disappearance of Martin Allen and some of the Independent sources related to it. If that doesn't explain why putting your autobiography in full view on one of the world's biggest websites is a terminally stupid idea, nothing will. (Although as you are now asking for it to be deleted, I think that has been taken on board). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Peace

Collard Dove Collared dove

I don't know what's got into everybody today, but there is far too much anger and bitterness bouncing around on this usually merry talk page. Whatever it is, please let's just get it out of our system now, and focus on articles. I've got a bit more of the Survey of London to mine through on Pentonville Road, and perhaps it's time to GA review another one of Gerda Arendt's Bach cantatas, if she has any on the pile. What about everyone else? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:38, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Not a lot. Just gotta work out when TfL started running services up the East Coast Main Line _Muffled ^Pocketed 14:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

No Bach cantata open for GA, Sainsf cleared them all! But I always need help, see red links on my user page, + blue DYK noms. Any articles for GA and FA can go to here, if the addition of an infobox is not regarded as an attack but a way to make information accessible to different kinds of readers. I successfully wrote an article and got it reviewed for DYK the same day, - that's what we are here for. I also enjoy praising people precious, today a user who served as admin for more than ten years! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Now a Bach cantata is open as GAN, - only it's not ready yet: Was willst du dich betrüben, BWV 107 ("Why do you want to distress yourself", useful). I was improving last year but didn't quite manage then. I'll say here when I'm done. Going to sing today parts of Elijah for a farewell service, about the angels and several more, - another article for improvement ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Ping: you can look now if you like. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest on this neutral ground a peace deal to end the socalled infobox wars: no revert of a stable infobox, - could be so simple and easy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I got a bit distracted by listening to The Snow Goose (a suite based around the story of the same name), having but the review's done now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:13, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi Ritchie - just letting you know you can remove the protection of Janatha Garage. I just blocked the main editor causing the disruption as a confirmed sock account.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

@Ponyo: Charles Turing broke something like 10RR on that article, and should consider himself lucky he did not get blocked. Given the traffic on the article, and the lack of a clear consensus in talk (I can't see an obvious agreement from Cyphoidbomb, the other participant there), I think I would need assurance from Charles that he will not edit war again (and will receive a block if he does) before I'd be comfortable unprotecting. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

I had made a statement in WP:AN/EW and in my talk page User talk:Charles Turing#Edit-warring.--Charles Turing (talk) 08:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Well I can't say fairer than that, so the article is now unlocked. Happy editing! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight

On 11 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wikipedian of the Year Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight has cited cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead as an influence on her writing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight), 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Annette Lyon

You are invited to join the discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Annette Lyon. Some matters were brought up by another user that have delayed the nomination from moving forward. Just a courtesy notice for you in case you're interested in the matter. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:50, 11 July 2016 (UTC)Template:Z48

Your GA nomination of Whitehall

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Whitehall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 09:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii

I am very pleased vie are taking over ze whole EU and will be stamping unser categorien on everyzing!

With regard to your reversion of my edit, the article infobox lists the film as a French / Belgian / West German co-production. This is supported by the given BFI reference and by IMDb, so I believe the categorisation is appropriate. Jellyman (talk) 10:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Could I have a piece of apple pie... without the crust? Without the crust... _Muffled ^Pocketed 10:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jellyman: IMDB is not generally a reliable source as anyone can add anything. While the BFI tends to be about as authoritative as it can get, I've got no idea how a film with an English band and a Scottish director shot in Paris and Naples can be considered German. So classifying it as a "West German film" is misleading - it's not exactly Das Boot, is it? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I understand your point, but films are normally classified under the country that financed the production, rather than filming locations, nationalities of personnel etc. The article itself lists one of the countries as West Germany in the infobox, with the BFI source. The article is categorised under French and Belgian films on this basis, why not the third country? I think I'll put something on the article talk page to see if anyone else has a view. Jellyman (talk) 11:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Good call, it does seem to be a bit odd and worth a talk page discussion to see if anyone can come up with a source backing it up and explaining. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pentonville Road

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pentonville Road you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Whitehall

I want a cushy Whitehall job, that scruffy oik in there at the moment shouldn't have it! Oy, Tezza, meet me behind the Haig Memorial at lunchbreak and we'll sort this lot out!

The article Whitehall you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Whitehall for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 11:41, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I don't suppose you're old enough to remember "The Worm That Turned" by the Two Ronnies? Well after the news that pretty much every major political party is going to be run by a woman, along with a major EU country that's been run by one for ages, and the US thinking about putting one in too (for gawd's sake I don't care what Clinton has done - SHE'S STILL NOT TRUMP), it looks like that comedy series was strangely prophetic. So when we're relegated to getting blue rinse at the local hairdressers dressed up in our frocks and pinnies, don't say I didn't warn you! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pentonville Road

The article Pentonville Road you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pentonville Road for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:02, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Tehran Imam Khomeini Airport - Edit War

Hello!

I noticed that you temporarily banned the editing for Tehran Imam Khomeini Airport a couple of days ago in order to stop the "edit war". The war has yet not ended and it still results in a number of confusing reverts and edits. I kindly wonder if you have any chance to watch that page again and take any necessarily actions to stop the behaviour. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, AminC99 (talk) 22:38, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

@AminC99: Just had a look. Revert, revert, revert. Full protected for three days. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

The page should be protected a little longer than 3 days. The edit wars are just going to continue when the protection expires. TravelLover37 (talk) 17:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I have never seen an article full-protected longer than three days, except perhaps the Main page. I've put a note on the talk page explaining the situation, and I think from now on we're going to have to upgrade to blocks. We can't keep pages locked forever because of fighting. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

1RR

Hi Ritchie - thanks for your updated text on the thread. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Pentonville Road

On 14 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pentonville Road, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the perpetrators of a major burglary were caught after discussing it in a Pentonville Road pub? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pentonville Road. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pentonville Road), 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) 00:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Congrats! That was my fastest from review to appearing in a long time, DYK? My fastest from writing to in a queue was 10 minutes, Cecil Aronowitz, - in the good old days ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

That was a surprise. Mind you, it seems surprises are all the rage right now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Yesterday's concert had all highlights:

• Komm, Jesu, komm - Jesu, meine Freude - Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied
• Nachtlied - Der Mensch lebt und bestehet
• de - de

Always more work ;) - For several weeks now, we have concluded every rehearsal by the last peaceful one! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

• Peace much needed. I began a new one, Bells of Beyond, today on my father's birthday, ringing the bells also for Kevin with whom I argued (Ethics of Dissensus, it's where "Talk before you block" came up the first time), but full of hope. - Thank you for your initiative for Martin, - I sent him blessings when the Welsh team lost), - just too lazy to go further, and knowing the feeling too well that to appeal a senseless restriction makes no sense itself, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

A7

A non-notable business, yesterday

Why did you say that "A7 doesn ot apply to hospitals at [4] >? I see no such provision in WP:CSD, and not reason not to treat them as any other organization. Have i overlook some discussion of the issue? DGG ( talk ) 09:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

In the past, I have treated hospitals as public buildings, whereas A7 tends to be reserved more for private organisations which are far easier to set up, and too numerous for any to be automatically of encyclopedic importance. I have expanded at least two hospital articles, William Harvey Hospital and Farnham Hospital as did you know nominations that have hit the main page (1, 2), so I would say it's definitely worth considering. I seem to recall somebody being concerned that Epsom Hospital would be sent to AfD, but RHaworth (who is more "on the ball" with speedies than any admin I know) asserted that it would probably stand a good chance of surviving a deletion debate. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You're comparing chalk and cheese. Even the smallest NHS hospitals in Britain are major public institutions; small-town hospitals in the US are private businesses with no more inherent notability than the local hardware store. ‑ Iridescent 09:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't know that, and I'm surprised to hear that's the case - do hospitals in the US get no public funding whatsoever? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

The big urban ones with attached medical schools might get public grants, as might unprofitable institutions which are the only source of healthcare in their area and thus an essential public good, and all hospitals indirectly get some government funding via Medicare/Medicaid subsidizing of medical bills and assorted subsidies for military and ex-military patients, but there's no American equivalent to the NHS; a hospital is a business just like any other (or a charity subsisting on donations), only the 'customers' are generally paying via insurance. There's a brief summary of the situation at Public hospital#United States. ‑ Iridescent 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Even so, I would have expected there would be some sort of regulatory body that means the bar to setting up a hospital in the first place is substantial enough that just having the facilities in place is enough to be at least locally significant. Something like the The Shipman Inquiry, I would guess. FWIW there are a couple of other classes of things I find myself pausing on before hitting the delete button - FM radio stations (where there is a reliable source confirming an active licence) and British shopping malls (I just did a quick spot check and even things like Fremlin Walk and County Square are on here.) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hospitals are regulated and inspected by the state authorities, but if "regulated and regularly inspected by state authorities" were a notability criterion Charlie's Kebab Van, Droitwich would have its own Wikipedia page. I would argue that hospitals fall into the same exception by which we don't delete rail stations, in that it can always be presumed that there will be significant press coverage of even the most obscure, but that's certainly not written into policy anywhere. ‑ Iridescent 10:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hospitals in the U.S. are certainly not all notable, and there is no presumption of notability. I would probably have declined A7 in this case since some of the information in the article could be taken as a claim of significance. However, it does not meet notability criteria and I could not find any additional sources in a search - no news articles, nothing about its history or local significance. I am going to PROD it. MelanieN alt (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Oops. User:DGG beat me to it. I do believe that PROD is the appropriate way to deal with this article. MelanieN alt (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

"Personalized Message"

Over the past several years, you've made it clear that you're not a fan of my edits. However your complaints ([5] and [6]) on ANI about me correctly leaving a templated message upon nomination of an article for CSD have reached a new low and in my opinion are defacto proof that you are holding a grudge against me. Given this bias, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from interacting with me including commenting on my actions going forward unless they directly involve you. Toddst1 (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever noticed any of your edits before - what articles have you worked on that I might have done as well? In any instance, my principles of leaving a personal message instead of a template are strongly rooted in real-world experience, generally involving people who don't use Wikipedia much and don't have a strong opinion about it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Re

Xin chào, làm sao có thể gỡ quyền Hành chính viên và Kiểm định viên vậy bạn?

Hello, how remove powers Bureaucrat and CheckUser? ㅡ ManlyBoys 00:32, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @ManlyBoys: I'm not sure Ritchie (nor anyone else you've left this message) will know what you're talking about - are you talking about the user rights "Bureaucrat" and "CheckUser"? These permissions get applied and removed by bureaucrats or ArbCom -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 10:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Tôi không nói được tiếng Anh, ý của tôi hỏi bạn là ai có quyền gỡ công cụ Hành chính viên và Kiểm định viên? có phải là Tiếp viên ở Meta hay không? Cảm ơn ㅡ ManlyBoys 11:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@ManlyBoys: Tôi không nói được tiếng Việt nên tôi dịch - tiếc là thông điệp của bạn đã không dịch rất tốt. Bạn có thể yêu cầu một Meta Steward như họ có xu hướng nói nhiều thứ tiếng, và có thể giúp truy vấn của bạn

I do not speak Vietnamese so I am translating - unfortunately your message did not translate very well. You can ask a Meta Steward as they tend to speak more languages, and can help with your query

-- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Wesley Spartan

Hi Ritchie. Hope you are doing well. I saw you declined the CSD for this page, but the reason why I nominated it for A7 is because A. The creator of the page was the person himself (I had a look on google to see if this person was really notable and it came up with a Twitter account with the same name as the account who created the article and B. Most, if not all the sources listed have no mention of this person. There is no indication that this person is notable. Should i take this to AfD or retag it? Thanks! Class455fan1 (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Class455fan1: Yup, send it to AfD. I think I suggested as much in the edit summary, but then got sidetracked with a bit of copyediting. With these sorts of articles, sometimes the subject can still be notable, which is difficult for African BLPs anyway, and if its an autobiography, it can get more than they bargained for. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:19, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Ritchie333. I have sent it to AfD now. Class455fan1 (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I've changed my mind and speedied it per A7, as I didn't clock that the subject was 19 years old, I somehow misread he was in his 40s, which makes the claim of importance orders of magnitude less credible. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletions

Thanks for catching Robert Smith (Medal of Honor) -- Checking the source, this is indeed the Medal of Honor, the highest US military award--those who received it are always notable. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide. DGG ( talk ) 17:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding that - I noticed that the tagger (who really should not be doing NPP) had A7'ed it only four minutes after it was created. I commented on that on his talk page, and I wanted to link to an essay about not tagging new pages within minutes of their creation. I thought there was such an essay but I couldn't find it. Are you aware of any such essay? If not, should we write one? --MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

There's Wikipedia:Field guide to proper speedy deletion as a basic guide, then a section on treating newbies at NPP which says "Please do not be too hasty with certain speedy deletions ... Research has shown that writers unfamiliar with Wikipedia guidelines should be accorded at least 10 to 15 minutes to fix the article before it is nominated for speedy deletion". If you have a G3, G10, or G12, then yes speedy immediately, but for everything else, just chill out and find a cat to cuddle. We have a template, {{Uw-hasty}} that you can put on over-eager taggers. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, that "hasty" template looks useful. --MelanieN (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you! - deletion of Zoolz

Hi Ritchie333, thought you might like to know, there is a still active afd on the above article - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoolz. ps. luv your kitty pics:)

Coolabahapple (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Coolabahapple: I've closed the AfD. Also, check out User:Ritchie333/Userbox Suede. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

thanks, userbox is very cute:), maybe we need an essay "Time to cuddle a kitten"? (although it might then be inundated with kitty pics, mea culpa at WP:WIK and Wikipedia:WikiCat) Coolabahapple (talk) 08:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

We've got Wikipedia:Time to take the dog for a walk, but perhaps there needs to be something for cat lovers. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of talk page section

Hello Ritchie. The block you recently gave me has expired. May I remove the section? According to WP:BLANKING, it says that "A number of important matters may not be removed by the user—they are part of the wider community's processes:

Declined unblock requests regarding a currently active block," etc.

However, the block is expired. Does that mean I can remove the block in addition to the unblock request? Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 15:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@DatGuy: I think technically you can now remove it; however I would personally recommend ignoring it and just moving on, as it shows you are mature and have learned from mistakes. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

RFA

Could you undelete my RFA please? If it's incorrectly formatted, please let me know how to correct that. Nevertheless, I am qualified for the position, being one of the pioneer Wikipedia editors. JoeM (talk) 17:36, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

You need to read the instructions at WP:RFA carefully, that will show you how to create a properly formatted one. However, since you edit-warred with Floquenbeam to transclude it, and you have copyvio warnings on your talk page, I would strongly advise against it - you are almost certain to get a WP:NOTNOW close within 12 hours. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Not to mention blatant WP:BLP and WP:POLEMIC violations. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:09, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Jet Blue Mint

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:JetBlue#Merge_proposal

This should be closed and made a merge. 3-1 favors it. Logic also favors it. If someone took a tremendous effort and expanded it, such as including traffic data and how Jet Blue was losing premium passengers and how the Jet Blue seat is revolutionary (if it actually is), then maybe I might be swayed. But the current article is just two things, that Jet Blue offers flat bed seats on a few flights and there's a lot of promotional material in the article, such that it is like an ad. Admiral James T Kirk (talk) 04:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Dammit Jim, I'm an admin not a scientist ... no wait, that's something else. I think the discussion at WT:DYK also concluded a merge was appropriate, so I've closed this. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Looks like someone is edit warring about the merge. That person did behavior that causes a block. Admiral James T Kirk (talk) 02:06, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

PROS

About deletion: PROS. I am trying to became writer and I was trying to make all missing profile of : Houston companies list

Because I don't know anything , most of mine article send for speedy deletion. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houston-media (talk • contribs) 18:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Houston-media: The last article there is written in a way too promotional fashion, e.g provides enterprise revenue and profit realization software solutions. It needs to neutrally document what the company does and why it's important, not a sales brochure.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:47, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Abusing checkuser

Regarding that ani. Posting here as well. Apparently, some experienced editors have found a nice loophole on how to ban any editor they wish. Your ISP uses a certain range of ip addresses. For instance mine uses several ranges, one being 89.164.xxx.xxx. Apparently, the only thing that is needed to block a person is to accuse him of being a sock of someone who uses the same ISP. Then they both will have the same ip prefix and appear they are the same person. I still haven't figured out the way they find ip behind a username. However, requesting cu until a suitable candidate is found can work, especially if a suitable candidate had used several isps. I come from Croatia where User:Asdisis is that candidate. There are only a few isps in Croatia so it's not hard to ban a lot of people as socks. Here's how to ban someone. The discussion [7]. The user that you want to ban [8]. The repeated cu requests outside spi [9]. Other cases that I had caught [10]->[11] My case: I'm being forbidden to post sources: [12]