User talk:Cuchullain

Click here to leave me a new message.

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

"Cuchullain moved"
... you were recipient no. 1381 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks much, Gerda Arendt!--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:39, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Saint-Lambert station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax (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) 10:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

ATTENTION

Please look in to the matter and read my edit summary . [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.50.79.74 (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Planet of the Apes (video game)

The article Planet of the Apes (video game) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Planet of the Apes (video game) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Manfred von Karma -- Manfred von Karma (talk) 11:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Planet of the Apes (video game), an article you GA nominated, has been reviewed

The article has been put on hold. You can check out the review here. Manfred (talk) 11:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Planet of the Apes (video game), an article you nominated for GA, has been reviewed again

Hello Cuchullain,

As per your request, the nomination was taken down. Although the article doesn't meet standards now, you can improve it and re-nominate it again. Suggestions on how have been made on the review. Manfred (talk) 03:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Georgetown railway station and Houston railway station

The next time you move British railway stations, please follow Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations). Thank you. Useddenim (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Useddenim, well, I didn't move those, I just nominated them to be moved and the consensus was for the names I proposed. I re-read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) when I proposed them, and it doesn't actually say to use that rather odd mid-phrase disambiguation. In fact, I find no actual guideline or consensus discussion that explains why that's done for some British stations. I've been told that style is used only when "that's how Network Rail styles those particular ambiguous station names when they conflict with other UK stations".[2] That clearly isn't the case with either of these stations that closed decades ago (and in fact, the Network Rail format would probably use towns or counties rather than (Scotland). Due to all that, the articles should be moved back, and perhaps it's worth a discussion to add some material on when and why disambiguation is added in the middle of the title in some cases.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Ahh, you're right. The explanation is actually buried way down at the end of Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK stations)#Disambiguation II. (It’s because {{Stnlink}} and {{S-line}} expect a certain syntax.) I guess editors who work on UK rail pages just “know” that, but yes, it should be clarified in the description. Useddenim (talk) 13:52, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Useddenim: Hmm. There needs to be a discussion about this, as currently there's little consistency across the board. Even within Scotland there's Stirling railway station, Scotland, Perth railway station, Scotland, Clunes railway station, Scotland, as well as Patna railway station (Scotland), Grange railway station (Banffshire), and then things like Bathgate (Upper) railway station, Bathgate (Lower) railway station, Newington (Edinburgh) railway station, and other variants. I'm not seeing any others that use "Xxx (Scotland) railway station". This is a problem that needs to be fixed; beyond the lack of consistency, the mid-phrase disambiguation is out of step with WP:DAB, and that shouldn't happen without a good reason. I'd thought that Amakuru's explanation that we use Network Rail styling to be a pretty good reason, but titling articles to suit templates isn't.

I'm going to suggest this: (1) we move these two stations back, as they've actually been through an RM that ended with the previous title, and (2) opening a new multi-move discussion with these and other relevant examples, informing TWP and other interested parties, and trying to hammer out some consistency.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

A few years ago all of the Scotland railway station titles were synchronized, so there’s evidently been some “page creep”. I would caution you, though, that a new multi-move discussion will probably be seen by WP:UKT as yet another attempt by Dicklyon et al. to impose their opinion onto the project. Useddenim (talk) 14:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

And there was likely no opposition—or relevant discussion—to those page moves because no notification was posted to WP:UKT! Useddenim (talk) 14:29, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Useddenim Yes, I'm aware of how finicky train editors can be with these articles. Unfortunately, there's no avoiding the discussion now, since there's no consistency, even within articles that use mid-phrase parentheses (the above articles' edit histories suggests there never has been), and there's nothing we can point to to say why things should be one way or another. This is a problem when local projects start using an unwritten convention, especially when it doesn't jibe with the site-wide practice. Hopefully it will be take for what it is - an attempt to fix an issue.

Re the notification, both were listed in the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains/Article_alerts and the Scotland article alerts. It looks like the UK Trains project doesn't have its own alerts set up. I wouldn't have thought to post an additional notification to their page.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:46, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

If I don't get to start the discussion today, it'll probably be next week. I'll make sure to notify you and the relevant projects.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:49, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for the ping. I agree that we need to get some conventions sorted out once and for all on this. As Cuchullain mentions above, my opinion (and I think the rule that was applied when most of these titles were set up) is that we should use the middle of the title disambiguator where Network Rail (or British Rail for defunct stations) do or did so, for example Sutton (Surrey) railway station; but that we should use a normal end of title disambiguator where there is no such NR disambiguator, for example Georgetown railway station (Scotland). Note that the infix disambiguators are those used by National Rail, which may differ from the locality disambiguator we would normally use if we were applying WP:UKPLACE - for example Sutton is usually denoted by its ceremonial county (London) rather than by its historical county of Surrey, but since National Rail call it "Sutton (Surrey)", so do we. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Amakuru. All that makes sense and it would probably be easy to add the clarification to WP:UKSTATION when we determine consensus. Unfortunately, I'm going to be out most of the rest of the week, so I'll wait till next week to get going. One more thing: should Houston (Scotland) railway station be moved back, since Georgetown has been?--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Cuchullain: OK, thanks. And yes, I think since Houston railway station (Scotland) was the result of the RM, that should remain the title until a wider decision is made. I've moved it back. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 20:52, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Useddenim: wrote: "a new multi-move discussion will probably be seen by WP:UKT as yet another attempt by Dicklyon et al. to impose their opinion onto the project." That's funny; I had nothing to do with this; consistency and conventions are not really my thing, so much as minor style items of capitalization and punctuation. I would think the project would be generally in favor of consistent naming conventions, but if they're not, it's not me that will be arguing with them. But thanks for dragging me into this. Dicklyon (talk) 16:26, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn

ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
• Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
• An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news

• Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

RFAR withdrawn

The request for arbitration in which you were involved has been withdrawn by the filing party. For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 20:39, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in New Brunswick

I draw your attention to Talk:List of tallest buildings in New Brunswick#Requested move 22 May 2017 as you have prevuoulsy been involved in similar discussion.Djflem (talk) 06:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Cuchullain - question about RFC closure

First off, I also posted this question at the help desk, but thought I would also personally notify you, as you have experience with the same issue/volunteer. Recently I had an RFC which was closed (inappropriately I feel) by user:WingedBladesOfGodric. When I went to his page and asked (very politely I might add) for an explanation, I was at first told "No - I see no need". Upon further inquiry, he agreed to explain the reason for his closure, and then promptly disregarded his commitment to do so. Further entreaties were met with radio silence. Here is a link to said discussion - My apologies for bothering you on your page, but how in the world do I find a reason for the closure to the RFC?? 2600:1012:B068:9A8C:51CA:D45C:30DF:BD0E (talk) 00:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Afternion Cuch, there is more to this anon IP's story than he is outlining here. Koncorde (talk) 05:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

A move..

Hi,can you help in executing the closure at Talk:Travis Knight (animator)#Requested move 1 June 2017.Am a little bit confused as to the fate of the DAB!(Does it get deleted?)Cheers!Winged Blades ^Godric 09:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric: Sure thing. This is the process I generally follow:

• Move the dab page to Travis Knight (disambiguation), and make sure to uncheck the "Leave a redirect behind" box (if you can't do that, move and add the{{db-redirect}} template to the redirect, or I can delete it for you).
• Move the article to the base name.
• Place the WP:G6 deletion template on the dab page (uncontroversial deletion of a dab page with only one other entry). The template is here: {{db-g6|rationale=The reason for deletion}}.
• Don't forget to add a hat note to the base name pointing to Travis Knight (basketball).

Let me know if I can be of any further help.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric, I see this hasn't been moved yet. Need some help?--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:09, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks for the help! I almost entirely forgot the issue. Methinks to have managed it successfully! Learning times!Winged Blades ^Godric 15:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm watching your moves

FYI. You have created Churchill station while there is also Churchill railway station. I know you can easily fix that. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Good catch, thanks. I'll fix it tomorrow. Let me know if you see any other problems.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Edmonton LRT Stations

I've noticed your recent moves of the Edmonton LRT station pages. However, these moves contradict with the official names of the stations. For example, the name of Century Park isn't "Century Park station", it is "Century Park LRT Station", per https://www.edmonton.ca/ets/century-park-lrt-station.aspx. It is also used on various other sources https://www.epl.ca/locations/EPLLCP/, http://www.arcinteriorsltd.com/projects/century-park-lrt-station/, http://globalnews.ca/news/2819566/up-to-75-of-park-and-ride-stalls-in-edmonton-will-go-to-paying-customers/. I believe, as it is both the official name and the most commonly used name, WP:COMMONNAME takes precedence. What are your thoughts? Thankyoubaby (talk) 04:45, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thankyoubaby, thanks for your comment. My moves are coming due to the new WP:CANSTATION guidelines. Before moving I did a quick search, and of the ones I checked, "xxx LRT Station" was not more common in Google News search than just "Xxx station". For example, Churchill (vs. [https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&ictx=2&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif8L6H9rrUAhVH2yYKHVaFAzQQPQgD#hl=en&tbm=nws&q=%22Churchill+LRT+station%22), Clareview ([3] vs. [4]) and Grandin ([5] vs. [6]). As such I thought it best to move them to the names more in line with the guideline.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't find that to be an accurate measurement of common usage. Looking at Clareview for example, several of the articles that came up were about an incident that happened on "Clareview Station Drive". I could also cherry pick stations where XXX LRT Station comes up as more common than XXX Station (South Campus, McKernan/Belgravia). Looking at the discussion on WP:CANSTATION, I see you have not reached a consensus on the GO station names. I believe the Edmonton LRT stations fall into the same category, these are proper, offical and common names. If Churchill LRT Station is the name of the station (http://www.metronews.ca/content/dam/thestar/uploads/2016/8/28/edmonton-transit-churchill-entrance.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg), it's the name of the station. Thankyoubaby (talk) 14:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there are (some) cases where "Xxx LRT Station" is more common in Google News results, but it's not consistent across all of them, and it appears that in most cases, either "Xxx station" is more common, or there's no one way that's clearly the most common between "Xxx LRT station", "Xxx station", just "Xxx", or something else. In those cases, it seems best to default to the standard convention of the guideline, which is "Xxx station". You are correct that it appears there's no consensus on what to do with the GO stations, which is something we'll have to sort out, but in those cases the gap is pretty narrow. We can take the Edmonton discussion up more widely, but as I've already started moving them, I'm going to continue and if there's consensus for putting them back, we can do it then.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:36, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I would suggest you do not continue to move them until after discussion per WP:TITLECHANGES. I would also like to draw your attention to this discussion, which reached consensus for Edmonton LRT Station naming conventions. Thankyoubaby (talk) 22:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, they've already been moved, but we can start a discussion at WP:CANSTATION.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:10, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Already started. Thankyoubaby (talk) 03:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Baltimore Light Rail

I completely agree with you that the new name of Centre Street is awkward, but it actually is correct. Please see this map provided by the Maryland Department of Transportation: https://mta.maryland.gov/sites/default/files/201%20LR%20Light%20Rail%20_JPEG%20Map_5_16_2017_0.jpg Scott218 (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. If tha's true, then the sources need to be cited, and WP:USSTATION formatting needs to be followed.Cúchullain ^t/c 17:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

CTrain

Why is Dalhousie station (Calgary) preferred over Dalhousie station (CTrain)? 117Avenue (talk) 02:44, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, either would work, but I felt (Calgary) was more recognizable than (CTrain), and in the discussion about Edmonton stations, those who favored parenthetical disambiguation tended to prefer just (Edmonton).--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:51, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Salmo railway station

This building's notability derives in large part from it once being a railway station. Why have you changed it to "Salmo station"? Britmax (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Britmax: Per the recently adopted WP:CANSTATION guideline. We are in the process of doing this for all the Canadian station articles.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:34, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Holy Grail

Hi - was wondering if you could help arbitrate a dispute on the Holy Grail article? I am trying to remove a couple non-sensical, totally irrelevant sentences from the article, but user DonQuixote keeps undoing my edit (now to the point of an edit war). The sentences in question are: "The arrival of the Grail in Britain may stem from the introduction of Christianity there. Though the Anglo-Saxons were Christianized by the 6th and 7th centuries, this was not the case with the Normans who at the time of the Grail would have still been close to heathendom." Both sentences cite a non-scholarly, fringe book by Emma Jung and Marie-Louise von Franz - neither of whom are Arthurian scholars, but Jungian analysts. The former heathendom of the Anglo-Saxons and Normans is utterly irrelevant to the article, as no scholars believe that the Anglo-Saxons are responsible for the development of the Holy Grail motif in medieval Arthurian literature and, while the Normans were certainly involved in its spread, the Normans who did so were thoroughly Christianized - and had been so for hundreds of years by the time Chretien de Troyes (who was neither Norman, nor Anglo-Saxon) wrote the very first romance mentioning the Holy Grail. In fact, the scholarly consensus is that Chretien, while likely influenced by earlier Celtic fairytales of magical vessels, invented the Holy Grail (as it appears in his story) himself. The sentence "(t)he arrival of the Grail in Britain may stem from the introduction of Christianity there" makes ZERO sense, as the Holy Grail is unknown in Britain until manuscripts of Chretien's Grail romance were brought there in the late 12th century. Any assistance you can provide here is most welcome. Cagwinn (talk) 16:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Cagwinn: I'll take a look. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:12, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Cagwinn (talk) 17:16, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

Happyme22 • Dragons flight

Zad68

Guideline and policy news

• The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news

• Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
• A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous

• A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
• A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
• Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker 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 TheSandDoctor -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker

The article The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker 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. TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks so much, TheSandDoctor!--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome! :D --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Pretty Hurts

Hello, I apologize if I upset you by requesting those moves for Pretty Hurts. I have set up a move request at Talk:Pretty Hurts#Requested move 24 July 2017, and I encourage you to participate in the discussion if you would like to get your point across. Thank you. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:E559:381A:F74C:F65B (talk) 22:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)