User talk:Hoary

People need Wikipedia. (Even if not as much as they need Facebook or something called "Glam Media". Ewww.)

Wikipedia needs WebCite.

WebCite needs money.

So give WebCite your money.

If I've posted something on your talk page, please reply there rather than here. Any new question or comment at the bottom of the page, please. If you post something here, I'll reply here.

From time to time non-confirmed editors won't be able to edit this page. If you can't post a message to me here, please do so here.

Sorry!

• Hi, I apologize for my mistake. I interpreted your response wrongly. My intention was not to hurt your emotions or to test your patience. You are a senior editor and you have more experience in editing wikipedia than me. I hope you will forgive me (a learner). 😓😓(223.230.151.127 (talk) 10:29, 4 January 2020 (UTC))

Thank you for saying this. Actually I have a thick skin and wasn't offended, though yes, you did test my patience. Well, many people contributing to talk pages occasionally say things that they later regret. (Certainly I have done this.) You're right not to remove it; but you are welcome to strike it, and to add a comment. So for example if somebody's first, angry comment is

You are a bunch of idiots! [signature+timestamp]

then later, when they cool down, they're welcome to change it to:

You are a bunch of idiots! Sorry about that comment. I was annoyed when I wrote it. It's not what I believe, and I hope that we can work together. [original signature+timestamp] edited [new signature+timestamp]

For more, see WP:REDACT. (And incidentally, I'm not really "senior"; I've just been around a long time.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:40, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

• Sir, if you forgave me then please leave a "sorry accepted note" on talk:Shamsheer Vayalil to make my image clean so, that other editors don't have ill feelings for me. If you will not do this then they will boycott my requests. Sorry 😔 once again!!

(223.230.128.8 (talk) 14:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC))

Al Franken, and "minor" edits

The article on Franken rightly has a substantial section on "Sexual misconduct allegations". The introduction to the article rightly says that "Franken resigned on January 2, 2018, after several allegations of sexual misconduct were made against him." To me, this seems enough. Perhaps to you it does not. If it doesn't, please argue for this in Talk:Al Franken. And when you do edit articles, be candid in your edit summaries about what you are doing. This was not a "Minor edit to clarify one sentence and add references to current status of subject". The meaning of "minor edit" is explained here. -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 20 January 2020 (UTC) Posted to User talk:Dale B. Phelps; pasted here by 8.46.95.20

I have no real interest in "arguing" (as you invited me to do on my "talk page.") My minor edit, to better summarize overall content, was just that, a minor edit that more completely, and appropriately summarized the articles content about the subject. You disagreed, and invited a pissing match over a subject that (ATMO) scarcely rates inclusion in wiki. No thank-you. -30- and "8.46.95.20 (talk) 15:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)" 8.46.95.20 (talk) 15:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

8.46.95.20 = Dale B. Phelps, the meaning of "minor edit" is explained here. Disagree with what it says? Then argue here for a change to it, and get agreement. Don't care how Wikipedia defines "minor" and want to use the term as you fancy? Then you'll be awarded this template; and if you persist, then a block for disruptive editing. -- Hoary (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Request for unprotection of The Rebel Media

Since you reverted my request for unprotection, that is removal of the move not the semi-protection, of The Rebel Media, which I'm not sure why, can you kindly un-move protect the page?

Thanks,
Doug Mehus T·C 13:03, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

The page title is unfamiliar to me. A glance at its history suggests that you may have confused me with Bbb23, who s-protected the page till April. I see no reason to change its (very mild) level of move protection (or other protection), and have simply moved it and changed the WikiData record accordingly. -- Hoary (talk) 13:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Hoary, That works for me. I have no problem with the page being semi-protected until April due to the persistent vandalism issues. My thinking was that I should request only unprotection for the move protection to facilitate the response in a more expedient fashion. Nonetheless, I appreciate you moving the page. Doug Mehus T·C 13:31, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Sicilian Baroque nominated for Featured Article Review

I have nominated Sicilian Baroque for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Shamsheer Vayalil editor again

Hello, there have been two new accounts editing the page, again demonstrating the same levels of competence and making similar edits to the three blocked accounts. I gave the first one the benefit of the doubt even though they sneaked the degrees back into the infobox after fiddling with the parameters. The second one, I'm more sure (as I can be at this stage) that it is yet another incarnation. It has made similar edits to the others, including disruptive ones to Zuckerberg's page (again) and the two new accounts are also talking to each other. Should these newer accounts be reported to SPI (not something I have experience of)? Eagleash (talk) 07:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip: I've blocked User:786 harsh life. One of the people he pleaded with for help hs himself been given a short block (not by me) for something else. If you notice a similar plea for help, then you might inform me or some other admin, or post to WP:ANI; you could also respond to the plea with a comment such as [[User:Whatevershislatestname]] is merely the latest sockpuppet of somebody whose other user IDs have been blocked. To learn more, please read [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1028#The_person,_or_persons,_keen_to_edit_Shamsheer_Vayalil|this]]. -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you; Yes I was following the ANI (I've been 'involved' with the 'Shamsheer problem' since last May when the help desk was disrupted with persistent incompetent requests) and was disappointed but not surprised, when the thread got archived without any input. ANI does not seem to react to this kind of 'low-level' disruption no matter how long it has gone on for. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 08:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

It's good to see that not everybody falls for this person's pleas. Example. -- Hoary (talk) 12:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Possible sock of...

There's an editor here who seems nothing but disruptive so far. Some of their efforts have been deleted, but they persist in creating article and article-type material mainly in user space. (including pasting their own name into the article about Virat Kohli and submitting it). In some of these they claim to be a 14-year-old boy from Bihar. Coincidence? Probably, but.. Cheers, Eagleash (talk) 12:04, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Sock puppet Anon IP.

Hello, Care to take a look:

1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/176.88.143.228

2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/110.168.30.203

This is a mayor issue now. Look for my User page to learn all this guys Sock puppets. And all his personal attacks and accustions.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fatima Bakery and Store (March 8)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by DGG was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

DGG ( talk ) 07:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Hoary! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DGG ( talk ) 07:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I saw your note to the original contributor didn't realize it was you who submitted it last--if you want me to put it in main space and see what the consensus is, I will-- DGG ( talk ) 09:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

DGG, increasingly these days, I like to put something in article-space when it's good and ready (example), so I don't mind. More sources and material really ought to be presented; and if these don't exist, the article shouldn't either. That said, there do seem to be an awful lot of useless stubs. While "there's loads of other crap out there" is an argument that shouldn't be used, I do wonder if en:WP isn't too forbidding to newcomers who mean well, are willing to do some conscientious work, but who aren't willing to immerse themselves in library research, scrupulous referencing, etc, for their very first articles. (I've a hunch that some of my earliest creations wouldn't meet your standards or mine today even in their present state; but if I hadn't perpetrated them then I wouldn't have hung around and later written stuff that's much better.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Much more than notability, I'm concerned about promotionalism. It doesn't matter much if the boundary for an article is set a little higher or lower; it matters critically that we not become a medium for advertising. The reason for raising the standard for articles is that promotionalism and borderline notability tend to go together. But many new editors fall into a mode of writing like press releases, because they see so much of it in Wikipedia--and in the world. After all these years, I can sometimes tell that an editor must be a press agent, and I can sometimes tell that even a new editor is not, but there are many where I can not securely distinguish, and I know I have made mistakes in both directions--and of course it is the ones where I incorrectly call someone a paid editor that really trouble me. It would help if we had a more objective standard of notability that easily-available-references, but though I will continueto try every fe years, I doubt we'll change. DGG ( talk ) 18:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

One key is perhaps your "and in the world", above. Let's consider India. Despite its august title, The Times of India will tailor its news for payment. But it seems that for some en:WP editors this is outweighed by the paper's age and ... augustness, let's call it. And in the Indian context, there's nothing unusual about ToI. I'll concede that ToI puts some effort into the appearance of a news organ by and for intelligent people. (Well, more often than not. Here's one exception among many.) Some months back I happened to be looking at a WP article about some Nigerian subject; as all the sources looked worthless, I thought I'd look for one or two better alternatives. I failed to find a single Nigerian website, with or without mention of that particular subject, that seemed to merit any serious attention. I presume that a large percentage of Wikipedia's editors arrive with no experience of trustworthy sources. (And their experience of "education" may just be the dutiful regurgitation of what they were told in class.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

And let's consider Saudi Arabia... I think that teaching really good critical thinking about sources of information is one of Wikipedia's most useful contributions. For West African topics, French-language sources are often useful. It is very difficult to cover topics which are not of interest to anyone with the ability to report independently on them, even if they are regional issues that would be notable if they happened in, say, France. I found myself a while ago failing to find sources establishing the notability of a diet-based illness fairly widespread among poor people in Africa; there were passing mentions, and almost no MEDRS. HLHJ (talk) 00:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Teikō Shiotani

Hello! Your submission of Teikō Shiotani at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Question

based on your question sir,

You suggest that you're working on a biography. At the top of your user talk page, you write "Working on creating a client biography". Do you mean that you're working, or that you're intending to work, on the biography of somebody who is a client of yours? -- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it's a client biography — Preceding unsigned comment added by ViciousProxy (talk • contribs) 06:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for responding to the question at the Teahouse (and quoting me from there). I've responded at the Teahouse. Please see my response there. And if anything is unclear, please ask there (not here). -- Hoary (talk) 08:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Simple requests at the help desk

Hi, the situation with this editor has been ongoing since 2015. Multiple editors have tried to assist and / or asked for an explanation. The editor has an account but more often edits whilst 'logged out' (multiple IPs). The account TP has multiple comments about their level of competence and there was an ANI which had no result. It has largely been felt, I believe, that the editor is a net positive and HD volunteers usually just fix the edits. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 04:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm newish to the Help desk, Eagleash, so I didn't know. Thank you for telling me. When I asked the question, I was aware that there might be a very unusual browser, perhaps dictated by physiological factors, so I tried to word the question openly and courteously. What worries me more is the nature of the article(s). I mean, Berney baronets: I see nothing there of notability, aside perhaps from claims that these people built or lived in this or that house -- houses that don't seem to have yet merited Wikipedia articles. Why do we spend our time attending to requests to make trivial changes on articles that are no more than stately, historical soap operas? -- Hoary (talk) 07:01, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree about the notability of some of the pages they contribute to. Their interest in the UK Royal Family and almost anything vaguely connected with it seems almost obsessive. I do find their constant requests for simple fixes and failure to heed advice frustrating, but 'go with the flow' and fix them where I can. The née question is nothing new; a 'sample' was left at the account TP in 2015 for them to copy and paste... but, well... no. However, I too, feel that there's possibly something we are unaware of hampering their ability and / or confidence. Eagleash (talk) 10:11, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I wish the user well, but I'll ignore them, unless either (a) I get an answer to my earlier question, or (b) there's a nontrivial request for an article that I happen to think is worthwhile. Still, I have to concede that the user provides less to complain about than do one person after another whose squawking boils down to "I'm fascinating and important! Remove these barriers to the posting of my PR puff on this website!" -- Hoary (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Teikō Shiotani

On 7 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Teikō Shiotani, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Teikō Shiotani photographed View with Weather Forecast (shown) from his upstairs window, exaggerating the curvature of the horizon by bending the photographic paper under the enlarger? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Teikō Shiotani. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Teikō Shiotani), 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.

--valereee (talk) 00:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Blimey! Um, I mean, thank you, Valereee. -- Hoary (talk) 00:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll be interested to see how many views it gets, as the photo seems really high-interest to me :) --valereee (talk) 11:33, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the photograph is of some interest, but it's disappointingly goatless. Not so many hits, I imagine. -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

There's only been one attempt at vandalizing, so I presumed that it had attracted little interest. But 4600 4400 views already, a veritable cynosure. (These days, perhaps even the vandals are enfeebled.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Only four thousand four hundred and something. Fail! -- Hoary (talk) 03:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a little disappointing for an image slot. I'm surprised. But I'm terrible at predicting what will attract interest and what won't. --valereee (talk) 13:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, I can't immediately find when Goat tower appeared and thus can't find the number of pageviews that it got. Call this N. Call the number of visible goats g. Therefore per capita goat dividend (Ɣ) = (N − 4400) ÷ g. We know that g=4; therefore Ɣ = N/4 − 1100. Hoary (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

lol...the goat tower is due to appear on May 4, as I requested that date. Maths to come. :D --valereee (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh yes! Now I remember that. -- Hoary (talk) 06:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Mändly to Maendly

Thanks for the modification

I try to use the same pseudo in all the "wikipedia" portal (Otherwise I'm going crazy).

My complete profile is here : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:SFCCF

I'm a fans of women soccer since 23 years but my job, is in the Geneva Airport :-) Sandy plays not in Servette FC but in Servette Fooball Club Chênois féminin https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servette_football_club_ch%C3%AAnois_f%C3%A9minin (page to be approuve this week ;-)) https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%C3%A9gorie:Joueuse_du_Servette_FC_Ch%C3%AAnois

It's possible to have the same login in all wikipedia ? I know, there is a lot of rules and not the same rules in all wikipedia but is the same aim, no ?

I'm not a bad guys, sure, i'm 47 years old and i have no time to be a bad guys :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SFCCF (talk • contribs) 23:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:Hoary/unprotected. SFCCF, you should be able to post here; there ought to be no need (right now) for User talk:Hoary/unprotected. Let's continue the discussion here. I think I understand what you're saying above, but I need a little time to think about the best reply. Please be patient. -- Hoary (talk) 23:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

In French there one expression "Too many rules kill the rules" "Trop de règles tuent les règles| Trop d'informations tuent les informations". Don't worry, "la patience est la mère des vertues / Patience is the mother of virtues"... not sure the translation is correct but I try:-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by SFCCF (talk • contribs) 23:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Your translation is good, SFCCF, but for some reason "Patience is the mother of all virtues" is slightly more standard. (May I say, la patience est l'Ève mitochondriale des vertues?) But back to business. Special:CentralAuth/SFCCF shows that you haven't made a great number of edits anywhere. There are several things you can do. (Let's use "GOODNAME" to mean a username that (i) you like and (ii) will be acceptable in the French-, Italian-, and English language Wikipedias.)

• Stop using the name SFCCF anywhere, and instead think of, and use, GOODNAME. If you wish, log in as SFCCF one last time, in order to announce on all three of Utilisateur:SFCCF, User:SFCCF and Utente:SFCCF that you are now GOODNAME.
• Read the page Demande de renommage de compte utilisateur, and then click on the link "Formuler une demande..." for a change (everywhere) from SFCCF to GOODNAME.
• On the page RFC/User names, apply for permission to keep using the name SFCCF, pointing out that the name has been used on French- and Italian-language Wikipedias without any problem, and that the restrictions in English-language Wikipedia come as an unwelcome surprise to you. As part of your appeal, offer to point out wherever/whenever appropriate that you don't represent the organization SFCCF.

I'd recommend either the first or the second of these. -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank's a lot for the suggestion I begin with the third, because SFCCF his my own creation for the acronyme of Servette Football Club Chênois féminin ;-). I am a volunteer who campaigned for the development of Women's Football in Geneva and this nickname corresponds to me. For that I would like to keep it as much as possible :-) This guiy is me https://www.proxifoot.ch/new/2017/02/salvatore-musso-les-recrues-vont-beaucoup-nous-apporter/ Salvatore (talk to me) 11:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

do it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_names

Good luck with it. ¶ More importantly, you mention that you're working at Geneva airport. I hope that conditions there (for both job security and health) are good. -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

photography
... you were recipient no. 2195 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, thank you, Gerda. Recently I've so been busy preparing for a different way of working (for money) -- not meeting people, whereas before it was all about meeting people -- that I've had little time. No edits here of any significance since this one two months ago. But I hope to be back. -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, thank you for welcoming me. I want to ask if you can help me review a page that I created? I have posted about it on the help desk too. I want to bring my knowledge of banking, finance, politics, and human rights here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FZR2020 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, no: I'm not going to review it, because it's about a subject of which I know nothing and for which some knowledge is needed. Good luck with it! -- Hoary (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou!

Thankyou for understanding me. That were my past mistakes and childish behaviours. Even after creating first and second socks, I never intended to destructive editing and any promotions. I may be banned from Wikipedia anytime so I thought to thank you. — GargAvinash ^talk 15:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Johnluvis

Hey, Here's an unusual one. I rejected this editor's sandbox draft (they keep meddling with my attempts to clean it up for them but that's a separate issue). Then I noticed that they copied all my userboxes and user infobox from my own userpage to theirs. They made some minor changes to dates and locations and the content is displayed at their userpage with user rights they don't have etc. (although not hard to spot for most people I expect). I was tempted to delete it but not certain of my ground as in userspace "Db-something" could apply I suppose? I have left a message at their TP but no response. Any advice? Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 12:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleted. (I think "hoax" can cover creation of a fictitious Wikipedia editor.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Excellent; thanks! Eagleash (talk) 13:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

note re your page

Hi Hoary. I just happened upon your user page, after seeing your comments at the Help Desk in a section immediately above a question that I just posted there. I just wanted to say hi, and to tell you that I admire your edits, as well as your approach to the details posted at your user page. I really like the way that you have laid out your editing philosophy here, and I enjoyed seeing the numerous edits reflected by your barnstars. I appreciate all your apparent efforts here. I think you've given me some ideas that I may try out sometime, for my own user page sometime. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, but I have you perhaps mixed me up with somebody else? I don't think I've described any editing philosophy; and one simple reason for this is that I don't think I have one. Still, if somebody does enjoy my user page, they're most welcome to the enjoyment. -- Hoary (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

A COVID-19 category is red

Look at your response here. Yes, I'm way behind. It used to be the Teahouse where I was behind but they changed their archive structure.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Very Unwelcome

Hi Hoary, in this message if I sond rude it is intentional. I am the person who keeps editing the wiked wikipedia page, I would like to say that Wicked is a common phrase in New England. Maybe before calling out someones edit you should do some reasarch, dum dum. I would like to say you are a shame to the whole wikipedia comunity. Please respond to my message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HairyLittleMan (talk • contribs) 04:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

HairyLittleMan, sorry for my comment on your talk page the other day: you caught me in a bad mood. Of course "wicked" means what you say it means: quite often I've heard it used in this way myself. And it's in Merriam Webster. Offhand I don't know if it's commoner in New England than anywhere else, but I'm willing to believe that it is.

Here's the thing. This is an encyclopedia. It's very big, and it's getting bigger, but there's no goal of covering everything that anyone could say anything about. The organization that hosts Wikipedia also hosts Wiktionary, a dictionary, which does have an entry for "wicked". Normally Wikipedia doesn't have entries for particular words. Yes, there's an article titled Evil; but it's not about the word "evil", it's instead about a concept that's often expressed with the word "evil" but doesn't have to be: in Japanese it's aku, and there are near-synonyms for it even in English ("wickedness", etc).

And in its disambiguation pages, Wikipedia doesn't list articles that don't exist (even if they should exist).

I hope that all is clear now. -- Hoary (talk) 06:25, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Hoary, thank you very much for the apology, sorry for the rude message I was also in bad mood. If you want you can delete my rude message I did not mean what I said.

Best regards, HairyLittleMan

Wikidata and the Help Desk

You answered someone's question about Wikidata, and someone else asked a very complicated question about Wikidata that didn't get an answer. Could you go here and see if you can answer the question or find someone who can? Thanks.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I've responded there. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Response to Been Sanctioned?

Thanks for reconfirming. But, I can't access the article's talk nor my watchlist responses. Which means what, exactly? And for what period of time? Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Let's keep the discussion in one place. -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, can't seem to reply to you at oneplace. Tried. But, yes, still can't access talk. Can read watchlist list, but not access info in actual posts. (Apologies if lack of knowledge prevented reply at oneplace.) Pasdecomplot (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Five minutes after posting what's immediately above, you did manage to post there. So I replied there. We'll keep the discussion in one place. -- Hoary (talk) 12:40, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

File Gheorghe Buzoianu.pdf

Thank you for your reply and advice. Domnica Lungu (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

YGM!

Hello, Hoary. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Marchjuly (talk) 05:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

More mail

Hello, Hoary. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Bishonen | tålk 20:51, 14 July 2020 (UTC).

A pie for you!

Dear Hoary, I was looking back through the Help Desk archive, hopeless of finding an answer to my question. It made my day to see your answer and help. Thank you for your service to Wikipedia, keep up the good work. Mohammad 19:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Munch munch, burp (excuse me!), thank you. I'm glad I could help you, Mohammad. Unfortunately I am very ignorant about Iran; but I'd be surprised if the coverage of Iran in en:Wikipedia is much good. It probably needs all the Persian-reading help that it can get. -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

The Day Has Finally Arrived! (A Thank You To Hoary)

Hoary, I want to thank you for helping me relocate the page Draft:Mark Gillespie from (music producer) to (music manager). The original draft was moved by an admin to (music producer). However, the draft contained no text or cited source suggesting the subject was about music production. The admin then denied the article, stating it did not meet the musical notability criteria needed for a music producer. After various Talks about how I deemed it an inaccurate move without basis, the admin explained that they did not see the difference between production of music and business of music. Although the differences were explained in detail, the admin yielded yet refused to move the article to its correct location. Whether this was because the admin forgot or refused under malice, I never thought the day would come where I would see the draft moved. Enter, user Hoary. Now, I finally feel confident in my resubmitting.

All of that being said, I thank you. 2020 Isn’t all bad. Bouncecouncil (talk) 14:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, good luck -- though I still recommend that you change "legendary superclub" to "club". -- Hoary (talk) 21:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Forensic Oceanography

Hello. Would you be so kind as to delete the redirect Forensic Oceanography, so as to make way for Draft:Forensic Oceanography please? Thank you. -Lopifalko (talk) 14:07, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Done! -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Ariko Inaoka

		The Barnstar of Recovery
		For your devoted recovery work on the Ariko Inaoka article. Netherzone (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

And thank you for your contribution, particularly for finding a copyleft photo of the soba place and having it successfully get through the Commons hoops. Well well, so the article has been OK'd -- and it wasn't long ago that it had a speedy delete template stuck on it. I'd rather like to push the article through didja-know (compare this); but if there's more about her then it would be in subscription-only newspaper archives, requiring a visit to a library. The problem with Japanese photography is that there's very little on the web about it. If it were European or American, there could be newspaper articles and substantial commentary in blogs by people whose opinions are known to merit consideration (although of course such blogs are ever less numerous); in Japan, the newspaper articles aren't on the web and the blogs are numerous but tend to be anonymous and to have feeble content. (Oh, and now Asahi Camera has expired.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

So much good info to digest. Will have a look at these links for sure. Ever onward! Netherzone (talk) 00:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Hoglin2020

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Hoglin2020 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

This message was automatically delivered by QEDKbot. 20:28, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Request on 15:15:25, 15 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Gammajv

• Gammajv (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Steven Paul Carver (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, Thanks for your review of my submission for Steven Paul Carver. I see that you question the contents of the site "Invaluable.com". This is an independent site. I assume you clicked on the "more details" button to see the information about Mr. Carver. I agree that the content was probably written by him at some point, as most artists and authors are asked to write their own bios quite often.

The reason I included so many references was that I have been consistently asked to provide more references, so I carefully looked at each reference I had and included it next to as many facts as I could find in that reference. Should I use it less often if the fact is referenced somewhere else?

Thanks,

Joy

Gammajv (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. The matter of presenting too many citations is discussed in Wikipedia:Citation overkill. The invaluable.com page isn't usable as a reference. If it were, it could be cited numerous times; but it isn't, so it shouldn't be cited at all. ¶ Let's take an example of the content of the article:

• "Their work on Face Factory, a database for building digital portraits, was featured in Wired Magazine." In that article, did Skaggs say anything that would help us understand Carver? If he did, use it; if he didn't, don't mention the featuring.
• "His cover art for the album The Best of Kansas has been thoroughly analyzed by those seeking to identify all the hidden visual references to all previous albums released by the group."
• "During the 1990s Carver produced art for many book publishing houses": For the covers? (If for something else, then for what?) Evidence, or examples, please.

Another matter. You have made quite a lot of edits to English-language Wikipedia. All seem to have been directly related to Carver. This surprises me. Please read and think hard about Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. -- Hoary (talk) 11:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest (Draft:Adrian Arguedas Ruano)

Hello. thanks for your respond. How I declare that i am not getting paid for creating an article.... actually, this is going to be my first article, I am doing this for an artist that i know, it would be based on multiple articles and books about his career. I work in a totally different field. I am not a philologist or literature professional, I don't even like that, I don't read books, and I am not a writer... i just like challenges and if I can help somebody I would do my best to do it..... Now, should I add a link to the article probing that I am not getting paid for this...? Joannych Joannych (talk) 00:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

"I am doing this for an artist that i know": then, as this explains, you have a conflict of interest. -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Your help needed re. the article on Anna van Egmont

I might need your help to stop someone obviously starting an edit war in this article, and precisely this paragraph. In spite of my arguments, and invitations to discuss facts on the talk page, in the dedicated section I created for him after already a few reverts from him ( Second section called "Do not start an edit war on wrong definitions"), he keeps reverting and bringing provocations without answers to the points If and when you have time, I will appreciate that you intervene. Thanks in advance, Rgds, --Emigré55 (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Are you also mentioning you highly aggressive behaviour and your personal attacks? And the fact that you - while still in discussion - call a 2-1 majority a consensus? The Banner talk 19:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

About Remi

Yes, you are right. From his 63 year long coaching career, we should just focus on those 2 years, that are related to BALCO. Sounds right. Radspeed (talk) 09:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)