User talk:Randy Kryn

For entertainment porpoises only: "Time: Illusion stirred by gravity" - Motto of the Salvation Space Force (new comments on bottom of page please)

• The pirate queen and her singing counterpart, and a corny virus respite.
• Now you know: Saverland v Newton.
• An IP upon realizing that birds are dinosaurs, and a related edit to honor our dinosaur brothers and sisters.
• Remembering five of the last eight Earthlings to travel to the Moon, four of whom were murdered soon after their return.
• Maybe my best geek edit: A five cushion bank shot italicizing Star Trek and Buffy the Vampire Slayer links on Wikipedia's Klingon language page.
• Write on!: Don't kick the Ouija board. Which may also result in Hillary v. Gandhi, Obama, et al..
• An IP's inadvertent poetically sexist edit, which they quickly corrected
• A sci-fi short story plot (dibs)
• Much ado about nothing (doesn't work as well with the coding that showed up awhile back, imagine it without the red code).

If you've never seen...

. . .Veiled Christ, a statue in Naples, Italy, depicting Christ in the tomb, maybe click the image two or three times to enlarge it. This almost unbelievable 1753 sculpture ("how'd he do that?"), carved from one piece of marble, has the only Wikipedia article which has to prove, with sources, that the topic was not the work of an alchemist. Step right up, and don't miss the modern looking couch, the two pillows with tassels, or the crown of thorns and other torture things down by the feet. All of that carved from that same block of marble. Literally a few steps from Veiled Christ sits another "how'd he do that?" piece also carved from a single block of marble (or created by alchemy).

One of life's pleasures

Watching Secretariat's 1973 triple crown races in order knowing that it wasn't until the third one that his trainer and jockey realized that they didn't have to hold the horse back anymore, that he could run full speed start to finish, and also while knowing that Secretariat, while being held back in two of them, still holds the fastest time record in all three races (and that the horse he trashed in the Kentucky Derby still holds its second fastest time):

Here's the Kentucky Derby...holds him back...holds him wayyyy back, then the Preakness...holds him back, holds him back, and finally...the Belmont "he is moving like a tre-men-dous machine".

Possible best vandal edit in the categories of...

• Best romantic edit, edit per topic, per user name, edit by a single-edit user, and the winner of the 2017 "Shakespearean dramatic and romantic tale in six words" Heisman

This one time at band camp I vandalized a page

The docents ask people: "Find the cat". Letting the coolness of it lead me to break my oath as a Wikipedian, I now self-identify as a vandal.

Always interesting

"The problem with Wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work." quoted by User:Kizor in the New York Times

See and listen to Wikipedia edits as they occur. Designed by Stephen LaPorte and Mahmoud Hashemi of hatnote.com, the link was copied from a user page, don't remember where, but it's deservedly on quite a few as well as having its own article. Just who is making all this noise? Well...

...the size of our stadium

Here is another user's subpage about how many Wikipedians can dance on the head of a pin.

************************************************

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Barnstar of Diligence to you. They called him Marius (talk) 22:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia! Randy Kryn (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

"Book 4" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Book 4. Since you had some involvement with the Book 4 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 12:01, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Tags removed from {{Orders of magnitude}} lists

Hi, I'm curious why you decide to remove some of the {{More citations needed}} tags from these pages since a lot of them still have quite a few unsourced entries. Ionmars10 (talk) 11:28, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Ionmars10, hello as well. The tags I removed were from articles which already had dozens of references, and in some cases over a hundred (one had 172 references). These tags seemed to be put on solely because some information in them wasn't cited. Others were from pages which asked for more references with tags from 2009 or earlier and where references had been added since. Almost every one of the six million articles on English Wikipedia could arguably be tagged with a morecites needed tag. When a page already is well cited, especially list pages such as these which hopefully have page watchers who patrol for vandals, spammers, and incorrect entries, they seem to deserve a noncluttered introduction. A page by page decision as to when to tag for morecites does of course help the encyclopedia, yet pages with 40, 70, 80, or 172 references have enough, in some editors opinions. At some point we have to trust that the overall page is fine and doesn't need the large top-tags even though, in some cases, individual in-text facts have citationneeded tags. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

The cat's out of the bag

Talk:Cat#Big cats a thing of the past? was turning into a hairy situation, and I don't want to see people claw at each other, nor have this dispute mewling away into archival before it's been settled. I've tried to lure some attention to the discussion via a cross-post at WT:FELIDS. Hopefully more editors will pounce on the issue (though not on each other).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I'll bring the catnip (which, by the way, effects only 2/3rds of cats, valerian picks up lots of the rest. never knew that until about a year and a half ago). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Sermon on the Mount

Hi, I noticed you removed the hatnote. Hatnotes are to help readers navigate. They aren't only for articles with related topics. In this case, the titles differ by only one letter; someone could easily wind up there by hitting the wrong letter on the keyboard. I only revised the existing hatnote, so evidently I wasn't the only one to think so. But if you want to ask for input on the talk page or somewhere else, I have no objections. Have a good day! --47.146.63.87 (talk) 07:12, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

The hatnote was to a speech nicknamed Sermon on the Mound, obviously a pun on the name. But I don't think there's a Wikipedia policy to hatnote every item that's one letter off, or a pun of a title. Thanks for letting me know that the edit has been questioned. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

There isn't a policy one way or the other. WP:HATNOTE says they're for assisting the reader. I really have no strong feelings about this, but I do see where the person who inserted it was coming from. What do you think about asking for input at the article talk? --47.146.63.87 (talk) 04:14, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I'm fine with it not being a hatnote, although you can ask for more input on the talk page. A pun on a name doesn't have to be included as a hatnote. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Colon?

Hey my friend, just fyi... Redirect: [[Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument 2.0]] doesn't work anymore. So please omit the colon, as in Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument 2.0. Thank you for your service ;>)  Paine  14:49, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Paine, I've always used the colon for redirects so will keep this in mind. The bots keep moving the goalposts! Randy Kryn (talk) 00:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

There was a bug report awhile back, and until the bug was fixed, a colon was necessary. Bug's been fixed, so a colon is no longer necessary, and in fact, a colon can cause problems, for example, this particular colon caused a malformed move request at Talk:Statue of Edward Snowden#Requested move 16 February 2020. That was about a nine on my Weird-Shit-o-meter. Best to you! PI Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 02:28, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

John Lewis (civil rights leader)

Hi, Randy... sorry I have been a stranger lately. I even missed the just prior move discussion. I've just had my worst health year ever—from the terrifying to the ridiculous—but evidently no lasting harm (the ridiculous was gout-I thought that was limited to Henry VIII, Dr. Johnson, and Hogarth's works). Anyway, could you poke me if I miss any changes at this article? — It really, really ought to be rewritten to a decent level while Lewis is still with us, and that would go a long way preventing the article being cluelessly jerked around. Thanks. (Today's NYT has a very good article with lots of graphs that shows how shockingly many republicans believe SARS Covid19 is a hoax—and why! Stay safe. — Neonorange (Phil) 01:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, and will keep watch of the page. Hoping all is well now. The RM at John Lewis has been well served by your comments, that's a primary title waiting to happen but not everyone sees it that way. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I could go into more detail on my scares, but why bother? Even had my health problems not disappeared, they would seem trivial in this pandemic.

Good health and an elbow-bump to you. — Neonorange (Phil) 18:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Alfred Worden

On 19 March 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Alfred Worden, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 03:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Vitamin C and the goat image

In my opinion the image of the goat and the statement that goats synthesize 13,300 mg/day daily, and more when stressed (from a 1973 article not available on line), implies that humans should consume far more than the 45-90 mg/day recommended by various government organizations, and more when stressed. Even if the goat information is true, it turns out that goats maintain a serum concentration barely double the norm for humans (information I recently added to the article). And there are few if any evidences that humans increasing vitamin C intake in times of stress (ill defined) gain any health benefit. David notMD (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

[for accidental page lurkers, this is about an edit at Vitamin C concerning an existing image and caption] I'm not a doctor either, but from research and experience I'd say that humans should consume much, much more than the 45-90 mgs. daily recommended for humans, and have personally taken a 1,000 mg. tablet three or four times a day every day since February, 1995. I'd suggest that the image and caption of a goat on the page be replaced with one of a zoo-captive chimpanzee or gorilla. The caption would include the governmental requirement for supplemental daily ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) for captive or kept primates. Last time I looked, quite awhile ago, was that zoos had to supplement their captive primates with an average human-weight equivalent of 3,400 mgs. a day. If you'd like to do a little research, please check to see what the government requirement is now. Thanks. [to accidental lurkers, this discussion references the fact that primates cannot create ascorbic acid in their bodies, unlike almost 100% of all other animals, insects, plants, and other life forms, whose bodies' make and process it continuously] Randy Kryn (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

FYI - My PhD is from MIT in Nutritional Biochemistry, with a minor in Human Nutrition. I will search for information on primate nutrition and primate serum vitamin C. David notMD (talk) 21:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Duly accidentally noted. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bee hummingbird. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Why would you enter "smallest dinosaur" on this page? Try to be more constructive, and use WP:SCIRS sources. Zefr (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Lo and behold, the smallest known dinosaur in flight

• Hi Zefr. Almost lol (just smiling out loud). The edit in the text that I made said that the bee hummingbird is the smallest known dinosaur. Which is true. Where is the disruptive context of the edit? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
• p.s. The reversal. Maybe give more thought to tossing up warning templates per much ado about nothing, and consider giving a shout out to a talk page discussion instead. Warning templates presented by one editor to another should mean something serious, so please, when you are about to give your next few to ignorant users like myself, maybe think about it just before the habit takes hold again. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Provide a WP:SCIRS review where an expert(s) says a hummingbird is a dinosaur, then I'll gladly revert and apologize. --Zefr (talk) 21:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

The Bird article and Dinosaur article, among many others, call birds avian dinosaurs, with many references. Wikipedia's descriptor for extinct dinosaurs is non-avian dinosaur. If you'd want to dispute those encyclopedic definitions then I'd think a full RfC would be needed. Whatever you decide, there is certainly no need for an apology, especially since you acted in good faith which, by Wikipedian courtesy, we assume of each other until shown otherwise. All I'm saying above is that templating other editors might be better thought out and rare (but since I've never used one on anybody, I must assume good faith that you thought I should be templated, so all is well). Randy Kryn (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Zefr. Wondering if you checked out the bird and dinosaur articles to ascertain if birds are considered dinosaurs or not? If so, and if birds actually do have that dino magic, since the revert has waited almost four world-gone-crazy months it can wait a bit longer. Thanks, and I hope all is well. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:54, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Funerary art in Puritan New England

Hi Randy, I was wondering if you could help be out with this page; am struggling to create in bound links outside of "see also"'s on specific graveyard articles. As well, am not sure that I have gotten the categorizations right. Hope all is well for you in this bizarre new world. Ceoil (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ceoil. Yikes, thanks for the Halloween-in-April article request. Will take a further look, but won't offer much help with this one, let the bones lay in shallow graves for now. Thanks for the hope, and to you as well. Yes, an odd time, and doing okay so far. I've got a loner friend who says he's "been practicing for this his whole life." When in Boston in November myself and another Wikipedian actually went into one of these old cemeteries (don't know its name, up a hill from one of the old churches near the harbor), small but evidently packed. Didn't stay long, as it was a cold rainy day, but many of the gravestones looked like the images in your article. And thanks for thinking of me (please give me a happier assignment too). On a quick look I did see a book title needing italics (not surprising, have done so many of them my brain picks them out of the pattern automatically). Randy Kryn (talk) 23:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

p.s., can't think of any outside links you or other editors haven't caught. The page is very well written and educational, a good (although kind of creepy and skully) addition to Wikipedia's sculpture collection. by the way, loved your article-unused image. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take your non overhaul as a sign that havnt done anything disastrous or likely to put me in prison. Re old cemeteries, once all this is over, myself and the mrs are planning to take a week in Maine, this is my alternative motive, there seems to be the bones of a very interesting article there. In fact myself and wifey basically fell in love in that very yard. ps, looking above It seems we have similar musical tastes. Ceoil (talk) 00:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Ceoil, will reply tomorrow, but just wanted to ask, shouldn't the page be included in the sculpture categories? These things are sculptures, right, mostly reliefs? I think it is a sculpture article. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:34, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I think sculpture might be pushing it, although yes they are reliefs. Ceoil (talk) 22:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Johnbod if he has a view re sculpture. Ceoil (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Category:American sculpture certainly! I suppose Category:Outdoor sculptures in the United States too. Then there's the "public art" tree, which doesn't seem to talk to the sculpture tree. Good to see you're keeping cheerful! Johnbod (talk) 22:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Txs John and Randy, added now. re cheerful: am a ray of sunshine as always!, although frankly I find this stuff uplifting. Ceoil (talk) 23:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Lots of good work by yourself and others on the page the last couple of days. It reads easily and informatively. Remaining puritans will applaud. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Yr edit to Luke

Randy, in your recent edit to Gospel of Luke (which I have no problems with in itself), you broke a sentence into two, and in the process created a sentence without a source citation. Please be careful to make new cite tags so that every statement continues to be identified. (God I sound pompous, sorry). Achar Sva (talk) 10:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the good advice, and for the simple, concise, and heartfelt prayer (Luke would have used it in his book if Jesus had said it). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Louis Kahn template for First Unitarian Church of Rochester (building)

After publishing the new link for First Unitarian Church of Rochester (building) on the Louis Kahn template, I decided to test it from an article that used the template. Arrrgh, it didn't work! It turns out that I had absent-mindedly tested it from First Unitarian Church of Rochester (building) article itself, and of course it wasn't happy with the idea of linking to itself. It works, naturally, from other articles that use the Louis Kahn template. Thanks for handling that situation so quickly, and thanks for the kind words. Bilpen (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Perplexed by Jefferson Bible article

In December 2019, appears that User:Mholowchak, first editing as User:2601:5c6:8200:980:ed50:f43a:cc4f:cccd, made a bunch of edits to Jefferson Bible, increasing the length of the article by 1/3 and referencing... himself (his published books on the topic). I know nothing about Jefferson, but am willing to believe that Holowchak is adding his own original (albeit published) research, which does not match mainstream historian content. Elsewhere, Holowchak has been reverted for adding his own thoughts into other Jefferson articles. See the Self-citation comment at User talk:Mholowchak. And added his 15 Jefferson books to Bibliography of Thomas Jefferson. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks. I removed one paragraph and points that seemed out of context, but I'm not a Jefferson expert. Maybe you can copy your comment to the Thomas Jefferson talk page which will get a better look from editors who have studied the material. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda!, and a nice shiny object to mull over. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject

I noticed in the past you took interest in the veganism and vegetarianism template and made good edits. I have proposed a new WikiProject if you are interested. Psychologist Guy (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Psychologist Guy, I don't like to commit to joining things on Wikipedia, makes it seem way too much like work. But I'll keep the project on my watchlist and probably think of at least joining at some point. Thanks for creating such an important WikiProject, I see it has lots of support. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Sulzberger updates

Hello again! I wanted to make sure you saw my proposed updates to the Sulzberger article here. I know not all editors receive ping notifications, so I thought I'd follow up here before seeking help elsewhere such as WikiProject Biography or WikiProject Journalism. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Inkian Jason, I did see them but would rather have more eyes on the edits for your next round of suggested edits. Thanks for your dedication to your work. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:59, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks for confirming so quickly. I will seek help at WikiProject Journalism. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

GW

Randy Kryn, do you have any experience with German Wikipedia? I have been in denial about it for well over a decade, but it does function like a Prussian monarchy, with a queen at its head. It is a very strange place, especially since that queen's antics do not work at all in the real world. A simulacrum. Cheers, --Edelseider (talk) 13:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

No, I was just playing at Jonbod's page because of your comment. Since you had some trouble there and seem to still carry emotion over it, and seem proficient in English, German Wikpedia's loss is English Wikipedia's gain! Randy Kryn (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Have a nice evening or morning, depending on your timezone! --Edelseider (talk) 14:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. Timezone? It's already August where I am. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for John Lewis (civil rights leader)

On 19 July 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article John Lewis (civil rights leader), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:40, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Although not a happy occasion, thank you King of Hearts, and for your own work on the topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Help

I don't know what is going on here - is showing random punctuation marks that I cant delete. Hello otherwise: life opening up again slowly in Ireland and we have been promised pints of Guinness on August 10th. Ceoil (talk) 04:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

thanks, no idea why my talk page was included in that category, just removed it. Besides that, the page looks normal to me. I'm on monobook, which maybe isn't seeing what you're seeing. And aye, the Guinness will flow like water. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:05, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and request for more help!

Hi Randy, I very much appreciate your edits on my page William Woodward! I am new to Wikipedia and I was hoping you could shed some light on the review process of drafts. If you have a moment, I would love to know if there is anything I can do on the page that will improve it's chances of a speedier review. It appears that you are a long-time Wikipedian and well versed in a variety of topics ... any suggestions or help would be brilliant. Thanks and hope you're having a lovely day! Best, EArvaWeb (talk) 22:04, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

He EArvaWeb. I really don't know much about the draft review process, and haven't used it. Nice work by the way, always good to see new visual arts pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Randy, thank you for the compliment about my work on comet NEOWISE. -- Kheider (talk) 18:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome Kheider. Lots of readers benefited from your work (haven't checked in a few days, but a bit ago the page was getting 60,000 to 80,000 views a day). Last night was the last for me for this comet, saw it seven nights but yesterday, even with pretty good binoculars, could hardly see it. Even Heaven's Gate wouldn't follow this one. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Navbox related questions

Hey I have a question. Regarding navboxes like Template: Great Lakes Megalopolis which relied on a source to decide what belongs there. If editors don't want it placed on certain articles linked. then what do I do? Is it better off deleted? Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:55, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

First I've heard of the term, and the template just seems to list all the big cities in a huge area of North America covered by the term (and I suppose the template could include every city, river, hill, nook, and cranny in-between). Seems much too broad a topic to include the template on all of those articles, at least I wouldn't place it on them. Besides, it's above my pay grade (i.e. the quarter I found at a wikiconference once). Thanks for asking. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me joining this discussion. Unfortunately, User talk:Jhenderson777 has been edit warring to keep this template in articles, despite at least three editors reverting the edit. I have therefor started a discussion about this at Talk:Detroit#New navbox: Great Lakes Megalopolis in the hope of gaining a consensus to have the navbox removed from the many, many articles it has been added to. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I haven't edit warred. they are still off the page bro! I undid once and did not break any three revert rule. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 23:40, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh, it's your template. I thought you were asking me if it should be removed from the pages. But as I said, it's a topic I've never heard of so am not the best person to enter the discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC),

Understood. sorry about not being that clear. I don't want it removed though editors are removing it in certain links. Also now it's on deletion discussion. BTW I ask because you seem to be an expert on navboxes. That is all! :) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 18:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for collaborating on the art list! Wm335td (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, very kind of you. It's your page, I just put a few things in here, and I hope the list shapes up well. There's a few things on it I haven't heard of, so thanks for the education. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Bevel promotion

Randy, Bevel does not need to have a title in all these articles. Simply citing sources and describing what he did is sufficient. We don't do that for anyone else. 23:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Accuracy. Please talk page it (this was about an edit reversion on the Edmund Pettus Bridge page). Randy Kryn (talk) 00:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

added: several more pages edited to remove, and then revert, the extremely basic Bevel information in each article. One of those I've since self-reverted. So please pick one of those to discuss what you have in mind, I'd suggest the civil rights movement talk page. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

1960s Counterculture template

I noticed you were adding this template to several articles I have worked on. Perhaps also include American Indian Movement and Occupation of Alcatraz? I get that Alcatraz was an "event" but it sparked a resurgence of Native pride and cultural reclamation, thus more like a movement in actual evaluation. Just a suggestion, if you think it has merit. SusunW (talk) 19:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi SusunW. Added the American Indian Movement in the movement section (good idea, thanks). Most of the 'movement' listings would have associated event articles, so the Alcatraz occupation as a stand-alone entry on the page would be an exception. A large 'Associated events' section remains a possible option that would have to include all of the movement activities (civil rights, anti-war, etc.) which would redefine the scope and size of the template. I added the template to pages after noticing it wasn't as yet distributed, and included a few additional entries to the already created template. Thanks for your good work in the topic areas. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Your explanation makes perfect sense. SusunW (talk) 15:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Italicizing an article

Hi - I was hoping maybe you can help me with this. I started the article on Earth to Ned earlier today and I don't know how to get the title of the article italicized. I also inadvertently capitalized the middle word To -- can you lower case that, please? Thanks! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

There ye go, and a nice page. It's now at the lower-cased title. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! (I didn't realize it was that simple -- I thought I needed special admin powers, etc.) Have a great day/night! :) DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Ta-da! (it's all smoke and mirrors). Randy Kryn (talk) 04:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

MLK and Till Colorado

I went back and forth a few times on that, found multiple examples of news articles spelling it either way, and no close up pictures. Your revert got me looking again - and finally found a clear close up picture of the plaque on the statue, showing... (line 1) Martin Luther King, Jr. (line 2) Prophet for Peace. I should have dug harder earlier today. Thanks for making the change. Jmg38 (talk) 02:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jmg38, and thanks for looking deeper to find the image, which (if applicable) could be used on the page. An interesting plaque. Then again, I'm one of the advocates for using real names of artworks as Wikipedia titles, and there would be support for removing the comma from the statue's actual name (although I still can't understand why real names of artworks are often discouraged). Randy Kryn (talk) 02:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

(barnstar removed by recipient)

NGUYENPHUONGBIMH (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar appreciated. Alas, I must return it to the photon universe from whence it came, as I am not an administrator. It's a compliment to be recognized for something, so thank you very much. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Randy, A Request

Randy, it's been awhile since we've been in touch and even longer since I last helped edit Widipedia articles on the Civil Rights Movement. I've been devoting all my time to current political crises and building up the Civil Rights Movement Archive (formerly Civil Rights Movement Veterans) which we've now incorporated as a nonprofit.

I thought it appropriate and long-since overdue for a Wikipedia article about the CRMA -- particularly because we are cited as a reference source in a number of Wiki articles. I drafted an article, but it was rejected by the Wikipedia editors because of the conflict of interest policy against posting articles about your own organizations. Though I accept the validity of the policy in principle, I have to wonder about all the articles on 3rd-rate TV shows, obscure novelists, small businesses, and so on. I was wondering if you would be interested in posting an article on the CRMA? If so, I could provide you my draft which you could edit as you wish, or use as-is, or do an article from scratch.

In any case, thanks, and thanks too for all your work in preserving the Freedom Movement in Wikipedia pages.

Brucehartford (talk) 21:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

• Hello Brucehartford, just saw this and moved it here. Please post a link to the draft page here and on the talk page of the Wikiproject, I'll take a look at it for sure and probably others will. It's an important topic. I hope you and yours are well, and your projects enjoy smooth sailing. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Randy Kryn. 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.BunbunYU (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Dustin Hoffman

It has taken awhile, but I finally have an answer and a source for your Dustin Hoffman question: "Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman also visited the courtroom soon after Midnight Cowboy had opened. They deliberately sat in the back of the spectator section rather than out on the front benches where the guests who had been specially invited by the defendants, prosecutors, or the judge would sit. They didn't want to possibly distract the jurors in case they were recognized. In our brief conversations with them, they were reticent in their opinions about how they thought the trial was going or how it might end, but they were entranced by our efforts to resist the government in the courtroom." Weiner, Lee. (2020) Conspiracy To Riot, Belt Publishing, p. 83. Cheers! Beccaynr (talk) 04:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Beccaynr, thanks. I've been set to answer this but then I saw you editing the Chicago Seven page...and editing...and editing, and didn't want to interrupt that flow in the slightest. Thanks for your work there. So when I interviewed Dustin Hoffman for my college paper in the elevator and outside the courthouse Jon Voight may have been standing right there. Good to know, and not too observant of me as a journalist (I had seen Midnight Cowboy by that time as I asked Hoffman why both his major films ended with him sitting in the back of a bus, and he said it was coincidence) and nice to see that Lee Weiner published a recent book. Your dedication to the editing project and assuring that the correct information, written in a coherent and interesting way, defines Wikipedia's page on the subject. Thanks again. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Sweet baby bajeezis, A Very Poppy Christmas has landed!

To you and yours, and your lurkers and theirs, even to unbelievers of Poppyism and/or Christianity, the power of a newer freer Hulk compels all to walk with each other in perfect harmony! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

And a happy holiday season to you as well. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:41, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Direct, reliable sources needed for Days of the Year pages

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages now require direct reliable sources for additions. For details see the content guideline, the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide or the edit notice on any DOY page. Almost all new additions without a reliable source as a reference are now being reverted on-sight.

Please do not add new additions to these pages without direct sources as the burden to provide them is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages.

Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I'd added the 1972 Apollo 16 Moon landing to the April 21 article. This was the fifth manned mission of mankind's historic six Moon landings, and is the only Apollo Moon landing not listed by date. There seem to be hundreds of entries on the April 21 page, yet only 13 references. And "Almost all new additions..." doesn't mean "All new additions", and the change you point to is an essay. I'll add it back with sources later, but it seemed fine due to common sense and ignore all rules. Thanks for being diligent, and sources will be added, but there exist exceptions to everything and this one did seems to be a prime textbook example of WP:IAR. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done, worked out better, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:Places named for Christopher Columbus has been nominated for listification

Category:Places named for Christopher Columbus has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:36, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I copied our the contested speedy nomination under this nomination if you want to cut and paste anything from our earlier conversation. Thanks for your contributions! - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:38, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Diplomacy (1916 film)

I think you mixed up Sardou's plays, see edit I just made, let me know if I'm wrong! [1]. Cheers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

(have thanked, and thanks again, nice catch!) Randy Kryn (talk) 13:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

In recognition of your spaceflight-related activities

		The SPFLT Achievement Patch
		Thanks for working with Project Spaceflight! Neopeius (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Neopeius, thank you very much, and thanks for your fine work on Spaceflight before 1951 and other spaceflight pages. I consider myself lucky to edit, no matter how slight, such articles. In the flow of human history the fact that space exploration came so soon after the flights of the Wright Brothers, and then such a thing as Wikipedia showed up to chronicle the ongoing deeds (many in real time), reminds us that "it steam-engines when it's steam engine time". Thanks again. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

My pleasure! If you ever want to join me down in the bowels of the 1960s, I'd be happy to have the company. :) --Neopeius (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, although I have a different Wikipedia style. You did well asking for help at the Spaceflight project. Enjoy the '60s. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

False "proper name" claims

After a year of peace, I find it very disturbing that you are returning to a pattern of making patently false claims at WP:RMs that various expressions are proper names when they absolutely do not meet any definition of that term, much less one that we use on Wikipedia.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:54, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

This is about the game Snakes and Ladders, where page sources use upper case, search engine results show upper case and proper name board games, and others in the RM describe it as a proper name. Please continue the discussion there not here, and read up on civil discourse on Wikipedia and assuming good faith. Assuming good faith on your part, and upsetting you so much at Christmastime, I suggest making snow angels and giving them names. I call mine the Angel of the Presence, and provide it with ginger bread to make snow cookies for the neighborhood. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to follow up on this over here (said some of this elsewhere, but it should be said here too). I do apologize for the tone. I gave some additional thought to "any definition of", and re-reading various materials on this, to fact-check myself, realized that some of the philosophy approaches to proper names might actually consider this a proper name, in a clear enough context, though without any implications for capitalization (since the philosophy sense isn't orthographic). Your !vote, one other's in this vein in the same RM, and a related comment by a third editor at another page were what most immediately led to the WP:PNPN essay (though some of the threads indicating we needed such a page go back to the mid-2000s). I think it might help over the long haul. The frustrations so many have had (regardless which views they hold) in "is/isn't a proper name" discussions primarily appear to be the product of commingling linguistics and philosophy senses of proper name. It reminds me a bit of "is/isn't a secondary source" debates WP had early on, before writing its own definition, because the meaning of secondary source sharply conflicts in several fields. These arguments still pop up from time to time (especially when an editor is a lawyer or some one else used to a specialized definition of the term), but the arguments no longer drag out now that we have a page showing which definition is meaningful on WP and why (and the reasons to prefer secondary ones, in that sense, etc.).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for my barnstar. I really appreciate it! Fieryninja (talk) 13:10, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

You're very welcome Fieryninja, and thank you. Well deserved. In all these years nobody has written the article Dove, one of Picasso's two or three most important contributions to the cause of peace. Wikipedia and Picasso's legacy are the better for it. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Best wishes for the holidays

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Magi (Jan Mostaert) is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 12:11, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Beautiful sentiment and painting, thank you (those magi sure get around). And the best of years to you and yours. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Merry!

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Nice link, and thank you for the thought. I hope your Christmas is a joyous one. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Tis the Season

	Holiday Cheer!
	To Randy Kryn, best wishes to you and yours for a holiday season filled with light and a happy & healthy 2021. Ewulp (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Will take your best and kind wishes, and offer the same in return. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you!

Fieryninja (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Very cool. Thanks for the kind words, and back to you. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2021 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

A belated but heartfelt thank you Modernist, and love and kindness from you to you, appreciated. Saw the Tom Hanks film on Mr. Rogers this week, and anyone seeing that can't help but hike their kindness up a notch or two on automatic pilot. It's always good to see one of your new creations, or well thought out revision, emerge on a template or on my watchlist. Your overall contribution to human knowledge, in the world of art and otherwise, is one of Wikipedia's genuine treasures. Happiest for the coming year to you. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Walter Elmer Schofield, Across the River (1904), Carnegie Museum of Art.		Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous 2021.
		Thank you for your contributions toward making Wikipedia a better and more accurate place. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 14:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC) Oneupsmanship: This painting turned the friendly rivalry between Edward Redfield and Elmer Schofield into a feud. Schofield was a frequent houseguest at Redfield's farm, upstream from New Hope, Pennsylvania, and the two would go out painting together, competing to capture the better view. Redfield served on the jury for the 1904 Annual Exhibition of the Carnegie Institute; at which, despite Redfield's opposition, Across the River was awarded the Gold Medal and $1,500 prize. It was not until a 1963 interview that the 93-year-old Redfield revealed the painting as the cause of the 40-year feud between them. Schofield may have painted it in England, but a blindsided Redfield knew that it was a view of the Delaware River, from his own front yard!

Best wishes

	To Randy Kryn!
	Wishing you, your family and friends the most fabulous holiday season ever, filled with health, wealth and wisdom for 2021 and far beyond. Coldcreation (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Dang, no one leave me antique hotties.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Watercolours and oils

While not denying that watercolours can be significant works of art in their own right, museums and auction houses (Sotheby's, Christies's, etc.) tend to classify all works on paper (Drawings, watercolours, prints) in the one category separate from paintings on canvas or panel. Hochithecreator (talk) 13:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• For instance, here's the Van Gogh Museum with an Arles watercolour placed in their drawings section https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/collection/d0431V1962 Hochithecreator (talk) 13:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks Hochithecreator, have answered you at the discussion page (for my page lurker, my cousin down where I buy my Wikipedia supplies, this is about template placement for watercolor paintings, should they be listed as paintings or as a form of 'Other'). Happy New Year's to you. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Veiled Christ

After responding at the glossary, I explored your userspace a bit and... just wanted to express my appreciation for that link. "[H]ow'd he do that?" indeed; breathtaking. If I ever visit Naples, I know one place I need to visit. For some reason it makes me think of Giuseppe Arcimboldo work, so different, not sure why, something to do with catching the eye with the extremely startling and unusual.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Fuhghettaboutit, and it's nice to share such a masterpiece. Because of your note I checked the pages out and saw that the full-statue image wasn't on the Cappella Sansevero page and popped it on there. A nice collab result. It's be interesting to see the statue in person, and from all angles, sides, and lighting. That alchemist sure was some wonder-worker. Arcimboldo's work is captivating, like a modern-memist creating memes. The art world seems endless in terms of exploring and appreciations, glad that humans have the functional motivations and abilities to flow outward in stone and oils in such ways. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

p.s. found the image on the right at Commons, the file reads "1744 Corradini Christus im Leichentuch The Veiled Christ anagoria". Don't know what context this 1744 work has with the finished statue, and if it's a semi-accurate portrayal of the final work then the image on the page is missing the entire bottom (but the height compared with the people in the image seems to show it low the ground already). Interesting. Thanks for putting my attention on this. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

An accidental collaboration! The world would quite a boring place without geniuses like this (and, to betray a bias, birds, and their ). That image maybe should be added to Antonio Corradini, although, this one is already on display there. Apparently, per this source, Giuseppe Sanmartino and Corradini were both commissioned by Raimondo di Sangro to make works for his family chapel, Corradini was the first to make a Veiled Christ, made 36 of them, and Sanmartino's work was modeled on his.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, a very good source containing interesting and detailed information. Quite awhile ago I tried several times to make a locally-zooed cucaburra laugh, with no success. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you comment

Is it possible for you to check this problem out [2]?...Modernist (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kunsthistorisches Museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pieter Brueghel.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Apollo 11 Talk

Thanks for the laugh. Canterbury Tail talk 21:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for the kind words. Hope you are doing well. Jonathunder (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Revengeish

Thanks for the thanks - you're one of the editors that I always seek out to see their recent creations. You're such a witty writer. I'll be doing some more Fluxus and Yoko stuff soon! No Swan So Fine (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks No Swan So Fine. Your newest (Revenge dress) is a Princess Di page fit for a King. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

LandesEcho

Hi, the name of Landeszeitung der Deutschen in Böhmen, Mähren und Schlesien has been a while LandesEcho: landesecho.cz. Please, correct the name in the article. --2001:999:20:E969:5915:168C:5EAB:1105 (talk) 22:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. My edits on the page were to add italics and move External links, so I don't know about naming, and I don't usually click on websites I'm not familiar with. You can probably change it yourself actually. Wikipedia is yours as much as anyone's. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Are birds not dinosaurs?

Birds are not dinosaurs. This is a basic linguistic fact. You need to stop mis-categorizing fiction.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Please read, or at least glance at - it just takes a few seconds each - Wikipedia articles Bird, Dinosaur, Size of dinosaurs, etc., and then come back to this discussion. It's a wonderful thing to know, that birds are dinosaurs, so congratulations on finding out about it. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

No, you are just plain wrong, and need to stop trying to impose your irregular use of the language on others. When people say dinosaur they do not mean bird, plain and simple.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Did you glance at those pages? If you think, as you've stated across three pages, that birds aren't dinosaurs, don't take it up here (although I do enjoy this topic) but on all of those pages (at least read them for ten seconds each? thanks). Randy Kryn (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. I have shown multiple reliable sources that clearly show that the scientific consensus is that humans and dinosaurs never coexisted. You are twisting words to mean things they do not in fact mean.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

One of your two sources says the opposite, that birds are dinosaurs and separates dinosaurs between avian and non-avian, as Wikipedia does. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:21, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

A short, very basic presentation of this astonishing, to some, idea can be found at at this berkely.edu website "Dinosaurs are not extinct. Technically. Based on features of the skeleton, most people studying dinosaurs consider birds to be dinosaurs. This shocking realization makes even the smallest hummingbird a legitimate dinosaur. So rather than refer to "dinosaurs" and birds as discrete, separate groups, it is best to refer to the traditional, extinct animals as "non-avian dinosaurs" and birds as, well, birds, or "avian dinosaurs." It is incorrect to say that dinosaurs are extinct, because they have left living descendants in the form of cockatoos, cassowaries, and their pals — just like modern vertebrates are still vertebrates even though their Cambrian ancestors are long extinct." To argue otherwise does not conform with widely accepted evolutionary classifications. — Neonorange (Phil) 19:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that's an informative read. And good to "see" you again. Yes, the sources concerning birds as dinosaurs are plentiful. Sometimes hard to believe though, probably because the standard media portrayal of dinosaurs just about hard wired that image into the mental picture of the universe of many generations of children and adults. So takes awhile to wrap your head around the fact that the dinosaurs who survived into present day were the small percentage of the then-existing bird species - the big bad almost got them all. Since lots of them worked their way through "the extinction" to become one of the most successful and adaptable animals (they live territorially almost everywhere), this information clashes with the societal and media-created built-in image. I enjoy seeing avian-dinosaurs outside, but if I talk to someone I'll usually use the word 'bird', the common name of the surviving dinosaurs. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I started a thread at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Dinosaurs that garnered interesting comments. I also left this sign-up for the project: Anyone remember The World We Live In published in one volume illustrated in part with two, three panel gatefolds of a version of Zalinger's Yale Peabody Museum mural "The Age of Reptiles"? The book was published in 1955; I was eleven, and imprinted on Dinosaurs. I still have the book. I retired from electronic journalism and would like to contribute to this science-based project.

I hope you and yours are in good health, and that you've had your vaccinations. I'm in an HMO (Kaiser Permanente)—received my second Pfizer shot last week. Getting my took some work—I had to live 76 years!

The city of Atlanta is beginning to plant trees in Freedom Park (adjacent to John Lewis Freedom Parkway) in Lewis' honor, crape myrtle I think, from the description—to be an on-going project to fill the park.

Little known fact: the main material used to form wind-power generator blades is... balsa wood! According to the economist, 95% of balsa is produced in Ecuadorian indigenous areas. So... with renewable energy sources on the rise, demand for and consequently prices of balsa has tripled. Contractors move in and sign contracts with the local tribes to purchase trees and the hire locals to harvest the wood. And then... disappear with the logs, paying neither the wages or purchase price. Greed, graft, grim pandemics. — Neonorange (Phil) 06:39, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Was also a dinosaur fan as a youngster, had some beloved books, toys, and made a beaten path to the library to take out or read more books. Seeing the progress that films made and are making in dinosaur special effects is really interesting. Then to find out that dinosaurs are right outside the door, and have niched themselves into every area of the world, that's the joy I mention when writing about the topic here. Your balsa wood mention, something I didn't know, and quite sad for the balsa wood forests (if any are left). I met Lewis several times, and was lucky (or made my own luck) in being in the first row behind him and on his right as he told his Edmund Pettus Bridge story at the apex of the bridge on Selma's 40th anniversary march. Lewis was a brave soul who was himself lucky enough (and made his own luck) to align himself early with other brave souls. Balsa wood and wind power, I just knew balsa wood as model airplane and boat material. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

John Lewis

Hello again. I just made an edit to John Lewis. The fourth graph of the lede used a awkward construction 'stood for injustices against other groups' verbatim from the source! A clue to consider another source! I removed two additional items from that graf since the level of detail indicated possible use in the text body. But even then, some nuance is required—prose, say, rather that quotes. I was going to work on a rewrite, but thought—why stay up late when I can poke Randy. Or you can leave suggestions that honor a B level article. I really think that 'stood up for injustices against other groups' had to come down since it reads as unintended vandalism! I hope! Thanks — Neonorange (Phil) 03:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

another beta function crashes — Neonorange (Phil) 03:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

How the sentence reads at the moment seems too general and can just be taken out, doesn't really add specific information to the lead. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:53, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

American Revolutionary War: Problematic Content

Hello,

I noticed you recently undid my edits to American Revolutionary War in which I removed what is likely a good faith attempt to majorly add to the article. I have no objection to the images themselves, but the headers and the captions to the images are written in a rather un-encyclopedic nature, in clunky languages, making uncited claims that might border on being opinions, and which in one case (Lafayette), is entirely misleading (The Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen was a French Revolution document written six years after America's Revolution had concluded, meaning it was not a document Lafayette was fighting for at the time of the American Revolution). Honestly, the whole deal feels like an amaturely written gallery you'd find in a High School presentation, or perhaps a children's history textbook. If you wish to maintain the images as they are, I highly encourage you or any other interested party to re-write the descriptions to be of a more neutral, encyclopedic, and grammatically correct nature. If not altered soon, I probably will remove the portrait images in the side galleries again, until they are ready to be added back with more professionally written descriptions, which can be worked on in your sandbox if you wish.

Thank you for your interest in this article

AvRand (talk) 10:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Will take a look at some of the captions at some point soon. Maybe this section should be moved to the article talk page so that more editors will check the captions out too. Thanks for following up on the edits. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:24, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Disappointing

We are trying hard to resolve a complex question. I am disappointed that you chose to disrupt it. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

? I iVoted and then you moved my comment. Disruption is in the eye of the beholder (or Eric Holder). For my cousin who lurks, this is about the requested move of the name Crusades. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:06, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

There is no user who thinks that there shouldn’t be an article called Crusades. The question is what should be the scope of that article – just the Levantine Crusades, or every Christian Holy War? Depending on the answer, we then need an agreed name for the other topic (“Crusading” has consensus against it). Onceinawhile (talk) 18:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, and I iVoted for leaving 'Crusades' where it is, which you seem to think is disruptive. I didn't focus on an alternate name for the second, would be inclined to leave where it is as well. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Eakin's portrait of Henry Ossawa Tanner and Edward MacDowell

Greetings,

I have been tasked to ask around for some contacts pertaining to Henry Ossawa Tanner. My employer has an Eakin's painting of Tanner and MacDowell as a portrait study when they were his students. It is one of Eakin's earliest portraits and a fantastic viewing of Henry Ossawa Tanner. Please respond with any information you may have on any organizations that would be interested in such a piece.

argod@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.185.4.93 (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Knowing of none, I say hello and acknowledge that your are thorough in your job. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Sibling artists has been nominated for deletion

Category:Sibling artists has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 22:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Italicizing classical "titles"

Randy, I'd go a bit easy here - I'm not sure the Venus de Milo really should be italicized. It isn't a conscious "title" by the artist, arguably more of a name, like manuscripts have. Murky waters. Johnbod (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Johnbod. The discussion at the statues talk page has been open coming up on a couple months with only three editors commenting, and it was the subject of a notice at the visual arts Wikiproject talk page. Agree that statues from antiquity are mixed when it comes to italics, seems the most well-known statues have been italicized, with this one being one of the last of the "greats" not to be (the originator of the discussion has some examples of off-Wiki italicization). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Small typo

You might want to correct "emits" at Talk:Crazy, Stupid, Love. It seems clear that you meant "omits". I thought about correcting it myself, but I don't want to give an impression of changing what other people say. — BarrelProof (talk) 12:45, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

SOL (smiling out loud). Thanks for the catch BarrelProof, although I personally emit crazy, stupid, love. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Flight dates Ingenuity

Hi, I added the flight dates and saw afterwards that you reverted that entry of Chinakpradhan with the remark "hasn't occurred yet". That is IMHO clear by the attribute "planned". Schrauber5 (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Schrauber5. The height and distance measurements added were quite exact, as if they had already occurred (the two flights already taken are listed above the entry for the third, and give actual measurements and not scheduled or planned estimates), and this misled me into checking if I'd missed the third flight. "Planned" is way over on the right, and corrects the misconception if someone glances at it but only after already being told the exact vertical and horizontal movements. Seems best to follow the ongoing consistency of adding those after the flights and not before. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I still disagree. As far as I read the source this sequence is already or will be downloaded to the Rover. If only successful flights should be in the table the it should be divided and also the planned dates should not be in the same table. --Schrauber5 (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I would change the "distance moved" for the first flight to 0 m instead of N/A since that is the travelled lateral distance. Would that be o.k. for you? --Schrauber5 (talk) 14:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Sure, but this conversation should be taking place on the article's talk page so other active article editors could comment. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Query on Leonardo template

Is there a reason for this? I'm not following... Aza24 (talk) 17:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the star clusters were huge and annoying (at least on monobook), and using the ^ seems less obtrusive while still getting the point across. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Years in the JCPC page titles

Thanks for doing that! Ironic thing is that when I created those pages about ten years ago, those were the names that I used. Then another editor changed them to the "1900-10" format, saying that was required by MOS. I preferred the full years, but I'm not very familiar with the MOS so didn't make a fuss. The wheel turns... :) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 12:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, thank you for creating them, a much more important task. The wheel grinds on but those who created the wheel ride first (Confucius say). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

It was a joint project. Another editor did the amazing job of entering all that data, but did it all onto one page, which far exceeded recommended page lengths. I just broke them up into decades, and have been doing some curating from time to time, fixing OCR errors, etc. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedian-style modesty. Nice work, and an interesting topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

It is interesting. What's struck me as I work on it is how many of the cases were not major points of principle, developing the law, but just application of pretty standard areas of the law, particularly commercial law and debts. The role of an "apex court" has certainly changed since then. (And then there's the difficulty of explaining to American friends how a court in Britain could hear appeals from the Supreme Court of Canada...) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, interesting points. I've never done a full study of international law systems. Governments should bring back the pillory for all judicial systems, so everyone can go down to the public square and throw mud at the pillories. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I have a Problem in editing

Can you please guide how to add audio of ingenuity flying on Mars to Wikimedia or Wikipedia https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/participate/sounds/?playlist=mars&item=mars-helicopter-flying&type=mars Can you guide or upload this file yourself Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Chinakpradhan, wrong person to ask about something technical. Maybe my lurker (my cousin, where I buy my Wikipedia supplies) can help. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Please ask him Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

That was a joke, but I will ask one of Wikipedia's fine coding geniuses, Wbm1058, who can either do it with two hands tied behind Jimbo's back or would know someone who can. And seriously, thanks for wanting this uploaded, another important Mars first to come from the Mars2020 mission. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Chinakpradhan: See Help:Upload. I think it's OK to upload NASA files (US government files) to Wikimedia commons. There is a category for them: commons:Category:Audio files by the Perseverance rover.

The first step is to download the file to your own computer, then upload it to Wikimedia commons from your computer. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

i want to know the process of uploading on mobile edits, as i converted it into ogg file but it did not supported in commons, but thanks to tell the pc version and also i have uploaded it on wikipedia see this

Helicopter Flying on Mars

it was not possible for me without your tips. thanks a lot. Chinakpradhan (talk) 12:35, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Memorial Tournament honorees

Template:Memorial Tournament honorees has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. This is one of the major golf awards in terms of hall-of-fame type honors. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Lunar Gateway

Hi, I invite you to give your opinion for the change of Lunar Gateway for Gateway (lunar space station). Cordially. CRS-20 (talk) 05:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Randy!

I saw your first comment at Talk:1989 Tiananmen Square protests. You made a very good point v. Selma. I thought I would drop by and give you props. And ask what you thought about my !vote. Then realized I'd forgotten to hit [Publish] B^( I more or less with you—but came out for two articles—splitting the current into one mainly about the events leading up to the protests and the Tiananmen protests themselves, under the current name, the other about the government's reaction, under the name 1989 Chinese government reaction to Tiananmen protests. Once I recreate my initial !vote I will again drop in here. My reasoning is that to focus either on protest or on massacre in the same article gets into a political evaluation that really isn't part of Wikipedia's remit. And it plays into political views of the editors that are being attracted to the discussion (the account that requested the move has fewer than one hundred edits). Articles already exist covering segments of the events: People's Liberation Army at Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, Student and Government Dialogue during the 1989 Student Movement, April 27 demonstrations

, The Students' Hunger Strike of the 1989 Tiananmen Protests, ... (the current article length is nearly 50,000 words).

I've begun to get interested in working on documentaries again. During the pandemic I've collected enough gear to meet, and sometimes exceed, the quality of that I used for network TV news (at much less than the cost back in the day—much, much, less). Got any ideas? Or, rather, any ideas to eliminate from this currently target-rich environment. I've just come across a 45 minute doc on 16mm film that I haven't looked at for nearly fifty years. I no longer have the script, but it's possible to recreate if I digitize the work. — Neonorange (Phil) 17:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Will get back to you soon in a few hours on this, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Neonorange, food calls, so a fuller note at some point soon as I don't want to rush one, but you may want to comment on that RM now that editor "3 kids in a trenchcoat" (hmmmmmm) has made some clear points on the topic. Hopefully the proposed name change won't pass muster. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Documentaries are scarce or nonexistent on several major Civil Rights Movement figures, such as Bernard Lafayette, Fred Gray, and of course the over 50-year forgetting of James Bevel (an equal to Gandhi and King when it comes to contributions to 20th century societal changes and the use of nonviolence to achieve workable solutions). Do any of those, with extensive interviews with Lafayette and Gray, and you'll have advanced the accumulated record of the CRM considerably. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:36, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

(moved here)

Hi, Randy, and sorry if the formatting looks odd, i don't usually edit like this. Well, the chimp that was many years ago, now there is a real (and very long and good-looking article Chimpanzee article in Wikipedia, so I have to delete my stub immediately. But well, I might come around here. Bye. That's Calypso. I don't remember how to sign. ---

Thought that counts. You were the first to write a Chimpanzee page on Wikipedia, which is cool, and the chimp part of my DNA thanks you Calypso! Randy Kryn (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Postal system

this seems better but if we go down that path there are several articles more important within the postal system then FDCs. However adding them would likely overload the "Related" section which I think should be quite small. Surely something like cancellatons are a far more important part of the postal system, not mentioned as a component? Personally I'm for keeping these template succinct and focused. ww2censor (talk) 11:41, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ww2censor, thanks for the note. A few more additions for accuracy and close relationship to add completion to the topic seem fine, and cancellations does seem a necessary addition to 'Components' (please consider adding it, good find) rather than to stamp collecting. Cancellation does focus the topic, and is the last step just before mail delivery. Used to collect stamps as a young kid (and coins, and bottle tops, and for a stupid day or three calling cards - haven't thought about that one in awhile). Attended the Rosemont stamp show which apparently was quite the historic showing (has its own pedia page). Good times. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

p.s. Philatelic exhibition seems like it would belong too but, as you mentioned, not too many more. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually I've removed Postmark and instead of adding cancellation, I've inserted Postal marking which incorporates both types of marks and others too. It is more encompassing. It's a pity gave up on the philately as it is so much more that stamps. Rosemont still exists but I never attended during my 25 years living in the US; I went to lots of East coast shows. I've been concentrating on Postal history for the last 40 years because it's so much more than just sticky labels. My oldest item is from the 1590s out of Prague. If you look at this user page and this category, you will see my wide range of interests. ww2censor (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Ww2censor, bringing back some good memories. The 1986 Rosemont show was amazing for the well-known stamps that were there, wandered around for hours seeing everything I had read about in the hobby. Nice work, you've shared and given Wikipedia a great deal of material, and it still surprises me a bit that not more people entwined and personally encouraged by their interests aren't flocking to contribute to Wikipedia (thinking of art articles, the collection is already huge but there are so many art and art history students, museum curators, gallery owners and other art professionals who don't edit, or have never even thought of editing). Will read more of your pages and other topics in the hobby, and have done quite a few small edits on stamp pages from time to time. Stamps are pure artwork, and the overlap between designs for coins and stamps and other duplicated visual art topics could find further enhancement and connectivity on Wikipedia. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:02, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

YYYY-YY dates

Hello, I noticed your recent edit on List of Johnny Bravo episodes that modified the format of airdate years. You changed 1995–97 to 1995–1997 for example. Though you cited a WP page, you did not link it, and I have not easily found the policy you were referring to when you made that edit summary. If you could, please link it here for me. Thank you. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 00:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paper Luigi, thanks for asking. MOS:DATERANGE covers it, and actually prefers that, in general use, all years be written in full: "Although non-abbreviated years are generally preferred..."). Nobody's asked before, and I usually just write "per w. style" for brevity. Have only edited consecutive years a few times, and Wikipedia as a site would have a mountain range of them. Maybe a bot could pull it off, not technical enough to know. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:33, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

New Category:Ram Dass

This category needs to be properly inserted into the category tree by adding parent categories to it. Skyerise (talk) 12:22, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay. How about 1912 Olympic champions? (added a few, thanks for the reminder)Randy Kryn (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Thank you, although my editing Wikipedia remains a conspiracy theory (Russian bot status confirmed by Arctic bots). Viva Las WikiVegas 2022. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving articles

You are citing MOS:DATERANGE when you are moving the "year articles". But that MOS says two-digit ending years may be used with two consecutive years. Christian75 (talk) 17:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Christian75, welcome to my trailer down by the river. Here is the guideline for my pagewatcher cousin, where I get my Wikipedia supplies: "Although non-abbreviated years are generally preferred, two-digit ending years (1881–82, but never 1881–882 or 1881–2) may be used in any of the following cases: (1) two consecutive years; (2) infoboxes and tables where space is limited (using a single format consistently in any given table column); and (3) in certain topic areas if there is a very good reason, such as matching the established convention of reliable sources. For consistency, avoid abbreviated year ranges when they would be used alongside non-abbreviated ranges within an article (or related pages, if in titles)." Although I did get a revert on a sports page move, which was my fault, using the full year on conflict and war pages follows the "generally preferred" language as well as the consistency-with-related-titles, where most of the consecutive years were fully written out before these recent moves. Seems the preferred use of full years in previous conflict and war articles works as reasoning for picking up the full-yearing of them all. I've done 1100 to present so far, with many more already having full consecutive years than what I've added. So many wars and conflicts, and amazing that Wikipedia writers have written all of these pages (getting a concise look at how often humans fought over the centuries by wading through these categories, how many roads must a man walk down etc.). Randy Kryn (talk) 19:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Evening Randy, let me reiterate what @Christian75: said above. The MOS permits two-digit years as the second of a consecutive range. Please do not move articles that already use that convention, unless there is a clear consensus to do so or a clear lack of consistency with a much larger set of related pages. Moving from one variant permitted by the MOS to another variant permitted by the MOS is rarely encouraged, and can cause considerable annoyance. I've just noticed that you've altered quite a few of these in the past month, and it's going to be a pain to go through and put them all back. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 20:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Amakuru. No need to move any back, as the Mos mentions that "non-abbreviated years are generally preferred", then gets into two-digits that may be used (although not if similar titles use the full years, which they do) but does not mandate they be used. The ones I leave alone are sports years, which seem to have the two-digit formula, and I always edit the page links to link to the new titles (and have always left a redirect). Why you'd want to put them back is unclear, as they seem fine and, more importantly, in accordance with the preference stated in Mos especially when many other titles in the same subject area contain the full years (wars, conflicts, illnesses, etc.) Anywho, besides all of that, good to see you around and I hope you and yours are well and in the best of spirits. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Randy, yes myself and the family are fine, thank you for asking... it's vacation time in my household, and we've been enjoying a week or two away from home which has come to seem like a rare thing in this day and age of repeated lockdowns! Re the two-digit years, the wording is written as you say it is, but that does not in itself IMHO constitute a reason to make large-scale page moves. The two digit format is not deprecated in any way for consecutive years, and many people (myself included) consider this to be a much more concise and readable way to represent such ranges. MOS:STYLERET is actually fairly clear on this point: "When either of two styles are acceptable it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change". As noted, if the page in question is one of a series, and is the only one using two-digit years, which might be the case for some of the military cases you mention above, then fine. But the weather pages you moved today were entirely consistent in using two digits for the second year, so all I'd ask is that you refrain from mass moving those or similar examples of consecutive years going forward, as you have already indicated is the case for sports articles. Or else propose the change in an RM somewhere to get proper consensus for it. Anyway, all the best to you, and I hope that you and yours are having a pleasant summer.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:39, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:PGA Tour navigational boxes

I'm doing a reorganisation of the golf templates. Seems to me that Category:PGA Tour navigational boxes is illogical (we don't have anything similar for other tours), so I was intending to recategorise the articles in there and then get it deleted. Currently we have eg {{BMW PGA Championships}} in Category:Golf competitions navigational boxes but {{The Players Championship}} in Category:PGA Tour navigational boxes (which is under Category:Professional golf tours navigational boxes). All seems a bit odd to me. Nigej (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nigej. Seems like the BMW should just be shifted over to the PGA tour nav list, but since you have a structure in mind have a go at what your envisioning, and I'll revert my reversion on the Players template. Thanks for your work on the golf pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Apollo 6

Thanks for the thanks :-)

Famine in India template

I have already reverted the addition of the template. Per my edit summary, and per WP:BRD, please establish on the talk page of the various famine articles why such a rudimentary template is needed when there already is a timeline. Adding the timeline to the template is not a solution. I will not make this point again, but you need to revert your addition of the template and establish a consensus on the various talk pages for its addition. You may take it to WT:INDIA if you must. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

No, waste of time fighting page owners, so have (and be on) your way. The {{Famine in India}} template should of course be on every page it has links to, that's how templates work. And per template respect. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia for you folks. There are people with knowledge, who take the trouble to create and maintain (not to mention reliably source) articles for years. They have already created a Timeline of major famines in India during British rule long ago. In walks a drive-by and creates a rudimentary template, full of errors, and the easy subject of under-the-radar POV promotion, a template I could have made in a New York minute 12 years ago. In walks immediately after user:Randy Kryn polishing the rungs of this POV ladder and now attempting to quote an impressionistic chapter and verse to me, not to mention attempting to canvass his friends to render murky topics they haven't the foggiest about. Editors who make a living polishing the ladders frequently take this tack. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

This is getting fun. I did not create the template, but added it to the linked articles. Have canvassed nobody. Have no idea what you mean by POV ladder polishing (why would someone polish rungs on a ladder? Seems it would make them more slippery. Must ask my repair guy friend). Please consider heartfelt apologies for insults both rendered and future. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

p.s. to be serious, I like your user page, esp. the quotes section. Very nice vids (one has the cutest baby turkeys outside of tofurky thanksgiving, recommended viewing to my nonexistent canvasees). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, at least you have responded with humor. I noticed that my kindred spirit Slim Virgin of happy memory had in fact made a template on the Bengal famine of 1943, although hers was not rudimentary. So I won't bother with opposing the new template for now. Thanks for the nice compliments on my user page videos and quotes. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Randy Kryn, I have continued a discussion on the talk page of the template. Your view would be valued. LearnIndology (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. I seldom edit India pages, came across the template while looking at many famine articles and saw it wasn't distributed to its linked pages. Seems a well-edited and guarded field, thanks to editors like you. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Important information

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:59, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Please, help yourself

For page lurking editors (who I leave milk and cookies for), see the section above this to ascertain F&F's problem with template respect, poor soul (who can have some of the milk and cookies to soothe). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm drinking coffee, my usual strong-brewed Peet's French Roast, but I will help myself to the thought of chocolate chip cookies. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Apparently on this gif you have to be virtually nimble to virtually catch them first. Actually thank you for the banter, it allowed me to find the cookie gif and have added it to my user page. Not a coffee drinker myself, although for several stupid decades hydrated (more accurately, dehydrated) on Pepsi. Gave PepsiCo the boot awhile ago. Fun hanging with you, and yes, those vids on your user page are very nice, simple but deeply natural camerawork. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit-warring on Satchidananda Saraswati

Randy, if you were a novice editor you'd be getting a templated warning for this. Whatever the ins and outs of hatnoted infoboxes may be, it's not all right to break the 3RR rule. I've not reverted you for obvious reasons, but this is no way to behave. I think Satchidananda might roll over in his grave and say "chill, brother" or words to that general effect. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

The article's name was changed without discussion and should be changed back, the same infobox title has been used for a long time (I haven't checked the complete history but what I've looked at the name used is Swami Satchidananda). As for Swami Satch rolling around in his grave talking to me, he'd probably laugh and say "Hi Randy". And in this case, as in others, the name Swami Satchidananda isn't an honorific but a job title. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The finger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boston Braves.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thank you! But the real person to thank is Gildir! I may have started the List of Fictional Astronauts, but Gildir made it something to be proud of! --Roland 15:19, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! And thank you for your creation, you both deserve credit for a fine and interesting page. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

BLIT (short story)

Anyone who has concerns about the redirection has a few options. They can restore the article. If it is restored, they can take it to WP:AFD or just leave it. The redirect can be left in place. If it is left in place, they can take it to WP:RFD or just leave it. The only thing that can not be done is restore a WP:PROD. ~ GB fan 12:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the note (restored the redirected page). Randy Kryn (talk) 12:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Category:New Shepard astronauts

To start with, I thought that I had sent you a message about this two weeks ago when you reverted my edit and I am only now realizing that I failed to send it, so I apologize for the delay. Regarding articles like Wally Funk, the category "New Shepard astronauts" was added to it and others in recent weeks. However, the day of the Blue Origin NS-16, a change was made by the FAA to the requirements under the FAA ​Commercial Space Astronaut Wings program. (FAA Website link, PDF link) Commercial launch crewmembers must meet the new requirement under 5.c., "Demonstrated activities during flight that were essential to public safety, or contributed to human space flight safety." As mentioned in the Record of Awards, the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation’s website will list all awards for the FAA Commercial Space Astronaut Wings program, which currently does not show those of the NS-16 program to have earned it. This could be due to a delay in processing, though there were no pending applications as of July 23rd.

Additionally, the FAA seems to consider only Bezos as an official member of the NS-16 crew. "The other passengers who joined Bezos on New Shepard—18-year-old Oliver Daemen, Bezos' brother, Mark, and 'Mercury 13' aviator Wally Funk—also don't qualify as being members of the spacecraft's crew, since the FAA defines that as employees or contractor's associated with a company involved in the spacecraft's launch." Therfore, I believe that the category currently should not exist as none of them have officially been awarded by the FAA Commercial Space Astronaut Wings program. At present, I prefer Category:New Shepard passengers ‎for those who were on NS-16, though I am open to another suggestion. A similar category can also be created for those who flew on Virgin Galactic Unity 22. Additionally, I believe it is okay for them to be added to Category:People who have flown in suborbital spaceflight and to Category:People in the space industry or a sub-category. If they or another employee qualify as a Commercial astronaut, then it should be okay to have them added to either Category:Blue Origin astronauts, Category:New Shepard astronauts, or both, depending on the situation. --Super Goku V (talk) 15:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Super Goku V. Can you maybe move this to the Wally Funk talk page, where more editors can join in. In defense of astronaut status for Funk, she was trained as an astronaut and then followed the rules to become one. The goalposts shifted under her in one country as she flew above it, and elsewhere she would probably be considered an astronaut. By the way, she had as much to do with her flight as Yuri Gagarin had to do with his (except for being responsible for a manual ejection from the capsule). I think the deciding factor here would be her astronaut training in the 1960s, which she used to finally become an astronaut. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

2021 Lafayette bio book

Thanks very much for you edits here. I was looking for a Lafayette category and a template but was unable to find them. So, I also appreciate that you provided both as part of this series of edits. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

You are very welcome, and thanks for putting up an interesting page. Maybe the Vowell book can be added as a 'See also' and visa versa. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:13, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with that. Can you give me a link to the Vowell book article and I'll be glad to do both 'See also' sections.---Steve Quinn (talk) 01:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Lafayette in the Somewhat United States, which is a brief stub. Will add Lafayette's 1820s U.S. visits to that See also. I skimmed the book once but should give it a good read, have enjoyed Sarah Vowell's other books. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:46, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Comment

A walled garden needs a gateway, don't you think? Skyerise (talk) 12:40, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Seems to be proceeding productively. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

A pleasure working with you. Skyerise (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Likewise. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:44, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I see you outrank me on the Grandmaster scale. LOL! I've got the years, but not the edits. Nice to meet another dedicated editor. Skyerise (talk) 12:48, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Category:Sculptures of Neptune has been nominated for renaming

Category:Sculptures of Neptune has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. MClay1 (talk) 13:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Appreciation.

Hey Randy Kryn. Thank you for your recent messages on the ANI. They were eye-opening and helped me realise I was being too anti-collaborative and sectarian. ButterSlipper (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

You are very welcome, ButterSlipper. From just a quick look at your talk page it seems that asking for a topic ban from the pages where editors have questioned your edits and motives seems reasonable. Nobody can force an edit onto a page, so you win some and lose some. Your major mistake was jumping into Wikipedia at controversial topics as a new editor, without learning some of the basics. If you can say, yes, give me a couple topic bans, and then take your editing energy, which is considerable, and improve the pages of your favorite movie, or of somewhere you've been and enjoyed, you just may get out of ANI with almost all of your editing powers intact. Wikipedia's scope is vast, and to learn how to sail it well you maybe should navigate less choppy waters while getting used to the ship. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Have you read the Five pillars of Wikipedia? The fourth pillar, "Wikipedia's editors should treat each other with respect and civility" covers lots of what ANI editors seem concerned about. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I have read that stuff and I get the civility but I have not done a single personal attack. Yes I have used negative loaded language towards others' edits but I don't believe that qualifies as disrespect. Editors that have made such a long list of personally attacks deserve nothing but the bitter truth from me. Although if this complication sizzles over I will go on to less controversial, stale pages. ButterSlipper (talk) 01:38, 11 September 2021 (UTC)