User talk:Boleyn

User:Boleyn is the same editor as User:Boleyn2 and User:Boleyn3. I used to use the three log-ins to increase my watchlist, but they can now all fit on one.

This editor is a
**Master Editor**
and is entitled to display this Platinum
Editor Star.

		The Original Barnstar
		Just wanted to show my support for your tireless contributions to hndis-cleanup, for both you and your alter-ego. The recent criticism is completely unjustified, I have always found your edits to follow WP:MOSDAB scrupulously. Editorial differences will always occur but this should never have gone beyond the pages concerned or your talk page. Keep up the good work! Tassedethe (talk) 08:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For just being you day after day Happydude 69ya (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thanks for all your help at Wikipedia:Suggestions for name disambiguation! Those dab pages may Wikipedia more useful and accessible for everyone, and your work is appreciated. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We did it!

Thanks so much for your help finishing off the missing disambiguation links. You made it happen! – Quadell ^(talk) 14:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boleyn, you are a one-woman disambiguating machine! Thanks for your continuing remarkable effort. – Quadell ^(talk) 00:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Disambiguation Barnstar
		For all your hard work cleaning up disambiguation pages, and consistently tagging worthless pages for removal, I hereby award you this barnstar! Keep up the good work! --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Purple Star
		For being a great long-term contributor who had to deal with a really lousy block and all that unnecessary ANI drama. IronGargoyle (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For doing such a great job refining and standardizing disambiguation pages, especially ones I create! Jokestress (talk) 22:02, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Disambiguation Barnstar
	For your prolific work with creating dab pages and development. Keep up the great work! Henry would regret beheading you! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:55, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Dont logoff (talk) 22:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For all the disambig work, including the recently created Andy Nelson page. Lugnuts (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award

In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.0.87 (talk) 21:25, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's very knid of you. Boleyn (talk) 16:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 12:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate you taking the time to send this to me. Boleyn (talk) 12:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Though it's been said before, it bears repeating, thanks for your recent disambiguation work! Rosiestep (talk) 02:16, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Disambiguator's Barnstar
		The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators. There's hardly a dab page that I create where you don't show to improve things. Your diligence certainly deserves a barnstar. Schwede66* 08:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]*

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Happy 6th Wikibirthday! Congrats on all the success and thanks for all the good work! MahmoudHashemi (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for excellent work in a largely un-rewarded subject area. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Northern Antarctica submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

As a 6-year veteran editor with over a 150,000 edits, Boleyn has quietly been creating tons and tons of disambiguation pages. This is an important area of work, but it doesn't generally get much attention, so Boleyn is probably well overdue for a bit of recognition. After all, users who faithfully work to improve the encyclopedia — yet don't get very much of the limelight — are the people that this award was designed for.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

The Disambiguation Barnstar

Boleyn

Editor of the Week
for the week beginning May 18, 2014

A one-woman disambiguating machine! Makes dab pages useful and accessible.

Recognized for

Creating a plethora of disambiguation pages

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ```Buster Seven Talk 13:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:Northern Antarctica and User:Buster7. It is very, very much appreciated. Boleyn (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Great job! Wgolf (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Wgolf: Thank you! Very much appreciated. Boleyn (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice please...

Hello!

You are the disambiguation guru. It used to be piped links were discouraged on disambiguations pages. That made sense to me. Is that still what is recommended? HMS Toronto has several piped links. Should I unpipe them?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 20:13, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Geo Swan, I hope you're well. Yes, WP:PIPING is still discouraged, so that readers can see the real link and have less chance of ending up at a disambiguation page again by mistake, and can more easily go directly to the right page. On the page you mentioned, some of the links need a blue link on their line (WP:DDD). Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the advice. Geo Swan (talk) 18:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Disambiguation Barnstar
		Your tireless efforts to identify and eliminate useless WP:TWODABS pages are very much appreciated. Of course, even if they were not, they would still be bettering the encyclopedia - but they are, anyway. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BD2412, that's very much appreciated. Boleyn (talk) 18:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chandrasekhar

Hello Boleyn, I'm curious to know which templates you'd apply on Chandrasekhar. It's currently tagged as hndis, but I'm not sure that's quite right. I believe that one should only be used for people names with matching first and surnames. On this particular one however, the name is being used both as a first and as a surname. Rgds, --Midas02 (talk) 21:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Midas02. I've admended it to a surname and given name page, it doesn't seem to be for those sharing the same personal name. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For all the work you've been doing to help clean up the minor planet mess, you certainly deserve this barnstar. StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, StringTheory11, much appreciated! It will help keep me going to try to get through them all. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 08:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia genealogy project

Just wondering if you have any thoughts re: the idea of WMF hosting a genealogy project. If so, feel free to contribute to this discussion. And apologies if I have made this request before. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Happy New Year and best wishes for 2015. Quis separabit? 03:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Robert, Happy New Year to you too. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 14:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Life Saver Award

▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ █ ▋▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂I’m ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ █ ▋▌▋█ ▇▆▅▄▃▂ so ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ █ ▋▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ █ ▋▌▋█ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂ appreciative ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ ▋▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂ for. ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ ▋▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▄ ▃ ▂ any ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ █ ▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂ help▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▇ █ ▋▌▋ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ █ ▋▌▋ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂ you ▂ ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ ▋▌▋█ ▇ ▆ ▅ ▄ ▃ ▂▂ extend ▃ ▄ ▅ ▆ ▇ PennellWiki (talk) 13:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

This wiki-kitten is here to thank you for taking part in my survey.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - happy to help Piotrus. Sounds like you have an interesting job. Boleyn (talk) 08:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thanks for what you do around here. Your work is noticed and appreciated.

Rosiestep (talk) 00:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rock en el Universo

So I found this article of Rock en el Universo which I turned into a redirect as even the Spanish wiki page was deleted-though I'm starting to wonder if this page should be deleted instead! Wgolf (talk) 21:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think a WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT was the best call here, and redirects take up less space on Wikipedia than a deleted page plus can be helpful. There certainly are a lot of songs in CAT:NN! Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 10:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Robin Hood (2006 TV series) episodes

I know that you're also actively working on the backlog in Notability so I thought you might have some advice on how to deal with this-- I recently noticed that a bunch of articles for Robin Hood season 2 episodes were tagged for notability in November 2008-- see Sisterhood (Robin Hood) or The Booby and the Beast for example. After doing some searching, it's pretty clear that these articles don't meet WP:GNG, so as per WP:EPISODE, it would be most appropriate to have the episodes consolidated under one "List of Episodes", with the existing episode articles redirected appropriately. My question is really: should the List of Episodes first be broken into "List of Season (1, 2, 3)" episodes to accommodate the content added from merging? I would really appreciate any input on what to do about this! Thanks so much! Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 18:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think it would probably be most clear if they were broken down into series/seasons first, and then listed chronologically. I bet there's an amazing number of episode articles like these. Thanks for your had work, Boleyn (talk) 20:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saletova Osveta

Okay so I found this old page of Saletova Osveta which probably could just be redirected though I'm not sure to what (and dang those lyrics are disturbing!) I am thinking of putting a prod up, but am not sure. Wgolf (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I looked it over - disturbing indeed. I redirected it to the album as I couldn't see that it meets WP:NSONG or WP:GNG. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 10:39, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Asteroid AfD

Hello Boleyn,

I'd like to ask you to slow down the asteroid postings to AfD a bit so that we have time to do a proper job. If you could keep it to ten a day, that would be good. Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to comment on the asteroid AfDs as well, but I'd actually recommend all of the articles you plan on nominating in a WP:BUNDLE, just to make discussions of the articles less split and to stop the flooding of AfD. Pishcal — ♣ 18:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry, I realise there was a large number today and yes, I've paused since this morning and tried to comment on other AfDs to make sure it doesn't get overwhelmed. A similar lot were bundled (including many of the same articles I've listed individually) and nomination was withdrawn after a lot of objection to it, so I've avoided that. But point taken on not trying to overload AfD. Boleyn (talk) 20:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In case you weren't already aware I just wanted to let you know that you appear to be signing all of your AfD submissions twice. Just thought you might like to know. Pishcal — ♣ 16:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bundling is not a proper solution to the main-belt asteroid problem. The problem was created by bots creating articles about every known asteroid. -- Kheider (talk) 13:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Asteroid size does matter

2617 Jiangxi is more than 50km in diameter with light-curve studies. When it comes to asteroids, the two most important things are SIZE and ORBIT. Any main-belt asteroid more than 50km in diameter deserves an article. Asteroids 20+ meters in diameter with a better than 1:10000 chance of impacting Earth also deserve an article. It is lame to delete/re-direct 50km main-belt asteroids when Wikipedia still has numerous computer-generated stubs about main-belt asteroids that are much less than ~10km in diameter. Boleyn, please quit nominating asteroids more than 50km in diameter. You can check the JPL small-body database to see if a main-belt asteroid is more than 50km in diameter. -- Kheider (talk) 13:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is precisely nothing in WP:NASTRO that agrees with your comment there. The article in question had been tagged as being non-notable for three years, and it clearly fails GNG; as the guideline is written, it fails NASTRO as well. As far as I can tell, this definition of notability is one you made up yourself. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of the NASTRO authors. The guideline was written in part to prevent bots from creating 100,000+ articles about every known asteroid. NASTRO should NOT be used to recklessly re-direct better known main-belt asteroids. I am not even sure if Boleyn is actively involved in astronomy topics. NASTRO does not say anything useful about what would make a bot generated main-belt asteroid article notable. -- Kheider (talk) 14:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, you are making up your own standards for notability, when they aren't reflected anywhere in Wikipedia. Thanks for admitting that. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of Wikipedia's top asteroid experts and am well known in professional and amateur circles. I am working on NASTRO as we speak, because I am suspect some non astro-people are being reckless and trying to make a wp:point. NASTRO makes it clear that re-direct or keep are the only options. AFD is not cleanup. -- Kheider (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on being a well-known expert in this area. I am sure that is very helpful on Wikipedia. Good luck in your current project. I am confident that at AfD each individual asteroid which seems non-notable will be assessed fairly, in what is a controversial area with lots of differing opinions. Thank you for taking the time to cmment at the AfDs. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The AfD Barnstar
		For overwhelming AfD with nominations on non-notable astronomical objects. Esquivalience ^t 00:06, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Esquivalience. It'll take a while to get them all sorted, but we'll get it done. Boleyn (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just do not go too quick or you will harm the project. "Overwhelming" is certainly the correct term and one might even suggest you are taking advantage of NASTRO for your own personal CAT:NN project. -- Kheider (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then one would be unnecessarily and unfairly assuming bad faith :) Boleyn (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time will tell. I have dealt with Wikipedians that despise all asteroid stubs because bots went around auto-generating thousands of articles from roughly 2004 to 2008. -- Kheider (talk) 21:09, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have no interest in your past dealings with other editors, nor do I see how they have anything to do with me (nor can I see how anyone would have the energy to despise asteroid stubs - do they not have real things in their lives?) But you need to stop re-writing my comments as if they are still mine and writing character assassinations of me. Boleyn (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I re-wrote 2 of your AfDs because you were asking for numbered asteroid deletions when NASTRO makes it clear you should be asking for a re-directs when dealing with asteroids. As soon as you complained, I quit. Is is now you writing character assassinations of me. I will write it off to semantics. But supporters asking for a numbered asteroid to be deleted are not complying WP:NASTRO / WP:DWMP. -- Kheider (talk) 03:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect standardization

I've noticed a few "incomplete" redirects when scanning through the asteroids. I'd just like to (preemptively) say to fellow editors working on the same notability problem that when redirecting asteroids, please include {{R to list entry}}, and carry over the categories and {{Default sort}} from the article. I also recommend that you add a useful comment I've seen being used in these redirects (that I wish I had found sooner and put on many more redirects):

<!--
 Before reverting this redirect into an article, please
 check whether the content will satisfy the guidelines for
 astronomical object notability on WP:NASTRO. In particular,
 the object must have significant coverage from independent,
 reliable sources. Just because an object is listed in a
 database (like the JPL Small-Body Database) does not mean it
 is notable.
-->

for example, in 4718 Araki. Thanks very much for your diligence. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 17:30, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions, Tom. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 17:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I meant by the 4718 Araki example. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 19:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When adding {{R to list entry}} please make sure that you do not include the tl| part - that is, don't write {{tl|R to list entry}}, as this defeats the object, which is to put the page in Category:Redirects to list entries Also, {{tl|Default sort}} is pointless. I've had to fix up several, like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion please...

You are my go-to person for advice on disambiguation. Pages have no pipes, correct? Did I fix this correctly?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geo Swan, nice to hear from you. WP:DABPIPE gives the full guidelines, but in most cases, piping makes it harder for people to be clear where they are going to, and to know the page title for the future. Boleyn (talk) 20:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Geo Swan, just re-read this and realised I'd left out the key point - yes, the way you altered it was correct Boleyn (talk) 07:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the geodis template

Hello, I'd appreciate your opinion on this discussion which I've started. --Midas02 (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More possible dab pages

Here: Ben Marshall/Benjamin Marshall, Gary Sherrer, Dave Owen (which probably can go with David Owen) Wgolf (talk) 23:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Kheider_Adding_stuff_to_WP:Notability_.28astronomical_objects.29_to_point_to_at_AfD.The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Notability (astronomical objects). Thank you. ― Padenton|✉ 00:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SS George Chamberlain listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SS George Chamberlain. Since you had some involvement with the SS George Chamberlain redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Tavix | Talk 07:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uthai Thani

You've requested this page to be deleted. Will you be requesting all Thai football articles to be deleted? Might aswell haven't you? Druryfire (talk) 11:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment at WP:Articles for deletion/Uthai Thani F.C. on whether you think this article meets WP:CLUB or WP:GNG. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 12:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	For being one of the most civil and positive Wikipedians. Esquivalience ^t 00:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Esquivalience! Boleyn (talk) 06:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing brackets without removing links?

Hi,

I noticed this edit which removed the brackets around the link to a deleted page. I think I've seen that this is something you do frequently. When we're talking about a list such as this one, it seems pretty rare for one of the entries to have its page deleted but for its inclusion to remain appropriate (and indeed this entry was the only redlink and then the only blacklink on the page). For an article, I suppose it makes more sense, but I'm just not sure what removing a link accomplishes for the list. On the other hand, it makes it harder to find instances of that deleted page on Wikipedia because there's no longer a "what links here" record, which is what I use to find links to a deleted page.

It's not a really big deal, of course -- it just seems like there have been many times that I've removed a harder-to-find blacklink from a list that otherwise only contains bluelinks because someone delinked it without removing it. Thanks. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. I use Twinkle to remove all links to a page which has been proved non-notable, and I know sometimes that leaves a black link which would be better removed. Nonetheless, I have looked at it and assessed that it shouldn't have brackets, as per WP:REDLINK: Do not remove red links unless you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on the subject and the page has been deleted after a discussion or is very clearly prodded. Of course, what is non-notable might turn out to be WP:TOOSOON or the AfD to have got it wrong. If I've removed the link, it is because it is no longer linked anywhere on Wikipedia, but could still be found by using the search box. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this quick response. I'm not sure I understand, though. It sounds like you may be saying that because WP:REDLINK compels us not to link to deleted page and because it's not always appropriate to remove the text as well as the brackets, you remove only the brackets from all links because it's easier to semi-automate?

If that's not an accurate characterization, I hope you'll clarify, but if that's the case I hope you'll modify your approach. I think by Twinkle you mean AWB (but it's certainly possible there's part of Twinkle I haven't used), and if that's the case it should be easy to quickly see where the link is on the page and/or if it's a list article (and then skip those or remove the whole link).

The search bar can help, but isn't as reliable. Sometimes a link is piped, meaning the name of the page would no longer appear when delinked. "What lists here" makes things a lot easier. Redlinks are also treated differently in MediaWiki such that reports can be run on them, they stand out to editors as a different color, their CSS properties can be modified independently from other text, and so on. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]