Jump to content

User talk:Ritchie333

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mark.hendry (talk | contribs) at 14:14, 24 October 2017 (→‎Remo Recover Free Edition deletion: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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


Music for thought

I like the header

Chicago (Graham Nash song) We hope (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you want to me to listen to it, improve the article, or both? ;-) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:01, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever you please-it just seems quite pertinent as of late. ;) We hope (talk) 19:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I like the header. Posted to AN one more time. That exceeded my chosen limit of 2 comments per discussion (which would be kind of wise for anybody any discussion) already, so I can't be one to discuss that protection of a talk page - never a good idea if you ask me - should end. Not even talking TPA. Among grown-ups, to tell someone that I know better than he what is good for him, seems so - lacking a word. Kafkaesque. This made Wikipedia better. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was involved (but not involved) with Mick Jagger's GA review, but I didn't have anything to do with the DYK, and I'm certain that had TRM been around, he would have seen it, we would have pulled it, and it would never have got as far as the main page. And yes, you are right about Kränzle too. And in a discussion, if you're not agreeing on stuff it's a good idea to duck out after two shots at the conversation; I do that a lot. Saves disk space on weighty ANI threads. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I try to stay away from AN and ANI, period. Once, I requested talk page access to be restored, and got it. - I wasn't blocked ever (but with an IP range), so don't know exactly what I'd do if I found myself blocked. Probably not waste time appealing. Same for arb, - I felt like giving up my pride when I gave in and did, and would not do it again. Experience gained. - What do you think about Der Messias. (Different topic, same feeling). - Sitting in the sun on a boat and trying not to let any of that disturb my peace of mind. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
hope in red silk, feel free to copy, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd love to go and sit in the sun on a boat and try and not let any of this disturb my peace of mind, but pragmatic circumstances means I'll have to settle for a cup of coffee and a Mr Kipling apple pie instead. And listening to the derange warblings of the bonkers but loveable Thijs van Leer. I do remember you criticising somebody for leaving a barnstar like this once. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for having critizized. Yes, Hawkeye, I remember. We are on good terms again, and I asked for a cat to illustrate ignore ignore ignore. Waste of time to take any barnstar to heart, - see, I'm learning. Had another good day in Berlin, just - in the train back - checking the watchlist.
That AN close is the next thing one can only ignore. I really need a good icon for that. Let me see if I get the logic right: an arbitrator made a trout-worthy block, but protection of the talk page needs to be kept because she's an arbitrator. How can we prevent such a thing from happening again? Abolish arbcom seems the most promising solution. If you ask me: an arbitrator should NEVER block for arbitration enforcement, - those powers should be strictly divided. End of ignoring. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As for the admin barnstars: they bother me more by a member of the cabal of the outcasts. I updated that list for some other edits that I found are not compatible for members (by what they do) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
One of my favourite diffs is this : "Really, no one should cheer after a block in the first place. Doing so trivializes the most powerful tool in our toolbox and celebrates a power that should be handled with care." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:10, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agree fully. That would be a nice addition to some barnstars, instead of saying that I'm easily upset ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I also note this comment from Eric seems to be quite insightful. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, by the other notable victim of that kind of blocks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I made a redirect He was despised for the victims, DYK? Working today on its German equivalent, concert tomorrow! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Did I mention I got roped into a chorale church concert to sing bass on the "Hallelujah" chorus from Messiah a few months back. Talk about a fish out of water.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:37, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmmm ... nice
No ;) - The first time I sang that chorus was for a memorial service. The deceased, a tenor in a choir, had expressed the wish to have it there, I was asked to help out, and much needed, because those who had known him could barely sing. I struggled only with the English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dress rehearsal went well, concert later today, Halleluja! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Different style: the tandem of Vincent Peirani and Michael Wollny, pictured on my talk. Looking for links, I found Jazz in France leaving much to be desired. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well at least it name drops Quintette du Hot Club de France, though Django Reinhardt was Belgian. As is Philip Catherine. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More work: Klaus Huber died. I'd normally ask what needs to be done to make him appear on RD. Huber received the Nobel prize of music, studied Arabic music, set texts by activists from Isaiah to modern ones, ... but the article is rather silent. Help? No time today, naturally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
With some help, namely Martin and Francis, he is on RD the third day, with amazing statistics. - Different question for you GA expert: It never happened to me until today that an article was changed right after becoming GA. What do you think, you and watching experts? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, people don't notice that an article's been improved to GA, and only catch it when it's on the list. And because a GA is normally only two people's views, there's always room for more work. Same reason DYK can be used as a device to improve an article, in order to get more eyes on it to put in the improvements they think are needed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:02, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, blimey! I just realised the significance of those initials: ". ."!! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC) " ... ere I 'ad that Bog Scratch in the back of me lido cab the uvver week, an' all.[reply]

"deep, lasting disgust"

Re: discussions in other places, my "deep, lasting disgust" is for the gravedancing trolls who leave petty little barnstars and pour petrol on flames. Particularly true when TRM has done a damned sight more for this encyclopaedia than the peanut gallery trolls who spend more time on talk pages, thinking WP is a social media site, not a fecking encyclopaedia! - SchroCat (talk) 14:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) -Wot he said. — fortunavelut luna 14:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at Talk:A82 road/GA2 (and the previous failed GA and FA reviews) - who did the work (aside from me) to actually improve the article to the desired status? TRM of course! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:12, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Because - and this is unlike the contemptible gravedancing trolls active elsewhere - TRM knows that this is an encyclopaedia, not a social media site. Quite a few people forget that, unfortunately. - SchroCat (talk) 15:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Carpenters pix

"Say cheese!"

The author on these should be A&M records because they paid for the advertising special section. ;) We hope (talk) 17:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, dodgy copypasta again :-/ Still, things are taking shape, 11 {{fact}} tags to nail now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Holding out for a cheeseburger. :-D We hope (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some nice quotes here, even one from Karen herself re: her voice. We hope (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trying now to add some variety to the refs. If there's anything you don't agree with, please remove. This 1976 People Magazine article has more on their private sides. I added refs to The Carpenters article from it using <ref name=act> Probably have more to dig from the musty cyberstacks. ;) We hope (talk)
That's fine, many hands make light work and all that - I trust you not to cite the usual tabloid trash! Meanwhile, I am having a go at some multimedia. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We hope (and Cassianto, SchroCat, Dr. Blofeld, Sagaciousphil, and old Uncle Tom Cobbley and all) - I am done with the initial improvements here and have stuck the article up for peer review here Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I give FAC another go about once a year, and this seems like a suitable candidate :-) I do mean to comment on Aberfan's PR, but it seems everyone else has got there and said it all before me again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:34, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plummeting admin standards

Plummeting standards...
Please take care of the bungee cord as it could come in useful for the next ArbCom candidate. Thank you.

Is it me, or have half the admins gone for trolling lessons? There has never been a golden age, but I remember when admins used to decrease the heat, not stupidly raise it unnecessarily. It's a shame admining is a job for life - sadly idiocy like this won't lead to a striking off the list, but it really should do, even if temporarily. - SchroCat (talk) 08:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's a simple cause behind this, that I'm sure you'll appreciate. It's harder to write a good article (not to be confused with a good article) than it is to do basic and rudimentary admin activities. You can delete expired PRODs with your brain turned off and most AIV reports take about 5 seconds to evaluate. On the other hand, once you've exhausted all the topics you know about already, to write more articles you've got to read the sources, understand them, digest them and then use them to write the content. I don't know about you, but stuff like Charing Cross railway station took about a week from grabbing the sources to submitting to GA - and that was lightning quick. The trouble with "community desysopping" is that everyone's got their own ideas about who shouldn't be an admin, and I dare say there'd be a few queuing up to get rid of my bit by now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:12, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right Ritchie, the vast majority of administrative tasks are by far much easier than writing a well referenced article. Thank you for hatting a "discussion" I caused with a needless comment -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey man... I’m at the front of this queue if you don’t mind!! And it seems it’s lot longer than we expected. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC) ...."Threesie Isn't Working"... [reply]
Ahem... We're just "BUIL ING AN EN YCLO EDIA THA WO KS OR EVE YON".....cough, cough, splutter... Martinevans P45 (talk) 18:18 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Can I interrupt...? - SchroCat (talk) 19:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
lol Schro, ur such joker. innit. Martinevans G4S (talk) 19:46 4 October 2017 (UTC) p.s. Don Ritchleone333 he always say "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."

Ekaterina Gorokhova

You deleted the page Ekaterina Gorokhova not long ago per G11. The page has since been recreated by the same editor (who seems to be acknowledging to being a paid editor in edit summaries). Since I can't see the deleted version, I don't know how similar it is to the existing version, so can you have a look and see if the page again qualifies for speedy deletion? Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Deli nk: It's an exact match (or near enough to be non-obvious) of the version I deleted. If an article has never been to a full debate at AfD, you can just respeedy if the new version meets the criteria. In this case, it does, so I have re-deleted and salted. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to discussion about Per-user page blocking

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building User Page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Help on Article Deletion

Can you help me understand how to improve my article, which you closed/deleted? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rushika_Fernandopulle)

I thought I had compiled good, relevant sources, but it was deleted for not being notable enough. But when I read the guidelines, I feel like I followed them. What would make this article more acceptable? Zapfdingbats (talk) 02:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Zapfdingbats: Essentially, nobody thought there was enough information to be able to write a substantial and neutral article on this person. The detailed breakdown of why your sources were felt to be insufficient was dealt with adequately by Ravenswing in the AfD (in my view), but essentially, we need to see lots of dedicated pieces about someone in prominent and national media, such as newspapers and magazines. What "lots of" is open to interpretation, but essentially you shouldn't have to struggle to find the relevant source material. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a tough one, because I felt like Ravenswing cherry picked a few slight sources and ignored some of the bigger ones that justified the entry. A profile in the Financial Times and articles in the New Yorker and Atlantic seemed pretty substantial to me. Certainly as much as or more so than any other health care CEO in the category. Do you think there's opportunity here to improve and try again? If so, any tips would be appreciated. I'm still learning the platform. Zapfdingbats (talk) 22:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looking back at the AfD, I addressed all the cites that were in the article. The FT article you cite later on in the discussion's behind a pay wall, but the Atlantic article you claim here as being "pretty substantial" isn't. It is, indeed, a pretty substantial article ... but it's not about the subject. Everything that article tells us about the subject is contained in this one sentence: ""Medical care is dangerous," says Dr. Rushika Fernandopulle, the co-founder and CEO of Iora Health, a leading practitioner of a more holistic approach to health." It is a longstanding and explicit element of BIO/GNG that a source consisting solely of quotes from the subject cannot be used to bolster the notability of the subject, but beyond that, a source bolstering notability needs to provide "significant coverage" TO the subject. Fernandopulle is mentioned in six paragraphs of that article, none of which tells us anything about him other than that one sentence given above. What they consist of is him telling anecdotes about patients, about this particular health care situation, and about his company. It's one of a piece with the other sources. I'm not saying you didn't include several in-depth citations from reputable, reliable sources. I'm just saying, as I did in August, that they're not ones that meet the GNG when it comes to Fernandopulle. Every other editor who put in his or her two cents' worth agreed. Ravenswing 22:16, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a threat?

Hi Ritchie. Bit concerned about a post on RolandR's Talkpage here. It sounds threatening. Didn't know whether to delete it or leave it if deletion would piss RR off, but in any case I thought I would inform you. Don't know what you think on the tone. Simon. Irondome (talk) 13:48, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody's been trolling RolandR for years and years. Blocked, reverted. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:56, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nice one Irondome (talk) 13:58, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your concern, and for deleting this. However, it is unlikely to be the Runtshit vandal, since the person many of us believe to be behind that account died earlier this year. Feel free to delete any future such stuff that you see on my talk page.RolandR (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever it is, it's the same behaviour as this account from a few weeks ago, so as far as I'm concerned it's quacking through the Grateful Dead's multi-channel PA system. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...who'll be in the Mouth of the Beast...? ;) — fortunavelut luna 18:55, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Ritchie, thanks for info on formatting sources - I didn't know how to do it. For the 'unknown' streets I am hoping that the Gillian Bebberton book will help with some of these. I doubt that they are really 'unknown', it's just finding their etymologies would take a lot more intensive research using local history books etc. which I don't have the time for atm. Hopefully someone with better local knowledge will be able to fill in some of these blanks. Thanks again Sdrawkcab (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)sdrawkcab[reply]

@Sdrawkcab: Well, I started Cranbourn Street yesterday and it is a piddly little stub at the moment awaiting expansion. Also, I can't recommend the London Encyclopedia enough, it's a 1000+ pages of rich information (and that's over a thousand densely-packed pages too!) that if London streets are your topic of interest, will be an absolute treasure trove. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:52, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! I'll have to check that out :) User:sdrawkcab
discogs.com has got lots of them, and https://rarerecordcollector.net/ is brilliant for late 60s / early 70s rock. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:32, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eagle Express

Hello there, Ritchie333. Please note tha the creator of the article is persistently removing the deletion tags from the articles they created [1] [2]. I've renominated the article for deletion.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:14, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jetstreamer: You've actually restored a proposed deletion (PROD) tag; since those are only for uncontroversial deletions, you can't restore it. You need to raise a full debate at WP:AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:17, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks for the heads up. I will wait a while to see the outcome of this [3] and then will move on to the AfD process.--Jetstreamer Talk 22:20, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFA clerked

Hello Ritchie333, part of your response on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Headbomb 4 has been moved from Question 8 to the talk page. Your response was stating an opinion on the entire RfA, while this may have been in line with an Oppose statement, or in the general discussion area, placing it in the questions section gives it undue weight to others reading the RFA. — xaosflux Talk 02:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you wish to withdraw your support, or even your nomination statement you are welcome to, with strike-though marking (withdrawing your nomination support will not stop the RfA). — xaosflux Talk 02:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - you intervened on this article but the portuguese version likewise has no sources beyond the authors own. Highly questionable inclusion. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Contaldo80: All I did was remove the {{db-person}} tag, which just means I didn't want to unilaterally delete it without getting a full consensus at WP:AfD. I'd suggest filing a discussion there. User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 has more info. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thank you. Have now followed up as you suggest. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 14:45, 10 October 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Marvellous Spider-Man 14:45, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marvellous Spider-Man: I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. If you're suggesting I nominate that editor for RfA, the first thing I looked at was a WP:CSD#G12 notification from six months ago, that was upheld and deleted. That's an instant "no". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Query about GA review

Hi. I started reviewing India national football team (at Talk:India national football team/GA1 on 2 September 2017. Initially the nominator did not respond to the comments (even though he was active) I wrote. First, I pinged him on the review page which he replied. Then I gave a reminder at his talk page. Even though the nominator responded to some of the concerns raised, he has again ignored the review even though he is active (evident from his contributions page). I just want to know provided that the review is open for such a long time and the nominator seems to be ignoring it, would it be correct for me to close the review? RRD (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Royroydeb: Essentially, it is the nominator's responsibility to do the work required to make the article meet the GA guidelines, and while it's great if the reviewer pitches in and helps, if you think the article is nowhere close and the required work is not being done, and you're well over the 7 day limit, I would simply close it with no prejudice against a renomination in the future. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carpenters

In all the kerfuffle there, I became third highest contributor (in terms of edits) to that page, so I demand at least two barnstars, one for the typically awesome review and one for the copyedits. I even fixed a few piped redirects (but don’t tell anyone!!) My mum used to sing “On Top of the World” to me when we drove home from school when I was about six, so it was a pleasure to help (assuming I did, of course). The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been very helpful indeed; I will get to the remainder of the issues over the next day or so. Unfortunately, I have been suffering from a bad overdose of RfA-fatigue this week, which means my motivation to do what we're all supposed to be here for has taken a bit of a nose-dive. This is not good. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno. Might keep you quiet for ten minutes fortunavelut luna 16:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bad revision

Hi.
In my mobile browser there was an open tab. It must have been there since a lot of days. The diff must belong either to a deleted page, or to a rev-del. special:diff/801864615
The contents arent necessary, but would you kindly tell me the name of the page? The curiosity has been bugging me. Best, —usernamekiran(talk) 17:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page was Vicky Kadian and the diff was you putting a {{db-person}} tag on it, which was obviously upheld and carried out. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It is appreciated a lot. Actually, that might be the reason why the tab was left open. Socks had kept on removing the templates. A sys-op (I think Alex Shih) deleted the article when he saw the SPI. Thanks again. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to this diff, and conversation; two more socks have been spotted lol. See you around.
usernamekiran(talk) 20:07, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've just worked out why I can't find any matching socks when I get dressed in the morning, half of them have ended up on WP :-/ Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:09, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason-

I'm beginning to feel ed re: the 2 Carpenters articles-what about you? We hope (talk) 21:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Wikipedia way - everyone's nice as pie working on articles, then a bunch of people turn up doing silly reverts and everyone starts going loopy. Are people just following The Rambling Man about and trying to get him into trouble? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:42, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Still have the feeling. ;) We hope (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A puzzle from a vandal

Do you know someone who would be interested in figuring this out? I'm a bit stumped as to how to find the offending pages and edits. --Slashme (talk) 22:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a clue (plus there's alway the possibility they're just lying). WP:AN is probably the best place to go in the first instance. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Slashme: (talk page stalker) I had a look through Category:15th-century Russian people, but only two of the articles had any mention of "Cardinal", and they were of notable people. Looks like I'm back to square one... Adam9007 (talk) 23:12, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find the edits. I've posted a thread at AN as there will apparently be more such hoaxes soon. Adam9007 (talk) 00:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for checking! I've also done a PetScan or two now that I know about the tool, and I've posted the results at that page. I'm also slightly skeptical, but I'll see the investigation through as well as I can.. --Slashme (talk) 08:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Comic Con Baltics wiki entry

Hello sir,

may I inquire why you deemed the information on the page not relevant, by that standard you can delete most of pages about different Comic Con events happening around the globe.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovaras (talkcontribs)

@Jovaras: Pages are generally deleted when they are left in a state where no independent editor can improve them to an acceptable quality; in this case, the problem is talking about an event in the future. While some future events can be immediately important to an encyclopedia, such as the next Olympics or World Cup, most others are not. In the meantime, I've restored the article to User:Jovaras/Comic Con Baltics so you can retrieve the content. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovaras (talkcontribs)

Happy Friday 13th, Thirteensie. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's spooky in here, watch out for Android trying to hack your phone. KGirl (Wanna chat?) 22:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How very app-ropriate. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Or should I say it's Apple-roprite :P KGirl (Wanna chat?) 22:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean that Steve is not right behind you. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:00, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Megyn Kelly is behind you who has the iPhone X while she thinks Android is the worst. lol 😂 (personally, I love to sneak in my phone during the the night to edit WP. But I don't have a phone yet. -__-) KGirl (Wanna chat?) 00:29, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks, I had noticed Megyn. But I was too embarrassed to say anything. Personally, I think Yardley is a lovely name. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A blues?

Incoming dumb question: is it grammatically correct to call a song "a blues"? The context is in a GA review (my first!) for "Red House": "...it is a slow blues with lyrics..." and "'Red House' is a moderately slow blues...".TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:55, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGracefulSlick: I think so. In the first Back to the Future film, just before playing Johnny B Goode, Marty says to the band, “Okay guys, this is a blues riff in B, watch me for the changes and try and keep up.” Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:14, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Looks fine to me, as it does to Ernie. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:17, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Basshunter

Hello. I think sources from deleted content were okay. Is The Sun problematic? Eurohunter (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Google for “stick it up your Junta” and “justice for the 96”, or see the many threads on the reliable sources noticeboard. The Sun is a sensationalist tabloid trash paper that is in complete violation of WP:BLPSOURCES. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There were also other sources. What about them? Eurohunter (talk) 21:39, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The very small Barnstar
For calling Kernow by it's proper name without being prompted, or it having mentioned just before on the same page. Sensitivity to all peoples is a great thing, so here is a very small barnstar made of Cornish tin to show gratitude. Dysklyver 19:57, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yma encyclopedia rydh nowydh hag yw as tasty as ("Jimbo - the Cornish for encylopedia") Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:02, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Richie, Please reconsider Joel Levine

Hi Richie, I check my Wiki page every once in a while. I did not create it. I don't know how to create a Wiki entry but did appreciate the page. I am not using this as a web host. I'm using GoDaddy and here's my website link: http://www.joellevineesq.com/ Please take a look.

Perhaps I don't qualify but I'd like to point out that the Section 351 Roll up was the first of it's kind and changed the way billions of dollars were invested in real estate. The company was sold to Sam Zell, one of he richest men in America and extremely well known. I've won multiple awards as you can see and my peers have chosen me as best or one of the best mediators and arbitrators. Actors in the 12 movies I produced include Colin Firth, Billy Zane, Eric Roberts, Joanna Cassidy, Beverly D'Angelo and others. My tv show, shot in Africa featured Eddie Albert, Janet Leigh and Steve Kanaly. Please see IMDB. My company, Gibraltar was one of the most successful independents in the early video years and our movies won many awards. My partners wrote and produced Valley Girl and several of our movies. I've had a unique and successful life (I call it the "Miracle of Plan B") in 4 different fields. My first book "Getting In" was a successful Random House publication and used by many college applicants in its day.

In 2003 Harvard Law School invited me to speak to the student body about law, business and the future.

Please reconsider allowing the Joel Levine Wiki entry to remain. If you'd like to contact me directly, my email is (Redacted)

Thank you for your time. 184.164.161.42 (talk) 21:34, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimately, the deletion debate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Levine was sparsely attended, with only two people suggesting to delete the article. I would consider that a soft delete, meaning an article can be restored on request. So I have restored it. Somebody needs to clean up the article, unfortunately I don't know very much about this sort of subject at all, so I'm not really sure I can personally be much more help. It may be at risk of being sent back to a deletion debate again. Pinging @Edwardx: and @Bearian: who participated in the AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like someone has done a clean-up, and what remains is an obvious candidate for deletion. An executive producer is just one of many people responsible for financing a film, and they are rarely notable simply for such EP credits. If it is not improved soon or moved back to Draft, there will likely be another AfD discussion. Edwardx (talk) 09:33, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The subject still fails both my standards for lawyers and for producers. I have been a lawyer for 25 years, and my domestic partner has produced a film that was in the Cannes Film Festival, yet neither of us are notable. Bearian (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Who ‎ →‎1978–1983

I'm surprised by the replacement of my Phil Collins quote by a "better source". I would have thought Phil Collins was a pretty good source on the activities of Phil Collins, especially as the replacement text suggests that Genesis were on hiatus (they'd played at Knebworth a couple of months before) and that his marriage had failed (it was in trouble, but his divorce was still two years away). BrunoMacDonald (talk) 08:08, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was more that I wanted to move away from direct quotations to a source that summarised the events. Bowler & Dray's biography is rather old, but it was officially authorised and covered the events between And Then There Were Three to Duke in detail, including Collins' marriage breaking up and going into complete workaholic mode. He frequently visited the Marquee club in his teens, so it's perfectly believable he would have seen the Who in their early days there and jumped at the chance to join them. On the other hand, he wouldn't have turned into a prolific songwriter (he didn't write much with Genesis up to that point) in the Who and we might never have got "In The Air Tonight" which we'd all have been the worse for. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For General Goodeggery

The Original Barnstar
After a short read of your user page, I was inspired to say Thanks. So: Thanks. Carrite (talk) 12:29, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Carrite: I'd say exactly the same about your page; the comment about IPs being treated like crap is spot on, and the note about GA being non-compulsory is also fair comment. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:19, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link to Plain and simple guide to A7, I will use this in the future! Thsmi002 (talk) 12:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thsmi002: You're welcome; a quick news search brings up lots of hits so it definitely doesn't qualify as an A7. if you've got any other questions, SoWhy's another admin to ask about speedies, including User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:02, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advice!

Hello there, Ritchie! Dileep Kandula was recently deleted, but the author has created the same page again with the very same bit of information. More problematic seems the probability of the author to be the very same person whose article is being written. It may constitute WP:COI! Any clue on what should be done? Thanks a lot, and have a wonderful rest of the day! Adityavagarwal (talk) 13:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Adityavagarwal: Observations on Wikipedia behaviour #28 : "Any new article with exactly the same name as its creator can almost always be immediately deleted as CSD A7" and that seems to be the case here. Nobody has tagged the recreated article yet, so I have put {{db-person}} on it; if that is deleted, the deleting admin should salt it (ie: protect against recreation). If the creator tries to circumvent this by creating under a different name, we can think about a block then. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a ton, Ritchie! That was really helpful. I wonder how you get all those hidden links. :P Adityavagarwal (talk) 14:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
....and the article has now been respeedied, so I have salted it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:23, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That seemed a really speedy action. :P Adityavagarwal (talk) 14:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is that the Hohner Cembalet that Greenfield plays or just an over-amped electric piano? Can't seem to find any good source that ties it down. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk)

Looking at this picture, the rig appears to be a Hammond L-100 (or possibly a T?), a Hohner Pianet (as used by Genesis up to Foxtrot) and a Minimoog. The middle keyboard is too small to be an electric piano. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was just going off the personnel credits at the album article (which does indeed say Hammond L-100) Maybe it's the minimoog then? It's a distinctive part of that song with it's very metallic sound. The TopPop clip suggests it's the Cembalet?Martinevans123 (talk) 08:56, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That clip's miming (kind of obvious really) so I wouldn't pay any attention to it - listening to the audio, it sounds like a Minimoog on square oscillators with a Hammond sans Leslie underneath. The actual sleeve for No More Heroes just credits Greenfield with "keyboards, vocals" though, so how the article knows is .... a matter for the community. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Miming?? On Top of the Pops!? I'll have none of that, thank you. But thanks for your expertise. Looks like the album article needs some attention. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, TopPop, Dutch TV show - probably done while they were out on tour there. At one point, Jet Black plays the drums facing the wrong way, so at least they're not trying to mime convincingly. There is a genuinely live Rock Goes to College (?) Stranglers performance when the group stormed out mid-set because they wanted anyone to attend the gig, not just students. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, tarnation! That's my theory blown to smithereens, then! Yes, that's not the most convincing drumming in the world, is it. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

😑 ugh

I'm at the All American Quarter Horse Congress in Columbus, OH and just tried to edit from my iPAD but got the message that I cannot edit from 2600:387:0:805:0:0:0:0/64 as it was blocked by Ks0stm. Whaaaa!! I'm bycatch! HELP? Atsme📞📧 16:49, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How did you manage to send me this message? You can't have done if you were hit by an autoblock. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
From my clunky tiny hard to see cell phone. Atsme📞📧 16:58, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Jealous. Wish I could find the time to go to the Congress.... Instead I'm at home getting ready to go get hay bales and struggling through some QH bloodline research... Ealdgyth - Talk 16:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well poopers, Ealdgyth - we could've found lots of fun stuff to do - I'm hoping to get some picts for Project Equine while I'm here so let me know if there's anything you need. Atsme📞📧 17:09, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Ks0stm blocked the IP for a month for sockpuppetry as logged here, and it's a hard block which stops editing by all users on that IP, full stop. I'm a bit wet behind the ears with IPv6 rangeblocks and can never remember how wide a range actually is in realistic terms, but you've been hit by collateral damage. As it's a check user block, there are private IP and personal data issues that mean I can't really tell you much more about the block other than I'm sure you've got nothing to do with it. There are a couple of possibilities, which are as follows :
  • Have a short wikibreak and do something else
  • Reduce the block to a soft block but leave account creation disabled on the block - this will allow you to edit but not allow any disruptive editors to create socks
  • Get IP Block Exemption (follow that link to see how) that will allow you to override hard blocks on IPs
  • Ask Ks0stm nicely to drop the block on the assumption that there's only over a week left and whoever the block was intended for is long gone.
Because it's a checkuser block, I can't simply undo it as I don't have access to the private data that explains the rationale behind it. I got hit by a similar block once in my local library that was set for two years, where multiple people share the same IP, and are only allowed one hour at a time on the terminals, so I was rather brassed off about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:12, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Ritchie...I posted the template at the bottom of my TP. Ks0stm is busy these days so other than the pings, I didn't disturb him. I also just discovered that I can use my iPhone as a personal hotspot - just hope my unlimited plan covers such use and I won't be surprised with a $1,000 bill for overages when I get back home. (~_~). While I do enjoy watching AQHA performance events, it can become repetitious - like watching paint dry - so editing WP is actually my break. Who'd a thunk it? Atsme📞📧 18:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah I gotta run and can't do much more than to say, follow the link to the exemption. I don't know what the block was for, but I imagine there was a really good reason to make it a hard one. Drmies (talk) 18:19, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Atsme: I might get my wrists slapped for this, but I've just gone ahead and given you IPBE for 2 weeks (the hardblock expires in 8 days anyway). The normal process for requesting IPBE takes a lot of time, and it just seems unneeded in this case. I assume you're not a master puppeteer who has managed to trick us all for 7 years. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Flo! I don’t know what you’ll get from others but you’ll get a big hug from me. Trying to edit on this iPhone is dangerous to the project. When I get back to the horse trailer I will be able to edit using a real keyboard and a screen I can actually see! As for master puppeter, does being a Mouseketeer count? If so, I will remove the hat for 2 wks just for you! Atsme📞📧 19:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Floq. Drmies (talk) 21:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rogue admin Floq strikes again - cheers :-) I didn't realise "normal" admins could set IPBE, I thought only checkusers could do it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ritchie, both words, "normal admins", should be in quotes - it's an oxymoron.[FBDB] But I mean that in a nice way...exceptional \S/ cannot be normal. That's my story & I'm sticking to it. Thanks again...Atsme📞📧 12:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and credible claims of significance

Hi. I'm curious about your removal of the A7 tag on Mark Capri on the grounds of "sources". Is there a guideline that having sources is automatically a credible claim of significance, regardless of what the sources are? I'm not confusing significance with notability here. At best, sources may convey notability, the existence of which generally overrides the defect of a absence of a CCS and, instead, calls for expanding the article to indicate the nature of the person's notability. But the source given here don't do that. Two of them merely document that Capri's parents are dead, and one confirms his lack of any attention-worthy role in any production. Turning away from the sources back to the article itself, the strongest claim it makes for this person is that he had a role that, as expressly stated, was not significant. Largoplazo (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Well; I supposed it to have been a reference to the fact that "the [A7] criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source." Whereas the claim of significance made (e,g., appearing in best Star Wars film ever) is then supported by the sources provided? — fortunavelut luna 12:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 - essentially, forget about subjective terms like "significance" and "notability" which mean different things depending on who you're talking to, and focus on what possible future the article has in mainspace with the entire editing community available to look at it. In this case, the name does sound at the very least like a plausible candidate to redirect to The Empire Strikes Back, as FIM says - so a full discussion is better. Regarding sources, years of experience have shown me that if an article has some that are not the blatant self-published fodder (ie: YouTube, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram and the ilk), the chances are there will be more available to look at. For example, This review in the New York Times seems to suggest it's talking about the same Marc Capri. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:21, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A User:Pricedelink, seems to have moved List_of_artifacts_in_Philippine_history back to its old (see here) page without explanation, in defiance of the consensus to userify the page. I've tried to undo this, but I discovered it wasn't so easy to do so. May I refer the issue to you? Also, based on this action, my instincts tell me to suspect Pricedelink of sockpuppetry. I wonder if you feel my suspicions are worth following up? Thanks for any action/Input on this matter. - Alternativity (talk) 15:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Ritchie333, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe needs a mentor

This editor crossed my radar due to a prod tag. Only a month-old account but a lot of deletion tagging. Might want to mentor a bit and encourage him or her to slow down a bit until they understand the place a bit better. Montanabw(talk) 06:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've closed one AfD they started as a snow keep, but other than that, they don't appear to be editing enough to require any sort of action right now. They seem to be spending most of their time compiling entries for List of people who died on the toilet, of all things. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I noticed that too. And yet they nominate other articles for deletion? Montanabw(talk) 08:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tongue images

Hi. Re this edit, can you please help me to find another place in that article to put that tongue image, not so close to the other tongue image?   — Jeff G. ツ 18:37, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Thick as a Brick

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thick as a Brick you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:00, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lua:Error listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lua:Error. Since you had some involvement with the Lua:Error redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 (talk) 12:58, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion

Ritchie, I look at images marked for "cleanup", which led me to Manuel Granada. What, if anything, do you think? I'm deliberately not saying what I think because I want an independent opinion. -- Begoon 10:59, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the obvious "who on earth uploads images not rotated properly?" since it's in a US publication before 1978, was used for commercial / advertising purposes, and has no copyright notice on the photograph, then I think it's PD. See File:Carpenters 1974.jpg for a worked example with the appropriate licensing information. We hope may be able to advise further. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:10, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was more interested in any opinions you might have on the article. I don't want to be coy, so I'll leave you "né Benjamin Italo Jose Ingenito Paralupi O'Higgins" O'Higgins to ponder. Something's not adding up for me. However, For the first half of his career, he worked under the name Paul Ellis, so who knows? -- Begoon 11:20, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can find one book source that namechecks "Paul Ellis" in "The Rise of Spanish-Language Filmmaking", so it's not a blatant and obvious hoax. The problem is as his claim to notability was a century ago, and he used different names, it's difficult to pick out the sources involved from a standing start. However, if you were thinking it's a blatant hoax, that source is dated three years after the WP article was created (the bizarre name has always been in the article since day one), so it's possible the book has copied Wikipedia. On the other hand, "O'Higgins" could be named after a wealthy landowner or military leader following the 19th-century British invasion of Argentina, so there is historical precedent for somebody to be born in Buenos Aires with that name. I'm starting to tend towards sending it to AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That's why I asked. It was (and still is, if I'm honest) ringing all my bells. -- Begoon 11:44, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, the creator, Lynchkenney, is still around. He has also created the definitely notable and sourceable Willie Piazza. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, well made. I notified them. -- Begoon 12:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remo Recover Free Edition deletion

Hi, lets discuss about deletion of Remo Recover Free Edition ..As its a free recovery tool ...i have used it and found very relevant for users ...so i started writting for that.. this a information article and it should not get deleted.... can you please restore add more informational content