This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SpaceMAN(talk | contribs) at 00:22, 10 February 2018(ZenCash(Cryptocurrency) New Unreviewed Article Disambiguation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:22, 10 February 2018 by SpaceMAN(talk | contribs)(ZenCash(Cryptocurrency) New Unreviewed Article Disambiguation)
Hi Narky Blert! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)
Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing!
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for your contract bridge edits, especially creating the BBL article which is a very useful addition. There's a Wiki project for those of us interested in improving the coverage of bridge on Wikipedia, which you might like to consider joining. If you look at the associated Talk page of any bridge-related article you'll see links that will take you to the project's own page and the association discussion page. JH (talk page) 21:10, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Template {{gcb}} provides convenient links to entries in the Glossary of contract bridge terms (many of which link articles that provide more information). Most bridge articles predate the template and don't use it; many of them and some newer ones should link more bridge terms than they do, which the template helps make convenient.
If the target ID matches the linkname that you hope to display, it's trivial:
Another deal with 53 cards! Eleven deals in one hour!
Otherwise you need to give the target ID and linkname as first and second parameters
Usually the target ID is the glossary entry name without spaces or capital letters. It is defined by tag [span id="biddingsystem"], for example, in the glossary code.
Hi. In effect these are responses to some of your edit summaries, all of which I scanned.
Terence Reese. Your first revision [1] is not minor. I might give the edit summary "identify team captain Swimer and WBF officer Zedtwitz; + tweaks". Your second ("Next edit") is minor, as you marked it; so is my followup, which I neglected to mark 'm'.
British Bridge League (N=new). Well done. (If A E Manning-Foster gets a page, its name will include two spaces, "A. E. ", and the pagename that begins "A.E. " will redirect. That is, it should, and those changes will soon be made unless AEM-F flies under the radar.)
List of bridge competitions and awards (m). I don't consider this minor in the 'm' sense. If you meet someone to ask for another opinion, do so. From your perspective, I suppose, I use 'm' for minor minor, when I remember to use it at all; I use the edit summary to indicate the major minor (eg, numerous minor fixes, add a few wikilinks, unify date formats, tweaks). If "The Lady Milne Trophy for Womens' Teams" is the official name of the event, I would probably give summary "use official name of event; + tweaks". (The Gold Cup bullet point now uses capitals unusually.)
List of bridge magazines Query. I think that ([see] above) and ([see] below) are redundant here, and links would be distracting--useful only if the list were multiple screens in length. Use italics every time that another title from the list is mentioned, however. Readers should expect that bridge magazines are named in italics and that those named appear in this "list of bridge magazines". I might give the summary "expand some entries and order alphabetically". — subsequently revised by others, now once by me [continue interrupted session and extend it but continue the numbering].
Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects. I see that another editor has promptly fulfilled your requests (What redirects to Scissors coup?). The general-and-shortcut redirect template {{Redr}} is effective now and I try to use it ({{Redr|alt}} {{Redr|cap}} {{Redr|from singular}}). I have revised the two new ones thus ({Redr|alt}), with edits summaries that may be helpful, and following the instruction "(please leave this line blank for emphasis and ease of reading by editors)". See eg Coup without a name.
EBU (disambiguation). Good reorder. I fixed the second entry per WP:DISAMBIG and used the article rather than a redirect for the one retained bluelink(name).
Template:OEB (you cited[2]). I agree that the template message --what the template displays in the article where it is transcluded-- is "messy" and too long for routine use. It needs a parameter, at least to toggle between one short and one long display/message, and the current display may be too messy or long for any use.
You know enough about WP:DISAMBIGuating and using WP:TEMPLATEs and the WP:Edit summary. You will be able to WP:REDIRECT adequately enough by reviewing those for Scissors coup. By "enough" I mean simply, enough to let me happily stop reviewing all your edit summaries now! When you hope that I read another one thoughtfully, consider visiting my talk page.
P.S. Every contract bridge article may be on the watchlist of User:Newwhist. I have few but championships, orgs, and people.
@Newwhist:List of bridge federations is exactly the sort of article I had in mind; I'd failed to find it. And I do think List of bridge governing bodies would indeed be a better title - not only for consistency, but as being more accurate. I'll make a suggestion on the talk page.
It's astonishing that recent editions of the Bridge Encyclopaedia haven't had an entry for him. I'd think that it was just an oversight, except that apparently he was in the first few editions. (BTW, you inadvertently put your piece on my "home" page so I've moved it to my talk page.) JH (talk page) 09:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jhall1: (Sorry, all thumbs!) Stern is certainly in the 1967 International edition, which I have. I cannot think of any good reason for his omission more recently. Does Walter Herbert still have an entry? Narky Blert (talk) 10:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The 7th edition has an 18 line entry for Stern in the Biographies and Results CD, page 248 and a 4 line entry for Herbert, page 213. Newwhist (talk) 12:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, my 5th edition (in the days before CDs) doesn't have him (though it does have Herbert), and I'd heard that he wasn't in the 6th edition either. It's good to know that he's included in the 7th. JH (talk page) 15:37, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are some other strong Austrian players from the 1930s who might be considered for WP articles - not least Hans Jellinek and Karl Schneider (a link to his name would bring up 2 other people altogether). Narky Blert (talk) 21:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
gcb
Thanks for the heads-up but I am just another editor and not the glossary police. Please use your initiative and be bold within WP policies. In your efforts on gcb you may wish to note the previous Talk here. Our colleague User:TurnerHodges has been a primary editor of gcb in the past and I respect his perspective on the glossary. If I am not mistaken he too is from the big island. Newwhist (talk) 06:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Newwhist: The primary intention behind my heads-up was to say: if I add some slang to gcb and it's not used in NA, please edit to say so. But if I say an expression is British slang - trust me, it is.
TurnerHodges doesn't seem to have been very active recently:-( - and he's no Brit, he spells "travelled" and "traveller" with only one 'l'.
I saw the recent Elaine Cassidy entry on your talk page ... I agree, once coming 40/488 is not quite my idea of a champion player.
"Edit boldly, <something> safe"? I can't quite get that to work. (I only ever played 2 boards against Rixi. She rattled as she moved, from all her bracelets and necklaces. The auction went 1N-3N, missing the 9-card heart fit. Complete bottom - for us. Arrgghh.) Narky Blert (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I too had the pleasure(?) of playing two boards against Rixi, in the early 1970s. All I can remember is that she effectively ignored me and my partner and was very rude to her own partner, someone whose name I didn't recognise. I think I would have been disappointed had she been polite and friendly. :) JH (talk page) 08:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jhall1: Rixi's partner in my anecdote was Pat Davies. I forget the event, except that it was in London. It may have been one of those things at the Europa Hotel. Rixi's writings always annoyed me, she was such a crashing snob.
I think the only ruder player I've encountered was Boris. He was the direct cause of the EBU ban on pets at congresses. We were playing in the same section as him in the Brighton Swiss Pairs (late 70s?). He was shouting at his partner after every hand. I think every nearby table called the TD to complain at least once, both about the noise and about the unwanted information on hands not yet played. But those were the days of Harold Franklin as Chief TD, and name players were rarely if ever penalised.
I can't remember the name or the breed of Boris' dog; it was white, perhaps a miniature poodle. We were introduced to it a day or two later when playing against the Hirons; it was a delightful creature.
No-one I spoke to had a word to say against the animal. But the ban was announced in the next edition of the EBU Quarterly. Narky Blert (talk) 11:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Summers-Smith
While I have to thank you for your effort in the additions to the J. Denis Summers-Smith article, I'll have to remove at least some of them. We'd want a source for saying he hates the name "James", and even then it probably wouldn't be worth noting, as it's pretty clear in the article that he's known as Denis. I've only read his books (and centred a lot of work on Wikipedia around them), but he seems like a pretty great person from In Search of Sparrows, you must be lucky to know him. —innotata01:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Innotata: No problem at all! That phrase was merely anecdotal, and didn't exactly add much. As you doubtless guessed, I was able to add factual details to an already-excellent article because I've known him all my life (I'm credited in On Sparrows and Man). He's getting frail, but remains mentally sharp. Narky Blert (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The first one is from the midweek chart update, which is not an official chart position. The OCC shows (see here) the album at #68 and a new entry, so it hasn't been any higher. The BBC one is fair enough, so I have restored that. If you could indicate your sources when you make a change it would be helpful. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
A couple of points
A couple of things to bear in mind as you go about creating biographical articles:
1. The correct markup for DEFAULTSORT is all capitals and with a colon, e.g
{{DEFAULTSORT:Hepburn, Ian}}, not
{{DEFAULTSORT|Hepburn, Ian}}.
2. The PERSONDATA template is expected to go near the end of the article, near the category tags, not at the head. There's a detailed list of what order the various parts of an article are expected to appear in at WP:ORDER.
Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
I am conducting research about newcomers to Wikipedia and I was hoping to ask you some questions. I’ve noticed you’ve had some good activity recently. Is there any chance you have time in the next month to speak with me? If you are interested or have any questions, please email me at gmugar [at] syr.edu or leave a message on my talk page.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Legacypac (talk) 05:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of human genes on chromosome 12 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Legacypac (talk) 05:54, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:20, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:06, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 10 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snowstormer ( T • C) 15:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snowstormer ( T • C) 15:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A trout for you for duplicating information at Whacking with a wet trout
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ww2censor: Thank you for your speedy reply. (1) The use of the image (most likely its only one, a low-res scan of an album cover) strikes me as fair use under 17 USC 107 of any copyrights in either the original artwork or the digital scan, so I don't think that is an issue. (FYI I own that album, and the sleeve does not credit the creator of the artistic work.) (2) I tagged the talk page of the image when I uploaded it with {{Non-free album cover}}. Is that the correct tag and location? (3) Should I also add and fill in {{Non-free use rationale album cover}} somewhere? (4) Should I tag in some manner the article in which the image is used? (5) An example of good practice with some randomly-chosen album cover could be helpful, a picture being worth 1000 words etc. (I have learnt not to copy, hoping for the best, what other editors might have done; an experienced editor had to point me towards Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout.)
Generally album covers can be uploaded for the article about that album only under our much stricter policy of WP:NFCC. We do not accept any image under the US legal interpretation of fair use, so you should not concentrate on it and focus on NFCC. I've linked the above two templates for you, so you can review them for details and you do require both of them. Here is an example File:Radio Clash.jpg of a album image which has been properly filled in. Look at the details in edit mode you see how the templates are filled in on the file page, not the file talk page. Generally it does not matter if there is a copyright notice or not. No need to tag the article, just add the image code to the infobox. BTW, such non-free image should be about 300 pixels at maximum but if not just tag the uploaded image as {{non-free reduce}} and a bot will deal with it in a day or so. I hope I have answered all you concerns. If not just drop me a {{talkback}} on my talk page or ping me. ww2censor (talk) 22:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ww2censor: Thank you, most helpful. I've added the {{non-free reduce}}, {{Non-free use rationale album cover}} and {{Non-free album cover|image has rationale=yes}} templates to the image page, and a signed declaration as to why I consider the use fair. I've also deleted the tag on the talk page. I have not deleted the {{untagged}} template, preferring that my work be approved first. Regards, Narky Blert (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ww2censor: TY again ... getting there I hope ... I'll try not to trouble ImageTaggingBot again in the near future ...
I forgot to say in my previous post: the 300x300 restriction looks thoroughly sensible, and {{non-free reduce}} is useful to know about. Narky Blert (talk)
I reveiewed the image again and removed both the deletion tag and the unnecessary declaration; the rationale IS your declaration. There is lots to learn and even after 9 years I learen new things every so often, so just ask if you have other questions. It's not a problem. You can always add the {{helpme}} template to your user page if you want assistance but directing a request more directly is probably better. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 10:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
John Ireland
Hi. I'm just wondering if it would be appropriate to use "(John Ireland)" rather than just "(Ireland)" as a disambiguator for this composer's works. Not that anyone with any level of musical knowledge is likely to get him mixed up with the country, but it's a more ambiguous name than most famous composers. Just a thought, really. Deb (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Deb: Excellent point - especially for works with widely-used titles like Prelude and Piano Concerto. It would be less than helpful if a passer-by categorised articles on his works under "Ireland" or "Irish music", for example! I'll use your disambiguator in future.
As for existing articles, I'll rename-move the relevant items in Category:Compositions by John Ireland, updating the "What links here" articles as I do. It seems to me that leaving behind the "(Ireland)" redirect pages should be harmless enough.
@Deb: I think I've now rename-moved all the existing "(Ireland)" articles to "(John Ireland)", and upgraded the relevant articles to the new link. I didn't touch the usertalk/bot/etc links to the old page, because (1) I don't like messing with those and (2) anyone who makes one should have some sort of idea as to what they're doing. I think the redirects from "(Ireland)" (now essentially orphans) should stay.
Ireland was a minor master, but very prolific. He deserves his 15 minutes. I got me a fun project, pointing anyone interested towards scores/recordings/texts - which is the intention underlying my recent tiny Wiki articles on his works - that, and populating categories for the same reason. Narky Blert (talk) 22:06, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with the above discussion is that it's one that the entire classical music wiki-community has a stake in, yet it's being conducted (up till now) as a private discussion between 2 editors, and I hope they don't think that whatever agreements they may have come to amount to anything like WP:Consensus.
I have only now been made aware of this discussion, and only because I've reverted some page moves that were made by Narky Blert without involving anyone other than Deb, and without any indication that this discussion existed. This is not the way to proceed, particularly where it's proposed that all the articles on a certain composer's works be changed. (Except that the "proposal" has already been turned into a series of faits accomplis.)
For the record, I disagree that the Edward German case is a proper precedent for these moves. Coronation March (German) could very well read like a German coronation march, i.e. one historically used in Germany. But what could Piano Concerto (Ireland) possibly mean, other than a piano concerto written by someone called Ireland? I mean, does the Republic of Ireland have a National Piano Concerto, played on formal occasions preceding their National Anthem or something? Hardly. And how many composers named Ireland are there? I know of only one. Where's the ambiguity? -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]21:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For now, I'll just add: (1) You know and I know that there is no Irish national piano concerto. Others might not. (2) Consistency. "Full Fathom Five (John Ireland)" is a needed article. "Full Fathom Five (Ireland)" would be seriously ambiguous and possibly misleading. If music articles are variously disambiguated "Ireland" and "John Ireland", non-experts might be confused.
I've stopped creating new articles on Ireland's music which need disambiguators until consensus is reached on this issue. I have several dozen in mind. Narky Blert (talk) 22:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We don't create Symphony No. 9 (Ludwig van Beethoven) just because it's hypothetically possible that someone, somewhere, might think that there's a notable composer with the surname Beethoven, other than the famous Ludwig, who also wrote a 9th Symphony. Equally, we don't go looking for spurious reasons such as that someone might think there's any such thing as an Irish National Piano Concerto. We disambiguate if and only if there's a need to do so, and then as minimally as possible.
In a particular case, I might be persuaded that (John Ireland) is more appropriate than just (Ireland), but that would not apply to all of his works, and certainly not to his Piano Concerto or his Sonatina. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]23:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@JackofOz: I don't see how reverting uncontroversial moves can be considered the right way to deal with this. Was there ever a discussion prior to the first article on one of Ireland's works being given the "Ireland" disambiguator? I doubt it. But I'll go along with the idea of a discussion and will contribute. Deb (talk) 07:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Deb: But your measuring stick for whether these moves are controversial or not is whether you agree with Narky or not. That's one other editor. Two people is a hell of a small sample on which to base such an assessment on. Now there are three people discussing this, and one of them disagrees with the other two. That spells "controversial" to me. Soon there will be more, and we'll just have to wait and see what they think. -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]07:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@JackofOz: And yet, on the basis of one individual's doubts (your own), you thought fit to revert changes that two people felt, and still feel, were appropriate, and that you yourself agree might be appropriate. Deb (talk) 07:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't defend the indefensible, Deb. Even if a hundred other editors turn out to agree with you and Narky, and I turn out to be the sole outlier, the fact that two editors decided this matter between themselves and then acted without any wider consultation means that it was premature, to say the least. Please read up on Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Narky Blert has been bold, I've reverted, and now we're discussing. Was there some other process you feel we should be following? -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]08:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Requested moves
The only way to resolve this now is to go to Wikipedia:Requested moves. We don't need to reproduce the whole discussion there, we can just cross-refer to it. Are you prepared to make the request or do you want me to? Deb (talk) 10:47, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Deb: I'd prefer you to do make the request, if you will. You're an older Wiki hand than I am. You suggested the idea – but I was the one that picked it up and ran with it, and so am a directly involved party.
At the moment I can only find two articles that actively need moving - the Piano Concerto and Sonatina. I'm not sure whether there are others I may have missed. Can you please confirm? Deb (talk) 12:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just deleted Category:Song cycles by Arthur Sullivan based on this discussion at CFD. However, I see that you were never notified nor was the CFD listing made on that page itself. Please look it over and if you think it's wrong, I have no objection to reversing it and re-posting it with actual notice and a chance for you to make your views known. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricky81682: Thank you for alerting me. I have no strong feelings. If an article is easily findable by someone browsing a higher-level category page, that's good enough for me. But ...
I question how appropriate WP:SMALLCAT is to classical music. Unless you know already, you'd never guess what types of piece Creatures of Prometheus, An die ferne Geliebte or Prince of the Pagodas might be. Pieces like the Debussy, Ravel and Verdi string quartets can easily be found under the composer's names; but if you didn't know it already, could you guess what forces Ainsi la nuit was written for? Category:Compositions by Henri Dutilleux I think categories for often-used classical forms or forces are useful.
I'm not sure about any of that. I was just reviewing the CFD closure which seemed pretty straightforward. SMALLCAT has an exception for categories that are part of a large structure so I'd say that since Beethovan's pieces by category and ballets by person have an intersection category structure, even those with a single article would fit a category within that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricky81682: Thinking further about the Sullivan case: the disambiguator "song cycle" may do everything necessary to help a searcher, and if so the category was indeed not needed.
I was certainly not suggesting any changes to those Beethoven and Britten categories!
I take your point about small categories which are members of two or more unrelated higher-level ones. Those can indeed make navigation easier. Thanks again. Narky Blert (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld: Thanks for the link! I should look in.
I had never heard of James Friskin until I started writing On Wenlock Edge (song cycle), in which he plays a very minor role. Hmmm ... a couple of redlinks (including an article-required one), yet more non-linked mentions ... he looks interesting, I feel an article coming on ... Google has turned up a couple of good-looking sources ...
Unfortunately, I can't find any of his compositions on YouTube. Of course, as soon as I started looking for him there (and on Allmusic) today, (a) I found more info, and (b) I opened a can of worms - see the talk page. I have to say I like his recording of the Goldberg's - it's on YouTube, in bits which have to be pieced together.
Thanks for uploading File:Dr-c-j-johnson.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@ImageTaggingBot: I've added a copyright status tag; I hope I've picked the right one. I have not added the "image has rationale=yes" parameter.
Replaceable fair use File:MikeMcCarthy-journalist.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MikeMcCarthy-journalist.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus(Talk)04:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Peripitus:Two days? seriously? This was a good-faith upload, made on Friday 3 July, to add context to a new and respectful article. I emailed the subject of the photo, on Sunday 5 July shortly after checking your notification. Do you mean that if he doesn't read his emails on Monday 6 July, the picture will be deleted? Even if he has to consult the most likely copyright holder, The Independent, for advice?
In two days, as you say, an administrator may delete the image. Note that it is a very simple matter for the image you be undeleted, if he consents to it being under a free licence - Peripitus(Talk)01:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Danny Gaither
Hi. Altho your edit to the above article was absolutely correct, your reason was faulty. The fact that you have never heard of the Bill Gaither Trio indicates your knowledge of music is not as encyclopedic as you think. Bill Gaither, Danny's brother is the single biggest name in Southern Gospel music; certainly now and most likely forever. Removing the term world-famous is nearly always correct, as it is what we call PUFFERY. Happy editing! John from Idegon (talk) 01:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@John from Idegon: My reason was shorthand – and ty, that's another useful WP link. I think we're as one. I can live with "famous", "well-known", etc - provided that the adjective is backed up by good citations. If not, ptooey!
Though I have to say I'm more tolerant of fan-puffery like that than I am of stuff like the article on David Gaither, which reads like a resume.
Hi. In a not-so-recent post on cheating in bridge, you made reference to statements by Harold Franklin in a magazine. What is the date of the article? Do you have it? I am trying to figure out what event is alluded to by Alan Sontag, (see here). Who where the victors that Sontag refers to? Newwhist (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Newwhist: I do have that issue of EBU Quarterly; and the citation is already on your sandbox page, at the end of my transcription of Franklin's article.
My copy of The Bridge Bum says exactly the same as yours. There is nothing about the results at Monte Carlo 1974 in either Bridge Magazine or EBU Quarterly 1974-75. However, I found an advertisement for it (EBU Quarterly No. 32 February 1974, pp. 12-13). "The most elegant of bridge festivals ... total prize list of $60,000 in cash ... daily sessions from 3:30 p.m. to 8 p.m, leaving ample time to enjoy the beaches in the morning and the extensive night life after the day's play. Chief Tournament Director: Harold Franklin." First prize in the open pairs was $6,000 - today worth at least ten times as much, I think. (Entry fee $40. In 1974, my salary as a recent graduate was the equivalent of $56/week. I could never have afforded to play there.) A typical French money tournament in a plush resort: Monte Carlo is a millionaire's playground. The best place to find the results might be le Bridgeur or la Revue Française de Bridge.
The Sunday Times was always held in London, around New Year. Facchini-Zucchelli had won the 1974 Sunday Times by a considerable margin (EBU Quarterly No. 32 February 1974, pp. 14-15). There's no suggestion in that issue of anything untoward. However, I did find an editorial in BM about F-Z at the 1975 BB, which I plan to transcribe into your sandbox. It is quite remarkably pro-Establishment and complacent, and IIRC takes a very different stance to that of TBW at the time.
Duh! Thanks for the reminder re the Franklin article date. According to a Rixi Markus book, the Monte Carlo event was usually in June, so I will check TBW after that month 1974 onwards for a few editions. Newwhist (talk) 03:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Newwhist: The same ad says that Monte Carlo 1974 was 7-16 June: open pairs 7-10, teams 11-14, mixed pairs 15-16.
I think I know the Rixi Markus book you have in mind. "I was playing with Prince Lobkowitz against the Grand Duchess of Gerolstein and the former King of Ruritania, disgracefully deposed by his ungrateful subjects, etc etc." Narky Blert (talk) 04:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Viennese Singing Sisters was a real mess when I found it. It turned out to be an unformatted copy/paste from a blog, without proper citations and with a fair amount of WP:PUFFERY. I'm pleased with the result: I find it much easier to write a new article than to rework an existing one. Narky Blert (talk) 13:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (Elizabeth Laurence) has been reviewed!
@Damibaru: Feel free to improve! :-D Not just a singer, but an actor too. I was idly YouTubing today, remembered that 1988 Bluebeard film, found it, watched it again, and was transfixed. WTF - no article about her???. Then I discovered she'd pioneered some important roles as well, and rolled up my sleeves. (I'd love to hear her Lied der Waldtaube.) Narky Blert (talk) 01:32, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Narky Blert: She has a beautiful voice! It is especially apparent in the Bluebeard film. Some operatic singers use too much vibrato, too much drama, but not her. Her singing is very natural. Yes, that is a very good way to find Wikipedia articles to create! I often listen to WQXR and based on what I hear (the performers, music, its composer...), I write about it.
BTW, I am a guilty culprit of looking up on Google what Narky Blert means. I wouldn't be that self-deprecating, though. Cheers! Damibaru (talk) 23:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Gifford Stower until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
@Majora: I think I found all I could first time round, I won't contest deletion. If (when) the article goes, I'll check that all redlinks have gone also. Narky Blert (talk) 19:59, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For being one of the top three finishers in the May 2016 disambiguation contest, you are entitled to a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia foundation. Send me an email for the details. Cheers! bd2412T00:44, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Chief Scout of the Northern Territory
I have reverted you edit. That red link is not going to become an article. There are, I think, less than a dozen Scout Groups in the whole of the NT. Even the Chief Scout of Victoria is not notable. --Bduke(Discussion)21:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bduke: Fair enough - but I dislike links to disambiguation pages. It looks to me as if Chief Scout ought to be a full article, not the (rather poor) disambiguation page which it is now: to distinguish clearly between B-P and the history after him, including both the heads of major Scouting Organisations with worthwhile standalone articles (e.g. Chief Scout (The Scout Association)) and the minor and political appointments (links in only, for readers who don't know what a Chief Scout is). All List(s) of Chief Scouts in XYZ would be See-Also items in such an article, rather than muddled in with the principal topic. (Also, I assume you'd agree that a sports scout is a "Chief scout" not a "Chief Scout"...) A small but useful project for Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting perhaps? (Onetime Senior Scout here.) Narky Blert (talk) 23:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea who the vandal (User:Richard4526) is. Yesterday, I turned a redirect into a DAB. It has 196 incoming links. I have the duty to repair them, and I cannot.
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Noticed you have corrected the link I put in the Yam Kim Fai page, thanks for that.
Since you may be in the position to do some edits I am not, I ask for your help to two listed below.
Can I ask you for a new favor that I already tried with somebody else? I have no idea what may the problem be to link them. Is this a complicated edit? Linking four pages together? Thanks again in advance.207.102.255.36 (talk) 19:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: Why thank you very much indeed! Much housekeeping is routine (though still helpful to readers and other editors, which is what it's all about); but there's always the prospect of finding a challenging puzzle to solve. It's helpful to have a smattering of the major European languages, including Russian - would you believe I've linked to at least 32 non-English Wikis? (I haven't yet managed a right-to-left language.) Many {{ill}} links are likely to stay that way for ever - but at least readers can find the information if they want it.
Richard Brinsley Hinds was the article which gave me the most pleasure. All I had was his surname, as binomial authority for a sea creature, pointing to a DAB page. Searching Wiki turned up a few more mentions - including the fact that he'd had a genus named in his honour. I realised that I'd found an important figure, almost lost to history. It took some 20-30 minutes of creative googling to even discover his initials, and a few more still to find his given names. After that it was easy - I found about 15 good 19th century sources without difficulty. I did the best I could, and posted requests for help on the Botany and Zoology project pages. Within a day, five or six other editors had found and added useful information - Wiki at its best! Narky Blert (talk) 12:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely to hear about Hinds, - sorry I missed him ;) - I place ill-links wherever I go, see Peter Reulein. Another project for you to join is probably Intertranswiki! I don't like the "expand"-tags so much, - I guess most readers capable of getting something from let's say French will find the French article on a French subject without some bulk on top. I inserted pictures, probably in more than 32, but confess that for Hebrew I had the help of a friend from Israel ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:46, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My searches turned up this link, for no obvious reason. You might wish to bookmark it, in case it has some relevant information for you about Lutheran or Calvinist hymns.
An update. I have now linked to 119 non-English Wikis. Selfishly (I admit it!), I have now started to collect and to count my translations from non-English Wikis. Schloss Zweibrücken got me P(f)älzisch, and De fofftig Penns (I implore you, do NOT listen to their recordings - aber der Artikel ist gut zitiert, nicht?) got me Nedersaksies and Plattdüütsch. 24 languages, and counting. (I thought I had Occitan lined up as another easy language – until my researches into the Counts of Astarac opened up a can of worms about their numbering. I'm after the troubadour, Bernard IV of Astarac.)
On another topic altogether, some clown had stuck a {{notable}} tag on String Quartet No. 3 (Bartók). Yes, really! I took that tag off in a hurry. The article is on my to-do list, but I haven't yet got around to doing more than adding a general reference. I mention it only in case you know of a source or two which I don't. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 23:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for what you researched for the hymn. I'm at a loss at what is "unbalanced". I'll look at your articles next month. "Reformation" is high up on my user page, and for five years at least, - forming RIP, and I prefer ps to NB, because it means PumpkinSky to me ;) (+ you can meet br in my edit notice) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: You're welcome. I could see nothing unbalanced about "Herr Christ, der einig Gotts Sohn" – unless it was the failure to mention Andreas Knöpken, who it seems to me does not need to be mentioned. I thought the WP:WEASEL tag unreasonable. It's only for things like "Some people say <unsourced anecdote>". The "under-referenced" tag was as bad or worse, the History section was full of good citations.
I don't fully trust Hymnary as a WP:RS source of biographical information. It's not always clear where the information is from, or how trustworthy it is. Nevertheless, it sometimes provides details (e.g. dates) not available elsewhere. and those I do trust. On the other hand, its articles on hymns are excellent in supplying publication details – "included in N hymnals" is strong evidence for notability. Cyberhymnal can be another useful source, but it too should be treated with caution.
I agree – it's often only when you start searching that you discover how complex a topic can be.
There will be a German article, as soon as I will have finished the English. - "Balanced" is (back) on the article, the others are gone. - I have never tagged an article, nor do I plan to do so. It can all be resolved on the article talk. - Never too late to enter the peer review for Bach's cantata for Reformation Day, BWV 80. Perhaps you are the one to write about reception? There's a lot in the Wolff source, only I don't have the time to dig it up, see above. What do you think about the image question? (I was just reverted.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:53, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have thanked User:Smerus for his contributions to the discussion on "Herr Christ, der einig Gotts Sohn". WP:CONSENSUS may have been reached.
Quatre petites prières?!?! Yet another gaping hole in English Wiki. I've seen Louis-Alain's work before.
Song cycles and the like are poorly covered. Hugo Wolf#Lieder, for example. (I have an incomplete draft on Goethe-Lieder somewhere.) I've written half-a-dozen articles about other notable cycles (mostly by Britten). Do you know Stanford's Songs of the Sea? I wouldn't call it a major work, but it's great fun. Benjamin Luxon. (Please try to forgive the wobbly brass and boxy sound.) On the other hand, I call Priaulx Rainier's Cycle for Declamation a scandalously little-known masterpiece. Very few tenors have taken the risk, it seriously exposes the voice. William George. Narky Blert (talk) 21:18, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:DesignForBidding.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, Narky Blert. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
@Dcljr: No worries :-) WP:INTDAB is one of those bits of small print in the hopelessly-bloated WP:MOS that not many people know about (and can take a lot of effort to fathom out). The reason behind it is, that User:DPL bot flags direct links to DAB pages as errors. According to its latest report, there are 42,000 such links to 28,000 DAB pages (which is well down on 406,000 to 73,000 four years ago). I estimate that about 10-20% are "technical" errors, where a link to the DAB page is appropriate (as in this instance), and that about 10-20% are insoluble. DPL bot reports around 400 newly-found DAB pages with links every day (some with many links, often the result of a page move), so WP:DPL members do a lot of running to stay in the same place.
Turning to your suggestion of swapping pages - I've been disambiguating pretty much full-time for the last six months or so, and it was only recently that I was pointed towards WP:MALPLACED, a sub-project which handles plain pages that redirect towards (disambiguation) pages. A minor problem, which only experienced disambiguators (or a bot) are likely to notice, and only ones more skilled than I can fix. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 12:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.
Breaking table on List of Interstate Highways in Illinois
This edit] breaks the table as it re-added a tag into a template parameter that can only accept a single number. Furthermore, the link generated by the templates is valid and should not be considered a dab link at all. Imzadi 1979→01:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Imzadi1979: If the template can only accept a single number, that is a problem with the template. User:DPL bot reports that link as an error, every day, and will continue to report it as an error, every day, until it is fixed. Along with the 40,000 others which WP:DPL team members are trying to fix. Narky Blert (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The template parameter is for the number of the highway to list in that row of the table. {{dn}} is not part of any highway's number, ergo it does not belong there. Adding that tag causes the table to break by linking to [[Interstate 494 (Illinois)[disambiguation needed]|I-494]] and to attempt to call a graphic by the name of File:I-494[disambiguation needed]/svg. I have fixed the situation though by pointing Interstate 494 (Illinois) to the primary topic instead of a DAB page, so your bot will remove the list page from its report. However, in the future, you should be mindful that when dealing with tagging templates, maybe you should have tagged elsewhere, like maybe in the |notes= parameter to attach the maintenance tag in a place that doesn't break things. Imzadi 1979→02:10, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sandra Landy
Thanks for the article. On reading of her death, I'd intended to create one myself, but you beat me to it. I may be able to add a few things to it from the obituary that appeared in today's Daily Telegraph. JH (talk page) 18:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jhall1: A sad loss; I learned through Bridge Winners, looked for her article, and there wasn't one. Yes, please help improve it. Things I know to be lacking include her Oxford and Cambridge colleges, and mention of Bridge for All and Standard English, which aren't in the references I found. Narky Blert (talk) 19:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've been able to add Bridge for All, but her Telegraph obit doesn't mention which colleges she attended or Standard English. I've just looked her up in the OEB, but (at least in the edition that I have), though it had a lot of details about her playing career and positions held in the EBU, it didn't fill in those gaps either. In the early '70s, I played against her in an early round of the Gold Cup. Not surprisingly, we were heavily beaten. JH (talk page) 19:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I found her Facebook page, which for now is still up. On it, she says that she was at St. Anne's College, Oxford, but I don't think Facebook would be acceptable as a citation. I've had a look on the college's website, but unfortunately she isn't listed among their distinguished alumni. JH (talk page) 20:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jhall1: I've added a request for help about colleges to the Talk Page - there are two categories and two notable alumni pages which could use updating.
I can't recall ever playing against SL; certainly not at knockout, but possibly at Brighton.
Standard English may need some digging into old EBUMags. Thoroughly sensible and playable system, which I've agreed to play in at least one ProAm club event (and also used a time or two when it was my turn to act as spare player/host at the local club, even though partner didn't know that I was doing so). Narky Blert (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As you've probably seen, I did eventually manage to find a usable reference for her Oxford college, though it's less than ideal. But still nothing for Cambridge. I would think a web search for "Standard English Landy" would be likely to turn up something. And thanks for the Barnstar. JH (talk page) 21:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your thanks. I noticed today that there's some more stuff on the EBU website: an autobiographical piece by Landy herself (which I suppose might not be usable under Wikipedia rules) and her Brighton Argus obituary, which might well have some useful information in it. When I can find time I'll take a look. Also Shireen Mohandes, who writes some excellent articles on the history of British bridge, emailed me today, having spotted that I'd made use of an article of hers for the Paul Stern article. She's just getting into Wikipedia, and could be a very valuable recruit. JH (talk page) 19:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JH: The article is unrecognisable compared with the stub I started: it's looking very good indeed. The piece by Landy herself could be included as an External Link at least.
I once gave Shireen an anecdote, which she used in one of her articles. She posted on Bridge Winners today asking about Wiki, and I'm giving her every encouragement. She asked for my email addy, and now has it. Any recruit to WP CB is welcome, and she could indeed be very valuable.
Wow! You and your partner might have been the last people ever to play it. Apart from Acol, the only system I've ever played is Precision. I think I'll have to start following Bridge Winners. JH (talk page) 20:33, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JH: I plead youth (it was 1970), inexperience, ignorance, perversity, and folly. It was a terrible system, but surprisingly effective against players who didn't know how to defend against something legal but weird. However, there is or was a strong Essex husband-and-wife pair who play or used to play a homegrown system with 1N as the forcing opener - I once got called up as last-minute sub into their Spring Fours team to play with an occasional partner (playing Acol, I need hardly add). IIRC we got through to Sunday evening, and I had to phone the boss at home to tell him I might need to take the Monday off. (Not needed - EBU GM partner played like a drain - 2N-3N on a hand where 6m on the 4-4 was hugely good, was making, and would have scored more than the losing margin. At least I didn't have to pay the entry fee.)
<ducks>Precision (which I've played) is basically Nottingham Club with advertising and a few gadgets.</ducks>
I strongly recommend BW, if only for the opportunities it provides to tease Americans and 2/1 players. A couple of Brits whose names you will doubtless know (I exclude mine) do exactly that. Narky Blert (talk) 21:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No need to duck. ISTR reading about Nottingham Club many years ago, and being quite impressed by it. I've now joined BW. I think I've worked out who you must be there, assuming that you were one of those commenting on Shireen Mohandes' post asking about Wikipedia, though I could be wrong. JH (talk page) 21:43, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JH: You're probably right ;-) - and I hope you like BW. (A onetime partner, who has understandably emigrated to Australia, pointed me to the site just before the 2016 BB, at which time some of the threads were notably serious...) Narky Blert (talk) 21:59, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi and thanks for your correction re Julliard instead of Éditions Julliard (in Salle Huyghens). My bad. I once thought the link was ok and since then have perseverated in my mistake. End result is I've left behind maybe 100 times the same inappropriate link. Do you think it would be possible for a bot to correct the error? If not I will, each time I will tumble over one of these and of course won't do the mistake again. Thanks for your help, LouisAlain (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Salut @LouisAlain:! No worries and no problems - that was the only incorrect link to Julliard. If there were any others, another WikiGnome has already fixed them. (I haven't checked the history, but one possibility is that at one time Julliard redirected to the publisher; and an editor decided that it should be a disambiguation page, made the change, and tidied up behind them. I did a similar thing once - I'd created 250 bad links, so it was my duty to repair them.)
As a matter of fact I had noticed this curiosity some times ago and yet never failled to fully link to Éditions Gallimard (one never knows...). Now, I've beefed up Gaston Gallimard a little bit with InfoBox, 1 category, external links, list of works. There is much left to be translated though. Maybe someday I'll return to it; LouisAlain (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
End of story: I mistook Éditions Julliard for Fayard (too much cognac before my afternoon nap) which indeed is a correct link that leads to the publishing house. So there aren't 100 wrong links left behind. All is well that ends well. LouisAlain (talk) 12:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (Keighley (disambiguation)) has been reviewed!
@JustBerry: - TY for the offer, but I'll take my chances on the few articles I do write. I've lost (I think) two after WP:AFD for failing WP:GNG - fair enough, there's an essay somewhere which says do your best, write the article, and accept WP:CONSENSUS if you lose an AFD debate. (And, as my gloss, if you do: remove redlinks left behind.) Narky Blert (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JustBerry: - (shrug) - indeed, it happens. Sometimes, I've felt I didn't know whether or not a topic was notable before I'd done the research - or, sometimes, even after. My motto, as an inclusionist: if in doubt, do your best (that is of course the important bit), post, and let AFD sort it out. OTOH, I've written an article or two where I'd felt nervous about notability, but which were rapidly accepted by experienced WP:NPRs. Narky Blert (talk) 22:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Replaceable fair use File:Susan Norton.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Susan Norton.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:17, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I saw your note on the file talk page. Per [Wikipedia:Non-free content]], " Non-free content should not be used when a freely licensed file that serves the same purpose can reasonably be expected to be uploaded, as is the case for almost all portraits of living people." It's almost always the case that a non-free photo of a living person will fail to meet WP:NFCC#1 (No free equivalent) as a free photo of the individual could be made. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 13:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian: - I don't often engage in WP:AFD debates. They are hard work, or should be. But that one was a large slow-moving target.
Wiki is far too serious a project to lose one's sense of humour. Some of my favourite finds:
from an ancient AFD: "This article has more redlinks than Lenin's watchchain" (I'm going to steal that one)
found while resolving an ambiguous link to a DAB page: "X holds cult meetings at his [impeccably mainstream] church every Tuesday"
Google Translate from Japanese may not be completely reliable: "My wife, Mr. Y, is an imposter"
One of those impossible-to-edit multi-level multi-purpose over-complicated Wiki templates: "Made in Europe" in an article about manufactures resolved to Made in Europe (I posted the problem on the Talk Page, I was laughing too hard to risk doing anything more)
I'm closing in on you on WP:NOE... Have you ever considered adding {{WikiGnome topicon}} to your User Page?
Thanks for uploading File:Sandra Landy.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:02, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hutton
Hello. I've only just seen your edit at Talk:Hutton Gate railway station - I wasn't watching it for a while. I find that I am wondering if we would almost have met, or known people in common. I know we shouldn't do too much by way of personal information on here but if I tell you that, once it was built, we lived in Lowcross Avenue? Does that ring a bell?? Cheers DBaK (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just a goshdarned cotton picking moment here
Ermmm long shot and feel free to remove this but - again trying not to get into too much personal info here - did you once have a rather nice Saluki? DBaK (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DBaK: Would that have been a Harry Peacock-built house?
No, never a Saluki. I doubt we met; I spent little time in Hutton Gate. My family lived in The Avenue; one now lives in Thames Avenue. It wouldn't surprise me at all, though, if we have known people in common. Do you remember a diminutive female coal merchant who used to lug hundredweight sacks like they weighed nothing? When she retired, her three strapping sons rapidly decided that the business was too much like hard work, and gave up.
I'll drop a clue: birdwatching, physiotherapy. If that means anything to you, my email is open.
When the RS was first converted into a house, it kept the original ticket hall and window as internal features. IDK if they're still there.
Talking of Hutton and Lowcross, Hutton Lowcross lacks an article. As does Blue Pool, in the forestry - one element in a notable C19 example of hydraulic engineering, for which I once spent 30 frustrating minutes trying and failing to find a WP:RS. Hutton Farm, is it? anyway, to the right of the road between Hutton Gate and Hutton Lowcross. Yrs Narky Blert (talk) 22:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, nay fascinating, stuff. I think I had better drop you an email on the personal bits. On the article questions, yes, we need those, as we do Hutton Village I feel. When you say Blue Pool do you mean the small dammed lake up the track from the gate opposite the old school (to which I went)? We always called that Blue Lake - to us the Blue Pool was that BL**DY scary thing up on the moors - some kind of disused quarry I think. A huge deep slot in the rock with deep water in and a bit of a vibe. The farm to which I think you are referring was called Home Farm and was farmed by Mr Wilkinson. I was at school with his kids D and G and saw G quite recently as she was standing in the door of one of the Hutton Hall lodges, her home! More by email I think. And yes I thought you were a birder, but physio is ringing no bells. Or Bells. Cheers DBaK (talk) 22:52, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
March Madness 2017
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.
(I just stumbled onto & rv'd an (IIRC) slightly earlier, apparent-PA, one by them. .... Oh, no clue beyond knowing about the centuries-old expression copper's nark.... Any chance that you've done busts u/c while wearing a N.N.E.O.A. lapel pin?) --Jerzy•t22:17, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jerzy: "Narky" in the sense of "annoying", "nagging", or "waste of space"; not "grassing up". It may be a northern thing.
IP-vandals annoy the bejasus out of me too. A couple of times, I've had to read back through half-a-dozen GF edits on top of a vandalistic edit to repair the damage. On the bright side: I've seen very few of the SOBs while I've been making lots of WikiGnomish edits; and even fewer who had other surviving posts when I had a look at their activity; (and yet fewer still who did afterwards... ;)). Regards :) Narky Blert (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Notability within bio (more specificallly: application of wp:GNG/wp:BIO against wp:AUTH/wp:PROF...and both vis-a-vis vagaries of actual practice!
Gave you a way too long reply on my talk page-- notifying here because I'm not quite sure if ping works if you separate the paragraph where you ping from the signature. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@John Crowfoot: I see you've piped the placename - good move. I'd forgotten the name Italian Riviera, much better for English Wiki than Liguria. I failed to find any Wiki links relating more closely to the place where she excavated. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 14:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tana Betrand is up in the mountains and was later used as a hideout by the Italian Resistance fighting the Germans. The entrance to the cave is very narrow and I bottled it as a teenager - three people behind me had to go backwards to let me out.John Crowfoot (talk) 14:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2016 Cure Award
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
@Doc James: I regret that I have to say - most of my edits on medical topics have involved slapping {{dn}} tags on ambiguous links to DAB pages. I've seen several hundred of them, which I don't have the knowledge to fix. Editors in human anatomy, molecular biology, genetics, and pharmacology can be seriously sloppy.
I don't know which it is supposed to be, and I'm not going to guess. My point is that your edit messed up the formatting - the previous version showed this:
@MinorProphet: For SIAs, see Wikipedia:Set index articles. As I understand them (which is not very much), they're a sort of halfway house between DAB and list pages.
The problem is: Ständchen (Schubert) is currently a DAB page, which means that User:DPL bot flags links to it as errors. One way round that, when an article needs to refer to multiple topics, is to link to the DAB page through a (disambiguation) page. That wouldn't work here - a doubly-qualified page title like Ständchen (Schubert) (disambiguation) would be a complete no-no (it's in WP:MOS, somewhere or other).
Ständchen (Schubert) looks like a complete list. If someone rummaging through Viennese libraries and second-hand bookshops ever turns up another Lied with that name (we can only hope), it could be added to the SIA. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 21:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MinorProphet: - that looks good for another reason also. DAB pages shouldn't include references - but they add real value to that SIA. (I see that you're another LiederNet fan.)
@MinorProphet: D.920/D.921 is a delight, and far too little known. I think you're right - there's enough of a story for a standalone article. (If it were me, I'd include both versions under D.920, and create a redirect from Ständchen, D 921 (Schubert) - and populate it into the same categories as D.920. That's a well-accepted technique for sub-topics, e.g. non-notable songs on notable popular albums. It helps readers navigate, which is always good.)
Thanks User:Narky Blert for taking time out to edit Maiorana appreciate it. Are you alright to remove sources [1] and [4] and the information relating to them please? As they are unreliable and a removal won't be challenged. Cheers,--Theo Mandela (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Theo Mandela: - TY for your kind words. Formatting a reference all the way down to the ISBN is easy if you know how, but learning how to do so is not.
I do not remove info, especially a citation, from Wiki unless I am absolutely convinced after doing my own independent research that it is wrong. If you think that a citation may be unreliable, add an {{unreliable}} tag and post on the Talk Page giving your reasons.
Oh - and it's bad Wikipedia:Etiquette to delete material from another editor's Talk Page. "Editing another editor's signed talk page comments is generally frowned upon, even if the edit merely corrects spelling or grammar." Please don't do it again. Narky Blert (talk) 22:19, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple filmmakers
Hi Narky Blert, can you help me please with this one? There is an article for "Japanese film director, graphic artist, and manga author" Isao Yamada. The issue is that there are seemingly more important Japanese film directors with the same name but with no article here: one whom I need to red-link and still one with less credits. So the question is, how do I go about naming/disambiguating them correctly (even as red links)? Thanks. HoverfishTalk16:30, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: In addition to your two, IMDb lists Isao Yamada (II). If needed, he could be redlinked as Isao Yamada (composer), because that's all he does and he's the only one who seems to write music.
Isao Yamada (I) is surely the man with the existing Wiki article, Isao Yamada. Wiki - Jouhatsu Tabinikki (The Soul Odyssey: 2003); IMDb - Jôhatsu tabinikki (2003). Anmonaito no sasayaki wo kiita is in both Wiki and IMDb. I found Jōhatsu tabinikki in Takeo Kimura filmography, and its Japanese title is 蒸発旅日記 - there's no article in Japanese Wiki, but it's mentioned in ja:山田勇男, which is the Japanese equivalent of Isao Yamada.
Isao Yamada (III) is the same man also. (Thanks, IMDb - not. An excellent example of why it isn't WP:RS.) Having no Japanese title, I searched the Japanese article for 2014, the year that Sturm Und Drang came out. Google Translate of the relevant bit gave me '"Stolm und Drunk" (2014) 138 minutes / color / HD (Strumm und Drunk Production Executive Committee)' - which is a good enough match for me. (Google Translate from Japanese into English is shaky at the best of times. Throw in the German phrase Sturm und Drang as well, and watch it really struggle.) Wiki isn't WP:RS, of course - but I'm prepared to go along with the idea that the Japanese editor got it right, and that whoever created those two very thin IMDb pages did not.
With any luck, that's problem solved. Only one filmmaker, and no redlinks needed. Thanks, that was fun to sort out!
(If there had been multiple people with the same name, the best way to distinguish them would have been with qualifiers like (filmmaker, born 19xx).) Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks for the great research, Narky Blert! Yep, I think you sorted out the who's-who issue all right. I've seen many flaws in IMDb, but this one was very tricky one. Thanks for the DAB qualifier tip too. I had a vague memory of having seen such a dab before but wasn't sure. Cheers! HoverfishTalk20:04, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: GICH :-) I enjoy disambiguation-type challenges like that one. Got any more?
That type of DAB qualifier often comes up in sports like association football and cricket. IMO it would be a lot better also in film than things like e.g. (director) and (producer) which can overlap. It's more neutral, and goes some way to force editors to choose the correct link rather than the lazy one. It may also be relevant to Indian cinema, where some mononymic actors and singers appear in multiple languages.
I started off thinking - possibly four (or even five?) people, and perhaps only the composer notable? Let's try to tell them apart. Then, I managed to link Isao Yamada and IMDb I. One long career, not two people bolted together in IMDb - down to three. I had written off IMDb III as seemingly non-notable very early on, but a thought kept nagging at me - who is this guy who's come out of nowhere and written and directed a full-length feature with a big cast? where did he find the money? Gotcha! down to two people, and the filmmaker is notable alright. (Oh - and either side of Sturm und Drang in Japanese Wiki is another German title, Der verlorene Sohn (The Lost Son), which made me feel sure I was on the right track.)
My favourite example of Google Translate from Japanese: "My wife, Mr. Yamaguchi, is an imposter". I think I know what was meant, but it was too good a find to investigate further. Narky Blert (talk) 21:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since you picked up my misses in the Cannes Festival series, I have noted your username, and since I intend to keep plowing through that profusion of Cannes Festival films and directors, I may stumble on another worthy puzzle for you. One thing for sure is that the Isao Yamada article needs some wikifying and I may soon get into the Google Translate from Japanese thing. About the Dab issue in the film industry people, I vaguely remember somewhere in the distant past a WP:Films or WP:Bio decision to put "filmmaker", then there would be "nationality" and then "birth year". So, ten years after my previous go in Films, I was keeping my fingers off the "director" option, but I see it used abundantly, so I used it too a couple of times. BTW, good point you have there about inclusionism, I tend to see it that way too. HoverfishTalk23:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: I'm strongly in favour of qualifiers like (American filmmaker) or (British filmmaker) if they help readers easily find the target they want. Whatever is simplest - I was thinking mainly of East Asian names, especially those which might have different ideograms but be transliterated the same way into the Roman alphabet. I suspect that we both dislike unnecessarily detailed qualifiers. Point reader at target? - job done. Next!
I have to say though, that I do dislike ambiguous qualifiers like (director) (company or film?) and (producer) (film or record?).
Between us, we may have discovered that Isao Yamada is a more important figure than his English Wiki article currently makes him out to be.
Hi again and thanks for catching some positives on films and directors again. I have here an inverse puzzle this time, namely, we have a Steve Wang giving two IMDb links, but I have reasons to suspect they are not one person. This is the one that went to Cannes [4] and following links from the other IMDb, here is the other [5]. Visual aside, the two seem to work on very different things. Maybe you can find some more solid evidence. Also, I want you to know that for all the red links I do not include in the Cannes series (to comply with MOS) I keep a backstage lab that you may find useful by means of what-links-here on red links, if you check this, though I imagine you use some state-of-the-art tools to catch these positives and existing reds. Cheers. HoverfishTalk19:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: I will have a look, but it won't be today.
My primary interest is in fixing links to DAB pages; my state-of-the-art tools are ones which other editors have created for WP:DPL. However, if I see an easily-fixable redlink, I'll take it on.
Improving articles about the Cannes Festival looks like a really worthwhile project (and I'm not a film buff). I fully agree with you about not redlinking everything in sight - but, are you comfortable with non-English Wikis and the {{ill}} template? Near the top of your list, I found "Overseas (film)(Outremer (film)) by Brigitte Roüan (France)". Here it is fr:Outremer (film) - though I have to say that the French article doesn't fill me with confidence about passing WP:NFILM, except perhaps for that award at Namur. On the other hand, "Am Ende der Nacht by Christoph Schaub" is de:Am Ende der Nacht (1992) - and that article includes three well-sourced reviews. I'm a big fan of linking between Wikis, and that's a topic which I'd be very happy to discuss with you. Outremer might merit no more than <sup>([[:fr:Outremer (film)|fr]])</sup>, which would give Outremer(fr); but Am Ende der Nacht might merit the full ''{{ill|Am Ende der Nacht|de|Am Ende der Nacht (1992)}}'' treatment, which renders as Am Ende der Nacht [de], and which will collapse into a bluelink if someone writes the English article. Narky Blert (talk) 20:55, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: I'm convinced you're right. I can find no connection at all between the two.
The Cannes man is Steve Wang Hsieh-Chih and Steve Wang (IV). The Daughter-in-Law and A ba de qing ren are the same film - just as it says in 1995 Cannes Film Festival, which I checked only after making that connection. Here's the film in Chinese Wiki: zh:阿爸的情人. (Some Chinese editors have a nasty habit of adding phantom InterWiki links. If you click "English" in that article, you get nowhere useful.) He has no article in Chinese Wiki. A Google search for his Chinese name turned up a lot of hits, some of which are to what look like film-related websites. He seems to be active only in Chinese-language cinema, and could perhaps be redlinked as Steve Wang (Chinese filmmaker).
Steve Wang is the Hollywood SFX man Steve Wang (I). Here's his FB page - which says that he's been in Hollywood since 1986, well before the other Steve Wang became active. The links to Steve Wang (IV) and to HKMDB in that article are wrong.
Oops, I was busy elsewhere, sorry. Thanks a lot for your time looking it up. I placed a Distinguish2 hatnote, removed the wrong IMDb and somewhere I will create a red link in Cannes, just for the record. Now, about the issue of interwiki links. I have notyhing against it, though I couldn't add this to my editing time. One thing from where I stand, is that an interwiki link to a stub isn't much help, but if we have a developed article, that's another issue. Years ago I was also volunteering for translating, BUT the issue is that some of the other wikipedias don't care a whit for citations, so I would have to do the all the research to justify this in the English side or tag it all as unreferenced. So after a while I quit trying. HoverfishTalk15:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoverfish: YW. It was a well-framed question - saying that there seemed to be a problem but without saying exactly what it was, so that I could approach it with an open mind. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, i would not hold my breath hoping to receive an answer from this Brazilian user. In SIX/SEVEN years, he writes no summaries and also does not reply to messages, ever. User:MYS77, his compatriot, can confirm this. Glad i could be of service, message back if you have any doubts or questions... Cheers! --Quite A Character (talk) 02:23, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Quite A Character: Obrigado! Excellent research. It is much easier to add new information to Wiki than it is to correct or to remove wrong information.
In my experience, almost all football websites are very good, even if they don't completely meet WP:RS standards. Everyone wants to get their information right. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 12:17, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed here that you added {{dn}} tags to a bunch of links that were intentionally pointed to the disambiguation page (here because they referred to the word itself rather than any specific meaning of the term). Such links do not need to be fixed, so don't need to be tagged for fixing. Cheers! bd2412T18:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@BD2412: - an exonym always or almost always refers to a specific place, rather than being a name used for several different places. (Example: the French exonym for London is "Londres", but for London, Ontario (which has a sizable Francophone population) is "London".) The Venetians were all up&down the Dalmatian coast from around 1400 to 1800, so the exonyms will refer to places - most likely ports - which were important to them; and IMO they do need disambiguating. Unfortunately, neither Italian Wiki nor any of the Balkan Wikis were any help at all in the cases I tagged. Some of the links are just horrible, e.g. Luke (disambiguation) = Lucche - not least because all five places in the Balkans called "Luke" are insignificant villages miles inland (so far inland that I'd hesitate to include any in Dalmatia) - and there seems no reason why the Italians should have heard of any of them.
Further north, the German exonyms for places in e.g. the Czech and Polish lands can be very useful in determining exactly where is meant. I've failed before now to solve problems there for lack of information, but never because of ambiguity. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is there some indication of a date limitation on these exonyms? Also, I don't see why Italians wouldn't have exonyms for towns deeper in a neighboring country. There are, after all, Italian exonyms much further afield, for places in Russia, for example. I think that we are safe in assuming that an exonym is about the word, not an ambiguously named place in a country or region full of them. bd2412T19:20, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@BD2412: (1) Dates need sources, almost certainly printed. I'd guess from the late 18th century; that's when several of the German sources are. (2) The "neighbouring country" was infested by bandits, and was part of the Ottoman Empire - with whom the Republic of Venice was rarely on good terms and was often at war. The Venetians kept to coastal towns, or to islands, which they could defend - just as they did in Greece. (The Ottoman Empire in those days was a hostile and expansionist power - they attacked Vienna in 1683.) You'd have been lucky to get out alive from a place more than a few miles from the coast - and there was no reason to go inland, there was neither military glory to be won nor money to be made. (3) Scanning through Italian exonyms, I've heard of most of the places. They're important. I see very few redlinks, except for Libya (Tripolitania) and Ethiopia (Abyssinia) - which were controlled by or were strongly under the influence of Italy until WWII. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them could be clarified using Italian Wiki. (4) As a European, I disagree that exonyms relate to names rather than to specific places. I cannot think of any instance where an exonym does that. "Assuming" is - dare I say it - WP:OR. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 20:18, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Narky Blert, it is extremely kind of you to mop up my dab failures. You have often assisted me before. It makes the whole task of writing much less stressful and I would like you to know that I am very grateful for it. Thankyou. Eebahgum (talk) 12:46, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Eebahgum: why thank you! That's just the sort of article where readers might want to click on the well-chosen bluelinks, so getting them right can make a quality article just that tiny bit better. It was an interesting little group to sort out - especially Pietro Perna, who wasn't on the Perna DAB page when I first looked at it. (I googled the Latin book title, found it in worldcat - ah, a person, not a place! Then, all I had to do was identify Petrus Perna...) Narky Blert (talk) 13:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Movement Strategy reminder
Hi. You contributed in a previous part of the discussion, so this is just a reminder to you (and any interested talkpagewatchers), that it's the second week of our Movement Strategy Cycle 3 discussion. There's a new topic each week in July, and this week's is: How could we capture the sum of all knowledge when much of it cannot be verified in traditional ways? You can see more details, and suggest solutions or respond to other people's thoughts (from this week and last week) at Wikipedia:Wikimedia Strategy 2017. You can also read a summary of discussions that took place in the past week. Cheers. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong armenian Wikipedia logo
The SVG armenian Wikipedia logo have truncated letters. How can I fix?
Hello ! Would you please apply at New page reviewing rights page. We need helping hands at Newpages feed. Please apply for NPP right as there are 17000 newpages awaiting review we need helping hands there. It would have been a pleasure to nominate a great contributor like you. But unfortunately only the users who want to patroll new pages can apply there so I cannot nominate you. Please apply there we need helping hands at new pages feed. Thank you
AnoptimistixLet's Talk12:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Anoptimistix: TY for the offer - which regretfully I feel I should decline, even though I recognise the importance of and the valuable work done by WP:NPP. I spend most of my time fixing links to DAB pages - and there are 28,000 of those, with 600 or so new ones appearing every day. I might fix 150-200 on a good day (some of those will need specialist searching skills, including in languages other than English) so it takes a big team effort from WP:DPL to drag the headline number down by even a small amount. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 13:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Making Ozark redirect to the TV series instead of Ozarks
I'm aware the Ozarks are rather older than a TV series called Ozark, but I think anyone who goes straight to "Ozark", singular, would be looking for the show, not the mountains. Is it OK to change the redirect?--occono (talk) 20:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Occono: If you think there's a case for changing the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of Ozark, I suggest that you start either a WP:RM or a WP:RFD discussion, and seek WP:CONSENSUS. (1) The redirect has been around since 2005, so there's the time-honoured factor. That doesn't mean it's still right, though. Things change, and 12 years is a long time in Wiki terms. It certainly wouldn't hurt to open a discussion. It could be that the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC has changed, or that there is now no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. (2) If there is consensus for a change, it will be YOUR duty to fix all the links it breaks. (59 incoming links is nothing, I once turned a redirect into a DAB page, breaking 250+ links...and in the middle of my fixing them, my IP got hit with a WP:BLOCK because of some idiot vandal in the building I live in...it took me an hour or two to find {{unblock}} and to regain the ability to edit articles and so fix the remainder...grr...) Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 21:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There's 56 links to Ozark, that aren't the TV show? Is it normal to refer to them singularly? I don't even know where to post those discussions, on the Ozark talk page? Will anyone even see that? I'm in over my head, nevermind.--occono (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Occono: I have Dark Thoughts about the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC guideline. It suggests that there is always a primary topic, except in very rare cases. I disagree. For a particularly horrible example, see Talk:New York (please don't read all of it, just count the pages of discussion). The primary topic for "New York" was until recently the state. Before it was turned into a DAB page, User:BD2412 found and fixed over 20,000 bad links into it, most (but not all) about the city. The problem with primary topics is, that bad links in never get noticed unless a page has a vigilant curator.
As a similar example to yours, vinyl has recently been turned into a DAB page; it had been since, like, forever a redirect to vinyl group. The change (which I'm certain was the right thing to do) broke 750 links. I got in early, and fixed the ones about chemistry - there were only about 60 of them, every other link had been pointing to the wrong place (they were mostly about gramophone records and floor coverings).
I had a quick look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Ozark. For the moment at least, everything looks OK. Nevertheless, you may be on to something. I suggest that you keep an eye on that link. If it starts to collect too many links about the TV series, get back to me and I will open a discussion. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 23:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Saint Dominic in Soriano 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 [[User:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|{{subst:Giteshs78}}]] -- [[User:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|{{subst:Giteshs78}}]] ([[User talk:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|talk]]) 02:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Narky Blert, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Alex ShihTalk13:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alessandro Manzoni as malacologist?
I am dubious that Alessandro Manzoni is known as a malacologist, and the claim that he described several (or any) species is not supported by the citation given. The 2400 years of Malacology paper rather generously and vaguely includes "others with an interest in mollusks" (per its abstract). Even if Manzoni did some academic writing on shells of Elba, it is debatable whether Malacology is a WP:defining trait for Manzoni that merits categorization, inclusion in malagcologists lists, etc. Albert Einstein is not categorized in Violinists, for instance, even though he enjoyed playing. Unless other sources can attest to the importance of Manzoni to malacology (or vice versa), it may be best to downplay or avoid misrepresenting this role, lest a myriad of bots, algorithms, readers, and editors end up perpetuating a weak claim as gospel truth. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 03:12, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Animalparty: - I grow less and less happy with the citation I found. I didn't stop searching when I found it, but nothing else so much as gave a personal initial. The site looks respectable, the identification is precise - but, it feels wrong. Alessandro was in the right place at the right time, but there seems to be no other suggestion that he took any interest in natural history. I suspect that the binomial authority may have been Angelo, who you found.
I'm tempted to WP:BOLDly change the authority links to Angelo, to downgrade the mention in Alessandro's article to "this source says, but..." and to remove Alessandro from both Category and List. I fully agree that hobbyists don't deserve mention in either. Thoughts? Narky Blert (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I fully support removing all categories and list entries referring to Alessandro as a malacologist and removing species authority links until/unless better sources are found. The 2400 Years of Malacology paper, while written by experts, appears to be somewhat self-published, and even taking it at face value may represent an extreme minority view or trivial claim, contra balancing aspects. I'd caution against even explaining "this source says this but...", as potential WP:SYN. Perhaps Italian-speaking wikipedians or others with knowledge of Manzoni can offer clarity.
Regarding the other A. Manzoni, the one more widely known as a naturalist, you may be interested in the Wikispecies page I created, with an obituary in Italian that includes biographical details and a (partial?) bibliography. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Animalparty: All links to Alessandro, and the sentence in his article, removed. I've added Angelo to List of malacologists as a redlink, with your WikiSpecies article as a pseudo-citation. I also found this 2002 journal article which mentions Angelo. It cites a 1876 publication; the extract from which, while entertaining, adds little more than where he spent his summer holidays in 1873.
2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
The Barnstar of Diligence
I want to thank you for you patience and magnanimity in this discussion, particularly encapsulated by your comment "If one editor finds it unclear, it is unclear." Getting consensus on revising guidelines is a tedious job, and you've shown an uncommon commitment to getting it right. Thank you. —swpbTgo beyond12:54, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Swpb: TY! My most recent suggested version still isn't right, other relevant issues have been raised which I will need to think through before posting again. (I've spent the last five days offline, sticking pins into a wax effigy of my ISP.) I don't want to overcomplicate; and I think we both agree that getting it right is the only thing that matters, and that making some sort of halfway "improvement" would be wrong.
(I am a retired patent agent. As a class, we despair at most lawyers' draughting skills. I've seen, and eventually recommended for signature for want of any better option, an NDA which was 10 pages long. In contrast, I once wrote one which was 4 lines long, which was dead easy to understand, and which covered everything that mattered. I also recall a telephone conversation with some lawyer after I had suggested a change to his wording. "This obviously means such and such." "So you say. I understand what you have just said. But what about anyone else who reads this document five years from now?" (I won that argument...).) Narky Blert (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Újpest (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
In discussions of architectural styles in New York City, "Flemish style" would refer to influences from the architecture of Flanders. New York having been founded by the Dutch as "New Amsterdam", architectural influences from the Netherlands are referred to as "Dutch", as in "Dutch Colonial style". Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Link to DAB page repaired)
Hi there, it looks like you're "repairing" DAB pages, but your two edits at Gerard have taken a regular WL and changed it to a disambig page, piping it to the original WL, but the disambig page just redirects to the original WL. If it's not broke, what are you fixing by adding unneeded redirects and unneeded piping? JesseRafe (talk) 16:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then move the pages? There's no content at the DAB page, only a redirect, this is confusing to the reader. Occam's razor suggests leaving it be. JesseRafe (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting from WP:INTDAB, 'the community has adopted the procedure of rerouting all intentional disambiguation links in mainspace through "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects' (emphasis in the original). Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for File:Burgervlotbrug - vlotbrug.jpg
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ImageTaggingBot: As a retired IP lawyer, I fully understand and accept the need for copyright statements and image size reduction.
However, hitting me with this message, causing an edit conflict while I was in the middle of adding the relevant tags immediately after uploading strikes me as arguably a touch over-zealous. I'm no longer a newbie, but this is the sort of behaviour which discourages new editors from improving Wikipedia. Don't bite the newbies. Narky Blert (talk) 00:01, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ImageTaggingBot: Even after 100,000 edits, I find the copyright templates almost impossible to understand and to select correctly. It could be just me, but I suspect it might not. The instructions on what you're supposed to do when uploading an image are woeful verging on non-existent. (Don't tell me where to look - I tried once, and couldn't find them. I'm a Searcher, who fixes links to DAB pages. I recall one problem which took an hour's work using Czech, English, German and Polish Wikis to solve. If I can't work out how to upload a photo correctly, how do you expect anyone else to?) Narky Blert (talk) 00:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Electric Jukebox
Hi Narky, you revised my edits to the Electric Jukebox (the product) page and suggested I create a new company page for Electric Jukebox (the company). Happy to do this if you think it's the right thing to do, but it may be easier to group Electric Jukebox (company) with ROXI (current music streaming product by Electric Jukebox) and Electric Jukebox (old music streaming product)? What do you recon? Otherwise I'll need to create new pages for both Electric Jukebox (company) and ROXI (current music streaming product by Electric Jukebox). Whaddaya recon? Cheers. Tho2009 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tho2009: - you're the expert! Electric Jukebox is a good-sized article, and 406 views in the last 30 days is pretty good too. I suggest adding a section about Electric Jukebox Company at the beginning of it. Readers are more likely to be looking for the product than the company, and they're the people that count. Also, it may be best to put all the information in one place. If the company launches more products still and starts to get news coverage in its own right, then could be the time to split the company info out into a separate article. Use your judgment - if you were a reader who'd just heard the name and wanted to find out more, what would you like to see?
ROXI looks a pretty new product (August 2017?). I'm not sure there's enough WP:RS material yet for a standalone article. A way to build towards an article could be (for now) to add a section about it at the end of Electric Jukebox.
Adding a topic to an existing article if you're not sure about that topic's independent notability is also a good way of keeping out of the clutches of WP:AFD... Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 17:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks for the tip Narky, the first Electric Jukebox (product) has been replaced by the new Electric Jukebox (company) product which is called ROXI and there's a fare amount of reliable source media coverage talking about it. I'll add in a section at the top about Electric Jukebox (the company) and a topic at the bottom about ROXI as you suggest rather than starting new articles at this stage. Cheers!
Buongiorno da Coreca,
ti scrivo per salutarti, ringraziarti e sapere come stai. Io sto abbastanza bene per ora, ti scrivo perché ho visto che hai collaborato alla stesura e miglioria di alcuni articoli da me creati o che ho partecipato io. Ti chiedo una piccola cortesia che verrà ampiamente e generosamente ricambiata. Per favore potresti aiutare queste voci, ampliandole la traduzione, e magari aggiungendo anche qualche riferimento? Io ho fatto qualcosa e ho chiesto aiuto qua e la con qualche insuccesso. Se per cortesia tu mi potresti aiutare io te ne sarò grato infinitamente e quello che vorrai vedere tradotto in italiano e suoi dialetti te lo tradurrò. Dal Siciliano al Lombardo, passando per il ligure al napoletano. Nell'attesa di una tua certa risposta ti ringrazio in anticipo di vero cuore. un caro saluto dalla Calabria--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 04:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino: Ciao! I try to improve Wikipedia in any way I can – in all languages. I cannot promise to work on any specific article – I'm a Wikignome, and I spend most of my time repairing mistakes in English Wikipedia. One editor can not do everything.
Those three articles look basically OK. But – don't rely on IMDb! It's full of errors.
I am satisfied with this article which I translated from Italian Wikipedia into English, Maurizio Giglio – che eroe! If you would like to translate an article from English into Italian, with Calabrian importance, look at Saint Dominic in Soriano. (It is always easier to translate into your own mother tongue.) Narky Blert (talk) 05:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning from Coreca, Calabria,
I'm writing to thank you and greet you. I told you that even if they look perfect, I'm sure you could do a masterpiece! Obviously your courtesy will be very much appreciated, if you have any request for me in some Italian dialect I will gladly do it. I do not expect much, but only to make me more beautiful and understandable the articles, the rest I will think of asking for help in the world. You are a great wikignome, indeed you are an extraordinary person who knows with diplomacy finding the solution to everything. In the expectation of your answer I thank you in advance for what you can do for me from today on. a fervent greeting from Calabria--Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino (talk) 05:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere(or here)09:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Insertcleverphrasehere: TY for the compliment! and for the invitation. I feel that I should decline the invitation for the same reason I gave the previous time I was invited to join WP:NPP. The headline number of 28,000 bad links to DAB pages in July 2017 is now down to 18,800-odd. I'm currently looking at #8,200 in that list, on my second time through it. I think it might be possible to get that headline number below 10,000. I flatter myself that I am one of the handful of regular power users in WP:DPL, see the DAB HoF. If that headline number stabilises at a low level (ha!), I will look for something else Wikignomish to do. It might or might not be WP:NPP, it might be something like sorting out this unhelpful mess. My speciality is multi-lingual searching and linking. Unless I've miscounted, I've now fixed bad links in English Wiki using {{ill}} links to 124 Wikis in other languages. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 23:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Insertcleverphrasehere: Just a heads-up. I see that you've recently issued a WP:NPP invite to User:Headbomb. I'm reluctant to question other editors' activities and motives, but I've come across him before and he strikes me as WP:LAWYERish. He has hit me with 10 (I kid you not) reversion emails in the last 2 days on pages where I had used his own fix to repair errors automatically created by Template:Infobox journal. He then made what look like the right, if thoroughly non-obvious, repairs. I would just have made changes like that silently. Why revert before correcting a change, when the first WP:AGF change did nothing more than fix a spurious link picked up by User:DPL bot and for which the reverter himself had suggested the fix? It's insulting.
@Insertcleverphrasehere: "maybe it makes the repair easier?" No. The steps were, in effect (1) |link=badlink (2) |link=badlink |suppressbadlink=yes (3) |link=badlink (4) |link=goodlink. Step (3) involved an unnecessary extra save. (I only revert two types of thing (1) vandalism (strange how often that seems to be by IP editors who have edited no other article...) (2) reversions of me when WP:MOS is on my side and I want to point reverter to the relevant guideline (which will be in my rv edit comment for teaching purposes – I wouldn't want to drop WP:MOS on my foot...). There's also (3), which has happened to me at least once: another editor disagreed with my attempted resolution of a {{dn}} tag, and put the tag back. Fair enough!) Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Narky Blert. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I feel that this category isn't really appropriate considering it was put on many songs that are considered "staples" and played by pretty much any Cajun band. For example [6]. I can find more than 50 bands that have played this song. I feel that the category would just unduly link many very popular songs to a single band. I understand that they charted with Allons A Lafayette, but I don't think it's appropriate to have this category on pretty much any important Cajun song wiki article. Michael miceli (talk) 02:08, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for being understanding about this. I wouldn't mind if there was a way to categorize articles that didn't involve a long list at the bottom of an article, because it is nice to have so much metadata on an article, but with the way they are displayed on Wikipedia, I just don't think it's appropriate. Michael miceli (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael miceli: not at all, thank you for bringing the issue up. I've now ploughed through WP:CAT, and you were absolutely right. I've emptied the category and requested its deletion.
I thought of the "Yesterday" issue. 2,200 cover versions? it would be ridiculous to add all of them to that article.
The one-sentence mention of Captain Gumbo with a WP:RS citation in "Allons à Lafayette" looks correct: charting singles pass WP:NSONG. Basically, it's that single and their one charting album (see WP:NALBUM) which for me get the band through WP:N. Most of the references in the band's article are evidence that something exists, not of the band's notability.
2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting
As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:36, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Nessie: TY! None of them, would be my guess. If the obituarist is right (and I have my doubts), I think they would be species in the Scottish Borders or Northumberland. Alarm bells (1) capital H in a specific epithet (2) biologists don't name species after themselves. Narky Blert (talk) 14:08, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A six-page obit is nice; but having two major arachnologists (Cambridge and Blackwall) name species in his honour puts to rest any doubts I had about WP:NBIO, especially when one of the specific epithets has stuck.
@Paine Ellsworth: I only had to read part of that discussion to realise that I was completely out of my depth. TY for the invitation, but I don't think I have anything useful to contribute (and it would be very unhelpful to post something which was uninformed and wrong). Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your consideration and candor, Narky Blert! It's probably not that big of a deal to most editors; however, to me redirect categorization and rcats' providing information about redirect categorization have been the main thrust of my editing for many years. I would, of course, go with any consensus that comes from that Rfc. Happy Holidays to you!Paine08:54, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Paine Ellsworth: I hope that that discussion proves fruitful and ends with a good consensus. I imagine that most if not all of us members of the 100,000 Club spend most of our time doing this sort of important but scarcely visible work behind the scenes. (I fix links to DAB pages, and do associated small copyedit/cleanup jobs.) Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 20:21, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
Hello. It would be nice if you used a complete phrase in Edit summaries. I have no idea what "DN tag" means (though I could look it up), and neither do lots of other people. Sincerely, your friend, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 16:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Narky, i think it would be better to change this [7] DAB as "Assyria". It has been discussed before and as other editors ascertained [8][9][10] the term refers to ancient Assyria (because the section in the article is about antiquity), and has nothing to do with one of the disputed[11] terms used by modern Syriac Christians, see [12]. In this case, fixing-repairing the DAB link as "Assyria" seems more accurate. I can't do it, because the page is semi-protected and I am not registered. Can you please fix it? Cheers. 192.222.219.35 (talk) 18:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Assyria/n/s are notoriously tricky terms to get right (as that to-and-fro over where Assyrians should redirect illustrates). I too have come the modern disputed term. Narky Blert (talk) 19:22, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Forth Bridge
Hi there, the dab tags at Forth Bridge regard clarification as to whether North or South Queensferry is intended, per a post I made on the talk page, so I've put them back in place. I dabbed several other instances in the article a few days ago but these two were less clear so I didn't want to guess them and tagged them instead. The first of the two is probably South Q, from the preceding sentences, but it isn't certain and the second could be either. All the best. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:38, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mutt Lunker: in that case they should be {{clarify}} tags not {{dn}} tags. {{dn}} tags are only to be used on links to DAB pages. From the documentation, "This tag is used on a link that needs to be improved because it goes to a disambiguation page. The tag is intended to be used only when an editor has tried to fix the link but not succeeded". {{clarify}} also has the advantage of a |reason= parameter which explains the problem on mousing-over. Narky Blert (talk) 12:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mutt Lunker: - a tip. If the sources are unclear and you think the problem will be impossible ever to solve, you could add a non-WP:OR footnote, e.g. "The sources simply say Queensferry; it is unclear whether they mean North Queensferry or South Queensferry." Not as satisfactory as finding the true answer; but at least of some help to readers, by telling them that there is a puzzle which an editor has tried to solve. I've used that technique with e.g. mediaeval history and the birthplaces of Polish emigrés, where there's very likely no surviving record. Opening a discussion on the Talk Page, as you have done, can also be a good idea. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Just to let you know that I've made quite a few changes recently to pages related to S-line, including the station subtemplates. If you find anything seriously amiss in China, Malaysia/Singapore, Thailand or New Zealand, please let me know as I may have messed up. Thanks, Certes (talk) 12:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working my way through Disambiguation pages with links for the third time, and so should find any new S-line DAB problems. (I find it a good place to work: hardly any duplication of effort, and sooner or later everything gets looked at. I'm also bookmarking DAB problems, some longstanding, which specialist WikiProjects may be able to solve.) Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 13:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reminder. I use page one of that report to fix pages with many links but just realised I can search it for "station" to check my work. It won't reveal any links that I may have inadvertently sent to the wrong article or turned red, but hopefully they are few. Certes (talk) 15:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I think I've got my head round some of the intricacies but link1= will be handy, especially when the article title is an an unusual format that doesn't correspond to any settings of the existing parameters. Certes (talk) 17:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ZenCash(Cryptocurrency) New Unreviewed Article Disambiguation
Dear Narky Blert
I would appreciate your help to review and cleaning my brand new article.
There is a disambiguation problem between Z Classic, Zcash and ZenCash that is needed to be solved. Maybe you can help me in redirect, move or reorder this to the right place
I would really appreciate your experience and comments to improve it.
RNLI). Mjroots (talk) 20:53, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Michig. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Half Man Half Biscuit because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!--Michig (talk) 07:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
LouisAlain (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC) 
--Jennica✿ / talk 13:22, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Done. Cheers, >MinorProphet (talk) 18:25, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
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 [[User:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|{{subst:Giteshs78}}]] -- [[User:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|{{subst:Giteshs78}}]] ([[User talk:{{subst:Giteshs78}}|talk]]) 02:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I'm OnoRod 93. The page Hopeless Fountain Kingdom World Tour: Installment One arleady exist as Hopeless Fountain Kingdom World Tour. Thanks
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
