User talk:Prioryman

DYK for Luis Bravo de Acuña

(X! · talk)  · @181  ·  00:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sandy's retired

Hi. Regarding this. Sandy's retired. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 09:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Belated message

I just realised that I forgot to inform you that the Crosby Garrett Helmet GA review is on hold. The review page is here. Sorry about that! Sarastro1 (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll have a look at it as soon as possible. Prioryman (talk) 16:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Passed now. I've added it to "Art" in the GA list, but I'm not sure if that is the right place. Feel free to move it if it is not. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I think that's probably the right place for it. Prioryman (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Green's Lodge Battery

Hello! Your submission of Green's Lodge Battery at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know - I'll try to take a look at it tomorrow. Prioryman (talk) 22:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination for Soldier Artificer Company

Hi there. I've reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Soldier Artificer Company. As I said there, many of those comments are not DYK requirements, but I left those notes anyway. I also left this note at WT:DYK as I'm not clear if a second review is needed there or not. Carcharoth (talk) 17:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tourism in Gibraltar

Hello! Your submission of Tourism in Gibraltar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Peter.C • talk • contribs 03:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Case srebrenica cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Case srebrenica cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Let know

Thanks for letting PumpkinSky know about the TFA nomination. We first have to win him back, not easy, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:23, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Translation request

Thank you and happy New Year. I am afraid I can't translate this article to sr.wiki because I am banned there. But I will start translating it to serbo-croatian wiki. All the best. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Prioryman (talk) 22:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK RFC

Was there ever a RFC drafted? If not I'd be happy to help.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I see someone else has broached this. I was coming here to ask if there's any likelihood of the new, multi-part RfC on inclusion of GAs going live anytime soon now that we're into the new year, since I would love to get back into helping out at DYK (and submitting there, to a lesser extent). Yngvadottir (talk) 17:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Maile66 notified me of a complication [1]. If people are intent on stuffing more content into the Main Page without coordination this is going to get seriously tricky (or perhaps I should say more so than it already is). I'm mulling whether we need to be looking at the Main Page in its entirety, rather than tinkering with individual bits of it. I'm conscious, though, that this would greatly increase the complexity of the task. What do you two think? Prioryman (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

People are, and it's likely that wanting to avoid that whole issue was one reason some thought it would be neat to use DYK to get GAs on the Main Page, since DYK already has a Main Page segment. However, that doesn't change the facts that those who wanted to simply express the view that GA should be on the Main Page have been denied a voice, and the one that really concerns me, that DYK has been left with an officially declared consensus that it must do something that ... IMO ... there was no consensus for. The GA project would of course have to be in on the new RfC from the start - and they may have insights/preferences about Main Page placement. But failing a re-opening of that flawed RfC close, there has to be a new RfC (unless someone with a deal more knowledge of these things has a third solution), and implementation is a secondary issue iff the new RfC decides for inclusion of GA on the Main Page. Maybe GA and Article for Improvement would balance each other nicely, I dunno. But right now it's a bridge too far. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a step too far to include them? Should we not press ahead with an RFC on should they be on the main page at all, if so in DYK, in new slot, if in new slot where, alternating... etc. ?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 23:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It seems to me that there's both a political problem and a practical one here. The practical problem is that you can't simply keep stuffing new things onto the Main Page without it becoming too unwieldy. The political problem is that we have an unresolved RFC on GA/DYK that isn't going to go away; and further, if the question of what should go on the Main Page is thrown open, there's a real danger that those who have a strange distaste for DYK will try to kick it off the Main Page. I wouldn't want to precipitate that. I think you're probably right, Gilderien, we should probably focus on the GA/DYK issue first and leave the big picture for others. Prioryman (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think DYK being removed is unlikely but a distinct possibility. I have no experience with running this sort of thing in the past, presumably the way forward from here is to draft a RFC on the whole GA/DYK idea and also a neutral notification to be placed on the WP:GA and WP:DYK talk pages, centralised discussion etc. and also on the talk page of everyone who commented in the previous proposal I made?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 23:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I meant that it's a step too far to consider where GAs should be placed on the Main Page if not within DYK (that, sadly, has to be asked now because the former RfC is not unresolved; unless someone can come up with a third way, let that closure stand or override it with a new decision appear to be the alternatives) or how it should interact with other things such as the Edit Suggestion. I liked the structure you had proposed and drafted, which is why I'm poking you now. But I am very far from thinking like a lawyer. I just do think a revisit of the issues needs to happen, and not only for folks who share my views about DYK, but for those who just wanted to say they want GAs on the Main Page, especially if they said it at the Main Page RfC that got ignored. But the GA project should be in on it from the start this time, particularly since they appear to have felt a bit blindsided last time. That's it, really, other than an apology for reminding you of this hot potato. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: Translation request

I'm not really into that kind of stuff ;) but I'm sure you can find someone to do it at hr:WP:K, which is the local equivalent of the Village pump on en:. There's also a foreign language section. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

TFAR

Replied at Sandy's talk page, since that's where the discussion has ended up. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 08:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

See followup there ... it will take me a moment to get caught up. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, got caught up, checked archives, decided I was wrong, re-instated. My sincere apologies! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting it out. Please note that the points score for the article is likely to rise to 4 in the next couple of days - there are some translations being done in other language wikis and it's already covered in 19 wikis, only one off the number for the "widely covered" criterion to kick in. This, of course, means that it would outscore the alternative proposal for February 14. Prioryman (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand the removal, go ahead and nominate it for any date, two slots are open, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Now I could also nominate it, the rules were "streamlined". Or do you want to specifically have it on 13 Feb? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I looked at the calendar: 13 February is Ash Wednesday this year, not the best match. I had not looked when I said I would support it that day. But I would support (almost) any other! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

re:Another Fucking DYK hook suggestion

I have no problem with what you suggested, clarifying that Fucking Hell is a beer however I do think that it should still have the Fucking Mayor in there as he was the one who pointed out that there was no Fucking brewery. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Problem is, that just ends up repeating the Fucking village name. It's better to mention it once and have either a Fucking mayor or a Fucking brewery. I thought the brewery was better. Prioryman (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough, I suppose a Fucking brewery does look better than the Fucking mayor. I suppose that you can't have too much Fucking than is healthy for the hook. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. Now I just have to find enough material to justify an article on Wan King Path in Hong Kong... ;-) Prioryman (talk) 11:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

If you're having trouble, you could always try having a go at Pissen in Germany. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I might have a go at expanding Brown Willy: did you know that Cornwall's Brown Willy is subject to the Brown Willy effect? Prioryman (talk) 11:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It would require expansion to just under 4500 characters. Do you want to collaborate on this and run it as an April Fool'd hook?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It requires 5x doesn't it? In which case User:Prioryman/Brown Willy should be sufficiently long. I need to source the etymology (should be able to do that tomorrow) but otherwise there's enough there to justify a DYK. And yes, April Fool's sounds like a good idea. :-) Prioryman (talk) 19:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow. I'm impressed, can I edit that in your userspace?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Go for it! There is scope for adding more to the Environment section; there seems to have been a controversy about the proposed building of wind turbines nearby, but I haven't got round to adding that. Prioryman (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I've come up with a few possible hooks - see User talk:Prioryman/Brown Willy. Feel free to add alternatives if you can think of any. Prioryman (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

What do you think of my suggestion of the merge on the talk page? --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Anne's DYK QPQs

Prioryman, you mentioned you'd be handling any queries on Anne's remaining DYK nominations. Does this extend to doing QPQs for those nominations that she never got around to doing? I was hoping that she might have some unused ones, but as far as I can tell her final review was assigned to a nomination that has already run. I've been holding off listing the QPQ-less submissions in my posts of undone reviews; I don't think it's fair to ask for a reviewer absent the required QPQs.

There are three nominations for a total of five QPQ reviews needed:

• Template:Did you know nominations/Spur Battery: needs one QPQ; still needs both reviews
• Template:Did you know nominations/Middle Hill Battery: needs two QPQs; the first review was favorable, but it can't proceed without the QPQs.
• Template:Did you know nominations/Bruce Cooper: needs two QPQs and both reviews.

The first review for Template:Did you know nominations/Green's Lodge Battery, which does have a QPQ completed, turned up issues. Can you respond on this one? It's been over a month since the review, and if the issues aren't addressed soon, it risks someone coming by and giving it an X, as would typically happen in the regular section when there isn't a response for so long.

Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I've done the first two, and I'll see if I can do the latter two later on today. Prioryman (talk) 12:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Done the latter two now. Prioryman (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Typo?

Hi, just wondering.... At the end of the Location section, is "Sitterton Farm" correct? I'd assume it's a typo, but without access to the source, I can't tell for sure. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's correct. A number of properties were renamed "Sitterton <whatever>" in the 19th century by prudish Victorians who didn't like "Shitterton" - more fools they. Prioryman (talk) 00:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I had checked Google, and it looked like more used the "h" for the Farm, but we should certainly go with what your source says. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Translation request

Hi Prioryman,

Thanks for your message on my talk page about translating Icelandic Phallological Museum into Polish.

Unfortunately translating into Polish is not my forte. I can just about manage to translate from Polish into English, so regretfully I will have to pass on this one. :-)

Best Regards -- Marek.69 ^talk 22:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

How about German, at least a subset, similar to Little Moreton Hall? - You asked PumpkinSky for thoughts here, you seem not to know that he stopped editing, missed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Joel Gilbert

Hello, Prioryman. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Joel Gilbert.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

:Applicable guideline toward specifically sourcing opinions, not facts, see WP:RSOPINION. Thans, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't remove someone else's comments from a discussion

If you don't agree with someone else, say so, explain why, don't just remove their comment, like you did with my comment here. It goes against all discussion page guidelines. Furthermore, in this instance, you are incorrect, a second review is needed since the original first one obviously no longer applies (it was about a different, since rejected hook). Fram (talk) 13:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Political development in modern Gibraltar

Prioryman, where does this one stand? I see that back on October 31 you were going to check on things, but the disagreement between Wee Curry Monster (the author) and Cambalachero hit an impasse a couple of weeks later, and nothing has happened since. No one has been interested in reviewing it, either, despite it being highlighted in my "old articles needing review" messages. Are you willing to dig into it now?

I think, if no one's going to take it up within the next week or so, we may have to let that orange X stand, and formally reject it as an unsuccessful submission. It seems to me that if it hits two months with no action at all, that will simply be too much. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I think you're right. I'll have a look at it later today. Prioryman (talk) 08:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I've done the first review. I think it's disgraceful that this nomination was deliberately thrown off course with spurious allegations in this way, and indeed yet another enthusiastic contributor chased away from the project, in what bears all the hallmarks of a petty nationalistic feud. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't even rise to being a nationalistic feud; it's pettiness, spite and paranoia, fuelled by a campaign of lies by Wikipediocracy members. Prioryman (talk) 22:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Howdy there

Done. No offense taken. — Maile (talk) 15:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Lynching of Laura and Lawrence Nelson

Hi, I left you a reply about your suggestion of taking this to GAN; don't know whether you saw it. I've tidied the article up quite a bit, added some details, checked sources and so on, and I think it's ready for GA. It's possibly almost ready for FAC (though you may disagree, I don't know), but I feel I'd need to see some of the early newspaper reports for that. There was a preliminary hearing, for example, for the son, which we know nothing about. But in the meantime GA might work. Are you still interested in doing that? I don't mind which one of us takes it through the process, or we could do it together. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Let's do it together, that way we can share the work. I'm happy for you to put up the nomination if you like. Prioryman (talk) 08:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good; I'll go ahead and set up the nomination. Reviewers are thin on the ground, so it could take several weeks. On the other hand, it's short, so that might appeal to a reviewer. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:12, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion please

Hello, I know you were involved in Fae case. That's why I'd like to ask your opinion about this. What is wrong with my post? Why it got reverted? Thanks. 76.126.143.35 (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess they think you're trolling - since you're coming from an IP address that has apparently never been used on Wikipedia before, and you've not registered an account, I can see why they might think that. Prioryman (talk) 20:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not trolling. My IP is a dynamic one, so there's no way for you to say, if I have ever edited Wikipedia before. The only thing you could say, looking at my IP, is the this IP, I am using now, has never been used to edit Wikipedia before. Besides one does not have to consider my Wikipedia's history to decide, if I am trolling or I am not trolling. One only should read my post. I expressed a legitimate concern about one arbitrator's performance in the case that ended up in the banning of Fae who used to be a trustee Director at that time. I truly believe that performance was unacceptable, and that's why I wanted to discuss this matter with the wider community.Instead I've found overprotective Wikipedians who are afraid to discuss the problems with the arbitration . 76.126.143.35 (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry you seem to have met with a hostile response, but I'm afraid there's nothing I can do about it. There's a lot of suspicion on Wikipedia these days. Prioryman (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Syndicate

Hi. Do you think you'd please be able to shed any light on the topic at Talk:Syndicate (video game)#In-game image - which platform? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 15:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK tick for Thổ Chu Island

Hi...you reviewed this already a while back; the issues are resolved, but we need another greeny tick for the ALT4 hook. May I bug ya to do it again? lol. Thx! Rcej (Robert) – talk 08:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK update for Manuel Antonio Caro

Thanks for reviewing and catching the lead-length issue. I've fixed the issue, so if you'd have another look I'd appreciate it.
— Sctechlaw (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK

I completed our review of Martin's Cave. Would you be amenable to a history merge of User:Prioryman/Brown Willy soon and a SYK nom requested to be held until Fish Day?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd forgotten I owed you a reply on that one. Yes, let's do a history merge and an April Fool's nomination. I've been busy April Fooling as well, see Template:Did you know nominations/Shitterton and Template:Did you know nominations/John le Fucker... Prioryman (talk) 22:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok excellent I'll ask Crisco1492 to do it. Those seem um ... interesting :) I've been planning one myself, if I can expand Field (agriculture) I can go for a really obvious one instead of the usual surprising one as a sort of anti-joke April 1.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chicken Kiev speech, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rukh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Sinclair

I have started a proposal to group together related articles about the works of Sir Clive Sinclair. Please take a look at the proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Sinclair and see if you support it. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for R v Registrar General ex parte Segerdal‎

(X! · talk)  · @224  ·  16:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments

Tag! - You're It! — Maile (talk) 15:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Abd al-Malik Abd al-Wahid

Hello! Your submission of Abd al-Malik Abd al-Wahid at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jetstreamer ^Talk 00:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Prioryman/Dyngus Day

Thanks, that's a good start and it would be nice to develop it so that it can be T:TDYKed; I think it is already the correct length. I've expanded it a little, also adding some clarifications that VM made on my talk. Could you provide a ref for the Dyngus god claim? PS. In the future, I suggest you post such issues at WT:POLAND, so you can get wider audience than just on my page. Also, thanks for writing about Poland! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Augustus II the Strong fox-tossing with a single finger

Congratulations, your addition to the lead just got the last laugh on The News Quiz. I've requested a citation, as I can't see this mentioned in the body of the article. Qwfp (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Wow! When was that broadcast? Prioryman (talk) 19:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Abd al-Malik Abd al-Wahid

The DYK project (nominate) 09:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Closure request

Hi Prioryman, just letting you know that I moved your closure request from AN to WP:ANRFC, which is where requests for admin closure are usually posted. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 12:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for doing that! Prioryman (talk) 13:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

TALKBACK

Hello, Prioryman. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Joel Gilbert.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

P.s. it would be good if you responded to all of your mail, including the similar talkback somewhere above. Or did you miss that? Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 06:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Triple TFA nomination

Those sorts of "unusual" requests need to go to Raul's talk page, rather than the regular TFAR page - the instructions say (fifth paragraph( "If you have an exceptional request that deviates from these instructions (for example, an article making a second appearance as TFA, or a "double-header"), please ask Raul654 on his talk page rather than making the request here." FWIW, I think a triple-header TFA with those articles would be an excellent idea. I also hope that the discussion about the 1st April TFA gets sorted sooner rather than later, but that's rather out of my hands now too. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 21:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

You may be interested in this discussion, for history facts. I don't believe that this project needs any kind of director, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, I do think it needs some kind of coordination, but relying on one person (and worse, giving him unfettered authority to make decisions) is just a recipe for trouble. Prioryman (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I mentioned consensus on TFAR. - (Did you notice that Raul scheduled last for 1 Dec?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Wagner was started 20 Dec, closed 9 February. How long it takes depends on how many people want how much changed, I guess, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's helpful, if a little discouraging... I'll just have to hope there aren't too many changes requested. Prioryman (talk) 23:50, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

My long wish-list is on the talk ;) - Talking of wishes: did you see my move request for The Flying Dutchman? (14 of Wagner's stage works in German, that one in English) - did you see my talk, pic and poem for Ash Wednesday? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Soldier Artificer Company

KTC (talk) 08:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Kiringul

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Grand Casemates Gates

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Wandering Jews and slippery dicks

Hi! I've a couple of mean ideas for DYK. I've been planning to expand articles about Wandering Jews (and those other Wandering Jews). There are plenty of sources (see these search results, for example), but I am not sure which of them would be considered reliable. Also, for the past few days, I've been trying to find a species that interacts with slippery dicks. Imagine a hook such as "... that Somespecies eats slippery dicks?" Expanding the article about slippery dicks itself would not be impossible, but a bit more demanding, methinks. What do you think? Surtsicna (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Hole (Scientology)

A tag has been placed on The Hole (Scientology), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

["The Hole" is an attack page that exists for no other purpose than "primarily to disparage or threaten its subject." The subject is not notable enough to warrant its own page. Furthermore, all the sources are biased and unreliable, and only corroborate each other in its statements, not offering a different perspective. Atack, Reitman, Kent, Ortega and Wright write from the same perspective. The page does not comply with WP:NPOV. Also, why would a Wikipedia page of a place be maintained about something that has not been proven to exist? The article starts with "The Hole is a facility reportedly operated by the Church of Scientology.." The page contains nothing but hearsay and conjecture.]

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. NestleNW911 (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. NestleNW911 (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fifth Siege of Gibraltar

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Gibraltar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cartagena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Brown Willy

Hello! Your submission of Brown Willy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

L Ron affirmations

I saw you had a draft on the subject...are you sure it's that special? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 05:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that article... it's possible that it comes out of that general background / milieu but I have no sources to support that idea, unfortunately. Prioryman (talk) 23:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Fourth Siege of Gibraltar

Lord Roem ~ (talk) 00:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

ITN for Exhumation of Richard III

FallingGravity (talk) 08:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work on Exhumation of Richard III (and many other articles)! LukeSurl t c 09:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Superb initial work on Exhumation of Richard III of England" Fascinating! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Hear hear! Excellent work!  An optimist on the run! 11:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, all of you! Prioryman (talk) 20:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Like I'm a bit late to the party, but just wanted to let you know i read your new article last night and found it to be very good. Thanks for putting it together so quickly ~! -- Dianna (talk) 20:21, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Prioryman, Exhumation of Richard III of England should really have the coordinates of the exact location the body was found. Can you find them?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Easy enough, the coords are 52.634027, -1.136458. What do you want to do with them? Prioryman (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I just saw the diagram of the old nave and I located it about a metre to the east of where you say and was about to add it until I saw you'd beaten me to it! I was close!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Help regarding maps

Hi. I found a map that you had made. I would like to make a similar one. I have the blank map from the Commons. My question is how to locate the places in the blank map? Ahmasmi (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Moorish Gibraltar GA?

I think we should at least try to get this to GA status or would you want to give FA a go? I have to say I'm not familiar with the process though but I think the article deserves recognition! --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 17:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tyson, I actually have a more ambitious goal in mind. 11 April 2013 is the 300th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Utrecht, which would be a perfect date to run History of Gibraltar as the day's FA. It's a tight timescale but I should have that article ready for a GA review within the next week. I'll try to get someone to do a speedy GA review before putting it up to FAC for consideration. Prioryman (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I'd personally prefer (and willing to help) to help with the Moorish Gibraltar article. I don't sincerelly think it'll be possible to have a neutral article on the history of Gibraltar (I'm not talking about you...) I'll try to help anyway. The good point is that I have possibly the most wide (physical) library on Gibraltar issues than any other wikipedist and that's really a good point. See you --Ecemaml (talk) 13:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your feedback. I'm quite happy to give Moorish Gibraltar a go, but given the anniversary I'd prefer to concentrate on History of Gibraltar in the short term. Obviously, any assistance you could give to the latter project would be much appreciated. Prioryman (talk) 13:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Either would be good, I tried to make a 3d model of the castle but it didn't quite work, will try to get some images from the museum or Gibraltar Archive for it. --Mrjohncummings (talk) 15:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

So we agree to put Moorish Gibraltar in the queue after History of Gibraltar? I was actually thinking a few of Anne's articles could easily make it to GAs too if a few of us pitch in... John, a 3D model of the castle would be awesome! --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 21:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh we are getting ambitious! 700 articles is my current boast, but we seem to be getting a dozen (plus!) new articles a day from the evil genius. - Actually we (Gpedia) have had one FA - and it was the article of the day on the Finnish Wikipedia and I understand it was a group effort by the Finns. However getting an English GA would be very cool especially as Moorish Gibraltar is clearly a G'pedia article Victuallers (talk) 00:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, to be honest I'm not that bothered about whether it's a Gibraltarpedia article or not. I'm focusing on History of Gibraltar (a WikiProject Gibraltar article which I started in its current version way back in 2010) rather than Moorish Gibraltar basically because it's likely to have a wider appeal, it spins off to lots of other articles on the topic (such as Moorish Gibraltar) and it lends itself better to a full-length FA-style treatment. Plus it has very strong date relevance - a tercentenary isn't to be sniffed at. I've written up a blurb which you can see at User:Prioryman/History of Gibraltar TFA. Prioryman (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I tend to blow hot and cold over wikipedia, I'll get some days when I've mad keen, others I'm not so interested, if I'm likely the create articles within the Gibraltarpedia area it will likely be a dozen at least in one go rather than one or two every day. I agree, History of Gibraltar would be good to get up to FA. I actually think that some of Anne's bastion/battery type articles would be easier to promote to GA as they're narrow in scope and pretty well-written.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

History of

I was struck by the cn tag in the opening sentence but have not yet found evidence to warrant removal. The referencing system is a bit too complicated for me to add anything, but the prehistory of the place yields lots of results easily enough, such as this, though I don't think that those things necessarily need more cites. That Gorman's cave looks fascinating. Drmies (talk) 22:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I think the date is the questionable bit. 100,000 years appears to be a bit too old; the Gorman's Cave Neanderthals are apparently only half that age. It's pretty respectable, though. Don't worry, I'll go back and fix it - right now I'm getting through the late 19th and 20th centuries. Prioryman (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice

I don't know how busy you are in real life but I had to go back to the library to get the book for the ONE remaining cite I needed to fix. I had done everything you asked bar ONE cite, ONE CITE, and you removed my DYK without even a courtesy notice. Far from the month you claimed, I promised on 28 January to fix it, that was just over a week ago. I have restored the nomination and removed your close, I consider given your claim that I'd done nothing for a month to be unfounded and the closure incorrect. Wee Curry Monster talk 21:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

German V-weapons sites

Thinking out loud... would File:Fusée V2.jpg work better for a blurb image than File:La Coupole exhibition V-2 rocket.jpg? I know it's not at one of the three sites, and it's a replica, but it's more obviously a big bad rocket than the exhibition photo, which I don't think really gives a full idea of the size of the rocket given the angle it's at (and is it slightly cut off in than shot?) It's quite a "busy" photo, with various background which might not work too well on the main page. Anyway, just a thought - there's still quite some time until 25th March has to be scheduled by someone... Bencherlite^Talk 23:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I thought there was a rule that the image in the blurb had to be used in the article as well? Prioryman (talk) 23:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Affirmations (L. Ron Hubbard)

KTC (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: History of Gibraltar

Great work as usual Chris! As you may have seen I've already started adding/correcting some links. I think the article should link to each siege (some are already linked but not all), just not too sure how best to go about it. Also, the caption on the pic of Gibraltar 1 says the skull is 50,000 years old but the prose says 100,000. Then the Gibraltar 1 article says 30-50,000 years, so which is right? I'll carry on looking into the rest of the article over the next couple of days. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 23:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Btw, great find on the closed frontier pic! --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 23:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Nice piece of work, glad to see wikipedia's coverage of Gibraltar history so dramatically improved. Wee Curry Monster talk 00:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks everybody. I'm pretty much happy with it now (and thanks for your edits, Tyson), so I'll go ahead with nominating it for GA. Prioryman (talk) 22:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Chris, according to this the ToU between Spain and GB was signed on 13 July 1713. It seems it was the one between France and GB that was signed on 11 April... --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 14:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Well done for spotting that! I must say, I'm relieved; that allows for a much less frenetic timescale. Prioryman (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Just happened to come across it as I visited Wikisource to link the actual text of Article X. If I remember correctly I think April is still the date given pretty much everywhere on Wikipedia. I'll go changing them as I come across them; grateful if you could too. --Gibmetal 77^{talk 2 me} 12:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Prioryman. You have new messages at Mrjohncummings's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Gibraltar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fifth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Brown Willy

Prioryman, is there any chance you can get around to addressing this one soon? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I had quite forgotten that - thanks for reminding me. I'll sort it out either today or tomorrow. Prioryman (talk) 08:05, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Infuriating

The entire issue is so infuriating. There should never have been any problem with Gibraltarpedia because it resulted in the creation of a large amount of quality content for the encyclopedia. The fact that people want to continue restrictions when it's a nonissue is shameful. Ryan Vesey 23:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I certainly think there is a degree of misunderstanding about what Wikipedia is for. Prioryman (talk) 23:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Why is it so important that Gibraltarpedia articles be featured on the Main Page? Especially as it seems to be hurting the future prospects of similar projects. If I were in charge of Gibraltarpedia, the first thing I would do would be to voluntarily end promotion of Gibraltar articles through DYK. This would show that I was serious about eliminating any appearance of COI or exploitation of Wikipedia and would silence the critics so that I could get back to writing great articles about Gibraltar (and pursue similar projects in the future). Seeking to remove the existing restrictions (warranted or not) seems like you are just shooting yourself in the foot. Why not take the high road instead of merely being defensive? It would be to your benefit in the long run. Kaldari (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Gibraltar hooks proportions.png

Thanks for uploading File:Gibraltar hooks proportions.png. 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 the "Edit" tab at the top of the 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) 11:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	This addendum (pop. 1) must be the most brilliant reply that I've seen in a Gibraltar-related discussion. I love it! Mind you, if I fly international they may charge me for two seats...  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I was kind of assuming that you were just a singular individual rather than a shared account. :-) Prioryman (talk) 08:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

• Of course! Hehe seems my reference went over your head. Either way, thanks for the laugh... (although I think there were a couple Indonesia DYKs by Dr B in that time). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, I see what you mean now! Don't worry, I've just woken up, so I'm still a bit slow on the uptake... Prioryman (talk) 08:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

• No worries. I've been up for a bit, so I'm a little too energetic. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

What else?

I suddenly have an overwhelming urge to write articles about Gibraltar or near province areas (more toward near province areas not actually in Gibraltar). It's so strange, I have NO possible idea why I feel this way, it's a completely inscrutable mystery. So I thought you might know of some easy to write and notable topics that haven't yet been covered that I might write about. Please do tell. Silverseren^C 08:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:Algeciras

Could you try to create some starter articles on those battles, I've asked Aymatth also. If Walrasiad is active he might be interested in a History of Algeciras article. Working on Ceuta stubs now, will start translating the Algeciras article later.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do - if I can translate corresponding articles from the Spanish wiki I'll do so. Prioryman (talk) 14:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar bans

I am so confused by the wording of this latest text that I do not feel in a position to support or oppose. It seems to me that either option may lead to continuing restrictions. Why should there be any further restrictions of any kind?--Ipigott (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to clarify it for you. Jayen466's proposal is that any articles within the geographical scope of Gibraltarpedia (i.e. southern Andalusia and northern Morocco in addition to Gibraltar) should be banned from DYK for the next year. That would have meant that your article on the Municipal Museum of Algeciras would have been banned from DYK. If you support that idea, you should vote to support it; if not, you should vote to oppose it. Prioryman (talk) 15:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Please don't engage in inappropriate canvassing

Your notifications to editors involved with Spain and Morocco may be inappropriate canvassing, per WP:Canvassing, in that you are broadcasting the message rather widely and you are presenting a non-neutral interpretation of the current proposals. Please be aware that inappropriate canvassing could undermine your cause, rather than advancing it. --Orlady (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK review.

Hello! Your submission of The Hole (Scientology) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! -- JoannaSerah (talk) 19:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)