User:Dr. Blofeld/November 2015

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Dr. Blofeld:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Sent to users on my mailing list. To opt-out forever, just remove your name.

Cheers Northamerica1000, great design!! You too!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Science

You are invited! Join us remotely! World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Science

Dates: 8 to 29 November 2015 Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event Host/Facilitator: Women in Red (WiR) in collaboration with Women scientists: Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you! Sponsor: New York Academy of Sciences Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR in parallel with a "physical" event during the afternoon of Sunday, November 22 in New York City. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in science to participate. As the virtual edit-a-thon stretches over three weeks, new participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in the field. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and learn more: →here← --Rosiestep (talk) 01:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Nice strategy.

;) —David Levy 12:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I doubt I'll be the 5 millionth though haha! I'm going to have to get an awb er to clean them up and somebody to help expand them later though!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you did it! 59.88.206.155 (talk) 12:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I figured you'd be up to something ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Haha, honestly I wasn't looking at the mark though as it approached, I didn't look at it between 4,999,923 and 5,000, 155. It was more a good gesture on passing it. I think you've got it Wikipedia talk:Five million articles!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:46, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah same, no once I was powering through all the persoonias I just kept adding...until I looked up and it was 5000123.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

You'll have that at FAC by next week now haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For almost making 5 millionth article. It shouldn't really matter who "won", but somehow, apparently, it does... Samsara 13:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Haha, cheers Samsara. Yeah it's just a figure! Every article counts.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I could have been adding a bunch of Alaskan rivers, instead I slept through it. Geez! --Rosiestep (talk) 15:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

5 Million: We celebrate your contribution

	We couldn't have done it without you
	Well, maybe. Eventually. But the encyclopedia would not be as good. Celebrate 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Cheers! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey, don't forget me! If my 10,000 stubs wouldn't have got deleted three years ago we could have reached 5 million articles last week ;-D JAGUAR  17:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

LOL!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia. For teh rulez, we delete a FAC, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Dr, good work! Ericoides (talk) 15:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Turkey stubs

Sure thing. It'll take me a bit to get to 'em today, but I'll be happy to do it.

Glad to see we finally crossed that threshold - it must've happened last night while I was asleep. It's a nice milestone to hit, though, no? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes. It frustrates me that it's taken so long, but it's still an incredible point to pass. And if we're talking of longevity, I remember way back when there were probably about 10,000 articles around here. I've done some poking around on former accounts whose passwords I lost, and it appears that I first reared my head around here long about 2004. Didn't realize it had been quite that early.

I'm also working on your talkpages now. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, think about what it would be like if every American created one article. And add in Canadians, for good measure. Incredible, what we could tap into then.

I've done the bulk of the Turkey cleanup - I'll finish it up in a little while. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Damn. Stupid of me - must be losing my touch. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Stubs?? You need some twizzlers. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Should be all scrubbed and ready now. Anything else you'd like me to do beyond continuing to work on the film stuff? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I got as far as 1975. I'll probably do more this week - it's a fairly low-key thing that I can do when I need to plug some other holes. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

SRK's "Fan"

What you think of this, Doctor? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:25, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Precious again, your contributions to arguably the biggest film star in the world!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! Yes, who most people in the "West" have never heard of LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations, Doctor! Gerda's "precious" stays true to its name. But, whom are you both referring to? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

SRK, most non Asian people in the UK and US I don't think would really know who he is.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:20, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Possible. Anyways, now his popularity is indirectly being documented as a fictional work by the name "Fan". What do you think of it i.e. the teaser of "Fan"? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I have no opinion on it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The second smart answer of the day, after a mere "?" by Vensatry. I really appreciate that. BTW, on a serious note, the second c/e on Mayabazar is on the verge of completion. FAC will happen soon. If happened, it will be Telugu cinema's first, and also mine. Hoping for the best. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Universidad Mesoamericana logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Universidad Mesoamericana logo.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Sinatra DYKs

Hey Blofeld, inspired by your work on the Sinatra GA, I thought I'd take a look if there were any other articles that could complement it in a set or two on December 12th. But I had to message you about this one because my mouth literally dropped open when I saw how short it was - That's Life (song). It's two short paragraphs and a list!! - and appears to have always been that short. Could be a potential double hook with That's Life (Frank Sinatra album) as that is even shorter. I'm going to give it a go at expanding using anything I can get my hands on from the web, but if you have any specific resources (or know anyone else who does) then please jump in at any point. Miyagawa (talk) 11:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

@Miyagawa: Thanks. Perhaps we could propose a Sinatra Day for the 12th and host his article and a bunch of other DYKS altogether for 24 hours on the day? There's also missing articles at WP:Intertranswiki, red links in his article to be started.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I think we've got the time over the next five weeks to make it happen. Miyagawa (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

That is a cool idea! Montanabw^(talk) 07:37, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Porcelanosa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Porcelanosa.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Could use your help with possible conflict-of-interest sock investigation

Dr. Blofeld,

Hey there, I hope you've been doing well lately !

I see you were previously concerned with an edit summary about promotional issues, at article David Gandy, at DIFF.

I've started a sock investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LauraLeeT.

Perhaps you could share your thoughts, and/or help out, at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LauraLeeT ?

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 23:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Check Loeba's talk page

Hi, I pinged you already but decided to also leave a message in case the 'ping' gets lost on the way or something – let's just say I'm extremely irritated by what's happened with the Taylor article. Anyway, as the title says, check the message I left on Loeba's page – Light show has nominated Taylor for GA review because he cannot stand anyone changing the article (i.e. adding actual facts and reliable sources, and cutting unnecessary quotes and hagiography...). I've never had to take any issue up with admins, but I wonder if there's something that could be done here, as it's obviously LS being disruptive (he hasn't been interested in the article in years, and it has been pretty stable for a long time – it's pretty clear he just has a bone to pick with me). He just cannot accept that any other editor could be making edits in good faith. It's gotten to the point where I'm thinking of leaving WP for a long time because I know he will appear in any Old Hollywood article I start editing. TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 11:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

@TrueHeartSusie3: I'm on a break at the moment. I'm sure User:SNUGGUMS who has accepted the review will know this and that the article is nowhere near GA quality, full of quote farms and devoid of "actual facts and reliable sources" as you say, proper research. It's a quick fail IMO. Don't be fazed by LS. Obviously he's right and we're all wrong about how to write articles. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Enjoy your break, you've certainly deserved it :) It's just so frustrating to deal with LS; he is such a classic example of someone with cognitive dissonance... and his behavior regarding my work here is starting to resemble hounding.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 17:08, 4 November 2015 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Commenting since I was pinged. However problematic the article might be, I'll still leave more than just brief auto-fail commentary, but will be reviewing Genesis (band) first within the next 72 hours. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: It is a quick fail though because the criteria says "no warring" and needs to be stable to pass. LS has not edited the article in years and only nominated as soon as @TrueHeartSusie3: began editing it so as if to mark it as his own article and put her off editing it. This is disruptive and not in keeping with the spirit of collaboration. He did it to me on numerous occasions. Just when I began editing Kubrick again he'd turn up and pick holes in it and try to put me off editing it. He has massive ownership issues. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Stability issues alone are definitely an auto-fail. I admittedly hadn't noticed them prior to your comments, but seeing them was more than enough for me to make up my mind. Excess detail also has me worried. While I've failed it for now, I'm sure that like you, Susie, and any other major contributors can get it up to par. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Films seen

Got a day off yesterday after three exams, which went well. My fourth and final one is on the 12th of November. Watched two films yesterday, The Trouble With Harry and The Shining. The former was amusing and funny (more or less like a mix of Drishyam and Arsenic and Old Lace). The latter was fantastic! Superb! Bowled over by it, I was! Nicholson rocked in it, period.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 06:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see how you have time for movies in the midst of your exams. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Human nature is unpredictable, Kailash. I don't find Ssven's act strange and surprising. Who knows? it may serve as a relaxation amid a stressful event! But, i don't personally recommend such things. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

A good film or two is a great thing I think, even during exams. Keeps your enthusiasm high, studies have shown that you can't focus on studying all the time and you're more productive when you have breaks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

....until that break influences your concentration to such an extent that you take a break for studying! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:24, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

@Kailash29792 and Pavanjandhyala: Yep, it did serve me as a relaxation too to a great extent after writing three papers. My parents gave me the day off, so I caught up with the two yesterday.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

My latest FAC

Mullum Malarum is currently a FAC. Do please post comments or attract reviewers if necessary. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:46, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Mayabazar

I've nominated this article for FAC which also happens to be my first attempt. It is also the first Indian Telugu film article to be nominated for such status. If interested, please leave your comments here. All constructive comments are welcomed. Yours sincerely, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, Doctor. I'll get back to you after sometime Can you revisit the article and the FAC page now? I really tried hard, but could find only a couple of reviews. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

TAFI

If you want to, take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt which is this weeks TAFI article. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

A gloriously attractive TAFI indeed but I'm afraid I'm not committing as much to the project as I did and am trying to really reduce what I do on here to just a few core articles or filling some related red links.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:10, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:12, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jack Entratter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Stork Club (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) 10:51, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Frankie

I've created Artanis Records for you, though at around 300 bytes of prose it is über-stubby at the mo. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank Ritchie, it's a start!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:37, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Nightclubs

I've recatted 'em. The category is fairly small - under 50. I'm not sure there's really any need just yet to break it down further than by US only. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

You're right about that - there are an awful lot to wade through, and I'm not sure I have the time at the moment. We shall see, though - perhaps I'll add it to the list of things I have to get done one of these days... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 22:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Can we move forward?

Look. I sincerely apologized for the stuff that went down last month, and I don't see why you are still making snide comments about me ([1]). The way I see it, if you can't forgive me for what I've apologized for at least stop poking and trying to antagonize me. If you don't want anything to do with me then please just leave me alone. All I want to do is create content like you know I can, so if you won't give me another chance then at least don't make it harder for me to stay positive. RO^(talk) 18:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Believe me, I'd rather not have to comment on your talk page or bother you. But when you say you're retiring and return just 11 days later I had to say something. If you continue as you did you will be banned, and it's only the fact that you said you were retiring I think people didn't step anything up against you.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:27, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I see that you are stuck in permanent feud mode. I'm never going to get banned, as my behavior is no where near as bad as many of the people you consistently defend. Even your own actions are at times worse than anything I've done here. It's really too bad such a minor thing had to ruin our friendship, but if that's how you are I'm not missing anything. Am I? RO^(talk) 19:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

No, I'm not in permanent feud mode. I just thought you made the right decision by retiring and would have avoided a tremendous amount of trouble to come that's all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

"A tremendous amount of trouble to come" is that a prediction or some kind of warning? I can't believe how easy it was for you to write me off when you've defended far worse here for years and years. Anyway, your negativity is not welcome at my talk, so don't edit it again if you are going to act like this. RO^(talk) 19:48, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Believe me, I was expecting you to leave the edit summary "Bore off Blohard" so much that I considered again placing a @RO post on here as I know you haven't the emotional capacity to deal with negative comments. Continue to act as you did last month and you'll be banned. I got you unblocked that one time but I could easily propose something to do just the opposite if I see you've returned to cause trouble rather than produce content.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, you've been blocked numerous times for harassment ([2]), so I don't think you hold any behavioral or moral high-ground on me. I'm saddened that you turned so negative so easily, but I'm not surprised. Anyway, I'll leave you the last word and not comment here again. Goodbye! RO^(talk) 20:19, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

LOL, when was I ever blocked for more than a few minutes?? Most of my blocks were by my old archenemy Sarek of Vulcan and unwarranted ones which were swiftly undone. I'd never behave like you did last month, nor would I go to wiki'ocracy as you've done very recently and start giving away personal details about somebody I dislike. That was the lowest of the low.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Rationalobserver, why don't you go and improve an article somewhere. This is a big place with plenty of room for manoeuvre. Cassianto^Talk 20:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

With pleasure. I'll take this page of my watchlist now. RO^(talk) 20:26, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

RO can continue to produce content in the meantime but it doesn't solve her underlying issues which I am convinced will again manifest themselves within a couple of weeks. The bitter conflict with Montanabw is so extreme it's destructive on so many levels. When people start getting personal and relaying personal info on websites out of spite then it's clear we can no longer tolerate them here, even if they produce featured articles. The bottom line is RO, drop your nasty "permanent feud" with Montanabw and clean your act up otherwise you'll be banned permanently from wikipedia. It's gone on long enough and people are sick of it, even administrators on wiki'ocracy.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:18, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jack Entratter

Hello! Your submission of Jack Entratter 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! SusunW (talk) 16:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC) Nice article. Sorry my time is limited on here until next week, but I am trying to squeeze in a few articles and reviews. SusunW (talk) 16:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

A short nursery rhyme=

You need cheering up, Blofeld. Here's something that just popped into my head:

Twinkle, twinkle, oh toolbar
How I hate to TTR
On their talk page you write spam
Throw your toys out of the pram
Twinkle twinkle oh toolbar
How I think tl;dr Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Mmm, LOL. I know November is a bleak month but somebody has to try to remain positive among the winter circus act currently going on on here!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

How are you doing with the Monopoly places?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I've continually updated User:Ritchie333/Monopoly to give progress. Oxford Street is (touch wood) going to pass GA in a day or two (there are no action points left on the review) then I think Trafalgar Square will be next. Just tackling them as and when I can. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Spetsnaz [3] seem pretty badass. I wonder if Steven Seagal is secretly a Spetsnaz agent LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Ray Bloch

Hi, I saw this article on your Frank Sinatra to-do list, and expanded it, but I can't find anything linking him to Sinatra! Yoninah (talk) 19:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Yoninah! Worth doing anyway. He was a red link in the Gus Levene article I think which I thought worth starting. Perhaps you could squeeze him into the Levene hook and relay two facts in it? Levene did some work with him I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

When I have the time, I'm trying to beef up the selection of Frank Sinatra articles for DYK. Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:39, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Miyagawa has begun a good expansion of Cal Neva, it would be good to get that up to GA status I think. I had intended doing ti at some point anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you planning on nominating Hank Sanicola for DYK, or are you waiting to put it in a double nom with Cal Neva Lodge & Casino for Frank Sinatra Day? Yoninah (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

It could be a double I think, that would be best. What does Miyagawa think?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:54, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you're better off nominating it now and then if we get Cal Neva up to GA before the centenary then we can put it forward as a double nom instead. Otherwise you'll run the risk of running out of time for Sanicola if the Cal Neva article doesn't pass GA in time. Also, general note - there are a shed load of Frank Sinatra books you can read online at openlibrary.org - it's completely free. Once you've signed up, just search for sinatra with the "e-books" option toggled. You won't be able to ready the DAISY enabled books, but the other ones you can read in your browser. Some of those will let you search within the book for certain subjects, but the majority won't - so you'll just need to check the indexes like a hard copy. Miyagawa (talk) 19:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Haha, I've already read enough Sinatra books!! I was planning on getting Cal Neva and Caesars Palace up to GA though in the next few months. Caesars Palace as one of the top DYK hooks alongside the others would also be a considerable achievement. It would need quite a lot of work to really be a GA though. I love looking at photographs of vintage Vegas. File:Caesars_Palace_in_1970.jpg. Hopefully I can get ones for Cal Neva in the 1950-70s era.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, the Cal Neva is like a slice of old Vegas stored away in Lake Tahoe for prosperity. Miyagawa (talk) 20:57, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Judging by the cars in [4] that had to be 1940s.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I'll nominate Hank Sanicola now. Hopefully we'll have 15 hooks in the queue (with the lead hook, Frank Sinatra, running for 24 hours, by early December. Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

If we have enough articles eventually I'm sure people would accept a 48 hour Sinatra showing of related articles, it's a big event after all.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:14, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I think I've pretty much exhausted the sources I have now. Newspapers.com helped to expand the early and late sections in particular. Miyagawa (talk) 00:18, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Looks in great shape, so quickly too!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:21, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kristin Feireiss

Hello! Your submission of Kristin Feireiss 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! SusunW (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC) Was looking for a QPQ for one of my science ones and saw this. Almost a month old. Think it went under the radar. SusunW (talk) 00:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Stephanie Burns ‎

This one might interest you, There's plenty more in the cited refs for Stephanie Burns and there are additional RS available. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Ja, will try to expand it tomorrow. I've been really lazy today!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

SPECTRE

Just saw spectre yesterday Christopher Waltz was awesome in it as You dear Blofeld!--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 14:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm definitely going to watch it tonight, I wasn't impressed by the trailer and was a bit dubious about it initially but I'll have to see!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I've seen it and it does pack quite a few punches. Christoph Waltz, though really good in it, could have had a more better scope in his role than just make Blofeld a guy with Daddy and adopted brother issues.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I saw it the day after it premièred in the cinema! The trailer is enough to put anyone off the film and it doesn't do any justice, but I personally loved the film. They could have made Christoph Waltz's character better though, I agree with Ssven. JAGUAR  14:43, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Mmm. Bit disappointed with it to be honest. It had some great scenes and some great ingredients. First 20 minutes I thought it was going to be a competitor for best Bond film but it seemed like a mish mash of loads of Bond situations/clothing throughout which patched together seemed odd. The Mexico opening was top notch but the Austria location I thought was wasted, you want to see some good mountains and villages and stuff in a place like that, much like OHMSS and For Your Eyes only with Cortina. I was particularly disappointed with Waltz and the Spectre centre. It just didn't work for me, none of it. The exterior and interior was just not evil enough and not the right location. Even the escape and explosion was too quick. What it needed was a build up to a climax and Waltz in a Nehru suit stroking his cat and saying "I've been expecting you Mr Bond" and it ending like You Only Live Twice soon after his lair is blown up. Also felt like Daniel Craig really didn't want to be there, far more detached and lethargic from previous films, though more sneering at times worked in his favour. Overall a good film with some great scenes but overall nowhere near as good as it could have been.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:04, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

CGI has been the death of Bond films. They've stopped thinking about things like set design, plot, pacing, choreography... the modern Bonds seem to be, "when in doubt, add another explosion." Montanabw^(talk) 01:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I saw it the first night it played in LV and I was quite disappointed with Daniel Craig's Bond. IMO, he came across as too old for the part. I kept thinking he was going to hurt himself. Waltz is top notch, but the whole step-brother machination was overly contrived... the screenwriters could have done better. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah the step-brother machination I thought was "lame", reminded me of Austin Powers's Goldmember. For Spectre and henchmen the most important thing was always the excess of the lair and the actual character of Blofeld and his henchman. Yes, we saw buggies/some equipment, a homage to Diamonds are Forever, but that part of the film was totally undercooked. What happened to global maps on walls, hidden doors, evil piranha tanks and elimination chairs? That Rome meeting was the perfect opportunity to "eliminate" one of the agents while seated instead of ripping his eyes out! For reintroducing Spectre I really think they needed to get it spot on and Bond fans would have loved Waltz and the set being classic Blofeld far more. Craig really seemed like he didn't want to be there and looked knackered. I think it's time they moved onto somebody else, though some of the muppet young actors which have been proposed I'd rather Craig.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Drax the walking thesaurus really destroyed that man didn't he? The "Ripping the eyes out" part was perhaps a reference to The Mountain and the Viper, an episode in Season 4 of Game of Thrones. Gregor Clegane would crush Oberyn Martell's skull and rip Martell's eyes out exactly the same way shown in the film (but in an even more gory and harder manner) while confessing that he had indeed murdered Elia Martell, one of Oberyn's relatives (sister I think). Spectre's screenplay writers might have taken a cue from that scene I'll bet. Here is the scene from Game of Thrones. Awfully violent isn't it?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra and Jewish causes

Hi, it's going really well. I came across this photo: [5]. I don't know anything about uploading from a site like this, but if the picture was taken in 1962, doesn't that exceed the 50-year statue of limitations or something? Yoninah (talk) 21:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll check later, I'm just in the process of uploading photos of some of the ones we started now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

....for dropping this truth grenade. It's surprising how many people are asleep. But you're not one of them. Viriditas (talk) 10:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

It's sad but the truth. I genuinely wish RO could rise above that part of her character but she really doesn't seem able to help it. There's a real problem there somewhere but what it is is none of my business. No matter what people say, she is capable of producing FA content and a good contributor when she focuses on it and if she overcame the mindset that everybody is out to get her from the moment she joined here could have succeeded on here. She just doesn't seem to realise how certain things she does, like giving away details offwiki and starting trouble over Ched and Drmies being sexist completely sours any glimmer of hope she might have with people in supporting her for her content. I'm all for giving people chances and a fair opportunity on here but no matter what content she produces you just can't defend all that negativity which is totally unnecessary. When you tell the truth she retaliates and tries to disguise it by exaggerating how other people behave to rationalize her own behaviour. If somebody crosses my path aggressively and acts completely out of order than I have no qualms about telling them that they're being an obnoxious xxx. I'm honest. But it stops there. Rationalobserver can't distinguish between the odd "Eff off" type of response to a meddlesome idiot and a disturbing one carried out over many weeks in which she makes things personal. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ray Bloch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Friars Club and If You Were Mine

Dean Martin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tom Jones

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Saeed Jaffrey

RIP Jaffrey!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

RIP indeed. Thanks to SJ for his numerous brilliant performances. He holds his own opposite Connery and Caine in The Man Who Would Be King. I may have to watch the film again tonight in remembrance. MarnetteD|Talk 15:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

One of the best British films ever made that one, a delight.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Just checking

RIP Saeed Jaffrey indeed. A truly fine actor.

Blofeld, I've got to ask, because I recall having a similar feeling when it came to a discussion between you, Ritchie and me regarding Revolver some time back: are you deliberately talking around my opinions, trying to nullify them even, in your replies to Ritchie? I'm not the overly sensitive type – it certainly wouldn't pay to be so on Wikipedia – but I can't help wondering about your, well, blanking of my comments in discussions regarding article content. I write this thinking, No, of course he doesn't mean to do that, but then … well, I'm here, aren't I. I'm sorry if I've read this all wrong, but it's easy to read it as right from where I'm sitting. JG66 (talk) 17:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, certainly you've got that aspect wrong as I don't think I've read many of your comments. I know what Ritchie has said about certain articles though and I think the standards being set are too high for wikipedia. If I came across like that with Revolver too it's because I think that these articles don't need to be perfect or perfect scholarly entries. I don't like it when people seem to imply that FA is something extremely difficult to achieve and think you need to be more easy going on what is actually required here. Like Ritchie you have ton of GAs but seem to think FA an impossible feat. I suggest you have more faith in yourselves and give a few articles a shot and you might change your perception of what is required. With FAs, yes they have to be comprehensive and well-written, but the emphasis at FAC would usually always be minor nitpicking, not general coverage.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:39, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't think an FA is impossible, rather it takes too long and I get bored! However, never say never, and if Eric really is retired, he's not going to help me get the coveted brown star. I've still got a sore head from The Who ... "we need to say something about 'x'", "we need to say something about 'y'", "we need to say something about 'z'", "oh wait, now the article is too long and needs to be trimmed", "I never liked this box here, it's crap, but I forgot to say until right at the end of the review". Fucking hell, make your mind up! Anyway, the White Album is in progress, and Revolver is probably the biggest "really really REALLY should be at least a GA" article I can think of. Let me have a tinker and throw it up. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Films

Have you seen My Neighbor Totoro yet? It's a really carefree and fantastic film from Miyazaki. Watching Kiki's Delivery Service right now. Grave of the Fireflies was really touching! I cried almost every scene right from where their mother dies. Still haven't got over it completely. I see why it's in your top 25 films list. You can take a look at Pasamalar and Mullum Malarum for brother-sister relationship films sometime.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Every film is Sven, I'm sure. Not yet seen Totoro and some of the others. His films are the most magical I've ever seen. I know that when I sit down to watch one it'll be a huge treat! I will watch the remainder over Christmas!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

No wonder Disney acquired the rights to some of his films.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ssven2: Glad you enjoyed Spirited Away, that comes close to my top 25 too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Next stop, Porco Rosso (1992).  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:39, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

He's a great character in that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Nice start with the funny air pirates. Porco kinda takes after Bogart in terms of that smoking, anti-hero persona and class.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Watched the film. Hilarious and yet, like most Miyazaki films, moving and fantastic.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ssven2. If you haven't seen it already make sure to put Castle in the Sky on your "to see" list. While I like all of HM's films this is one of my faves of his earlier films. Cheers to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 14:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: I have lined up a sort of Miyazaki fest for the next 2 days. Watching his debut, The Castle of Cagliostro now.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:05, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

You are in for a fun 2 days Ssven2. Many of the things that are special HM are there in that first film. Enjoy. MarnetteD|Talk 15:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey Doc. Glad you enjoyed Princess Mononoke and Howl's Moving Castle. I'm watching the latter now. Mononoke and Castle in the Sky show the romantic side of him in more detail than Nausicaa (Between Nausicaa and Asbel). Do watch Castle in the Sky. It's really one of his best as MarnetteD points out. Will watch The Wind Rises tomorrow.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, me too, I really should have seen them all by now! I've seen Castle in the Sky, in fact it was one of the first films of his I saw, did I forget to add it?.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:45, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Yep. It's on your list now.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:27, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for giving me the motivation to see the rest of them, I knew you'd be strongly recommending them if I didn't see them now haha!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Watched Hercules (1997), Rescuers Down Under (1990), The Wind Rises (2013) (Miyazaki's final film, It was wonderful), and Gilda (1946). You were right, Gilda was superb. Hayworth was fascinating and delightful in it.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Cary Grant and tags

Do you know why this article has suddenly sprouted about 42 gazillion {{fact}} tags on it? I assume you're actively doing something with it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:20, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

If you don't know why it "suddenly sprouted about 42 gazillion fact tags" then you're probably due a break from here! The article was largely unsourced and the references given below didn't verify what was written about. It was tagged for citations as it actually needs them, otherwise the sentences will be deleted when it is written. Ssven has begun working on it, I'll begin in a week or two once I've finished O'Hara, that's if I have the "Cajones" to do so! I already started sourcing it last month but Ssven asked me to wait until his exams were over.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

That's fine, and that's a good reason to use the tag, because you intend to fix it later. I'm sick of seeing refimprove tags from 2008, they're Wikipedia's answer to urban decay. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:44, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, but I had intended adding sources the next day until I made the agreement with Ssven2 to wait until November. I thought he might have gradually done it over the last few weeks but we'll do it soon. Yes, annoying seeing tags from like 2007 on articles and nothing changing. I rarely add the big page tags though except ref expand in the source section as somebody does it fairly quickly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra and Jewish causes

Here it is! Could you offer any help with images? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Excellent work! Not sure I'll be able to find anything but I'll see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Where is all this from? Yoninah (talk) 22:34, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering about the title. Another idea: Frank Sinatra and Jewish activism. Yoninah (talk) 22:36, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's probably better Yoninah.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Songs for Young Lovers

Good Dr, I've done about all the damage I can do to Oh! What it Seemed to Be. I'm ignoring Castle Jazz Band for now, since real-life got in the road and I missed the DYK deadline, so now I'm turning my attention to Songs for Young Lovers per your request. Problem is the article is already 3000+ bytes. I think I can get it to 10,000+, but not much more. Therefore it won't be eligible for 5x expansion DYK. Do you think the article could potentially qualify as a "good article" at that size? Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:44, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps 78.26 they can make an exception for the date given the importance of the album? Expand it as much as you can and leave a comment or something when you nom. If you did get it up to GA status that would quality regardless of length anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nostalghia.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nostalghia.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:51, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Raftaar (1975 film) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Raftaar (1975 film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raftaar (1975 film) 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. Musa Talk  11:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Kaayay?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Review

Interested in reviewing the GAN of Pelli Chesi Choodu nominated by myself? If yes, let me know. Also, a gentle reminder about Mayabazar's FAC. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:37, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Walter Linsenmaier

The article Walter Linsenmaier has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Zero references. Article contains essentially no information, and would be better as a redlinlk.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LukeSurl ^{t c} 13:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

My name is Day.... GoodDay.

I commenting at Skyfall, after seeing it mentioned at ANI. Nothing suspiciuos about it :) GoodDay (talk) 14:09, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Mmm, just Liz, you and Caden in succession and I know the other day you disagreed with Cassianto on RO.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:51, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I also defended Cassianto & Co. at Kevin Gorman's talkpage. As for the RO stuff, I agreed (and still do) that gender shouldn't have been brought up. :) GoodDay (talk) 15:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm surprised the billion argument hasn't turned into one about gender!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Let's hope it doesn't. GoodDay (talk) 15:14, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fires on the Plain.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fires on the Plain.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Sheraton Skyline Hotel at London Heathrow for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sheraton Skyline Hotel at London Heathrow is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheraton Skyline Hotel at London Heathrow 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. DGG ( talk ) 17:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow DGG, the old grudges are starting to manifest, that was 6 years ago! Of course it has nothing to do with this comment made just hours ago. You are a strange fellow. An extreme inclusionist in many cases but others oddly ignore things to meet your own perception.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:51, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

First of all, I saw that comment on my talk page first, before I checked the other notices, so it certainly has nothing to do with the comment you made there. And I did not check who had introduced the article--I rarely do, quite deliberately. I have no grudges, but I do have memories. People change, sometimes for the better. It is true, I've become much less of an inclusionist over the years especially in certain fields, such as companies, which are particularly vulnerable to promotional editing, Lack of notability is not the only reason for deletion. Variations to the notability standard either way do not fundamentally harm the encycopedia, but accepting articles that are part of a promotional campaign causes great damage. Once we become a vehicle for promotion, we're useless as an encycopedia. Even earlier, I do not consider I was ever an extreme inclusionist--there were others who actually did fit that description, & I was a wikifriend of some of them, though I tried to moderate their zeal. I'mquite aware my priority in this respect have changed, as a result of the change in the environment surrounding WP. I've never been one for a foolish consistency.

Back then, even with academics, I remember a few other AfD discussions like the current one on Rhoda Patrick where the academically non-notable individual had done something which attracted publicity. I generally said delete in these cases, and I was usually over-ruled by consensus. I would have said the same thing for Rhoda Patrick at any time, 8 years ago or now. I consider as a general principle sources showing publicity are not RS for N or anything else either. Sources showing accomplishments in the field by sources reliable in that field should be what is needed. The GNG applied over-literally, is so paradoxical that I would at least modify it in that fashion.

As a general concept I would say that the inclusion of material about non-notable individual in a class obscures the significance of notable ones--especially in our context where we have no rule providing that more detailed articles should be written for the more notable.

With respect to the hotel article, if you check the history you'll see I made two inconsistent decisions, which I recognize as an error on my part. I thought the only rational thing to do was to revert the deletion and let the community decide.

With respect to the articles where you will see me arguing currently, I can no longer work on them all, as once upon a time I did try to check every afd, so I usually only participate in the unobvious ones--I'm not concerned with proving a principle, but in establishing the boundaries. We after all need some non-foollish consistency, and I would strongly prefer a clear standard relating to the actual subject even if I didn't like the place where the line was drawn. DGG ( talk ) 18:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

You have definitely become less of an inclusionist over the years. I remember at one time you fought to the tooth and nail to keep a list of teletubbies or Power Rangers or something. I have certainly noticed your stance on companies, but now it seems you've extended it to scholars. There are a great deal of subjects in a wide range of fields which have mention in a significant number of sources but often not in any great detail. When we delete or keep something I always ask myself "what damage might this do the encyclopedia if we kept it. If it doesn't damage it and it can be reasonably sourced then we should keep it. The Sheraton Hotel might be a bit generic, certainly not one of the monumental hotels which exist, but the sourcing IMO proves it's worthy of inclusion. It's worth compiling a load of scraps, though I agree it would be nice to access magazine articles which discuss it in detail.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:01, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maureen O'Hara may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Carey as agent Van Logan to that of [[Bogart and Bacall]], with frequent verbal sparring. The ''[[Monthly Film Bulletin'' wrote: "Maureen O'Hara looks very handsome in Technicolor but her

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maureen O'Hara may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• stream/modernscreen3637unse#page/n851/mode/2up|title=Money No Object|publisher=''Modern Screen'' (December 1947-November 1948|accessdate=}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Folklore Museum of Velventos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Folklore Museum of Velventos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folklore Museum of Velventos (2nd nomination) 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:15, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Update

We now have 16 entries under the December 12 centenary date. They all mention Sinatra in some way, except Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Entratter. If you would like to IAR and run the lead hook for 24 hours, I think you'll have to raise the issue at WT:DYK and get some kind of consensus, so no one switches the lead hook in the middle. Alternately, Gerda Arendt has suggested running the "younger" image with Template:Did you know nominations/Riobamba (nightclub) in the first prep set and the "older" image in the second prep set. Yoninah (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I thought I did raise the issue but nobody answered.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Should we do an RfC? Yoninah (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, start one somewhere if you like. I did actually intend my talk page post on the DYK talk page to blossom into one but nobody seemed to get it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:16, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Today

St Cecilia's Day

A Boy was Born

Talking about music, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Very nice!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Kristin Feireiss

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of jazz standards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Three Little Words (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) 09:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)