User talk:Beyond My Ken

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
It is The Reader that we should consider on each and every edit we make to Wikipedia.
MOS is not mandatory
(see User:Ritchie333/MOS for Dummies)
     A HORSE
     (crowd-sourced)
(Life is too short!)
Undertow seal.png

Articles that need serious visual work[edit]

Reminder: to work on[edit]

Files[edit]

Hi,

I notice that you've been working on the file additions by Elisa.rolle. I've been working on those on User:CaroleHenson/sandbox2. I'm just trying to figure out my next steps, if any. Are you finishing this up and I can step back at this point?

Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I was intending to work on the 10 or so articles left which are marked as current in her contribution list, and then I planned on stopping. I figured that those articles not marked as "rollback" had been dealt with by you or some other editor. Have we overlapped, or have I stepped on your edits? If so, I'm sorry. I'm pretty much taking the articles as I find them without being overly worried about what elisa.rolle's edit was, just approaching them as if I was editing any other article I had come across randomly, and doing what I would normally do - the exception being the ones where e.r had removed her image(s), in which case I look at what the image was and decide whether to restore it or not before I begin the normal editing process. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
There were some that popped up on my Watchlist - and then I went to your contributions and noticed article names on the worklist.
In a couple of cases, too, I reviewed the articles but didn't make edits, like John McCormack (tenor) where I thought the image was ok. It does looks very similar to the main photo, but it's a different expression - so I let it pass. Not a big deal, though, I can easily see it called a duplicate because he's about the same age as the main photo.
Go ahead with what you're doing and I'll check back in the a.m. You've been doing a nice job cleaning up articles as you've gone through them.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
There are still some articles that are labeled "current" in ER's contributions that I haven't looked at and aren't on the worklist. I am going through those, too.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:58, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
OK, I'll check the status of things after work today. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:08, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States declaration of war on Germany (1917), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evening Star (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) 10:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done

ANI-notice (it wasn't me)[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Kleuske (talk) 11:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Tempest in a teapot closed before I even got there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
'It' ...was sorted! ;) — O Fortuna velut luna 16:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Portrayal of East Asians in Hollywood[edit]

BMK,

I hope I can impose on you for a bit of help.

I edited this sentence for its english, then I chewed a bit about it. Knowing next to nothing about Hollywood, I'm unqualified to decide on this statement's value; but I wonder how well it might be supported and whether a reference can be found for it. You sometimes edit movies and theather articles, so I wonder whether you can provide some input on it, or point me to somebody who can.

Thanks, 82.57.69.86 (talk) 08:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

BMK,
allow me to put that on hold - I received notice that references for it are already present and I failed to notice them. I'll go through them later today or tomorrow as soon as I can devote an hour or two to their study.
Sorry for the intrusion.
82.57.69.86 (talk) 08:22, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Seems just a matter of deleting a (quasi-)duplicated statement. Let it be a lesson for me; always check the whole paragraph even when things seem tame.
My apologies for contacting you uselessly. 82.57.69.86 (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:25, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14[edit]

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.

Petra (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to National Geographic and John Yarbrough
Hunter's Point South (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Real Deal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Silver[edit]

I put up orphan/problematic/useless userbox templates at WP:MfD. For Template:Voluntary_protection_program (and redirect Template:Voluntary_protection_Program ?) I guess that it would go at WP:TfD but it's not orphan yet, unless the articles were edited or first deleted (I think you have all PRODed those). Thanks, —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR 02:08, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Oddly, my MfD entries have gathered no attention so far, while a more recent entry the same day did. I'm not sure if I missed something (those were my first MfD entries, here). —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR 18:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I didn't see them listed when you posted your first comment here. I just assumed that they would pop up eventually. Have you checked to see if they're listed on the master discussion list at WP:MfD? Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
I see them as 2.2.2 - 2.2.8 there. Do you? Thanks, —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR 20:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
OK, I see Template:Voluntary_protection_program on April 16 at WP:TfD, but that's not yours. I'm still looking around MfD. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC) Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Found 'em. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Nice, and thanks. I was slighly worried that the documentation may have been outdated and that an automated tool did yet another step which the documentation didn't mention, preventing people using tools from seeing them. I thought for a moment about "stealth banning", but considered this very unlikely Face-smile.svg. I then checked if the page was not under a special pending-changes protection and it was not. Thanks again, —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR 00:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Silver Master[edit]

Since he's the only one to have edited from 197.42.0.0/16 in the last two years, I've rangeblocked it for a month. Black Kite (talk) 10:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Black Kite: Thanks! Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Your move of the Inwood–207th Street article[edit]

As per my Commons talk page, "Inwood" is in the title of the page. It is on the official map and in the MTA internal data. Please don't change it without reliable sources indicating otherwise. Thanks. epicgenius (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

No, that's good enough for me. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Courtesy Note[edit]

Hi BMK. I just wanted to let you know that as I was going through the daily Prod log I declined a number of Prods you posted with a rational that the articles were virtually incomprehensible. While I do agree that the language in some cases was rough, I don't think it was so bad as to justify deletion. This was a bit reluctant since a number of the articles looked like there may well be other reasons for deletion including lack of notability and reliable secondary source coverage etc. I did tag most of the articles for copy editing. Anyways in situations where I decline multiple deletion requests from one editor I try to drop a line and let them know what's going on. Thanks for taking the time to review new articles. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I appreciate it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Usage of date parameter in templates for monitoring date-format drift[edit]

Hello. Regarding Clara Bow, I just wanted to let you know that the date parameter for Template:Use mdy dates is documented thus:

The month and year that the article was last checked for inconsistent date formatting.

The documentation also refers to the parameter as a "visit date":

a bot can...clean up formats periodically, correcting any new introductions since its last visit, and updating the visit date on the {{Use mdy dates}} template.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Scottyoak2 (talk) 14:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Although that makes sense in one way, it makes no sense in another. Probably the template should have two date parameters, one for when it was placed, and one for when it was last checked. In any case, thanks for the info. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Your close at ANI[edit]

I'm not going to reopen it but do want to register my dismay with your close. The issue there was 90% behavior and 10% content, and I thought the behavior in question was clearly in violation of WP:NPA. But the views you expressed in the close apparently reflect a widely shared tolerance for this type of expression of disrespect for fellow colleagues on WP, hence my dismay. Cheers. --В²C 01:18, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

You could well be right, we'll see if anyone feels strongly enough about it to re-open. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:23, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Here[edit]

...should you care to read, is my response to the tagging Noticeboard issue, in which you recently expressed opinion. For fairness, and completeness. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 10:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

And should you actually care, the main discussion is here. Primefac (talk) 15:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Uruguayan cuisine; bad english.[edit]

Thats sad but true, im not as fluent in English as I once was, neither as I believe myself. Obviously I use a more basic English at discussions in favor of celerity hence I ask that you judge me by my articles and not by my discussions. I have a clue that I understand English better than im understood, respective to the article Im almost done with it. --Neurorebel (talk) 20:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neurorebel (talkcontribs)

@Neurobel: I did judge you by your article work, and I stand by what I said. There's nothing wrong with the fact that your English is not good enough to write English Wikipedia articles -- my own command of any language except English is practically non-existent, and I don't attempt to edit Wikipedias in other languages because of that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:12, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken; Editing other Idioms is nice, hope you be confident enough to try.
Im sorry to tell you that despite of your discouragement, I already and again have edited the article, I offer you my apologizes and I hope such not to turn an important issue, I was forced to and did it because I considered strictly necessary since the article has many issues other than. and mayormajor to, poor use of language.
Im doing mea culpa here, mainly on the abstract are: deviation of recommended style, autoreferencing and affirmations against NPOV
The fact is that I have spawned them myself and now Im being coerced against redeeming fixes.
I ask you to please revisit your posture, also take on account that I like being here and I feel comfortable despite of not being English my everyday language (green card please :p) and that these days I mainly use the language for watch movies, much of this can change.
On return to the article stuff and on a bit of history excesses being present there because that on a start served as developing sketch. The article lacked as I found It much of the content that has, The reason is that I intervened to my personal amusement and learning, on the wish to bring different content to Wikipedia, in fact i have chosen this article because of the suspicity suspiciousness that few natives would embark on such enterprise and hence its potential impossibility (I hope not to be underestimating my compatriots but —I think— on the way stay biaisement, tacitness and poorer implementations of English Language).
Deviations of mea culpa should be now to go, please watch, inform, feel free to correct, and let me operate on such way, take care that with medium effort, good concentration and a dict on hand I may easily achieve this level and better.
Also note that this is the first time that i receive this kind of advertence after time with many editions, the article inherited some controverted affirmations that I did not generate myself and you have (controversially?) reverted at a prior edition of mine.
P.D.: Yet deficient?
--Neurorebel (talk) 00:47, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Your comment above is a clear and compelling example of your lack of competence in English. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken; Really?, why? --Neurorebel (talk) 03:08, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
That fact that you don't know is proof of your inability to write in proper English. Your comment above is intelligible only by overlooking the myriad mistakes you made: the use of words that don't mean what you think they mean ("the article inherited some controverted affirmations", "now Im being coerced against redeeming fixes"), the use of archaic or obscure words that few people will understand (", the straight-out incorrect use of words ("celerity"} and use of non-existent words ("mayor to", "suspicity", "advertance", "biaisement"), the use of the wrong form of words ("apologizes" instead of "apologies"), not using an apostrophe in contractions ("Im" instead of "I'm"), the misuse of common phrases ("doing mea culpa"), the misuse of prepositions ("mainly on the abstract")
In short, your English is really very poor, and your attempt to make it better just makes it worse. Please stop editing articles -- instead, make suggestions about what changes you want to make on the article talk page and allow other editors to decipher what you mean and put the changes into the article. I have to warn you that competence is required in editing Wikipedia, and if you continue to edit articles despite this advice, I will be compelled to bring your behavior to the attention of administrators. I really don't want to do that to someone who enjoys being here, but I will have to if you continue to mess up articles with your poor English. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Just for curiosity, how do you tell "the quality of being biased"? I have wrongly taken that word from wiktionary not realizing that it was strictly a french term. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/biaisement
Also Isnt a word In English to describe the quality of being suspicious? google says this [1], a similar word on spanish is suspicidad; the straight forward term in English is suspiciuosness [2] but i think that if existent suspicity is more correct for what I intended to say.
Can you at last understand me despite of obscure language?--Neurorebel (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
It is good that at least I can sustain some kind of conversation, and on greater or lesser manner make me understand on languages other than my native one as seen here; you personally cited your unability (impediment) to do so.
It is curious that the word celerity is in English even stranger that it is its spanish translation: "celeridad" that is a more formal way of saying speed or "velocidad" on spanish.
I intentionally used less colloquial lexicon to approach a more formal writing. I hope that that is not what you adjectivate as obscure.
I just noticed that you have misspelled advertence as "advertance", what is wrong with using that term instead of "warning"? I think that that is still English and also less severe, so on the lack of use of the correct form of contractions is analogous of what would happen to an English witter that tries to type the "ñ" on its computer, we simple lack of respective chars at hand (Im on the switch from windows to linux and desperately miss alt+numpad ASCII composing).
I take your advice on how to behave here but im slightly inclined to suggest a possible submission to consensus as last resource on the instance of preventing any further disagreement, as an antecedent and also an affirmation of your decision, if you do not oppose, what do you think?
Im learning some English on the go.
"That fact that you don't know is proof of your inability to write in proper English", I just asked, also that is not a proper argument--
"Doing mea culpa" instead of "making mea culpa" those are two idioms at the same time, make cocoa and do homework are both actions and one day I will ask an English speaker if he can make difference of both verbs using a definition, most possibly he will can.
For sure on which language is it written that text on your user profile, if any? it seems a mixture of spanish Italian and Portuguese.Neurorebel (talk) 04:53, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
That inner page is diffuse for moments, seems not my understanding of English what is preventing me to get the point in some parts, WP:CIR says: "...to limit their contributions on English Wikipedia articles to edits that do not require writing in English" Really I cant understand which articles of English Wikipedia are those that dont "require writing in English".--Neurorebel (talk) 06:38, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
I hope Beyond My Ken doesn't mind that I answer to this. Other ideas of contributions are fighting vandalism, editing templates, categorizing articles, improving sources and references/citations of articles, ensuring that articles follow the manual of style for things like typography, sentence case for titles... there probably are other aspects that don't currently come to mind. — PaleoNeonate — 06:55, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh, working on images is also an important part of improving Wikipedia. — PaleoNeonate — 07:12, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Of course I don't mind your chiming in, and your suggestions are all good ones. @Neurorebel:, please take note of PaleoNeonate's suggestions. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Neither I had any explicit invitation here but a message on my discussion, I also hope that Beyond My Ken doesnt care that I reply to unexpected guests, PaleoNeonate you stepped on me! as we say on my country: if you want it clearer just add water ("Mas claro echale agua"). @Beyond My Ken: I just saw that you did a good work helping on the article, thank you very much. Where It says Italian grappa it links nowhere because the article is located at Grappa If you wanted to write Italian Grappa im not sure wether is that correct since you are talking about a spirit that is made in Uruguay and also is sometimes called grapa uruguaya I believe that is written on the bottle let me take pic... I will keep improving the article at my sandbox if there is no opposition, you can check it everytime you wish and i stay at your orders if any doubt.--Neurorebel (talk) 07:29, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Cheers[3]--Neurorebel (talk) 07:46, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
I am much too busy in real life to give you lessons in English -- I barely have enough free time to keep up with my watchlist. Besides, (1) Your inability to write English is well beyond the reach of small corrections to repair: you don't really seem to know how bad your English is. I'm not attempting to insult you, I'm simply being truthful and blunt: your English is really quite bad; (2) At some point, you have to take responsibility for your actions, and what I'm telling you is that your writing in English is bad enough that you are not improving Wikipedia by editing here, you are actively hurting it by inserting writing that is practically indecipherable. Please look at all the aspects of improving Wikipedia that PaleoNeonate laid out above that don't require a native-level knowledge of English, and by which you can act to improve the encyclopedia. You really must consider switching your focus to one or more of these areas and stop writing and editing articles, a task for which you are not equipped. As I said above competence is required, and you are simply not competent enough in English to be doing what you're doing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Load an clear (?). My time here fluctuates and It will not be long until my next recease recess, you somehow hit my proud but your words are wise, Id prefer that you rather say Im forgotten but who knows truthfully there are times of the thay day that i do not know in which language Im talking. I will try to find help as soon as possible and improve moreover those silly things (at least ill get an apostrophe from somewhere), it cant be that bad that we are communicating and that Im not in use of any translator.
Im frustrated that I cant get the article finished by direct means and moreover that I cant fix all the negligible errors that I added whithout without standing too much, I would have done an entire article if not of you and you are right that its too much, effort, work, and language level, but it worths.--Neurorebel (talk) 06:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Uruguayan cuisine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Caña (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, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done Someone already fixed the link. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Surreal Barnstar Hires.png The Surreal Barnstar
The Surreal Barnstar is awarded to any user who adds "special flavor" to the community by acting as a sort of wildcard. Thanks for your oppose, and I'm not being sarcastic. I'm glad you noted my trolling, but that's not what I would describe as "trolling" but more as a clever recipe for humor. After all, I was running as a "surprise party" candidate for adminship. That doesn't sound too serious. Thanks for the laugh mate! Face-grin.svg cheers! CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 06:09, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

User:MainlyTwelve/51 Astor Place[edit]

Hi there. I had already disabled the category membership, per WP:USERNOCAT, by converting it from a membership link to just a link. I'm slightly puzzled why you reinstated BenjaminR44's change which I reverted. It might match some change in the article categorisation (I don't know), but he shouldn't really have been changing it without explanation in the first place (on another user's sandbox copy), hence my revert of his change prior to my explained edit to disable it per guidelines. Murph9000 (talk) 02:58, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

His category was correct. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:43, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Possible discussion of interest[edit]

Based on your statements in the recent RfA, I don't believe it is canvassing to alert you to this. I have started a discussion related to the Did you know template, specifically, moving it from "Full protection" to "Template protection". Thank you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, the discussion is a bit esoteric, so I probably won't participate. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:00, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

AN/I[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Legal threat by Director. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:09, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, it was already closed by the time I got there. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:01, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Voice of process for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Voice of process 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/Voice of process 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. -KAP03(Talk • Contributions • Email) 18:05, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

A question[edit]

If I may ask, BMK, other than the idiom, is there a difference in meaning in the two versions of this? If there is, I can't see it. Thank you, 79.18.123.177 (talk) 21:59, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

The "too" is an intensifer. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you again. 79.18.123.177 (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4[edit]

Hello Beyond My Ken,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 428 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Downtown[edit]

Hello. I've split my recent edit to Downtown into three simpler edits with more detailed summaries. Please feel free to revert whichever part(s) you object to, and I'll leave the page in that state. Thanks, Certes (talk) 10:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

With the exception of the mispelling of "Manhattan", your "corrections" were not improvements. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I agree that a limit is at least as good as the limit; I just wanted to avoid using both articles together in the original text the a limit. Certes (talk) 11:45, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Very good. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:55, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

RFAR withdrawn[edit]

The request for arbitration in which you commented has been withdrawn by the filing party. For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 20:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Newimpartial[edit]

[4] and [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legacypac (talkcontribs) 01:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure why my name is here, exactly; I see that my stats are largely as I described them - a better record in AfD than in MfD. Anyway, I am observing an extended moratorium on both, at least until I complete CVUA training, as was recommended to me. Newimpartial (talk) 12:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

No hard feelings[edit]

I've worked too hard mediating this hurling of insults into actual content dispute resolution to see it snap close right away! If you really can't stomach seeing it on AN, let me gracefully move it to DRN.  · Salvidrim! ·  04:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Response: because I see the actual content dispute discussion as a victory, but a very fragile, barely blossoming flower, and I'm worried that poking it (let alone moving it in another room) will cause it to go astray. :)
I'd much rather have a healthy discussion in the wrong venue that an unhealthy discussion at the proper one. When things start working well, don't touch anything! :p As a mediator, when people start talking about the right issues, step back, shut up and don't interfere anymore.  · Salvidrim! ·  04:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
No, no hard feelings, and no need (at least on my part) to move it if you think it best to let it go on where it is. I trust you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:10, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

BMK for turning my poorly-articulated thoughts into beautifully crafted proposals. Hopefully this will break this (to me) inexplicable logjam and remove an extremely toxic presence. Simon. Irondome (talk) 22:39, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Tagging of 10 Cabot Square[edit]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on 10 Cabot Square. I do not think that 10 Cabot Square fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because Buildings are not within scope for A7. I request that you consider not re-tagging 10 Cabot Square for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 04:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I've prodded the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

NYC borough decimals[edit]

Hi, Ken,

Do you have any particular rationale for keeping decimal places (e.g. some minimum number of significant figures) in the Template for area and population of a few (but hardly all) New York boroughs? I'm not saying or assuming that you don't; it's just that I couldn't easily come up with one for myself. Keeping everything in whole numbers has at least the advantage of lining up the columns consistently and making eyeball comparisons easy.

While it's true that this is an encyclopa[e]dia, that doesn't mean that the full details have to be everywhere, just readily found in the obvious places (e.g. the Geography section of a particular borough's article). I created the 5-boro' table, later converted by someone else into a template, just to present basic information while cutting comparative verbiage in each Borough's lead [lede] paragraph — words that are just as tedious and confusing to compose as they are to read ("X is the 2nd-largest, but the 4th-densest..."). The table wasn't intended to replace articles such as Demographics of New York City.

If you'd like a basis for comparison, you might look at another table I've worked on (adding miles for metrically-deficient minds like my own) at Provinces of South Africa#Current provinces. Or else at Demographics of South Africa, where my partial contributions were more general.

Best wishes, —— Shakescene (talk) 18:52, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

There's no reason to truncate or round these figures, we're not running out of space anytime soon. There's just as easy to compare with decimals as they are without out. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Further, the land area and population density figures need to be updated, as they do not accord with the Encyclopedia of New York City. If we're going to have a template such as this, the figures in it (and in the borough articles) need to be accurate. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:13, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Please, delete this comment[edit]

I kindly ask you to strikethrough this comment. It seems Wikihounding due I've started that discussion only after User:Ghouston requested me to do so. --Grabado (talk) 08:01, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

You can ask me kindly, or you can ask me roughly, but I will not be striking it out, as it represents the actual situation and your refusal to do the right thing on Commons.
Please don't post here again, or bring up this Commons situation on Wikipedia again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Removal of flags and insignias from multiple info boxes[edit]

User Huberthof has been getting around these past couple of days with his newly created account, and seems to be on this mission to remove flags and insignia from numerous articles, mostly those of American military people. This users cites a guideline about flags in infoboxes (which btw says nothing about insignia), but ignores the fact that every guideline stipulates "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.". Famous military people are such exceptions. Other editors have taken exception to this apparent mission to remove flags and insignia, mostly from the articles of prominent Americans, as evidenced on Huberthoff's Talk page. Imo, we should return these items to the infoboxes. Some of these articles, like George Washington Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant have had these items when they were approved for GA and FA status, with no issues all of this time. See the debate at Military history Talk. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:24, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I've commented on the editor's talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Boeing720[edit]

Thank you for the message you left for this editor. I was appalled by his intimation (if not outright accusation) of anti-Semitism, but decided it was best not to respond to him. This entire matter is very minor, but he has turned it into a totally unnecessary drama. At any rate, I appreciate your message. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 00:52, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I, too, was appalled that such an accusation would be raised in such a minor content dispute. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Source for poster[edit]

Hello, may I ask where you retrieved this poster you uploaded for The Getaway article? I'm gonna need the exact url if possible. Thanks Bluesphere 13:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bluesphere: You're going to need to ask User:Thismightbezach who uploaded it originally. All I did was crop out the border. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
@Bluespeher: If it'll help, the TinEye search result is here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
@Bluesphere: (fix ping) See my last comment re: TinEye search. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

New York Question[edit]

The article for Danceteria has the coordinates for the club's final location of 30 East 30th Street. As the more notable location was arguably 30 West 21st Street, shouldn't the coordinates point there? I changed the location on the page, but knowing you as an expert on New York area history/locations, I wanted your input on whether this was the right thing to do. Thanks for any help you can offer SpintendoTalk 17:56, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Spintendo: My recollection is that Danceteria spent a considerably longer time (in club-years, that is, which are sort of like dog-years) at the 21st Street address then at the 30th Street address, so what you did is probably best. If I get a moment I'll do a little research to confirm that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Much appreciated =) SpintendoTalk 19:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Spintendo: According to Time Out Danceteria was at its original space at 252 West 37th Street [6] beginning in 1979 (or 1980 according to other sources), and then at the 21st Street address from 1982-86, and that is where it made its mark. That really is the heyday of the club. After '86 it moved to the Hamptons (actually, they had opened the Hampton club in '84, and were there until '95), and then reopened a NYC location in the ballroom of the Martha Washington Hotel (at 29 East 29th Street, not 30 East 30th Street, which is the address of the hotel) in 1991. [7] It ran until 1993. [8]
Hope that helps. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
That does help. Since the club's main notoriety derives from that second location, I would think that ought to be where the coordinates go to. I'll make note of the change and why on the talk page. Thank you again for your help I really appreciate it! — SpintendoTalk 22:22, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Foreign language sources and notability[edit]

Taking this to your talk page since it's got nothing to do with Chang and I don't want to give the impression that it does. I think you were wrong to write Foreign language sources are certainly acceptable, but when they're relied on for notability in the obvious absence of any English-language sources which establish notability, that's got absolutely zero to do with WORLDVIEW and everything to do with the notability not actually being established. The vast, vast majority of notable topics in the pre-modern histories of the majority of Asian countries have received only piecemeal coverage in English and other European languages. That's why Japanese and Chinese Wikipedias have a lot more articles on medieval Chinese texts and poets than we do at the moment, but that's something we should be working to remedy.

Indeed, it is often English sources that are only "acceptable". With topics like Li He, the English language sources all seem to be superficial and reliant on Chinese and Japanese scholarship, and until I fixed our article it got a number of details wrong because of its reliance on what were essentially tertiary sources. And insisting on English sources to establish notability (for historical topics, if not necessarily residents in 2017 Australia) is also not technically supported by the notability guidelines.

Hijiri 88 (やや) 21:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

I think you make a very good case for historical topics where the focus of the scholarship is not in English, so I won't fight you there, but in the present instance -- a Taiwanese "dissident" given asylum in Australia -- there really ought to be more English-language sources to establish notability. If we allow this, we essentially hand over the keys to en.wiki to any editor who can put together sources unreadable by the vast majority of our editors and readers, and say to them "Sure, we can't tell if the subject is notable or not, so go ahead and make an article, we won't delete it" I don't think that's a very good idea, and I doubt that the editors at other language wikis would think so either if the shoe were on the other foot. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, yeah, but even in most such instances there are probably plenty of Chinese-proficient editors (I'm not one of them, mind) who understand our notability guidelines and don't have a dog in the fight. Since it's a BLP, and in a problematic content area (dissident articles are magnets for POV-forking and coatracking), obviously we need to be stricter than usual, but even with such cases there are plenty of topics that probably do merit articles, but not based on English sources. What makes me suspicious enough with the current article not to wait for a WikiProject China editor I trust is that the subject has been resident in Australia for most of the time he has supposedly been noteworthy, so there definitely should be English-language coverage. Hijiri 88 (やや) 06:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Not only that, but not a single Chinese-proficient editor has offered a synopsis of the content of the Chinese sources, simply a blanket assurance that the subject is notable. I respect AGF, but that's a determination I want to make for myself, as I believe should be tha case at AfD. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:30, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

AN/I[edit]

Information.svg

As you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive957#Proposal: One-way IBAN on Godsy towards Legacypac, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposing IBAN between Godsy and Legacypac. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 03:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)