User talk:Midnightblueowl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1 (2006-2011)
  2. Archive 2 (2012)
  3. Archive 3 (2013)
  4. Archive 4 (2014)

Hello and welcome to my talk page!

Contents

Death of Leelah Alcorn[edit]

Thank you for your substantial contribution to the article. <3 <3 <3 Glitchygirl (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC) Thank you for the thank you, Glitchygirl! Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Coldrum Long Barrow[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Coldrum Long Barrow you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Squeamish Ossifrage -- Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Symbol wait.svg Tagged the review on hold. This is a very well-researched bit of work, and I'll be happy to pass its GA candidacy with only some relatively easy changes. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Coldrum Long Barrow[edit]

The article Coldrum Long Barrow you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Coldrum Long Barrow for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Squeamish Ossifrage -- Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

WP:Today's_featured_article/requests/Tintin_in_the_Congo[edit]

Hi, I'm co-writing the TFA text with article nominators these days, and I made more tweaks than usual to this one; please have a look. Were any of my changes mysterious? Is anything left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 20:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Prhartcom. I'd prefer to keep discussion in one place, so I'll stop watching here. - Dank (push to talk) 21:51, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Daily Mail/Mirror[edit]

  • No one with their head screwed on straight would consider those to be reliable sources. Not only that, but they're often redundant to other sources in the article. Do not readd them again. Ever. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Luke. Sorry that we've got off to the wrong foot. Don't get me wrong, I'm not championing these tabloids as high quality sources, but I think that they may be necessary in this instance. I'll open up a talk page discussion over at Talk:Death of Leelah Alcorn where we can discuss the situation in a civil manner with others. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I take an extremely dim view of anyone readding these sources. I'm happy to have a talkpage discussion about it, but I'm not going to ever change my view on these sources. With regards to your readership comment, a large amount of people read TMZ, but that would never be a reliable source for anything at all bar perhaps themselves. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:23, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Although I do apologize that you're on the end of it; it's kind of my standard response to anyone re-adding anything to do with the Daily Mail. Excessive, yes, but probably justified. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:28, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I've put together three paragraphs of waffle, so do give it a read. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your concern regarding said tabloids, I just think that there are a few instances where their inclusion is indeed appropriate. And yes, I agree that these tabloids shouldn't normally be read; they simply don't reach the intellectual heights of The Sun and the Daily Sport! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:44, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Death of Leelah Alcorn[edit]

Please be mindful of the 3 revert rule so that you do not exceed it today. 1, 2, 3 Best, Mike VTalk 19:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Mike V, thanks for bringing this issue to my attention. To be fair to myself, at least one of these cases was an instance in which I was dealing with another user, who has themselves been called out for edit warring and disruptive behaviour at the administrators' noticeboard. So I do believe that it is unfair to hold me responsible for edit warring on that particular issue. But thank you nonetheless. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:44, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
It's best not to fight edit warring with edit warring. Also note that the 3RR has very strict criteria as to what is considered exempt. Mike VTalk 19:48, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Ted Hollamby[edit]

Just dropping by to say "yes" to Ted Hollamby as English architect, and agree with "good" article. Qexigator (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Qexigator, and thank you for your message. I'll open a conversation over at Talk:Helena Blavatsky at some point so we can discuss how to proceed with the lede. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Iron man book.jpg[edit]

Hi Midnightblueowl, I delved into this mystery for you (File:Iron man book.jpg) and found that, according to History, you did upload it October 2006, which was probably a few months after you started editing! It has been illustrating this wonderful book all this time until yesterday, when someone, rather than upload a new version of the same filename, uploaded a new version with a different filename, causing this one to orphan and the message appear as if you had recently uploaded it. I spoke to the new uploader yesterday and suggested that next time they can upload a new version of the same filename to avoid this. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 13:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, okay, thanks @Prhartcom: I've no recollection of uploading it to be honest, but as you say it was a long time ago. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

FLC request[edit]

How are you doing mate?, long time. Requesting you to comment on this one when you find time. Vensatry (ping) 08:56, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

My bad, I thought this to be ChrisTheDude's talk page. Apologies for cross posting. However, feel free to comment on the nomination if you find the topic to be interesting. Vensatry (ping) 10:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
No worries, @Vensatry:! Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mortimer Wheeler[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mortimer Wheeler you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Blavatsky[edit]

Thanks for your good work on this article. It is coming along quite nicely! HGilbert (talk) 00:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks @Hgilbert: I'm always glad to see people appreciating my work! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
@Hgilbert: I'd like to also say thank you to yourself for the edits that you have been making. It's good to work alongside another editor who is helping to improve this contentious article. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes...the more I explore sources, the more it seems a quagmire of unreliable and contradictory assertions. HGilbert (talk) 15:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mortimer Wheeler[edit]

The article Mortimer Wheeler you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mortimer Wheeler for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mortimer Wheeler[edit]

The article Mortimer Wheeler you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Mortimer Wheeler for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The Castafiore Emerald[edit]

I would very much like to take this article to GA status. Since you have expanded so many Tintin books, I figured I might as well ask your help for the article's expansion. I already have the Michael Farr book (The complete companion one). If you could send me photos of the books by Thompson, Assouline, Apostolides and Peeters (if you have them), which are related to the article, it would be greatful. Thanks. Face-smile.svgSsven2 speak 2 me 17:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Ssven2, In my opinion, it is inappropriate in the extreme to ask another editor to provide "photos" (I assume you mean of each page) of the sources they use to research their articles, and it isn't appropriate to expose your email address in that way (editors occasionally allow other editors to contact them via email using the link Wikipedia provides in the menu to the left, but many editors, especially such as editors with the community respect and reputation as Midnightblueowl, do not normally accept email in this way and solely prefer communication via Talk page). In my case, I went to the trouble and expense to acquire all of the books you mention for my own library, just as I feel certain Midnightblueowl went to the trouble to do. May I suggest you doing the same, as well as checking your local university or public library for these books? Cheers and good luck to you. Prhartcom (talk) 18:14, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello User:Ssven2 and thanks for your message. It is good to hear that you are interested in helping improve Wikipedia's coverage of The Adventures of Tintin. However, I can't help but share Prhartcom's view that it is inappropriate to ask another editor (in this case myself) to take photographs for you and thus do a significant part of your research for you. I am more than happy to use the resources that I have access to to improve The Castafiore Emerald (as I have done with many other related articles), but asking me to engage in criminal activity (in this case copyright infringement) is something that I do not feel comfortable doing. Further, I would express caution about posting your private email address online, for you open yourself up to threats from spammers and the like. I hope that you understand. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your replies. I have removed the phrase containing my email-id as a precaution. As of now, I will expand the article using the Farr book. Thanks again. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 05:50, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Le monde de Tintin[edit]

Hi Midnightblueowl, hope all is well, and congrats on starting your edits on what I am assuming is your next project, The Secret of the Unicorn‎. I remember probably five years ago now, when I was a wee editor, I rewrote the Synopsis of this article and you promptly rewrote my rewrite (as mine was too long and nothing but OR). You then went on to greatly improve the whole article, completely intimidating me. Face-smile.svg We had a discussion about it then (our first); I learned from you then to always keep my synopsis short. I don't believe you were into GAs back then so I applaud you if you are heading in that direction now. Having said that, I will give you a tip I picked up about Mr. Jackson's and Mr. Spielberg's next project which is supposed to be out late 2015: I distinctly remember them telling an interviewer that they couldn't disclose the title of the next Tintin film, but did say, "We know which books we’re making, we can’t share that now, but we’re combining two books which were always intended to be combined by Hergé." (only one example of this quote) I think that means that we almost certainly know which two books are about to be adapted, and which two books are bound to need improvements by then. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 19:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, yes I'm going to go for GA over at The Secret of the Unicorn. I've been away from the Tintin articles for far too long (mostly focusing on archaeology and esotericism-themed articles), so hopefully I can make up for lost time over the coming months. Yes, I never used to see the point of GA or FA, but then again, when I was a novice editor I didn't even see the point of having referencing (I've learned an awful lot over the last decade). The longer that we spend as Wikipedia editors, the more we learn, or at least that is how I feel. Only earlier this month I ended up learning a lot about WP:BLP regulations through my work at Death of Leelah Alcorn, which I had previously known next-to-nothing about.
My guess would be that Seven Crystal Balls-Prisoners will be the basis for the new film (and I hope so, because those are among my favourite stories in the series), although going just from those quotes then I suppose that it could also be the moon adventure (I hope not, I've never found that one very interesting) or the "Tintin in the Orient" arc (not sure how that would work as a single film). If that is the case then we should ensure that the Incan adventure is brought up to scratch (i.e. GA) before the year is out, which I am confident that we are more than capable of achieving. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Precisely. The Seven Crystal Balls-Prisoners of the Sun, with the title "Prisoners of the Sun", will almost certainly be the next Tintin movie. And what an exciting movie that will be, when the solar eclipse is halted by our hero Connecticut Yankee-style. Yes indeed, those two articles must be ready. I'm working on a couple of other projects now but really need to return to the Tintin (character) article, then of course I would eagerly help you tackle perhaps one of the two articles for those books. I'm afraid we don't have until the end of the year, as the title for the movie is bound to be announced any time now of course, and guess what people will start to do the moment that it does. I would even venture to say we should consider dropping everything and getting this settled. Prhartcom (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I shall endeavour to have both Secret of the Unicorn and Red Rackham's Treasure done by the end of this weekend, and then shall move on to the Peruvian adventure next week. How does that sound ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
My gosh, you are prolific in the extreme (as I have always said about you). That would be wonderful. I think I may drop my current GAN and get busy on whichever of the two books you don't start on first, if you have no objection. Prhartcom (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem. I won't send anything (i.e. Secrets or Red Rackham) off for GAN until you give me the go ahead, either. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I've basically exhausted my source material when it comes to The Secret of the Unicorn, so if at some point you have the opportunity to give that one a read through, it would be useful, and then if we're both happy with it it can be sent off to GAN. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I have just finished giving it the once over. It was very good; there were long passages with no errors that I could see. The plot had plenty of problems but I believe I fixed them all, and the Adaptation section had been copied in from The Shooting Star without making a single change; that was also corrected. I believe I will give it another read-through tomorrow but right now I think it is ready to be nominiated. Which of the two books we were discussing above are you interested in taking on? Prhartcom (talk) 09:48, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Apologies, I've just realised that I didn't respond to this one (I think that I was authoring it when my computer crashed earlier). I have sent Secret of the Unicorn to GAN, but who knows how long it'll have to wait there (not that there's any rush). I've found that most of the sources dealing with Seven/Prisoners discuss them together, and often provide information pertinent to them both, so I've just been adding information to both articles simultaneously rather than treating them separately. However, feel free to butt in and correct or improve my prose at any point, as I know that a lot of it isn't up to scratch yet. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi again, Midnightblueowl; I have just completed proofreading Red Rackham's Treasure, as you requested; thank-you. Just to point out a few things: We can't ever use the encyclopedic term "Tintinologist", a word used only in marketing materials and not by reliable sources. Please go easy on the clichéd "revolves around" phrase; once per article is quite enough. I changed a few of the critics "asserted" their points to a different euphemism since it was being used repeatedly. As primary references in a plot synopsis are not necessary, perhaps only these few references at the end of the paragraph are more appropriate. I improved the plot summary mostly by telling the last few pages of the story and to tie this story better into the previous story. Other than these and a few minor fixes, once again there were actually very few mistakes in this article. I believe you can submit it for GA. Prhartcom (talk) 09:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Update: I re-read both books in this two-part story and they still look good; well-done. I wanted to pass on some advice I took from Neelix when he was reviewing Tintin in Tibet: He suggested that the tense of the Critical analysis section be changed from past to present tense. I understood what he was explaining: Artists and their critics may have written their piece yesterday, but their work speaks today. This writing practice tends to avoid passive voice and lends to reading that feels more alive, while still keeping the required encyclopedic style. (An exception would be a direct quote in the section; the interview occurred in the past.) I have not made the tense corrections to these sections; I am interested in hearing what you think about this first. (Side note: Neelix gave me about thirty suggestions on that article and I believe I accepted all of them but one. In other words, I greatly respected and reality-checked each piece of his advice. This one that I am passing on to you was like almost all of his advice: excellent.) Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like an apt proposal; I am happy to see the prose in the "Critical Analysis" sections of the articles switched to present tense. On a related note, I've yet to send Red Rackham's Treasure to GAN as I am a little unsure about some of the references; we have two citations to a French-language book without any page numbers, and I don't think it can pass GAN (or at least, a thorough GAN) without that corrected. I don't have access to this particular tome, and even if I did, I cannot read French, so I am wondering as to whether it might be worth removing those references altogether, or seeing if we can find a decent replacement ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad you brought that up. I went to the trouble of changing the referencing style of that source to the cite book style used consistently and only at the very end of that process realised that there was no page number. I must admit that at that point I just hoped no one would notice. I would be able to read the source if it were in front of me (barely) but that will never happen: the book is sold only in Belguim, probably only at the Musée Hergé. Since it is in low distribution I began heavily leaning heavily towards leaving it out. However, I considered one more possibility: asking the editor who added the information to find the page number for us. I used WikiBlame to determine the editor is a fellow named Marktreut who added it five years ago and has not been active on Wikipedia since. I notice everything else that editor added has been excised, therefore, I think you can guess where I am heading with this: Cut it.
I'd be glad to help you take a look at modifying the tense in the Critical analysis sections.Prhartcom (talk) 20:35, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I nearly forgot: The article had two missing references that you may have intended to get back to: the The Daily Telegraph 2011 and Ubisoft 2011. I added the missing references. I located an appropriate article in The Daily Telegraph written by reporter Michael Farr. The Ubisoft reference did not exist so I changed to a different source. Prhartcom (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
This one is more fun conversational rather than strictly business: I wanted to acknowledge that I was impressed when you said you recently learned to write articles that have BLP concerns, and that I agree that sounds interesting and useful. I have even just finished writing an article that was just promoted to GA that has one area that could very well be infringing upon BLP and was wondering if I should ask you about it.
But first, pivoting from that, I too have been learning areas of Wikipedia that had not been crystal clear before and one of those I recently learned was writing articles that have primary source concerns. I spotted that the Ubisoft reference to the Tintin game in the Red Rackham article would have been published by the Ubisoft company, the game publisher, and therefore would have been reference to a primary source. That was one reason I looked instead for an industry magazine discussing the title in order to find reference to a secondary source. It's fun to learn any new knowledge about Wikipedia.
Pivoting again, I also learned something about editors who think Wikipedia is a battleground, but that is another story. Face-smile.svg Prhartcom (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I have improved the Synopsis and Adaptation sections plus made other small improvements to The Seven Crystal Balls and Prisoners of the Sun. Would you please look to the top of the References section where I have left some temporary {{sfn}} templates there for you? These are of the authors you have not yet used in the article (but that I know you intend to). Please take inline refs from here then delete when done. Cheers, Prhartcom (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

@Prhartcom:, that's great, thank you. Have send Red Rackham to GAN then will turn my attention to finishing off Seven Crystal Balls when I get the chance. Best for now! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:22, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI, Tintin in the Congo TFA tomorrow. Prhartcom (talk) 16:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh my. What a day monitoring this TFA. The worst was having to tell an editor WP:NOBLE. ;-) Prhartcom (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I've just seen what you mean... oh dear oh dear. I'll pop over and lend my support. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:13, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Ha, it's okay, my dear Midnightblueowl, (be sure not to rouse that guy, he's already calmed down)—You never asked for this one today and I have taken care of it; besides in only a few minutes the day will be over. ;-) Prhartcom (talk) 23:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a wonderful job as always for the two latest Tintin book articles. Saved the most fun (Apostolidès) for last of course. ;-) Prhartcom (talk) 18:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Prhartcom. Yes, I tend to leave both Apostolides and McCarthy to last. I don't know if that's because it's most convenient to put them in last or because I put off the chore of reading those two books to the very end ! Psychoanalysis and literary criticism are two disciplines that I'll never get my head around, I'm afraid. I want to make some more additions to the publication history of those two articles before sending them off to GAN; in the meantime, make any revisions that you see fit! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
@Prhartcom: I think it's about time to send Seven Crystal Balls to GAN, if you're happy with that course of action ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 00:26, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate the heads up; I actually just started someone's GA review so my attention has been elsewhere; please give me the weekend to take a good look at it. Cheers to another success, Prhartcom (talk) 00:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Ready now; quite a few corrections and improvements were made, not only to this one but I am happy to say also to a few others for consistency purposes (view the differences to see if you approve). Prhartcom (talk) 16:58, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested Move discussion[edit]

Information.svg There is a Requested Move (article rename) discussion that you may be interested in at Talk:The Adventures of Tintin (film)#Requested move 30 January 2015. Thank-you. Prhartcom (talk) 08:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

DMY discussion[edit]

Information.svg There is a DMY vs MDY discussion that you may be interested in at Talk:The Adventures of Tintin (film)#The article uses European date formats.. Thank-you. Prhartcom (talk) 19:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Secret of the Unicorn[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Secret of the Unicorn you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The Secret of the Unicorn[edit]

I have another book besides Farr's one. It is called "The Adventures of Tintin at Sea" by Yves Horeau. It describes that Red Rackham was also based on the character, Lerouge, who apears in C. S. Forester's novel, The Captain from Connecticut, probably also explains why he is called Rackham le Rouge in the book's French version. Rackham's outfit is also inspired mainly by Daniel Montbars, better known as Montbars the Exterminator. Page number 39 of the book. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 16:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I wish I had that book. I mentioned it on the main article, The Adventures of Tintin. Prhartcom (talk) 21:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ssven2 - I'd forgotten about that book. I actually have a copy of it knocking about somewhere, which I purchased when I visited the original Greenwich exhibit. I'll look into it. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Secret of the Unicorn[edit]

The article The Secret of the Unicorn you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:The Secret of the Unicorn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 06:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Tintin 21[edit]

Can you help me in further expanding The Castafiore Emerald? I have expanded the article using Farr's books. The Assouline and Thompson references are from the Google book previews. — Ssven2 speak 2 me 10:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sven; I'll try and get around to it after completing my work on The Seven Crystal Balls/Prisoners of the Sun - best for now! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It needs some work as I'm sure Ssven2 would agree (it's not always written in a neutral voice and it needs WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE) but it's a good start, it's a big improvement over what was previously there, and should be commended for that. I'm sure Midnightblueowl will get to it in the order she prefers. FYI, the Thompson pages that are online are of the newer paperback printing that has completely different page numbers; these will need to be changed to the page numbers of the hardback (I own both copies and perhaps can do this myself later). Prhartcom (talk) 13:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leo Martello, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patricia Crowther (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) 09:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations[edit]

Yes, precious again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Congrats from me as well: know a TinTin (and cartoon) scholar, shared it with him, will see if he has any thoughts :) Sadads (talk) 17:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Ssven2, and also Sadads and Gerda Arendt. Your comments are much appreciated! Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Feedback from the scholar via Facebook: "In general, the Wikipedia entries on all of the Tintin volumes are remarkably good. I skimmed this one just now, and apart from the watering down of points that often takes place in consensus prose, this look good. I'd like to see more on the recent debates about whether the book should have a warning sticker on it, but there's stuff here that I didn't know, and the writers' knowledge of the French scholarship is more than surface." The article definitely holds up :) Keep up the great work! We definitely need more strong, and nuanced, coverage of humanities topics. Sadads (talk) 22:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
That's great Sadads, thank you. If there were more reliable sources discussing the issues surrounding warning stickers, then we'd definitely be able to include that here, so if the scholar (or yourself) did come across any such sources then please do let myself or User:Prhartcom know. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Red Rackham's Treasure[edit]

Would you like me to review Red Rackham's Treasure? SFriendly.svgSsven2 speak 2 me 16:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Ssven2, and thanks for your offer. According to the instructions for undertaking a GAN, a nomination may be "reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article". I see that you have made a number of edits to the Red Rackham's Treasure article recently, but I'm not sure what constitutes "significantly" in this context. However, if you feel a desire to undertake the review then I certainly won't complain. All the best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
That's what I thought and decided to ask you before taking up the GAR. Well, can I do the GAR for The Seven Crystal Balls as I haven't made any contributions to that article? Face-smile.svgSsven2 speak 2 me 06:09, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Midnightblueowl, if you want, you can ask User:Jaguar to review Red Rackham's Treasure. Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 06:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

There's no rush on my behalf, but if they would be interested in reviewing it then that would be fine with me, @Ssven2:. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

For your work on the Talbot Mundy article[edit]

Book barnstar2.png The Literary Barnstar
For your work on the Talbot Mundy article Ian.thomson (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks Ian, I hope to expand and improve the article with other reliable sources over the coming weeks, with the intent of getting it to GA status in the near future. All the best! Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Uncle David FAC[edit]

Do you plan to respond to my remaining comments at your Uncle David FAC? More than a week has passed since I made them. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I've just logged on and seen this message User:Cwmhiraeth, so I'll get to this immediately! Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen tools.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen tools.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen weaponry.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen weaponry.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen Centre.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen Centre.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Bromley H.G. Wells mural.JPG[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bromley H.G. Wells mural.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Kelly hi! 16:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Map of Avebury.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Map of Avebury.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen centre and sheep.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen centre and sheep.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Spong Hill.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Spong Hill.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen trackway part (2).jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen trackway part (2).jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:47, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Flag Fen roundhouse door (2).jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Flag Fen roundhouse door (2).jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Antony's Meltdown at the Southbank.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Antony's Meltdown at the Southbank.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly hi! 21:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Agatha Christie books.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Agatha Christie books.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Seven Crystal Balls[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Seven Crystal Balls you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 05:00, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Seven Crystal Balls[edit]

The article The Seven Crystal Balls you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:The Seven Crystal Balls for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 06:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
In recognition of your work for The Seven Crystal Balls. Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 07:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for undertaking the review and for the award, Ssven2! Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Prisoners of the Sun[edit]

So, are you ready with it? Face-smile.svgSsven2 Speak 2 me 07:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I feel that I am broadly finished with it for the present, although will let Prhartcom take a look before sending it off to GAN. I wonder if it should perhaps contain information on the foundation and development of Tintin magazine, or whether that would be superfluous in this instance ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Midnightblueowl, I will take a look at it this weekend (you're the fifth editor I have promised some of my weekend to but this this will be a pleasure). I expect it to be in good shape as always. The Tintin magazine article certainly needs expansion from the reliable sources we have; I will let you know later how the weight re: the magazine looks for Sun, but I believe the treatment you gave for The Seven Crystal Balls for this was the right amount. I see the article has a sentence on Charles Wiener who Ssven2 said Farr mentioned; that's good. BTW, I suppose we are encroaching on you a bit, sorry, but I am working on an article for the Carreidas 160 to be followed by an improvement of Flight 714 and I know Ssven2 has finished The Castafiore Emerald which I plan to add the other sources to and he is also working on The Calculus Affair. Cheers for now; I will let you know in two days when I am finished with Sun, and congrats again on another accomplishment. Prhartcom (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
There's no rush at all on my behalf, so don't feel that you must get it done at the weekend if you have other commitments; it really can wait. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:34, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
That's true, this is your statement always. Thank-you. I may take you up on that or I may look anyway. Prhartcom (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Museum of Witchcraft and Magic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Castletown (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) 08:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Red Rackham's Treasure[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Red Rackham's Treasure you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)