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)
  5. Archive 5 (2015)

Hello and welcome to my talk page!

Your GA nomination of Heathenry (new religious movement)[edit]

The article Heathenry (new religious movement) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Heathenry (new religious movement) 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tintin and Alph-Art[edit]

The article Tintin and Alph-Art you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Tintin and Alph-Art 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 Brigade Piron -- Brigade Piron (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tintin and the Picaros[edit]

The article Tintin and the Picaros you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Tintin and the Picaros 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Brian Williamson[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brian Williamson 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) 17:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Midnightblueowl. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Tintin and Alph-Art.
Message added 07:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America1000 07:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tintin and Alph-Art[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Angela Lansbury[edit]

Hey there, Midnightblueowl. Been a while. How's everything with you? :-) I happened to notice that you nominated Lansbury for GA. I would very much like to review the article if it's alright. Watched Bedknobs and Broomsticks a week ago. You were right, she was fabulous in it. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 04:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ssven, yes if you would like to review it then I would be more than happy for you to do so. All the best for now! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I've read until Mame and theatrical stardom (not including). Found little to say there. Will look at the rest tomorrow. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 11:59, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Angela Lansbury[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Angela Lansbury 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) 17:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi not sure where the best place for this is. Angela Lansbury holds citizenship of 3 different countries. British, Irish and US.

She acquired both British and Irish citizenship at birth. She has held an Irish passport which is clearly a positive act identifying her as Irish. She has lived in Ireland for several years. Additionally she has lived in the US and acquired US citizenship. Thus she holds 3 citizenship from countries. If she is to be described as British American in the intro she could/should equally be described as British / Irish /American. I have edited the page in the past to reflect this but you have repeated undone my edits. What is your problem with my edit?

@Kevinc565:If you would like to make a contentious edit to the lede section then I would suggest that you open up the issue to wider discussion through an RfC over at the article's talk page rather than unilaterally changing it yourself. I personally don't take massive issue with your suggested alteration but given that you are trying to bring about a change to something that has proven contentious in the past then you must ensure that you have a consensus behind you before doing so. That's just the way that Wikipedia works. (Also, try to remember to sign your name to your comments, so that we all know who is talking!) Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of James Murrell[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Murrell 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) 19:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of James Murrell[edit]

The article James Murrell you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:James Murrell 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Angela Lansbury[edit]

The article Angela Lansbury you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Angela Lansbury 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) 08:41, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your contribution in bringing Angela Lansbury to GA status. Congratulations and keep it up. Yours friendly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks, Pavanjandhyala! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. All the best for your future endeavours. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Stalking[edit]

[Note to any readers: For any uninvolved observers, the exchange below began on 4 February 2016 when I realised that the West Wycombe Park article, which has remained FA rated since 2006, did not meet the FA criteria given that it contained vast amounts of un-cited material. I raised the issue at the article's Talk Page, where Giano, who was the original FA nominator, expressed disagreement with my perspective, and decided to be rather impolite and facetious in their comments rather than actually constructively responding to my concerns. Their condescending attitude (exhibited here, here, here, and here) was totally unwarranted and was in clear breach of WP:Civility. I soon after initiated a Featured Article Review (FAR) of West Wycombe Park, although the latter was (understandably) dismissed by other editors for being too hasty; by policy I should have discussed the issue at the talk page for a longer period of time before going to FAR. I subsequently noticed that two other articles recently edited by Giano (Buckingham Palace and Louis d'Oger, Marquis de Cavoye) also contained uncited text, and added "citation needed" tags onto them at the appropriate point. Giano responded by starting the conversation that one can find below. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC) ]

At least stalking my edits in order to add silly citation tags should keep you out of mischief for a while, but it is making you look rather silly. Giano (talk) 13:56, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh but how can I help myself, Giano, when the temptation to stalk you is overwhelming me! Seriously, do you get some sort of pleasure out of being rude and uncivil to other editors? Does it make you feel good about yourself? Does it improve your day? Citation needed tags belong on uncited material in articles, it's as simple as that. I wouldn't be able to get an article through GAN or FAC with large chunks of uncited material in the prose, so why do you expect yourself to get a free pass on this issue? Because you're a self-professed expert on architecture and everyone should take your word that everything you write is the undisputed gospel truth? (Don't worry, I don't seriously expect to receive an answer to any of these questions). Frankly, I've never been unreasonable to you so I have no idea why you choose to act in such a manner toward me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
because you are clearly trawling my edits, and simultaneously amusing a great many people. Grow up and find another interest other than me. Giano (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, yesterday I had a fairly brief trawl through some of your recent edits, I admit it. Having seen your work on West Wycombe Park I had become well aware that not only do you tend to add large chunks of information without citations to articles, but that you also seem to see no problem with doing so, even when the issues that this raises are (politely and cordially) pointed out to you. Instead you start throwing ad hominem insults around without addressing the original concern. Accordingly I decided to take a quick look at some of your other contributions (a grand total of two, I believe); when I saw that they too often included chunks of un-cited prose, I slapped a "citation needed" tag onto those sections. (But don't worry, you are not alone in being my victim here, for I actually have the alarming and monstrous habit of adding "citation needed" tags to un-cited prose whenever I see it, at any point in Wikipedia! What a fiend I must be.) Maybe I should indeed "grow up". Or maybe – just maybe – you should stop calling the kettle black. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
  • 1; 2; 3;4; 5; 6; 7; 8 (you are edit conflicting me in some of those edits), but by then you had already expanded your search: 9. Please do not play little Miss innocent with me; I have been writing here for a great any years, and no one has ever yet proven that I make things up. I have seen you about over the last few years, you like trouble! I don't, but if it comes knocking on my door, I meet it head on. Now you have two choices, stay away from me, or go wringing you innocent little hands on some notice board or other Giano (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Oh for Heaven's sake, you don't actually pay attention to anything that I write, do you? I certainly don't deny having put "citation needed" tags in some of the articles that you have worked on, and never have denied doing such a thing. Rather, I openly admit to doing so; thus, I haven't the foggiest what point you are trying to illustrate by showing me these links? Moreover, I have never, ever accused you of "making things up" so don't claim that I have. I merely pointed out that an article lacking in-line citations can lead to a reader suspecting that the information contained in it might be original research (a perfectly reasonable thing to point out, no?) and that accordingly it is much better if we do have inline citations in our articles here at Wikipedia. And "I like trouble" do I? Well, truthfully no I don't and have no idea how you have come to that impression of me. Perhaps it's because I speak up to impolite, uncivil entities such as yourself and actually spend a great deal of time improving the encyclopaedia with well-sourced content rather than repeatedly picking fights with other editors over the most trivial of issues. You're a very odd character, I must say. I wonder if you are so damnably unpleasant 'in real life' or whether this is just part of your online persona? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not unpleasant at all, just rather perceptive. I have encountered your sort before. You like to swoop down on pages other people have mostly written and then nominate them for something-or-other and pretend they are all your own work (pour example). One only has to look at the revision history statistics of some of the pages you so boastfully promote on your user page - remember you enticed me, yesterday, to look at your user page - mistake, big mistake! Now go and find something useful to do. Giano (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
"Boastfully promote on your user page"? Yes, I like to have a neat, ordered, and well presented record of all of my work and awards on my user page, as much for my own reference as anyone else's. Doing so makes accessing my regularly used articles easier. Furthermore, seeing them lined up in this manner does indeed give me a sense of satisfaction and achievement. Some might see it as boastful; if that's their opinion then so be it. But I don't see it that way. I honestly don't. Moreover, given your decision to criticise me for "boastfully" referring to my contributions on my own talk page, I would like to point out that you yourself link to all of your awards and significant contributions on your own user page; is it really that different from my own approach? I don't think so. This is just yet more of the pot calling the kettle black.
"You like to swoop down on pages other people have mostly written and then nominate them for something-or-other and pretend they are all your own work." No, no I do not. That is a lie, an untruth. "One only has to look at the revision history statistics of some of the pages you so boastfully promote on your user page..." Fine, be my guest. If you actually do so and take the time to look at them you will soon find that your accusation is totally and utterly baseless. You quite clearly haven't looked at them at all; you've merely made an assumption about me without fact checking anything (just like when you referred to me as a "he" without bothering to check my gender...). Which raises the question, why are you making baseless accusations against me? Do you enjoy doing so? Does it give you pleasure? For someone who claims to be "not unpleasant at all" you sure seem to be doing everything possible to give the opposite impression.
In trying to evidence your malicious accusations you cite one just example, that of the Mick Aston article, where I briefly clashed swords with two of your Wiki-chums last year (no doubt that it is because of that instance that you know of me). However, this article too does not support your statement that I hijack the work of others to claim it as my own; rather it exposes it as the poppycock that it is. Contrary to your accusation, the Mick Aston article, as it stands, consists primarily of my own work. Check the user stats. Check the past 500 edits in the page history. I'm not lying. I'd been working on the article in concentrated bursts since 2011 until its GAN in 2015. The vast majority of prose was written by me; the majority of references were added by me; the article structure was shaped by me. Is it such a surprise therefore that I was the one who took it upon herself to (successfully) nominate it as a GA? Where's this evidence of (alleged) hijacking? Oh, it doesn't exist... As for the argument that I had on the Mick Aston talk page with your two pals, I was initially in the wrong, because my wording inadvertently belittled their contributions to the article's formatting. I was wrong to do that; hands up - I'm guilty! And I immediately apologised to them (even if they then decided to follow up with a long line of insults and erroneous accusations that just went into total over-kill and reflected a severe lack of civility on their part). Moreover, the Mick Aston situation was a lone example in which I unintentionally cocked up and offended some of my fellow editors, at which they overreacted. There is no other comparable incident in my editing history (at least in the past five years or so, I can't remember beyond that) so you are wrong to generalise from this incident and assume that it is my normal approach to editing Wikipedia. I avoid confrontation unless it is forced upon me, as it was in that instance, and as it is here, by editors that appear to enjoy a fight.
Seriously Giano, this image that you appear to have of me isn't correct. I don't go around nominating articles for GA/FA unless I have been the primary or in some cases secondary contributor to them. I just don't. I work hard to produce readable, well-cited articles, and then I nominate them for GA and then (in some cases) FA status. In that respect I'm not unlike you, the only difference being that I don't launch ad hominem attacks, mock, and belittle fellow Wikipedians - instead I try and keep everything civil wherever possible. I try to be nice, to behave cordially and with respect for others. Why you decided to be rude and obnoxious from the first instant of our encounter I have no idea; why you insist on continuing to just insult me and lie about me boggles me just as much. "I'm not unpleasant" indeed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:03, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Image of Sani Abacha[edit]

Good afternoon, recently I did some edits at Igbo Wikipedia. The stubb about ig:Sani Abacha would look better with a foto in it. There is one on the english version and, if I understood well, you are the holder of the rights. Is there a posibility to use the foto on other wiki's? Greetings from --Tschips (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)