User talk:Necrothesp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I am so used to saying "car" that I was surprised to find Antony Flew use car and automobile as a difference between British and American English respectively, right after lift and elevator. Should "automobile" be added to a list of differences? PS insular American who has never been across the pond, but have blood from Coventry and Wendron. Cake (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The difference is that Americans use car and automobile, whereas British people would only ever use car except in a highly technical context. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:14, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

On names of churches in Italy, Santa Maria del Pianto specifically[edit]

I prefer to have churches suffixed with place, since it would help someone looking through categories discern the localization of the church at a glance. Also I fear someone will name a hotel or restaurant with the same name in some other city. But alas, I notice Wikipedia prefers the simplest descriptor, over the more informative.

On Santa Maria del Pianto, however, I strongly disagree with the move. It may be the only such church in Wikipedia at this point, but there are churches with same name in at least in Venice, Rome, and Naples. And in time, this is not likely to be true. This name change will lead to complex disambiguation in the future. I recommend you revert this specific change.

This may be true for others. For some churches, the name is so specific, that they will remain unique as a church name: San Giacomo dell'Orio for example.Again, anyone looking in categories of 17th-century Roman Catholic churches would not necessarily know San Giacomo dell'Orio is in Venice.

Thanks. Rococo1700 (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

As you say, we do not pre-disambiguate on Wikipedia. If an article on another church is created in the future then disambiguation can easily occur. But I shall revert Santa Maria del Pianto if you consider it necessary as I do happen to agree that more common names should be pre-disambiguated (and in general I have left such more common names as they are). -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:10, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Necrothesp. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Fortification of Antwerp[edit]

You are welcome to review the progress on User:DerekvG/sandbox/edits_fortifications_Antwerp--DerekvG (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Charles Purdom[edit]

Hi Necrothesp, Can you tell me what trade union Charles Purdom belonged to, and where you read it? It is not mentioned in the article. He was a critic and an economist, so not sure what trade union he would belong to? Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@Dazedbythebell: He was General Secretary of Equity. It says so in the first paragraph of his article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)