This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Ritchie333

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

Keeping an eye on stuff. Meanwhile, here is some music.[1]


Is it Purple.....
.... or is it Pink?

Hi Ritchie333. I don't want to make another edit without talking to you first. You undid my change of Purple to Pink. You said that was the US version. That is not true. I checked with HASBRO UK and specifically named Pall Mall to ask them what colour it is officially and they told me that it was PINK. Where is your proof that the colour is PURPLE? Can you please cite something? You are the only one I can find online that is claiming that Pall Mall is Purple. In addition to the people who publish the game. This wiki site agrees with PINK: Moreover, just look at the color tag. The tag itself says deepPink. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Basically, we had a huge argument about this at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of London Monopoly locations/archive1 and Talk:List of London Monopoly locations. The sources I have for purple are this, this and this and this. The problem with pink is proving it. is a self-published site and unsuitable for a source on a featured list. What I suspect has actually happened is it was purple historically but has changed to pink at some point more recently without any fanfare or discussion. Have you got anything written and published by Hasbro? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:21, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Maybe it's only really pink in Gay Monopoly?? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC) ...if fact, it seems it was mostly pink...

Thanks for responding Ritchie333. I agree that the self published wiki can't be seen as a valid source. You listed a newspaper article as a source so I gather that you find newspapers to be an acceptable source. Here's one I found that lists Pall Mall as Pink: scroll down to where it says in an image: Pall Mall "originally pink". You might be right about it being purple a long time ago but now the colour is clearly not purple. So shouldn't it say Pink with information about it being originally purple? Are you going to stick to Purple no matter what Hasbro changes it to in the future?? What if they decide to go with a yellow and green checkered pattern for pall mall (they won't just saying it hypothetically)? Shouldn't the info be about the current board with further information about what the colour used to be in the past? For example for Brown properties it clearly states in a footnote that it used to be dark purple. Why can't we have that for Pink with a footnote that says it used to be purple? Why did a color change from Dark Purple result in an update to Brown but a colour change from purple to pink not result in a change on the wiki page? I had a look at a board from 1930 and yes it does look purple but the current board looks no where near purple. So if there is already precedence for updating dark purple to brown then why can't purple be updated to Pink? Certainly pink is a more accurate description of the current colour. Even the colour used on the wiki page is "deeppink". Here's a board from 1984: it is clearly pink. The board from 1930: here it is clearly purple. The board from 1961 is pink:

I contacted HASBRO UK support and the person assured me that it is pink. I asked them repeatedly as to wether it is "officially" PINK and they responded with an emphatic YES. I didn't get an email of this exchange which I thought I would automatically so I'll have to repeat it. I think we need to settle this with an official response from HASBRO and not newspaper articles or some book about monopoly written by some random person who could also be mistaken. What do you need to see to change it to PINK with a footnote about it being purple in the past? Please let me know so I can work on providing it to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I think the most definitive source would be something under the domain that lists the group colours. Unfortunately, I looked everywhere I could think of and couldn't find one. The original instructions don't mention what the colours are at all - probably because it's only important that they're different from each other. This Independent source describes the set as "pink", but again, that's not a definitive source. If Hasbro have not published anything saying what the colours are, we can't cite them. And the problem with citing individual boards is whether something is pink or purple can be challenged as a matter of opinion.
To be honest, this is one of those occasions where Wikipedia:Verifiability, one of the core policies in the encyclopedia, is confusing and counter-intuitive. But simply put, it means we can't add information just because somebody asserts it's true, and asserts they have checked without anybody being able to back it up. The policy is geared more towards countering things like flat-earth theory, fringe science and extreme right / left wing political views, not the colours on a Monopoly board, and "I'm not changing it because it's policy" is the weakest appeal to authority I can think of. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:41, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm so sad you conceded the point here, but I understand. I have a Monopoly set from my grandparents which dates back to the 1950s, complete with metal tokens, and a splendid battleship (rather than the subsequently lame-ass boat), and the purple set are .... well, PURPLE. But sometimes, as you've clearly reached, there's a limit, and you just have to give up. Best wishes. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the Monopoly set I have was inherited from my dad (and what I learned to play on) and is from the 1950s. It's post-1948 because the stations are "British Railways", not "LNER", and the Pall Mall set is purple. However, doing an image search, it seems modern boards are indeed pink, and a discussion amongst Wikipedians seems to conclude there is a consensus for it to be pink. And now we have a nice Reservoir Dogs parody on WP:LAME, which at least tickles my sense of humour. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Monday's Daily Telegraph has a colour photograph of Hasbro's new "Monopoly for millennials" board. I can see some of the squares are pink. They comment:

Instead of purchasing Park Lane, they can fill their vegan leather boots with "experiences" like staying in a parents' basement, on a friend's couch ...

WP:DENY and WP:SIG apply, not necessarily in that order. ——SerialNumber54129 10:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

File:Oxford Street 1882.jpg[edit]

Gilding the lily
... no, not that one!

Based on the information provided, I tried to find this image using the BHO search engine. I've updated the sourcing field, after a long time following up some leads. It wasn't straightforward to use. I was eventually able to trace this image to a vlomue of the "The Survey of London" was nominally which this appears seems to have been published around 1980 -, it mentions the London County Council however, which I think might be a mistake as by then it would have been the GLC, wouldn't it?, I don't have a university library to run a more comprehensive check, against a print original. I'm very pre-disposed to the licensing on the file being updated as well. (The list of plates gives an Acknowledgement for the image to a publication called "The Architect". from the 1880's.. I've got no idea where might hold a copy of that, and the publication by that name on on a quick search was a different US publication (although with a simmilar name and theme),

Was this the level of detail you were desiring of before being bothered by CSD/FFD/BSR walls? If so, then I am feeling I'm not necessarily up to the task of checking images on Wikipedia, and should perhaps do something in less contentious area. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Side note: It's a shame the licensing at BHO ( ,preclude a mass import of something like "The Survey of London" to Commons/Wikisource. I'm going to have to suppress my angry disappointment at this. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
The London County Council is spot on there, having existed from 1889-1965. The Greater London Council was it's successor organisation. Many schools, public buildings and early social housing still has the LCC logo on them in London. I see them every day. I always quickly check here (WP not Ritchie's talk page), for little things like that. Simon Adler (talk) 20:58, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, expanding the image to include more information about the original source is exactly the sort of thing that I appreciate, and should be encouraged. In this instance, common sense ought to tell you that a picture of a major London thoroughfare showing Victorian buildings and traffic restricted to horses and carts is probably going to date before 1923, and is barring some extraordinary evidence, going to be out of copyright. The "Joseph S. Moye, architect, 1880–2 (p. 179). Demolished" means that the photograph was taken by the architect Joseph S. Moye around 1880-2 and was reprinted on page 179 of volume 40 of the Survey of London. It's not referring to a publication called "The Architect".
I'm a pragmatic sort of chap; as long as the Survey of London archives are available online somewhere, I'm not bothered about who hosts them. After all, Wikipedia isn't the only website in the world. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
The actual citation in the BHO source was "..(c) Nos. 399–405 (odd). From The Architect, 25 December 1880" (in the list of plates I linked), which to me suggested a journal. It's not like a fully formated {{cite}} though. However, I think overwhelming consensus is that it's PD in the US (and is probably in the UK as well if someone with library access ever wants to conclusively close that issue.)ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
This get's even more puzzling, (in relation to File:The Angel Islington 1890s.jpg says LCC again but a 2008, date by which time the London Assembly would have been the successor as such... Maybe this needs someone whose an expert on London, and the history of "The Survey of London" itself.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Hmm the article on the Survey seems to say it's now run privately again, having been variously continued by respectively the LCC, GLC, Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, and English Heratige., and of course it's used images from third party sources. If you think unwinding the intracices of Wikipedia copyright policy is arcane... (sigh) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
As our article states, the Survey of London is a huge undertaking and has been in the past staffed by volunteers (sounds familiar). So yes, it's perfectly possible for the archived copy of volume 40 to be originally published in 1980 and for volume 47 to be published in 2008. This is not particularly strange - Don Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming is still not complete after 50 years. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:20, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) A little more about Joseph S Moye here. But I'm not sure he was a photographer, Threesie? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
@Martinevans123: Seems he's the architect of a number of buildings in London and environs. Didn't necessarily find enough sources to write a stub, so whilst obviously active around 1880, not necessarily notable enough by Wikipedia standards,.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Not sure there's enough for an article, but if you find the right sources you can come up with some gems. John Samuel Phene appears in enough books and journals to get listed here, although in his case it helps that he was a bit of an eccentric which got him written about. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, I might do that if I ever find myself at a loose end in Chislehurst.... But I was really more interested in any evidence you might have that Moye was a photographer! lol Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't think you need to be professionally qualified to take a photograph of a building, as numerous uploads on Commons have proven. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:57, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
(... more hysterical laughter...) we should have asked Joseph to add a better copyright determination!! Martinevans123 (talk) 14:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: On your sounds familiar comment, I burst into hysterical laughter... As I said, if you thought 'copyright' stuff on Wikipedia is hard, it must have been even harder without online sources, databases or even a telephone!.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
ShakespeareFan, there's no need to ping an editor on his own talk page - that's gilding the lily. The Survey of London volume 1 was published by the London County Council in 1900. Volume 33 was reached in 1966, after it had been replaced by the Greater London Council. Many public buildings are still registered in the name of the London County Council. Compulsory registration was staged, but it still applies only when a building is sold - many public buildings are not sold but passed on to a new public body so in many cases it's now impossible to work out who owns them.
A woman thinking of taking a let online asked her aunt (an estate agent) for advice. The aunt said "ask the landlady for evidence of ownership." The landlady said "I am an honest woman" and provided a "Certificate of Ownership". The woman took it to her aunt, who said "Have you checked with the Land Registry?" The niece replied: "The what?" These days they no longer issue Land Certificates - all you get is an "official copy" (formerly an "office copy") of whatever the computer has stored as regards the title. Homeowners are peeved because building societies/banks/solicitors sometimes destroy their old deeds as they have no further use for them. (talk) 11:16, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
WP:DENY ——SerialNumber54129 11:41, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
As long as 92.8 is just stating a point of view, not personally attacking SFan (or anyone else), or clearly violating WP:CIVIL / WP:NPA (which they're not), a more appropriate application of WP:DENY would be to leave their post to stand and not reply to it. I'm not inclined to revert, block or come down like a ton of bricks because that very much is not "denying recognition" at all. In fact it's likely to make things worse. And yes, land registry is legally complicated and can be a pain in the backside, particularly if you are closely related to a wealthy homeowner who suddenly dies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:47, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
"Would you have a bit of cake, Father? Go on - it's got cocaine in it! No, wait, not that, what's the other thing ... oh yes, raisins, it's got raisins in it! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
"There Ain't Half Been Some Clever Admins". Martinevans123 (talk) 12:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Page move help[edit]

Hey there! I need some help moving this page: Bukit Bintang monorail station into this name: Bukit Bintang Monorail station. I want to standardise the article naming but seems like im blocked from moving into that page hmm... Thanks =D VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 07:04, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Cheers! VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 12:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Ritchie333 Can help with this one too? Turn (The Wombats Song) to Turn (The Wombats song)? Thx hehe VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 04:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Vincent60030: Done; I've also given you page mover rights so next time you can do this directly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Wow thanks very much! I appreciate that a lot =D VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 11:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

DYK for A719 road[edit]

Updated DYK query.svgOn 22 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A719 road, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Trump resort is directly linked to Moscow? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A719 road. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A719 road), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Haha nice one. I knew it was you when I saw it was a UK road, shows you how few editors we have!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

I was doing a bit of work on Turnberry (golf course), not knowing the area well, and had a look on the map. I then spotted Moscow village, and noticed, "hang on, that's the same number as the Turnberry road .... is it .... OMG that is like the best DYK evaaaaaaah". It was waiting to happen ;-) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:08, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Love it. Seems nothing compares, and here I was so proud of ... that Sara Hershkowitz, who usually appears on the opera stage as the Queen of the Night and Zerbinetta, parodied Donald Trump in Ligeti's Mysteries of the Macabre at the Lowlands Festival? - Video is a must see. - In the mood for music and giving thanks, defiant of death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
If only Putin played golf?? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
In Putin's Russia, golf plays with YOU! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Did you know..... that Svetlana Gounkina won a national poetry prize while playing golf in the U.S.? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:44, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

password auditing[edit]

Didn't see your post till the whole thing was concluded. The reason there is no password auditing is that it is up to the WMF to do it, and although they said they could do that and add a password strength bar after the 2015 security review in reality they don't just do things unless you keep bugging them about it. So if we still want this we basically need to actively campaign for it. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:25, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) T121186 - you can see how "important" it is - TNT 💖 19:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, the recent disruption really needs some response. In my view, making 2FA mandatory would solve a lot of issues - admin accounts would be less likely to get compromised, and unlike any activity policy there's not much debate as to what it means. Although I think I've got a secure password, and it's not used on any other website anywhere, there would be a strong motivation to brute-force crack it, and that's getting easier and easier. This video is worth watching. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:33, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
This all assumes that security is tight on the WMF side. If not, the 2FA shared secret could be leaked along with your password hash. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
As far as I know, there’s yet to be a leak of 2FA information or a successful attempt to bypass it (except for bot passwords). Vermont (talk) 19:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, admins are required by WP:STRONGPASS to have a strong password but until we have that auditing it can only be enforced when something like this happens, which obviously is not optimal. This particular account was so marginally active it's possible they weren't even aware that there are password requirements for admins. 2FA is at least something, at least trying to make it harder. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:58, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Rant/request for advice about source access (or strictly accurate: The excessive number of sources)[edit]

So normally I talk on Iridescent's talk page but I need some variety and my own is essentially inactive. After having completed a set of geology articles (and with two climatology articles on the way) I was planning to write an article on African humid period, a major event between 14,500 and 5,500 years ago and a topic well discussed enough that you could squeeze a FA out of it.
...except that on a hunch I checked and noticed that "african humid period" has been the term since about 2000 but that there is research going back to World War II on the topic, under different terms. And the total number of sources is almost 10000.
So what do expert editors do when they meet a huge laundry list of sources and have a limited time? My normal topics don't usually have this many sources. Of course, Green Sahara may be easier to write as there are fewer sources, but AHP catches my attention more. JoJo Eumerus mobile (talk) 21:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Find the most standard textbooks you can find on the topic, and see what books they cite; those are likely to be the important ones. This kind of problem comes up all the time on railway articles; Otley's Bibliography of British Railway History is the size of a large phone book and that's just a list of the significant sources on the railways of a single country. Islam and Sea have both passed FAC - it is possible to push these kind of enormous topics all the way to the top. ‑ Iridescent 22:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, mine the sources. But how long did Jesus spend at FAC?! ——SerialNumber54129 22:32, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I've never really tackled an article where you have a huge amount of sources - the biggest I've done have just got over a million views a year and generally you can rely on about 2-3 good book sources to get you about 90% of the way in terms of content. Some people advocate doing all the prose in a sandbox, writing from one source at a time, and then moving everything over into the main article, integrating with what's there - I can't remember if you do that or not. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:24, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Mostly so although usually the text of the article as is isn't usable. Sometimes I expand from the existing text, conversely. Incidentally, as far as I can tell most sources on this topic are in academic journals and not in books but that's probably not a critical difference.
Thanks for the aid, anyhow. I figure I'll be working through these journals and then through the articles they reference. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:24, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

You didn't delete Wizkid (band) and FTD Records packaged with the AfD[edit]

. Flooded with them hundreds 15:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, done - principally because the debate was an unanimous "delete" and nobody expressed any opinion towards keeping any of these articles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

The Beatles "Cover Versions" addition[edit]

First time trying to edit a page. What did I do wrong for it to be deleted? David Schmidbauer (talk) 23:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@David Schmidbauer: The problem is that The Beatles (album), being one of the most critically acclaimed and commercially successful albums of all time, gets a lot of traffic and has been assessed as a good article, and a number of editors have factually checked the entire article carefully and made sure the prose is of a sufficient standard to stand up to works like the Encyclopedia Britannica. The problem with your change is it puts too much balance away from the main focus on the article, which is on the original album. I don't mind a small section for notable covers of the entire album that are discussed in major works such as Rolling Stone (didn't Phish play the entire album end to end once?) but I don't think it can really be sustained over more than a couple of sentences.
The best advice I can give you is to put your writing in your sandbox (ie: User:David Schmidbauer/sandbox), where you'll be able to work on it at your own pace. Then when you think it's ready to integrate into the main article, add a note on the talk page (Talk:The Beatles (album)) saying something like, "Hi, I've written some new prose to go into the article, and I've checked the sources - can an experienced editor take a quick look", then somebody should be able to transfer it over with the minimum of fuss. I think that's probably the easiest way to get things resolved.
Oh, for what it's worth, I'm a bit of a Postmodern Jukebox fan. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:11, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Though it is in English I have no idea what it meant (think "this is not how any of this works" lady).

While may of the individual songs have been covered the only "complete" cover is David Schmidbauer (talk) 23:44, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Is Phish' (though they didn't include "Good Night").

While I could edit each songs Wiki page to include James' cover I don't feel it would do the entire undertaking the justice it deserves (covering the entire album (with live art video)).

So I have no idea on how to proceed.

David Schmidbauer (talk) 23:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@David Schmidbauer: Start off by writing something in your sandbox. You should see a link "sandbox" at the top of the page, which will be in red - click on it and you'll be taken into an edit window that allows you to start writing it. You don't need to worry about sources, you can put anything you like (as long as it looks like you're writing part of an encyclopedia, which you are). Then it's probably easiest if I have a look at it and integrate it into the existing prose. That should hopefully be the best solution. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Removing Template[edit]

Hello, Ritchie333
Thank you for mediating over the Adam Cooley debate. I was wondering if and how could the Template on the page be removed. It seems inappropriate and irrelevant now since the issue has been concluded. Is it ok for me to delete it or is that against guidelines? KevinJardine (talk) 23:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
KevinJardine, it's appropriate to keep it, since the AfD revealed that you've been in active contact with the article subject, as the AfD revealed. KevinJardine's edits are also 99% about Adam Cooley, so s/he fits the SPA definition. As the template says " or someone connected to the article subject". You're probably best off leaving that article alone and editing something else, given your obvious COI. There are literally millions of articles to edit on Wikipedia.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:22, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
ThatMontrealIP, please refrain from interjecting. Since you have been continually disregarding the principles of WP:AGF, WP:NPA, and WP:Civility and have a history of it, forgive me if I don't trust you. Considering that the question wasn't addressed to you it might be best that you let Ritchie333 speak for himself. KevinJardine (talk) 03:21, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Please. We AGF here but you have been editing the Adam Cooley page only for three years! We call that SPA. It only takes a simple google search to see your close connection to the article subject.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kevin. No, I don't think the tag's appropriate as many other editors have reviewed and looked at the article during the deletion debate, so I've removed it. It seems there are strong opinions on both sides, so arguing about it further anywhere is counter-productive. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Operation Winkle[edit]

You're in charge of it; I'm a complete arse. ——SerialNumber54129 14:19, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Don't slouch, Darling. Baaah! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

≈== Hello, I'm in desperate need of your support/assistance. ==

Greetings fellow earthling! I'm in great need of your help with regards to Wikipedia. It's a long and unfair and somewhat ridiculous story so I'll leave you my email address in the hope you'll message me on it so I can explain my issues and what I need help with slash if you can help. Please bare in mind I am another human being an I'm getting slightly disappointed with being treated like a contagious disease, so please help me. :( email is (Redacted) being my name as a person. But yes I look forward to hearing from you as I really am desperate. Thanks and hopefully talk to you soon. (talk) 14:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what I can do, to be honest. You have no other edits under this IP so I don't know the context; plus it is generally preferable to keep communication on talk pages wherever possible, so anyone can assist. If the problem is truly impossible to discuss on-wiki (for example, it involves harrassment or private information), I would recommend contacting the Arbitration Committee by emailing Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:22, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
I was hoping you'd email me but had a chance look here to see if you replied and you did, so hello. Well it's a long story to be honest. I had an account on wiki years ago (making several hundred different articles over a various range of subjects) and I had the option ripped away from me by whomever and I had tried to get the old account revived (which it was, by User:Salvidrim!) but was then re blocked literally 10 if not 15 minutes after returning to Wikipedia and that infuriated me for obvious reasons. I have tried to request an account but it says my email is blocked an every time I have emailed the I'm not even acknowledged. Hence me wanting to talk to you in "private" And v now just ignores me or passes me off with some vague excuse and now I find myself here. Like I have said I'm another human being. People on Wikipedia seem to forget that in my experience. :/ But pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee help me, I'm literally begging you :( (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Have you read and digested WP:STANDARDOFFER? I suggest you now wait 6 months without any socking and then contact Arbcom before creating a new account. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow earthlings, sorry for the late reply. Alas with regards to the standard off, I was told about not doing anything for 6 months by Salvidrim and did so and look where that got me [lol] As I have said, and will say it again I'm another human being with feelings just because ou can't see a picture of my face doesn't mean I'm any less of a person. Please could you just email me (the dreaded word sockpuppet is why I wanted you to email me asap to avoid me being accused of god only knows what, i's not fair) (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
If your complaint involves information you are not happy about putting on-wiki, you can use the "Email this user" functionality; however be advised my mailbox is an official disaster area with about 950 unread messages, so it may take a while. I need to hire a secretary. Or a gopher. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:30, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I can't actually seem to find an option to email you at all which is confusing. :/ could you possibly give me your direct email address at all? Just to save a bit of time/energy and help my mental stability? (talk) 16:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
(watching) The ability to email registered accounts is restricted to other logged-in acccounts; i.e. IP users will not see the button. Many thanks for your interest today. ——SerialNumber54129 16:28, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Well in that case, you can see I'm not registered so why suggest something you'd know I can't do lol? (email option) I really don't know what to do or whom/ to ask/where to go. Like I said I had the option of contributing ripped away from me for pretty much no reason which is totally unfair it's almost like Wikipedia is a small place for a privileged few to run around and treat others however they wish, which is not fair. Hence why I'm determined to try every avenue to get back to what I enjoy and am good at. I made hundreds of articles over a range of subjects like I said so my wanting to return is not unjust nor unreasonable. :( Someone pleaseeeeeeeee 2A00:23C4:6F4D:9500:65EC:E5DB:C575:E196 (talk) 15:41, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crash (magazine)[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Crash (magazine) 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 Spinningspark -- Spinningspark (talk) 19:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)


Hi, Sorry I was busy with my job for some days.That is the reason I couldnt reply properly.I am sorry about it.If I get my Rollback permissions back I will be careful in future.Thank you Darsana.vinod (talk) 08:04, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Hermes 3000 (typewriter)[edit]

You should probably go look at it, or like... whatever. Hamster Sandwich (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for starting this, I wasn't sure where to begin if I'm honest. I've added a few other sources. Part of the problem, and I'm rather surprised at this, is that there doesn't appear to be an easy to access online book that gives a general description of the typewriter or its history, and we're reduced to scrambling around at the edges. In its heyday, it was popular and well-known model, so I was just amazed we didn't have an article for it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:40, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
NP. I never have a problem writing, I only have a problem thinking of or finding a worthy topic. In the past, if I've looked something specific in the project and not finding it, I would fill in the blank. Happens rarely nowadays. Sorry about the rocky start... I was broadsided by only a couple editors, most everybody else was helpful, if not welcoming. I've pretty much determined to rise above. I don't need admin tools for editing. My previous focus was actually heading for dispute resolution and mentoring problematic editors. Hard to believe, ain't it? [2] . Best regards; Hamster Sandwich (talk) 21:49, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
@Hamster Sandwich: That's alright. I think it was just an issue that you've been away for a while and not realised the rules had changed a bit. The DYK is progressing now so we're heading in the right direction. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Question for you: Could you take a look at Marten Hartwell and give it a review, however ad hoc it may be. That article has, over the years has developed into a rather complete picture of the topic. I'd like to see it promoted to "GA" but have no clue. Also, how is the Hermes 3000 article moving along? I can't seem to find it in a queue anywhere. Best regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 02:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vauxhall station[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vauxhall station 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 Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 12:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Deleted content[edit]

Just requesting the content from the “Thumbtack Jack” wiki page that got deleted. Thanks in advance! 2600:1700:10E0:2820:E130:C9A3:91D3:33E6 (talk) 17:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I can restore it to a subpage of a user account, but I'll need to know which one first. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:21, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

selectivelymute! thanks a bunch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selectivelymute (talkcontribs) 00:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Selectivelymute: Done - User:Selectivelymute/Thumbtack Jack Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crash (magazine)[edit]

What d'you think this is, the Dark Ages?!
Crash Smash.png

The article Crash (magazine) you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Crash (magazine) 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 Spinningspark -- Spinningspark (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Well I must say it's been awfully nice that you lot at Wikipedia can still remember the halycon days of when you waited four minutes for Mined-Out to load off cassette, only to be greeted by the infamous R Tape loading error, 0:1. I think we still have some T-shirts around here, and I will mention to that nice Mr Frey about uploading Commons. Back to the trusty Hermes now..... Lloyd Mangram (talk) (cont) 21:11, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I subscribed to Crash after issue 1. Had about 12 binders of the thing. I was all over those Ultimate: Play the Game games. Favourite: Sabre Wulf. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
First issue I got was #4 (May 1984) from which I decided to buy Jet Set Willy, and I was a subscriber from about '86 - '88 if memory serves. I transferred all my old tapes over to one of the first PC emulators after a friend made up a parallel port cassette adaptor, and I still have all the games sitting here. I put them on my son's Raspberry Pi and they work just fine. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:11, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Bet you can't get past To The Kitchen: Main Stairway in one run! :p ——SerialNumber54129 22:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm trying to find which issue had a letter that said the entire Crash team should be sent on holidays that took them away from their usual interests, and in particular said that Oliver Frey should "be sent to a place where people wear clothing all the time, such as Central Siberia". ;-) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC)


It sounded to me like King arranged for the singles knowing they would be unsuccessful. I understood the correct meaning, but I thought it could be clearer. Red Jay (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Victoria line[edit]

Updated DYK query.svgOn 2 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Victoria line, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the London Underground Victoria line (train pictured) was so named because it "sounded just right"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Victoria line. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Victoria line), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Here we go! :D ——SerialNumber54129 16:30, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Ah yes, "Look at the mess this guy is making of a bacon sandwich. In 48 hours, he could be doing the same for Britain!" On the other hand, he won't call a referendum that he only promised because he didn't think he'd win the election otherwise (and only then in coalition with another party that he could blame for not implementing it), smugly assume the result would go his way, and cause de facto civil war when it didn't, forcing him to resign and run away and hide. So, in retrospect, wouldn't life have been better if we'd had Red Ed as PM? Incidentally, I recall a bit of brouhaha at the original DYK which blew up one hour after I'd passed RfA, which was fortunate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:33, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) heyyyy Red Ed almost share the same birthday as me wow VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 05:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Get down, Shep![edit]

Any contributions gratefully received, especially regarding her use of whistle register. But yes, my request is obviously really only an excuse to place this copyright-compliant link to a highlight of 1974 which I can't easily shoe-horn into that article You won't hear much tighter brass on any other pop single of that era. Song written by Allen Toussaint. Just utterly wonderful. The clip is from AVRO's TopPop "Golden Years". If you can get over the kooky funky chicken in the middle 8, just check out those platforms. What a voice. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC) "Secretary", also 1974 on Alston, also well worth a listen.

If it's a biography of a woman you want improving, you need the Megalibrarygirl whistle. *Phweeeep* Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes. I'm pretty sure Betty is a mere woman. In my opinion the article certainly needs a bit of a clean up. Oh dear, that all looks a bit sexist? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vauxhall station[edit]

The article Vauxhall station 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:Vauxhall station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 15:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Ritchie333 I'm not sure if you are busy but hope you have not forgotten about this :o VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 05:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
No, I haven't forgotten about this, I've just been out and about and haven't had a chance to be online much. I'll definitely have some free time by the weekend, but I might see if I can nail the issues tonight as the library's open late on Thursdays. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I haven’t heard of such a unique operating hours schedule before. Which library is that if you dont mind me asking? XD VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 17:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Moving somewhat off-topic discussion here[edit]

I wanted to respond to what you stated, but also don't want to send that ARCA completely off-the-rails. I'm glad things have cooled off between GW and yourself. You are both people I respect, and it's never fun when the parents are fighting. I do still think the original conversation (and not just your participation in it!) represents a pattern of those who try to see TRM's remedy enforced being the targets of extreme pressure, so I've got to leave that in, but I'm heavily encouraged to see that particular friction is no longer an issue. Thanks for your comment. ~ Rob13Talk 16:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

In my specific instance, I remember TRM was doing a whole bunch of GA reviews for me, and suddenly getting blocked knocked all that work in a big pile on the floor. He's always been a good GA reviewer and helps make articles genuinely "good", not just ticking a box to get a green blob which doesn't fool anyone. That's really what I was brassed off about. In any case, I was cross over the specific action, not her as an editor, and I am not one to bear grudges.
The problem with TRM is, as I said on the ARCA thread, is I sometimes read what he says and think "aww jeez, did you have to?" - and often I agree with the substance of what he says. There's nothing wrong with wanting to do better as an editor and a project and responding to main page issues quickly and efficiently; it's just I think bashing everyone with a stick and leaving edit summaries like "HELLO ANY ADMINS HERE WANT TO UPDATE SOME QUEUES?" isn't the way to get it done. However, because he does great work for stuff I'm involved with personally, I think hectoring him about WP:CIVIL isn't just patronising, it would break off a very useful workflow for my activities on the project. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
And I can appreciate that. I also think it makes you involved, which is not to say I think you've done anything wrong. There are plenty of editors I would consider myself involved with respect to just because I have a particularly friendly relationship with them that extends beyond typical collegiality. There's certainly nothing wrong with that. I have to say I don't think we could hammer out our dispute over beers, but only because I don't know there's even a dispute to hammer out. I certainly don't see anything that there would be a dispute over from my side, anyway. ~ Rob13Talk 00:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)


Hello! I want to ask your support. Here users remove relevant information. Stop them as administrator. Rollback them if they will continue do it. I hope. Thank you! - Yellow Man 1000 (talk) 20:32, 4 December 2018 (UTC).

I don't think I can do anything about this, as I reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Kolya Vasin so I would be considered WP:INVOLVED. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Unblock request...[edit]

(____) RE: "I don't think it's appropriate to unblock you unless you take an indefinite topic ban from writing about [K]arlton Hester. What other topics would you write about if I unblocked? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)" I am a professor of music at UCSC (composition and jazz) so I can contribute in those areas. Thanks... Karlton Hester (I hope this is the correct place to respond to your question) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:CD02:BE30:9524:BE11:5B83:CDB1 (talk)

Tiny Mix Tapes[edit]

Would you be willing to weigh in this discussion regarding Tiny Mix Tapes should be count as an reliable source or not. If you want to. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Marek Kukula[edit]

Has any reliable source (other than the Sun & DailyMail) picked up on his conviction? And, can it be mentioned esp. in light of BLPN? From a random OTRS ticket........WBGconverse 08:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Can't find anything, and per WP:BLPCRIME we should not add anything about this until further broadsheet coverage is available (if, indeed, that ever happens). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:57, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


Hey, I realise I have made precisely zero progress with this review. I'd like to get my head clear of my personal stuff before I get stuck into something that takes more effort than simply pointing out the half-dozen DYK errors every day, a trivial task which takes seconds and no major effort. I understand that if you want someone else to take a look at it in the meantime, that's fine. I'm sorry for getting into something which I can't competently complete, I'm still doing a lot of sorting out for what happened a fortnight ago, and I'm the only one doing it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

That's fine. I've been distracted by real life myself and I've struggled to find time all week to complete another GA review, so I'm not in any rush. Don't let anyone tell you that Wikipedia is more important than family and good health - it isn't. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)Yea It’s difficult to hear about that...if you need anyone to talk to you can find me too :) my doors are always open. It’s not all right now but hope you feel better soon :) VKZYLUFan (talk) (Mind the Gap!) 16:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC) Meanwhile here’s a

Your GA nomination of Vauxhall station[edit]

The article Vauxhall station you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Vauxhall station 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 Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 02:21, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A4061 road[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A4061 road 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 Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 05:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A4061 road[edit]

The article A4061 road 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:A4061 road for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Waterloo East railway station[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Waterloo East railway station 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 Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 06:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Waterloo East railway station[edit]

The article Waterloo East railway station 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:Waterloo East railway station for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vincent60030 -- Vincent60030 (talk) 07:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Recreating Article Jay Pizzle[edit]

hello, I will like to recreate the article on Jay Pizzle. please send me a copy of the previous article. Aigbokhan Chukwuemeka Ogbeiwi (talk) 10:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


Hi could you please userfy this article for me? You A7'ed it in 2017, but I can substantiate the band's notability - they charted and got plenty of reviews. Chubbles (talk) 15:46, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Chubbles: You'll find it at User:Chubbles/Kaddisfly. Hope that helps. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Chubbles (talk) 19:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, half that band's albums have articles (which granted, look like they should all be deleted), yet the band itself is "A7".. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually, Did You Know People Can Fly? has an AllMusic review in the article, and Set Sail the Prairie is reviewed by several reliable sources. I probably wouldn't have caught this either given the state of the band's article, which has facebook, MySpace, and bandcamp as references, almost always a sure sign the band has no notability. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions)


It looks like as a result of the latest "update" from Arbcom to my editing restrictions, I will no longer be able to conduct GAN reviews in the best interests in Wikipedia, without running a risk of being accused of calling into question the competence of the nominators, whether that be deliberate, incidental, explicit or implied, even by a bystander (and there are plenty of those). So I'm afraid that even once I'm finally through the whole funeral thing, I still won't be able to do your Karen Carpenter review, unless I receive clarification that conducting reviews in the same way I've done them at GAN, FLC and FAC, for the past 13 years is still acceptable to these individuals and those who would use any excuse to block me for two months. Apologies for wasting more of your time. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I spotted one falling out of the sky...[edit]

Jumping Humpback whale.jpg


You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that one feel out of the sky and landed on you... (talk) 22:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)