User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 120

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 115

←

Archive 118

→

Jefferson Starship

Hello Ritchie333

I'm the editor who opened the dispute resolution case. Is there anything I should do? AbleGus, reverted my most recent edits, again using the same arguments. I'm not familiar with the protocol for this, so please excuse if I'm not proceeding correctly.Regards,Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton, I had a read through Talk:Jefferson Starship, and I'm amazed at how large the conversation is. I've worked on numerous classic rock articles, and I've never seen a debate as lengthy as that. I've tried to pick through the points you have both made, but it's just too long to be able to parse in any meaningful way. However, one thing I have noticed is that AbleGus has generally been working on the main body of the article, adding citations and fleshing things out, while your edits have been to rewrite the lead. That's generally the wrong way round to do things - you want to get the body of the article properly written, referenced and balanced first, then put an appropriate lead on top aftwards.

Anyway, I'm going to take this edit as indicative of the dispute, and I've redone the lead based on my experience in writing leads for numerous other music-related articles. I've dropped a note on the talk page explaining this. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ritchie333

Thank you for taking the time to unjam the "logjam" that has occurred on the Jefferson Starship article. I agree with your comments, in particular comment #3. I have been attempting for several years to add more balance to this article, and other related articles, and less POV, but AbleGus has dismissed my efforts consistently and immediately for the most part. In one instance when another editor intervened, at my request, I was able to get a sentence or two about lead guitarist, Chaquico, into the article. I would like to see a lot more about other members of the original band included, their contributions, and the musical contributions of the band Jefferson Starship both pre-1984 and post-1992, but I have so far been unable to succeed due to this particular editor’s resistance.

I appreciate your effort to rewrite the introduction also; however, because of the article’s content, there are inaccuracies. Based on your explanation of how the article should be written, I see that I must correct the inaccuracies in the article first. I assume you’ve read the intro that I wrote and was reverted by AbleGus and because the intro/summary was not based on the content of the article is the reason my introduction should be used?

I really appreciate the time and energy you put into reviewing my case. If you have any other comments or suggestion for me to help me provide some neutrality to this article, please advise.Regards,Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton, I've just put a reply on Talk:Jefferson Starship. It would be nice to see the article at good article status at some point, though I think it's got some way to go before that.

What would have made things easier is if I could still call on the services of TheGracefulSlick (talk · contribs), who did a lot of work on 60s music articles and was a particular fan of Grace Slick (as you can guess from the user name). I requested that he be unbanned a year or so ago, but was unsuccessful. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:30, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps, it was Grace Slick? Might have had some NOPV problems with that? Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

One of the problems with this article is that it has been an unbalanced focus on Slick, Kantner, and Jefferson Airplane history, rather than a focus on Jefferson Starship history which was a different band, though it included some of the same members as Jefferson Airplane.

You probably read my version of the lead, but I'll post it again to get your feedback. I think it is more balanced and neutral.

Jefferson Starship Jefferson Starship is an American rock band that formed in San Francisco in 1974. Founding members included former members of the band, Jefferson Airplane, namely rhythm guitarist, Paul Kantner and lead vocalist, Grace Slick, along with late-stage Airplane members drummer Johny Barbata, electric violinist Papa John Creach and keyboardist/bass player David Freiberg. Lead guitarist, Craig Chaquico and keyboardist/bass player Pete Sears rounded out the original band. In 1975, another former Jefferson Airplane member, Marty Balin, joined the group on lead vocals.[2][3] The bands greatest commercial success was between 1974 and 1984, when it released eight gold, platinum and double-platinum studio albums, a gold-selling greatest hits album and had nine top forty singles on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, including among others, "Miracles," "With Your Love," "Count on Me," "Runaway," "Jane," "Find Your Way Back," and "No Way Out."[4][5]

In 1985, after Paul Kantner left the band, the remaining members of the band at that time, Grace Slick, Craig Chaquico, David Freiberg, Pete Sears, drummer Donny Baldwin and vocalist Mickey Thomas, continued on as Starship, releasing three No. 1 singles,” “We Built This City,” “Sara," and “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now.” Starship was officially retired in 1991.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]

In the early ‘90s, Paul Kantner began using the moniker “Jefferson Starship” again with a "rotating cast" of side members, while Mickey Thomas established his own band under the name, “Starship featuring Mickey Thomas.”[15][16] Since his death in 2017, Kantner’s remaining band members have continued to tour under the name “Jefferson Starship."[17][18]

Let me know what you think. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Cheryl Fullerton, I have left a response at the talk page. I think a key problem is that both you and AbleGus seem to be big Jefferson Starship fans - far more than I am - and consequently the length of discussion is just too long for people to look at as third parties and see what should be done. Resolving a content dispute is something of an art than a science, and I'm certainly guilty of using more words when less might have done, on occasion. However, I think distilling everything into no more than three sentences is essential to sort this out. Otherwise, I fear the talk page is just doing to fill up with pages and pages of you and Gus disagreeing. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

March flowers

Today: Carmen for TFA (on my request), with Bizet's music "expressing the emotions and suffering of his characters" as Brian worded it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Also today: an IP edit-warring on Fleming. I wish he'd edit under his real name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Congrats on the TFA. As for the Fleming feud .... I was wondering where to write this, but I might as well put it here. I am absolutely certain that's SchroCat, in which case I'm going to say this. For goodness sake, why on earth does an intelligent, well-educated and talented writer of FAs get bogged down in such pointless and unnecessary drama? Well, my patience has run out - I have range blocked him for three months. I don't normally go near that sort of stuff, but I've been doing TCP/IP programming since reading "An introduction to Berkeley UNIX about 30 years ago, so I know how to technically do it. Sro23, I feel I should apologise for when you got jumped on by SchroCat's IPs the other month after asking me a reasonable question - I just really wanted to let them vent and ignore it, and while I did mildly criticise one thing you did, I don't think it deserved the abuse that was heaped on you. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:07, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I noticed this egregious personal attack apparently by the same editor now on a different (IPv4) range. Levivich ^harass/_hound 21:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I got so used to it, sadly. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

... still arguing infoboxes and edit warring from yet another IPv4: Special:Contributions/213.205.194.58 Levivich ^harass/_hound 22:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Levivich, I don't think it's a personal attack, I just think it's sad. Observations of Wikipedia behaviour #64 : "It's reminiscent of Richard Matheson's Incredible Shrinking Man, that great existential film into which so much can be read. Instead of helping build the largest encyclopedia in the history of the human race, those editors finish their Wiki lives battling imagined spiders, with toothpicks." Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

As I explained to El C, my edits to Ian Fleming are zero, my edits to the talk are zero, my interest in participating in the RfC is zero, but I keep looking for curiosity. I also looked at the archives, and this treasure amused me. Better read Carmen. It's author approached me, introducing steps towards compromise infoboxes for operas (first L'Arianna) and composers (first Percy Grainger) in 2013, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, I saw a video about Candace Brightman on my morning FB feed, discovered we had no article on her, and thought "we can't have that!" WP:SQUIRREL. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

That's great, thank you. It's articles we are here for. I was on my way to request Kathleen Ferrier as the next BB creation for TFA. I'm not concerned about attacks via edit summary from IPs claiming own for a user talk - that's quite absurd - and I wonder if Bish really didn't know who when she reverted. I stole an image from her, and that's what concerns me, not trivia. The RfC was closed well, - but just imagine how much energy and wits could have put to better use if the improvers of Fleming had not used a little argument about collapsing as a reason to remove the box altogether, or at least had listened to "this treasure" and returned it, in 2012. Imagine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, I still think there is an argument for not putting an infobox on an article until it is developed enough to mandate a summary; however once one is added it can be considered a general sibboleth that the article is sufficiently expanded to be at least useful. (eg: here) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, but Fleming was not a stub ;) - Anyway, infoboxes don't matter much, I never understood why so much ado, much more than for images and tables. Never heard of an image warrior (and have no idea what makes an editor who likes additional (not competitional) structured information a "warrior"). - In case you wonder why no Ferrier: I should have looked, and seen that we have already a request for the day, for Earth Day. Next year, providing we are still doing this. - Which image do you like better for the one who isn't, Bish's or mine? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:56, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, Sorry, what images are we talking about? File:Kathleen Ferrier.jpg is one, what's the other? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for being enigmatic, and running three unrelated topics. I am more concerned about a lost user than these little boxes, wasn't that clear? (I was when I quoted "expressing the emotions and suffering of his characters", mine being icy.) Please click on "stole an image from her". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Time spent on that arb case is good for nothing, wasn't that clear? When I said "lost" I meant lost, and there's nothing to win. I tell myself to not get too upset over it - as my edit notice quotes - but wasn't successful yet. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

If Schrocat chooses to make an actual WP:FRESHSTART and work on something totally new, I would support that. That would mean abandoning old articles/topic areas/discussions for new ones, and avoiding the editors he had disputes with in the past. His FA's are in good hands and he doesn't need to constantly watch over them anymore. But that's not what we've been seeing. So if he doesn't want a clean start, then he needs to either find a way to access his account, or make some indication (be it in edit summaries or talk page posts) that "this is Schrocat editing as an IP". It's an abuse of the community's trust to say you're retired only to come back logged out to the same old trouble areas. And thanks, but I'd really like an apology from Schrocat for his abuse (and I imagine others would too) though I doubt I'll ever get one. Sro23 (talk) 23:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to add, I've had some off-wiki correspondence from Cassianto, who wants to stress he's had nothing to do with the Fleming infobox feud, and having looked at the off-wiki evidence given, I believe this is true. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I never even had the idea, but thank you for support. I had good discussions with Cassianto, and even used my "wrongly blocked" template, as I happened to see yesterday. Cassianto, why don't you just return? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:22, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I think your principal problem, Gerda (assuming you want to define it as a problem) is that sometimes I have difficulty understanding what you're saying - and if I do, it's a safe bet others do as well. I usually consider it my fault I don't understand, simply because I've worked with people in different countries and cultures, and in particular have done quite a few projects with Germans. However, hopefully you can see it's possible that some editors may be less tolerant. I have no doubt that you are a kind and courteous person and do everything here out of good faith. The trouble is I can't think of a good way of explaining what the issue is in a way that won't upset you, so I don't. And as I see your popularity in the community rising and the general view moving away from someone sanctioned at Arbcom to a good model of civility and kindness that the project needs, I stick stuff like that on the back burner, along with "Eric, could you please not use the 'f' word when dealing with edit wars, it just inflames the situation". Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:36, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I'll give you an example - again, this is to illustrate what the problem is and how it might help, rather than a direct criticism of your conduct:

"Time spent on that arb case is good for nothing" - I assume you mean the current RexxS arb case. Do you mean me trying to respond to the evidence to add some colour and a counterpoint was a waste of time that would have been better spent improving the encyclopedia? Okay, fair enough but I know RexxS personally and don't want to see him hung out to dry.
"wasn't that clear?" - Are you implying that I wrote the response in the arbcom case to snub your or deliberately ignore your advice? Not at all, I wrote it for the reasons I just mentioned above.
"When I said "lost" I meant lost, and there's nothing to win." - Do you mean that it's a waste of time and RexxS should get the desysop he deserves? I'm sorry you feel like that; personally I'd like to at least state my opinion on a thread once, and then leave it. If the case closes with a desysop and retirement, at least I can say "well, I did something".
"I tell myself to not get too upset over it - as my edit notice quotes - but wasn't successful yet." - I'm not sure which specific quote you mean, but I'll assume you mean "go on with life, have a laugh, don't get too upset". Okay, but please understand that we are in the middle of the worst global pandemic in 100 years, so expecting people "go on with life" and "have a laugh" when that's not possible isn't necessary helpful. Again, I understand what you're saying, but I'm trying to explain how people might be able to interpret it in a different way. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:08, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

You refer to things I wrote in distress over RexxS gone and not planning to return. "Go on with life" is a quote, attribution right there. I tried to be less open/blunt/cruel but see that it can be misunderstood. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

The general desysop -> retirement cycle is quite sad. As firmly as I believe the case was necessary, I do hope whatever the outcome is doesn't lead to anyone leaving. And I do think evidence that provides a less one-sided view is a good thing (and certainly not a waste of time). I also don't think there's any doubt that all of the actions mentioned in the evidence section were done in good faith to improve the project (which applies to most remedies against regular editors I suppose, but I think it's worth remembering). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:30, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda I presume you've had some private correspondence with RexxS because I don't think there's been any on-wiki confirmation that he's "gone and not planning to return." I hope he changes his mind and participates in the case because a desysop is by no means inevitable, but it will be more likely if he sits it out.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I have private correspondence, stress on private, and perhaps said too much already. Ask Bish, whose display looks like a confirmation to me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I've read Carmen now, and I can't quite believe nobody thought of putting in its perennial appearance at Formula One races, which must have been watched and known about by millions of people. I guess if you weren't around to hear Murray Walker's unbridled and infectious enthusiasm ("Well Mansell's doing well, going into turn three, er, no, is it four ... a good lap time there ... AND LOOK AT THAT! OH MY WORD! HE'S CRASHED!") then it'll be a bit of a mystery why F1 was so popular in Britain during the 1980s and 90s. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

be the one to add it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:08, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand your peril. What you have started is an in popular culture section, which is like a toreador's red rag to a bull! In the case of Carmen, there's much scope for expansion as even the opera houses recognise, from Seattle to Sydney. Me, I'm missing the traditional F1 opening music but we already have that covered. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Ah yes, The Chain. This one seems somehow appropriate. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 5 March 2021 (UTC) p.s. sorry humour-bot is currently undergoing essential maintenance work.

Yanking my chain again, Martin? Oh Well. [1] Anyway, couldn't I just have a little bit of peril? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Verily, verily, Sire! I am but the Patsy to your King Arthur. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Listen! Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Eh? Some farcical aquatic ceremony?? That reminds me, I must vote next year. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

!Vote early, !vote often Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Pissing in the aquatic?! Fish objects! Fish objects! --Tryptofish (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

today (IWD): MMMM with a reference to Carmen again --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Tryptofish, perhaps fish here, for "Don't" (the ultimate guide to arbitation) and "not a game I'm willing to play" (a few threads later) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, And just after I mention him, now he's died. [2] :-( Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I called myself Cassandre on the Evidence page ;) - "Knowledgeable beyond words and with a passion that occasionally got the better of him" - could be said of RexxS the same. - I hope the legend's article is well-referenced enough for ITN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Back to the top (expressing the emotions and suffering of his characters), I just came across this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Today Bach's cantata composed for today, - perhaps listen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary with the beginning of Passover today - putting some little ego-battles in perspective --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for what you wrote about Giano, or in short: he has a heart (you, too, by the way). I try soooo hard to stay out but each round seems to be worse than the previous. Boing! wrote the best summary so far, content the same as Giano's, just less colourful wording. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, Best experience I have of Giano is pinging him to do something about Tracy Park, whereupon he turned it from this to this. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

All my Giano experiences were good, - no wonder he got Precious on Christmas day. He should be an arb, no kidding. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie, thank you for the way that you closed the ANI thread about Giano. I think that you handled it very well, and I appreciate that. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. As I said to somebody else about something completely different above (so not really as I said at all), sometimes things like this are a bit of an art than a science. The key thing is just to listen to people, which is difficult to do in an online discussion, but worth it if you can. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to recruit, but...

I was just wondering if you'd like to take a look at Ava Cherry at some point, which I've had at GAN for over a month now (I know, I know, it can get much longer -- but it's nearly halfway up Wikipedia:Good article nominations#Other music articles now). 70s music bio about a woman, so I felt you might be interested. No hurry and no pressure, just seeing if it's anything you'd want to review or not. Vaticidalprophet 21:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Vaticidalprophet, I am aware of her from her work with the Young Americans-era Bowie, so I'm happy to take the review on, and hopefully I'll finish it in the next day or so. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

You ain't a pimp and you ain't a hustler. Drmies (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Vaticidalprophet, I think the lead is too much Bowie, who appears midway through the first sentence of the lead and never leaves, as if she is nobody by herself. I understand Bowie brought her into the spotlight, but she is her own person too and the lead needs to reflect that--her "before" is missing and her "after" is cursory, and is again dominated by her work with other, famouser people. Can we get a bit more about her? Drmies (talk) 14:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

And in "The Astronettes and GO", there are no dates--when and where was that album recorded? (and who regarded it as a curiosity?) When is "after the demise of the relationship", and I assume that's the relationship with Bowie? (and one vial of cocaine doesn't really bear out the lead's claim--need to see that it messed up their relationship.) When was GO, and (in the next section), when was "after GO"? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

File:PimpThatSnackLogo.jpg

The original "Pimp-that-stub-snack-to-GA" logo"

(currently on show at the V&A)

Threetunsie, hearty congratulations on not being a pimp (or was it just a hustler?) Martinevans123 (talk) 15:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I know, one of them's got a Cadi and one's got a Chrysler, I've got a Network Southeast Railcard. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Drmies, I've addressed those issues at the GA review, and stressed that the first of them is probably the major thing that needs fixing for GA. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:54, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Right on. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Mistake in ANI closure

In the Giano thread closure, you state "Giano is unblocked", but in reality his block simply expired. "Giano is unblocked" gives the impression that he was unfairly blocked, and such inaccuracies may cause confusion further down the line. Fram (talk) 07:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

(watching:) I am under the impression that he was unfairly blocked (he didn't make personal attacks, actually he seemed to attack nobody but describe a situation in colourful terms, and also those who blocked and removed TPA were part of the well-described situation, so not neutral, they really should have left actions to someone else), and I am not alone, as discussed on Giano's talk and already archived. - Boing! said Zebedee described the same situation. The problem is the situation, not those who speak about it in different temperament. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes Gerda, Brief und Siegel! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rocky Mount Instruments

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rocky Mount Instruments you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 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 Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:00, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rocky Mount Instruments

The article Rocky Mount Instruments you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . 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:Rocky Mount Instruments for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion

An article you created or have significantly contributed to has been nominated for deletion. The article is being discussed at the deletion discussion, located here. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Chopin

Dear Ritchie333, thanks for your action regarding Frédéric Chopin. In the meantime I have filed a notice of the situation at the NPOV noticeboard. I do not intend to revert Crossroads's deletion on lifting of 24-hr protection, but I may institute an RfC on the specific wording to which Crossroads has expressed such a dislike.--Smerus (talk) 12:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Smerus, It may be worth notifying Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Music and Wikipedia:WikiProject Composers as well, as participants there are likely to be the most familiar with Chopin's work and the best sources, so will be able to give the most appropriate input. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I have done this.--Smerus (talk) 15:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

and p.s. thanks for the RMI 368X Electra piano. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC) I had thought of this, but apparently it's a Werly.

Perhaps after the Wurlitzer could follow articles on the aeolomelodicon and aeolopantaleon?--Smerus (talk) 20:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rocky Mount Instruments

The article Rocky Mount Instruments you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rocky Mount Instruments for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Seems appropriate that Some Dude From North Carolina reviews an article about some old company from North Carolina :-) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Green Bullfrog

On 3 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Green Bullfrog, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Green Bullfrog featured members of Deep Purple, Procol Harum and Chas & Dave? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Green Bullfrog. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Green Bullfrog), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Cake and Cunnilingus Day

On 1 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cake and Cunnilingus Day, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 14 April is Cake and Cunnilingus Day? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cake and Cunnilingus Day. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cake and Cunnilingus Day), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah yes. The memory of your wonderful DKY's facts Kinda Lingers, doesn't it. [3] Martinevans123 (talk) 12:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Made it on the all-time list at WP:DYKSTATS too. Congratulations! The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

The C of E, A shame that the eventual hook didn't have (not pictured) at the end of it, but maybe it's a good idea that it didn't otherwise a bunch of Commons editors would be scrambling around on 14 April a week on Wednesday to take pictures of the event. Is it possible to eat cake while receiving cunnilingus, or will you accidentally spit it all out? Have we scared EEng away from this thread? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Not being an expert on this, I presume it is possible if one does one and one does the other. I don't think we quite have the late-night version of Wikipedia set up just yet so I don't think we need to worry about Commons editors asking their wives to assist with obtaining such an image.... The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

EEng?? No way. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Eugénie Brazier

On 5 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Eugénie Brazier, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Eugénie Brazier was the first chef to be awarded six Michelin stars? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eugénie Brazier. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Eugénie Brazier), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Help, please?

I'm using sub-UTP to conduct NPP training, and dummy that I am for not thinking ahead (so unlike me), I moved NPP training3 to NPP trainingCW, then copy-pasted it into this archive. The lame reason I did it that way was because one-click archiver was adding the training sessions to my main User talk page archives. I am open to suggestions as to how best to fix this mess, and if you don't have time or are not technically inclined, do you know who I can ask? My prior go-to was RexxS, 😢. Atsme 💬 📧 13:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Atsme, Sorry, I'm confused. What exactly do you want to achieve? You have page mover rights so you should be able to move the page back again. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I need structure and archive help so as not to mix my UTP archives with the subpage archives. Who is an archives expert? Atsme 💬 📧 16:43, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Atsme, I don't know, I set my archiving up very early on and just copy and paste talk page archiving from one that works. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

American Descendants of Slavery

Hello Ritchie you helped prior with the American Descendants of Slavery page. They altered it again inacurately today. I put in a editor assistance request and would prefer if you reviewed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Descendants_of_Slavery

We are having repetitive issues where editors are changing the wikipedia for American Descendants of Slavery to omit information and present the group inaccurately. Editor Ritchie333 had to correct this prior just two months ago.

On the about just today three hours ago an editor omitted information about one founders Antonio Moore contributing on a progressive site and left information about the other to misrepresent information. They also restructured the page as not about but a biased slander. We have attempted using the talk page and it is ignored. Please have the page reverted to what it was prior to the revisions that make biased omissions to misrepresent the group. The page should be reverted and locked. They also added slanted information about singular statements that shouldn't be on a group page. They changed the whole page and now it isn't a description of the group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnways21145 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Johnways21145, There's an important difference between what happened in February and now. Back then, the information that I reverted in response to your complaint was added by an inexperienced editor, who is now blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet. This time, the article has been changed by Neutrality, who is an experienced editor who knows what they're doing. I would suggest starting a discussion on the talk page, Talk:American Descendants of Slavery; however in my opinion Neutrality had reasonable grounds to remove the material, as it was not backed up with a high quality source clearly linking it to the ADOS in a neutral manner. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply. The page is now more of a blog with the goal of making ADOS appear right wing. It has left the line about Southern Poverty and omitted the clearly sourced mention of Moore writing at Inequality.org Here is the source. Its their actual site. https://inequality.org/authors/antonio-moore/. You can omit both but not one and not the other.

Also, there are inaccuracies of added information on the page now. The source doesn't say what the editor asserted. It said "They say" this is basically the editor effectively piecing together material to make their own argument that is not in the source. This is the quote "They say calling Harris “African American,”..." and the writer is ambiguous to the source of that "they" it is inaccurate.

The editor added this but there is no support. "In one video, Moore criticized Kamala Harris and asserted that she was not "African American" (Harris's father is Jamaican American); the claim was amplified by right-wing figures, including Donald Trump Jr..[" There is no source to support this discussion. And now what the editor did is took one wash post article and made sections off this one article. The prevalence section added is from this same article. As is the misquoted citation.

In addition, now the page both tries to frame the group as small and right-wing which is not for a description page about page. It took citation 5 that the recent editor added and embedded it as the page in all senses. The prior version of the page is a basic description that leaves all assessments to the reception section properly.

I have added a talk page request. This editor despite expertise took one article from the post 12 months ago and made nearly the whole wikpedia page. That is not appropriate. In addition they made up quotes that are not in the article as I mentioned above. There’s no problem adding critiques in the reception here they made the about us a biased inaccurate critique from one source. When there was already a fair page up. Johnways21145 (talk) 22:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of London Ringways

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article London Ringways you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 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 JackFromReedsburg -- JackFromReedsburg (talk) 04:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of London Ringways

The article London Ringways you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:London Ringways for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of JackFromReedsburg -- JackFromReedsburg (talk) 19:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Tara Downs

On 13 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tara Downs, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tara Downs co-founded the Tomorrow Gallery in a converted paintball studio in Toronto? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tara Downs. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tara Downs), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

revision 1017272186

Hi

You undid revision 1017272186 (in which I added a pic of storm damage in 2002). You said

"I think that puts in too many images, try a category on Common".

Which I did, thanks for suggestion, put in Brighton West Pier between 1975 and 2004

[I'm a virtual beginner to wikipedia, BTW, so apologies for beginners questions]

First: is there a rule about "too many" pics? Can't find one.

I'd like to see an image of storm damage as well as fire in the "Decline and damage" part of the West Pier page.

I read through MOS:LAYIM. Would best option be to use a two-image gallery, or create a sub category of Brighton West Pier between 1975 and 2004 and reference it?

Not particularly excited by image I used, maybe another in would be better, e.g. West_Pier_Remains.JPG?

I don't feel competent to make any further changes to page: will leave it to your judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EntropyReduction (talk • contribs) 15:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

EntropyReduction, The category commons:West Pier is rich in images, and could always use some more. The problem with the West Pier article is it only has around 10K of prose, and consequently it's difficult to put as many images as we want without disrupting the flow. If the article were to be expanded, that might allows more space to put more images, but I'm not sure what else can be written about the West Pier based on the information I have. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Ritchie333: Ok, understood. Thanks for clarifying. EntropyReduction (talk) 00:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello !

Hello how are you ? Ritchie333 can you review this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Ali_Mahmoud_al_Suleiman if it is ok can you move it to Article space thanks a lot --Istanbul1453Istanbul (talk) 13:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Looks like the article has been deleted and Beeblebrox has blocked. Wonder why they're asking me? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Playing some weird game, it seems. They created that draft then went around admin shopping. I don't know who's sock it was but it certainly failed the duck test. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

FYI Ritchie333 and Beeblebrox, permalink/1017524376 --Alaa :)..! 08:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

"It doesn't take a 'brox / to spot heely-holey stinkin' socks" ——Serial 15:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

But just in case, change the locks, unless you have to issue blocks. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Oi, Threesie, me ol' china... 'appy Yuri's Night !! [4] Martinevans123 (talk) 21:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Oy vey! --Tryptofish (talk) 21:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

American Hot Rod Association

Hi Ritchie. Hope you're doing well. Terribly sorry to bother you, but are you sure that "Delete" is truly the consensus? Numerically, yes, but the I find the delete rationales, aside from the nominator's, incredibly weak. If you think TNT or copyvio applies, would you be so kind to say so in the closing statement? Many thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

78.26, Yes, the copyvio concerns were the strongest argument, and not really refuted. I have clarified this in the AfD. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive332#(Un)paid_votes_in_Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rt_Rana

(Un)paid votes in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rt Rana admin close this discussion nobody close that MO-Quotes (talk) 13:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

West Pier

Hi Ritchie333 - you reverted my edit to West Pier on the grounds that it is still there (or 'what's left of it'). Perhaps it comes down to semantics but I would not describe a derelict metal skeleton isolated several hundred feet out from the shore at sea as being an extant pier. It is to all intents and purpose a former pier and warrants use of the word 'was'. I don't intend getting into further debate but don't you think that to introduce it as something that still exists as a pier is to mislead the reader? cheers Geopersona (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Geopersona, The definitive source is the The National Heritage List for England which still lists it as extant. There's also this Brighton Argus news piece, that hints the pier may be restored. On a more personal note, on several occasions I have stood on the Brighton Palace Pier with my children and said, "That's the West Pier over there - wishful thinking in architecture!" Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Mind you, Geopersona, the West Pier didn't sink so quickly as the West Pier Trust's DYK nom :) ——Serial 12:18, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Rocky Mount Instruments

On 21 April 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rocky Mount Instruments, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an RMI sounded best with a Hi-Scream Cone? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rocky Mount Instruments. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rocky Mount Instruments), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

—valereee (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

"Ekta Jain" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ekta Jain. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 23#Ekta Jain until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jay (talk) 22:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

New Proposal for intro on Jefferson Starship article

Hello again, Ritchie,

I proposed an edit on the Jefferson Starship talk page and wonder if you could have a look at it. AbleGus, again, contested my proposal. I would appreciate your feedback. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda's April corner

Thank you for the image on top! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

... and wow, 150 GAs! - Yesterday's Mainpage was especially beautiful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The Schlosspark, Brühl does look like a nice place to visit, if I ever get the chance. Next goal then, I guess, is 200 GAs. I've run out of sources for stuff like Grafton Street that I was going through, and can't remember what else Smirkybec recommended. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I went there with my parents when my mom had just recovered enough from hip surgery to enjoy it. Want to make BWV 157 my next GA, said so here, in other words. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Casey, Christine (2005). Dublin: The City Within the Grand and Royal Canals and the Circular Road with the Phoenix Park. Yale University Press is a very good one for architecture and general history and is very dense! I have bought Dublin: The Making of a Capital City by David Dickson which is quite large, but haven't had a chance to delve into in much, but has very good reviews and a good index. I have Constantia Maxwell's book on Georgian Dublin, as well as Frank McDonald's 3 books on Dublin, but I don't know if they would be worth paying for! Maxwell's book is interesting as it was written not long after the Civil War/Independence, so much of the city is still newly rebuilt or recovering. If you wanted a slightly different take, The Liffey in Dublin John W De Courcy was recommended highly to me by the heritage officer in Dublin port, if you're interested in maritime or that sort of history it's another way to "read" the development of Dublin. Smirkybec (talk) 19:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah yes, you did recommend Casey for me before, I think that's the first one I'll pick up. I think generally I need a bit more "on the ground" experience of Dublin first, as with the London streets I'd visited all of them numerous times and had a vague idea of the history. I only recently realised that the original city is on the Southside, while the Northside is newer and is roughly equivalent to the South Bank in London. (Or at least I think that's right?) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Pretty much! The Viking city was all on the Southside, as much of the area that is now down towards the docks etc was reclaimed/drained. The article on the River Poddle is quite good for giving a sense of how the landscape shaped the early city, and was then changed as it expanded. Apparently that Liffey book is quite good for explaining all that, so I might grab that if I find a secondhand copy cheap. The Northside was briefly very fashionable, but suffered the most after the act of union and the dissolution of the Irish Parliament. We're in no rush with these articles, and hopefully visiting will be on the cards at some point soon! Smirkybec (talk) 21:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

On this day in 1742, He was despised was performed for the first time, in DUBLIN! When I wrote it in 2012, I didn't only think of Jesus. Andreas Scholl sang that for us, - you are invited to a Baroque stroll. Eric helped me with the singer, DYK? Missed much. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

more memories on the Main page today, Psalm 115 thinking of Yoninah, Christa Ludwig and Milva, - voices that made the Earth a better place. Sad that the psalm hook didn't appear on Earth Day as planned, but better pictured and late than going unnoticed ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:11, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Apology

Yes, I apologize about that. Forgive me. Anyways, got to get editing. Have a good day. - Doctorine Dark Doctorine Dark (talk) 11:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Citing vinyls

Hi Ritchie, hope you're doing well. Do you know how to cite a a vinyl sleeve? I'm trying to source the personnel for Ultrapop and I'm using this LP release (6th img) but I'm not sure which of our many CS1 templates to use and what to include. Any guidance would be appreciated. Regards, Anarchyte (talk • work) 07:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Anarchyte, In the past I've used {{cite AV media notes|title=[Album title]|publisher=[Record Label]|year=[year]|id=[serial number]}}. For example, {{cite AV media notes|title=The Dark Side of the Moon|publisher=Harvest Records|year=1973|id=SHVL 804}}. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll use that. Anarchyte (talk • work) 09:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)