User talk:Sluzzelin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Alice par John Tenniel 37.png

Archive Brchive Crchive Drchive Erchive Frchive Grchive Hrchive Irchive Jrchive Krchive Lrchive Mrchive

Coral tea cosy.jpg
The Coral Tea Cosy Award
For your excellent and always kind and good-tempered service to the encyclopedia, you have been awarded this coral tea cosy
to keep your jasmine tea scaldingly hot (the way 'shonen likes it). darwinfish 21:42, 19 July 2014 (UTC).


Thanks for caring about the spelling of Trinity in today's cantata. It's a quote from old handwriting as sourced, should not be changed. In today's orthography, it would be Trinitatis, and sechzehnten. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

... and Sonntag :-) I figured as much ... now. I had looked for the source and couldn't find it, but got misled by another title page (probably a later one) where it was spelled "Trinitatis", but then I noticed that the rest of the spelling had been modernized/standardized too ... anyhow, sorry for wasting your time, and thank you for your kind response! ---09:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
You are not wasting my time, - people who accuse me of driving away editors are, but I have no time to even defend myself ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)


"Welcome! (and please stop adding nonsense)"

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality key service for more than 10 years: welcoming with a side note ("and please stop adding nonsense"), reverting vandalism, adding precision, asking the tumba question, all with the images of various readers in mind, - repeating from 4 August 2010: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda, I love sapphires, much appreciated! (wow, over 10 years, and I'd completely forgotten about the tumba question). ---Sluzzelin talk 19:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
I found the tumba tumba tumba tum question and found it unique! The price - which you received a second time - is of course from the cabal of the outcasts, and you are under our double curse. Good luck. All these reader images: how wonderful! While I simply said let's make it the year of the reader and of peace. It turned out the year of one death after another, and little peace. To see all "your" readers really reestablished the New Year's resolution, - thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
A years ago, you were recipient no. 1491 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:34, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Gerda. #1491! You make me feel special! (^_-)-☆ ---Sluzzelin talk 22:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Sluzzelin. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Trigger warning (offsite)[edit]

Dear Sluzzelin,

Hello, Sluzzelin. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

and it's long. I suggest accompanying the reading with the comforting beverage of your choice. Not urgent, really. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 10:36, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Received and read, dear DJ. Will respond sometime within the next few days (cuz that's how my mind works ;-). ---Sluzzelin talk 13:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Like Minded Club[edit]

Hello, Sluzzelin. Yes, it's sad that the Ref Desks are not what they once were. I've taken a much lower profile there for quite some time now. I have no appetite for the seemingly interminable discussions mostly about apparently inconsequential stuff, so I leave that for those with the time and the interest. Anyway, for taking a stand, I hereby award you this.

"Dreaming the same Impossible Dream"

The Like-Minded Persons' Club
For displaying here common sense and uncommon good taste by agreeing with me or saying something I would have said if only I'd had the presence of mind, I hereby bestow upon you Provisional Membership of the Like-Minded Persons' Club.

To qualify for Full Membership, simply continue to agree with me in all matters for at least the next 12 months.

(Disagreements are so vulgar, don't you think? And, as Bruce Chatwin said, Arguments are fatal. One always forgets what they are about)

Happy journey. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

♥ ---Sluzzelin talk 22:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ref desk talk page[edit]

I have reverted a reversion of your comment, made by an IP alleging to be you logged off. If that actually was you, feel free to log in and revert my reversion of that reversion. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, taken care of (though a quick check of the IP's contributions might have lead you to realize it was me). Now, unless you've brought delicious food, go away and let me enjoy my break! (smilingly and winkingly-right-backatcha) ---Sluzzelin talk 22:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I only saw like 4 entries from that IP. In any case, all I can offer is vegtables. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:26, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

You were right...[edit]

About this, I mean. Some time spent lurking the internet's underbelly netted me the full audio of "The Way it Was", a collection of tracks recorded in July and August, 1970, mostly at a place referred to as "MGM Las Vegas" in the files, though the MGM Grand Las Vegas would be anachronistic. The specific track I had heard was the one done on August 11. Anyway, I wouldn't have found it without your response - so thank you! Matt Deres (talk) 00:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by and that feedback, Matt! (I'm assuming you encountered this one during your research). ---Sluzzelin talk 00:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I hadn't - thank you again. That track is obviously from the same time period and place, but wasn't the exact version that I'd heard. As a Vegas headliner, he would have done multiple shows per week for an extended period, so there are probably an enormous number of very similar recordings. Matt Deres (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Attention: WikiProject African diaspora participants[edit]

Hello fellow project participants. Not sure how many users are still active as normal Wikipedia editors but felt the need to attempt to get a gauge on who can be called on for help with articles falling under the umbrella of the African diaspora project. According to the project's article table there are over six thousand articles related to the African diaspora; there's not a hundred at FA/GA grade and there's over twelve hundred that are unassessed. With Wikipedia being one of the major information reference points in the world today we should consider this unacceptable. Much work needs to be done on the rating of the importance of articles as well. With more communication amongst participants and a dedication to addressing the articles on the to-do list I believe we can make this WikiProject one of the most well organized and thorough on the site. If you are interested in collaborative work with some of your fellow project members, have certain expertise on any particular subjects, ideals on/about the WikiProject, etc. simply drop your name under the "Project revision" section I've created on the project's talk page and state your intentions and main points of interest in our WikiProject and we can attempt to move forward from there. Hoping to hear from everyone soon! WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Nerve argh[edit]

You don't have the nerve argh? Well, I don't have the covfefe! (And sorry, I also don't know any species like you describe.) Bishonen | talk 19:35, 1 June 2017 (UTC).

Ha ha ha! (wow, including a recently re-baptised university) ---Sluzzelin talk 19:47, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Haha, great idea to use it as a name. You remember Boaty McBoatface? HMS USS Covfefe would be a fine name for a boat. Bishonen | talk 20:02, 1 June 2017 (UTC).
Hah, only read about this] now, BishyMcBishface. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Nice stuff[edit]

Have a cup of coffee.

I like your style, Sluzzelin. (A name whose source I recognized, when I read your userpage, as ancestral, or at least avuncular, to Schlüsselein. Yeah, see my userpage.) Reading-art! I'm a compulsive reader and my mother was an art teacher, so, yeah. Phenakistoscope! I'm interested in illusions, and as a teenager patented a type of kaleidoscope (never manufactured, patent long expired). Hatnote! I'm listening to Wikipedia as I type— very calming without being boring. And so on. Have a cup of coffee. --Thnidu (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for those sweet words and for slipping me a slug from the wonderful mug, Thnidu! (May I draw your attention to WP:RD/L where your knowledge, skills, and experience might be of tremendous help). ---Sluzzelin talk 04:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Can you help verify translations of articles from German[edit]

Hello Sluzzelin,

Would you be able to help evaluate the accuracy of translations of Wikipedia articles from German to English Wikipedia?

This would involve evaluating a translated article on the English Wikipedia by comparing it to the original German article, and marking it "Pass" or "Fail" based on whether the translation faithfully represents the original. Here's the reason for this request:

There are a number of articles on English Wikipedia that were created as machine translations from different languages including German , using the Content Translation tool, sometimes by users with no knowledge of the source language. The config problem that allowed this to happen has since been fixed, but this has left us with a backlog of articles whose accuracy of translation is suspect or unknown, including some articles translated from German. In many cases, other editors have come forward later to copyedit and fix any English grammar or style issues, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the translation is accurate, as factual errors from the original translation may remain. To put it another way: Good English is not the same as good translation.

If you can help out, that would be great. Here's a sample of the articles that need checking:

  1. David W. Peck  Fail
  2. Deutsche Umwelthilfe  Pass

All you have to do, is compare the English article to the German article, and assess them "Pass" or "Fail" (the {{Pass}} and {{Fail}} templates may be useful here). (Naturally, if you feel like fixing an inaccurate translation and then assessing it, that's even better, but it isn't required.) Also please note that we are assessing accuracy not completeness, so if the English article is much shorter that is okay, as long as whatever has been translated so far is factually accurate.

If you can help, please {{ping}} me here to let me know. You can add your pass/fails above, right next to each link, or you may indicate your results below. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 06:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, Mathglot, I pecked at the first article. If only the translation were "Good English"! then it would be easier to say something about its accuracy. I took a close look at the first section ("Life and work"), and there are at least four instances where the translation's meanings are ambiguous enough to be misleading. Some of the syntax in the subsection titled "Peck Panel" is very hard to parse, and I can't evaluate meanings I don't understand. It's a shame, because one does find correct information and understands a lot in that article on a notable person, but I have to give it a "Fail". ---Sluzzelin talk 17:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
As for Deutsche Umwelthilfe: I'm not sure from where it was translated, even when you compare it with the German article at the time the English one was created and only with its first paragraph, the English article doesn't correspond, neither in its current version nor at the time of it being created. Can't evaluate that one, sorry. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:37, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Sluzzelin. If the English is not good enough or too ambiguous to even verify whether or not the translation is accurate (fact-wise), then that would definitely be a "fail". As for the second one, if it doesn't seem to be a translation, then it's "not applicable", which for our purposes, equals "pass". I've marked them above accordingly; feel free to alter that if I haven't interpreted you correctly.
Here's why the 2nd one is a "pass", if you're curious: these evaluations are part of the temporary speedy deletion criterion X2, in which a machine translation which is inaccurate can be speedily deleted under special circumstances not normally available. Thus, an article which is a "fail" can be deleted under X2. An article which is a "pass", or not a translation, or other non-translation fail cases, cannot be deleted under X2. As such, they are equivalent to "Pass".
Thanks again for your help. Can I send you a few more? Mathglot (talk) 18:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining, Mathglot, and sure you can send over more (as long as there is no deadline). ---Sluzzelin talk 20:31, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
There might be a deadline, but I haven't heard it yet, so I wouldn't worry. Here are four more; same deal, {{pass}} or {{fail}}; accuracy not completeness; any questions, just ask!
  1. Arthur Porr
  2. Embassy of China, Berlin
  3. Ich hab Polizei
  4. Ku'damm 56
And thanks again. Mathglot (talk) 03:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Hey, Mathglot, remember me? champion procrastinator Sluzzelin calling! Anyway, I finally took a look:
  1. Arthur Porr  Pass
  2. Embassy of China, Berlin  Pass (The English WP is quite a bit shorter, but the comparable chunks pass. I fixed a couple of consequences of machine-translation.)
  3. Ich hab Polizei  Pass, I guess, for the same reasons as you explained with the Deutsche Umwelthilfe above. I couldn't locate a source text for comparison. Our article doesn't match any German version I found.
  4. Ku'damm 56 Matches early versions of German WP's article, though even the very first version has a subsection on "Produktion" (and we don't). Tough one. Two or three ambiguities. Not sure "zeitgemäß" means "contemporary" here. I suspect it means something like "in keeping with the period". Hard to say. (added later) Alright, Sluzzelin will have another look and try to improve the article within the next erm days. But in terms of evaluation of (if indeed) automatic translation, I'd prefer giving it a nasty bureaucratic fail. Take that, Brainoogle! ---Sluzzelin talk 02:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience, and have a Happy Friday! ---Sluzzelin talk 11:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Investment[edit]

If you come back from your break check out this project.Thanks!

A1 Houston Office Oil Traders on Monday.jpg

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

WikiEditCrunch (talk) 20:59, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


I didn't want to clog up Joe's talk page, but for clarification what I meant by "answer to me" is that I laid an editing restriction on Joe, so in a sense messing with him without going through the proper channel would equate to messing with me - or more precise, with an editing restriction in place, people need to find consensus first or a block would be overturned because it would be in violation of the conditions set forth for a block. Otherwise, I agree with everything said :) TomStar81 (Talk) 01:30, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'm not sure that editing restriction still even is in place, since I saw the succession of events as follows:
  1. You closed the ANI discussion and laid an editing restriction on Joe.
  2. A couple of days passed during which you took a closer look at past kerfuffles regarding Joe etc.
  3. Based on your new analysis, you drew a different conclusion, and decided that the right thing to do was to submit a case to Arbcom
  4. Arbcom declined the case
Since the original restriction was placed prematurely or not knowing all the facts (according to what I read in your statement) and the case was then passed on to Arbcom, I'm not sure that editing restriction should remain in place. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:11, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Sluzzelin. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Blast from the past[edit]

Hey Sluzzelin! I though you might be interested in this recent edit to WP:Reference desk archive/Miscellaneous/2006 September 5#Looking for the title of a children's book. -- ToE 20:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, ToE. For eleven years, that unanswered question had been robbing me of well-deserved sleep! (Also saw a bunch of signatures there I haven't seen in quite a while. Blast indeed)! ---Sluzzelin talk 22:17, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


Yes, I agree she should be in jail, so I will desist. But I notice Anders Zorn is missing from your talk page gallery. See Google Images. Definitely worth a look-see. Incredible turn-of-the-century Swedish romantic realist painter. μηδείς (talk) 03:48, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

A bit confused. As indicated, I suck at hilarity, but to jail me for that? Anyway, no need to desist (you can't jail me anyway). Feel free to revert back to your hilarious comment. But, more importantly, thanks for pointing out readers painted by Zorn. Unfortunately, Commons hyper-categorises its images, so it will take many clicks to find one of his readers, but I'll add them eventually. Thanks again! ---Sluzzelin talk 03:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • My edits were ironic. Do see Anders Zorn's total opus, and that of Michael Newberry, a personal friend google who introduced me to Zorn as his favorite beside Rembrandt, Vermeer, and Picasso. He and I disagree on Picasso's famous works, and I find Rembrandt too workaday. But I respect Newberry's work, and his online catalog. Still Life. μηδείς (talk) 05:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

About Ann-Kathrin Brömmel (and de:Ann-Kathrin Brömmel)[edit]

Sluzzelin, could you possibly have a little look into this? My spidey-senses are picking up all kinds of WP:BLP problems here. For example, the first reference on Ms Brömmel's de article is some person's - maybe her, maybe someone else - tumblr page. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Just skimming, most of that first tumblr-referenced paragraph can be found elsewhere in probably more reliable sources such as the RP ONLINE, or Goal, from what I saw. I'll take a closer look for more specific refs. (Not sure I saw one for the siblings). ---Sluzzelin talk 02:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Astrid Lindgren[edit]

(I've written the same message to Mojoworker too about a different article.) Thanks for reverting this article. The user doing this has been doing this for some time now, which I reported to the CVU and at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Nothing has been done about it to date (except for someone trying to hack my account once I reported the vandalism...). If you know of any way of getting someone to take action, please do. I've linked some of the vandalism in the CVU request. -Yupik (talk) 20:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Yupik. I don't think I'll be able to do much more than keeping an eye on Astrid Lindgren's article. But it's flagged somewhere in my brain now, thanks to your communication which is much appreciated. Take care. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)