User talk:Spinningspark

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

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirateSchwede66K6kaEaldgythFerretCyberpower678Mz7PrimefacDodger67
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg BriangottsJeremyABU Rob13

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Scale of justice 2.svg Arbitration

Nuvola apps knewsticker.png Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Transfer_function[edit]

Hi there! When you have time, it'd be good to chat some more about the Transfer function article : ) InternetMeme (talk) 07:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure, what do you want to talk about? SpinningSpark 09:53, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm confident you can figure that out ; ) InternetMeme (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Hey, have you read my discussion reply yet? I could use some help with grammar. InternetMeme (talk) 07:17, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Not until just now. I was no longer watching the page and you gave no indication or link that you had posted elsewhere and wanted me to look at it. I'll take a look and reply to you on the article talk page. SpinningSpark 11:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello again. I've left another comment on the Transfer function talk page. Please respond. InternetMeme (talk) 13:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
I've really got nothing to add. If you have a specific knowledge question, I'll do my best to answer, otherwise I'm not interested. SpinningSpark 14:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Templates[edit]

Alright, find someone else to do the GA review. I'm not comfortable dealing with citations that can't be easily reviewed for accuracy, completeness and long-term bot maintenance. Or which forces the reader to manually scroll up and down between two sections to get where they want to get. Or which omits dois, bibcodes, and other similar bibliographic identifiers.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

That's fine if you don't want to do the review, but you never declared you were reviewing to start off with so I don't see how I was supposed to take that into account. SpinningSpark 18:49, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
I was doing prep work for the review. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:53, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
The thing is, if you change the referencing system, I will have to work with that if I add to the article in the future. I have several FAs that have used this system so I don't think it can be as difficult as you claim. If someone wanted to make changes as a prelude to adding substantial content with lots more references I wouldn't stand in their way, but at the moment the only content provider to this page is me, so let's stick with the way I work. SpinningSpark 18:59, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Not wanting to pick another fight with you, but I would also say that putting nbsps in the shortened refs is useless code clutter. It is not really possible to make the window narrow enough to cause a line break in the page number. Even if it was, the window would be so narrow that breaks would be occuring mid-word on long words so breaking at the page number might even be preferable at that stage. At least it would not be adding to the unreadability of the window. SpinningSpark 19:09, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
"Let's stick with the way I work". Well you can do that, but I never liked the attitude of putting editors before readers, so I'm going to work on other pages instead. I removed the spaces in the ref tags, but kept those in the bibliography since those can break. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't really agree that that is what I am doing. The style does not prevent dois etc being added and bots can parse it quite easily. But anyway, thanks for taking an interest and looking at the article, even if you don't want to review it. SpinningSpark 20:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
"Bots can parse it quite easily" not existing bots, at least. Good luck finding another reviewer. No hard feelings.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Erno Rubik[edit]

Hello there!

Sorry if my change to the Erno Rubik page seemed a little unconventional. I'm afraid I have recently suffered a stroke and find it has affected my memory. I cannot recall the correct way to change links in articles. I have included a link on the talk page It is to rubiks. com. "Cube Story" (right hand side of page, scroll down): 1979 - deal signed, 1980, Cube renamed. Apologies for confusing you. The link follows - https://uk.rubiks.com/about/the-history-of-the-rubiks-cube

Also Cube Facts page, rubiks.com - scroll down to bottom of page - https://uk.rubiks.com/about/cube-facts/

(Solidsandie (talk) 11:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC))

Thank You![edit]

Thanks so much for your work on the Erno Rubik page. I have been trying to re-introduce myself gently to Wikipedia and enjoying the experience, but there are some things it seems I must re-learn since my illness, such as the system for reference links. Thank you again.

(Solidsandie (talk) 13:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC))

Parasitic element (electrical networks)[edit]

"Give it a rest"? There's no need to be so testy, dude. It's not like I tried adding {{no footnotes}} to the article multiple times or something. --Dan Harkless (talk) 14:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, sorry for that, it was uncalled for. My belief is that Wikipedia has a "little blue numbers disease" believing that makes an article better referenced. But it doesn't and it gets under my skin sometimes. I could have responded to you by duplicating the exising refs inline at the end of every paragraph. That wouldn't have made one iota of difference to the verifiability of the article. It would only have provided false reassurance; the only sure way to check is to actually read the refs. I'm not denying that many things should, or even must, have inline cites, but I don't believe there is anything in this article that rises to that and it is very short (stub plus) with only two sources, both with the relevant pages identified. SpinningSpark 14:56, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Ah, sorry, I didn't notice that (short) page number sequences were identified in References. I wouldn't have added the tag, had I noticed that. Cheers. --Dan Harkless (talk) 15:58, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Historical comet observations in China[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 9 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Historical comet observations in China, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that historical comet observations in China as far back as 12 BC have been used to study changes in the brightness of Halley's Comet? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Historical comet observations in China. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Historical comet observations in China), 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.

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Planar transmission lines[edit]

Just wanted to say that it's great that there is now an article on planar transmission lines - this has long been a conspicuous omission. --catslash (talk) 22:59, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing. It's currently waiting for a GA review if you are interested in doing that :-). It's been a cospicuous omission, yes, but not from my to do list, I created the draft page all the way back in May 2013 would you believe. I thought it was high time to turn it into a proper article. We still need an overarching article, transmission line circuit, which should now be easy to write as a summary of the four or five good quality articles we now already have. SpinningSpark 23:30, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Transfer function matrix[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 13 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Transfer function matrix, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first use of a transfer function matrix in control systems was on development of gas turbine engines for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Transfer function matrix. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Transfer function matrix), 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.

Mifter (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Electronic career[edit]

I notice you are into electronics. A good portion of my life I was in the hardware electronics part, mostly computers and aerospace. In the 1970s I repaired computers that keep track of scoring for bowlers. Here are the schematics I worked with. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

We haven't caught up with that in lawn bowls yet. We still use a person turning over numbers on hooks. SpinningSpark 23:34, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Air stripline[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 16 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Air stripline, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in an air stripline, air is used as an electrical insulator to reduce transmission losses? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Air stripline. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Air stripline), 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.

Mifter (talk) 23:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Transfer function matrix[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Transfer function matrix 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 North8000 -- North8000 (talk) 00:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: Lambda2 method[edit]

Thanks for not deleting, and for publishing, the article. I find it useful as a reference to get the information quickly for my homework. (I bumped into it from a web search results page). I am grateful to your assistance with review and approval. --Gryllida (talk) 01:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

James L. Buie[edit]

I created this article. I worked at TRW the same time he did. Did You Know that James L. Buie invented transistor-to-transistor logic circuitry (TTL), which led to the development of the integrated circuit industry? I did not know Buie personally as we each worked in different buildings on a large complex.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Admin mop.PNG Administrator changes

Gnome-colors-list-add.svg AmortiasDeckillerBU Rob13
Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg RonnotelIslanderChamal NIsomorphicKeeper76Lord VoldemortSherethBdeshamPjacobi

Green check.svg Guideline and policy news

Octicons-tools.svg Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination for Planar transmission line[edit]

Hi - I've tried to review your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Planar transmission line. As I understand the rules it fails to meet the newness criteria, having not been expanded 5-fold in the 7 days prior to nomination. However this is the first time I've tried to review an article, and I may have misunderstood the rules, so feel free to comment. Hopefully another reviewer will look at this as I haven't rejected it. Optimist on the run (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Transfer function matrix[edit]

The article Transfer function matrix you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Transfer function matrix 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 North8000 -- North8000 (talk) 00:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Faraday[edit]

Is there really any confusion?. DuncanHill (talk) 00:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not following your point. Are you disputing my move of the disambiguation page? Or something else? SpinningSpark 00:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I do not understand your move of the disambiguation page. DuncanHill (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
My rationale is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. By far and away the most likely target a user is looking for when typing Faraday is Michael Faraday. Faraday should therefore redirect to the primary topic, which in turn required the dismabiguation page to be moved. SpinningSpark 00:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Planar transmission line[edit]

Please comment on ALT1 proposed hook. 7&6=thirteen () 15:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Spinningspark can we strike the original hook and go with ALT1? 7&6=thirteen () 15:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Transformer article / Don't link to disambiguation pages in articles[edit]

Referring to Transformer article's revision of 22:43, 15 January 2017 made by you, it is one of the Don't's of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Linking_dos_and_don%27ts. to link to disambiguation pages in articles.Cblambert (talk) 17:00, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

This edit you mean? The linked page is not a disambiguation page, and has never been a disambiguation page. SpinningSpark 17:02, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
I guess is was referring to Solid cores- disambiguation, which was pointing to disambiguation in the previous change. In any case, your change getting rid of the disambiguation does indeed appear to have been an improvement. This talk-reference 'Don't link to disambiguation . . .' perhaps applied more to me than to you.Cblambert (talk) 02:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Experiments and Observations on Electricity[edit]

I have improved the article using your suggestions and ready for a re-review. I have all the hard copy books on hand, so if you need further let me know. Professor I.Bernard Cohen of Harvard University seems to be the best references in his books "Benjamin Franklin /scientist and statesman" (100 pages) and "Franklin and Newton" (650 pages). There doesn't seem to be specifically what technical information was added on each new English addition = just that so many of Franklin's letters were added to enlarge the edition. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Planar transmission line[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 9 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Planar transmission line, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that planar transmission lines were developed for the US military, but can be found today in household mass-produced items such as mobile phones and satellite television receivers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Planar transmission line. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Planar transmission 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.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Current full protection status on an article[edit]

In connection with your current decision to invoke full protection status to an article, I would say that any Wikipedia user that has recently admitted in writing on his talk page, "I'd only get banned again if I tried to edit an article on it.", should clearly not get involved in aggressive editing behavior on that article.Cblambert (talk) 03:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can see, you are both just as guilty of trying to force your preferred version rather than trying to resolve the issues through discussion. I really don't want to maintain full protection on the article, but the alternative is to take action against the editors causing the protection, and I don't want to do that either. SpinningSpark 08:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

GAR for Transformer[edit]

Transformer, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Shearonink (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey I need some help with an MFD[edit]

I want to withdraw a MFD I started: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Good article reassessment/Transformer/1. My MFD will just bollix up the issues with its somewhat-malformed GAR - I tried to look up if there was any kind of process for a withdrawal but a process doesn't seem to exist. Can the MFD just be stopped or archived or something? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 20:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I just always want try to do things WP-wise as in-process as possible. Shearonink (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Help needed at Costas loop[edit]

Could you take a look at Costas loop. I'd like to revert this edit, but that will put me in a slow edit war. It's clear the editor is well meaning, but he's invested a lot and I don't think I can get through to him. I'm reluctant to 3RR him for fear of escalation rather than resolution. The phase difference for a Costas loop needs to be near zero. If it isn't, then the eye pattern shuts, the BER goes up, and satellite communications stops working. A phase error of a few degrees will be enough to adjust the VCO to the right frequency (the VCO would have started very close to the baud rate). The editor may be taking the diagrams too literally. Glrx (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mosholu, Bronx, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seneca (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Standing waves[edit]

A previous edit removed k. I don't think it is wise to mix omega and lamda. Talk about wavelength and frequency, or talk about wave number and angular frequency. Do not mix them. Clean math or clean language. Pick one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbf81tb (talkcontribs) 21:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Wise in what way? This discussion probably belongs on the article talk page. SpinningSpark 12:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed XnualaCJOldelpasoBerean HunterJimbo WalesAndrew cKaranacsModemacScott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elastance[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Elastance 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elastance[edit]

The article Elastance you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Elastance 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Dennisgunnarsson[edit]

Hi Spinningspark, I fear that User:Dennisgunnarsson may be about to embark on a promotion of Swedish Microwave AB, a company with which he appears to be associated. This user's contributions so far consist of a couple of external links to this company's website. He has also started an article about the company in his sandbox. Perhaps an adminly intervention is called for here, before he invests too much effort in this? --catslash (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

He's not very active, this is the first edit for a year, so not really a serious problem. I have given him the standard COI and paid editing warnings. He must comply with this, it's in the terms of use of the site. If he ignores that and carries on there would then be a case for blocking him. For future reference, you can issue a warning yourself with {{uw-coi}}. SpinningSpark 09:35, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I saw edits dated March, and April but failed to notice that these were from different years. --catslash (talk) 15:01, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Elastance[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Elastance at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HaEr48 (talk) 06:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Thetupeta[edit]

Can I work on it to provide better sources and improve it?--Vin09(talk) 08:14, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Of course you can work on it. What I don't think we should do is delete large swathes of factual information from a draft that is likely to be true, even if it is not instantly verifiable. However, some of the information is verifiable even from the meagre sources we have to hand. Census of India appears to give a figure for population (although hard to tell from the snippet view); the gmaps link at least verifies existence and location; it also confirms the statement about the distance to the nearest road, and the ariel view confirms the number of buildings. These are all things you removed in your massive deletion. This would not have been justifiable if the page was in article space, let alone a draft article. SpinningSpark 09:17, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Many other facts are verifiable with a quick google search, such as the existence of the school. SpinningSpark 09:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Elastance[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 26 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elastance, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the term elastance, the inverse of capacitance, was coined by Oliver Heaviside to promote an analogy of a capacitor as a spring rather than a container of charge? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elastance. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elastance), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

ANEWSicon.png

Administrator changes

added KaranacsBerean HunterGoldenRingDlohcierekim
removed GdrTyreniusJYolkowskiLonghairMaster Thief GarrettAaron BrennemanLaser brainJzGDragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Revert[edit]

Hello! Just to let you know that while patrolling, I've reverted one of your edits on Ford Cirrus concept car, because you appear to have accidentally added a typo instead of removing one. KarlPoppery (talk) 22:21, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

SETI[edit]

Greetings friend , I hope my humble comments gives you onsite about not the urgency for creating water for planting food when we use desalination for the time that will soon come as water evaporates in our planet, but the necessary healing actitude or so called humanitarian movement to begin working together as one planet that looks up to the sky wondering if there is inteligence up in the sky when we have for so long neglected the light in the wisdom that was giving to Israel for the peoples of all nations in this rock. I believe the kingdom of heaven is to terraform the moon as one small step and mars and so forword claim the heavens, but we need to learn and practice new politics new views of our investment for a long term jointly prosperity. That is the movement that we all should be awaiting and wilfully all have in common. I reserve the anonymous as to the duke of Oxford and his beloved queen for such statements and this novel I yours truly share with you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wethepeople2017 (talkcontribs) 05:16, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Unprotection[edit]

Hi, could you unprotect Transformer for uninvolved editors which has been indef-protected since 7 March? Brandmeistertalk 12:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok, but there has not been the slightest indication that the dispute has been resolved or that the involved editors are going to stop edit warring. SpinningSpark 13:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

could you please explain more fully...[edit]

In your delete opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lorca Cohen you echoed nominator's original claim that Ms Cohen "has done nothing notable".

Excuse me, but don't our deletion policies merely require reputable sources to have written about our topics, in order to be considered notable? Your comment implies you think our policies require individuals to have done something to be considered notable. I think that is a serious mistake.

You described the RS coverage of her to be "either passing mentions or about her association with someone more famous". I don't agree that is a fair summary of the available references. Queen Elizabeth goes to Wimbledon, and press reports state, the Queen was joined, in her booth, by her third cousins, Amelia, Bernadette, and Ernestine. That is a passing mention. It was Lorca who first detected the fraud that bankrupted her father, the fraud that forced him to begin touring again, after decades of retirement. In my opinion, the various coverage of this event is not an example of a "passing mention". I disagree that the coverage of her sharing a child with Wainwright are all passing mentions.

As to whether is is merely "about her association with someone more famous" -- sorry, but this comment suggests a serious misconception, on your part.

We are all associated.

Yes, it was her father's fortune that was stolen. But, in the actual initial detection of the fraud, she was the detective, and it was her father who was the peripheral figure.

There was a wiseguy, a few years ago, who mocked positions like yours, jokingly urging us to merge the article on Tony Blair, into the article on George W. Bush. They argued that no one would ever have heard of Blair if it weren't for his support for Bush's invasion of Iraq. They pointed at various US publications that called Blair "Bush's lapdog", and similar.

Topics intersect. The topic of Tony Blair is linked to a whole bunch of things, including both the Iraq War, and George Bush. Here, on the wikipedia, the way we map these intersections, is by using wikilinks to link articles on those separate topics.

When genuinely notable topics each have their own standalone article, and those articles are properly linked to the articles on the topics they are related to, our readers have more freedom. Readers can traverse our wikipedia more freely, on more different paths, than if we allow the merging of perfectly adequate standalone articles for arbitary reasons like this child is not as famous as their parent, or this parent is not as famous as their child.

Lorca Cohen is closely associated with both her father, and Wainwright, the childhood friend who fathered her first child, in a remarkably unusual child-rearing arrangement. I think she is also closely linked with Kelley Lynch, her father's former financial advisor, who stole his fortune. I looked into starting an article on Lynch. Various factors stopped me, including accusations just so ugly I didn't want to work on them.

By agreeing with nominator that we should prune the wikipedia of the links between Lorca and Wainwright, Lorca and her brother, Lorca and the financial advisor, you are acting to restrict the utility of the wikipedia as a whole.

In your comment you didn't state a merge target, which suggests that you left a drive-by comment, without really giving the topic any meaningful thought.

At first I thought that this was a newbie mistake, and that you were a newbie. But I checked. You are not a newbie. You have been an administrator for eight years.

I have been a contributor here for over twelve years. I have made a huge time commitment. I have expectations. Since administrators are entrusted with considerable authority I feel entitled to expect administrators to set a good example, to measure up to a higher standard. Should newbies really see administrators setting the example of leaving drive-by comments that suggest it is OK to leave drive-by comments on AFD based on a surface snap-impression?

Maybe your comment is not based on a drive-by snap-impression, merely looks like a drive-by snap-impression? If so I still think it falls short of the good example you should be setting. Geo Swan (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It is you that has "a serious misconception". Participants at AFD are entitled to recommend on any basis they wish, whether or not it is a policy based argument (and that does not mean for one minute that I am admitting that my recommendation was not policy based). The closer of the AFD is required to give more weight to policy based arguments, but that priniciple does not extend to the participants. On the other hand, if everyone, or nearly everyone, at an AFD wants to delete for a non-policy reason, then the closer would be obliged to delete. If that happened repeatedly then that reason would sonner or later find its way into policy. Policy on Wikipedia is not like legislation from a higher authority that must be obeyed. Rather, it is meant to be a reflection of the views of the community. If the community is at odds with written policy then the community wins. That's why we have policies like WP:IAR. My status as an administrator is entirely irrelevant in this since I was contributing as a normal user, not closing the debate. In fact, I have now debarred myself from closing because by contributing I can no longer be a neutral closer. SpinningSpark 14:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)