User talk:The Gnome
Hi there
I think you were one of the editors that deleted my article. If you look at the talk page, I made several suggestions around notability, but I received no response. I also happened to see other entries still on Wikipedia from other bands which don't remotely meet the notability criteria e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Go-Katz
Pink Peg Slax recorded sessions for BBC national radio and appeared on C4's The Tube. Surely this meets notability? I can provide the music press references, but I got no reply. I also tried to contact the other deletion editor, but without success.
Regards
User SelfPityingStan (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Greetings, SelfPityingStan. To be precise, I participated in the AfD discussion that ended up with an admin decision to delete that text. The over-riding guideline is WP:GNG, where we read: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Emphasis added. I checked once again to find the significant number of reliable sources required to support the subject's notability. (Note that, for whatever it's worth, I happen to be a music aficionado, with a large collection of recorded music, and follow almost all kinds of music, with a special fondness for the marginal and the obscure in music.) I found nothing more than what I'd found in the original search in which I engaged in order to form my opinion in the AfD. Therefore, I'm afraid I cannot but repeat what I wrote then:
Wikipedia is explicitly not a directory of music.
When looking for musical acts such as Pink Peg Slax, I'll look elsewhere; not here. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 15:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)- The Nervous Fellas Yet this article has been on Wikipedia since 2012 and is also devoid of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."
- In fact, there are multiple articles on rockabilly bands with even less significant coverage. It's inconsistent to delete Pink Peg Slax and leave these. I wonder why the article on Pink Peg Slax got special treatment. SelfPityingStan (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- You might want to take a look at the policy about similar "bad stuff" in Wikipedia. If there are also other articles about subjects devoid of Wikinotability, i.e. notability as defined by Wikipedia, then the way forward is act up on them too, and certainly not creating more such articles or allowing them to stay up. -The Gnome (talk) 11:35, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
[edit]
|
The Teamwork Barnstar |
| Thank you for your conduct in this discussion. I have always tapped from your knowledge and while I was initially disappointed, I was very happy when I saw your comment. Thank you for always been rational in every discussion. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 17:58, 7 February 2025 (UTC) |
February music
[edit] | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Thank you for your comment for the composer! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Gerda Arendt. Could you please remind me to which article are you referring? I'm under a nephosis of small amnesia.
-The Gnome (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- No, because I have been accused of canvassing for pointing at a discussion. - You kindly supported my view without me asking ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
March music
[edit] | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
On Ravel's birthday, we also think of a conductor and five more composers ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- -The Gnome (talk) 10:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! - Today I could have written five stories off the main page, and chose Sofia Gubaidulina. I find the TFA also interesting, and two DYK, and a birthday OTD. How about you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Today: an opera, 100 years old OTD, on Bach's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- Today, 300 years of Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1! We sang works for (mostly) double choir by Pachelbel, Johann Christoph Bach, Kuhnau/Bach, Gounod and Rheinberger! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- Blessed be the everlasting Night,
- And blessed the endless slumber.
- We are heated by the day too bright,
- And withered up with care.
- We're weary of a life abroad,
- And we now want our Father's home.
- What yet doth hinder our return
- To loved ones long reposed?
- Their grave limits our lives.
- We are all sad and afraid.
- We can search for nothing more —
- The heart is full, the world is void.
I won't be engaging in an edit war with you. I will leave you to do what you want to do. I'm sure you will get reported if you continue doing what you are doing. Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 23:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- This is not about me doing "what I want to do" nor about "edit warring"; it's about about generating good quality articles. Which is why I first posted a message in your talk page. The response you gave there was constructive. I do not know what changed. -The Gnome (talk) 00:00, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- I personally don't have any issue with the edit you made. I posted this message before reading and responding to the message you left on my talk page. I just don't like seeing editors engage in edit warring and personally don't want to engage in one. Prior to reverting your edit, I did not know that you already had a discussion about this particular issue. I will leave you and the editor to resolve this minor issue. Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 00:12, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Versace1608. What you just did is exactly what I'm here for: honest yet constructive collaboration. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 12:27, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- I personally don't have any issue with the edit you made. I posted this message before reading and responding to the message you left on my talk page. I just don't like seeing editors engage in edit warring and personally don't want to engage in one. Prior to reverting your edit, I did not know that you already had a discussion about this particular issue. I will leave you and the editor to resolve this minor issue. Versace1608 Wanna Talk? 00:12, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
DYK for Dying for Sex
[edit]
On 20 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dying for Sex, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the nearly 200 sexual encounters Molly Kochan had while terminally ill formed the basis of the Dying for Sex podcast and subsequent TV series? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dying for Sex. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dying for Sex), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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) 00:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Kevin Sheekey, content changes
[edit]The Gnome, nice to meet you. I noticed your participation in Project Biography and would be grateful for your assistance on Kevin Sheekey's BLP. I opened a new edit request at the request of a different editor, but the content changes remain unimplemented. Would appreciate your collaboration on this. Thank you, DLARoss (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi The Gnome. Thank you for your work on Rape of Queena Vuong. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thank you for taking the time to create the article! Have a blessed day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 07:28, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Anniversary The Gnome 🎉
[edit]Hey @The Gnome. Your wiki edit anniversary was 1 day ago, marking 20 years of dedicated contributions to this Wikimedia project. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. With over 20,549 edits, your dedication is an inspiration to the community. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you all the best for the year ahead :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 13:55, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi The Gnome. Thank you for your work on Nathan Tankus. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thank you for creating the article! Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 12:30, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
Hello The Gnome. Would you mind taking a look at Talk:Bill Ackman#Support of Israel section? I found your name at WP:BIOGRAPHY and was hoping you might be able to review my edit request there, which touches mainly on questions of WP:UNDUE in a BLP. (The discussion there thus far has not related to the substance of the proposal.) Thanks! FMatPSCM (talk) 18:54, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invitation. I responded. -The Gnome (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hi again. Thank you for taking the time to respond at Talk:Bill Ackman; I appreciated your feedback. Another editor chimed in and acknowledged your response as "reasonable enough," so would you mind implementing it?
- I'd just ask that you reconsider what you wrote about the line "called for people who disagree to lose their jobs or be expelled from their schools." The line isn't supported by the sources: Ackman did not call for people who disagree with Israel's actions to lose their jobs or be expelled. Thanks again! FMatPSCM (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
- At this point, I, as a contributor directly involved in the discussion, would prefer to leave any action related to the discussion to a third party, especially since the participation has not been significantly large.
- About the sentence attributed to Ackman, which you're still disputing, I see no reason to change my suggestion since there are, contrary to what your search failed to find, reliable sources supporting the information. Note that the information is presented synoptically in the text, with the main point intact, though laconically stated. Here's, for instance, something from Forbes: [F]ollowing the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman called for the public release of names of Harvard students who signed a letter holding Israel 'entirely responsible' for the violence and argued that he and other business leaders should not 'inadvertently hire' any of the signatories. -The Gnome (talk) 18:19, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
Did you mean to put your comment under the white nationalism as a faction discussion? Based on context I assume your comment was intended for the RfC replies. Thanks! Springee (talk) 14:59, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for the pointer, Springee. I placed my comment right under the paragraph pinging me and other "non-#1/2's", as the RfC initiator & pinger put it. Isn't that correct? -The Gnome (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- That talk page is a serious mess and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the pointer links are messed up. I think this would be the correct location [1]. The extensive and rapidly changing source edit section has messed up the page. Springee (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- I have already !voted in that section. My new submission (a renewal of my !vote, actually) was in response to Jollyrime's post, here, offering a sources' recap and calling us to revisit our position.
- But I fully agree the whole RfC discussion is very messily delineated. This happens often in long discussion because some participants get hot rather fast under the collar and ignore the required format of their submissions. Which is also why I often try to amend and improve the format, and only that. Helps people in their closing work. -The Gnome (talk) 09:42, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
- That talk page is a serious mess and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the pointer links are messed up. I think this would be the correct location [1]. The extensive and rapidly changing source edit section has messed up the page. Springee (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)