Hi. I use infoboxes all the time. I want a quick overview of things and to see when the subject died or what his/her accomplishments were.

I dislike reading Wiki articles. Most are poorly written and inaccurate. A good infobox is just fine.

I see you're trying to add infoboxes. I see too you're having problems with consensus. Maybe I can help. But in all honestly I don't login to this site too much.

If you want to add infoboxes and want consensus, you can let me know. I'm with you all the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueJackfruit (talk • contribs) 03:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate the sentiment. ~ HAL333 03:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the sentiment, you get around 10 opposed each time, so would need to have 50 to make a difference in consensus, and it's not good for relations among editors + a waste of time that could go into article writing, - that's why I stopped arguing. Needless to repeat: some argue as if it was infobox OR lead. I never understood why they can't coexist, and nobody I know suggested to change the "beautifully crafted" leads. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ps: recommended reading today about music, for harmony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that Gerda - it's been a while since I initiated an infobox rfc or discussion. Instead I've been able to pass some featured content. But I think I have to hold the line and participate in discussions, as Leonardo da Vinci said, "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." ~ HAL333 13:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August

Sunflowers in Walsdorf

A first for me today: a featured list (= a featured topic in this case) on the Main page, see Wikipedia:Main Page history/2020 August 21, an initiative by Aza24 in memory of Brian. - I wish he was with us. DYK that Brian came to my talk right before the arbcom sanctions to tell me of an experiment (CM means Claudio Monteverdi, and BB Benjamin Britten), and again? He wrote The Rite of Spring and Percy Grainger, - was always open for compromise and gentle respectful approach. I miss him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! I have yet to have one of mine up there. I wish I could have known Brian - he seemed like a great guy. ~ HAL333 20:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While SchroCat, Tim riley and others knew him in person, I only met him on these pages. He and Tim offered me to participate in the FAC for Messiah, a great honour, - my first. (Next was Kafka, also in collaboration, and with Brian thoroughly reviewing. Only the third was a solo, BWV 172.) His last generosity was offering me his collection of sources for Monteverdi's Vespers. I was naive and just thought he had turned to Antarctic exploration. I guess he knew he would not live to use them. Quite a legacy, - again a great honour. Look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you did a great job getting them up to a featured topic. Are you planning on completing the articles on the Heroic Age of Antarctice Exploration? ~ HAL333 21:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up a tribute I liked. - The Arctic one was brought to FA quality by a collaborative team led by Yomangani. - Wikipedia at its best. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That kind of constructive collaboration is really why I still edit here - it's an awesome community. ~ HAL333 21:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sparing me a ping to the Sinatra discussion. We hope made me smile. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. ~ HAL333 13:06, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Less funny: "a new low", the edit for which I thanked was this. I am happier without that dirt. So, I avoided clicking thank-you to you, for a while at least ;) - Recently, I received thank-you clicks for two infoboxes, Rudolf Hindemith and Symbolon, - much more fun than discussions in the walled garden of a few elite articles (less than 100 I guess) by a few elite editors (less than 20 I guess). We hope for constructive collaboration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're always one of the most thanked editors, right? ~ HAL333 18:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about always, but it's on record that I was No. 3 in receiving the "lazy thanks" 2019, and No. 1 in giving them (see top of my talk, below the New Year's resolutions, one f them being dominating a discussion too much). On a walk, I thought about reverting my last comment (which showed too much for my pride how much that hidden message had bothered me), but now that you commented, it's not fair. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As Walt Whitman said, "If you done it, it ain't bragging." ~ HAL333 21:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"I am large, I contain multitudes." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd" for inspiration. Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whitman was great, one of my favorites. ~ HAL333 23:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(We have to ban authors like who created the lilacs, - really?) - Brighter: Rhythm Is It! - I expanded that stub on my dad's birthday because we saw the film together back then, and were impressed. As a ref said: every educator should see it. Don't miss the trailer, for a starter. - A welcome chance to present yet another article by Brian on the Main page, Le Sacre du printemps (mentioned above, and btw, that ibox discussion has them all in a nutshell, these arguments, but the one supposed to be banned was Andy who refuted them all, - they just counted his edits and found them too many ... - Kafka is always close when infoboxes are discussed.). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's just the same perspectives rehashed again and again... ~ HAL333 14:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Frank Sinatra on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply] A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spencer Kuvin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spencer Kuvin (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick look, and saw many bare urls, and not all facts sources. Could you fix those first, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get at it later today. ~ HAL333 15:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Carrier wave on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw your edit history and SUPPORTED an infobox for Frank Sinatra.

The opposers don't have proper arguments. I think much of it comes down to the difference between amateur and professional writers.

Professionals understand that Nobody Wants To Read Your Shit, whereas the amateurs here on Wiki don't have a clue about what it's like to write for paid contracts.

This is why these amateurs are so possessive about their articles, and why they want to force users to read them (ie, do away with infoboxes).

PS. If you check the sources for articles written by some of these amateurs you'll see they are often very wrong. BlueJackfruit (talk) 09:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I wouldn't call some of those editors amateurs. A lot of them are retired academics or just really bright guys and gals. Some of their works here are well beyond anything on Britannica. I just disagree with them on one or two trivial things, but beyond that I admire and respect them. ~ HAL333 14:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September

WP:AE is the worst Wikipedia has to offer, - I've been there, and try to avoid it like a virus, sorry for no help there. - For a glimpse at the best Wikipedia has to offer, look at collaboration. - I'd change this thread header. One of the bigger misunderstandings that the RfC is about the FS infobox. It is only about collapsing it (a kafkaesque idea to collapse what should be available at a glance) or not. - Best wishes for your GA efforts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again.

See this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro

In the first paragraph [after the intro] the article has this:

Around 1442, the Portuguese first arrived in Southern Africa while trying to find a sea route to India.

This is completely wrong and [obviously] unsupported by the sources. The error, YEAR 1442, seems to have been in place for over a decade.

Will you correct this? BlueJackfruit (talk) 05:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources that support another date? ~ HAL333 14:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Huey Long 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 Indy beetle -- Indy beetle (talk) 06:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You just made my day. ~ HAL333 14:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Death of Jeffrey Epstein 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 Ovinus Real -- Ovinus Real (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two in a day! What are the odds. ~ HAL333 00:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

for daring to nominate such an article! Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 22:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By removing entire sections in one swoop because some of the facts were repeated earlier, you end up removing other, not previously mentioned facts. Please be a bit more careful in preserving relevant content added by others. QRep2020 (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My intention was to remove those facts. They aren't really pertinent to his biography. ~ HAL333 14:06, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion concerning you at arbitration enforcement. While I know that you have participated at the discussion you may wish to revisit it as sanctions have been suggested against you by an uninvolved administrator. Barkeep49 (talk) 14:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you ping me once more, you will be reported for harassment. You've been warned about this before. Stop it. Now. Cassianto^Talk 16:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]