Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Someone is making waves about the term support so you are needed to go and change the wording to delete. Botheration. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your request etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I love the idea that I have such [power... Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I thought you would like to know that Wikipedia:Wikipedia in blogs is separate from Wikipedia:Press coverage. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also this is kind of a side note but did you note that the blog post is riddled with factual errors? Some such as "Two other users who have edited the ASPI page, Festerhauer and Telsho, have also been identified as sockpuppets of the Waskerton account.” are particularly egregious, Telsho is an ineedtostopforgetting sock not a Waskerton sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Horse Eye's Back Hello! It's been a few hours, but there was a crayfish party, alcohol and some sleep that had priority. I know about WP in blogs, but per WP, [1], [2] and [3] it's not blindingly obvious that "blog" is the right classification, in this day and age it can be hard to say.

On riddled with factual errors, no, I've never come across the topic before. But in this context, it doesn't matter. Media mentions are media mentions, even if they are wrong. WP press coverage often has errors, it's a difficult topic for many journalists. For example, on the recent WP-nazi flag thing, some Swedish media reported that the vandal was an admin. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hii@User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång, can you help me in creating an article because i am facing many problems in Draft:Syed Taha Bukhari, like, it has been declined by revievers and i din't fully understood declined reasons, so i request to you please check it. Ttttt321 (talk). 16:15, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ttttt321! It's not a topic I'm very interested in, and I don't promise to do anything at the moment. Here are 2 places you can try to ask for help and advice: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts and Talk:Taekwondo. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See now article talk page... AnonMoos (talk) 07:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re your comment in Special:Diff/1045050264

Yes, I agree he could mean a software he just enjoys to use. But his contributions so far makes me suppose he rather intends to promote himself and his work. --CiaPan (talk) 17:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saw their userpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed the creator of the 2008 map. Doug Weller talk 15:28, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Discussion at Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Maps_without_citations. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:33, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for welcoming me, I appreciate it really, and I hope to do my best for the community, if you want to correct me something, please contact me! It would be very helpful for me!! Thanks, Fewasser ;-)Tell me!! 12:37, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you've placed a {{lead}} on the The London Economic. There has been WP:BATTLEGROUND on the matter previously. I therefore request you elaborate on your reasoning for tagging and what you expect. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK ... so I see you are WP:SEALIONing me into a possible battleground .... hope you are very very happy with that if that happens. Rather than shame tagging go and sort it yourself please. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:42, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So I did what you asked and now I'm WP:SEALIONing. Well, sometimes you can't win. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:48, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, I don't see myself at Wikipedia:Civil_POV_pushing#Behaviors. At all. I made one edit to the article, then, because you asked me, one at the talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You wearn't going to win unless you dug deeper into something weird rather than fly-by shame tagging. Loosely speaking TLE started as a blog: effectively became somoewhat respected for a while. Wikipedia blacklisted it for what I would allege was a kangaroo court with procedural errors and likely inappropriate slagging of a journalist identifying as female. The said I did find an article where said journalist was using an article to promote an organisation without that article being mentioned as an advertisement ... so the blacklist would ultimately have held but not for the reason given. The lack of editorial oversight is an issue, also possibly due to owner bias. Balancing that is tricky - hence the uneasily holding current lead. the {{lead}} is an incitement to BATTLEGROUND. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so to you, my adding the template [4] is an indication that I "hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear." Got it. To me, your comments here indicate that you don't WP:AGF enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I memrely say the say the shame tagging was without sufficent thought. My AGF on the matter went with the evidence accepted at the blacklisting disucssion. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! So since you said I could probably provide pictures since I live there, what pictures do you think would benefit the article? Just curious since I've never actually done this before myself. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at [[5]]. I've done a little on Commons [6], the upload wizard is quite friendly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, you thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt...  YOU'RE WELCOME! It's a pleasure, and I hope you have a lot of fun while you edit this inspiring encyclopedia phenomenon! Vukky talk•edits

13:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Why is the photo of Søren Espersen on this page Danish withdrawal from the European Union? Regards, Wname1 (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because you put it there.[7] Why are you asking me? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove the photo because many do not accept Søren Espersen's text. Au revoir, Wname1 (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it acceptable to present these two themes on Danish withdrawal from the European Union page? https://www.facebook.com/Danexit-vi-vil-ogs%C3%A5-stemme-om-EU-medlemsskabet-1749327048658419 and https://www.facebook.com/groups/709143369557268/ . Wname1 (talk) 05:40, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not with those sources per WP:SELFPUBLISH. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you want to discuss Danish withdrawal from the European Union, do it at Talk:Danish withdrawal from the European Union, that's the place for it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a new article and would love any input on it that you might have - if you have the time and the inclination. [8]. Thanx! Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:47, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I commented. Classic Jenhawk-crocodile! My draft Draft:Shakespeare coat of arms is a little shorter, but each to their own (If this was Upstart Crow, Shakespeare would say ""Each to their own", that's one of mine, isn't it?"). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously Xover, this topic (the coa) is annoyingly complex. The more I read, it's starting to feel like a Shakespearean version of Dynasty. Oh well, I'll get there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:05, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know - and Richard wants me to expand it!!!! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heh heh. Welcome to the Thunderdome! It is devilishly complex to handle in Wikipedia form because there is so much room for interpretation in the evidence, which scholars have engaged in with gusto; some more responsibly than others. It also has relatively recent developments (stemming from research into the Heralds), so we can't just lean on the sober authorities (Schoenaum) and call it a day. No, I think you're going to have both "teach the controversy" (discuss the disagreements and uncertainties) and cover the historiography (how the scholarly views on this have developed over the years). Xover (talk) 13:16, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xover Is this a suggestion for my article or Grabergs? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's for mine, but hey, if you feel it helps ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Xover, would that be Schoenbaum? You mustn't misspell to us ignorant people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, sorry. I should have linked him for clarity. His and EKC's main works are so fundamental that I tend to refer to them by initialisms: SS,CDL (William Shakespeare: A (Compact) Documentary Life), EKC,FP (William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems), and EKC,ES (The Elisabethan Stage). Chambers and Schoenbaum are both extremely thorough and sober scholars, each of their eras, and can be relied upon to not engage in sloppy research or fanciful speculation. While they may both be superseded on certain points (the CoA being one), they are always a good place to start. Xover (talk) 15:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well, they are good suggestions, but confusing for me, because I think that 'teaching the controversy' and 'covering the historiography' is what I have done - in fact, in this controversial field that I write in, I think it's what I pretty much always do. But perhaps my perception is off, so tell me if you think so.Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:53, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, like I said, he wasn't talking about your article. I didn't mean to imply that I found it applicable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:24, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Barack Obama for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]