This user's email on Toolbox menu (also icon top right hand side) is activated. /Useful

Archives
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Is/was test[edit]

What do you make of Bulkington with that test? There is Bulkington, Warwickshire, Bulkington, Wiltshire, Bulkington Pass, a character, Moby Dick (1998 miniseries)#Cast and Louis Phillips (author)#Poetry (maybe the same as one of the last 2). Although I'm not convinced its useful for Willingale (since the people referenced there appear to have been refereed to to with their first name at the beginning) it seems in this case that since we have at least 2 uses of "Bulkington" and more without articles and the pass that maybe we should have a DAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

The Moby Dick character "Bulkington is" comes up first and most. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

See Talk:Bulkington#Requested move 23 January 2019. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

RfC discussion on List of 2017 articles that is really about proper use of Wikipedia:Article size. Requesting your time because I think a guideline is being misused[edit]

Please, I need your input. I know I asked earlier and you did not provide feedback, but I am worried about the actions of two editors.

There is a conversation about splitting an article because of its size, but I don’t care which way you would vote on if it should be split or not. My issue is that the other editor and a companion-in-arms are misusing, mistranslating Wikipedia:Article size. These two are reducing the size of the largest articles in Wikipedia, which sounds like a noble goal, but when I asked what limit there should be on an article size, the response was 100 kB characters. The Wiki-guideline does state that readable prose should be less than 100 kB, but readable prose is the article minus citations, lists, tables, footnotes, and images, so I find the interpretation dangerous. The other editor said to get articles down in size, a yearly list could be cut down in half, in quarters, or even monthly. I cannot picture the easy usage of lists that is divided by month for multiple years. The guideline mostly states lists and tables are excluded from the guideline, so my objection to the split is that there is no justification except a misused guideline.

Basically, I think these two editors are going beyond being useful in improving Wikipedia and are moving into damaging Wikipedia, so I would like you to come to Talk:List of 2017 albums#Request for comment, read the discussions in the two section above it, especially Talk:List of 2017 albums#Redux, and provide feedback. I do not care if you say split or oppose, but to me the discussion is not about the split but the misuse of the Article Size guideline, and I want your and others I respect feedback on the conversation and the proper use of the guideline. Mburrell (talk) 02:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Papa, Can You Hear Me Sing.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Papa, Can You Hear Me Sing.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Sound of Silence Tibetan.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Sounds of Silence (documentary).jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Shining Brow (opera)[edit]

On 17 August 2017, you redirected "Shining Brow" to "Shining Brow (opera)". At this date, there is no other article named "Shining Brow" ... perhaps the redirect should be reversed? Scarabocchio (talk) 14:14, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I've popped it back, but really a hatnote to the poet is required. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:26, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Intrigued, I looked up Taliesin, but there's no mention of Shining Brow ... (?) Scarabocchio (talk) 14:39, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Alabama (band) listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alabama (band). Since you had some involvement with the Alabama (band) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

File:Sarah Vaughan (1950 album).jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

File:Everybody Loves Somebody (album).jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7[edit]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

St John Passion (disambiguation) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Georg Gebel

St Mark Passion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kurt Thomas

St Mark Passion (attributed to Keiser) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kai Wessel

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mary lePage[edit]

The article Mary lePage has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article has been around for several years and I still see no notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Postcard Cathy (talk) 01:35, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Is this or this along the lines of what you've been wondering about? If so, it's actually pretty remarkable consistency. Dekimasuよ! 03:38, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Second question, is this the other thing you've been wondering about? I'd think it was unfortunate, but it's what I guessed, and then found that diff. Dekimasuよ! 04:51, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Ugh. Dekimasuよ! 04:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Dekimasu: I hadn't pinned it down with such accuracy, but basically yes, it was clearly someone's sock. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome back. The second one I've taken care of myself now, but the first one was originally caught by you a few years ago, so I thought you might have noticed the similarity and would be better at filing the SPI. Dekimasuよ! 18:26, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

A bit fatigued for filing a full SPI - here's another obvious one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Lovesaver but again not sure which of the usual suspects returning In ictu oculi (talk) 08:29, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Right, actually that's who I was referencing with the links in the first post of this section. But if you're not sure, then I can leave it be for now. Dekimasuよ! 00:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

The Orderly (1913 film)[edit]

Can you check this one please? I think you may have meant The Orderly (1918 film). Regards. PC78 (talk) 10:06, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

List of operas performed at the Wexford Festival (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dinner at Eight

Richard Genée (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Nanon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Greatest Generation which affects an article which you have previously participated in a discussion about. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you! Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:08, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17[edit]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Andrew Synnott[edit]

The article Andrew Synnott has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability not shown - one news source, not about him per se and the other is slight bio in the program of the opera mentioned in the news item. Fails WP:COMPOSER

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ww2censor (talk) 11:29, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Osmodrama[edit]

Thank you for calling my attention to the AFD. It looks not so much like original research as a probable conflict of interest in promoting the technology. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Neither the genre nor the technology behind it seems like it is likely to have much popularity, for various reasons including that primates have a relatively poor sense of smell compared to other mammals. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:21, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Diacritics for airports in Vietnam?[edit]

Do you have an opinion on diacritics for airports in Vietnam? Some titles have them but most don't. —  AjaxSmack  21:20, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

I'd have thought where there's no "International" Đông Tác is better than Dong Tac - which isn't helpful for anyone wanting to know whether to read Đ or Yong Tac. But It might be better to avoid stirring up a new anti-diacritic lobby. As Talk:Sobibór_extermination_camp#Requested_move_14_March_2019, Talk:Raul_Julia#Requested_move_8_December_2018 show, collective memory of consensus 7 years ago has dimmed and the attraction of tabloid font sets remains powerful. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)