User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2014

Happy New Year

	Happy New Year
	Wish you a happy new year 2014! Hope the year goes bright for us all. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 03:33, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Baffle gab1978!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Baffle gab1978: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 11:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

GOCE 2013 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2013 Annual Report The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2013 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Pakrac clash copyedit

Hi! Thank you very much for copyediting the Pakrac clash article. Your copyedits really improved quality of article prose and made it a read much better. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Need Citation heading for Wojciech Bogusławski

Just copy edited this and lost the template for more citations. Would you point me in the right direction? Cheers! Shir-El too 17:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

PS is there a SHORT page of editing templates somehwere? Thanks!

Hi Shir-El, for in-text "citation needed" notices, just put {{citation needed|date=January 2014}} where the citation should be. If there are no references in the article, you can use {{unreferenced|date=January 2014}} or {{unreferencedsection|date=January 2014}}. If there are unreferenced sections, use {{refimprovesection|date=January 2014}} at the top of each section that needs it.

I think the page you're looking for is Template messages, where you should find what you need. I don't think there is a short page of these templates! If you're looking for templates to add citations, you should find what you need at Wikipedia:Citation templates. I hope that's useful to you; if not, just let me know and I'll try and help you find what you need. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks! Will copy your links to my talk page for future reference (I'm no good at waiding through "administrivia", just implementing what I do learn :). Again, thank you. Shir-El too 13:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC) (Will not bother you again unless I'm really stuck!)

Mladen Stojanović

I am really glad that you copy-edited the article. Thank you very much for the excellent work. Vladimir (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Gustavo Borges

Thanks a lot! Your copy-edit is wonderful. Janperson (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

About Fernando Scherer, he ALMOST beat the world record by 0,13 seconds, this phrase "In the 50-meter freestyle, Scherer beat the world record of Mark Foster of 21.31 seconds, obtained on December 13, by 0.13 seconds" isn't wrong? Janperson (talk) 15:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah sorry about that; the existing text was poorly written and I interpreted that sentence incorrectly. I'll correct it tonight when i continue the c/e. Thank you for pointing that out to me. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for another excellent copy-edit. About this edition: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fernando_Scherer&diff=591477771&oldid=591476300, I really would like to maintain the part that says Scherer barely hit leg during the race. It was a notorious fact in Brazil, he basically used the force of arms and still won medal. At that time, was a great achievement. Janperson (talk) 01:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank ;-) I removed "barely hit leg" because it doesn't make sense. Does it mean "he hardly used his leg(s)"? I've no objection to you replacing that fact, but it would be best to replace it with something like, "he swam mostly using his arms" or "he hardly used his legs", or similar. Anyway I'll leave it with you. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

OK! Janperson (talk) 12:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to step on your CE but

I'm sorry to have stepped all over your copy edit, but this guy has been a huge problem in this sort of article. Take a look at this AN/I thread if you really want to know more. Mangoe (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Mangoe; I've no problem with the article move, . I've no idea what Bladesmulti's agenda might be and I don't get involved with wiki-politics, but I accepted his copy-edit request herein good faith. However I did c/e most of the 'India' section; you might like to review the copy-edited text from my last revision and replace the existing text if you think there's an improvement. Anyway I won't be revisiting the article unless it's stable and the c/e is wanted. I'm prepared to wait a few days until Bladesmulti's block expires and see what sort of response we get. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Fuck peer review, again

1. Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties
2. Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1

I've listed the article Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for peer review.

Help with furthering along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

CE Legal education in Alaska

Thanks for the update on my talk page and keeping an eye on the copy edit progress of the article.-- Jreferee (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Baffle gab1978. You have new messages at Talk:SpaceX reusable launch system development program.
Message added 04:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Baffle gab. Thanks so much for the super copyedit.

I wonder if you happened to see that I added a few notes on the Talk page yesterday? And after I finish reviewing your changes, I might add a few more, if you wouldn't mind Watchlisting that page for e a few days. Hope this is helpful. N2e (talk) 04:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC) N2e (talk) 04:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi N2e; no worries :-) Yes I've seen your comments on the talk page and I didn't realise they were addressing me directly. I'm sure I looked over the 'Technologies' section, but probably didn't see any reasons to make any changes. I'll have another look at it now, but I'll be going offline soon.

The other issues, like the possible Grasshopper version conflation, are essentially content issues. I didn't see any confusion between the versions in the text; the passages, "A reusable first stage is now being flight tested by SpaceX with the suborbital Grasshopper rocket.[7]" (first para) and "In early March 2013, SpaceX successfully tested Grasshopper for a fourth time with a 24-story hop" seem to be talking about the Grasshopper rockets generically rather than specifically.

Whilst I do sometimes check online sources to confirm sketchy or confusing prose, copyeditors aren't usually content builders in the same ways as the main article editors (i.e yourself). We work to improve the standard of the prose and to make it clearer to the ordinary, non-expert reader (i.e. me). Therefore if someone writes "the dog was black and ran across the town, barking as it went", I won't check the source to see whether the dog was really white, or to check its name. But if someone writes, "black was the dog that ran across the town barking", I might want to check the source because Black might conceivably be the dog's name, and it might have run across the town of Barking.

That said, if I have misinterpreted something incorrectly (I did remove some long-winded, repetitive prose and quotations), or have made any other blindingly obvious errors, please let me know and I'll try and fix them. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited House of Lancaster, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard, Duke of York (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) 08:57, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I popped past to thank you for the excellent ce on the House of Lancaster so I've fixed this one. It reads fantastically now (I am most envious) just a couple of fixes required where the meaning has changed. Thanks again Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Kalidas edit

I had earlier decided that the article be best for copy-editing once there were at least 20 sources in it. Now that there are 25, I decided the time is fine. But if my activities seemed wrong, then it may be removed from the GOCE request list. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll do the c/e. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you so much for doing the copy-edit for Trouble, though, do you think it is almost ready for an FA promotion? Your opinion would really be important to me. Thank you! prism △ 17:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Prism; to be honest I'm not familiar enough with the FA criteria to answer you properly. I think that listing it for a peer review would be a good idea; the reviewers there will be more knowledgeable than me. Good luck with the article; I hope it does get promoted to FA status. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Copyedit of the Siege of Dubrovnik article

Thank you very much for your throrough copyedit of the Siege of Dubrovnik article. I believe your contribution has greatly helped readability of the article and I appreciate your time and effort. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

No worries; good luck with the A-Class nomination. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for working on the Chennai Express EthicallyYours! 15:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

SpaceX reusable launch system development program

Hi there, Baffle gab. On the SpaceX reusable launch system development program article that you recently completed a copyedit of, media have reported a slight change in the test plan for the March 2014 controlled descent flight test from high-velocity/high-altitude conditions. As a result, I made about five edits to the article in the past couple of days.

Now, just today, I was notified that the WP:GAR would start in the next few days, here.

If you might be so kind as to just review my recent changes since your last edit, I would appreciate it greatly. Don't want any poor prose left in because it was written by an engineer.  ;) Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

OK I'll have a quick squiz. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I had a quick squiz and made a minor tweak; hope that's okay. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

That's great. You rock! I am really happy to have you as a qualified copyeditor go over those edits as the GA review gets started. I needed to make the edits after news sources have indicated that the next test flight will only do a simulated landing over the ocean, not the first-ever land landing they had previously said they hoped to do. But now the article is both accurate, /and/ copy edited. Thanks very much! N2e (talk) 05:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Sarat Ubaida Governorate

Many thanks for your recent copy edit of Sarat Ubaida Governorate. It's much improved. -Arb. (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

No worries; I wasn't quite sure what to keep, but nothing is really lost on WP. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:01, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article

Notifying you, as you provided a copy-edit for the article:

I've nominated Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties for Featured Article candidacy.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 05:34, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for your serious and thoughtful copyedit of SpaceX reusable launch system development program. That article achieved Good Article status yesterday, and your contribution is very much appreciated. N2e (talk) 10:24, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad to read that, thanks for informing me. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

I highly appreciate your hard work on Géza, Grand Prince of the Hungarians, Géza I of Hungary, and Coloman, King of Hungary. Now I can nominate them to GA. Have a nice day! Borsoka (talk) 04:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

No worries; I haven't finished the current c/e yet; it might take two-to-three days for me to finish it. Good luck with your noms. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you again. As I promised, I nominated them one by one. :) Borsoka (talk) 05:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Borsoka; I hope the articles pass GA. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Baffle. I strongly suspect you knew it already and that you were helping with another situation :) Thanks for doing that. Cheers, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 11:42, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Actually I found exactly the same question answered in the Drives FAQ; it's a pity I didn't think to read that until after I'd asked on yout talk page... :-D Thanks for helping me, I appreciate it. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, perhaps unwittingly, but you helped me with a situation I was wondering how to resolve. Will clarify in a while. Cheers, S. --Stfg (talk) 22:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

The banner at the top of your talk page

Are you aware that per WP:SMI, you really shouldn't have the "you have new messages" banner at the top of your talk page? --Jakob (talk) 00:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; I'm aware of that guideline. But the banner doesn't say "you have new messages" (it says massages); and the new system has made the orange bar redundant. Nobody else has complained about it. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

My apologies. I didn't notice that. --Jakob (talk) 11:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

No wuckers; I suppose I should change it, my layout is getting stale. Hope the c/e is OK. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	For copyediting Fishing Creek (North Branch Susquehanna River). --Jakob (talk) 14:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Jakob, good luck with your FA nomination. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:22, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Thank you for judging the GOCE March 2014 copy edit drive! :) Newyorkadam (talk) 19:36, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

No worries Adam; thanks for taking part.:-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Baffle gab1978. You have new messages at StudiesWorld's talk page.
Message added 10:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

StudiesWorld (talk) 10:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: Battle of Borovo Selo

Hi! Thanks for copyediting the Battle of Borovo Selo article. I really appreciate your time and effort. The article has definitiely improved in terms of readability. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 08:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

No worries Tomobe03, I find that articles you've worked extensively on are always well-written and therefore easy to copy-edit. I wish more articles were like those! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Request Page

Hi Baffle gab1978... Want to make sure I did something correctly. I had to unaccept a request for copy edit. In my opinion, there were some major issues which had to be resolved (NPOV, Citations), before any c/e work should be done. I just wanted someone with more experience to look at my "un"-acceptance, and make sure it's okay, if you have the time. Thanks.Onel5969 (talk) 00:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi One15969, thanks for bringing this to my attention. Your unacceptance was perfectly fine. I've just looked briefly at tyhe article and there does seem to be lots of POV texrt in there, and I did see some uncited text which should be cited. I agree that there needs to be more clean-up than we should be asking you to do. I'm going to suggest declining the request on the talk page. GOCE isn't Cleanup. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thank you so much for the great copy-edit work on Ancient Macedonians! Codrin.B (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi again. Sorry to bug you, but it's the price you pay when you're so helpful. I did a copy edit on Free Expression Policy Project, and like a good little goce editor, added the goce tag to the talk page. The main editor on the article, moved the tag into one of those boxes that collapse (don't know the technical name). Doesn't bug me, but when you look at the page, you have to open the box to see it's been worked on by a goce editor. You might want to take a look, and if it doesn't bug the folks at goce, it certainly won't bug me. Onel5969 (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I've moved it out of the collapsible box again. I don't think it belongs there as it has a different role to those other templates. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, me too. But being new to this, I was unsure. Thanks. Onel5969 (talk) 03:58, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Not in Front of the Children

Someone accepted this request on April 11, but has not worked on it since April 12. I notice the two immediately above it have notices from you that the pages have not been edited since a certain date as of your timestamp, and since you're a coordinator (and I'm not) I just thought I would bring this to your attention in case you wanted to note this request was accepted and then apparently abandoned as well. Sorry if this is inappropriate in any way. Cheerio. LazyBastardGuy 21:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi LBG, thanks for brinign this one to my attention. I'll look into it. Sorry for the late reply; I'v been doing mostly offline stuff today. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:16, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Dude, my definition of a "late reply" is days after the fact. Trust me, you weren't late. ;) LazyBastardGuy 00:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Copy-editing at Chatichai Choonhavan

Hello Baffle gab1978,

thanks a lot for your help!

Kind regards, --RJFF (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

CE Jack Parsons

Hi

Sorry about the intermission, I had a massive abscess come up on my neck causing me to take some days off, then it flared back up - hoping to get back on it tomorrow now the weekend is here.

The article was up for FA, but I started the ce a while after it had been turned down. I did not my absence on the article talk page, and have been reassured that it is not an urgent ce.

I realise it is taking some time, so if something goes wrong I will let you know. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:12, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear, I'm sorry to hear that you've been ill Chaosdruid, that sounds very unpleasant and I fully understand that WP will take a back seat. Thank you for updating me about the request; I'll amend my note on the Requests page and you might like to renew your timestamp there. Feel free to remove the template from your talk page if you wish. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

No probs, I should have left a note really - those opiates are crazy, felt like a couple of days, but turned out I had been off for almost ten days. Ah well, drama over, life goes back to normal - hopefully!

I have finished the first run on Jack Parsons, as noted here, and marked it as done on the req page. Also asked for a coordinator to look it over as I have been away for so long I may have missed things.

Thx for the best wishes. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No worries; I'll archive the request and will look over the article tomorrow evening (UK time); I'm a little tired right now. Thanks again for updating us; we do appreciate all you do for WP and the GOCE. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Cheers for that. If you spot any mistakes, even tiny ones, please let me know so I can tighten up any slack areas after my hiatus. I also appreciate there is a drive on and you will be very busy.

I have been trying to get a feel for how MoS has changed over the last six months, it seems quite different in some areas.

I'm going to miss this drive and do a cpl requests a week to start winding up to full speed - hopefully I will be raring to go by the July Drive :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 22:02, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, I've just started going through the article; I've made a few changes so far but it looks good. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Just one point, we did discuss "the Group" v. "The Group" v. "the group" on the article talk page, I was in a quandary over that one for a couple of days ... the name is derived from the University's own title for them. Chaosdruid (talk) 01:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

OK I'll have a look and correct it in a while; thanks for the pointer.  Done Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Changes I've made

Chaosdruid, you asked for a few pointers to slack areas of your copy-editing. I've noticed that the article uses "with" + a present-tense verb as a conjunction; for example:

Science fiction writer and former United States Navy officer L. Ron Hubbard soon moved in to 1003; he and Parsons became close friends, with Parsons informing Crowley that Hubbard was "the most Thelemic person I have ever met".

This use can be rather awkward and is best avoided—the solution is to break up the sentence or use a more usual conjunction, and to change the verb following "with" to a past-tense form. So this becomes:

Science fiction writer and former United States Navy officer L. Ron Hubbard soon moved in to 1003; he and Parsons became close friends. Parsons informed Crowley that Hubbard was "the most Thelemic person I have ever met".

Have a look at Tony 1's tutorial to see what I mean. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for spending the time to go through it. I understand about the present-tense, but was trying to preserve the writers' styles and to make the article more uniform, i.e. make the sections read as if they were written in the same style/using the same wording where possible. In those circumstances I try to change as little as possible, as well as not knowing all the US terms and how they are used/ignored formally - for example (and a really bad one as I didn't see anything like "gotten" or "off of" or "bring & take") here it seemed as if the writer was trying to keep the "informing" in the present tense (though of course MoS BIO says past for deceased), and as I do not know all the US writing styles and which to change or not, I guessed this was one of those quirks - where the first sentence part is "moving" (present/future) and the last part is also present tense (with the middle past tense) - thought it was more a style than prose issue and so left it. It is especially difficult with GA and FA, as they are almost always fairly well written and in styles that are often (quite literally) foreign to me. If that is not a US quirk, then I will bear that in mind in future :¬)

I also found it odd that "The Parsonage" ended up being referred to as "1003" halfway through (though the terms were used 50/50ish throughout, so I will just leave a note on the talk page about that one.

Thanks once again, it is a big article and full of detail - it must have taken you some time to do that for me. I'll take a look at your changes tomorrow to compare notes - on a lighter note, I think I realise where I first came across your name - I am currently re-watching the series again after only seeing a couple of episodes and clips over the last few years - it might have been thirty years ago, but it is still a great but silly programme. Good old British tele - crap effects, superbly sarcastic scripts, and some of the best acting in the world lol Chaosdruid (talk) 21:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

No worries, Chaosdruid, and thanks again for your comprehensive reply. I'm still going through the article and I'll probably finish it tomorrow—I've made other changes, mostly to grammar and punctuation, etc. It's an interesting article and I think it should reach FA standard without too much more work. I hadn't considered that the 'with + ...ing' formation might be an Americanism; I just consider it to be an awkward way of joining two coordinate clauses, most of which are better split into two sentences or joined with a semicolon. It also obfuscates meaning and implies a connection between the clauses, which may (or may not) be the case. In general, I think your approach of leaving the styles intact is a good approach to copy-editing; sometimes though, changes are needed to clarify meaning. Be bold! :-D

Wow I have been lazy—it's a long time since I put any effort into those Blake's 7 articles. I was a big fan of it for a while and I should make an effort to get the main article to GA status. The effects were sometimes crap but that was before the home video market and it was supposed to be forgotten after three broadcasts. At least the BBC didn't wipe the tapes, unlike other series (and Avon's brain in "Ultraworld"!). I'm glad that you're enjoying re-watching the series; I hope it brings back some good memories for you. Teleport now—dat-dada-dat--dah! :-D Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

GOCE election

Hi. I just saw what you said about standing for re-election. I hope you will. You've been doing a very fine job, especially of watching over the requests page and spotting issues like stale working tags. You'd certainly get my vote, even if it were a contested election (which I doubt it will be). Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 13:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Simon, it's good of you to say so. I feel I've rather let the side down because I don't assist with the drives and blitzes, and because I'm not quite so active because of RL activities. I'll think about it over the next fortnight, though I'll probably stay on. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Great, and I must say you haven't let the side down at all. You've done what you specialise in, and done it very well. --Stfg (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Agree with Simon. In fact, it was your great attention to the requests page that got us interested in drafting you as an official coordinator in the first place. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 04:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	awarded for the excellent copy-editing on steam (software). -- Aunva6talk - contribs 05:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Aunva6, good luck with your proposed FA nomination. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Hey Baffle gab1978! Thank you very much for copyediting the Squidward Tentacles article. It's so much appreciated. Cheers! — Mediran [talk] 02:20, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

No worries Mediran, good luck with your planned nomination for GA.:-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for the excellent copy-edit on Development of Grand Theft Auto V! CR4ZE (t • c) 12:00, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

No worries Cr4ze; good luck with your FA nom. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:47, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

World War I reparations

Thanks for taking up the task of fixing up my grammar! If you have any questions, please let me know and I will try and work with you as much as possible in getting this article into shape. Although I should note that I have just started a new job and that coupled with a odd work schedule, is leaving me with little time at the moment as I get use to it. Long story short: I may not be around much or able to speedily respond, but I will try my best.

Look forward to working with you. EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:02, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Enigma, thanks for your message, I appreciate it. There's one thing I'm not sure of. Is the article in American, British or British Oxford? I found 'organized' (universal), 'totaled' (AMEng) but 'cancelled' (BREng), and it also uses the Oxford comma. It's no big problem to change them over or back (I've assumed BREng Oxford for now), but probably best to leave it or correct it as I go. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:55, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

My bad about the blurring of the two styles, it is something I have attempted to avoid. The explanation is simple: I am British, but I live in America and my word processor is set for American English. I am slowly transitioning from one to the other.

As for the article, British English will do fine. I also agree that the Oxford comma should be retained.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 09:05, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, Enigma; I'm British too, so using BrEng Ox makes the c/e a little easier for me (though I must remember to retain those "extra" commas). ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the copyedit. I will review your notes and comments asap.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Enigma, though I only removed a short section of seemingly-irrelevant text to the article's talk page. I hope my changes are useful; good luck with your planned GA nom. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks a lot for the copyediting you have provided, not only on articles I've worked on, but the relentless effort you put in to making Wikipedia a better place for everybody. You are a great example to others. Keep it up! C679 10:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Cloudz, that's very nice of you. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Another MOS question

Firstly, thank you for your response to my question on Jonesy95's talk page. Secondly, I have finished copy editing Ararat Center for Strategic Research and I need a second opinion on the article title and whether or not it should follow sentence structure or if it should remain as it is. I have had a look at the MOS and I am still unsure. Many thanks in advance. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Hiya Skamecrazy123, the article's title and first sentence are in accordance with the MOS and are fine. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you again for having a look at that. Much appreciated. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK

Hi, congratulations on the recent GA Béla II of Hungary. I have nominated it for DYK here. Thanks, Matty.007 17:22, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Matty; I'm glad it passed the GA nomination. Good luck with the DYK. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For your excellent copy-editing of The FP. You really helped that article come together to what I could only try to do. Thank you so much! Corvoe (speak to me) 04:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Corvoe; I hope the FA review goes well and I'm glad the GA confusion was cleared up. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 17:46, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. Thank you so much for your copy-edit, you made the article read infinitely better than I could have. I said that in the barnstar, but I feel like repetition is emphasis, and I need to emphasize how much you helped. If you accepted direct requests, I would definitely refer people to you :P Corvoe (speak to me) 13:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Arena Corinthians

Thanks for accepting the job. I will be on hand for any questions you have.Legionarius (talk) 11:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

No worries; thanks for the offer of help. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, @Legionarius:, if you have the time and the inclination, you can help speed the c/e by removing some of the unnecessary whitespace in the references. I've completed the task to "Names" but it's taking me far longer to remove these pointless gaps than it is to c/e the text! That would be much appreciated; thanks. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Baffle; I am in a bit of a tangle this week, but will be glad to fix all of them. Can you fix the other parts and then I come back in the end and fix them?Legionarius (talk) 16:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Legionarius, that will be great. I'll try to c/e as normal; large spaces interfere somewhat with the c/e because they make it difficult to see where the paragraphs are. I hope you get your tangle sorted out. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:32, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@Legionarius:, thank you for removing some of the whitespace; it's appreciated. I've found an easier way to accomplish the task in MS Word: paste in the article code, use 'find and replace', push the space bar twice and hit 'Replace all'. The program will then remove almost all of the whitespaces. Unfortunately it doesn't remove the line breaks but it's still a great help. Anyway i'm signing off for now, Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank for your wonderful work! Really appreciated.Legionarius (talk) 11:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Friday the 13th

Thanks for doing a great job copy editing the article. It is much appreciated. :)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries; good luck with your planned FA nomination. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The Rules of the Game

Hi, two small comments regarding the edits you've made so far:

• "Outbreak" is not a good word to use in regard to World War I, since everyone could see it coming well in advance of the start of declarations of war or hostilities. "Outbreak" implies an rather instantaneous occurrence, whereas WWI was more like a film of a disaster run in slow-motion. Could you please find another word to use there?

• In general, I don't believe that mdashes have much use in online text. In printed text, they are useful, but online they make the text look busy, and make it more difficult to read. This is why I prefer to use a spaced ndash - that is, an ndash with spaces before and after.

Otherwise I have no objections or comments on anything you've done, it all seems fine, and an improvement.

In general, would you prefer me to comment here on your talk page, or on the article's talk page? I'll be glad to transfer these comments there if the latter is your preference. BMK (talk) 01:12, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi BMK: thanks for your comments; I'm happy to amend the text as you suggest above. Re: dashes; I tend to use {{mdash}} because I'm lazy and it's easier to type than {{spaced ndash}}, but I'll amend and use the latter in this case.

I'm happy for you to use this page to discuss my edits, though I think it's best for major content and/or style discussions to occur at the article's page, especially if they might be contentious. If the conversation veers in that direction, feel free to comment there.

Thanks again; I'm glad contentious activity around the article has calmed down now. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:54, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

OK, will do. Let's have fun with this -- too much stuff around WP is so fraught! Best, BMK (talk) 02:20,

15 July 2014 (UTC)

Things continue to look very good to me. A couple of minor notes:

• Filming, 4th para: "Over-running production" is not a particularly felicitous phrase, and it's also one I've never heard before. Any chance you can rephrase it?
• Same para: It should be made clearer that Renoir encouraged the actors to improvise.
• 5th para: "Moot" is a rather obscure word to use in this context, and I believe its connotations are a bit different in American and Broitish English. I would suggest that another word replace it.

That's it - thanks so much for undertaking this. BMK (talk) 02:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi again; thanks for your suggestions. I couldn't think of a better term to replace "over-scheduled", which I thought rather awkward; Irealise its replacement is too. How about "was running over schedule" or "was taking longer than planned"?

"Moot" doesn't seem obscure to me, though rather formal i suppose. I'll change it to "suggest". I know there are several meanings of moot; moot point, an old word meaning a meeting or gathering, etc.

By the way, what variant of English is used here; I've seen "modeled", "theater", and "improvisation". I'm guessing it's American English, in which "theater" and "theatre" are accepted but only "modeled" not "modelled", and "...ize" not "...ise". I'll add the correct maintenance categories when I know, and make the spellings consistent.

Thanks again for the suggestions. I think (thus far anyway!) the text is at least up to GA standard and the article could easily attain that merit if nominated. I've seen supposed FAs in a worse state than this one. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Further to the above, I need a clarification if that's possible. In the second para of "Release and reception" I find: "It was later shown at the Aubert-Palace in Paris and at the Obert Palace".

Do you think these are alternative spellings of the same venue name? The first is from a book source, the second from a DVD. I have access to neither source. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:04, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Googling, I find that the Aubert-Palace still exists, but I get no hits at all for "Obert Palace", except for its use in this article. I would eliminate the latter entirely.

As for the version of English used, I'm not sure there was ever a choice made. Have you noticed one version predominating over another? BMK (talk) 00:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that; I hadn't thought of Googling it! :-D I haven't found a dominant variety of English, but as I progress I'm finding more US-style spellings (favorable, recognized) but also "amongst", which I changed to "among". Actually, "...ize" and "...ise" are acceptable in BrEng, but only "...ize" is acceptable in AmEng (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling). i think i'll have to dig into the article's history... Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, given the subject matter, a French film, neither British nor American English would sing out to be the preferred variant. I don't particularly care: although I myself write in American English, I can live with either. In reality, I don't really object to a mix variants in this kind of article, but I know that others do -- if you don't find strong evidence in the article's history, maybe it should be brought up on the talk page? BMK (talk) 00:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

That's a good idea; I'll have a look in an hour or so, when I've broken off editing. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, I had no notes about today's edits - it all seems good to me. I do hope that other contributors will make any comments they have known to you. BMK (talk) 03:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

"The Rules of the Game" Arbitrary break

• Thanks for your comments on the talk page today. A couple of quick notes:
  • If we're using American English, shouldn't Themes para 2 have "candor" instead of "candour"?
  • In the final para of Themes, are you sure that the quote "Everyone has his reasons" should start with a small "e"? My practice has been that if the sentence preceding the quote is providing the necessary context for understanding the quote, then using a small letter to start the quote makes sense, since we're essentially seguing directly from one into the other. An example would be "Philip, speaking of Margaret, said that she was "not a very nice person". However, if the quote is essentially a "meta-quote", then it should stand alone and start with a capital letter, as in "As Shakespeare famously wrote: "To be or not to be, that is the question." It seems to me that the sentence in the article is of the second type, and that the quote "Everyone has their reasons." should begin with a cap.
• Best, BMK (talk) 06:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I believe "candour" (I changed this from "chandour", which seemed to be a typo) is part of a quotation, and therefore should be spelt as it is in the source, per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. I'll check this later and correct if necessary.  Done It is indeed part of a direct quotation.

You're probably correct about "Everyone has their reasons"; I'll be happy to change it back in my next edit session later. Done Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I have no notes whatsoever on today's edits, it all seems good to me. Thank you so much for your work on the article, but, even more than that, thank you for your easy and calm demeanor during the process. Both are much appreciated, and I would be happy to see you as a copy editor for any other articles that I am a major contributor on. Best, BMK (talk) 06:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries; it's an interesting and well-researched article, and I've enjoyed working on it. Some articles can be a slog to c/e, but this was straightforward. I think it at least deserves Good Article status. Thanks for your comments and help along the way; it's been good working with you. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:03, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I second the idea that this article should be put up for a Good Article Nomination. Please ping me if you do so, and I'll come over to the review page to support the GAN and help with any recommended improvements. Nice work, everyone. Thanks for being patient with the process. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Black and white etc

Saying "it is considered by some" are not weasel words. I put this in because a statement like "Black and white is more subtle" is purely a personal opinion, and this is an encyclopedia, so personal opinions have no place in it. If there is a view in some quarters that B&W is more subtle (and I happen to agree with it), the statement needs to be backed up by a reference to show that this view indeed exists (as it does). I will revert the edit. If you have a reason to object, I suggest you take it up with Higher Authority (eg the help desk), who can confirm that what I am saying is right.

Sardaka (talk) 08:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Sadly, I no longer own my old copy of Langford's Basic, so I can't check it and I've no intention of re-reverting your edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I might add that the ref tag at the top of the article indicates that I'm not the only one who can see the problem. Sardaka (talk) 08:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for your understanding and help! I appreciate it a lot! :) 001Jrm (talk) 05:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

GOCE July Drive

Hi there. I just looked at a few random articles "copyedited" as part of this drive and I have some serious concerns about the resultant quality. Obviously not every single submission can be checked/redone but to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia I think that it's important to have some sort of quality control process in the loop. Thoughts? Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 07:09, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Phil; I think it would be a good idea to have some QC in place. We do encourage editors to volunteer as reviewers, but the general short-handedness of experienced editors means there's often a lack of QC. Tagged articles should receive a general improvement where possible, but those on the Requests list are often the result of editors seeking nomination for GA, FA and A-class status, so we need to be more particular with those. Another thing; different editors have differing standards and won't necessarily have the same skills with English grammar, punctuation, spelling etc. I wouldn't want to discourage users from taking part though; saying "your edits are rubbish" might just have the opposite effect! So yes, I'd like to see the reviewers check more articles and I wonder whether we can build something around the existing structure, but finding and retaining good reviewers might be problematic. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response. Glad you agree that we need to do something and that it's important not to drive editors away by criticising their work (which is why I didn't mention any names in my comment above).

As a start, how about adding a "Drive article quality" section to the project page? These are my initial ramblings:

"It is important for the continuing quality of Wikipedia that when complete, all copyedited articles (whether done as part of a drive or otherwise) follow the Manual of Style and use clear and concise English with no spelling or grammar errors. The appropriate tags for identified problems that do not fall within the remit of a copyedit—including {{clarify}}, {{Expert-subject}}, {{POV}}, please see WP:TC for a full list— should also be added to artcles where appropriate."

With regard to reviews as part of the drive, I think that we should have a sliding scale of "auditing". If drive participants haven't taken part before then (sigh) every one of their submissions should be checked. Therafter, we have a sliding scale of 50% for at least one drive, 25% for two and 10% for three or more. I reckon a total of three editors should be able to handle the task and I'm willing to volunteer myself as one for the next drive. Then we come to the thorny issue of what to do if the copyedit is substandard. Would adjusting the word count and adding a simple template that says something like "This article has been reviewed and retagged for copyedit as a result of unresolved issues" placed next to the editor's entry in their article list do it?

Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 07:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, Phil; I'm going to centralise this discussion. I think it should occur at an appropriate Guild talk page rather than on my talk page. I've thus copied it to the Drives main page. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 10:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

No problem, a sensible move as I'm sure others will want to comment.  Philg88 ^♦talk 10:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Vanajan Autotehdas

Hi Baffle gab1978. Regarding your recent edits in article Vanajan Autotehdas, please see my reply on my talk page. Cheers, Gwafton (talk) 18:17, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I've replied there. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Greetings Baffle gab1978! Thanks for copy editing December 2013 North American ice storm. Best, ///EuroCarGT 04:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

No worries; good luck with your planned GA nom. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Targeted/targeting

This is not a Br vs Am Eng issue. There is no variant of English in which "targetted/targetting" is an accepted spelling (this is a fairly good guide to when to double letters in British English participles). "Targetted" (with the double t) isn't even listed in the OED as a common misspelling, let alone an acceptable variant. Mogism (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Oops sorry; I've self-reverted but you'd better tell that to Wiktionary and The Daily Telegraph, and all the other websites that use it, then. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:58, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, do I believe a user-generated page on a wiki and a typo in the Telegraph (48,000 uses of "targeted", 555 uses of "targetted" in the Telegraph archive; for political balance, the Guardian style guide lists "targeted" as the only acceptable form), or do I believe the OED, Cambridge University Press, Collins, Merriam-Webster and Britannica? Find me a single non-user-created dictionary or style guide that lists "targetted" as an accepted variant spelling in any form of English (British or otherwise) and we'll talk. Mogism (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Here: Astronomy and Astrophysics (style guide) and Macquarie Dictionary, Mercedes College, Perth W.A. (use), Wordsense.eu Dictionary, ielts-academic.com (use), Australian Broadcasting Corporation search... Hope that helps; I've self-reverted and apologised (apologized). Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I give this barnstar away to you 'cause you truly deserve this. You've helped me several times whenever I have needed it! Thanks a lot FrankBoy (Buzz) 16:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Participation

Hi Baffle! Would you mind participating here?--(logged-out) User:FrB.TG 85.167.232.112 (talk) 11:58, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry Franky, but I'm not a FA reviewer and I don't think I'm experienced enough to comment there. Good luck with the nomination though: I hope it goes well for you. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Hans Aasnæs

Sorry for archiving this one without checking it. Boy, is this blitz a fiasco . All the best, Miniapolis 01:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

No worries, Miniapolis, you couldn't have foreseen the train crash. I've stopped archiving unchecked articles on the Requests page, though I'll check through some of them tonight and have a clean-up (well it's 3 am here in the UK and I'm about to finish a c/e). Let's not allow this to get the better of us; a sharp intake of breath and onwards! :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:12, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Waverley Line

It appears that there was actually no problem with this article with regard to copyright. Please see the talk page. Do you care to restore your edits and restart the copyedit? RGloucester — ☎ 15:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it seems to have been a backwards copy—the site copied from Wikipedia—but the author was claiming copyright for the content. I'll be happy to restart the c/e once I've done the article I'm currently working on. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your hard work. It is appreciated. RGloucester — ☎ 02:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

E-Mail

Baffle, your e-mail address is out of date apparently, correspondence to yourself from the "Email this user" link is being rejected. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 19:43, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi DWB, it's working fine; I just tested from WP and received my test e-mail. Try it again; if it still doesn't work I'll post it here (it's a WP-only address). Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:46, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Failed again. Seems to be a Yahoo protection thing, sent it directly. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:53, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

That's very odd; I have notification of your posts too. I'll try and find out what's going on. Anyway I have your e-mail, so no worries. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:14, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your excellent work copy editing Shah Rukh Khan. BollyJeff | talk 17:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

No worries, cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Parasi Kalan

Thank you for your contribution to Parasi Kalan. If you look at the history, you will see updates that I did, which were rolled back by User:Parasikalan. Rather than an edit war, I did not try to redo my edits. However, I deleted the sentence about Parasi Kala, because I do not think there is such a place, at least not distinct from Parasi Kalan. Good luck with this one!--DThomsen8 (talk) 21:46, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

No problems; well you were right not to revert him/her, it's not worth us getting involved in edit wars over such an article. Thanks for fixing my punctuation error though... I must have been tired! :-D Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

This user just took away all the catalog entries. I put them back. --DThomsen8 (talk) 10:53, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

I just warned the user on his/her talk page, hopefully it won't happen again. If it does, let me know and I'll escalate the warning. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Pavle Đurišić

G'day Baffle gab. The Pavle Đurišić c/e is just for one section (which is tagged). The rest of the article is largely the same as the version that was promoted to FA. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 21:40, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67; the request here is for the whole of the article; the requester is 23 editor. I wasn't aware it is tagged with {{copy edit}}; judging by the changes I've made in the header and considering it's an FA, I think it needs a full c/e. Thanks for letting me know; I'll remove those tags because it's already getting help. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:18, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I've now removed those tags; it seems from the history that 23 editor was unsatisfied with the earlier attempt at a copy-edit. Judging by the amount of work I've done so far, a full c/e is in order. Regards, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi! I noticed your edit on X-Men: Days of Future Past. And could you edit the cast section of this article: The Fantastic Four (2015 film), its kinda messy right now and one user there won't let me edit it back.--SuperHotWiki (talk) 12:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

No @Hotwiki:, I've no intention of geting into edit wars on your behalf. Also, please see my edit notice and the top of my talk page, where you can find a link to a more appropriate venue for such a request. Regards, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Please check your inbox

Hello, Baffle gab1978/Archives. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Miniapolis 01:56, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I've replied by e-mail. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Magic word

I slightly revised your comment at User talk:Cloudz679, as you had inadvertently added the page to an error tracking category. 'PAGENAME' is a magic word, the template version is a 'backup' for if it's misused... it should be invoked as {{PAGENAME}} not {{Pagename}}. When you use the second version, the page gets added to Category:Pages which use a template in place of a magic word. No harm done, of course, just letting you know. Revent^talk 22:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'll get it right one day! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:29, 28 September 2014 (UTC)ç

Regarding Cobain Feedback

Thank you for your thorough feedback on my copy-edit.

The laying mistake was a brain-fart; I should know better. My intent was to change "inside" for clarity. I have no idea why I changed it to laying.

I am new to this, and I am constantly studying WPMOS and The Chicago Manual of Style. I will be more vigilant next time. I enjoy copy-editing, and I will try my best to do more good than harm. Your feedback is much appreciated, and I welcome any more as always.

JacobiJonesJr (talk) 04:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

No worries; I'm glad you found my feedback useful. Don't worry too much; there are lots of things to remember when doing a c/e. Your efforts are appreciated; just take your time when going through articles—there's no rush—and think about how that text can be improved without altering its meaning. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

... for helping me understand how to add geographical locations into an article - Haj Omran. Friend, how come you turn down requests for copy editing but then you still do it? I appreciate your work but don't understand what you mean.

  Bfpage |leave a message  18:23, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I "officially declined" because your request was for help with the coordinates template, not for a copy-edit (fixing grammar, spelling etc). I also thought that because it's so short, there wasn't much point leaving it on the Requests page, where it might take around six weeks to process. It was an easy thing to fix though, which is the reason I did that. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. It seems that the guidelines sometimes get in the way of getting things done. I am glad you found a way around this.

  Bfpage |leave a message  00:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Range-blocked

My ISP has been range-blocked. I'm posting this from another expensive, dial-up ISP. Please be patient until i get this sorted out, as I don't intend to edit from this ISP regularly. I'm sorry for any inactivity on my accepted copy-edit; please go ahead and strike my acceptance at the GOCE Requests page.

Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:59, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

All you need is to become IP block exempt, which can be granted by an admin @Bencherlite: am I correct? - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 09:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I've been granted block exemption and can now edit normally. Thanks Nick. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:00, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Reply

Understood, and good luck! — Cirt (talk) 03:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

You're most welcome, Baffle gab1978, I meant it and I wish you the best of luck, — Cirt (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Query about history sect

Hey, I really appreciate the copy edit of Hitachi Magic Wand, but so far only have one minor quibble, which is creation of sect Hitachi_Magic_Wand#In_media and moving material out of chronological order from the History sect.

I had originally re-structured the article to present the majority of the sourced material in a straight chronological format within the History section.

I feel that the material moved to the In media sect you created should go back, in chronological order, in the History sect.

This way, the reader can see the natural progression of chronological events throughout history within that sect.

Specifically, for example, the progression from the device becoming more popular over time for alternative uses -- then that such usage being popularized on Sex and the City, after that usage shown in the same type of use in films in 2011 and 2012, and subsequently the company's decision in 2013 to cease production of the device, later convinced by Vibratex to keep producing it.

I think that shows a natural progression of events over time and removing those mentioned above doesn't allow the reader to see that chronological progression.

Would it be alright for me, to move that info back to the History sect, please?

— Cirt (talk) 15:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cirt, I moved the text to a new section because it didn't seem to be connected to the device's distribution by Vibratex; it only describes media appearences. I haven't checked the sources to see whether the device's appearences in "Sex and the City", an art exhibition and a comedy show, are connected with the device's discontinuation by Hitachi. That needs to be shown in references, otherwise it's original research. The Flam/Seattle Times (I found an online version of the article) article says nothing about this either. I won't object or revert if you move it back to the 'History' section, but I think you should at least consider whether the material should be there. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

It's directly relevant. The appearance on Sex and the City caused it to be sold out, by Vibratex. The first might be media and history, the 2nd part is history. — Cirt (talk) 19:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

That's fine with me then; go ahead. I'll continue the c/e later tonight. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:09, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much!!! :) — Cirt (talk) 19:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

UK dates

I used UK dates formatting rather than US for Hitachi Magic Wand because the company is located in Japan.

Just wanted to let you know the reasoning if you were wondering.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake; I cut-and-pasted the date over without thinking. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Totally no worries, just an FYI. :) — Cirt (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for the copy edit on Saradha Group financial scandal, the article looks a lot smarter now. Thanks Legaleagle86 (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Good, no worries. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

GOCE October 2014 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors October 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights: Results of the August Blitz and September Drive A few changes around the Guild's pages Sign up for the October Blitz Review the Coordinators election results – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

An advice

Hello Baffle gab. May I ask for an idea how to paraphrase this sentence: Irwin wrote that the song "describes how people are willingly turned into blind religious followers", and that the fact that "people are religious" is not what annoys Metallica, but that they "mindlessly do whatever they are told". I want to get rid of some the quote marks, as they ruin the flow of the sentence. Thanks.--Retrohead (talk) 11:20, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) How about dropping the middle set of quotation marks and the overexplaining: Irwin wrote that the song "describes how people are willingly turned into blind religious followers... [who] mindlessly do whatever they are told". You would have to check to see if the original source justifies the ellipsis; the first and second parts of the quotation need to be reasonably close to one another and quoted in context. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Retrohead:, I commend Jonesey's suggestion and comments about context, etc. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Thank you for your assistance with the Bundy article. But could you please add the GOCE tag at the articles talk page, I would appreciate it :) Also someone has reverted quite a few of your improvements, just to let you know.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:42, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi BabbaQ; yes I have abandoned the c/e because I can't work when I'm constantly being reverted. It was DoctorJoeE yesterday and David J Johnson today. It's a shame because the prose does need work; one does one's best but there are ownership issues at play. I'll put {{GOCEReviewed}} on the talk page for you. Sorry, again. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

It's interesting that "ownership" is invariably invoked in these situations, as if everyone is obligated to accept all c/e changes unquestioningly. I actually agreed with a substantial number of the changes that you made, and I plan to restore them, a bit at a time. I disagreed with some of the others. I do a substantial amount of c/e myself, and inevitably, there are disagreements with some of the changes I make. I try not to take it personally. I hope that we get a chance to work together in the future toward improving some of the many articles in dire need of it. Cheers, DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 23:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi DoctorJoeE, thanks for your comments. Yes I agree it's interesting; I should withdraw my comments at the article's talk page. I think the other editor who reverted me x4 might have been more restrained—I use reverting as a last resort to remove edits that are wholly unsuitable for the article, like unreferenced additions, not those with which I only partly disagree and which a brief edit will fix. I suppose he was just being protective. There are bound to be disagreements; I normally leave c/e'd articles alone when I'm finished, otherwise I'd go insane running around "fixing" things. Thanks for posting here; although I won't be returning to Ted Bundy, the requester BabbaQ still wants a c/e done so I've left the request on the Requests page. Hope to see you at the Guild some time; we've a December November Drive coming up if you're interested. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll be working in Bhutan and India during most of December, but I'll be sure to participate in a future Drive. Honestly, though, I'd love to know why this c/e was requested; tons of articles are in far greater need. Ask Diannaa; she and I (and others) rewrote the heck out of the Bundy article in preparation for its FA nomination. Any article can be improved, of course. If BabbaQ would be good enough to point out his specific concerns with the existing content, one of us will be happy to address them. I'm already working, as time permits, on the "Pathology" section. Cheers, DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 01:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

The requester's only briefing was "An GA article that still could need c/e.", so i don't know what the specific problems are; you'd have to ask BabbaQ that. I corrected the drive month above, btw. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-retirement?!??!

Real gold? I don't know.

I'm sad to see you step away, but it's understandable. Since you're only semi-retired, I'm giving you only half a gold watch. You get to choose which half.

Happy wandering! – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Jonesey ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 13:34, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Mazda B-Series

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thank you for the great improvements made at Mazda B-Series. The article is so much better now because of your hard work! OSX (talk • contributions) 20:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Please review Hitachi Magic Wand

Notifying you as you were the copy editor from WP:GOCE, no obligations or expectations. :)

As part of a Quality improvement project, I've recently put the article Hitachi Magic Wand up for Peer Review.

Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Hitachi Magic Wand/archive1. — Cirt (talk) 06:18, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cirt, thanks for the notification but since I did the copy-edit it doesn't seem appropriate for me to comment on the article. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for 2014 Jefferson County Public Schools protests

 — Yngvadottir (talk) 05:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Copy-edit 'half done' message

Hi Baffle - regarding your comment on my GOCE scoreboard entry for Ocean's Three and a Half - at the time I looked at it, I was not quite sure whether there was anything else I could do with that article (so I asked Cirt whether he had anything specific in mind when he made the original request for copy-editing), but do you want me to take a second look? LS1979 (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm all set, you don't have to bother, thank you! — Cirt (talk) 17:17, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Sorry to see you won't be standing for GOCE coordinator again (not least because it probably eliminates my chance to bail :-)), but I hope you'll remain active as a copyeditor. That's what I enjoy most; I realize that someone has to give out the barnstars, but think that the GOCE now suffers from a mild case of instruction creep and has become way too complicated. I may be wrong, but I don't see anyone stepping forward as coordinator; with fewer editors steering the ship, the project has no choice but to become more sustainable (i.e. simplify). Hope you haven't burned out completely, and I continue to see you around this nutty place. Early Happy Holidays and all the best, Miniapolis 16:04, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Miniapolis; I'm bowing out because I want to spend less time on WP and work on a personal photo restoration and archiving project. Also, my analytical, critical nature doesn't seem to make me many friends on here. Don't worry, I won't be away for ever. I'm planning to take a three-month wikibreak from WP but hopefully I'll be back at the Guild in April. And I'll still be coordinating until the new team takes over (though i might be unavailable on the 31st Dec/1st Jan... ;-)).

As for the election, we'll have to see what happens when the newsletter goes out. If people don't want the Guild to end up moribund, like the LOCE, they'll have to step forward. Perhaps the instruction creep could be dealt with by the new Lead coordinator's team. Perhaps the Blitzes could be dropped; they seem to attract more new, inexperienced editors than the Drives. But if we want people to do things in particular ways we have to tell them how to do it, otherwise the project slides into chaos. IMO, our instructions should be like our copy-edits; clear and consice. If there's something you'd like looked into this month, please let me know and I'll try to help. I think out Drive/Blitz FAQ needs a rewrite. ;-)

Happy hols to you too; i hope you have a warm, dry one without sandbags. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh gosh, please don't think that what I said about instruction creep was directed at you. What I meant was cruft like the blitzes (particularly) and maybe even the drives, although I think the drives will be (and should be) permanent. My concern is that the more contests we have, the more we attract editors we're better off without: those whose chief concern is winning a contest, any contest. Since it's hat time for the drive I went to the main drive page coordinator instructions, and that page (and the others you've redone) is so much clearer than it used to be thanks to your hard work. Glad your wikibreak will be temporary, and the photo project sounds like it'll be fun. All the best, Miniapolis 00:12, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Minapolis; I didn't read it that way, so no worries ;-) I semi-agree about the blitzes, but there have been some benefits as well as drawbacks, and most of the poorer copy-editors seem to lose interest quickly, so it's probably the case that "many are called but few are chosen". ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for copy editing Thillana Mohanambal. Thamizhan1994 (^{Appo Pesu}) 06:13, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

No worries; good luck with your GA nomination. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:19, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Nipo article

Hi, I hope the reading of the article is worth the work of fixing it. Thanks. --Smkolins (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's an interesting article. I'm nearly finished, just tidying a few stray wikilinks. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Radio Caroline

Hi Baffle, you undid my edit on Radio Caroline, but why mention Tony Prince twice and Tom Lodge even three times in the same summing up? Doesn't make sense, doesn't it? Hartenhof (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes I'm sorry for reverting your edit, I didn't notice the duplication of names. An edit summary might have prevented a mix-up. As you see I've self-reverted. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 11:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Elvis is Back!

Thanks for your corrections, a really sharp work as usual. Much appreciated!--GDuwenTell me! 20:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

No worries, good luck with your GA nom. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:15, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Smooth Island

Hi Baffle_gab1978, thank you very much for offering to help on Smooth Island (Tasmania). I need to reassure you that I am NOT the current island's owner. Whilst it is in my extended family, I have a broad interest in all islands as you will be able to tell from my Contributions. I hope to eventually create solid articles for all the major islands of Australia. Thank you again for your help. Warm regards, Jkokavec (talk) 02:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jkokavec, thanks for clarifying that; I'll strike my comments on the talk page. I did some minor source checking earlier and noted the similarity in your names; I hope I didn't cause you any problems. I'm just cleaning up some of the quoted material, removing blockquotes etc. I'm not doing a full c/e as I've already started on another. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Baffle, it looks like you spent close to 2 hours copy-editing the article - I'm incredibly grateful, thank you. It's people like you who make the Wikipedia project so addictive.

If you can, just as really, really brief dot-points, could please tell me what remaining c/e issues still need to be addressed on this page? Please don't spend much more time on this, you've already been exceptional. Have a very happy new year! Jkokavec (talk) 06:57, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments; I've been focussing on converting the references to {{Cite web}} format; that allows short titles to show in the References section rather than long urls. There's still some more that need converting. Also i've tried to consolidate some of the text in the History section; basically trying to merge the very short paragraphs into some more substantial paras. This is just to make a full c/e easier for another editor; I haven't fully checked the article's text or properly copy-edited it. Anyway I'm happy to help; i might do some more tomorrow (Sunday). Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 07:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)