User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2021

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thank you for copyediting Bengaluru FC. Iamfarzan (talk) 03:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Plot c/e

Hey! Remember you had promised me to c/e the plot of the two articles without putting them at GOCE/REQ page once I complete them as that time the plot section was not complete? Would you? I would really appreciate your gesture as these two articles are ready to go since last 7 months but I could not nominate them for GA as I had not written the plot because of my busy schedule. I was also offline for four months. Now that I have written one and will write the another one tomorrow, I wanted to know if that offer still holds or not?Krish | Talk To Me 19:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Krish!:, welcome back to Wikipedia. Yes, I'm no longer a GOCE coordinator and I've reduced my involvement so I'll have time to c/e the plot summary of The Hero: Love Story of a Spy for you; what is the other article you wanted doing? Let me know when you're ready. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:44, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for accepting my request. The other article is Waqt: The Race Against Time. This one too needs c/e in the plot section and I will be writing it today. Thanks again.Krish | Talk To Me 19:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Krish!:, I've done the plot section at The Hero: Love Story of a Spy; I couldn't quite understand the sentence fragment at the start of the final paragraph; "Zakaria, Khan and their group force Wahid to 'speed up the blueprint of the nuclear bomb". One cannot speed up a blueprint; unless I'm missing something (I haven't seen the film), a blueprint is a paper document, usually an architectural drawing, which cannot be sped up. otherwise, I think that section is good to go. I'll have a go at the other plot section later today. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

@Krish!:, I've now done the plot section of Waqt: The Race Against Time; good luck with your planned GA nominations. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 09:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	For copyediting Shaiju Damodaran Iamfarzan (talk) 11:51, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Marianne Means

FYI, I have nominated the article GAN. Thanks for your great GOCE work. I'm hoping to do 100 Good Articles this year. Last October during the GA drive I did 31 Good Articles.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:36, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

No worries Doug; good luck with your quest, that's an impressive target and I hope you succeed. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:44, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Politics of Bihar

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Thanks for helping, if you ever get time (not an obligation) plz also see Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav.Heba Aisha (talk) 03:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Some issues with the copy-edit of Ricky Rodriguez

@Baffle gab1978: thanks for your (still ongoing) very effective copy-edit of Ricky Rodriguez. I want to notify you that there are some significant issues; a couple that you have fixed already, but there are a couple more that I'm not sure if you're aware of.

• Rodriguez and Munumel married in a minister's home; according to the minister, they struggled with finances and experience in the outside world, and moved into a low-rent apartment. It wasn't the minister who said both of them struggled, it was Munumel herself. In fact I should probably remove the minister thing because it's really irrelevant.

• After recording the video, Rodriguez called Jones and told her of his suicidal thoughts. She encouraged him to testify in a legal case and said "things will be taken seriously". Rodriguez told Smith he did not believe her. Rodriguez is speaking to his friend Celeste Jones, not Angela Smith who he murdered.

Please let me know if these were difficult to distinguish in the article, as I think this may have been the case. Thanks -NowIsntItTime^{(chats)(doings)} 04:52, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi @NowIsntItTime:; thanks for letting me know about the errors; I'll go back and correct them forthwith. Most of the text has been clear up to the current point ("Investigation and memorial"); I normally check refs where possible if something is unclear but that's not always possible in the case of obscure and print-only sources. The "FamilyX" wiki has transcriptions of some articles though, which is useful for me. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:03, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey I have some collections compiled by the ExFamily website that may be of some use to you! Here they are: Regarding Ricky Rodriguez articles 1 Rodriguez articles 2, and a few you'd have to skim through to see the ones in the article The Family news -NowIsntItTime^{(chats)(doings)} 05:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you; I'll check them if needed, though I do anticipate finishing the c/e soon. I've made the corrections above (sorry!); please let me know if I make any more silly mistakes! :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Perfect :). Well that's all I can ask of someone ;P...but, I will do that! NowIsntItTime^{(chats)(doings)} 05:17, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Puffery and guff

Hi,

regarding the INSEEC Business School article, may you please let me know what you define as puffery and guff?

You liked my edit, so I assume that you do.

The content which you may qualify as "puffery and guff" is certainly the section about the honestus clerus, which doesn't infringe any copyrights, and is verifiable. Correct?

May you please let me know how to get rid of the banner "puffery and guff"? To me it seems like there is room for interpretation.

Shall there be a section in Wikipedia's codex defining puffery and guff, I will be happy to be enlightened.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onna Bugeisha 2020 (talk • contribs) 08:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Onna Bugeisha 2020: see WP:Puffery and WP:COATRACK. The article was tagged with {{Copy edit}} or one of its friends; I have been checking the category Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit for the current GOCE drive. "Guff" is a colloquial term for padding, bluster or waffle -- extraneous words that don't convey any information but serve to inflate the wordcount of the article, thereby making the subject seem more important to the untrained eye than it really is. An example of puffery and guff from that article's "Values" section:

This ideal of humanity will live on until the mid-20th century and isn’t specific to French: the concept of the cultivated, reasonable and curious gentleman emerges in London in the wake of the Glorious Revolution, but tends to disappear during the Victorian era. The honestus clerus is a feature of the first German romantism via the so-called Aufklärung-mindedness.

In 1947, the French historian Philippe Ariès wrote: «honestus clerus does not embody a professional erudite, but a curious and cultured mind, endowed with an ascertained decorum».[60]

The concept of honestus clerus appeared in the literature of the 17th century, in the literature work of Madeleine de Scudéry and Molière, where the latter criticised it in its plays: Le Tartuffe or Les Femmes Savantes. In the continuity of his critics of politeness, which socially condemns people to appearances in the way we see ourselves and our peers, Rousseau criticises the honestus clerus, for the grotesque aspect of interpersonal communication which ensues from this concept.

Please remember this article is about INSEEC Business School, an educational business, it is not about educational concepts and ideas. The above text is miles off topic; the reader doesn't care about Philippe Ariès or his theories; s/he wants information on the school. This is also is known as coatracking. So to remove the tag, you should cut out all examples on the above and refocus the article firmly upon its subject, rather than diverting the reader into theoretical bluster (guff). Please also remember that Wikipedia is NOT for promotion, advertising, or web hosting. I hope that is clear enough for you to understand. I see you were warned for a conflict of interest on your talk page regarding this article. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your lovely work

Hey, Baffle☿gab. I would like to thank you for a good work you did on copy-editing Magtymguly Pyragy and Turkoman articles. Also, I'm sorry to have thanked you so late, I was a bit busy with other important stuff. Nonetheless, it's better late than never. Thanks again and take care! --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 07:38, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

No worries, Visioncurve; yes that was a few months ago and I'd forgotten about those articles. I'm glad the copy-edits were useful. Good luck with the articles and cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC).

Weed Lake

Did you check whether any of the refs actually say the species is found at Weed Lake Wetland? If not, they aren't relevant refs. It's a weirdly overinflated article. I can see no mention of Weed Lake in the first two, general, refs, except one 2018 birding walk which is described as visiting it. Almost a hoax. PamD 08:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi @PamD:; thanks for your note. I must admit I didn't check any of the refs in that article. Because it's tagged for copy-editing, which puts it into Category: Wikipedia articles needing copy edit from March 2021, I removed the off-topic text and listified the items there so copy-editors don't unnecessarily spend time on that text. The location does exist (see here), though I can't vouch for its notability or coverage in reliable sources. I've no objection if you wish to send it to AfD or another deletion process. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Keterkaitan Keterkaitan

I'm glad we would work together, with a very equally split work on this article that was not at all lopsided whatsoever!
How did you do that much how did I miss all this is English secretly not my native language or something Snowmanonahoe (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Snowmanonahoe:, thank you for your work on the article; I've given you joint credit in the archives. Don't be disheartened; your copy-edit was good and you fixed a lot of errors. Formal written English is quite different to informal spoken English and I think the differences can often catch people out. It takes a while to learn Wikipedia conventions; the Manual of Style is a useful guide in most circumstances. I've done a lot of copy-editing on WP and I still make silly mistakes! Thanks for your work and happy editing. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 17:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

The Smeezingtons C/E

First of all thank you so much for the edits so far in the article. However, shouldn't the "the" in the "The Smeezingtons" be lower case, according to the Manual of Style/Music.

Kind regards, MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi @MarioSoulTruthFan:; you're probably correct but Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name) says the opposite. If the team's official title was actually "Smeezingtons", we should probably ditch "the" wherever possible. If the official title was "The Smeezingtons", I'd argue "The" is part of a proper noun and should take a cap. I'll change it back anyway when I continue; I expect some officious reviewer would take issue with it either way. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:16, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

The official name is "The Smeezingtons", just wondering actually. I actually agree with you on that. Keep the cap. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks; I just changed it back... will self-revert. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

I took your advise and removed some things that were in excessively detail on the "Influences and style" section. Regarding the "Production equipment" section, I do understand your concerns but perhaps I'm not the best fit to reduce the list to something more generic. Regards MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

No worries; it's not a huge problem, GAs don't have to be perfect and readers can skip past it if they wish. :) Good luck with the article and cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:52, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=}}

You are using {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}}. But you can't seem to know how to use this tool. Watch User:ClueBot III/Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978 and User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978. I hope that you revert [1] and apply deletion of User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2020-temp. With best regards. Sawol (talk) 01:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Sawol:, what is the problem here? My archiving code has been the same for years and the archiving bot seems to working quite nicely. Removing an underscore from my username has no effect; [[User:Baffle_gab1978]] is functionally identical to [[User:Baffle gab1978]] Why are you poking around in my user-space anyway? Baffle☿gab 02:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at their histories. Or wait for User:ClueBot III' contributions. User:Baffle_gab1978 is different from User:Baffle gab1978. You use User talk/Baffle_gab1978 with 2 errors (/ and _). Sawol (talk) 02:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sawol:, you are mistaken—there are no errors in my bot archiving code. The bot archives my page as intended; please check the history of this page and the current 2021 archive page. The most recent thread was archived on 10 May 2021. As for the underscore, open User_talk:Baffle_gab1978/Archives/2018 (2x underscores) then User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2018 (no underscores) and you'll see the same page. Now check the url in the address bar of your browser; identical. I really don't know what your fiddling is supposed to accomplish. I checked your recent contribs; are you here to help write an encyclopaedia? Baffle☿gab 03:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I mentioned that User:ClueBot III/Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978 and User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978 are watched. I am correcting errors caused by that like User:ClueBot III/Indices/Talk:Bahun. Sawol (talk) 04:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining; I think we may have misunderstood each other. Good luck with your mission. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Baffle gab1978: Check User:ClueBot III/Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978 and User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/User talk:Baffle gab1978. I request that your talk page should be corrected with |archiveprefix=User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/ in your talk page. And I request that User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/ and User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2020-temp be deleted. Sawol (talk) 04:17, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Give us which side is right in only grammar, which |archiveprefix=User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/ or |archiveprefix=User talk/Baffle_gab1978/Archives/. User:Baffle gab1978 is self-centered. Sawol (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

(←) And Sawol is being disruptive for no particular reason. See also my comments on Sawol's talk page here asking him/her to stop being disruptive in my user space. Liz, it might be useful to examine Sawol's contribs in more detail; I don't believe s/he is here to help write an encyclopaedia. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:10, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

A mention of you at the Help Desk

Hey Baffle gab. So apparently the conversation above has bled over into the help desk. Not really sure what's going on. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:37, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Tenryuu:, I'll have a look later. This is all about, would you believe, an underscore in my user-name in the archiving code of my talk page! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 07:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

(←) Note for archive and lolz; Help desk conversation is here. Baffle☿gab 21:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

That weird archiving issue

Hey there, I'm just passing through. I think I understand the issue that the editor was trying to bring up about your talk archives. Ignore the underscore thing; it doesn't matter. It's the slash in place of a colon. You have "archiveprefix=User talk/"; it should be "archiveprefix=User talk:". The consequence is that the bot is a bit confused about where your talk page is when it builds the index and has been edit warring with itself here and here for years. You are right that this doesn't matter much and the bot still seems to archive your talk correctly, but it's straightforward to fix. — The Earwig (talk) 06:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @The Earwig:, thanks for your message. I wish the other user has posted a concise note like yours instead of charging in and altering the code without explaining the problem. That makes sense, I'll have a look into the issue a little later. My archiving is odd in that that the current archive page is always at User_talk:Baffle_gab1978/Archives/1, which I then manually move to User_talk:Baffle_gab1978/Archives/20xx at the end of the year.; i don't know if that would have anything to do with it. Thanks again. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 17:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I think the other user is editing in good faith but they have a language barrier that made explaining the issue hard. Anyway, I doubt the Archives/1 thing is related. Is the strategy you described what you want? We can have the bot archive directly to 20xx, but if you prefer the current setup then no problem. — The Earwig (talk) 00:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks but it's no bother to move one page and create a new one once a year so I won't disturb my existing setup. I guess a language barrier would explain some of the odd behaviour and I should AGF more. Sorry for dragging you into this silliness. I've corrected the code. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 00:36, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

In answer to the question you briefly posted...

...but removed while I was typing this response. Notable academics are not covered in the press the way politicians, sports people, and movie stars are. So coverage doesn't turn up in Google searches. Wikipedia:Notability (academics) spells out how we find the reliable independent in-depth coverage. To meet any of the 8 criteria means that reliable people or institutions independent of the person have assessed that person's contributions to their field and found it significant. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:27, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @StarryGrandma:; i moved it to the Teapot because the Helpdesk appears to be a venue for for WP beginners. WP:PROF doesn't over-ride WP:BLP or WP:VERIFY so I don't understand why academics get a free pass when other BLPs don't. Thanks for replying; I'll keep working on reducing the backlog. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

GOCE request discussion for editors that haven't edited articles?

Hi Baffle gab. I was going through the requests when I saw two requests marked by you as requesters who haven't edited the article with a link pointing to WT:GOCE (instead of WT:GOCER). Did those discussions ever happen? I can't seem to find them on both aforementioned linked pages or their archives. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Tenryuu:, thanks for checking... no those requests don't seem to have been discussed at either talk page. You're correct the link should have been to Requests Talk rather than the general talk page, and I'll go and correct that in a mo. Edit:  Done. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Copy editing

I don't know if this stuff is more nitpicking or just a fanatical devotion to a certain style guide that I've since forgotten, but:

1. the rules around commas can be maddening, but they shouldn't be used before conjunctions unless they're independent clauses. So, for example, in Special:Diff/1036859001, you don't use a comma. The phrase "and stars X, Y and Z" is dependent on the subject ("it") and can't stand alone. In Special:Diff/1037026351, you do use a comma. "Herr advised against this" can stand on its own, so it's an independent clause and needs a comma. Some style guides say this is actually unnecessary, but they're evil and should be ignored.
2. A colon can be used to introduce a quotation, but a semicolon can't. So, in Special:Diff/1037322859, a colon or comma (only) would be OK here. Some style guides insist there are circumstances when a colon is preferred over a comma. There's a rare case when a semicolon is used to punctuate quotations, but that shouldn't happen in Wikipedia articles.
3. the MOS advises us to write "Kubrick and his friend left Kubrick's book at Kubrick's house", but I personally think it's usually better to rewrite sentences to avoid this robot-speak. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @NinjaRobotPirate:, thanks for your message. It's true I'm no grammarian and we may be located on opposite sides of the globe, which would account for our different writing styles. I don't know specific AmEng punctuation rules (I would have thought it would be pretty much the same as any English variant) but here's my reasons for punctuating as I do:

• In my first diff you note above; "The film is based on Hasford's 1979 novel The Short-Timers, and stars Matthew Modine, Lee Ermey, Vincent D'Onofrio and Adam Baldwin." The second comma is needed to divide the clauses to avoid a confusing run-on of 'and's.
• In my second diff you provide, the comma before 'but' isn't needed because 'but' is a conjunction and is sufficient to join the clauses and there's no redundancy. A semi-colon would also work there is we wanted to remove 'but' for some reason.
• In my third diff, I precede quotation with a semi-colon because the quotation relies on the rest of the sentence in which it sits, making in a dependent clause. I'd only use a colon in a sentence with two linked independent clauses; "My car blew up today: I'll have to walk to work tomorrow.". I just noticed I didn't change the colon on the quotation above.
• I don't remember writing "Kubrick and his friend left Kubrick's book at Kubrick's house" but if I did, you're correct that's poor writing; thanks for fixing it.

Anyway, please feel free to adjust any punctuation you feel is incorrect; I'm not attached to the article. I accepted a c/e request from REQ that's been waiting since May and I thought it should get done. I guess our styles will always differ and I'm not here for a grammar stoush. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 00:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, things are kind of hectic right now... those explanations sound reasonable, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ce

I would give you a CE Barnstar but you have so many of them already. Any other BS you have been lusting over?--Akrasia25 (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

No problem @Akrasia25:; it's what I do here. Thanks for the offer but it's probably best for my lustings to remain off-wiki. ;) No worries and cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:27, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Baffle gab1978. You have new messages at Kailash29792's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kailash29792 (talk) 04:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: I've replied at your talk. You're welcome. Regards, Baffle☿gab 05:22, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Errors introduced in Red (Taylor Swift album)

Hello Baffle, some of the edits to Red (Taylor Swift album) introduced errors that were fixed by Rfl0216. I wanted to bring this to your attention as a heads up and in case you meant to add the text elsewhere. Best, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 02:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh okay, thanks for letting me know. That was unintentional and I'm not sure how it happened. I might have a mouse gremlin (no virus); I've had trouble with random cut/paste operations before. Thanks for letting my know, I'll try and avoid it in the future. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

All good! I do greatly appreciate your edits of it. I just wanted to bring those two instances to your attention. Thank you for all that you do with GOCE! --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:31, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Don't we want the wikilink here? It's the first mention in the article. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:15, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

James Perone is a redlink with no other inbound links; it didn't seem useful to direct readers there. I can re-link it if you wish. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

My mistake...I think I somehow mixed up James Perowne. I could've sworn Perone was a bluelink...huh. Please disregard, my apologies. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:35, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Thank you so much for your review. The quote you mentioned was backed up in the next sentence, but went straight to the publication they cited and have included that now right beside it. Shall nominate for FAC probably in a couple hours --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 01:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor:, no worries, I wasn't sure where that quotation had come from so I marked it. Another problem I found and corrected was one review quotation in Critical Reception that doesn't exist in the source, so it might be worth checking others. I did check a few, those were fine, but I can't remember which. It's an interesting article, good luck with your FA nom. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 23:19, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

PrOP-M rover, help with ce

Hi, Bafflegab! You helped me a lot with copyedit of Sojourner rover; now I'm trying to move another rover article, PrOP-M, through DYK process. It's rather small piece about Soviet rover from 1971, that was, unfortunately, a failure. I would greatly appreciate if you could take a look and maybe copyedit it a bit, as grammar is not my strong side. Artem.G (talk) 18:09, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Artem.G:, I don't take direct c/e requests but this one looks interesting and short enough to do some work on over the next few days. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@Artem.G:, I've completed the requested c/e. The bill's in the post. :-) j/k Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, the article became much more readable! Artem.G (talk) 05:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I'm interested in space exploration so I enjoy working on those articles. Good luck with your DYK nomination. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Revolt of the Fourteen has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Erm, seems to be a mistake? Did you mean this for another edit? Mako001 (talk) 22:19, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi @The Alternate Mako:, oops... yes that ES was in error; I use auto-fill and obviously didn't check the box. Sorry! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:24, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for this edit. I had it on my mental to-do list, but I have bot edits disabled on my watchlist, so I didn't see the archiving happen. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:08, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

No problem; I'd thought to archive the request manually yesterday but the bot beat me to it. The Guild will be a quieter place without TfT's prolific copy editing. Take care and cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:17, 30 November 2021 (UTC)