User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 108
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:HJ Mitchell. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 105 | Archive 106 | Archive 107 | Archive 108 | Archive 109 | Archive 110 | → | Archive 115 |
The Signpost: 2 May 2016
- In the media: Wikipedia Zero piracy in Bangladesh; bureaucracy; chilling effects; too few cooks; translation gaps
- Traffic report: Purple
- Featured content: The best ... from the past two weeks
The West Country Challenge
Hi, Are you going to join in at: Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge. I'd particularly appreciate your help with getting the right things included in the core articles & missing articles lists at this stage as we are still preparing for the contest.— Rod talk 21:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for a thing you know about...
... even if you don't, despite what I've somehow have had in my head for a couple of years, turn out to look remotely like Harry Morgan!
It's funny how minds work alike (in other respects); yesterday a colleague and I had an entire lunchtime discussion of the libel per se criteria with respect to a potential client, and contemplated the bar-exam-question-worthy debate of whether that person's particular issues met them. This name-expunged example here was so comparable I obliquely brought it up in the discussion, which is how this line of thinking on my part came to pass. More "curious" than "funny" is this phenomenon of ending up with a random stranger on one's Wikipedia watchlist whom one would never think about in a jillion years, much less with any frequency, and growing to be concerned for at least a few seconds a day for that person's fate as an actual human, and there's got to be at least a law review article in all of this even if not a maximalist novel. Cheers, H.J., from J.D. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- It is ... curious. Of course, we're not a court and the idea isn't just to limit potential liability; we apply common sense and consider the potential impact on somebody rather than just ticking boxes to determine whether something meets arbitrary criteria. But part of the reason I like doing what I do on Wikipedia is the intellectual exercise. In this case the benefits of getting rid of something far outweighed any benefits to keeping it, but justifying it is good exercise for the brain! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Batch protection again...
I know I could learn how to do this myself, but asking you is easier, and I'm lazy. Our interstate vandal is back, see here and hitting Category:Auxiliary Interstate Highways. Can you put a long term (like a year or 6 months) batch protection on these? Grassy ass. --Jayron32 13:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks again! --Jayron32 13:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I'm not sure protecting 300-odd articles isn't overkill, but I suppose there's no way to tell where he's going to pop up next. If there are any that don't need protection, hopefully somebody will unprotect them or give me a list and ask me to unprotect them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- I've been working with someone in the edit filter department to get this figured out. –Fredddie™ 14:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, it's a bit tricky but I think I'm on to something :) Feel free to proceed with the protections for the being — MusikAnimal talk 15:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- I think we're all set. I've removed protection from the pages in that category. If you see any relevant edits getting through please let me know — MusikAnimal talk 15:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks MA. I'm all for more refined measures if they work. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- I think we're all set. I've removed protection from the pages in that category. If you see any relevant edits getting through please let me know — MusikAnimal talk 15:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, it's a bit tricky but I think I'm on to something :) Feel free to proceed with the protections for the being — MusikAnimal talk 15:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- I've been working with someone in the edit filter department to get this figured out. –Fredddie™ 14:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I'm not sure protecting 300-odd articles isn't overkill, but I suppose there's no way to tell where he's going to pop up next. If there are any that don't need protection, hopefully somebody will unprotect them or give me a list and ask me to unprotect them. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2016
| ||||||
page move can do?
Hey, I used to do page moves aeons ago, back before they became so adminly. Plus this has small issues. So History of agriculture in the Indian subcontinent used to be History of agriculture in India back before it was moved by permabanned POV warrior/sockherder Mar4d/Acejet in November 2011. The article is a backwater (it has had a total of 50 edits in its life) so moving it would not be disruptive. Technically, you could make a case that he current name is technically correct (because it includes areas that much later split off o become Bangladesh). However, I want to have it moved back to where it was, to bring it into line with Agriculture in India, and because it's just a shorter and more obvious article name. Can do? Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 May 2016
- Op-ed: Swiss chapter in turmoil
- In the media: Wikimedia's Dario Taraborelli quoted on Google's Knowledge Graph in The Washington Post
- Featured content: Two weeks for the prize of one
- Traffic report: Oh behave, Beyhive / Underdogs
- Arbitration report: "Wikicology" ends in site ban; evidence and workshop phases concluded for "Gamaliel and others"
- Wikicup: That's it for WikiCup Round 2!
Thanks
Thanks for attending to my request so promptly - Arjayay (talk) 08:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Macaroni pie
Thanks for giving me a DYK award for macaroni pie, but I only reviewed the nomination. Stilll good to get an award nonetheless! '''tAD''' (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Thanks for the DYK-credit for Yibna Bridge...but should there not be a DYK credit for Jisr Jindas, too? Huldra (talk) 20:03, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Supression
Hi HJ i would like a big favorite for me is to supress [1], because it was a hoax at first but Amakuru delcined it because it has been mentioned on websites. Amakuru said not obviously a hoax; film is mentioned in articles which i find it suprising. Scotsman18 (talk) 09:52, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hi @Scotsman18: I was referring to newspaper articles I found when searching for this topic. For example this one: [2]. What is your evidence that it is a hoax? I think this needs more thought than just a speedy deletion - taking it to WP:AfD would seem a better thing to do, as it is not an obvious case, although perhaps HJ Mitchell may disagree? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 09:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- I assume we're talking about Jana Gana Mana (2018 film) (as it's now titled)? If so it's certainly not eligible for suppression, which is only for really, really nasty stuff like libel and personal information. @Scotsman18:, I agree with Amakuru that AfD is the best place for it if you think it's a hoax because it's not so obvious that anyone could tell it was fake. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:39, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay that's cool. Scotsman18 (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
File:HJ oldid.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HJ oldid.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:43, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 May 2016
- News and notes: Upcoming Wikimedia conferences in the US and India; May Metrics and Activities Meeting
- Special report: Compensation paid to Sue Gardner increased by almost 50 percent after she stepped down as executive director
- Featured content: Eight articles, three lists and five pictures
- Op-ed: Journey of a Wikipedian
- Arbitration report: Gamaliel resigns from the arbitration committee
- Recent research: English as Wikipedia's Lingua Franca; deletion rationales; schizophrenia controversies
- Traffic report: Splitting (musical) airs / Slow Ride
The Battle of County Hall
In case you are not stalking me, I have been looking at Boundary Estate and with it the antics of the architects of Housing of the Working Classes Branch of London County Council. It seems that there were 16 or so influential architects working there and most need WP articles. Then I strayed into this article http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/bk17/pp14-25#h2-0009 and found a glorious battle between some of them and other prominent (WP-articles? unsure) architects- your mate Lutyens was in the thick of one melée. Do you have any interest in getting some of them aboard?
Another reference is: Housing of the working classes in London. We have pages for Ralph Knott, Owen Fleming
Enjoy the sun.--ClemRutter (talk) 08:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 June 2016
- News and notes: WMF cuts budget for 2016-17 as scope tightens
- Featured content: Overwhelmed ... by pictures
- Traffic report: Pop goes the culture, again.
- Arbitration report: ArbCom case "Gamaliel and others" concludes
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Video Games
Unprotection of Adrian Chiles
The article on Adrian Chiles has been infrequently edited for several years. Therefore, semi-protection may no longer be necessary. Pickuptha'Musket (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
requesting unprotection of Thierry Henry
History, I think 5.5 years of semi protect is long enough! LibStar (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: May 2016
| ||||||
NPP / AfC
Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:33, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 June 2016
- News and notes: Clarifications on status and compensation of outgoing executive directors Sue Gardner and Lila Tretikov
- Special report: Wikiversity Journal—A new user group
- Featured content: From the crème de la crème
- In the media: Biography disputes; Craig Newmark donation; PR editing
- Traffic report: Another one with sports; Knockout, brief candle
Fake AFD
Hi, just thought I'd ping you about a sockpuppeteer briefly impersonating you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sinungaling Mong Puso. It's a fake AFD, copied intact from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legacy (2012 TV series), evidently in the hope that their article would look like it had survived an AFD already. The SPI is at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dakotaparty. OnionRing (talk) 07:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Language in Italy
Hi, I noticed the article Italy had only one official language (Italian), while this is obviously correct other countries with one official national language also have regional official languages written in their side info box... please could you add French to these languages for this page, since it is also the official language in the northern region Valle d'Aosta ? Some refs to back this addition: http://www.lovevda.it/en/culture/tradition/languages , https://www.uwgb.edu/wisfrench/franco.htm , http://www.axl.cefan.ulaval.ca/europe/italieaoste.htm
Thanks, W
Above mentioned WP:DYK nomination might be of interest to you regarding WP:QPQs.
--NearEMPTiness (talk) 23:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
WWI directory
Hi Harry. Would you have time to look at this WWI directory I've put together in my userspace and advise on anything you can remember that might be missing? Was the work you are doing on memorials connected to any ongoing project that is documented anywhere? Carcharoth (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Drone photograph
Hi! I should be interested in your opinion on this photograph. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:28, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 July 2016
- News and notes: Board unanimously appoints Katherine Maher as new WMF executive director; Wikimedia lawsuits in France and Germany
- Op-ed: Two policies in conflict?
- In the media: Terrorism database cites Wikipedia as a source
- Featured content: Triple fun of featured content
- Traffic report: Goalposts; Oy vexit
The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Please disable Jasonski 15's talk page access
Ever since you blocked Jasonski 15, they have made abusive edits to their talk page. Can you please revoke their talk page access? —MRD2014 T C 17:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- I've taken it to ANI and talk page access was later revoked by JohnCD. —MRD2014 T C 17:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Cascade
Hi, sorry, to bother, but any chance you could cascade the protection on User:InternetArchiveBot? I would greatly appreciate it. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Cascading only works with full protection (the option literally doesn't exist for lower levels of protection), and even if it was possible, that would protect everything transcluded on the page, including images and things like the bot template, which are used elsewhere. Sorry. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Right, I didn't think of that. Well then never mind and thanks. Do you think you could protect Cyberbot I and II's user pages as well. Though, not very recently, it has been subject to vandal attacks, most likely because Cyberbot II is practically everywhere on Wikipedia now. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, template protection again? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes please. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- As you wish. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- One last thing. :p. Can you unblock Cyberbot II. Ops has cleared it for operation again. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- As you wish. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Yes please. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, template protection again? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Right, I didn't think of that. Well then never mind and thanks. Do you think you could protect Cyberbot I and II's user pages as well. Though, not very recently, it has been subject to vandal attacks, most likely because Cyberbot II is practically everywhere on Wikipedia now. :-)—cyberpowerChat:Online 12:41, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2016
| ||||||
Copyedit request
I saw your name listed at Peer Review saying that you like to copyedit for prose and MOS compliance, so I was hoping you could help me out. I wrote White Night riots 9 years ago and got it to GA. Since then, I and others have done some improvement, and I think it is nearly ready for FAC. However I'm rubbish at MOS, plus I'm sure standards have changed in the last 9 years. Would you mind having a look? The WordsmithTalk to me 18:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 July 2016
- Discussion report: Busy month for discussions
- Featured content: A wide variety from the best
- Traffic report: Sports and esports
- Arbitration report: Script writers appointed for clerks
- Recent research: Using deep learning to predict article quality
Thanks
| File:Its a Cartoon duck.jpg | Duck.... |
| Thanks for being so prompt on that Washington Familymembers/US historical figures-Causes of death block-evading vandal.
Cheers! Shearonink (talk) 21:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC) |
86.178.123.170
Can you please block this IP for persistent vandalism, thanks... 2607:FB90:2204:658F:0:1E:BDE5:B801 (talk) 07:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) No edits have been made since the IP was given a final warning. The report you made at AIV was sufficient for making the IP's vandalism known. Be patient; let the man work ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- I know... generally some admins block w/o edits past final warning, and since he was just at AIV, I thought I'd give a heads up :-) 2607:FB90:2204:658F:0:1E:BDE5:B801 (talk) 07:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) No worries, my friend. I really appreciate you for reporting vandals. Coming from someone who does a lot of vandalism patrolling, it's a big help when you do it. But be patient; someone will get to it :-). Also, we want to try and make sure that we've given sufficient warnings. No big deal though; I just added a note. An admin may very well feel that blocking is appropriate. Keep it up, dude. You're awesome. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Aaaand he did! lol :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:59, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict!) Reasonable minds disagree on what constitutes 'sufficient warning'. For me, for obvious vandalism, I'd give one warning and then you're liable to be blocked without further notice. I might be more lenient with somebody who might be a newbie seeing how things work, and I've no qualms about blocking without warning for really nasty stuff or where the vandal clearly knows their way around Wikipedia. Anyway, I've blocked your friend (I'd ping you but I don't think pinging works for IPs, alas). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Aaaand he did! lol :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:59, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) No worries, my friend. I really appreciate you for reporting vandals. Coming from someone who does a lot of vandalism patrolling, it's a big help when you do it. But be patient; someone will get to it :-). Also, we want to try and make sure that we've given sufficient warnings. No big deal though; I just added a note. An admin may very well feel that blocking is appropriate. Keep it up, dude. You're awesome. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- I know... generally some admins block w/o edits past final warning, and since he was just at AIV, I thought I'd give a heads up :-) 2607:FB90:2204:658F:0:1E:BDE5:B801 (talk) 07:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) No edits have been made since the IP was given a final warning. The report you made at AIV was sufficient for making the IP's vandalism known. Be patient; let the man work ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
92.23.93.50
Our messages got crossed multiple times there, but no edit conflicts (weird!) - thank you for looking out for the editor and I'll keep half an eye on the queue as well -- samtar talk or stalk 10:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- Must have saved half a second apart or something. Hopefully they'll write in and I'll do what I can but I'll be off to bed fairly soon and it could be tomorrow morning (UTC) before I'm back online (I work nights). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Your question
Since the request has been archived and you did ask me a question. I did help him after I noticed these pointers. When I reverted I only noticed this unexplained content removal which blanked the entire page missing the reason why this user blanked it. I have to admit that I was a bit overwhelmed by the legal treat at my talk page but I tried to repack myself and look into the actual complaint. I might have picked the wrong notice board (I realized I should have written at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents) to report a legal treat. EN-wiki has so many of them. I do apologies for picking the wrong one. Please also realize that I am not a native English speaker and it takes me some time to write a balanced reply. While I was writing a reply to the IP-user I noticed your ping. I felt that I had to reply to you first given your treat . Please note that the IP has been blocked by another admin (Materialscientist) in the meantime, reverted by another user (Twsx) and has been warned by this other user.
If you want to have a good reason not to revoke my rollback I can give you a couple. Revoking it over one screw up which I was trying to correct seems a bit harsh to me and this also seems to be against the spirit off the rollback policy. Another one might sound a bit selfish but given the last conflict you had at Commons and my role in your de-admin discussion we should be the last persons to impose admin actions on each other on any project. If you really believe my rollback should still be removed over this single, complex situation I should have handled better I plea to your decency to ask another admin to investigate this case.
If you now excuse me, I will have to write a message to Graham McCann (or the IP who claims to be Graham McCann but I see no reason not to believe him) explaining the chances I did to the article. I am sorry that I got a bit overwhelmed at my talk page and therefore I didn't give the balanced reply I use to give. Natuur12 (talk) 11:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- While AIV no doubt was a mistake, I personally don't see any wrongdoing of @Natuur12:'s part beyond that mishap. He also seems to have noticed that I have already given the IP editor some pointers on my talk page, and even went so far as to try to rectify the situation on the article itself as he already pointed out. Looking again at the IP's edits, including this edit unrelated to "himself", I think there is a limit as to how far AGF goes and regardless of intentions, the editing was clearly disruptive.
- Quite frankly, I find the uncivil tone that you, @HJ Mitchell: took on the AIV page, as well as the fact that you threaten to revoke a user's rollback rights even though your issue does not seem to be with anything related to rollbacking/reverting much more disturbing that what happened with the IP editor. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 11:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Natuur12: My apologies, I didn't recognise your name from Commons. I mistook you for one of the inexperienced but well-meaning editors often seen at AIV who mash buttons with no thought for the effects they have on the people behind the screen. I'm not going to revoke your rollback rights; if I felt strongly about it I'd start a thread at a noticeboard or ask another admin to look, but I'd already decided to let it lie when I saw your edits to the article and your response here shows that you do have common sense. That's all I was looking for—something more than robotic policy compliance. We should be understanding towards article subjects who feel their articles are unfair—blocking them doesn't do anyone any good. And @Twsx: if you feel that an administrator of a website taking a strident tone with someone is more disturbing than feeling (justly or not—that's something we can discuss with them instead of reverting/warning/blocking them like a common vandal) that you're being libelled by the top Google result for your name, then I would invite you to take a moment to think how the latter must feel. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you though this whole situation is a nice reminder why I rather edit other projects. Though, isn’t there some “articles should be of decent quality” policy that allows the deletion of the article in question? I understand that it was established that the subject is notable but surely poor quality articles shouldn’t be kept? I am asking because the deleting process at en-wiki is still an enigma to me. Natuur12 (talk) 09:09, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Natuur12: My apologies, I didn't recognise your name from Commons. I mistook you for one of the inexperienced but well-meaning editors often seen at AIV who mash buttons with no thought for the effects they have on the people behind the screen. I'm not going to revoke your rollback rights; if I felt strongly about it I'd start a thread at a noticeboard or ask another admin to look, but I'd already decided to let it lie when I saw your edits to the article and your response here shows that you do have common sense. That's all I was looking for—something more than robotic policy compliance. We should be understanding towards article subjects who feel their articles are unfair—blocking them doesn't do anyone any good. And @Twsx: if you feel that an administrator of a website taking a strident tone with someone is more disturbing than feeling (justly or not—that's something we can discuss with them instead of reverting/warning/blocking them like a common vandal) that you're being libelled by the top Google result for your name, then I would invite you to take a moment to think how the latter must feel. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:01, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
AIV
Your removal of my reports have left me scratching my head. I report, on average, 5-10 accounts per day. I've reported well over 500 accounts within the last 2 months to AIV/UAA. I think most, if not all, the accounts are blocked by the various administrators, but you. Would some of the accounts also fall under UAA? sure. However, I don't bother making a report to AIV unless the edits are CLEARLY promotional in tone. The bizarre of all: The last time you removed my reports, I noticed another administrator actually went back and blocked all the accounts I reported. --Cahk (talk) 08:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 August 2016
- News and notes: Foundation presents results of harassment research, plans for automated identification; Wikiconference submissions open
- Obituary: Kevin Gorman, who took on Wikipedia's gender gap and undisclosed paid advocacy, dies at 24
- Traffic report: Summer of Pokémon, Trump, and Hillary
- Featured content: Women and Hawaii
- Recent research: Easier navigation via better wikilinks
- Technology report: User script report (January to July 2016, part 1)
Reading and other cenotaphs
I noticed that there was no photo on Royal Berkshire Regiment War Memorial, and I see you took some photos in Reading, but of a different memorial. Is there an easy way to get the file info and category changed over there (the images in commons:Category:Reading Cenotaph)? It confused me momentarily and might confuse others as well. It is interesting that there are eight Lutyens cenotaphs, with the seven other than the Whitehall one being two regimental memorials (Maidstone and Reading) and two being in barracks (Reading and Cardiff). Am I right in thinking that not all of them are listed? The Glasgow Derby one and the Cardiff one don't have articles as far as I can see. We are only missing a photo of the Reading one though! I suppose it might be difficult to get into the barracks? Carcharoth (talk) 20:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- PS. I can see why no-one has attempted a list of all the works by Lutyens. We have what is mentioned in the Edwin Lutyens article (not sure if a list of his cenotaphs would fit there) and List of Edwin Lutyens buildings, and Category:Works of Edwin Lutyens (if you include subcategories, probably 124 articles), but nothing to go alongside List of works by Charles Holden. Maybe turning List of works by Edwin Lutyens blue might be a project for someone! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 20:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Last note for now. I used the link Welch Regimental War Memorial for the Maindy Barracks cenotaph in Cardiff for when that gets written, maybe a redirect if another name is better. If it helps, it was unveiled on 11 November 1924 by Major-General Sir Thomas Marden. Also, a slight correction to the list of Lutyens cenotaphs. Some of the articles you've done give Norwich War Memorial as one of the eight cenotaphs, but the seven other cenotaphs are given by Historic England here as "Cardiff, Derby, Maidstone, Manchester, Reading, Rochdale, Southampton" (i.e. not Norwich). I suppose it is slightly ironic that the fanfare from Historic England about listing all 44 of the Lutyens First World War memorials quietly manages to gloss over the fact that they've only listed the ones in England. The one in Cardiff is outside their remit, though it is listed here. I have no idea what works by Lutyens are in Scotland (there are some in Ireland). Carcharoth (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Carcharoth. Thanks for the note. That's a lot of questions, so in some sort of order:
- Yes, Reading Cenotaph is a different beast; that's the civic memorial for the town. It's also listed and could be worth an article (it's right next to the Maiwand Lion, which is another fascinating war memorial!), but it's not a Lutyens. It confused me at first, but I've fixed the descriptions on Commons (I meant to do that months ago). We don't have any photos of the Royal Berks memorial and Skelton notes that it's not publicly accessible; I'm guessing it's not visible from the street but I may have a friend in Reading who could walk past and look. The barracks is only a TA base these days, not a top-secret fortress, so I might try getting in touch with them and asking nicely if they'd let me in to take photos (they evidently let Tim Skelton in!).
- Derby has an article: Midland Railway War Memorial, Derby. Cardiff doesn't (yet!), but it does have a photo on Commons. It's listed by Cadw (grade II), which makes all the English and Welsh memorials listed.
- And yes, he was quite prolific! A comprehensive list would take pain-staking research and a lot of time. I'm thinking of doing some sort of umbrella article/list for his war memorials once I've written all the individual articles. A complete list of his works might have to wait for a braver Wikipedian (or one with more time on their hands).
- I'll fix the articles that mention Norwich as one of the seven. It sort of is a cenotaph (albeit a horizontal one), but you wouldn't recognise it as fitting the pattern of the other eight and the four(?) copies of the original abroad.
- He wasn't directly involved in any war memorials in Scotland. The Stone of Remembrance at Edinburgh Castle used his design but was reduced in size and a different stone (he wasn't happy about it). And he designed the Irish National War Memorial Gardens; I don't think he did any more war memorials in Ireland (north or south) but I don't know if he did anything else.
—Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:40, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the prompt reply. You are right, the Maiwand Lion is fascinating, but then most war memorials are. I have a soft spot for this one as I've not seen one covering three different wars like that before (though there probably are some out there). Thanks for the Wales/Scotland/Ireland notes. A list of Lutyens war memorials would be very good to see done. On copies of the Lutyens 'Whitehall' cenotaph abroad, our article lists the ones mentioned by Historic England, plus the Auckland one (which I suspect they missed). There might well be others. The case of people abroad asking for permission is interesting. Sometimes I think people copied the design without asking permission and got in trouble (or went in the architect's bad books as you saw with the Edinburgh stone)! There are a number of imitations of the Cross of Sacrifice for example, and sources are sometimes murky on which ones are official. Carcharoth (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:58, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
"Inactionable" AIV report
Wallaceshawn has repeatedly inserted the same unsourced casting details into a film article after a final warning not to - why is this "inactionable" under AIV? --McGeddon (talk) 10:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Because adding unsourced information is not vandalism. Vandalism is something done to deliberately damage the encyclopaedia. If the additions are a hoax, that would b grounds for a vandalism block, but you didn't specify that in the AIV report, and I'm not going to block someone for adding unsourced content, at least not through AIV. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:32, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, fair enough. --McGeddon (talk) 11:11, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
War memorial lists and geolocation
Forgot to mention that one thing that can be done with categories or lists of geographical objects is to generate a map showing the location of them all with respect to each other. If you look at the lists on {{Commonwealth War Graves Commission}}, and click one of the links at the bottom generated by {{GeoGroupTemplate}} (I used the Open Street Map one because it loads quickly), then you can see the locations relative to each other. I have yet to work out how (and whether it is OK or not to do this) to produce a labelled map to add to the list articles. Just a thought for the Lutyens list when/if you do that. Carcharoth (talk) 12:31, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Hmm. I usually leave mapping to Chris M. He's much better at it than I am and he actually enjoys it! I just write the prose. I'll probably do the list of Lutyens war memorials at some point, but I don't know when I'll get to it. Probably after I've written all the articles on the individual memorials, which could take months. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:40, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Unsourced edits continuing
On 1 August, you blocked 174.25.254.43 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for continued disruption via unsourced additions. The editor is continuing this pattern using 174.25.254.144 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) including two such edits today. (A comparison of the contribs confirms.) TIA. —ATS 🖖 Talk 03:06, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
This person also has edited, to all appearances, as:
- 174.25.249.98 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
- 174.25.255.170 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
- 174.25.255.174 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
- 174.25.255.3 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
- 174.25.255.51 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
—ATS 🖖 Talk 04:10, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- They appear to be hopping around 174.25.248.0/21 so I've blocked that for a week. If necessary, we can look at a longer block if that doesn't work. Let me know if you notice a reduction in disruption for a week (or if you don't). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:44, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Much obliged. —ATS 🖖 Talk 21:38, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Mind if you take a look into this guy? Been trying to revert his disruptive edits on Philippine-related timeline articles to no avail as he outright refuses to collaborate and discuss changes. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:05, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Blakegripling ph: Just saw the AIV report. What's the problem with the edits? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:08, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- User's being insistent and relentless on his edits from what I've read, despite the said additions being WP:ROUTINE or too trivial for inclusion, c.f. this discussion on WT:TAMBAY.
- I see Ed Johnston had a word with them yesterday but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. It's not really an AIV matter, but I've blocked them for two days. Hopefully that will encourage them to stop and discuss. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:21, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks mate, hope that would at least make him consider and think about what he just did. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- I see Ed Johnston had a word with them yesterday but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. It's not really an AIV matter, but I've blocked them for two days. Hopefully that will encourage them to stop and discuss. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:21, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- User's being insistent and relentless on his edits from what I've read, despite the said additions being WP:ROUTINE or too trivial for inclusion, c.f. this discussion on WT:TAMBAY.
- Gotcha. But you forgot mark my report at WP:AN3 as resolved for now. Thanks for the concern--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
- Welp, looks like the temp block on his account failed to deter him from continuing on with his edits; see this for details. Perhaps a semi or temporary full protection would do the trick, but idk as this guy's relentless. Blake Gripling (talk) 02:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- Gotcha. But you forgot mark my report at WP:AN3 as resolved for now. Thanks for the concern--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Talk: Jill Dando
I just wanted to follow up on an issue where I was blocked some time back (about a year ago).
RE: Revision 668779873 In a lengthy discussion regarding the alleged murderer of Jill Dando, I offered a theory, presented as a theory. Isn't this one of the purposes of the Talk page? The theory referenced an article that the user ThisisPaul found objectionable, and he removed my comment. I then provided a different reference and rewrote my theory. He deleted that text as well. I reworded my text, and he deleted that. Since I am a Wikipedia novice, could you please review my text and tell me how I broke Wikipedia guidelines. I have found a reference from a regular newspaper/website that could be cited (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2698820/Murdered-Crimewatch-presenter-Jill-Dando-tried-bosses-investigate-alleged-paeodphile-ring-inside-BBC-no-one-wanted-know.html). It appears to me that it's acceptable to discuss other theories regarding the murder, such as the ridiculous Serb hit-man theory, but not the involvement of people closer to home. And I really have to wonder why ThisisPaul is so hypervigilant over the Talk page of someone who has been dead for sixteen years. My previous contributions were not simply re-edited, they were scrubbed. Thank you. 192.40.24.4 (talk) 18:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Shandafurdie