User talk:Kablammo/Archive 18

Draft:Fredrick Willius

Thanks so much for your copyediting help! I'm new to editing source code so there are bound to be some mistakes, but thank God for the draftspace, so I can iron out all of the kinks before tag it for review. I am still waiting on a couple of sources I want to use to add some more detail to his career section, but do you think it's sufficiently sourced and edited to go ahead and tag it for review now, and I can make those changes later, once it's a real article again? - Evansknight (talk) 02:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Archiving blanked pages

Re: Talk:Norway Debate#Archiving are you taking about the page in the state it was in when you made your comment or in general?

Generally, I want to discourage User:No Great Shaker from setting up archive bots that remove so many old sections the ToC disappears. Adding archiving without first ensuring consensus is only acceptable if the user in good faith believed his or her actions were uncontroversial. Once it is readily apparent this is not the case, persisting is not acting in the best interests of the project.

However, I am not prepared to undo bot actions once taken. CapnZapp (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

• Capn, I think the bot edit should be reverted, and the page restored. It was only half the size where archiving is recommended. I give no special deference to bots; they should be a tool, not a weapon. Kablammo (talk) 19:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

While I would normally say auto-archiving is a trivial and uncontroversial action, and hesitate to undo archiving once done, in this case its obvious the stable state is before archival. Let's just see if User:No Great Shaker self-immolates first. Cheers, CapnZapp (talk) 22:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hilda Doolittle

Hi Kablammo, would u mind giving this a check over - no heavy lifting- only need a scan for obvious mistakes /nonsense. You are one of the better informed people I know in this areas, so asking for guidance. ps, hello long time no talk. Ceoil (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

PPS, here is some gothic music [1] and my rip-off version[2]; we all have our dark periods, H.D. vocalised them acquitly, and would like you to take a look.. Ceoil (talk) 21:12, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Ceoil, on first reading it looks very good. I will go deeper this evening or overnight. Kablammo (talk) 22:16, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

No rush man. Ceoil (talk) 23:34, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I thought it was exceptionally well written, and despite diligent search, was unable to discern any Paddyenglish misspellings. My copyedits are minor; feel free to revert/alter any of them. (But I must disabuse you of one notion; I am not one of "the better informed" in this area, and had virtually no prior understanding of H.D.) Kablammo (talk) 14:03, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Hmm. There was another Joyce incident today; how come these accounts are often adding boxes on first edits. That aside, thanks a bunch for shaming me on spelling; genuinely appreciated man, I suck at English and writing and meaning and stuff, but....am great at Paddyenglish !!;) and the look helped a lot. Onwards my friend! Ceoil (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Actually I think you are a very good writer, and knowledgeable. As you may have noticed, I take a very light touch on copy-editing, and will defer to the author even if I may have expressed it differently. And now I know something about this poet, thanks to you.

—Sláinte! Kablammo (talk) 23:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

In an environment that is a magnet for verbose, obnoxious, self-important people to pontificate at length, your understated editing, quite authority and humility are a breath of fresh air, and long may you continue. I often wonder wtf am I doing on this website; when it comes down to it is because of working with people I respect and know I would like IRL. Ceoil (talk) 20:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Twin Cities Zephyr

I'm talking about moving the Twin Cities Zephyr and thought you should be notified. Only come if you're interested, I'm not recruiting. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 20:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I get knocked down but I get up again

Here is something plaintive from a band that never compromised, even during the fuss over their worldwide nr 1 hit, but were far from one hit wonders [3]. I always though "Give the Anarchist a Cigarette" was one of the best song titles.ever. The point is; keep on going, despite being told to "behave"/conform with regards to infoboxes and everybody should have one, regardless of argument. Ceoil (talk) 12:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

One of my favourites also. Kablammo (talk) 13:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

You know the Joyce article is being hit by a coordinated squad fresh off a victory at Laurence Olivier. The OWN and "new faces input" claims/requests are thus a bit rich and hard to take. I'm making a tactical withdrawal. Ceoil (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Re "tactical withdrawal": a little WBY, perhaps? Kablammo (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Should they prevail we likely will have to fight off a proliferation of fields, and contests over whether he that he was "British", who "influenced" him and whom he influenced, and so on. Instead of actually knowing the subject and making intelligent and nuanced contributions, they will add trivia which contributes nothing to our understanding but will give them the satisfaction of "contributing" to an article on a great writer.

And this is not to say that the subject is a walled garden to which only experts should contribute; there are scholarly journals for that. (Nor should Wikipedia be a place for advocating pet theories.) Instead, we should be familiar with the subject and the varying views of real experts, and then do our best to represent the facts and expert differences, so that readers get a basic and (we hope) nuanced understanding of the subject. Kablammo (talk) 14:41, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

There are two other (besides yourself and Victoria) editors there that I have high opinions of; Wtfiv (who wrote much of the page) & Xx78900 (a fellow Corkman that I share interests with). If it has to be a box, let's at least make sure it's a very small box, per your elegant rational above. Ceoil (talk) 17:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

• Who are you replying to? + I take it you are talking to me? / 2 = [4] Ceoil (talk) 20:44, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Here is another tune, fitting, with mind-bending harmonics. Seen them loads, and their capture of post brexit England is bang on - " nothing but a bare faced lie, is all you cunts can hold on to". Ceoil (talk) 03:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Another year gone

		Best wishes for the holidays
		Wishing you and yours the best over the holiday season, and here's hoping 2023 won't bring as much global trauma as 2020, the worse 2021[5] & fecking 2022! Ceoil (talk) 04:07, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Your e-mails

No doubt it was a combination of both of our slownesses. It was taking me a while to craft my comment (smiling).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Received with thanks. WP:ANI is always available should you think it is necessary. Mjroots (talk) 06:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad

Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. I saw you made some significant edits to the article in 2007 and are still active, so I figured I'd give you a notification. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

2 poor quality articles

Thank you for getting involved in WT:WikiProject_Ships#Two_poor_quality_articles and for posting some encouraging remarks for the originating editor. I have gone ahead and posted the two articles in the formal AfD procedures. I have notified Товболатов (who I had already been in discussion with on my talk page when he contacted me and I laid out my reservations over the articles). I have to say that the process of putting two AfD notifications on the talk page of a new-to-English-Wikipedia editor, when their only other contribution here also has an AfD – well, it seems an entirely brutal process. So I put a note of apology on his talk page too. I hope he understands.

Just so you know, I have a very unreliable internet connection at the moment (due to a poor-quality temporary repair to my landline after it got ploughed up by a tractor). If I disappear from any ensuing discussions, it will probably because the telecommunications infrastructure here has collapsed completely. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Eladkarmel (talk) 18:41, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm very very sorry. I was wrong. Eladkarmel (talk) 19:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)