User talk:Philip Cross/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Katie Hopkins

I did have one eye on improving this to good article status at some point this year, but a moving target is hard to hit and she keeps getting the news so the article isn't really stable enough. What do you think? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Best to concentrate on another subject to achieve your goal of a GA. As you say, her article is unlikely to be stable for long. Good luck. Philip Cross (talk) 09:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

quote

Reuters attributed the wording - which appears to be from Clause IV - but I am unsure that "greater" is supported either, if one reads the cites accurately. Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:22, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

"false attribution"?

[1] seems on its face to be a Reuters dispatch by Andrew Osborn dated August 9, 2015. What part of that attribution is "false"? Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:10, 9 August 2015 (UTC) .

The attribution to Corbyn of "means of production, distribution and exchange", a phrase which he did not use in the Independent on Sunday interview. As is clear from the direct quote, he is more open minded. Philip Cross (talk) 19:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

You well should have noted the use of the phrase in the cite which you removed from Reuters. Which is RS AFAICT. I rather think the Reuters ref should be re-added, to be sure. Collect (talk) 20:30, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Page 3

Every day I have checked now there is a new Page 3 girl. It seems odd to leave something in the article so oviously wrong and so easily checked. I don't understand, is this something that is only in the online addition? Capitalismojo (talk) 03:36, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

As your user page says you are in the UK, could you pick up the paper and see? Capitalismojo (talk) 03:39, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Richard Desmond

You're right, thank you, neutrality is preferable.212.121.210.45 (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Laurie Penny

Hi. Looking at the edit history, it was established a self published blog written by a subject was OK - so surely a post from a verified Twitter account is too? I have also placed info regarding her father, which also in effect confirms her surname.

Noddyholderspetchimp (talk) 12:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

It would be legitimate if the source was Laurie Penny herself. As the Guido Fawkes blog isn't admissible here, their twitter account should not be either. See Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#Twitter where only primary sources are allowed. Philip Cross (talk) 12:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Benny Lee

Hello,

I would like to invite you to the talk page of Benny Lee. I need a second opinion, so I picked you since you created and have contributed to the article. Thank you.Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I have looked in to your query, and my response is on the talk page. Philip Cross (talk) 09:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 13

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - EBSCO, IMF, more newspaper archives, and Arabic resources
• Expansion into new languages, including Viet and Catalan
• Spotlight: Elsevier partnership garners controversy, dialogue
• Conferences: PKP, IFLA, upcoming events

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Djindjic

I see you reverted my edit there based on your view that the journalist was biased. Can you give me some evidence that would prove he is "a notorious Milosevic sympathizer"? VS6507 (talk) 16:33, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Try this. Originally published by the New Statesman, on whose website it is not currently available. Note the name of the organisation at the top of this document. Search for articles by Marko Attila Hoare and Oliver Kamm (among others) who have written about Neil Clark's pieces on Milosevic, Serbia and the Balkans. I have to declare an interest in that Clark and myself do not exactly get on. Philip Cross (talk) 17:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Catherine Masters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Catherine Masters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Masters (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. EEng (talk) 04:45, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

For lurkers, and myself in years to come, the proper link is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Masters (2nd nomination). Philip Cross (talk) 09:21, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit to Hilary Benn's WP article

Can you explain this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.248.83 (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

A mistake. The "values" and "public opinion" comments, now removed, are POV. To be admissible, an editor would need to add a source. See Identifying Reliable Sources. Incidentally, when asked about his son, Tony Benn usually described Hilary Benn as being "his own man". (Talk pages don't normally need to be sourced.) Philip Cross (talk) 14:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Stella Creasy

This quote appears on her page "Creasy is coming under the threat of deselection from activists in her Walthamstow constituency, such as members of the Jeremy Corbyn-supporting Momentum group, who would prefer a candidate at the next general election with opinions closer to those of the Labour leader. A possibility that the seat might be redrawn after boundary changes means potential candidates are jockeying for position in the constituency party.[28]"

The article referenced http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2015/12/stella-creasy-targeted-deselection mentions Monentum's denial. In the interests of balance this denial should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.105.139 (talk) 15:44, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. Done. Philip Cross (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Brackets and references

The MOS says that references for information in brackets are included inside the brackets and not outside. This is an exception to the usual rule. Anglicanus (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The Independent censoring comments

Why are you censoring the talk page over on the Independent:

'The Independent has taken to disabling commenting for a certain subset of registered users. If you log in, all the comments and the commenting box totally disappears. For an alleged independent online newspaper, this is disingenuous and dishonest at its worst. Would anyone here care to contacts the editors and ask for an explanation.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Independent&diff=prev&oldid=694130073

Yaweller (talk) 10:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Take up the issue with the newspaper. If you read the WP:FORUM article you will find that talk pages are intended for discussing potential improvements to the article, rather than for issues unrelated to Wikipedia itself. If you can find a reliable source discussing the issue, you could add a passage to The Independent article itself. Philip Cross (talk) 10:53, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 14

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Gale, Brill, plus Finnish and Farsi resources
• Open Access Week recap, and DOIs, Wikipedia, and scholarly citations
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref - a citation drive for librarians

Read the full newsletter

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

Thankyou both, and to all this pages other followers, formal watchlisters and occasional visitors. Philip Cross (talk) 13:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:27, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

MarnetteD|Talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.

Make sure to click on both pictures to see them full size Philip Cross as they will give you a chuckle. May your 2016 be full of joy and special times. MarnetteD|Talk 04:29, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Mother Agnes and StWC (admin noticeboard)

A "clash"? Really? Have you been reading tabloids or something? Seriously, I would appreciate the withdrawal of your ad hominem comments regarding my supposedly disliking a person I have never heard of before today. I fear it will not look good for others reviewing your case. I would hate to see you getting a topic ban unnecessarily. Please at least think about it. --John (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Edited comment. I wasn't accusing you of disliking me, only of disliking my comments about Mother Agnes. Changed the heading, so I know what this section is about in the future. Philip Cross (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I've never heard of Mother Agnes and neither like nor dislike her. I do have concern that the edit I highlighted, combined with the comments you made in article talk which another editor highlighted, may be seen as problematic regarding your future conduct at that article. I was interested to see your name come up at AN, a page I have watchlisted since 2006, right after our disagreement, but if you are trying to deflect criticism of you onto me for carrying on a perfectly civil disagreement over article content into endorsing concerns others have raised abut your editing in an entirely different area, I am not sure how well that will fly. This is a precious opportunity for you to reflect honestly on how your editing may come across to others. Please take it. --John (talk) 21:19, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I would look into Mother Agnes if I were you. You objected to necessary NPOV in the Janner article's opening summary which had unaccountably been omitted.. This would have been noticed as uninvolved administrators look through our edit histories, so frankly you are scaremongering. I note neither you, or other editors, have accused me of breaking the 3RR rule which is usually considered edit warring and leads to topic bans after several warnings. So I am not particularly worried. Philip Cross (talk) 21:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Militant in Liverpool

Thank you for your edits on Militant in Liverpool which means that I can resume my obsession with century old by-elections. JASpencer (talk) 14:02, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration notice

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Solntsa90 (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Philip Cross (talk) 23:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 15

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - Ships, medical resources, plus Arabic and Farsi resources
• #1lib1ref campaign summary and highlights
• New branches and coordinators

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Protection of Children Act 1978

Hello Philip Cross, On 11 October 2015, you made a change to the article on the Protection of Children Act 1978. It looks as though it may be a mistake: an apparently random change to a number, some content deleted, and a reference added. The intention isn't altogether clear from the edit summary. Could you check and rectify it, please? Frans Fowler (talk) 02:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The changes I made would have been to match the available source. The change from 1.6 million to 11⁄2 signatures for Mary Whitehouse's petition in support of the Protection of Children Bill matches the figure given in the book by Suzanne Ost. I think it be should be clearer to users that Mary Whitehouse's petition on the Protection of Children Bill would have been presented to 10 Downing Street, she had presented several petitions to No10 before, but the sources I have managed to locate do not specify this. I would have removed the reference to the Paedophile Information Exchange on the basis that it looks like OR, no link was established between the two, only another editor's assertion of the context without a source being cited. Looking in to this again, I am still unable to find a source making a direct link, but easily found a reliable source establishing the context in 1977–78 when PIE (briefly) had a connection with a civil liberties organisation. Philip Cross (talk) 06:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Peter Lorre

Hi, if this talk is in the wrong place please forgive as it seems difficult to work out how to contribute to another editor for a first time. In relation to the above I wondered why you deleted my edit? As the sub heading was titled mimicry and if you listen to the album, which I have, it is clearly Peter Lorre and about the Maltese falcon, it is also in the article about the album. Thanks Morayman (talk) 09:52, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

The passage you added belongs in the article on The Friends of Mr Cairo, but not in this article or the one on The Maltese Falcon. WP:TRIVIA indicates that material in trivia sections should be incorporated in to the article proper or deleted. It is not possible in this case, and such sections can develop to unwieldy length. Best to keep to a handful of key examples, as here. Philip Cross (talk) 10:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

AN/I

Hi. I have mentioned you at AN/I regarding your involvement in the Stephen Sizer article.

• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Collusion.2C_Intimidation_and_ad_hominem_attacks_at_Stephen_Sizer.

--Hillbillyholiday ^talk 10:19, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Charles Hawtrey and the Def-Aids

I disagree that the Beatles reference has no notability; there are probably millions of Beatles fans who know Hawtrey's name only from "Two of Us". I'm not suggesting (as some do!) that every little thing any Beatle ever said is significant, but I think this is worth noting. (Heck, they even have T-shirts! http://www.oldskoolhooligans.com/images/hawtrey.jpg) DetroitWheels74 (talk) 13:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Each to his own. I outlined my objections on the talk page of the Hawtrey article when this issue was raised before. Philip Cross (talk) 13:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

About Women

Hi Philip Cross. I'm an editor of the Italian Wikipedia. I'm trying to participate to an IEG with the project "Women are everywhere". You will find the draft at this link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere It would be great if you could have a look at it. I need any kind of suggestion or advice to improve it. Support or endorsement would be fantastic. Many thanks,--Kenzia (talk) 19:20, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 16

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

• New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
• Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
• A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
• Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Malia Bouattia

Please don't misrepresent the source of material in articles. My source was the paper version of The Times. I don't know that the web version is identical though I accept it probably is. Also, they don't say born. WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT "Don't cite a source unless you've seen it for yourself." Philafrenzy (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I pay a monthly fee to use The Times website, and have read the whole article, not just the portion which would appear to non-subscribers. Your account of the hard copy matches the text I saw. I used the search function on the website to trace the article and there does not appear to be two articles on the subject by Mark Brown, the kind of issue which sometimes leads to sourcing problems. Accessibility, the Times paywall in this case, does not mean it is illegitimate to cite the article in this form on Wikipedia.

It is a reasonable assumption that Bouttia's birth would have been registered near where she was born. My concern was that it could have been read as having been copied from one of the websites which list Births, Deaths and Marriages in the UK. As such, it would have been liable to (hasty) deletion by another editor on the grounds of privacy and such sites being an inadmissible source. Philip Cross (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 364 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this template to your page.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

 Buster Seven Talk 13:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Seumas Milne

I do not see any sense or benefit in using a concealed link for Straight Left instead of openly linking at first mention. DuncanHill (talk) 23:57, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

OK. Modified to resolve what I saw as a problem. The faction pre-dated the publication, but that fact is now more clearly implied. Philip Cross (talk) 08:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC).