User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 27

Bottom of Page

CBT for DYK

Hey, want to take you up on your offer to nom the DYK. Think that gets us out of having to do a review.

My proposed hook is "Did you know that...that the male common box turtle has to lean back past the vertical to mate with the female?" Uses the ARKive content and is short and "cool".

Here's a possible photo:

(If you want to change hook subject or prose or photo, feel free.)

TCO (reviews needed) 08:11, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Featured article unlikely

None of the pages had enough content. Would take a lot more to bring it up. Also, I think FA should and does expect the article to have had the sourcing itself checked. They always run into issues when doing "brush up" FAs that rely on previous work (on wiki or off). It really does (and should) require someone checking the whole document and is a good thing. Is the one time in an article's history when we can get a warm fuzzy that it's not full of old mistakes.

I do think their content is brilliant on something like CBT which is a high interest topic and we had a stubby article forever...and they got us to a decent article fast.

TCO (reviews needed) 22:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment - no harm in trying I suppose, and any feedback will be useful. What about "Good article" status? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe with a fair amount of user addition and checking. GAs can have a lot of variation because of the single reviewer, but in general would be doubtful as they are sort of FA lites. Just think Arkive articles a bit short. not sniffiing my nose at them. they are nice overviews and better integrated than our usual start class melanges of previous submissions. And going from stub+ to B- is a big deal (really benefits reader functionally).

Indirectly some GAs might result if the text adder gets interested...like if I get interested in CBT and just pursue it...which is kinda how I am leaning.  ;-)

Would feel like some statement to the effect of "if you get interested in the topic and further develop it to GA or FA status" might be OK. No way is the transfer going to be at that level (my take).TCO (reviews needed) 22:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Ad:Template:Infobox_Mars_crater

Ad:Template:Infobox_Mars_crater

You may be interested in this discussion Bulwersator (talk) 14:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

2011 Oslo attacks

Thanks for copyediting the above article. --Eisfbnore • talk 21:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Foursquare Badges Discussion

You recently contributed to List of Foursquare Badges. Your input is requested for the following discussion: Talk:List of Foursquare Badges#Images. Thank you. --Flyguy33 (talk) 15:08, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

HotCat

I think you should check what you're doing when you're using a script to change articles. This is from 2011 Norway attacks:
(cur | prev) 22:08, 24 July 2011 Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) (47,413 bytes) (removed Category:Zionist terrorism using HotCat) (undo)
(cur | prev) 22:06, 24 July 2011 Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) (47,444 bytes) (removed Category:2011 in Norway using HotCat) (undo)
(cur | prev) 22:06, 24 July 2011 Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) (47,480 bytes) (removed Category:Terrorism in Norway using HotCat) (undo)
(cur | prev) 22:05, 24 July 2011 Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) (47,513 bytes) (removed Category:Terrorist incidents in 2011 using HotCat) (undo)
All those categories are relevant to the article and should be there... Kiire (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I have already posted a justification for my deliberate removal of those redundant/ inappropriate categories, on the article talk page. You're also sailing close to WP:3RR in restoring at least one of them. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I have responded to you there. Kiire (talk) 22:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Islamophobe

The term "islamophobe" is controversial. Please don't place it as you did here again. Pass a Method talk 23:33, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I was fixing your ungrammatical edit; but I dispute your assertion that the term is not to be used. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:37, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Possible plagiarism on ARKive

See WT:GLAM/ARKive#Possible plagiarism at ARKive: Galapagos penguin. Not very nice, this. Could you contact ARKive about it? —innotata 01:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I added a comment: my impression (having seen ARKive's response to you) is that they can't have used the Wikipedia article; both we and they used www.penguins.cl. And they cite it, too. So they've done nothing wrong. Andrew Dalby 13:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds#External links to Arkive

Hi, I see you're in charge of Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive. Thanks for working with this site to increase our coverage of different species. This being said, your external links to this site have prompted a discussion on the WikiProject Birds talkpage. I admit that I find the concerns valid and I'm puzzled as to why you are mass-linking this site, when just incorporating their material into articles would do. On the Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive page, the issue I have is with point 4 in the "How to transfer content" section. The rest of the instructions are great, its just the directive to link to the page en masse... I don't think it jives with our external links guidelines. ThemFromSpace 11:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome to advance the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds#External_links_to_Arkive. Snowman (talk) 11:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

TB

I invite you to a discussion we are having in [1]. Pass a Method talk 11:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Late response

Sorry not to have replied before, Andy -- I've had an urgent piece of work to finish. I'm just now looking at what the project is doing to see how I might help. Seems very worthwhile. Andrew Dalby 13:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you; no problem. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Andy, you must think me rude or lazy or both. What has made me hesitate is the difficulty (as it seemed to me) of defining for foreign-language Wikipedians what exactly they can do (is there a full list of the ARKive pages we can use, or not yet?), how reliable the material is (this seems variable, depending whether ARKive professionals have verified it) and therefore how it should be used on other Wikipedias.

Where the material is "reliable" (I guess, if it has been not just drafted but verified professionally by ARKive) we should be able to cite ARKive for it, in footnotes. That's fine, and it could be used in that way in any language.

Where it isn't "reliable", it won't be so simple to decide how to use it on other Wikipedias. For some other languages there may well be material of equal value in that same language already on the Web, which would be handier for editors than any English website. If there isn't, and there is currently no article about the species on a particular foreign wikipedia, OK, the material from ARKive may be a handy basis for starting an article, or the newly improved English article may be a handy basis; but more likely the latter, because it's organized in a Wikipedia way and it might be at least partly footnoted from reliable sources.

So, if the ARKive material isn't "reliable", the best advice (I think) would remain: translate the English Wikipedia article (or German, French, Spanish, or any other well-made article) and acknowledge with a transwiki template, not an ARKive template.

So, how much of the ARKive material is "reliable", i.e. verified by ARKive professionals? I think the extent it will be useful on other Wikipedias rather depends on that. Is it possible to say? Andrew Dalby 17:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Neither "rude" nor "lazy"; I just assumed "busy". I'm not suggesting that material be translated directly from ARKive, but (as you suggest in your penultimate paragraph) that the English-language articles improved by this project be translated. The list of those improved articles is at Wikipedia:GLAM/ARKive#Work done. ARKive is a reliable source, so there's no need to worry about that. A transwiki template will be fine; but it would be good to get also a project template on the talk page of articles translated as a result if this initiative, in order that we can qualify our achievements. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

With a further apology for having delayed, I have to say regretfully I just can't help after all. Demands on my extra-Wikipedia time are coming thick and fast. You may meanwhile have seen Victuallers' note (meant for you) on my talk page: it's true, there are some notable polyglots among the contributors to the Derby challenge. Maybe you would find a collaborator there? Andrew Dalby 14:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ginger Gilmour

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 05:27, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Azimuth Coordinator

Being a sound and recording engineer for a great many years I added a bit of extra obvious information to the stub to improve readability for non-technical readers benefit. Also V&A Museum has a catalogue number for it. 82.11.121.200 (talk) 19:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Nice work, thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:47, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

African elephant

Hey mate, just popping in to let you know that I left some comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/African elephant/archive1. Cheers! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 15:08, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks; I'll get on it shortly. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Common box turtle

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 09:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Well done, Andy: great to see. MartinPoulter (talk) 08:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

proposal re academic journal abbreviations

A while back you'd suggested a design for infoboxes on academic journal articles to include informal/common abbreviations. The subject's come up again, and there's a pro and con. Your comments would be welcome. -- Econterms (talk) 08:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for George McGavin

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

{{Times}} template.

Hello, is this template the same as having an X? Because there are many articles that are connected to the 2011 Pan American Games that have to be fixed for this template. If I left it alone, would the articles still connect to the one with the templates in the name? Intoronto1125TalkContributions 23:14, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

This template is not the same as an X, but is the same as ×, which is actually faster to type than {{times}}. 76.113.124.50 (talk) 05:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The HTML entity may have two fewer characters, but its meaning is less clear to editors not familiar with HTML. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

It's the typographically-correct "times" character, not a letter - try enlarging the text on your screen, greatly, to see the difference clearly: x ×. I'm not sure what you mean by "connect to the one with the templates in the name"; but the use of {{Times}} is optional, if there are articles already using the letter 'x', you can just leave them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Me and forgetting words. Anyways, When Men's 4×100 metre freestyle relay and Men's 4 X 100 metre freestyle relay articles are created do they have the same name? Intoronto1125TalkContributions 14:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, you mean in article titles? No, to do that you'd need to create both, with one redirecting to the other - but check first on our policy on article titles in such cases. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Alternately, you could simply hold down ALT and type 0215 on your numeric keypad; see Extended ASCII. Nyttend (talk) 04:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, but how many editors will remember such combinations? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 08:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Handsworth discussion

Dear Andy
I note that you made a contribution to the discussion regarding Handsworth that states you personally know of two police officers being shot in a car in Handsworth. When did this happen?
I was brought up in Handsworth, and have family and my Church in the area still, as well as working there for many years.
I have consulted others but no one can recollect such a thing happening.
I note that this does not appear to have made the news as many of these things normally do - in terms of any search that I can find.

80.249.57.49 (talk) 08:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)Philip Evans

I've made no such comment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 08:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Apologies Andy - it was not your comment at all -I mistakenly linked your name with comments made after a comment you made I will take this up with Nick Boulevard who it actually appears to be 80.249.57.49 (talk) 11:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)Philip Evans

Deaths in police custody

Well done for noticing and correcting the two errors about 333 deaths in police custody in the article about the London riots. I feel bad about not having noticed either of them myself, since I moved that particular piece of text, and looked at the source, and added the reference to the article about the IPCC report. It just goes to show that it's only too easy for misinformation to slip into articles. Thank you for making those corrections. Rubywine . talk 10:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Encephalartos caffer

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't do that again.

I'm serious. My comment was concise, and given what I'd written what you did (rolling me up) was totally taking the mick. You have no right to tell me where my perfectly considered and relavant comments belong (esp when it is just "elsewhere"). What you did was childish more than anything else - over a subject that could not be more serious. People are allowed to disagree with your position - get over it. Matt Lewis (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll do it whenever it's appropriate; as it was in this case. You've already been told, more than once that your recent behaviour is disruptive. You're also actually wrong in your accusation about what I said. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)