User talk:RGloucester/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treefight for Sunlight. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! France3470 (talk) 21:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

Sorry for the belated welcome, but the cookies are still warm!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, RGloucester. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! France3470 (talk) 21:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted.; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/A Collection of Vibrations for Your Skull. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! jsfouche ☽☾Talk 06:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

This musical artist does have an article on wikipedia, but it is listed under the name "Treefight for Sunlight (band)". I am in the process of trying to get the band's article moved to "Treefight for Sunlight" as there is no good reason to leave it as it is now, and furthermore, it makes the article very hard to find. That's why this article is notable, in the context of wikipedia. RGloucester (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

A Collection of Vibrations for Your Skull, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping Wikipedia!

Hallows AG (talk) 02:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

Hi RGloucester. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Atomic K Records, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Guerillero | My Talk 00:51, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hey RG--I was wondering, have you ever edited Wikipedia under a different username? – Lionel ^(talk) 03:50, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Housing

Hi. I've made a couple of edits here. Please look at the edit history and review my edit summaries. If my edits and comments are helpful, swell. If not, please fix what I've bollixed up. Welcome aboard, and happy editing. David in DC (talk) 21:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

May I nominate you?

As you may have noticed, I've suggested that the Conservatism Project might benefit from having a formal coordinator, helping along discussions etc. from a neutral point of view (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Conservatism#Proposal_to_elect_a_project_coordinator). I wonder if I could nominate you? It would be quite a lot of work, but I think you have the ability to help the project move forward. Best regards. --Kleinzach 23:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I simply don't have the time, as much as I'd like to. I do support your attempts to define the "scope" though. The opposition faced is a little too stalwart for me, as much as I'd like to solve the problem. I don't like arguing for no reason. The fact of the matter is, despite what Lionel and Toa say, the definition of conservatism I tried to put forward is with no doubt accepted by everyone in the world, even American political scientists...it just seems like a great misconception to promote their definition of conservatism...especially on an encyclopedia that is supposed to represent all English speakers... RGloucester (talk) 15:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I hope you will participate from time to time. The project could be productive if it's set up properly. I don't know whether or not we will be able to achieve that! --Kleinzach 04:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Article Help

re: review of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Tyler_Ward Thanks for your review and input. We have made some changes to the content of the article. I am concerned that I missed the actual reason for disapproval. Can u review and advise? I am hoping that the 4 non-self made references are enough & thats not what held us back. Thanks again. Dee03z (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Labour Government 2007-2010 / Brown Ministry

I have undone edits to these articles because, to move an article, you need to follow the procedure described at Wikipedia:Moving a page rather than using "cut and paste". Tim! (talk) 06:36, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. When you recently edited Churchill caretaker ministry, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Hudson, Richard Law and William Anstruther-Gray (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of Thatcher ministers 1979–1990 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to David Howell and Peter Walker

Third National ministry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Liberal Nationals

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Page move

Done. Were two pages merged to create this one? I can't see why someone would move from the old title to this one if it also covered C-B's tenure. Nyttend (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I just saw what you said at the deletion discussion, and thank you for it. To answer the question you posed, the ministry articles aren't on my radar. It's possible I've edited Cameron ministry at some point, but I've been bogged down on Shadow Cabinet (and some similar Australia-related articles) for quite a while now. -Rrius (talk) 02:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I think we should delete {{UK Shadow Cabinets}} (the one you replaced). I started an informal discussion because I don't think it's controversial. Anyway, weigh in if you care to. -Rrius (talk) 02:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Politics in the British Isles / Ireland-United Kingdom relations

I've replied to your post at the AfD. While I agree to the substance of your post, I'd point to the already existing article on British-Irish relations, which treats the topics you indicate. --RA (talk) 10:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back. I've replied again. --RA (talk) 08:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Change of comment tag

In [1] you changed an ending comment tag away from the correct -->. This meant the comment didn't end and the following wiki code became part of the comment. It has been fixed. I noticed the issue while investigating Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Today's AfD nominations not listing. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:UK Shadow Cabinets

Per my comment above and at the template's talk page, I have nominated it for deletion here. -Rrius (talk) 03:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thanks alot for your help on The British Politics Portal, it's greatly appreciated. Hence why I award you this exquisite Barnstar. Voltacus (talk) 12:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/userbox

Hi. Would you mind if I invert the colours on {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/userbox}}? The dark blue area does not contrast well with blue hyperlinks. I have placed examples in one of my sandboxes if you want to take a look. Road Wizard (talk) 08:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that’d be great. I was actually planning to do it myself, because it looks much better that way. Thanks very much for taking the trouble to do so. RGloucester (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I've done it for you, by taking the one from your sandbox and putting it in place. Thanks again, for that...I don't know why I put the colours that way. I had planned to do it the other way. Must've not been paying attention. I changed the colours as part of a "common branding scheme" to match them with the UK politics project page, which I thought was appropriate. Anyway, though, thanks again. RGloucester (talk) 19:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that. :) Road Wizard (talk) 22:05, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Email

I was trying to send you an email, but you don't have that feature enabled. Like many Wikipedians, I have a gmail account setup specifically for Wikipedia and nothing else, which is often handy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

It’s all working now, go ahead and send it. RGloucester (talk) 17:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Excellent. Sent. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
• Another one sent. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Possible stress increaser

Hiya. Dennis Brown has recently left me a message on my talk page indicating he thinks the WikiProject Conservatism discussion should be brought before ArbCom, and generously suggested that maybe the two of us might be among the better people to get together the Request for Arbitration. Lucky us, huh? Presumably, we would be not only putting together the request, but also a lot of the evidence we feel most relevant to the matter at hand. It is your call, of course, but if you want to assist in the matter, I am starting a page at User:John Carter/WikiProject Conservatism to get together the material I think relevant for the request, and maybe some of the evidence to present. If you would like to assist, particularly regarding relevant evidence regarding possible POV pushing, actual or implicit, by the project and its members, and maybe some input on how the UK Politics project deals with material of the same kind in a more seemingly neutral and less apparently problematic way, that input would be greatly appreciated. I guess I am going to try to get at least the request for arbitration ready by the weekend. If I do, and giving the ArbCom maybe a week to decide whether to take it up or not, although I doubt it would take anywhere near that long, we would have about a week to get together the evidence to present in the casse. If you would be interested, please feel free to contact me, or edit the page linked to above (which I actually haven't started as of the time of this message - so if you respond really fast, it might still be red), regarding the matter. John Carter (talk) 19:25, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Opening statement looks good. Basically, what happens is that the ArbCom review the opening statements, including the evidence provided, and see whether they take the case or not. I'm going to try to spend, unfortunately, probably most of the weekend reviewing the material for edits of concern to point out to the ArbCom but if you know of any particular edits relative to the subject which you think provide information which would be of use to ArbCom by all means add the diffs to the draft page. Like I said, I'm going to try to spend most of the weekend reviewing the material, for maybe making a case early next week. If it is accepted, then all involved present evidence, and, after a week of that, they propose any solutions to the problem they deem reasonable, and then ArbCom makes it decision. So, I guess I'll review things and then let you know on probably Monday here in the US about the request. Then you would probably best copy the statement to the Request for Arbitration form, for appearances, we wait for a response, and then present the evidence. I like the content of the statement you have written very much - it points out the problems with the definition of the term and the perceived questionable motivations and actions of some of the editors. That should help a lot. John Carter (talk) 00:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

Hi. I wish you'd mentioned you were going to add task forces, as I have been testing them in a sandbox for a while. I've also been discussing the UK constituencies one with the UK constituencies project. There is some debate on the name for the parameter and the categories to use with a suggestion of only implementing the change for Westminster constituencies.
For future changes can you please make sure you test the changes in a sandbox first? Each edit affects 28,000 transclusions of the template, which puts an awful strain on the server when you need to correct errors. Road Wizard (talk) 02:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I had meant to be doing in a sandbox, and even created one for that purpose, User:RGloucester/sandbox, but somehow I ended up working on the proper one without trying to (lapse in attention, clearly). I was simply testing things out. The template is back as it was now, as I was not planning on using these in actuality, at least, not now. RGloucester (talk) 03:10, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor's surgery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doctor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

2012 Benghazi attack

How am I doing? :) ClaudeReigns (talk) 07:45, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

February 2013

Please take disagreements to regarding the article 2012 Benghazi attack to the talk page. You and another user appear to be at the beginning of an WP:EW. Better to take this to the talk page before it actually starts.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the concern, but you don’t have to worry about me. Anyway, the other editor realized that the source did in fact say what I said it did. He was confused by the fact that the NY Times spells Gaddafi as Qaddafi. RGloucester (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Winter Storm Nemo

Hi! I noticed that you previously expressed an interest in seeing February 2013 nor'easter renamed to Winter Storm Nemo. You might be interested to know that there is currently an official vote regarding a move at the article's talk page. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Atlantic Canada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newfoundland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Petromax, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cooker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Winter storm naming

I just wanted to make you aware of this discussion I started at Winter storm naming. I have no intentions of making any changes to the article myself, but was just hoping to get input from editors previously involved in the article (or recently-closed AfD) in an effort to improve the article and clarify its purpose. I will leave any changes to the consensus of other editors who decide what's best. Your participation would be welcome, regardless of your views on the issue. Thank you. 76.189.111.199 (talk) 22:37, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

"German speaking Jews are not "Germans", they merely speak German"

You wrote on my talk page "This article is also incorrect, as it includes German speaking Jews. They are not "Germans", they merely speak German.". This is no longer a problem of vandalism, this is the pure expression of nazism. --Minorities observer (talk) 21:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Your conception of "Germans" is a nazi-like one even if you deny it. As far as I am concerned, there is nothing to be "discussed" with you. --Minorities observer (talk) 06:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Police Scotland logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Police Scotland logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moravian Margraviate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Free city (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:NOTARGENTINIAN

Been fighting this battle for a long time. Thanks for writing this. It's useful. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. It is very queer that, in an attempt to be more "friendly" to the Spanish, English-speakers have gotten further from the proper Spanish meaning. RGloucester (talk) 15:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Forgot to properly sign before. Too early in the am for me. Signed. thx.

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Province of the Sudetenland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Old–time radio

Why did you move this title from 'Old-time radio'? My reading of MOS:HYPHEN suggests that the hyphen was correct here. 'Old' modifies 'time'; it's not an equal partner, as the dash would imply. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I must have been fuzzy, because you are correct. I’ll revert it. RGloucester (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting that out. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Templates to auto-respell IPA

After reading your ideas about IPA versus wp:respelled forms, I have written a template to auto-respell by "reading" the various 366 IPA symbols and "saying" the equivalent simple syllables, as Template:IPAc-en/re.

• "Aspartame" has IPA /ˈæspərteɪm/, or auto-respelled as {{IPAc-en/re|ˈ|æ|s|p|ər|t|eɪ|m}}.
• "Azerbaijan" has IPA /ˌæzərbaɪˈdʒɑːn/ , or auto-respelled as {{IPAc-en/re|ˌ|æ|z|ər|b|aɪ|ˈ|dʒ|ɑː|n}}
• "archipelago" has IPA /ɑːrkˈpɛləɡoʊ/ , or auto-respelled as {{IPAc-en/re |ɑr|k|ɨ|ˈ|p|ɛ|l|ə|ɡ|oʊ}}
• "chartreuse" has IPA US: /ʃɑːrˈtruːz/, respelled {{IPAc-en/re|US|ʃ|ɑr|ˈ|t|r|uː|z}}.

See related discussion in the Idea Lab, at:

• "WP:VPIL#More templates to auto-respell IPA format"

That template could be the start of a massive break-through in quickly showing the wp:respelling forms. I think we need another template which will show both forms, the original IPA, plus the auto-respelled form, as an easy alternative to trying to decipher the 366 IPA symbols used to pronounce each word. Later, in some complex cases where the auto-respelled form might be confusing, then people could just show the manual respelled form (with hyphens "-" between each syllable), in those few cases. Anyway, now we have some power to begin moving quickly. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

This is great! I'm glad someone else saw what I saw with regard to pronunciations. My only concern is that this does not follow the Wikipedia:Pronunciation respelling key, which might be a problem. Is it possible that we might be able to work out a system whereby the IPA is automatically converted using the respelling key? I don't know much about this type of template, so it may be a stupid question with a long answer. I only say so because if one could work it out to work like that, it would be awesome. RGloucester (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

• Feel free to edit {H:IPA/re} to match key: If you could help edit Template:H:IPA/re, to match those key letters, then the results would be closer. For example, I had put "hw" in that template, but I guess it should show "wh" or where I put "ah" (for 'a' in "about"), then it should be "ə" in the template. So, I guess there are over 30-40 symbols which might needed to be changed, and perhaps show different words in the related examples. No articles are using the template, yet, so we can make changes to the template, without disturbing the live articles. Whenever you have time, no rush, just fix some symbols to better match the key. We are still discussing options at this point. -Wikid77 (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Rilke:German vs. Austrian

Hello. You have a new message at ColonelHenry's talk page.

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Square Enix

• Traffic report: Most-viewed articles of the week

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation's new plans announced

• Featured content: Documents and sports

• Arbitration report: Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds case opens; July 22 deadline for checkuser and oversight applications

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

• In the media: Wikipedia flamewars

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Religion

• Discussion report: Partially disambiguated page names, page protection policy, and more

• News and notes: Wikivoyage turns ten, but where to now?; Wikipedia Zero expands into India

• Traffic report: Gleeless

• Featured content: Engineering and the arts

• Arbitration report: Infoboxes case opens

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

• Op-ed: The VisualEditor Beta and the path to change

• Recent research: Napoleon, Michael Jackson and Srebrenica across cultures, 90% of Wikipedia better than Britannica, WikiSym preview

• Traffic report: Bouncing Baby Brouhaha

• WikiProject report: Babel Series: Politics on the Turkish Wikipedia

• News and notes: Gearing up for Wikimania 2013

• Arbitration report: Race and politics case closes

• Featured content: Caterpillars, warblers, and frogs—oh my!

• Discussion report: Defining consensus; VisualEditor default state; expert and layperson terms in article titles

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lyonnaise cuisine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

• Arbitration report: Fourteen editors proposed for ban in Tea Party movement case

• Traffic report: Greetings from the graveyard

• News and notes: Chapters Association self-destructs

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Freedom of Speech

• Featured content: Mysterious case of the grand duchess

• Discussion report: CheckUser and Oversighter candidates, and more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Structure and organisation of Interregnum articles

As you were active editing Interregnum (British Isles) after a large addition to the article was made and before it was reverted, this is a heads-up for a possible reorganisation of the Commonwealth and Interregnum articles, please see Talk:Commonwealth of England#Structure and organisation of Interregnum articles -- PBS (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Your edits on WikiProject Telecommunications

Hello, RGloucester. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Telecommunications#Wikiproject_Watchlist.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Prag university

I had asked you to merge after (!) the section to which it redirects is phrased in a way that someone new to the article is not confused. Why the rush? I have no time today, you do it, please. To send a reader who expects to learn about a university to "The Czechs were not satisfied with bilingual status …" is rather cruel. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I working on it in one of my sandboxes as we speak, it will be done shortly. RGloucester — 📬 20:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Good luck, and thanks for doing that. (I still think that the redirect could have waited for your improvements.) BTW, what about Wikidata? —Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Wikidata is a real concern. The German article isn't that good, as it conflates two different universities. The original Charles-Ferdinand University, and the later German Charles-Ferdinand University (which was the official name, as one can see in this certificate, just above "Rector Magnificus"). RGloucester — 📬 21:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Please define who is "we" in your revert on Kafka. For a featured article, you please explain your change on the talk. We, who wrote it, use the German terms (as in the German sources) with a translation (it's not that we don't use English). Consider to return to the more precise style of the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Please also find a solution for bolding the complete redirects, —Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I've started a discussion on the talk page at Kafka, first of all. Second of all, "we" is the Wikipedia guideline which mandates the use of English. I linked it, in my edit summary. The common English name is Charles-Ferdinand. It is not something that English speakers cannot pronounce or understand. Furthermore, the foreign name should be in italics, not in bold. Regardless, respond there. RGloucester — 📬 15:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The common name for Kafka's novel is The Castle. He wrote Das Schloss. We can't say he wrote The Castle. What about Albert Einstein? - The foreign name should be italic, as a redirect it should also be bold, actually in the lead already. —Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

There is a difference with written works, no doubt. Especially because there are translation problems involved. For example, what should one call Der Proceß, The Trial, The Process, The Inquiry. But this is not a problem with unambiguous place names, organization names, &c, which the guideline actually explains. And regardless, the article for that book is at The Trial, and Das Schloß at The Castle (novel). RGloucester — 📬 16:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treefight for Sunlight concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Treefight for Sunlight, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

• News and notes: "Beautifully smooth" Wikimania with few hitches

• In the media: Chinese censorship

• Featured content: Wikipedia takes the cities

• Special report: Jimmy Wales: media favors entertainment over raising public awareness

• Discussion report: Wikivoyage, reliable sources, music bands, account creators, and OTRS

• WikiProject report: For the love of stamps

• Arbitration report: Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds case closes

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:02, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

• In the media: Chelsea Manning, Box-office predictors, and 'Storming Wikipedia'

• Recent research: WikiSym 2013 retrospective

• WikiProject report: Loop-the-loop: Amusement Parks

• Traffic report: Reddit creep

• Featured content: WikiCup update, and the gardens of Finland

• News and notes: Looking ahead to Wiki Loves Monuments

• Technology report: Gallery improvements launch on Wikipedia

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 07:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

• In the media: Chelsea Manning, Box-office predictors, and 'Storming Wikipedia'

• Recent research: WikiSym 2013 retrospective

• WikiProject report: Loop-the-loop: Amusement Parks

• Traffic report: Reddit creep

• Featured content: WikiCup update, and the gardens of Finland

• News and notes: Looking ahead to Wiki Loves Monuments

• Technology report: Gallery improvements launch on Wikipedia

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 14:50, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

• In the media: Manning "put back in the closet"; State involvement in Azerbaijani Wikipedia

• News and notes: Privacy policy debate gears up

• Traffic report: No accounting for the wisdom of crowds

• Discussion report: Arbcom election procedures, Wiki Loves Monuments, Privacy policy, FDC, and more

• Featured content: Bridging the way to a Peasants' Revolt

• WikiProject report: Writing on the frontier: Psychology on Wikipedia

• Arbitration report: Manning naming dispute case opens; Tea Party case closes ; Infoboxes nears completion

• Technology report: Making Wikipedia more accessible

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:07, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sudeten Germans may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• resulted in a prevailing equality between [[Czechs]] and German Bohemians.<ref name=autogenerated3>[http://alex.onb.ac.at Alex – Historische Rechts- und Gesetzestexte online, Website der [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Moravia may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• tribes]] defeated in Marcomannic Wars, during the reign of the Emperor [[Marcus Aurelius]].<ref>[http://books.google.it/books?id=kSnRD5X16zYC&pg=PA893&lpg=PA893&dq=Suchohrad+roman+fort&source=bl&
• between the anchor and the present section header is the hyphen > ndash between the years. -->

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)