User talk:Wham2001/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome to Wikipedia

Welcome, Wham2001/Archive 1

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome, and have fun! 

-smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 22:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

St Neots

I've just reverted your edit to John Bellingham. St Neots has been in Cambridgeshire for local government purposes since 1974, but in 1770 when Bellingham was born, it was in Huntingdonshire and the usual practice on Wikipedia is to give locations at the time that was relevant. David | Talk 18:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC).

Thank You!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I would like to thank you for reverting this edit, as it affected my user page. Jamesjpk (talk) 23:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank-you @Jamesjpk: that's most generous of you! Best of luck with your own editing! Wham2001 (talk) 05:46, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Romeleåsen

What about "the Romele Downs" , doubt there's any reason to go further. "Romele" has no significance in Swedish, has it ? I'm not certain "Downs" is correct, but the hills south waest of London (in Kent) are called "the North Downs" and if changing from M2 to M20 by the use of road A249 , there is a sudden and very sharp downhill around Maidstone. Someting like the north side of Hallandsåsen. (This way to London Orbital, M25, is to prefer , if driving towards Southampton or the South West from Ramsgate) Boeing720 (talk) 04:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I like the idea since Romeleåsen is the same rolling steep countryside as the Downs (or the Yorkshire Wolds, and "Wolds" ought to be a Viking loanword given the Danelaw, but I can't think of a related word in Swedish off the top of my head). But I guess that on English Wikipedia the name ought to be the most common name used when people write about them in English, and a check on google suggests that there isn't a common English name; i.e. that they tend to be called by the Swedish name.

Were you thinking of writing an article about Romeleåsen? I think that would be good, but I don't know how much there is to say about them (the top of Romelestugan is one of my favourite places, but that's not really interesting to anybody else!) Wham2001 (talk) 06:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Paul Maurice and Kathryn Tappen

The anon IP will be violating 3RR if they re-insert the unsourced and disputed material. Thanks for your help. JTRH (talk) 20:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

That's a good point JTRH, I had not thought about 3RR. I did look and could not find any source for the information they are adding, even an entirely unreliable one. Wham2001 (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

TonyBallioni (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank-you TonyBallioni! I shall try to make good use of it. Wham2001 (talk) 06:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Need to know

I need to know how to insert photo in Wikipedia of a film Please help JR 3507 (talk) 06:00, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

JR 3507, images are not really my thing, but I can give you some advice. Firstly, you need to have permission to distribute the photo that you want to upload. You can read about Wikipedia's copyright policy for images here. I fear that if you want to upload a still from a film you are likely to be stuck at this point. If you have an appropriately licensed image, though, you can upload it to Wikimedia commons as described here. Then you can link to it in the same way as to any other image on Wikipedia.

If you need more help you might find the tea house a good resource. But do check out the copyright policy before you get started. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 09:36, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Aww, thanks! There's nothing quite like a kitten to brighten one's day up! Wham2001 (talk) 07:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment List of churches in Sweden

ello1 YOu made some good observations in the AfD for this list. I would appreciate some ideas for making the list better. Aurornisxui (talk) 17:48, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Aurornisxui! I shall take a look (though if it requires thought I may not say anything until the weekend). Best, Wham2001 (talk) 07:23, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Gia Carangi article

Hi, Wham2001. Regarding this, why did you accept that edit? The IP has repeatedly been a problem at that article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:15, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Flyer22 Reborn, I don't recall my thought process from yesterday, but looking at it now I can only say that I clearly wasn't paying enough attention to what I was doing. Apologies for making more work for you; I shall take it as a lesson to be more careful when reviewing pending changes. Regards, Wham2001 (talk) 15:23, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Reliable Secondary Sources Jesselyn Radack

Read the complaint. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4469578/AmendedRadack.pdf It's pretty bad. Including the actual texts and communications.

These are the data to which the secondary sources below, refer:

• 1. https://www.styleweekly.com/richmond/the-fire-starter/Content?oid=2233402
• 2. https://shadowproof.com/2018/05/18/whistleblower-attorney-faces-lawsuit-alleging-defamation-and-malicio
• 3. https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/24/fitzgibbon-v-radack-firing-squad/
• 4. https://disobedientmedia.com/2019/02/fitzgibbon-sues-the-institute-for-public-accuracy-for-alleged-defamation-by-jesselyn-radack/

---

For the record, I didn't believe the secondary sourced articles myself, until I saw the actual court-filing (which is tied-in to the Gostolza article), so I can see why you undid the edit - which is, in fact a valid edit. Truth is stranger than fiction. NigelRulesFine (talk) 10:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

The complaint is a primary source, and hence inadmissible in this context: see WP:BLPPRIMARY. If it is damaging to the subject (I haven't read it) then that argues more for its exclusion than inclusion. None of those secondary sources look reliable to me, but I admit that this is not really an area that I'm very familiar with. I'm going to post on WP:BLPN asking for some advice. This discussion should really be on the article talk page rather than here; feel free to copy it over there. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 10:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

I did copy it on the talk page. Daily Caller, Shadowproof and Style Weekly are legitimate media outlets. Authors are legitimate.

Weight Changes

I changed the weights, using the Alliance of American Football's official website as reference. The website includes the rosters for all 8 AAF teams, including player numbers and measurements. Note that the player weights I changed are all players currently playing in the AAF.

The following are the links to all 8 AAF team rosters:

• 1. Arizona Hotshots: https://aaf.com/arizona-hotshots/roster
• 2. Atlanta Legends: https://aaf.com/atlanta-legends/roster
• 3. Birmingham Iron: https://aaf.com/birmingham-iron/roster
• 4. Memphis Express: https://aaf.com/memphis-express/roster
• 5. Orlando Apollos: https://aaf.com/orlando-apollos/roster/
• 6. Salt Lake Stallions: https://aaf.com/salt-lake-stallions
• 7. San Antonio Commanders: https://aaf.com/san-antonio-commanders
• 8. San Diego Fleet: https://aaf.com/san-diego-fleet/roster

Ptkday, thank-you very much for taking the time to let me know and put this list together for me.

I think that if the articles are to use these weights rather than the nfl.com weights then they ought to be cited inline, but I don't quite see how to do that with Template:Infobox_NFL_biography. The documentation says height_ft / height_in / weight_lb – used to display the player's physical dimensions as listed on the player's NFL.com player profile. (Preferred source is NFL.com). Weight_lb should be the player's weight in pounds per standard American usage. Only enter the numerical value. When specifying, do not wikilink the information. Adding an inline citation to the field looks pretty stupid (it appears between the value and the unit). Any ideas? Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

World boxing champions

Hi Wham, in the article List of current world boxing champions i think is incorrect to list gold champions and champions in recess. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.110.184.70 (talk) 11:11, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Moved to correct place, and replied on the IP editor's talk page since I can't ping them from here. Wham2001 (talk) 15:53, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

About the Recent Changes

Hi, I'm sorry if the changes i made on the page "Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response" was offensive. I only made it to see if it worked, and this account was just recently made. I strongly promise you to not vandalise this page again. And I will surely use my account to share my intelligence on certain subjects. Thank you. AltheaLibranda (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

AltheaLibranda, I'm glad to hear that. I'd recommend reading through the guide to contributing to Wikipedia for some helpful advice on how to make constructive contributions that improve the encyclopedia. If you want to test out the wiki markup, you can use the global sandbox, or you can find a personal sandbox of your own here. Happy editing! Wham2001 (talk) 12:59, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

A new page

Hi, I wanted to request you to make a new Wikipedia page on child actor Naman jain as well,your acceptance will be highly acknowledged 😀 Namanj8879856956 (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Please sir it's a kind request Namanj8879856956 (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Namanj8879856956, I'm glad to hear about your enthusiasm for Naman Jain having an article on Wikipedia. What I'm less sure of is why you feel I would be a good person to write such an article. I don't know much about Indian film, and I don't know any Indian languages, which might help for sourcing an article.

If you feel that Naman Jain should have an article I suggest that you draft one yourself. You can find advice and instructions at this link and the other pages linked from it. The first thing, though, is to make sure that he's notable according to Wikipedia's rules: multiple, independent, reliable sources must have written about him first.

If that's the route that you choose to go down, then you can ask me for advice, though I may not always be able to help you. A better source of help may be the teahouse, where you can find many experienced and helpful editors. I've also placed some helpful links on your talk page. Good luck, and happy editing! Wham2001 (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Fix ping: Namanj8879856956 Wham2001 (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Morwell

I was speaking the truth about morwell — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.250.105 (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

The point is that Wikipedia does not contain things that we believe or even know to be the truth: it should contain a summary of what reliable sources have to say on a topic, and should be written in formal plain English, not in slang. So if you have some reliable source discussing unemployment in Morwell – an accademic journal would be best, but an article in a mainstream newspaper such as The Age or The Australian would also be fine – please add a summary of that content to the body of the article along with a reference. If you only have your own opinion to discuss, though, that would be original research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia, and I suggest that you take it to Twitter, Reddit or somewhere similar instead. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 17:46, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Gigi Becali, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. JudeccaXIII (talk) 20:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@JudeccaXIII: I wouldn't go quite that far! But I agree that you found a cleaner revision to revert to than I did – unfortunately I was also a bit slower than you so the article ended up at the one I went for. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Wham2001 I was about to expand the message to see if that was an error. Thanks for letting me know. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 20:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019

Re: Halo (safety device) Hello Wham2001. You have removed the paragraph about Woven Technology but this contains an original halo design concept from 2014 that predates the information on this 'Halo' page. The introduction mentions that the Halo was based on a Mercedes project however this statement does not have a citation. As you have removed my post due to lack of citation why are other posts allowed to remain when they are lacking evidence and citations? I think this should be reinstated for consistency. Don't you? Thank you. Carboncounter1 (talk) 19:36, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@Carboncounter1: I've replied on your own talk page, since you replied to my message there first. Wham2001 (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Another kitty for you

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank-you kindly User:Fylindfotberserk! Your timing is perfect; there's a kitty pointedly reminding me about dinner as I type... Wham2001 (talk) 16:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Hehe.. What time is it in your place? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I prefer to be a little bit coy about my location, but it's early evening here in Northern Europe, where peace has been restored with half a can of ground liver All the best, Wham2001 (talk) 16:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Saint George

Apologies, no idea where or how to contact you or edit, but you appear to be an editor/contributor to the St. George wiki (thank you, very informative and great work). Perhaps my suggestion better for the St. George's Day wiki? In literature St. George is mentioned in Shakespeare's Henry V: “I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips, Straining upon the start. The game's afoot; Follow your spirit: and upon this charge, Cry — God for Harry! England and Saint George!”

― William Shakespeare, Henry V

Forgive my posting this in seemingly the wrong place. I just don't know where/how to post it or contact you separately. Kind regards, 100.33.126.100 (talk) 04:16, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

This is the place to contact me; thanks for your message. If you want to add this material to the article you can edit it in yourself – your edits will then be reviewed before going live, however, since the article is pending changes protected. Alternatively you could make your suggestion on the article talk page. Personally, I wouldn't make the addition that you're suggesting. Shakespeare's mention here is rather in passing, and there are lots of passing mentions of Saint George, with him being the patron saint of several countries. I'm personally not keen on "In popular culture" sections in general – which is basically what you are suggesting – and I think that this would be a particularly bad article to have one in. But if you suggest it at the article talk page you may find a consensus for addition. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 21:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Timelines and lineups

please create the timeline and update the lineups of the bands House vs. Hurricane, Royal Coda, Sianvar, Secret Band, Nova Charisma (with all the info of this new band), Norma Jean (band), Set Your Goals (band), Bloodline Severed, Wolves at the Gate (band) and Dream On, Dreamer with new additional and correct info — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.81.214 (talk) 15:12, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I mean, this sounds like a great idea, but timelines on band articles is not really my thing. You should feel free to do this yourself; most articles on Wikipedia are open for everybody to edit, and if you need some help with the mediawiki syntax you can find another article to copy from. The important thing is to have reliable sourcing for everything that you add. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 16:07, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Wham2001. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:01, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank-you very much, Beeblebrox! I shall do my best to use it wisely. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:06, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar!!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts on countering Vandalism and protecting Wikipedia from it's threats. I appreciate your effort. You are a defender of Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 14:11, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank-you Path slopu! Your own efforts on the anti-vandalism treadmill have not gone unnoticed either. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Maria Mitchell "Early Years" Section Edit

Hi Wham2001! My name is Belajane41; I'm one of the students who has been working to update the Maria Mitchell page this fall. Thank you for reading and editing the page! My partner on this project and I were reviewing the "Early Years" section and were wondering if you could tell us about your thoughts on the first two paragraphs. When we published our first edits to the article, we wanted to rewrite first two paragraphs of the "Early Years" section to present facts about Mitchell's upbringing in a clear, unbiased manner. We also wanted to reduce the amount of repetitive information we found to "streamline" the article. In rereading the page recently, we have observed that some of the information you inserted in the second paragraph appears similar to information we thought we presented in the first paragraph. We were wondering if there is a way that we could combine these paragraphs in a simple, straightforward manner. We would love to hear your thoughts on this topic! Feel free to respond here or reach out to our talk page. Thanks again for your help and contribution!

All the best, Belajane41 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

@Belajane41: thank-you for your friendly enquiry and your work on Maria Mitchell. Like Jim Henderson, I am going to take the liberty of replying to you at the article talk page, since we may be able to bring more editors in to the discussion there. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 16:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Midori

In reference to Midori- also, ‘Still Game’ s3.ep4: Jack and Victor enlist the help of their old friend Big Innes when lawlessness runs rampant in Craiglang. Only rule is that Innes can’t have Midori!(funny episode:)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.17.67.238 (talk) 06:58, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have really no idea what this is about. Does it relate to an edit I made, or to an article? Best, Wham2001 (talk) 07:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Fylindfotberserk (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Wish you a Prosperous 2020! And thanks for that kitty. He looks just like mine. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank-you for the card, Fylindfotberserk, and happy Christmas to you and your family Wham2001 (talk) 13:48, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Apologies

I was attempting to create a fictional page for my father in law Hadesdrklrd (talk) 11:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hadesdrklrd: Thank-you for the note, and for stopping making the edits. I've left a welcome message on your talk page with advice about how to contribute to the encyclopedia, which I hope you will. Happy new year! Wham2001 (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Wham2001!

Happy New Year!

Wham2001,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank-you Fylindfotberserk – Happy New Year to you too! Wham2001 (talk) 10:22, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks and welcome man. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Epic Barnstar

		The Epic Barnstar
		has been awarded for your awesome work getting the erroneous entries out and citing the rest of the entries on March 12! Keep up the great work!! Toddst1 (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank-you very much Toddst1! Wham2001 (talk) 08:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Dario Bisso Sabàdin

Dear Wham2001, I read your notes on the Wikipedia page of Dario Bisso Sabàdin. I would like to add a bit to this discussion. In particular, I oppose to deletion. I may took up the process of improving the page, which is effectively lacking proper referencing at the current moment. However, Dario Bisso Sabàdin is a well-known and respected musician and compositor in his field, so that I think it is not fair proposing deletion on the basis of some personal opinion or a brief (and poor) search on google. There are indeed several independent sources that can be referenced. Hence, please allow for some days until I find the time needed to properly update the page. Cheers, Tramarin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tramarin (talk • contribs) 17:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tramarin: Thanks for your note. I would be more than happy to see some suitable sources provided so that the article can be improved and avoid deletion. Please allow me to give you a bit of advice on how this process works and how you can best influence it to improve and keep the article:

• The discussion takes place on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dario Bisso Sabàdin. I see that you posted to the associated talk page; you should copy your comments to the main AfD page if you want them to be taken into account.
• The best way to ensure that the article is kept is to find some sources which demonstrate that Bisso Sabàdin is notable. You can find advice on suitable sources here, and the basic guideline for notability can be found here. In summary, you are looking for more than one source that discusses him in detail, is independent of him, and is published by a reliable and respected source. Non-English sources are fine, as are sources not available online, as long as they can be verified.
• If you have sources but don't have time to update the article, please consider posting the sources to the deletion discussion. Then other editors can look at them and discuss whether they are sufficient to keep the article.
• By default deletion discussions are open for a week; however, they can be extended to two or in extremis three weeks if there is good reason to do so. The discussion will be closed by an independent, experienced editor who has not contributed to the discussion, usually an administrator, who will assess the consensus at the discussion page and conclude on the best course of action.

You can find more detailed advice at this help page; please ask me if you are unclear on anything. Good luck tracking some sources down. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Wham2001: The page has been finally moved to Draft. I will anyway continue, in my spare time, to edit and improve referencing there. However, I would like to ask you why you have not continued the discussion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dario Bisso Sabàdin, especially after my last edit. I provide serious argumentations against deletion, in line with the requirements of Wikipedia for notability. However, since no further answer from you arrived, the editor concluded that a consensus was not reached. If you had provided your comments maybe this situation could have been avoided. Anyway, please verify what I added, and kindly provide me with some "unbiased" (WP:NPOV) hints to avoid a further deletion. Being a researcher, I know quite well what is a reliable source, but it seems that Wikipedia has its own rules. Regards. Tramarin (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tramarin: I'm happy to hear that you want to carry on working on the article. In draft space it should be safe from further deletion as long as you or others carry on editing it; drafts are only deleted because of inactivity for 6 months, or if they're gross copyright violations / attack pages / hoaxes / etc., non of which apply here.

In terms of sourcing, I wonder whether you might find this page helpful – it discusses how sources are used differently on Wikipedia as compared to academic research articles. At the discussion, I felt that I'd said everything that I wanted to say; though perhaps in hindsight you're correct that it would have been helpful for me to reply again.

I was reluctant to ping individual editors to the deletion discussion since that is often frowned upon, but now that the discussion is over I'm going to ping Gerda Arendt, who is a very experienced editor of articles about classical music, to see whether she can help with any useful input about notability for conductors and what sources might be useful to demonstrate it. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 11:24, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I took a brief look, and find the person clearly notable, having conducted for La Fenice, and edited a critical edition for the Spohr piece. I suggest we trim the article considerably to first those key facts, have it moved to Main space, and then add one or the other of the other facts. It also should look a bit more professional, Sentence case in headers, no bold font other than the article title, better formatting of refs, formatting of operas (example: Verdi's Aida) etc. Don't have a section See also, Spohr, and then he's not mentioned on the linked page. The last Italian conductor whose article I improved was Nello Santi, perhaps Tramarin, look there and get some ideas. I'll watch, but have little time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you very much for your kind words and for the insightful suggestions. I apologize for the last three weeks of silence, but I have been busy and had no occasion to edit the page. I had a look at the Nello Santi page, and trimmed the article to contain only the most relevant facts. Also, I tried to restyle the page a bit, with a better formatting. I sincerely hope now the page is in a better shape, and I would like to ask you, Gerda Arendt, if it is possible to move the page back to active pages. Thank you again. Tramarin (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I took a short look, and find it much improved. Perhaps we can talk about further steps on your talk. I see lack of citations in the career section, too many capitals in headers, and too much bolding in CD titles, for a start. That's normal formatting, so I would not like to discuss it on the article talk page. It will be moved some day! ... not by me, because I am involved now, - I'd prefer someone independent, best someone who objected in the AfD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Fine, but first the article needs to be ready. I am busy - see my talk - so it may take some time, unless you help yourselves before I get to it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt and Tramarin: This is a very quick reply since I may not be online much this weekend. I was the only other person commenting in the AfD (I originally suggested deletion since I couldn't find other sources that I thought supported notability, though I'm happy to have been proved wrong). I am happy to look at the draft with an eye to moving it back once you are both happy with it. If you'd prefer somebody more independent we could ask BD2412, who closed the AfD. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 15:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

BRO YOU ARE MEAN

Look, Wham. Ain't nobody here that cares about your opinion. You have been going after me for solving problems with another editor. You are being constructive. This is your first warning before I report you to jurisdiction. Stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihatetommyy (talk • contribs) 18:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

In the unlikely event that anybody is interested in this, the edit the user was complaining about is here. Unsurprisingly they have now been blocked as WP:NOTHERE. Wham2001 (talk) 19:15, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wham2001!!!!!!!!!!!

Did you see now You just want all the edits to be in your name. Why reject any small edits I make? Why do you lock 6 Roman parts? Why did you confuse me with sinners? Why are you asking me to delete or block my page until I protest? See my own edits. I just changed one word but you restored it. Why? Why should a global lock be sent to me for not making a mistake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PBSR\QCRSDBSR0199 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted a large number of edits that you've made today, because they have made articles worse, mostly by erroneously overcapitalizing words. I have left you some advice on your talk page about how to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Wham2001 (talk) 12:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding disruptive editing by an IP

I reverted some disruptive editing/vandalism from an IP in Sonic the Hedgehog, the IP kept changing content to MediaCorp. Could this be paid editing? Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 18:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rodrigo Valequez, good to hear from you. I don't think that this edit is likely to be paid editing. Firstly, the IP had previously made other edits to the article which were clearly vandalism but were unrelated to MediaCorp; this one for example. Secondly, MediaCorp appears, looking at our article on them, to be a large, publicly-owned corporation. I think that they would have very little to gain by paying somebody to ineptly edit links to their Wikipedia page into the article on Shadow the Hedgehog. However, the edit was clearly vandalism and you were correct to revert it.

If you are doing a significant amount of anti-vandalism work I would highly recommend checking out Twinkle. It makes reverting serial bad edits and warning users about them much quicker and easier, and is very straightforward to install and use. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I’ll check it out. Rodrigo Valequez^(🗣) 18:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Relevant discussion on WT:HED

A discussion which may be relevant to you is currently taking place on WT:HED (section) on the wider picture of WP:BOOSTERISM across university articles. Please see the relevant section if you wish to contribute, as any consensus made there may end up impacting articles you have contributed to (such as London Business School), and it would be sensible to get involved earlier rather than going through any discussion it again if it affects those pages. Your views and input would be most welcome! Shadowssettle_(talk) 19:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious

Nordic gnome

Thank you for quality article work, such as improving Landskrona and Lund, for coming to the rescue of articles threatened with deletion, for welcoming new users and fighting vandalism, for gnomish tasks such as updating railroad stations and finding refs for day articles, for restoring kitty peace ;) - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2382 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt:, this is very kind. Precious is a group of editors I'm honoured to be a member of. Thank-you also for your advice about Bisso Sábadin: I shall try to make some headway with the draft later this week. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Mistaken editing of Rod Liddle page.

The edit made to the Rod Liddle relating to his comments printed in the UK and the response it caused was supported by both a link to the column where Rod Liddle originally made his comments and a link leading directly to the letter published by the relevant organisation in rebuttal. You where mistaken to remove these edits under the excuse that they weren't citated using a reliable source, they where citated with the most reliable sources possible, the very authors of the remarks in question them selves. Please replace the material you have mistakenly removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.32.106 (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I think that you're referring to this edit. The two sources you included were The Sun and a twitter page. The Sun is not reliable and should not be used on Wikipedia under any circumstances; please see here. A twitter page is at best a primary source and is not suitable to support critical content regarding a living person. Please review the Wikipedia policy on writing about living people and this guideline page on which sources are suitable for use on Wikipedia. Once you have done this, if you wish to restore some of the content I removed and believe that you have suitable sources to support it, please open a discussion on the article talk page. Wham2001 (talk) 07:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

marco antonio solis premio lo nuestro 2004

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premio_Lo_Nuestro_2004#Regional_Mexican_Category — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.205.248.223 (talk) 02:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, as I said on Talk:Marco Antonio Solís, that section is entirely unsourced. The entire article references only three sources, none of which support the content that you wish to add. You need a source that tells us that he won the award. Note that since Wikipedia is user-generated you cannot use it as a source. See this guideline for what sort of publication is suitable as a source on Wikipedia; in this case, you are probably looking for articles written in reliable newspapers or magazines. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Message from Mafufu

I loved your last edit on Anne-Marie's page 🌈 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mafufu (talk • contribs) 09:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Mafufu! I've put a welcome message on your talk page which has some helpful hints on how to get started improving articles on Wikipedia. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 13:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Moose and JRock

STOP UNDOING EDITS FOR THE MOOSE AND JROCK PAGE, THEY PERSONALLY HAVE REQUESTED LISTENERS TO DEFACE IT FOR SHITS AND GIGGLES! LISTEN TO THE SHOW ON PRIMORDIAL RADIO AND YOU’LL KNOW WHY WE KEEP DOING IT!

GFY Bo Squiddly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a04:4a43:4f7f:cb3d:d88e:e9a1:35f9:faa2 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Article subjects do not get to dictate the content of the articles about them. Vandalism is not made acceptable by the article subject requesting it. This is a serious project, not a playground. If the article continues to be vandalized, it will likely be protected from editing by anonymous users. If you continue to vandalize the article you will be blocked from editing. Wham2001 (talk) 20:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Christian II of Denmark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles V (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I meant to come back to this, but predictably forgot. Fixed with thanks, along with numerous other little snags. Wham2001 (talk) 07:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

With the wstitle no url parameter is needed

Thank you for this edit Revision as of 12:34, 3 May 2020 to the article "March 14". Custom templates like {{cite EB1911}}, {{cite DNB}} (and many others) have a parameter |wstitle= which automatically links to the article on Wikisource. When it does so it ignores the content of the url parameter because it uses the WP:sister project link "[[s:]]" (see also Help:Interwiki linking

-- PBS (talk) 17:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

BTW for DNB articles just include the title do not add the bracketed postscript the template takes care of it:

 {{Cite DNB|wstitle=Russell, John (1486?-1555) |volume=49|pages=444–447|first= William Arthur Jobson |last=Archbold}}

• Archbold, William Arthur Jobson (1897). "Russell, John (1486?-1555)" . In Lee, Sidney (ed.). Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 49. London: Smith, Elder & Co. pp. 444–447.

Just as the template {{cite EB1911}} prepends the path to EB1911 articles:

{{cite  EB1911|wstitle=A |volume=1 |pages=1–2}}

• Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "A" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 1 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–2.

-- PBS (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@PBS: thank-you very much for this note; without it I would probably never have realised that I was making these mistakes! I was going to claim to have been mislead by the documentation, but reading it now I see that it is quite clear, so I imagine that I did not read it properly the first time. Then thereafter I copied how I had invoked the template previously. Having said that I seem to have got it right on March 13 and March 12, so how I led myself astray thereafter is mysterious. Anyway, I shall endeavour not to make the same mistakes again. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 17:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

WP Ticket#2020073010003845: Re: Timothy McVeigh Faked Execution Edits

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Wham2001:

Transparency Notice: Re: [Ticket#2020073010003845] Wham2001 Deletion of EoP McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page

Thread:

• 28 Jul: EoP McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page.
• 28 Jul: WP-W2001 Re: EoP Re: McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page.
• 28 Jul: EoP Re: McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page.
• 30 Jul: EoP Re WP-W2001 Re: EoP Re: McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page.
• 30 Jul: WP-GL Re EoP Re WP-W2001 Re: EoP Re: McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page. [Geoffrey Lane: Ticket#2020073010003845]
• 30 Jul: EoP Re WP-GL Re EoP Re WP-W2001 Re: EoP Re: McVeigh Faked Execution Edits to McVeigh Wikipedia Page. [EoP MILED Clerk: Ticket#2020073010003845]

EoP – OKC TRC – Axis Alliance [31 Mar: EoP Upd: Sergey Lavrov: Re: EoP Axis Alliance negotiations] Honest Lives Matter [29 Jun: EoP Axis Alliance is an Honest Lives Matter culture] Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]

Respectfully,

Lara Johnson, EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF] 16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529

Sent per electronic notice to:

Wham 2001: Wikipedia: Wham2001 Talk Page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.0.203.35 (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

169.0.203.35, I have no intention of opening any of these external links. If you would like to correspond with me, please write what you have to say in wikitext here on my talk page. You should also learn to sign your posts. Thank-you, Wham2001 (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

In the unlikely event that anybody is interested in the conclusion of this baffling little sequence of events, the person posting here was behind this edit, which I reverted. After my reply above they created an account, which has been blocked by the ever-vigilant Ponyo for pushing fringe theories. Wham2001 (talk) 09:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Isaah Wilson

yo Wham2001 shut up and stop dogging on my boy isaah wilson you best be lucky that you're not in a 300m range of him or he would merk you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 300msprimter (talk • contribs) 09:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

@200msprimter: Please stop vandalising Wikipedia, or you will be blocked from editing. If you would like to contribute positively to the encyclopedia there is advice on how to do that here. Wham2001 (talk) 09:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Fix ping: 300msprimter Wham2001 (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!

Appreciate the revert. :) Glen (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Glen: No worries Wham2001 (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Dating history

I saw that you removed dating history from Troye Sivan's article; do you think the dating history on Antoni Porowski's article should be removed too? Some1 (talk) 02:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Some1, thanks for dropping by. My personal view of WP:BLP, which is more towards the strict end, is that we should only include long-term relationships or relationships which have clear encyclopedic relevance; e.g. if they are important to understanding a musician's work. In both cases they need reliable secondary sourcing. I have to admit to not having heard of Porowski before; despite what one might think from my editing history I'm actually more interested in, say, Swedish geography than popular culture. Looking at the "Personal life" section of the article, seven years is clearly long term so I would leave the relationship with Krietemeyer in, though I note that the cited source does not actually say when they broke up. I'd remove the subsequent short-term relationships. I'm not sure that "popsugar" is a reliable source, but the instagram thing is harmless enough so it could stay. The last paragraph, though, has to go – it's barely sourced and highly sensitive – and should only go back if a reliable source can be found.

As you can see I've made the edits that I think are unambiguously required by policy and will leave the rest up to your judgement; perhaps any further discussion should be on the article talk page? Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 05:40, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I was just curious since I saw your removal of dating history on Miles Heizer and Troye Sivan, and wondered if you felt the same way with the Antoni Porowski article. I agree the 7+ year relationship should stay, but the other two relationships aren't noteworthy enough to be included at all since they lasted a year or less. But it's not a really big deal I guess if they relationships are mentioned or not on the Porowski article. Some1 (talk) 05:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Assistance on AfC Submission: Draft:Moses Olufemi

Hi Wham2001, I'm sure you're doing pretty fine. Could you please review the above draft article. The article is about someone who qualifies for a Wikipedia page. He meets WP:ENT and he have major/STARRING roles in notable films. You can do more research about him but I think he should have a Wikipedia page. It has good citations and they are citations from good sources, news websites and magazines. This person has worked with great actors his movies. Actors such as Antar Laniyan Bimbo Akintola Bimbo Ademoye Funsho Adeolu Ebenezer Eno and so on. I wait to get a reply from you. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdeditorr (talk • contribs) 21:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Abcdeditorr, and thanks for your message. Unfortunately reviewing draft articles is not one of the things that I do round here, so I can't help you much. I would, though, advise you to take into account the advice that previous reviewers of the article have given you. Have you read the "general notability guideline" and the notability guideline for people? That is the standard that you need to meet in order to get the draft accepted, and you need to meet it unambiguously. Submitting a draft repteatedly without improving the referencing is not going to help. I have made one edit to the draft, whch was to restore the previous reviews which you had inadvertently removed whilst editing the draft. I'm no expert on the process, but I'm pretty sure they need to stay in place. Good luck brushing the draft up. If you need help interpreting the guidelines and working out how to apply them to the draft, I would suggest asking at the teahouse, where there are lots of experienced and helpful editors. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 21:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Gammliahallen

Since you are the one deleting an entire article that was created years ago, don't you think you should use the talk page regarding the issue? Shouldn't the article stay otherwise? Evangp (talk) 21:36, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Evangp, I redirected it because it was a two-sentence stub talking about a building which appears, from the sources that I could find, to be part of a larger complex. I couldn't see the point of having the separate article. You reverted me and I was intending to leave it be at that – I imagine that you know more about the topic than I do! However, other people seem to have reverted back: two of them, in fact, both very experienced editors. I think that at this point if you want to retain a separate article on Gammliahallen you will need to open a discussion on the talk page yourself. You might feel that the reverts were out of process and technically you might well be right but in my experience the cookie sometimes crumbles that way on Wikipedia, and one basically has to roll with it. I suggest opening that discussion. If you have good, source-based arguments for why Gammliahallen needs a separate article I think people will listen to them. I have both Gammliahallen and Gammliavallen watchlisted and I will attempt to reply to any discussion that you open, with the caveat that expect to be rather upptaget in the near future. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:52, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Happy Diwali!

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:26, 14 November 2020 (UTC) Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Thank-you very much Fylindfotberserk! There were some really impressive fireworks here, and a nice dry night to watch them on. I hope you had a lovely celebration too. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 08:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Couldn't celebrate lol. Was banned. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:09, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Oh goodness, yes, of course. It's not been the best year, has it? Wham2001 (talk) 08:12, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies and help requested

Wham2001, I'd like to apologize for getting flagged for a bad citation. I was working under the impression that e-comm sites could be valid sources, so long as the information was neutral and informative. But when I added a link in "hemp oil," you promptly took it down. So obviously, I was mistaken. Is there an appropriate way for me to add links to a blog that add relevant context to existing wikipedia posts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebanonky (talk • contribs) 21:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lebanonky - thanks for reaching out about this. The link in question was to a blog on the website of a company that sells cannabis products. As such it is not a suitable source for use in Wikipedia articles. You can read about what sorts of sources are suitable here; but in summary they should be independent, secondary, reliable sources with a reputation for fact checking and neutrality; ideally scholarly or at least high-quality journalism. Blogs run by companies that are selling their own products cannot meet those standards, and should not be used as sources anywhere on Wikipedia. The cannabis / hemp / CBD articles in Wikipedia unfortunately suffer badly from spamming of websites that advertise cannabis products, often disguised as references or external links to articles. As a result I was perhaps a little hasty to revert your addition without explaining why in detail: sorry about that. Hopefully this clears it up. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Is there a distinction between hemp-derived CBD product company blogs, like the one I linked to, and full-strength cannabis source material? To clarify, the link in question is to a hemp company whose products are legal under federal law. As a former journalist, I value the work of wikipedia editors such as yourself, and I understand the bad reputation that CBD and cannabis companies have received due to bad behavior. I do not want to contribute to that bad reputation, but I would like to add context with links to informative, neutral blog posts, if possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebanonky (talk • contribs) 21:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Lebanonky: No, corporate blogs are not good sources anywhere on Wikipedia, regardless of the legality of the business.

PS talk pages are a bit special on Wikipedia. You should indent your posts with : symbols at the beginning of the line, adding one more than the message that you are replying to used, and sign by adding four sequential ~ symbols at the end of the message. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 08:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Wham2001!

Happy New Year!

Wham2001,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank-you! Wham2001 (talk) 09:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

... so much for fixing my lamentable numeric ineptitude at Bona Dea. I'm truly an old geezer in this modern world.... Haploidavey (talk) 11:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Haploidavey, not at all! I was going to leave you a note – the only thing you were missing was an equals sign. Reading and synthesising the sources is the real work of editing in my opinion; the endless fiddling that editors like me spend our time on is just a side show. Wham2001 (talk) 12:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Miles heizer/connor jessup

Why do you keep deleting the fact that connor jessup and miles heizer are dating ? Zuidh024 (talk) 14:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping by, Zuidh024. My view is that, because of the high visibility of Wikipedia articles, we should be particularly careful to protect the privacy of article subjects, and only publish information about them that has been covered in high-quality, independent, secondary sources. This is also what the Wikipedia policy on writing about living people requires. When it comes to relationships, I interpret that to mean that Wikipedia articles shouldn't cover dating gossip; i.e., they should, unless there are particularly good reasons to deviate from the policy, only mention long-term, persistent, particularly significant relationships such as marriages or life partnerships. I think that applies particularly strongly for people who are notable but not household names. All of this analysis fits Heizer and Jessup – they're successful but not everybody-has-heard-of-them-famous actors, and their relationship has been covered by gossip sheets and fansites but very little by the mainstream reliable media: thus I think it shouldn't be included.

There has been some previous discussion of the matter at Talk:Miles Heizer#Relationship, where there was a rough consensus that the relationship shouldn't be mentioned, and I don't think much has changed since that discussion. Best Wham2001 (talk) 19:08, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Neglected to include section

I neglected to include the section of where my first edit was. What's the best way to fix this? ScottMacC (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I understand this question – does what I've written below clear it up? Wham2001 (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Undone revision

Could you please explain why? ScottMacC (talk) 05:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi ScottMacC, thanks for dropping by to ask. The answer is unfortunately a little bit complicated. Most of the "wikitext" – the text that you see in the editing window – ends up directly in the article. But sections of the article included in pairs of curly braces – {{stuff}} – are instead instructions to the Wikipedia web server to include templates, which are basically pieces of computer code that do some form of processing to generate article content. What your edit here did was to change the name of one of the templates being inserted into that article from {{harvid}} to {{harvard}}. Those templates form part of the "short footnotes" referencing system, which you can find a summary of here. The {{harvid}} template does the same thing as the {{sfnref}} template discussed in the "Linking" section of that how-to guide. As a result your edit meant that the wrong template was being called, and so I reverted it. I hope this clears things up.

Thanks for your work fixing typos in article text: that's a very helpful improvement to articles and Wikipedia is full of things that need fixing and improving! Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Fall of Constantinople

Hi, Wham2001 wondering if you could take a look at this edit, Cite error: A list-defined reference with group name "" is not used in the content (see the help page). Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 07:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Lotje, my apologies. After I save an edit I usually check that I haven't stuffed anything up, but this time I must have omitted to do so. It's now fixed. As penance, I've also tracked down the two citations to Crowley 2006 in the 2013 edition of the same book (the only edition available on the Open Library), so there are now no reference errors in the article. Thanks for letting me know about my mistake, and best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 07:27, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Wham2001. If only I were more familiar with this <ref></ref> stuff, I would have done it myself. Still struggling after all that time, I must admit. Thanks again. :-) Lotje (talk) 11:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

About voice actor vandal

Hello, just to let you know that I requested page protection for Hideki Ogihara. I saw you reported the vandal earlier but they weren't blocked, and now their IP has changed already. This is an Indonesian DOB vandal who keeps changing birthdates of voice actors. Maybe the vandal will go to sleep soon and hopefully the page will get protected before they wake up. The vandal will just move on to another article eventually, though. -kyykaarme (talk) 19:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Kyykaarme, thank-you, yes, I saw your request for page protection when I went to make one myself. I wasn't aware that it was a well-known vandal, though – thanks for alerting me. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 19:28, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Bob Kroll

Please do not add your own changes, as you did to Bob Kroll (police officer). You have violated Wikipedia's terms of service and may have your account suspended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.100.101.92 (talk) 20:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I have replied on the IP editor's own talk page, having reverted them again. Wham2001 (talk) 20:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Citation Barnstar
		Thank you for correcting the citations in the Pashto Phonology page. Please keep up the good work PashtoPromoter (talk) 07:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank-you very much PashtoPromoter – that's most kind! Wham2001 (talk) 07:35, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

You are more then welcome. I have been expanding pages on Pashto as very little information is available on my language online. Your service is a great help to my language. Many regards PashtoPromoter (talk) 07:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

ref conversion

Do you have a software tool or are you doing that manually? Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:50, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Cuñado, pleased to meet you . I'm doing it by hand, I'm afraid: lots of search & paste in the browser window. Occasionally I dive out to an external editor. I don't know of any script for dealing with harv/sfn references – I suspect that they're a bit too niche for anybody to have written one. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 04:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm also converting manually and it would be great to have a tool for that. Probably too complicated. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 19:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hinduism in India

I have seen that you have reverted my whole edit of nearly 68,000 bytes in the article of Hinduism in India, though it was challenged, but this was in a very small part and many of the parts was in the category of good edit which was very useful, so pls resecure my that edit. Nonameonlyusername (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I've replied on your user talk page to keep the discussion in one place. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 17:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Removing broken archive URLs

Hi, could you please be terribly extra careful when removing any archive URLs - these obviously are provided for safety, so it's worth taking more than usual precautions before removing them. I just did a rapid search and replaced one that you had deleted: it only took a moment to find it on Archive.org. That way, we preserve the integrity of the article, which after all relies completely on its sources. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Chiswick Chap, I had just noticed your edit summary and was about to write to you about it! I can't personally see how having an archive URL that's exactly the same (as, if I remember correctly, it was) as the source URL provides any extra safety – it rather is likely to dissuade correct archiving of the URL. My original plan was to run IAbot on the article once I'd removed the defective archive, but apparently IAbot is broken at the moment. It's fair to chide me, though, for not looking in the archive myself; I'll do that next time.

The request was purely to find the proper link, given that the thing in the parameter was duff.

Whilst I have you here, I was just doing some reference tidying on Martin Rundkvist, and I was surprised to see how much that article relies on references to Rundkvist's own writings. I realise that sourcing for articles on academics is challenging because nobody writes about them other than themselves and their employer's press department, but is having a whole section ("Swedish Skeptics' Association") sourced to primary references, most of which are the article subject's blog posts, really good enough for a GA? I noticed your name in the GA review comments and I'd be interested in your perspective: am I being unreasonably critical? Wham2001 (talk) 16:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I helped in a small way on MR, starting from far too much primary sourcing and helping to add many secondary RS; I insisted that we separate out the primary sources so everyone can see at a glance how rich the secondary sourcing is. I am quite confident that the sourcing is now more than adequate for notability, and that the article is easily up to the required standard. It's of course normal to rely on 1ry material for basic facts; the article would be much the same without the short section you mention, but even it has 2 secondary sources. There are indeed many GAs which don't have anything close to 57 secondary sources listed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:02, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank-you Gerda! Wikipedia may famously not be therapy, but I've found that gnoming has helped keep me calm in a very non-calming year. I hope you too are well. Wham2001 (talk) 07:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Sanga article

Hello Wham2001 and thanks for your edits and fixing refernces on Rana Sanga article. Can you please do one more favours there are still some grammar and spelling errors or wording in entire article (apart from lead which is best described the content in body), Please fix them immediately to make this a good article for readers. Please do it soon dear.2402:3A80:105F:9B4B:D453:D111:DEA9:B300 (talk) 05:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, the article is available for anybody to edit – including you! So if you see errors in the writing please dive in and fix them. I may come back to the article if I get time later this weekend. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 05:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

1st Maine Cavalry

Thanks so much for the catch. Including the volume number in the ref was redundant anyway with the volumes distinguished by the approved YYYYa, YYYYb, YYYYC, etc. convention. Eliminating the nonparameter vol= from sfnp kept the ps Italic textadditions functional. Once again, thanks so much. Good attention to detail like yours makes Wikipedia better every day. Take care! :-) Hal Boo (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hhfjbaker, good to hear from you :-) I'm not quite sure that the issues are 100% fixed, though. Looking at the article as it is now I see a couple of errors: "Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEU.S. War Department1885a573–575, 587–593 " was defined multiple times with different content" on footnote #48 and another similar one on #65. I think that the issue is that {{sfn}} consolidates references where the source and page numbers are the same, but that leads to an error if they have different ps= params. I've not found a good solution to this using sfn, which is why I converted those references to {{harv}} inside <ref> tags. earlier. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Roger that. Thanks again! Hal Boo (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Jayne Mansfield

Hey, did I accidentally screw up that page? I meant to add a phrase referring to Mariska winning an Emmy, but you said my edit duplicated a large part of the article? That's odd. I hope I didn't screw up the formatting or cause some other weird error. If I did, thanks for fixing it. eb (talk) 04:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Ebrown2112, yeah, if you look at the diff of your edit it added a second copy of the article. I've seen this happen before to other editors; I suspect that it's a rare and obscure MediaWiki bug. I couldn't work out what you were trying to do, so I reverted. Based on what you say above, though, I've made this edit – is that what you were aiming it? Thanks for dropping by, and best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 07:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Looks good! Thanks a lot for fixing it! eb (talk) 06:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Content removal

Hi. Did you mistakenly remove the contents from Marthandavarma (novel) ? --Gazal world (talk) 07:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Gazal world, I have no idea how this happened, but I have fixed it. Thanks for pointing this out. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 08:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Rana Sanga article

Are you free Sir; Can you please fix some grammatic errors on Rana Sanga article & Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests which you recently edited. Please do it, Thanks.2402:8100:2162:F4BE:9B81:F5EB:8CC:563A (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I think you've asked me this before? I might take a look at it, but it's not top of my todo list. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 15:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Bishop Ramsey School

Hi, I've just rewritten the page on my sandbox which should now be free of copyrighted material or promotional material. Could you please take a look at it and run any tools required on it, and if it is all clear then you can update the page. Thanks! Heichō (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Heichō, sorry about the delay in replying to your message, and thanks for the work in your sandbox. Your re-written version looks a lot better on a quick read. A couple of things:

• If you have a conflict of interest with regards to the school (e.g. you're an employee, student, parent, etc.) then you should follow the instructions on this page. In that case I would ask that you make an edit request on the article talk page, which will then be reviewed by an editor with experience in vetting material that's been written with a conflict of interest – I don't have much experience in that area.
• If you don't have a COI, you can make the changes yourself.

In either case, one thing to note is that your revised draft uses a lot of italics – more than most articles. There's advice on what italics should and shouldn't be used for here. If you haven't already you could review that advice and then revise the draft accordingly if necessary.

Best, Wham2001 (talk) 08:34, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help in getting this done! I've reviewed the use of italics and don't have a COI, and the page is now updated. - Heichō (talk) 11:49, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Heichō, I see that your edits have been reverted by Girth Summit. They have made some comments on the article talk page and I think that you should reply to them there. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Dhammakaya tradition

Thanks for clearing up the refs at Dhammakaya tradition!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Farang Rak Tham, no worries. Thanks for dropping by! Wham2001 (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for your help! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 22:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank-you Joshua Jonathan, for the tea and for your tireless work on articles about Indian topics. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 06:17, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I made an error when merging two notes diff, but I don't see what. Can you fix it? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:59, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I've solved it for now, by leaving the text of the note in the body of the article diff. But it's not satisfying... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan, I'm not sure what's going wrong off-hand, and I'm about to be away from Wikipedia for a week and a half. I'll take a look when I get back if you haven't managed to fix it by then. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan, I had a few minutes to look at it this morning. I think that the problem is that you can only use {{refn}} once in a set of list-defined references – there's a note to that effect here, though it doesn't explain why or give any advice on how to avoid the problem. I guess you could convert the ref inside the Shlok 121 refn to {{sfn}} and then use <ref> instead? That's not beautiful either, though... Wham2001 (talk) 06:08, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. {{sfn}} doesn't work either, though, probably for the same reason. I always use harvtx/harvnb within notes, but to do that for a web-reference I'd have to figure out yet another "houtje-touwtje" solution (a stick and a string to solve a problem; my English fails me here). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan, yes of course it's not possible to use {{sfn}} inside <ref>, is it? I had forgotten that. There's no solution I can see here that doesn't involve stick and string, unfortunately. Wham2001 (talk) 06:58, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not edit any resourceful information as you apparently did to the article Gujarat Sultanate.

When you edited the article Gujarat Sultanate, you edited the main heading, but you did not edit the origin page, in which you are contrasting two different statements in the article. At least two verifiable sources say the origins of the Sultans were Khatris who converted to Islam. Please also do not edit nor remove any resourceful sources.

Here are some sources about the origins of the Gujarati Sultans' origin

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GujaratiHistoryinDNA (talk • contribs) 14:06, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

GujaratiHistoryinDNA, two things. First, you are mis-reading the article history. An unregistered editor made the substantive edit that you are complaining about above; I merely converted the source that they'd added to use {{sfn}}, so as to avoid an error caused by having the bibliographic information for the source in the article twice. I don't have an opinion on (or any interest in) the question of the origins of the Sultans or which sources should be cited in the article. Secondly, when posting on talk pages please place all the content that you're adding in a single section and sign your messages by adding four tilde (~) characters at the end. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Re: A pie for you!

Thank you! ☺ Mmmm, it was yummy! 84.69.182.103 (talk) 11:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Glad you enjoyed it Wham2001 (talk) 20:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Talking up Frederick the Great

I appreciate you removed the personal attack. I think to maintain Wikipedia civility, that is critical. I'd imagine most attacks would hurt, but I did want to tell someone that this particular one honored me. Thanks again for being on top of it so quickly! (I noticed due to an edit conflict and posted my response unchanged. I don't think it should be a problem.)

With gratitude Wtfiv (talk) 08:24, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Wtfiv, thanks for the note. I think that your reply was commendable, and I'm glad to see that the discussion has calmed down. Good luck with the rest of the FAC process. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 06:13, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Yuki Katsura

not sure how tto message you but i am editing yuki katsura's page and you made some cross-edits and deleted all my progress. Any chance you have an earlier draft saved somewhere? I'm gutted. 6 hours of work gone. I'm hired to edit this page at the moment as part of a Wiki Edit-a-thon and appreciate you staying out of the page. LoveKawasaki77 (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

@LoveKawasaki77: this is the correct way to message me. Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm sorry that I stepped on your toes earlier. One of the things that I do here is tidy up a particular formatting error – multiple short footnotes pointing to the same source – when editors introduce it. It's not an obvious error to diagnose so editors are often unaware of having made it. I usually leave around an hour or so after the most recent edit to the article to be confident that the editor who made the edit has finished, but here that apparently wasn't long enough. What likely happened was that you suffered an Edit conflict. You can check the article history here and see whether any of the saved revisions contain your work. If your work never made it into the article history then unfortunately it is lost; I never saw it. If that's the case, then I'm very sorry for your wasted effort.

I've lost work to edit conflicts before and know how annoying it can be. Here are a few ideas for how to help avoid them in the future:

• Break your edits up into smaller chunks working on a few sentences or paragraphs at a time. There's an "edit" link next to each section heading of the article that lets you edit just that section, which helps a lot with this approach.
• If you need to make really major edits to the whole article which you've spent several hours on, save a copy of your work locally on your computer before hitting "Show preview" / "Publish changes".
• If you're taking a whole article apart you might want to place the {{in use}} template at the top. While Wikipedia work s on a philosophy that anybody can edit any article at any time, that template lets other editors know that you are restructuring an article, and most of them will leave it alone while you work. It's best to use it sparingly, though.

Finally, thank-you for your improvements to the article! I hope that the rest of your Wikipedia career is less frustrating than this incident has been. Best wishes, Wham2001 (talk) 08:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for your conversion of references in the Fascism article to sfn format. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank-you very much Cdjp1! I haven't even finished yet — I guess I should do a bit more of it this evening... Wham2001 (talk) 19:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)