User talk:Yngvadottir/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Yesp

Ok, I understand. That was my first edit ever and I was experimenting with the edit feature. I am sorry for that. It won't happen again. Pompidou Centre (talk) 17:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello!

I did B, you did R, so I started D at [1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes thanks for letting me know, but I saw and was hoping others would weigh in. Since it was not a 100% shutdown, I regard "partial" as more neutral, but I'd like to have more than two voices involved :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough! I think the other way around, but I won´t leave Wikipedia over it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I have no Idea what this is, So you can have it. Epic (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! It's actually extremely yummy if you like sweet stuff - made with dates and honey. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Activity tracker 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:

• of sharing via [[social media]] and resulting rivalry.<ref name=Wired/><ref name=CNET/><ref>G. F., [http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2013/05/quantified-self "Quantified self: Fit, fit, hooray!",

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 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:

• ref>[[Franz Josef Worstbrock]], [http://www.jstor.org/stable/20658954 "Mitteilung des Herausgebers]], ''Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur'' 126 (1997) 494 {{de icon}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ilsfeld 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:

• the district of Heilbronn, on the valley of the [[Schozach]] near the point where the Gruppenbach]] flows into it. Parts of the town fall within two [[Natural region|natural area]]s: Schwäbisch-
• und Seetham; auf Markung Auenstein: Finkenbach (in Helfenberg aufgegangen) und Kapfenhardt.[ -->

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AdvanFort 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:

• Cargo Security International |date= |accessdate=2013-10-15}}</ref> and Rear Admiral Joel Whitehead (USCG-Ret.<ref name="cargosecurityinternational" />.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Yea, I decided to make more. Here. Epic (talk) 17:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!! Yngvadottir (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

[Breathing out a light spray of {{brownie}} crumbs as she speaks :] Darwinbish has stolen your brownie! The brownie made her happy and she'd like to give you a great big hug for leaving it where she could reach it. Spread the WikiLove by giving her more {{brownie}}s, unless you want her boys to pay you a visit! darwinbish ^BITE ☠ 18:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC).

LOL do you like lutefisk, too? Lovely lutefisk, come and get it ... Yngvadottir (talk) 18:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

[Darwinbish avoids eating her relatives. But Bishzilla tucks in.] Nom nom! bishzilla _ROARR!! 19:11, 21 October 2013 (UTC).

N94228

I think that N94228 misunderstands one of the criteria for speedy deletion. (It isn't clear whether he or she understands anything about Wikipedia.) Articles written by banned or blocked users can be deleted. N94228 apparently is concerned that he or she is about to be blocked, which may happen if he or she continues making idle accusations. However, the deletion rule does not apply to users who are blocked or banned after writing the articles. It only applies to users who are already blocked or banned, and so never should have written the articles, but were evading the block, typically by sock-puppetry. Now that reliable sources have been added, the article should not be deleted either for lack of notability or for sockpuppetry. Thank you for adding references. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, being a teenager is not an excuse for N94228. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:47, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Fixing references

YOu have been very helpful to someone still learning! Please fix up references formats for 2 pages - 1) Conyers Baronets 2) 5th Earl of Orkney, Thomas FitzMaurice thanks so much Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.10.139 (talk) 04:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Fixed the first, can't find the latter - if you mean Thomas FitzMaurice, 5th Earl of Orkney, all I was able to do was change it from unreferenced to refimprove - I can't find the second reference and doubt it is reliable anyhow. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:24, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Unilateral major deletion of content from MV Seaman Guard Ohio page

Hi, can you do something about the major deletion of content [2] from the MV Seaman Guard Ohio page by a user called TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom. This was done with total disregard to the comments left by several users including yourself on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MV Seaman Guard Ohio incident. Thanks. 109.128.150.134 (talk) 12:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know; I see the AfD ended as keep. I feel strongly that that material belongs in an article on the company, with only a short summary in the one on the ship. I also have to tell you that it will need to be thoroughly rewritten. You'll see in the history that I made a tiny first step along those lines after first finding and adding some information on the ship itself. But one is not supposed to blank an article while it's at AfD, plus it would be fairest to pass the AfC on AdvanFort and thus give credit to the editor who's worked hard on sourcing it. I have some other tasks I must do today, so I'm going to tell you to sit on your hands - the info that was in the article is still in the history and it's not going to be deleted - and I'll either do that or help do that as soon as I can. But. It will probably not be the article you would like to see - it will probably be shorter, it won't attack anyone in the administration of the company, and it won't forecast how this might become a legal precedent unless I find at least one unimpeachable source (such as a major news outlet) has published such speculations. I hope that satisfies you; remember, we're an encyclopedia, not journalists or an NGO ourselves. Thanks for working on this, but the ideal encyclopedic article is a lot more boring than activists or other enthusiasts might like (I've also made archeological evidence of cannibalism boring, for example). Yngvadottir (talk) 12:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. Thanks Yngvadottir. Drmies (talk) 14:15, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

@Yngvadottir (talk) & @Drmies (talk): In order to avoid a revert-war, I have NOT reverted the article to it's previous version and instead flagged the deletions by TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom as inappropriate on the talk age of the article. I'll take the cue on the editorship style and also help with sourcing the text to prominent news sources.

I trust that you will do the needful as best as you see fit and in the mean-time will sit on my hands and not update the page anymore till you folks are finished with it. Thanks for your time & have a nice day ! 109.128.150.134 (talk) 18:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

• A new editor is edit-warring to keep all that content in. I reverted; I think it should go and I think that the AfD gave enough reason for that. Have you had another look at that AfC? Drmies (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

It got bumped ahead in my to do list by today's events (fortunately I see someone already merged List of Channel Awesome Shows); I just confirmed my earlier impression of the AfC submission and created the AdvanFort article. Must now feed dogs, then I think I will draft the new incident section in Word. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Woof! Drmies (talk) 00:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Karen Aabye

Might interest you...♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Linked it to the rest on Wikidata and added a couple of sentences from the Danish article, but I'm afraid I have a massive to do list right now. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:45, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Sicced

You know, the OED supports "sicked", not "sicced" (though "sic" is given as an alternative for "sick"): "He had cleared away some underbrush, for instance who had sicked the cops on Laidlaw"; " Why should you barge in here, gnashing your bally teeth, just because Horace sicked Claude Polt, private investigator, on to you?" (P.G. Wodehouse!); "Seems some of the boys..sicked the dogs on him"; "He sick-ed him on all the time". Google Books suggests (OR alert!) that "sicced" is the more vernacular form. Later, Drmies (talk) 16:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I think the verb is irretrievably vernacular and that was the IP's problem; note that Wiktionary gives "sicced". I went with that as clearer, since I couldn't think of a good paraphrase. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I only used it as a kind of joke in the first place, given the completely vernacular nature of the myth. That picture is just wonderful--I mean the modern one. No, the IP just misread the grammar, I think. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

TheGeneralUser has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween! If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Hi Yngvadottir! Wishing you a very happy Halloween :-) TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:06, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Om nom nom! Thanks :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 04:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Hawkeye7 (submissions)
3. Sasata (submissions)
4. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
5. Casliber (submissions)
6. Adam Cuerden (submissions)
7. Miyagawa (submissions)
8. Piotrus (submissions)
9. Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

• Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
• Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
• Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
• The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
• Finally, the judges are awarding Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Happy Halloween

	Hello Yngvadottir, Hafspajen has given you some lovely Pumpkin cupcake, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Pumpkin cupcake ! Enjoy!

LOL, thanks! (Gods, that's humongous!) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• Hafspajen (talk) 19:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ilsfeld, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eberbach (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) 09:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Regarding changes made to the article on the National Security Agency

Hello. I noticed you've reverted the changes I made to the aforementioned article, and would like to say the following:

The subject of the sentence in question, pasted below for your convenience, is "bugging [electronic systems] and [allegedly] engaging..."

"The agency is authorized to accomplish its mission through clandestine means, among which is bugging electronic systems and allegedly engaging in sabotage through subversive software."

The word "and" requires that both verbs — "bugging" and "engaging" — be considered the subject of the sentence.

When it comes to recognizing the subject of a sentence, I've always found that rearranging words, as well as disregarding prepositional phrases and other supplementary information, is a useful strategy.

For example, the sentence can be reorganized such that it reads, "Bugging electronic systems and allegedly engaging in sabotage through subversive software are among the clandestine means through which the agency is authorized to accomplish its mission."

Again, doing so allows for much easier identification of the subject within a sentence; however, the sentence can be simplified even further, as is demonstrated below.

"Bugging and engaging are among the clandestine means through which the agency is authorized to accomplish its mission."

Hopefully, this lengthy explanation of my edit has proven comprehensible.

I'll await a response before I revert to my edit.

Thanks,

~zziccardi (talk) 01:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

You're right of course - I didn't see the "and" and second subject after the ref. I've reverted myself. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:57, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Thanks, again. ~zziccardi (talk) 23:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

speaking of Pratham...

ancient stuff

Actually, since you asked, you might be able to help me convince him to sit down and chat. Maybe leave another message on his talkpage, saying thanks for helping improve wikipedia, listen the the wise words of 74-whatever, their method may seem unorthodox but that is just pillar five of the foundations of wikipedia, lend them your ears.....  :-)   Thanks, see you around. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC) ((IMPORTANT: NAME IS SPELLED like this: Pratham. My bad, I started off right, then got confused at some point, and confused you. I've fixed up his personal talkpage where I confused you, and my own goofs on the article-talkpage. Sorry.))    Appreciate the help. Of course, I actually don't have much experience with this sort of thing, although it is nice of you to say. And looking at your userpage, you in fact do. Have a ton of experience, that is. Come visiting, if you like. WP:RETENTION, the talkpage of that project-page is where all the fun happens. We can always use another inclusionist that supports anons, and Mark will be *thrilled* to have a philosophy PhD who went to Cornell with us. However, I must warn you, we're not starting a cabal or anything, so if you're into that kind of thing, there's nothing to see here, move along.  :-)    No problemo, whatever you end up doing. Thanks for improving wikipedia! See you. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 02:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC) And feel free to wax this if you need space. I usually assume people will do so, since it's there talkpage after all. From what you've seen, is it actually considered impolite when somebody cleans up like that? I actually just leave mine around... should my IP address go out of style, the old talkpage "cleans itself up" after a fashion, and I can start fresh. However, usually people can tell my by my calling card, the dreaded WP:WALLOFTEXT. Not very many anons have an official policy named after them, you know. <preens> Anyhoo, talk to you later. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 02:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC) While I do take your point on not wanting to embarrass Pratham someday... the truth is, he is totally completely not at all in any way at fault here. WikiCulture is at fault. A new editor shows up, ready to tell the world about a *completely* legitimate and encyclopedic topic, out of nowhere WP:NINJAs start deleting images, deleting text, drastically rewriting Pratham's carefully tuned prose, and in general screwing everything up! With nothing but inscrutable talkpage jargon, primarily composed of three-letter-acronyms which lead to maddeningly inscrutable wikilegalese, page after page after page of it. There talkpage is first template-spammed to welcome them... oh and by the way 'helpfully' give them links to the five bazillion policy-pages ... then quickly fills up with *much* more template-spam, telling them it is *their* fault when somebody *else* deletes their hard work! That's adding insult to injury, and not helpful.     WikiDan is trying their best to help, and in fact *is* helping 100% pure and simple, but with all the officious accusational template-spam flying around, Pratham just sees WikiDan as a distraction to be ignored, HIS WORK IS BEING DELETED AND JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED!!111!!! Anyways, I hope someday Pratham does read our disjointed conversation, once he's accustomed to surviving in the wikiverse. Aside: Pratham, if you do see this someday, when you have a thousand edits under your belt and are an experience pro, go ahead and chuckle a bit. But remember what it was like, when you were inexperienced and frustrated, and try to be kind to others you see in the wikiverse -- maybe they are also just inexperienced and frustrated. Anyhoo, that said, do feel free to clean this up if you the screen-real-estate, Yngvadottir. (And do you have a nickname? That username is a mouthful. :-)   Pratham can always nostalgically review his First.Article.Evah someday in the future, by pulling it from the edit-history, if he wishes. By then he'll know how, which is the whole point, for me -- WP:NICE as the key to WP:RETENTION p.s. I feel I must say, no offense intended, but clearly we do not want any loose cannons in the cabal we are not starting. And as for the WP:RETENTION project, please, if anybody were starting a cabal, which of course we're not, involving loose cannons publishing propaganda like the pocket wikipedia guerilla warfare survival manual, which of course we're not, that bunch of 150 people with the wise and famous Dennis Brown, Dirk Beetstra, Rich Farmbrough, Dougweller, Kudpung, HeatherWalls, and other luminaries of the wikiverse would be an unwitting vehicle to cloak our nefarious schemes in a facade of respectability. Any cabal members would, if such a thing existed, be far down the list, buried and effectively undetectable, or in some cases unlisted. Nobody is making waves about template-spam, either. Don't rock the boat, that's my motto. Loose cannons are a disgrace! We have strict rules around here! You should straighten up and fly right, Yngvadottir, before you get yourself into trouble.  :-)     Thanks for the pointer to Drmies, they just left me a note. Perhaps I'll seek out some respectable not-at-all-loose-cannon-types over there. See you around. If you see any beginners struggling, please ping my talkpage, or direct them to the teahouse, I guess. Pratham actually tried that, but they reverted him, how rude... and somebody from WP:RETENTION at that, who ought to know better. So much to do, so little time. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

older stuff

Pratham has not logged in again. Maybe they are just discouraged, and will come back later, but methinks not. If they never login to their account again, but merely browse as an anon, chances are good they'll never see the messages we left on the talkpage. There are a couple options we have in a case like this. Zeroth, we can wait it out ... like we have been doing ... but how long before they forget their password, or their initial frustration hardens into bitterness-and-evergrudge? First, we could try leaving a message on their IP, but in this case that's not obvious to me from the edit-history, and wikipedia has pretty strong restrictions against trying to figure out a registered editor's IP/location/name/etc. (Which I agree with... and think they are in fact too weak. But we know Pratham's full name, and where he works/somesuch, and all that, so maybe we can ask some super-admin with access to the username-to-IP-tools, and they can post a message for us?) Next, we could -- but will not -- try to figure out Pratham's personal email, or whatever. I'm very much against that; bad precedent, and not what they came to wikipedia for. My actual plan is somewhat dramatic, but under WP:IAR might actually be acceptable. Before I bounce it off of wikidan and eastmain, the two folks that cleaned up the initial article, I figured I would bounce it off you. Is it okay, temporarily, to put a big billboard smack dab in the middle of the article about the school, saying "PRATHAM -- HELP HAS ARRIVED -- WE CAN SAVE YOUR IMAGES -- PLEASE CLICK HERE" with a hyperlink over to the now-collapsed version of Pratham's personal talkpage? Sometime they'll probably browse the page -- or somebody else in the school will browse the page, and tell Pratham. Anyways, I hate to disfigure mainspace with what boils down to a classified advert, but it seems a shame to lose an editor that had moxy and wikithusiasm, signed up to be an admin, and a teahouse host, contested deletion, and fought for page protection. All mistakes, of course, but beginners cannot help it nowadays. Do you have any alternative suggestions, or thoughts on zero/one/notTwo/three? Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2013 (UTC) No. I saw, and was sad, but since he did not enable e-mail, any attempt to figure out who he is is outing, and that's wrong. In any case it's up to him - he may just be busy with school right now, or he may be holding off till he can get a picture ... he may even have to wait till the picture is developed before he can upload it. Who knows and it isn't our business. And we mustn't disfigure an article with a personal message. What we can do is see if references can be found for the school (and info like you highlighted on the talkpage - which may well be on the school website, and it can be referenced for things like that). I'd have a look today, but see the other sections on this part of this talk page and then add two three tasks not mentioned (I almost forgot this); this is my "weekend" but I have tasks stacked high. It saddens me that we have people leave and it also troubles me that sometimes people come back under a different account and just start afresh, but that's what it is - it's an anonymous internet project, so everyone has the rights of an adult to just walk away or to do it the wrong way. Hopefully no one will AfD the article, because it's comparatively hard to find Indian sources, but I recently did find sources for this unpromising school article (see latest version). Yngvadottir (talk) 15:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC) Yeah, I kinda knew that. Well, okay, I *did* know that, but was resisting acknowledgement of the reality. Sometimes life is not fair. Option zero is our only option, for this case. Maybe we'll luck out, and they'll come back.    But you know, and I know, that the article was effectively killed. Even if you find out the student-count... which I don't want to discourage you over, Pratham will appreciate it if somebody else answers one of the questions that will *help* the article via adding something useful rather than 'help' the article via deletionism... but the figure will go out of date next year, or the next. Nobody *truly* having zero WP:COI problems cares deeply enough about this particular school-article to keep it up-to-date in the long run, yourself and myself included... nobody but an insider can do the necessary legwork easily enough, which would keep the article correct and up-to-date. It will just languish, in the form it is now. Which angers me, and frustrates me, because if I was just a little quicker on the draw, I believe the situation could have been controlled and calmed, without driving away Yet Another Beginner.     Nobody did anything wrong here (well -- Pratham did plenty of things wrong, because of WP:NOCLUE mitigating circumstances albeit). You did fine. I did fine, excepting my transient desire... not acted on... to post a personals-advert in mainspace... sigh... thanks for your calming advice. EastMain did fine. WikiDan61 was *very* patient, and kept their obvious frustration with Pratham's shenanigans from doing any harm; WikiDan deserves a cookie. People who marked the copyvio for speedy, did fine. WP:SNOW on the RfA, better than fine. I might grumble about Pratham's teahouse-host-sign-up getting ninja-reverted, but even that is fine per the letter of WP:BRD procedures. I also might grumble about *every* *single* article ever created being nominated for deletion, as a matter of course, and nobody apparently thinking it the height of rudeness save myself, but that is the way things work nowadays, and changing that will take a fundamental change in WikiCulture, not one grumble. Everybody did fine, and the system worked the way it was supposed to, the article is now a reasonably-encyclopedic one... but with no sources... and no real maintainer... and effectively a stub... which prolly started as a pure copyvio of the school website (even if Pratham works there he does not hold copyright to that text and thus cannot relicense it as GFDL)... and thus will probably be deleted at some point, on the Immovable Object grounds you were worried about. Worse, instead of having +1 editor to swell the ranks of the 30k on enWiki[3][4], we had +1 and then -1 for a net gain of zero... and the bitterness[5] makes it overall *negative*.     So. We follow option-zero with Pratham. Going forward, though, what lessons-learned do we have here? I'm already busy elsewhere trying to change the rudeness of template-message-wording. But how do we lower the response-time of WP:NICE folks? Pratham got into trouble way before you heard about them at RfA (by chance), and before I heard about them at the xLinkBot talkpage (also by chance). Is there some wiki-tool that will give me the list of newly-created-accounts (or even better first-time-anon-editing-attempts), with a count of their edits, and a count of their templates-on-the-talkpage, so we can nip the frustrations of future Pratham-equivalents in the bud? There's probably ten similar happening now, but I don't know how to find them. (And p.s. if this discussion about meta-helping has little interest for you, then no problemo, just let me know. No worries... I'll find somebody to whine to.  :-/    In the meantime, I'll change gears and write something about dogagory, so you'll have yet another wall-o-text to chew through.  :-)    If it becomes too much, please say. p.p.s. I expect my captcha-words will be the word of the day, which is Rrrrrgh. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC) And, you can just reply over here if you wish. Anons cannot have watchlists, as far as I could figure out -- one of the few punishments that stings -- so if I don't respond promptly, feel free to ping my talkpage. Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

That's a good question about seeing newly created accounts and first edits. Ask elsewhere. But I'm sure you realize what a flood of both there is, and that it includes people who do mean mischief. On nominating new articles for deletion: I've found my own most useful roles are through AfD watchlist categories and WP:Pages needing translation into English. The Article Rescue Squadron made too many enemies and was done away with; a net loss from my point of view, but I'm not a pure inclusionist: I've nominated some articles for deletion (mostly with success) and I often stand back and let the process take its course, particularly with articles about companies. The project is attracting an increasing amount of promotion. I also have a great deal of sympathy for new page patrollers. The speedy deletion categories are an alphabet soup and I personally find disconnected letters and numbers hard to remember, plus there are types of article that some speedy categories don't apply to - I always double check before I speedy delete, making me a very slow admin indeed. And a couple of years ago there was a breaching experiment that led to the resignation of a large number of experienced new page patrollers - that was one of the first things that soured me on the WMF, but more importantly, new page and vandal patrol have a tremendous potential to damage the encyclopedia if done badly, not least by driving away good-faith contributors, and experience is really to be desired there; since that breaching experiment NPP has been mostly inexperienced, trigger-happy people, despite intelligent and caring efforts to fix the problem, and vandal-fighting will always be that way. Yes, we have a problem. But we also have a problem with new articles that probably are not notable remaining because everyone's busy - I can sort of understand making it their main activity to nominate things for deletion when I consider the promotional company articles, including things like this - I translated it, removed the promotional inline links and links to where to buy it at the end and tagged it as of dubious notability, but I should maybe have PRODded it. We have to recognize that some people do not wish the best for the encyclopedia. I use the warning templates you object to, for two reasons: first, a standardized process of escalating warnings provides a clear basis for an admin to determine whether to block; second, the wording has been decided on by wise heads over a long time and is both as polite and as clear as we can make it, and the escalating levels of warning provide an alert to someone who may just be having fun and may not even have thought about the consequences of putting silliness in an encyclopedia article - most vandals who get the full series, or the "stop now!" BLP warning, do indeed stop short of the blocking point. But perhaps you didn't mean those, but only the "marked for speedy deletion", PROD, and AfD templates? Those could probably be made kinder and clearer, yes. But do look at Special:New pages and see the silly stuff that's mixed in with the premature saves and the purely bad English notable topics. And at the sheer speed with which pages are being added, at least at some times of day. It's ... daunting when you look at the top of the queue. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

You hit on a lot of points here, which I'll try to touch briefly. Knowing my knack for verbosity, that won't work too well.  :-)

quick listing of many of the various and sundry problems wikipedia faces, often perennially

1A. seeing newly created accounts and first edits nipping trouble in the bud will save *everybody* time... look at Pratham's history! 1B. realize what a flood yes, there is a flood. WP:RETENTION is the answer. We need 1M active editors, not 31k. 1C. includes people who do mean mischief sure... but we *have* plenty of wiki-tools to hair-trigger badguys. We just need more sherriffs 1D. new articles for deletion my current scheme is to merge-delete all of AfD, into the new&improved AfC process. 1E. Article Rescue Squadron which is a very sneaky way of reviving this ARS cabal. Who were their enemies, and why? 1F. attracting an increasing amount of promotion comes w/ being a top-ten-site that consumers trust; what is your bright-line[6] position? 1G. sympathy for new page patrollers there are too few of them... another WP:RETENTION silver bullet... combining with AfC helps too. 1H. speedy deletion categories are an alphabet soup *this* crapola must die... it is wikiCop jargon, for the promotion of the wikiBureacracy, and especially propagation of the caste-system-based wikiCulture. I intend to crush the caste-system-culture, and replace it with my WP:NICE not-a-cabal. 1I. I always double check before I speedy delete, making me a very slow admin which is called Doing The Right Thing... as opposed to lazy cut-corner slackers busy-busy typical admins. Again, solution is WP:RETENTION, if we had 300k vandal-fighters instead of 30k, it would *really* help. 1J. breaching experiment that led to the resignation of a large number of experienced NPPs yes... surprise breaching pop-quizzes are stupid... but we *do* need a metric, that gauges how well our NPP folks are doing their work... I have an AfC-fka-NPP-related software-app[7] scheme for that purpose. 1K. things that soured me on the WMF welllll... I knew they were wasting money and spinning wheels... but the VizEd fiasco is what turned me into a Crusader To WP:RGW. Damn thing cost millions, and is not even wrong.

NPPs, wikiCops, AfC-reviewers: on the front lines to *protect* wikipedia... and *serve* when not too busy-busy

2A. new page and vandal patrol have a tremendous potential to damage the encyclopedia if done badly correct 2B. not least by driving away good-faith contributors *very* correct 2C. experience is really to be desired there subtly incorrect: what matters is WP:COMPETENCE. Some people with ten mainspace edits and ten days as an editor will be naturals at the NPP game... whereas other people with 10k edits and ten years will suck at it and WP:BITE plus cause cascading-busywork correcting their mistakes. We must test *skill* via primary criteria (see software-app above), not fuzzy editcountitis-based 'experience' in general. Edit-count can prove *commitment* and in some sense *morality*, but that's no substitute for being able to shoot straight. We need wikiCops that satisfy both orthogonal criterion. 2D. [NPP nowadays] mostly inexperienced, trigger-happy people this is partly because WP:ABF about anons, and partly because no automated metric 2E. vandal-fighting will always be that way. why? what distinguishes vandal-fighting from sending an AfC-submission back for another round of improvements before it's pronounced ready for mainspace? (Hint: our assumptions about the intent of the submitter! but we must really really WP:AGF) 2F. Yes, we have a problem. no arg here 2G. But we also have a problem with new articles which can be solved by WP:RETENTION... and by the software-app thingie. 2H. that probably are not notable the queue is several weeks long! 2I. remaining because everyone's busy again, WP:RETENTION... plus merging NPP with AfC, and AfD with AfC, pooling 2J. consider the promotional company articles these can conceivably be an asset: More Editors Is Possibly Good... who *will* work hard cause they're paid to! ... we just have to 'incentivize' them with our apps and our rules, so as to tend to make them do their work in a way that improves the encyclopedia, rather than detracting from it 2K. some people do not wish the best for the encyclopedia weasel words. citation needed. WP:AGF. most people are good, and the bad eggs are also mostly not smart enough to get around bohts. We just need two things: first, WP:RETENTION to get the good eggs to become-n-remain active editors, and second, wiki-tools that we mostly already *have* for letting the good eggs keep the nest clean, so to speak.

template-spam: how 'polite' with-all-due-respect messages killed actually-WP:NICE messages of authentic respect

3A. I use the warning templates you object to, for two reasons: Sure, and there's nothing wrong with you using them... I avoid them for philosophical WP:AGW reasons, not because I don't *want* to use automated-wiki-tool-templates.  :-) 3B. first, a standardized process of escalating warnings I agree that the standard process should be retained... but as hidden-html-comments, not user-visible unfriendly your harmful action has been stopped continue and be destroyed 3C. provides a clear basis for an admin to determine whether to block; from personal experience, only a few admins pay *any* attention to 'process' ... they follow pillar five, and get-er-done. Also from anecdotal observations, users (Pratham only being the most obvious) respond *badly* to being pigeonholed into an officious, painful, slow, buggy, asinine bureacracy. The process, as implemented today, is a big fail. 3D. second, the wording has been decided on by wise heads over a long time consensus can change.  :-)    But especially with boht-messages[8] and template-wordings,[9] you are dead-on correct: there is a caste-system in place, who derive *pleasure* from issuing officious warnings, and take pride in their *status* as high-caste insiders. I don't even think that the folks I argued with over at meta about the antispam-template-spam (define irony) and the antivandalism-boht were that bad; at least they gave me the time of day, and found a test-case where I could make my crazy changes without messing up their world. But they *are* assuming bad faith; the 999 bad guys, for every one good egg, has colored their thinking. That's the wikiCulture at work. Consensus will be a bitch to change, and will not come easy. 3E. and is both as polite and as clear as we can make it, you are asserting that current wording is optimal for wikipedia's survival and thrival, in some kind of absolute sense? "as we can make it" is an *extremely* strong statement. And where does pillar four say 'polite'? It specifically says *respect* and WP:NICE. 3F. [escalation] provides an alert to someone who may just be having fun sure, but why not have the first N levels *be* fun, themselves? why not make *constructively* editing be MORE fun than getting lulz by screwing with mainspace? This is the key to everything -- if we can make editing wikipedia fun again, WP:RETENTION will skyrocket, and our other problems will be solved by the vast influx of new good eggs. The current approach, which makes it *zero* fun for bad eggs out to do mischief, is also exactly what's killing off the good eggs stumbling around doing their best to improve the encyclopedia in some way: we get 1000 new editors every single month, and lose 1050 editors (not all of them new) every single month. We've got to start keeping those good eggs around. 3G. most vandals who get the full series, or the "stop now!" BLP warning which is the same exact stop now or be destroyed message we give to false-positives... 3H. do indeed stop short of the blocking point. ...which is pointless, right? Because vandals *should* be blocked. We should immediately block pillar-four violations with a 1-minute timeout. Next pillar-four violation, 2-minutes. Keep doubling until they learn their lesson. Blocks should be per browser, using cookies, not per IP or username. Prolly these would have to be called 'love taps' or something insipid, and implemented differently than actual blocks/bans, since the language around those is already settled. "We never use blocks punitively". Oh reeeely? Pretty sure that wikipedia *only* uses blocks punitively, except in very rare cases like Pratham, where if we temp-block him, it will be to forcibly open up a talkpage-dialog with him.

in which a solution is suggested, the Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, for the good of the wikiverse

4A. But perhaps you didn't mean those, Oh, I definitely meant those. I mean all the messages. Time to turn wikiCulture on the ear. WMF cannot save us. The 634 633 active admins cannot save us. Everybody -- well not moi but everybody paying attention -- has known about the peak in active-editor-retention,[10] and the peak in RfA success,[11] for *years* now.[12] But the change must come from the bottom up, not from the top down. 4B. but only the CSD, PROD, and AfD templates? I want to get rid of all these, completely, not just modify them. Instead of seeing "your article has been nominated for deletion at AfD" instead you would see the far more pleasing "your article has been nominated for a free round of improvement at AfC". Best of all, instead of getting raked over the coals by deletionists, looking for any loophole in the rules to G387 your butt and kick you out of wikipedia forever, instead you could have a nice chat with librarian and computer programmer Anne Delong, who will incisively point out ways your article can be improved, and then sent over to 74 who can kickstart the process. 4C. But do look at Special:New pages and see the silly stuff there is actually a scheme I've been considering, the Silly Stuff Hall Of Fame, which might help divert this from being a problem, into being borderline-constructive.[13] "I am not about to accuse you... of being involved in the apple industry...." 4D. that's mixed in with the premature saves Boy, I've done *this* before. Wikipedia needs to have a way to *easily* work on a draft version of the article, in your personal sandbox, which keeps itself sync'd up with the mainspace version (without trashing your changes), and then a merge-tool that permits you to submit when you are ready. Ideally, you would ping somebody to glance over your suggested changes *before* they went into mainspace. Right now, all this is possible, but painfully manual. Maybe there needs to be AfE services? (Articles for Editing). 4E. and the purely bad English notable topics. Surprisingly, this actually is a key part of my not-a-cabal. There are a *ton* of simple spelling-fixes and grammar-fixes and clarification-needed problems, over in the AfC queue... and there are *zero* WP:NINJA folks waiting to swoop in and revert anything a beginner dares to touch, then template-spam them (or just insta-ban them). I think the best way to get immediate WP:RETENTION traction is with fun-quick-teaming; I'm working on a five-person proposal, but here[14] is the initial[15] two-person-proposal. We need to make editing fun again, to achieve WP:RETENTION of a million people. 4F. And at the sheer speed with which pages are being added, Sure. Tough with 31k editors and 633 admins for enWiki; no problemo if we have 250k editors and 25k admins. As long as they are Good Eggs, that is. But we have 500M readers a month: surely one tenth of a percent of the readers are good.

Later update -- well, it was pretty damn verbose. So I'll chop it up into three four mini-tables, rather than one huge honking big table, and collapse each of them separately. Hope this helps clarify. And, as usual, although this is obviously a blow-by-blow reply to your specific question, with footnotes to justify my answers and everything, I'm really writing it for *my* use, not just for your edification. If your wiki-gumption, or your desire to be edified about my sekret skemes to revamp the wikiverse, is drained by looking at these four massive walls, then you are WP:REQUIRED to totally skip reading them.  :-)   I will not be offended in the least. Thanks for improving wikipedia, see you around. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 05:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, Pratham has returned, so that's good... more than once... but the flip side is that he now seems resigned to avoiding talkpages entirely. He knows *how* to use them, but sees engaging in dialogue as pointless, presumably. Is there some way that we can force him to the talkpage, short of actually blocking him? The copyvio-templates are harsh enough, but the block-template is positively eeeevvviiillll. Not sure we have another option though; maybe we can replace the stock you-have-been-blocked template, with something like the pratham-please-respond-to-the-question-about-how-many-students-are-in-the-school template? Or maybe, you have some trick up your sleeve, that we can pull? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 05:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, I'm glad he returned. Some of your suggestions scare me, personally - too much software, not enough accommodation for personal styles. And have you seen the Village Pump: Proposals proposal for a Draft space to replace AfC? More thoughts tomorrow, particularly on the assumptions aspect; I am in the middle of rewriting Mogden before bed. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Charles IX, "King of ???"

You edited the article about King of Kvenland but your given source does not write anything about Charles IX calling himself with the title "King of Kvens" as you claim. Would you please include a source where the given information can be checked? Thank you in advance.Finnedi (talk) 20:55, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Now I do have to say you need to read the section. It argues that he used a term that some historians have considered a synonym of Kvens. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Please, a claim that the word "Kven" has something to do with "Caijaners" - something we don't know - does not entitle anybody to write that Charles IX would have called himself "King of the Kvens", which of course is an entirely different title. I'm sure everybody agrees here.Finnedi (talk) 21:11, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Look again at the scholarly argument referred to - and the sources cited. There's more on it in the Kvenland article. Then take it to one or both article talk pages. I referenced the actual title adequately; beyond that, it should be discussed there, not in edit summaries or on personal talk pages. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, per WP:IAR, *I* discussed it on a personal talkpage, *and* in an edit-summary.  :-)     See the User:Thomas.W talkpage, and my insertion of a qualifier after the see-also link in Charles IX of Sweden. Nobody has reverted me yet, but the day is young. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:28, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

As I wrote above, the Kvenland article is where you'll find the summary of the historians' argument. Personally I dunno - I know a lot about some things, and have a couple of fancy pieces of paper, but unlike some academics I admit when I'm not very up on something '-) I've responded to you on one minor point at User talk:Thomas.W, but on the way to finding that I saw you say you got blocked??? I'd been wondering why I hadn't seen you around recently. Ouch. Sorry that happened. (For talk page stalkers I should note I just finished an exhausting work week and then I had to try to figure out what on earth to do about Passage du milieu. Bed soon, after I do an off-wiki task involving Old Norse.) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did read through the Kvenland stuff, that's how I wrote up my see-also portion, which explains that Kings of Kvenland is included in the Charles article because he called himself King of the Caij from 1607 thru 1611 (but the successor dropped the title). I *believe* that was the underlying objection Finnedi was making: that Charles never called himself of-the-Kvens specifically, and thus the see-also was misleading. Anyways, you at least know *something* of the matter, whereas I know nothing.

   I'm just going on general principles, which you brought up over on the Thomas-page, namely, that in Ye Good Olde Days there was often not a very firm distinction between Kvens and Kvenland, or between Cajuns and CajunCountry. There are Some (still-anonymous in the prose I point out) Historians that claim Caijainie==Kven==Finnish and therefore CaijainieCastle==Kvenland==Finland, fair enough. But we should not oversimplify, and list Charles IX as flat-out one of the 'Kings of Kvenland' which is what the bare-see-also implies to the everyday reader ... unless we have WP:RS which says flat out "Charles IX was the Nth king of kvenland" in exactly those words, scholarly consensus with no conflicting sources saying otherwise. Anyways, my drive-by-editing career in ancient swedish-and-maybe-finnish royalty is over now. I leave it in your capable hands.  :-)

    p.s. Appreciate the talkpage ping, and the wish-you-were-here-concerns; on the former subject, I'm about fed up with lacking an automated watchlist (as opposed to a list of URLs maintained and polled by hand) that I'm planning to write a wikipedia-javascript-gadget to do it for me. If I can write it, are you willing to be the 'owner' of the gadget-code, under your username? On the latter subject, I've actually been writing you not one, but two walls-of-text for your very own, offline. Bet you just cannot *wait*, huh?  :-)   Don't worry, you'll get to open at least one of your presents before Kvenmas. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

p.p.s. the sad tale of when 74 was oh-so-wrongfully banned, woe is moi, woe is moi

In other news, oh yes, boy howdy was I blocked, for 168 hours to start with, no talkpage dialog required! You are in discussions with a notorious wikiCriminal, bub -- so watch yer step.  ;-)     It was a false-positive. Somebody made a joke that struck me funny, and posted a link to one of the old "cabal-approved" humourpages, and I pulled the satirical definition of 'collaboration' therefrom, and reformatted it as song-lyrics. It was a completely satirical bit of satire, but I prettied it up with plenty of boldface, a mention of WP:NICE nazis (self-referential! but not necessarily clear to the uninvolved drive-by admin).    Plus, well, I added a naked picture of Jimbo Wales.    ...and, um, an edit summary in allcaps.    And -- yeah.    So, uh.    Well. Ahem. You see.. nevermind.    Guess I can understand why Thomas reverted my comment with Twinkle... but later, he thought twice since it was not *totally* obviously vandalism, and self-reverted-his-revert, which was appreciated (when I finally found out about it 36 hours later). Meanwhile, either because of their twinkle-alert-watchlist, or because they watchlist the Bishzilla talkpage, AGK pulled out the ban-hammer, and gave me 168 hours for 'clearly WP:NOTHERE' aka 'generic disruptive editing'. But lacking a relevant diff (the ban-template does not require the banning admin provide any diff whatsoever ... per WP:AGF in one direction only), or any clue what specific sort of disruption I was being accused of, I could not unblock via the nearest random admin; you specifically have to explain, during the unblock, that you understand what you did wrong (which I did not), and promise not to do it again (whatever "it" was). Double-extra confusing, I knew who AGK was, having emailed them some time ago about one of their Arbcom votes, making me wonder if this was some sort of delayed fallout from that.    Anyways, it all turned out okay. Somebody who's in a content-dispute with me, but is a genuinely nice fellow despite being Totally WRONG (heh -- burn!), went to AGK's talkpage in my defense, and I posted on my own talkpage the usual wall-of-text (my disease) explaining that I did not understand why I'd been blocked. Anyways, AGK provided the diff to, the uh, naked man and the nazi thing, ahrmm, and I explained it was ha-ha-only-serious, and they unblocked me. Took 24 hours, instead of 3 hours, due to timezone-mismatch (Anthony is in Scotland). Might have taken under an hour, if AGK or Thomas.W had sent a diff my way, template-spam or otherwise, pointing out their concerns, so I would not be obliviously ignorant-and-thus-blissful, but WP:REQUIRED, which I still fully support. Anyways, no harm done.    But get this: AGK is a sitting member of ArbCom. That is correct -- you are speaking with the IP that fought The Lawz, and the IP won! Woo!  :-)   But that's the last time I post nekkid pix of the One And Only True Founder Of The WikiVerse.... 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mogden Sewage Treatment Works, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sewer (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) 12:00, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2013 Valdresekspressen hijacking may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:

• 30156082/ "'Tilfeldig' at asylsøkeren drepte tre kvelden før tvangsutsendelse"], ''Dagbladet]], 5 November 2013 {{no icon}}</ref> He hijacked the bus the day before he was to be returned to

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Mike's requests

I've actually seen this before, over here... User_talk:Slakr#Conyers_Baronets. I might drop in on Mike and see what the deal is here. Something about the conyers-baronets thing rings a bell, like maybe that is one of the articles under discretionary sanctions for Northern-Ireland-related stuff? Hmmm. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Please could you check my references fo 2 pages Lupton family and Conyers baronets cheers Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.138.209 (talk) 02:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Could you plesae check Gibside page and Family of Duchess of Cambridge page Thanks so much Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.138.209 (talk) 10:44, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Mike is a history teacher, and GoingBatty is trying to teach them the ropes. User_talk:GoingBatty#Untitled_.28Mike.29_2. I also ran across WP:BARONET wikiProject, and some others that may be useful, per my talkpage. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 02:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Rubinkumar's talk page.
Message added 15:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rubinkumar^Talk 15:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

so do you know the server-lowdown? and care to tell?

We know, we know. We still don't have deleted edits. Try annoying Coren to tears and pressure labs into speeding up the process if you want to see it happen since toolserver is shutting down on 1/6/14.

...toolserver is shutting down? What is the replacement? Are the tools being moved, or what, exactly? --74

Hi again 74, you get around :-) WMF labs. It is a tortuous tale of politics and funding. The current edit counter is at labs, see the url and the message at the top. /me waves to Coren.Yngvadottir (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe this tale is unwritten, or maybe there is a WMF document that explains such things. But I would like to know at least the rough outlines, I guess, of the story. As you know, I have it in for some of the bohts around here. But besides the installed-in-mediawiki-itself extensions like AbuseFilter, there are also plenty of 'actual' bots such as SineBot, which run on the main wikipedia servers from what I can tell. Then there are semi-off-wiki things like toolserver, which I always assumed were privately funded, but it sounds like not. Finally, there are "rogue" bots like the one being run by archiveDotIs folks (semi-allegedly). Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 03:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

owe-age-ness

"I owe you a long reply"? Negative, my friend. As always, WP:REQUIRED fully applies. And that goes doubly-especially for WP:WALLOFTEXT. You don't even owe me a skim-thru. SRSLY. I hereby formally morally, ethically, and sociologically-speaking release you of any crushing burden of wiki-societal debt you may feel.  :-)   Live free! Hope this helps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 00:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

p.s. As far as owe-age-ness goes, I actually owe you... my big post about ontology, wikiData, dogagories, and other such things. I'm working on it. No promises I'll ever finish tho. WP:REQUIRED applies. See you later, take is easy, mope not, mop not. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 00:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

BuBBLeSGiRL209

Ok, I'm sorry 'bout that. I'm known to be a little bit of a troll.BuBBLeSGiRL209 (talk) 14:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Nallebombing

Yarn bombing

An international incident when the Swedish were bombing Latvia and [16] some Belarusians with teddy brears . On the teddy bears were slogans about human rights. The Russians were pissed. Nallebombning Can't find anythihg on any wiki about this. Hafspajen (talk) 21:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw you mentioned that on Drmies' talk page. I'll have a look; I thought it had happened earlier. (And I feel so sorry for the teddy bears! dropped out of planes over the FSU! poor things!) However, bed now. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Sleep well, Yngvadottir! Hafspajen (talk) 21:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• SOO, that is where it was! Smart of you to find it. Weird that there is nothing on the Swedish wiki, thought. Hafspajen (talk) 11:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Write it :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• I will. I am a bit entangled in nudity right now, but I will. You do understand Swedish, no? I mean it looks like you get hold of the right kinds of references and so no. (Not that I would need copy editing in Swedish) Hafspajen (talk) 17:00, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkpage stalker swoops in to say... ummmm... is it just me, or does this entire thread start to sound like euphemisms, after those first couple sentences? You do understand Swedish, no? Say no more!  :-)   But I don't get the reference to "copy editing" unless you mean... oh. Ooooh! Well then, in that case, nevermind. I get it now. Usually, you know, I just say this as a standard sort of salute, but today, my eyes have been opened: "thank you" for improving Wikipedia, say no more. ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:09, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Silly :-) I am usually rummaging through ruins or sacrificial bones or hip deep in bogs - Hafspajen is more likely to be embracing nudes :-) See the bottom of his talk page if you haven't already. However, the Swedes have worked hard for their reputation. We both had a hand in Rumskulla oak, and look, they used it in I Am Curious (Yellow). Yngvadottir (talk) 01:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I can read Swedish (not well, but adequately). See my user page :-) I cannot even attempt to write it. Now that you realize it was Belarus and have the sources in the English article, you should be able to find plenty of additional Swedish sources. Sadly there doesn't appear to be a copyright-free picture though, since the photographer was caught up in the event and the legal repercussions. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:10, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• The poor thing. Like those teddys. Hafspajen (talk) 17:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• We both had a hand in Rumskulla oak, now, now... You shouldn't say that so loud... Say no more! Hafspajen (talk) 06:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Yngvadottir, you are so wonderfully helpful, the WMF should have you on payroll. Thank you so much for hanging around and helping all the strange and friendly people that come to my talk page. Drmies (talk) 03:10, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Aww, thank you (blushes horribly) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:13, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Valdresekspressen hijacking, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Asylum and NTB (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) 09:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Bridges?

Hi Yngvadottir, I don't know why but for some (probably insane) reason, I've come up with the notion you are interested in bridges - I'm not but for some (even more bizarre) reason just created an article on Wellington Suspension Bridge. As I have no idea what most of what I've written in the construction section means, would you be able/willing to check if does actually make any sense? Please? note to myself: never try to write articles on subjects you know nothing about! Wanders quietly away, still very perplexed as to why I think Yngvadottir might be interested in bridges ... SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:36, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

LOL, well, I did 2 bridges in Regensburg but I have a scandalous science/technical education. I'll have a look. :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC) ... OK, I've mucked about a bit with it, I hope to the good. I also had a couple of questions, which I've stuck on the talk page. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:39, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for such a prompt, excellent and extremely helpful response! Apologies for being so tardy myself but feeding time for the dogs intruded! I think I've addressed the first two queries; it took a bit of digging to confirm from sources that the QE2 bridge was also referred to as the Wellington Bridge (it runs off of Wellington Road, the A956). The closest I could get was it stated it was the replacement for the suspension bridge, so have had to run with that. I've managed to find some info on the restoration (costs, done in four phases and the like) but the only mention I can find at the moment is that the wooden decking was replaced. I'd only intended to knock out a quick stub for the bridge to link to the expansion I'm drafting for John Smith. Thank you so much for your help, it really is very much appreciated - I don't even walk across bridges and, if forced to drive over big ones, make sure I'm in the fast lane (I have a dread of heights!) SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:19, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Aww, sorry to have made more work for you, glad you found the changes helpful. Writing about German engineering has educated me a teensy bit beyond Nuffield Science - still a redlink, and I could not possibly do it neutrally. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I decided to give it a shot at DYK (as I've heaps - mega loads, in fact - of QPQ reviews); I added you on the credit as well as you gave it the final polish! SagaciousPhil - Chat 12:30, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! That may also be a good way of attracting someone who actually knows engineering '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK does have it's faults/problems but I find it's a good way of getting extra eyes onto articles - and getting formatting etc sorted! I wasn't even sure if it's 'extraordinary' that the main chains have survived but no doubt will end up being told if not! SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:06, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have been a strong proponent of DYK and used to be active there - until Good Articles got mixed in. It's a pity (I liked the project a lot, and I've had some articles since then that I would have liked to share), but since then, I just accept others' nominations, usually for collaborations :-) I wouldn't worry about the hook - it's interesting :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the mention

Thank you for the kind mention. You are correct in your statement that I did wish to help. It wasn't in the cards though. I also agree that Visual Editor was a complete disaster and Flow will likely be much more of the same. The implementation of Lua was a good thing I think from a Wikipedia perspective but it has a huge amount of send and third level consequences with other sites because they do not use Lua. The recent creation of the technical editor role was a good move in the right direction too but with that said, and as much as I beleive unbundling is a good thing, it is only necessary because there is no trust in the community. If we trusted our editors, particularly the ones who have stuck around and have technical proficiancy, we would be much better off. As it is we have developed a culture of us and them between the admins and the editors where the admins actions are above reproach and have no consequences and the editors can be banned from the site for an infraction that admins don't even get a nasty message for. Kumioko (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkpage stalker swoops in to say.... Programming-language-choice is always a bit of a religious thing, right? We have a bunch of tools written in Perl (for instance xLinkBot), a bunch more in Javascript (for instance the current AfC helper-gadget), and now the Lua stuff, plus of course there are plenty of things written in PHP like the MediaWiki core (but even *there* you also have to know SQL queries). We also have some closed-source things, so even though they might be written in PHP, they might as well be in spaghetti-coded assembly-language, since the source is effectively invisible.

  The advantage to picking one language and sticking to it is that everybody who knows PHP can help everybody else with every single wiki-tool. The disadvantage is that, not everybody knows PHP, and even of those that know it, not everybody is *good* at it. When you demand Just One Lang, thereby you shut out anybody that dislikes that language, doesn't know that language, and so on. Of course, the sword cuts both ways: when you demand Any Language Anybody May Want, you end up with *multiple* islands of incommunicado tool-builders, walled gardens of technology, and so on. Do you recommend all-PHP-all-GPL3-all-the-time? If not that, what? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 09:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Be that programming-stuff as it may, what I really came over here to ask about, is... What Are We Gonna Do About The Caste-System? You seem to be interested in making sure that due process is followed, which is a good goal. We don't want admins to be above the law. (Well... except for Yngvadottir and Jimbo.  ;-)   On the other hand, Kumioko, your proposed solution is to give editors "who have stuck around" more power than other folks. That sounds like out of the frying pan, into the fire. Where is the improvement? There would still be a caste-system there, just more like the Post Office (where seniority trumps merit every time), rather than our current Wild West (where the fastest gun trumps all other arguments *most* of the time).

  You are over-simplifying, I guess is what I'm trying to say. The problem is not 'us versus them' aka the 620 active admins versus everybody else. (Yngvadottir qualifies as active... all you need is 15+edits/mo to be counted... sparing use of the admin-bit is not as important as staying actively available *to* use the admin-bit when required.) The real problem methinks is a bunch of little "them" divisions and subdivisions. Part of it is baked into the software itself, such as the notion of autoconfirmed (versus autorejected whenever semi-prot is used to lock out the low-caste editors from being amongst the 'anyones' who can edit the encyclopedia). But mostly it is just wikiCulture, social constructs that we are shooting ourselves in the foot with. Here is a typical listing: Chuck Norris, Jimbo, wmfStaff, Devs, Stews, Arbs, OvSite/CkUsr, Crats, Admins, Rev'rs/Roll'rs, Uids, GoodAnons, Bohts, Poop, Vandals==BadAnons, Socks.

  Humorous, but reasonably correct. Of course, reality is far more subtle, both technical and social. Most editors do not realize there *is* anything above 'admin' level. But the CkUsr and Devs have *vastly* more power than regular admins: they can see the readership, not just the pseudonyms. There are many subdivisions among Uids: the redlinked userpage, the autorejected Beginner (10 edits), the Contributor (hundreds of edits), the SineBot threshold (800 edits), the Content Creator (roughly a couple thousand edits), the Respected Regular (roughly five thousand edits), the Respected Shooting Star (over 2000 edits per month until burnout), the Respected Addict (roughly 1000 edits per month for years on end). That's before we even get to admins of any sort! And some of these folks outrank lesser-caste admins. So, again, my question is... what shall we do about it? Can we fix the caste-system, even in theory? What sort of replacement do we want? Along the way, we ought to solve the admin-due-process bug, as well. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 09:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

• @KumiokoCleanStart:: pingggg. @74: I doubt he watchlists my talk page :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 14:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, I actually do. First I don't think everyone should have nor do they need the tools. I also don't necessarily think that all the tools should be bundled the way they are. I certainly don't think admin should be for life or the tools impossible to remove. It should be fairly easy to get and fairly easy to take away if abused. If we have a lot of people with the tools and they aren't being abused that's great. I think there will always be some abuse, and there is now. What we lack is a good mechanism to remove the tools if abused. Right now it requires an arbcom decision and no one wants to submit to arbcom, not even the admins. Arbcom is a nightmare process (by design I assume) and the inference is if you submit it your probably both going to get blocked, banned or desysopped. So the only ones who bother with it are those who have nothing to lose generally. If your even remotely involved in the case your going to get penalized somehow and Arbcom has shown that repeatedly (even as recent as the Bradley Manning case). As far as the hierarchy you list I don't really agree its all that complicated. There are certainly a number of non admins I would trust more than many admins though. The end result is we need more active people with the tools. You say there are 620 active admins but thats a too high of a number. Its more like 100 and its the same 50 or less that do most of the admin stuff. Thats way too few and that's partially because the trend over the last few years has been to only give the tools to those who aren't going to use them. Or use them infrequently anyway. Most of the most active ones are the ones who got them back in 06-08. Which isn't a completely bad thing but its not a great thing either. Another thing worth mentioning is that the majority of those getting the tools over the last few years are non technical. The process heavily favors mediators over technical editors and many of the technical folks (including most of the "technical" admins) are a bit gruff and unfriendly. If they applied for the tools today, most admins wouldn't pass. That has been admitted frequently and is a driving factor for why they don't want to make adminship a limited duration. That is a major problem that needs to be addressed. If the admin couldn't pass by todays standards then one or 2 things need to happen. They need to be reevaluated to todays standard and/or todays standards need to change. Probably a bit of both. I honestly don't have much faith in the community changing anything at this point though until the problem gets so bad they have to do something...at which time it will probably be too late. Another critical problem is the whole wikisystem is too dependant on the same 10 admins. There are several admins who specialize in certain areas (FA, CCI, AE, AFD, etc.) and if the one leaves, that whole process starts to collapse. Its the same thing with WikiProjects and a number of other areas. I stopped supporting WPUS and the supported projects and most are back to being inactive again. In the end we have too few active editors with the tools needed to keep the place running and the desire or skill to use them. This is a volunteer project and there is no requirement (nor should their be) for someone to do anything they don't want to do. Most aren't going to use the tools and that's ok, but we can't continue to maintain a crippled system with the arguement that we have 1400 admins (most of which don't do anything admin related). Anyway, like I have said before I'm pretty much done with the project. My intent really is to basically be done with it and retire although I do intend to poke my head in from time to time. Contrary to arguments to the contrary I no longer want nor need the tools, because I am not planning on editing. I'm going to invest my time over at Wikia where my help is wanted and needed. But I would like for this project to continue so I don't feel like I wasted the last 8 years of my life. In the end though if at some point in the future the servers get turned off due to lack of interst and support I will neither be surprised nor upset. Its inevitable at this point really. Kumioko (talk) 14:59, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Denville Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Harris (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) 09:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

A question ...

Hi Yngvadottir, I'm playing with an article I've just started BUT when I get it ready to move into main space, should the article title be "Udny Mort House", "Udny Morthouse" or "Udny Mort-house"? Now, don't you think we (the royal we, of course) can manage to get an intriguing DYK from this? SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Good question - the official refs make liberal use of all-caps and I see we have both Mort-House and Morthouse in county lists of historic monuments. I definitely think you can get a good DYK, and I'd be inclined to do a separate article on the morthouses in general (and thereby get a double DYK as well as educating the public on the zeal of Scottish anatomists in the past, and the resourcefulness shown by both them and parishioners). Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Mentoz86's talk page.
Message added 20:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mentoz86 (talk) 20:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Also, I'm very happy you're an admin. I wish I could be as patient and helpful as you are. Now go clean the house: mother is coming. Drmies (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

LOL thanks, but ... I hardly do any admin stuff at all! I keep getting all redfaced at WT:RfA when people talk about admins who do not do their share of logged actions. (Other than rescuing stuff like Tiddles from oblivion, I think I mainly use my mop to quietly shitcan awful stuff before anybody sees it.) And I don't dare close AfDs, of course. Say hi from me to your mom :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

... although I've been kind of surprised by the mistakes needing fixing on the Main Page. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Brackets

Seems like we were both trying to explain at the same time - but I'm not very fast at typing on my iPad! SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Prathamprakash29's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Message

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Prathamprakash29's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Pratham 16:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)Prathamprakash29

Nice work

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		for your work in finding more sources about Gregory Hodge. Nicely done.

WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Heh, thanks! I haven't !voted at the AfD yet because I'm hoping I can find more. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:36, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I doubt you need to. The source you have already found are sufficient for me to have changed my own opinion. I'd withdraw the nomination altogether, but at least one other user has already weighed in. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and I've just voted after finding the Heritage Foundation singled him out for a chapter. I had a feeling there was coverage like that out there somewhere. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:48, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Very nice work that! Neonchameleon (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Bramshill House, sections of mullions.jpg

Any chance of scanning the whole book to DJVU? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Not familiar with DJVU, but someone else has put pdfs of all or most of it on Commons. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Link? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Bramshill, its history and architecture (by Sir William H. Cope).pdf Yngvadottir (talk) 23:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Sant Serni de Tavèrnoles

Hi, can you translate this from Spanish?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:25, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not the best person to do that; Spanish is one of the languages I futz my way through, and it's a Christian article. Ping me again if you can't find anyone else. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Howz about Loyada from German wiki?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. That has more on the variant names and etymology; some referenced info on recent political history with regards to the border crossing; and an unreferenced account of an atrocity. I can add the first and second to the article, but not right now - bedtime draws near. I'm not sure of the advisability of adding the third; I would hunt for sources but Google News Archive has quit working for me (they have apparently discovered the URL hack; for some reason they don't want people actually using their archive search). Yngvadottir (talk) 20:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:36, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.

Ayesha Takia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tollywood

Davood Roostaei (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sarab

The Humpty Dumpty Circus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Albert E. Smith

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Gingerbread house

You are invited to edit the new article Gingerbread house. We hope for a Christmas DYK Hafspajen (talk) 12:15, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a Christmas observer, but I will see what I can do :-) We really didn't have an article on that??? Yngvadottir (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

• No, we didn't. Or maybe in the "old" times. We had a redirect, and a short&lousy section in gingerbread man or gingerbread, I don't remember any more. The redirect was from... 2004? Look down on the history page. One of those early merginionist's work. Hafspajen (talk) 01:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Of gingerbread men and gingerbread houses, saints and queens and aged folks

Looks like it is a conection between the tale and the house. "The first gingerbread man is credited to the court of Queen Elizabeth I, who favored important visitors...with charming gingerbread likenesses of themselves..." So it was not the house..? Sagaciousphil‎; who like Orlando: A Biography lived through the centuries would probably know, since she was about 20 when living at the court of Queen Elizabeth I, (I am just joking, but has anybody read Orlando of Wirginia Woolf?)... Hafspajen (talk) 11:53, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did, long ago :-) I am not sure whether any of the gingerbread man material is relevant; it may be that they are part of the same tradition in some countries, though. And I didn't look at the sources, including the one about Queen Elizabeth I. I did briefly check out the bishop/hermit (to make sure we weren't confusing him with the Pope of the same name who retired to the same exact area of France), and he probably deserves his own article. His introduction of gingerbread needs better sourcing, I think. Other than that, I don't know, it's a cute topic and I'm really sorry I can't use Google news archive search to find more material about it but Google has apparently decided to withdraw that or only give it to favoured people or something. Anyway, thanks for the sweet pic, and glad to be able to help a little :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, he probably deserves his own article. the fFrench has one called Grégoire de Nicopolis. Don't know how to source more... thanks for your help, has to run (got to go...) Se you soon. Hafspajen (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2013 (UTC).

Aha, yes they do! And he has or had a local confraternity dedicated to his spice cake/gingerbread (source archived in footnote) :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me edit the article on Nikolai B. Kopnin!

Thank you for helping me edit the article on Nikolai B. Kopnin! I hope it works now - I shall await the review.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkopnina (talk • contribs) 16:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to American Leak Detection may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• company had 351 franchise units in the US, 14 in other countries, and 4 company-owned units.<ref>[[cite web |url=http://www.americanleakdetection.com/corporate-profile.php |title=Corporate Profile |
• profile.php |title=Corporate Profile |publisher=American Leak Detection |accessdate=2013-12-10}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:20, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

More on gingerbread houses

.

Gingerbread in the market

Happy Saint Lucy's Day!

Hi Yngvadottir and Eric, I'm intending to nominate Gingerbread house for DYK this morning. As both of you have been working on it, I wonder if you can let me know if you can access the food time line (ref #2 [17]). I've tried it quite a few times in both Safari and Chrome and can't get it to open. Hafspajen can still access it and pasted a copy on my talk page. I also stuck a Project template for Food and drink on the article talk but it seems to have included bizarre categories that I can't get rid of. Can either of you offer any advice, please? it seemed easier just to pick one talk page to post this message on SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:06, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I've found a pdf copy of it that I've substituted. SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

That food timeline link works fine for me. Eric Corbett 13:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Eric, must be something my computer - and iPad - took a dislike to! On a different topic - have you time to pop over to Pitfour estate? Mega, mega thanks for your help already! SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:30, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Presumably the review has started now? Eric Corbett 13:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes! I'm trying to work out the best way to address the comment about naming the Lairds - the suggestion of putting James Ferguson, third laird etc in each time. I think it might effect the reading fluency and perhaps become a little monotonous; especially when the first three are all James (although the second is easier as he's Lord Pitfour) and the next three are all George? The reviewer is very complimentary about all your hard work ! SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

• Hi both and any interested talkpage stalkers: I've done a little more copyediting and tweaking, but again I haven't looked at the refs. I had internet problems yesterday and although this is my "weekend" and the internet seems to have been fixed, I have a very trying day today involving the vet's office. Letting folks know. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks everybody, me too, (internet problems -not around) Hafspajen (talk) 23:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Lucia bun, made with saffron.

• The article is now a good article, well done SagaciousPhil and Eric. About the catch for the house, se, one can read on this pic= above used: 294 kg flour, 92 kg margarine, 100,4 kg sugar, 66,3 liter Golden syrup, 2,2 kilo cinamon, 2,2 kilo cloves 2,2 kilo ginger and 3,7 kilo baking powder .. I mean this house is big, but it is not the largest house in the world, so the cath is maybe not quite correct. But what about usind this? For "the year's biggest gingerbread house" in Stockholm, displayed 2009, there was used up to be built: 294 kg flour, 92 kg margarine, 100,4 kg sugar, 66,3 liter Golden syrup, 2,2 kilo cinamon, 2,2 kilo cloves 2,2 kilo ginger and 3,7 kilo baking powder ... Well, using pouds and so... Hafspajen (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC).

• Ah yes, it's Lussi Day :-) Thanks, Hafspajen :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 05:24, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

• Yes indeed it is, just had one of these to breakfast. Now is time to light the candles and eat saffron buns and pepparkakor... Hafspajen (talk) 05:44, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Just curious

Do you speak Icelandic (very hard language to pronounce) or are you just from MN? Or am I totally off?(Lihaas (talk) 23:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)).

See my user page for the answer to a slightly different question :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 05:24, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

what part>?(Lihaas (talk) 08:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)).`

I deliberately use "read" Babel boxes rather than the usual "contribute in", because speaking and grammatical writing are both far harder than reading (plus my education didn't have as heavy an oral emphasis in many languages as is now common), but I've been known to attempt speech in most of those listed. As far as Icelandic goes, it's not the phonetics that's hard, really. Sorry to be coy! Yngvadottir (talk) 12:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

A reply to your helpful comment

Regarding my question about this proposed page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Marvin_Megee

Hello! Thank you so much for the information that you gave me, and for the help. I appreciate it.

Of the 14 references, 5 are from TV station reports that aired on TV and then the investigative stories were published online. I cited those stories.

All are from stations that I used in the references are national (US) affiliates: KSHB is a national NBC affiliate

KCTV5 is a national CBS affiliate

KMBC and KTRE are a national ABC affiliate

(NBC, CBS, and ABC are considered the “big three” television networks, and all of the affiliates I referenced also have Wikipedia pages, so I could go back and connect to those pages if needed.)

One of those television references is in another state (Texas, KTRE), and the others are all out of another city, Kansas City which is the metropolitan area of 2 million people spanning the MO-KS border.

Of the other references which are from newspapers, 2 are from papers in other cities (reference #s 4, 7), and two are references to state-level information (reference #s 3, 5). Of the 14 references, only 3 are from a newspaper local to where the Mayor is located.

As a note, the Mayor Marvin Megee is also listed on the page of the City of Greenwood: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwood,_Missouri

With that background about the references, can the page be accepted? Thank you for your help. I really do appreciate it.

Michelle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stewarmd11 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I will take another look at it and see how wide the coverage is geographically, but it would help if you could find more indicating that he is known at least state-wide. As the template says, you are encouraged to work on the article further and then re-submit it. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:35, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

As the mayor, they have some local coverage in papers; the teevee coverage was for the pardons in August 2012, and for the snowstorms in March 2013, so WP:BLP1E no longer applies. I had a similar conversation, about whether the author of a self-published book who had local teevee coverage in three states (her current state of residence plus her state she was born in plus a third one where she stopped while she was travelling) had crossed the line. See Talk:Travels_with_Charley:_In_Search_of_America#Link_to_site_for_sale_of_book for my usual novellas.  :-)   This is a grey area, but I'll be interested to see what the end result is.

  The town where he is mayor is only 5k residents (which is not *tiny* but not a city). They are southeast of Kansas City, which is split in twain by Kansas on the west and Missouri on the east. Greenwood-the-city is also split in twain, at the invisible border between Jackson and Cass counties on the Missouri side, so it is close to the 700k people in the northernmost county of the pair, but not quite *in* that populous county. The southern county has 100k residents which is somewhat dense by North American standards at ~50/km^2 but hardly by european standards methinks.

  Anyhoo, hope this gives the flavor. The mayor sounds like an interesting character, but I'd prolly argue (without reading the refs! this is a passing shot from the hip) for them remaining a section of the Greenwood-article, for the time being, rather than standalone. If they get re-elected in 2014, then run for Mayor of Kansas City in 2016, aka top-25-city-in-the-USA, that would of course be impressive. See also Mayors of Puerto Rico which recently caused an ahrbcohm drahmahz. Hope this helps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ostrich, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Panting (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) 09:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Art

Tell me what is the meaning of this |upright=0.9| thing that everybody so generously messing around with everywhere on the pictures? Don't get it. What is this? If you put them on the pictures, they became uneven, and take all different sizes, while using only thumb or a special pix, then they are same size, are alike. Just look how the pictures look like in the Art nouveau article, for exampl the first 3. Looks terribly uneven and silly to me. Some editor said= Same images sizes using "upright", which allows user preferences too. And made editwar of it. What does mean "allows user preferences "? What is the meaning of uprighting everything? Can't see any point in using it. Hafspajen (talk) 16:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

(You do realise I am a technical incompetent, right?) I have no idea whatsoever about the 0.9. The upright thing I believe I do understand: it shrinks the picture down when it is a picture in portrait mode because it would otherwise display in "thumb" as overly large, since the software looks at the width to define the size. For example, the pic at Ulrich Mescheder looks a bit large to me. Other than that: the problem with defining pixel sizes is that someone may be using a cellphone to view the page or otherwise have very limited screen space, or more commonly, they may have screen size defined in their browser settings so that if the pic were just left at "thumb" or "thumb" plus "upright" it would display for them larger than the defined size, so for that reader the defined size has the opposite of the effect the editor intended. (That will be what people mean by "allows user preferences"). I'm not sure you realise what a wide range of screen widths and settings readers have: you dislike unbalanced galleries, but I often notice that those on your user pages, for example, display either balanced or unbalanced depending on whether I'm on my desktop (modern wide-format monitor, with windows set at varying widths so I can see stuff out of the corner of my eye or copy from one window to another) or my laptop (old-style screen width). I sometimes use the galleries with borders, as in Märkisches Museum, because those allow absolute definition of image width, but from using the laptop I've learnt to keep the overall width of the gallery relatively narrow, to avoid users on laptops and older monitors having to scroll to see the whole gallery. I agree, at Art Nouveau the differing picture widths look awkward, but if the pics actually are different widths, it's better to leave that alone except possibly for the top image, because people on different set-ups may be seeing the page quite differently. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

• This may not seems like an intelligent question, but - why? I mean why can't Wikipedia do those stuff that it look good or the same everywhere? And yes, I use full screen, and I loathe those little things people carry everywhere. But what can you se on them anyway? Saw the Märkisches Museum galleries. Those don't give you a uniform picture size in the gallery, some are biggger, some smaller, gives a kind of restless feeling about it, I think. Why should it be so much trouble, I imagine that some programing chap would be able to fix picture sizes and galleries to match all devices... no? Hafspajen (talk) 09:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know; I have to remind you, I'm a technical incompetent '-) But undoubtedly one factor is the variety of aspect ratios (if that's the word - ratios between the horizontal and the vertical) of screens for computers/notebooks, even if we exclude smartphones (which I also would be inclined to do - that's a whole different display environment, so small that things have to be stacked to be visible). Another is that people with poor eyesight have to be allowed to magnify their screen displays; that's an advantage of computers, not a disadvantage. Also, as those Märkisches Museum pics demonstrate, pictures actually come in a wide variety of ratios. What I like about the framed galleries is that they let me make them all roughly the same size and make a balanced gallery: the usual kind of gallery often has them very different sizes, some really small and surrounded by a lot of frame space, and is a crap-shoot as to whether the reader sees a balanced gallery or not (I agree with you in most cases that that's desirable.) Whether a picture display format can be programmed that overcomes most of those problems - I dunno. You'd have to ask the computing mavens. But if you try shrinking and then expanding your window, you'll see the appearance of most picture-heavy articles change quite a lot. At least with the framed galleries, the basic look stays the same, which is why I use it for articles like that one that have several galleries illustrating different sections of text. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
• If you a technical incompetent I'm much much worse. Don't You have some computing mavens buddies around Wikipedia that you know about ? Hafspajen (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• Heh, don't put yourself down. Actually I do, but either they don't work in user-interface design or they wouldn't want me to out them. And Kumioko is fed up and not programming here any more. Ask at Drmies' talk page; there's a wider variety of talkpage stalkers there. Feel free to link to this section, but I suspect the first thing they'll do is snicker at me trying to get my mind around tech '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 14:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• I'm only moderately front-end competentent (someone compentent in front-end would say completely incompentent), but I can tell you what I do know about the gallery format. First and formost, the hight/width ration is always conserved. This seems like a no-brainer. Different images have (obviously) different hight/width ratios. What the gallery does, is fit all images in a box of identical size, that is, shrink and/or expand the image so that either it fills its width, or it fills its height (minus a padding). With images of different ratios, this means that if they all fill the with, their heights will vary. I'm not sure what a better approach would be; maybe allow some variation in width if it would make the height fill "better". Lastly, I'm not at all sure about how galleries are printed on a mobile display, which may be dependent on which skin, mobile or desktop, is applied. I could make some mock ups, where you can say if it's gotten better or worse, and if we settle on better propse that to the wider community. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

So is this question still open? I'm overcompetent overconfident overbearing, I've already cracked the security-barrier on Hafspajen's talkpage *and* vandalized Yngvadottir's userpage. That means I'm totally LEET. I mean, L33T, yeah, totally. You just want to know what upright does? Or are you trying to find something that doesn't suck?  :-)   74.192.84.101 (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Dunno - Hafspajen? ... but that was totally not vandalism, and I feel dirty - I just full protected a page. Ugh. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Dunno - Hafspajen? that was a present and it was asked for. But since people think IPs are no good, it was reverted by a friend, who ... just thought that it was some silly thing. Hafspajen (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

When pigs fly.

Adynaton and List of idioms of improbability .. Same thing? .. And it was one of the few aricles LI created, but it got deleted. Never (word). It got deleted, but the same thing is here now, actually in two different articles, too, Adynaton and List of idioms of improbability. I remember I had some good ones in this, and a very good ref. Can you find that reference? i can't find that anywhere. Aren 't deleted articles somwhere ... still available? Hafspajen (talk) 11:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not enough of a philosopher to know whether those are actually the same :-) I suspect not but that the examples should be kept in the list article as far as possible. I can see your deleted article on Never (word). In its final version, it had the following listed as references:

• Canetti Elias Die gerettete Zunge. - Die Fackel im Ohr. - Das Augenspiel, München, Carl Hanser Verlag, 1995, ISBN 3-446-18062-1.
• Canetti Elias The Tongue Set Free. Remembrance of a European Childhood, translated by Joachim Neugroschel, in The Memoirs of Elias Canetti, New York, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1999, ISBN 0-374-19950-7
  

Is either of those what you want? If not, more when I get home from work - have to pack up the laptop now. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, even those, thank you. And I was thinking of the webbsite with a lot of translations. Hafspajen (talk) 14:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• I don't see a website except for Wikisource and Wiktionary, so I've gone ahead and undeleted and userfied it: you'll find it at User:Hafspajen/Never (word), complete with history, so you can look through and see if there was a source you added and then removed again. Let me know when you're finished looking (you may want to save a copy off-wiki) and I'll delete it again so nobody gets annoyed. OK? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

• Wonderfull. And thank you. Promise not to recreate it, or what is the word for it. Hafspajen (talk) 15:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I've studied the linguistics of How Articles Are Born, methinks Drmies taught that course last semester, allow me.

1. when a full-sized article is written in userspace, we call that a sandbox
2. when an anon births an article in mainspace, we call that CSD
3. when a pseudonym with fewer than 999 edits creates an article in mainspace, we call that PROD
4. when a real editor having at least rollbacker permbit creates an article in mainspace, we call that AfD
5. when an admin creates an article in mainspace, we call that NPP
6. when somebody creates an article in AfC, we call that nofollow
7. when somebody clicks the button on their article in AfC, we call that submission
8. when somebody bypasses AfC by reviewing then approving their own submission, we call that socking
9. when somebody asks another person to review and approve their AfC submission, we call that meatpuppetry
10. when some real AfC-reviewer comes along and reviews a submission, we call that declined
11. when a previous article that was deleted is move to userspace, we call that a refund
12. when a userfied article is once again place in mainspace, we call that disruptive
13. when a on-wiki content of any sort is used off-wiki, we call that stealing under trademark law
14. when the author of a new article, knowing all of the above, gives up before bothering to click save, we call that survival of the fittest

My question is, what do we call people that write novels on talkpages, but cannot get edits edgewise into mainspace because of semi-prot and WP:FLAGGED and other such dirty tricks? Oh. Yeah. Nevermind. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not that bad. My first article got categories added to it by some nice person. And I've saved several articles at AfD - sometimes it really is "articles for discussion." Less importantly, we all agree to let others use our writing as they see fit, so it's not stealing when someone does so, although instamirrors are creepy and I do not see any reason why we should make it easier for huge corporations to scrape our content by putting a trading card at the top of every article that they can copy. They can do their own extraction of cutesy titbits to spam searches with. (And the price of being the encyclopedia anyone can edit is that it has some horrendous articles/edits in it. I won't give examples, it would be mean, but I've fixed up some sad things and have a few waiting for my or someone else's attention.) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Not so fast. Look at my edits from a couple of days ago: that's a lot of AfCs I went through, and I got a couple of actual articles out of it. I understand you're also poking fun at the power structure and all, but besides part of the superstructure I'm also an editor, and an IP editor, and an editor with a couple of sock accounts you'll never find, and on more than one occasion have I used 9, for instance. No one, not even me, accused me of meating (it's canvassing, more likely). In my recent AfC frenzy I found at least one example of 8 (Hafspajen's cousing peeing in the park), and I didn't yell at anyone for socking (sure, it's more work for me, but it's not a big deal if someone grabs the bull by the horns). (And of course there was an enormous amount of horseshit in those submissions--they're still there in my history. Pick one I declined and improve it until it's ready: there's a challenge.) As for 2, it can't happen, at least if "anon" means "IP editor". What does happen is that IP editors create talk page and leave various rants and nonsense on; yeah, that has to go. And et cetera. Your cynical sense of humor is appreciated, but I think if you look among my 150,000 or so edits you'll see that we're not all like that--and I'm certainly not the best of us. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I luvs the both of you. ♥♥♥ But I wish Yngvadottir would bathe more often, all that recent page-protecting is getting Kvenland's one true sovereign's hands dirty. But look at Kafziel, retired "under a redacted redacted redacted cloud" now, for following pillar five. I've gone way beyond cynical, I'm well into terrified. People are actually arguing with me over at WP:RETENTION that the steady 4% decline in both our 3k veryActives (100+edits/mo) and simultaneously our 33k actives (5+edits/mo) are Not.Really.A.Big.Problem. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!! That seems misguided, to me. <heartrate skyrockets>  :-)   p.s. What I'm saying here, is that wikipedia is becoming the encyclopedia anyone with The Right Stuff can edit. I do not concur, even though the three of *us* would continue to survive here, that such a wikiCulture is actually Good. — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't either, but as you know I am as unclubbable as Mycroft Holmes and would not fit in at WP:Retention, or WER, or whatever the official shorthand is :-) I just left a note asking again for use of the article talk page so that that article can be unprotected. And regardless of my user name, I don't claim to rule Kvenland; there have been a change of dynasty in Sweden and several changes in the status of Finland :-) Bravo for speaking up on Kafziel's case, although I find different aspects of it scarier - Arbcom's existence is an inherent threat to Pillar 5, or perhaps a necessary counterweight, wouldn't you say? In any event those of us who don't speak legalese tend to stay as far away from there as we can, so as I say, bravo. I see from a site notice that the Draft space is to be implemented. That may be a gamechanger for AfC, but if it isn't, have you proposed making AfC submissions no-index? That strikes me as an excellent idea. 14:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• Listen here. I feel sorry for the percussionist guy article. Couldn't we fix that? I mean the guy was good and talented and notable. Our doctor had probably some stomach problems and was not able to get the point, but... I think is kind of a kick in the as for someone who really tried to do some good thing there. You said there were some refs available. Hafspajen (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• Emmanuel Séjourné. I can't promise much help without Google news archives, but I'll see what I can do. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
• Well, once upon a time we were all new beginners, if you know what I mean, mean... I don'twanttohurt anyones feelings, but I can imagine helping out to wikify a bit. Is it OK to work on it as it is now? Hafspajen (talk) 21:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• I've wondered that myself about the AfC submissions, but people have always been grateful, so go ahead :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
• Tried a little clean up. Hafspajen (talk) 22:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

• I did a more intrusive edit, adding a source and moving things around. I'll return to it but have to stop there for now, and I am not sure I can find enough sources thanks to Google ... but he has won more prizes than I'd noticed first-off. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:18, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

• I think that percussion is not a very well known instrument. It can explain why pople don't wrote books on him. And usually pople who are living artists don't usually get into books while still performing - only articles in news. Hafspajen (talk) 13:20, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I miss my Google news archives! They were never so good for French stuff, but I'm sure I would have found other bits about his performances in English-speaking countries. He has several pages in a book, but none of us has access to it. However, I've got stuff going on off-wiki that's making me distracted - I intend to come back to that one. And in the meantime it's not going anywhere, can always be resubmitted. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:24, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

OK. Hafspajen (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Template assistance

Fabulous! Wonderful! Great! Thanks!!! --Bddmagic (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Hafspajen (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Aww, thanks, and good Yule to you :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Do you have your stockings ready Hafspajen (talk) 19:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

LOL no, Father Christmas omits this house :-) But we have our Yule tree up and are observing all 12 days, which is why my editing pattern is so distracted :-) I hope yours gets well filled, by the way :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

• MMMMmmm. Yes. There Ain't No Sanity Clause! Hafspajen (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Jonas Vinther

I was trying to be nice, but he just became more and more aggressive, one wouldn't expect me to play Mahatma Ghandi after that. I didn't even offend him. I just won't tolerate people calling our guidelines "offensive, stupid, and a waste of time" based on such quick judgments, specially when they go "screw you and Wikipedia". Victão Lopes ^Fala! 05:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I do understand your frustration, but he didn't know any of our rules; no one had yet given him a welcome template (or even a Teahouse invite - just an invite to play the Wikipedia Adventure). All I'm asking is remember not to bite newbies; this is a classic newbie, and a lot of people come here with misconceptions. Make sense? Yngvadottir (talk) 05:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikilinks

Yngvadottir, I am trying to learn how to edit correctly and you already know a lot on the subject. So tell me, is the rule that links shall only appear once, or are we talking about trying to keep links to a modest number? Andersneld (talk) 07:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

It's a rule of thumb, to avoid overlinking; I sometimes repeat a link if it is in the lede but then doesn't occur again until much later, but in general it's good to only link something the first time it occurs. So, not a rule, but good practice. Sorry to have reverted you, I felt mean doing it! Yngvadottir (talk) 07:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! Andersneld (talk) 09:10, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! :-)

Happy Yuletides!

Merry Yuletides to you! (And a happy new year!)

~TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Yngvadottir, Wishing you a very Happy and Wonderful Merry Christmas! Hope you are having a great time with family and friends :-) Best wishes. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:52, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and I hope you are too :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:59, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Marbach (Lauda-Königshofen),

Hello Yngvadottir, I've understood your message on my User talk. This version must deleted, you've right. Can You do it, please? Thanks and greetings -- Werddemer (talk) 21:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Please

Could you please comment on this article [18] and compare it with the Olde English Bulldogge. It looks like the same thing for me. What are the rules in these cases? Do we really need two separate articles on bulldog breeds where none of them is officially accepted by the Kennel clubs, AKC, FCI and so on. Hafspajen (talk) 21:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

On my way to bed and way outside my areas of expertise, but I note that it's at AfC and that the See also is in there. Let the AfC reviewer decide. If it gets accepted, is there a WikiProject:Dogs where you could raise the issue? Unfortunately I can't see the NYT article - they tell me I've reached my limit for the month, sigh. Ultimately there's AfD, but it's always possible there are indeed sufficient sources; some unrecognised breeds do collect enough press. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:07, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, well. thanks. I get sometimes the feeling that if it is in the Wikipedia, than it will be - kind of the kick of for the thing. People do fight to get their thing in - and - their oppinion will be spread all ower the world, I don't know if you understand what I mean. Hafspajen (talk) 22:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

• Damn. Why do we suppose that all new beginners know about all the rules? This Barry didn't have a clue on the guidelines, or anything else about Wikipedia in general, and nobody really cared to tell him anything, just growled at him all the time. Are we so great that we don’t care about people who are helpless? I think I have seen this over and over again, everywhere. Hafspajen (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• There's a lot of that, yes - which editor are you referring to? Yngvadottir (talk) 05:16, 22 December 2013 (UTC) Ah, I see you meant Freedombulls. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

The one who created this article[19]. He must be a thoroughly unhappy man by now. He is Dutch, bu the way, and nobody cared to explain a thing for him. And mostly for anyone, as far I can see who seeks for Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation - declined ones. I mean, yes, they do make mistakes, but then everybody does who does't have a clue. And instead of explaining things for them, people just keeps telling them about their mistakes, instead to tell them how Wikipedia works. Me to I am affraid, in the begining. Hafspajen (talk) 14:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I see they did get the article, and now a fairly typical Wikipedia situation: the AfC was accepted, but other editors are not sure it's notable (as you weren't). It seems to me people often disagree about similar dog breeds; I know more about cats but I recall some cat breeds also that are not universally recognised. As regards the treatment of the editor, I agree, we seem to welcome people less these days, and that's sad. You left him a nice big welcome template though (I prefer the ones with lots of links, myself, but I note that the page where they are all listed seems to imply that those can be overwhelming.) The 74 IP doesn't like user-page templates at all, but is very good at helping confused new users and very much concerned about how we treat them, so I've pinged them at their talk page. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks. Yes, I know that some editors are not sure it's notable, but that is one thing. Not to notice a poor confused persons situation, is a different thing. I mean he is trying to do something he thinks is a good idea, I think. Hafspajen (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

  Please feel free to ping me, either of you, any time this sort of thing comes up.  :-)   I'm reasonably certain that Leavitt Bulldog 2005+ is not Notable enough for a dedicated article yet... but it does seem to be WP:NOTEWORTHY, and deserves a mention (in a distinct paragraph) in the existing article Olde English Bulldogge. And truth be told, that article may need a rename! From what I can tell, here is the deal.

  Circa 1971, David Leavitt started trying to breed a "healthy bulldog" which was more like photos from the 1800s, not the current smashed-in-nose sort of bulldog (they die young from oxygen-deprivation during sleep... nose is simply the wrong shape!). Various other dog-breeders, a couple others in the 1970s, and one in the 1980s, and about four in the 1990s, have also tried to breed "healthy bulldog" lines. After founding the OEB breed-registry circa 1975, David gave up that name circa 1995 to some other person named Mark. There is also a UK variation, and another American variation, and so on. The variations are listed in breed-books (cf King of the Kvens and royalty-line-breeding); the name of the breed-book is a tradename aka corporate brand; the breed-book-tradename-owners publish a "standard" which describes how canine-offspring must appear to qualify for the stamp of approval. See also "organic" certification in agribiz. Just satisfying the breed-book-standard is not enough... you also have to pay the registration fee! So there are all kinds of WP:COI and WP:OWN difficulties in the world of exotic-strain-Molosser-descendants (which are the dogs Alexander the Great used to conquer the world allegedly). Through in some nationalism-slash-patriotism while we're at it... there are around a dozen flavors of Tornjak, depending on which portion of the former Yugoslavia the owners of their canine-ancestors paid registry-fees into.

  So how does all this apply to Barry? Like this. The full official name of the 1970s breed is the Leavitt Olde English Bulldogge, the 'genericized' OEB tradename. There are at least four different groups claiming to WP:OWN some portion of the pie: ioeba.net, nationalbulldoggeassoc.com, "Leavitt OEB" from the 1970s to the 1990s, and now the leavittbulldogassociation.com (not to be confused with leavittbulldogassociationeurope.com and leavittbulldog.com). Genetically, these are all the same animals, and are all descended from the original 1970s Leavitt Olde English Bulldogge adam-n-eve-pair most likely. The question is who gets the registration-fees, and who gets the credit, not what sort of animals they are biologically/genetically/scientifically.

  The politics of the situation do make our sourcing *very* tricksy, unfortunately... the dog-breed of the 1970s, the Official Leavitt OEB, was often shortened by crass vox populi into simply "Leavitt bulldog" from what I can tell. Some commentators even go so far as to call *NBA*-registered animals "Leavitt bulldogs" which is so totally not the case. Multiplying the confusion exponentially, as of 2005/2006 when the LBA was founded, David has made an official tradename out of the colloquial phrase — quite on purpose I presume — and dubbed his current not-at-all-OEB-registered-animals the Official Leavitt Bulldog. Which means, that when we have a source calling something the Leavitt bulldog, they might well be referring to IOEBA-OEB-animals descended from the 1970s-Leavitt-adam-n-eve, or to LBA-not-OEB-animals descended from the 2000s-Leavitt-adam2-n-eve2 (plus also the 1970s-Leavitt-adam-n-eve great-great-great-grandparents), or to some third-party-breedbook, or perhaps to some unholy combination/conflation.

  Anyhoo, TLDR, I'm glad to help beginners, especially when they are getting hammered by you-are-wrong-we-will-now-delete-all-your-harmful-stuff-from-our-encyclopedia-while-you-go-away. Most of the folks talking to Barry were not *trying* to be that way... but the overall effect was absolutely that. Even though I doubt that LeavittBulldog2006 qualifies as a dedicated article, it does seem to qualify as a sentence or two of WP:NOTEWORTHY-ness, which should go in Olde English Bulldogge. Also, wikipedia can perform the service for our readership, of disambiguating the various BrandedBulldogRecreationBreeds, and pointing out which are "more Notable" and which are run by whom, and so on. This explanation of the various feuding breedbooks that all claim to be the real bulldog, might be best served in a renamed article that would cover the non-Leavitt-inspired recreation-of-the-breed attempts, but I'm uncertain such a step is really necessary. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

		Holiday Cheer
		Victuallers talkback is wishing Yng' Season's Greetings! Thanks, this is just to celebrate the holiday season and promote WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - Vic/Roger inspired by this - you could do the same

Frigg Rewrite

I don't think I mentioned it, but this is happening. You're welcome to help. :) :bloodofox: (talk) 18:25, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

LOL, like there isn't already enough on? Thanks for the tip-off, although I know less about the scholarly views on her, except for the evergreen Frigg-Freyja thing, on which I probably Should Not Write. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:34, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I know what you mean! However, I think it's all pretty approachable. There are a lot of interesting questions when it comes to Frigg. It's always so great to sit down and write these articles. And you should write about the Frigg-Freyja issue! We need a solid article on that. I've been itching to sit down for a Frigg rewrite for a while now, and it will help with getting the Odin article in order. Another connected article that should be easier to rewrite would be the mess at Vili and Vé—but now that I think of it rewriting the Frigg article will also provide a lot of material for a new attestations section there... :bloodofox: (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Folks please! Enough with the friggin' profanity already, we are supposed to be WP:NICE to each other!  :-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Sigh, you wouldn't believe how often folks have said stuff like that to me and meant it ... call her Frige or Frija if you like :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 16:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

:) :bloodofox: (talk) 17:20, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Something for your page, new article?

You know, we don't have an article on this woman.[20] I might start some stubb, but it would be silly. She was somewhat in the shadow of her husband, Carl Larsson, but she did have a personality of her own, and own works and the question is if it is not her work we admire when we admire the Larsson paintings about their home. Are you interested to make this article? Hafspajen (talk) 16:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm - severe lack of sources. I wish they'd footnoted where they got that V & A quote from, or better yet given the original English. Unless I can find a couple of good sources, to show she is notable, that exhibition will have to have either been on her or given her a good-sized section. Or did she make it into the Nordisk familjebok? I'll put it on my list to research. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

It should be a book written in English, quite recently about her.Hafspajen (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.clg.se/karin.aspx http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DUQfwUsfGA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q8ifjC1w_k

Thanks, that first URL helps (as I suspected, the V & A exhibit was on her husband - but it does imply it devoted considerable attention to her). However ... the Swedish article is copyvio of the biography! Sigh. Could you be a gentleman and a scholar and paraphrase? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.thelocal.se/20081209/16236

Good, thank you, that plus the book referenced at the bottom of the Swedish article settles it, she should be safe from AfDing :-) I don't know how soon I can get to it, mind you - Yule is still happening :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

A tomtenisse

This is what I feed mine (recomended by the Swedish connoisseurs, especially for our climate)

• Shall I scholar and paraphrase? Do you mean....? Hafspajen (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC) http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/journals/conservation-journal/issue-25/preparations-for-carl-and-karin-larsson-creators-of-the-swedish-style/

Oh goodie, that's the V & A, thanks! ... I mean that somebody who can actually write Swedish needs to change the Swedish article so it isn't so obviously copied from that website. Unfortunately I can only read it (and that not as well as Norwegian). Yngvadottir (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

• Ok, I got you. Will go ahead and paraphrase, then . This is a book written about her. http://www.bokborsen.se/Axel-Frieberg/Karin-En-Bok-Om-Carl-Larssons-Hustru/2687353. There is a second book too. this one Hafspajen (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

• I did it, paraphrased and paraphrased, since you asked me so nicely, but it was really a lot of work. Weird how difficult is to break out of a sentence that is put in a certain way. Hafspajen (talk) 19:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is, which I think is why other Wikipedias have so much copyvio - we tend to hunt it down here. Thanks very much for doing that!! Yngvadottir (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC) (LOL I just noticed the pic, that is cute!) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:41, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is a fun picture. It should be in the Topiary article. Did you feed your house tomte with porrige on Christmas eve? It is actually a very old custom. If you don't take care of the tomtenisse, he will not take care of you. Hafspajen (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

LOL yes, I have a less than ideal relationship with wights/tomter; luckily they do like the booze I give them, and the other stuff other household members give them :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Karin Larsson-Bergöö's rocking chair

What do you feed them? Hafspajen (talk) 21:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

In my case mainly wine, sometimes other forms of alcohol - others in the household set aside fruit and vegetables, and yes, occasionally oatmeal. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

- It should probably be noted that our vaettir article is the most relevant to this household. We don't honour them only at Yule, and we honour outside ones as well as inside. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• You know, the funny thing that this husband, Carl Larsson, was extremely fond of the National Romantic style, but he never really was recognised for those murals - and they are not so good as the home paintings - I say - and that house was made and furnished together with his wife! She designed furniture, textiles, lamps and clothing. Hafspajen (talk) 11:42, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Yup, I see that in the materials you've found for me, but I won't venture a theory about how far ahead of her time she was :-). As I understand it, a big problem with his murals was that this shocked people with the nakedness (and maybe a bit of lèse-majesté ?):

Yngvadottir (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, who cares about naked people. Not in Scandinavia. I would say, with the artist judgment - (that's me) - anyway, my judgment is that he wasn't as good at the monumentality of the composition, and the rhythm of the greater scale, as he was at intimacy in art. Compare for example with Michelangelo. And you would be surprised how difficult it is painting in the larger scale, it is not an easy thing, I tell you. What I mean, looking at it now. Hafspajen (talk) 18:30, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Who cares... who cares ... whaddya MEAN who cares about nekkid people?!? I like 'em. Count me as caring. Those poor anti-cultural Scandinavians that don't care for nekkid people... who cares what they think, I say!  :-)   p.s. The_Agony_and_the_Ecstasy_(film) is a dern good one. — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

An aside comment

We all need to put on our clothing and start behave civilized :)

• It makes me happy that you like them. I think I messed up your talk page.Hafspajen (talk) 18:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

• Nah, you didn't mess it up, you just forgot to close the <div...> <div...> tags above your bespangled pointy... spiky... very tall... hardwood ... uh, tree ... with some matching </div> </div> stuff at the end. Sometimes, an obelisk is just an obelisk, as Freud might say. See HTML#Markup for some example-syntax, look for the colorful monospaced fontface. Also, see the diff,[21] I added the divs back in, with matching slashdivs, so the blue-border and the custom-fontface are restored. As the saying goes, it is the thought that counts, thanks much. I've returned the favor, with some pics for your enjoyment, see below.74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Where? Hafspajen (talk) 19:21, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Apropos nudity I am not sure I like this article. Depictions of nudity. We have Nude (art) and Nudity and Nudity and sexuality and Nude photography and History of nudity and Public nudity and Naturism and Nudity in sport and Nudity in combat and Clothed female, naked male and Naked marriage (silly) and Naked party and a very weird article called Buck naked sorry to put all this on your page, but do we really need even an article that is not telling much more than is already told - and has a big part on Children as subjects. Hafspajen (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

• When you list the articles like that, it does seem as if we have rather a lot. I notice that you made a couple of edits there. I'm inclined to leave it alone, because it is a topic that has been of major importance in art on all levels - and that has generated libraries full of books discussing it. But there will always be a titillation factor, if only for some viewers. If you're still concerned, you might look at the talk pages to see whether any of these have previously been nominated for deletion (AfD); sometimes the decision was "no consensus" and that would mean the article could be nominated again. Or propose a merge. You never know, people might agree; there is little planning involved in how the encyclopedia grows, so sometimes we do wind up with overlapping articles one or two of which can be merged. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Hafspajen, you have such a large supply of naked ambition, cleaning up wikipedia of WP:POVFORKs and such! Soon you too will be an admin methinks, staring into the abyss, like the king of the kvens only with more lewdity. Speaking of POVFORK, see also the discussion at WT:Drafts for keeping material that should not be deleted really, but does not yet belong in mainspace. There is some possibility that *multiple* drafts can exist, for one particular name-in-mainspace. Of course, Yngvadottir is correct about the vast amount of library-content which has been generated, over the years. There was even a painting by the Great Jimbo himself, which was uploaded back-in-the-day™ during 2009 methinks. WP:WikiSpeak#J Maybe it will be featured in the revised article history of nudity, perhaps in the infoboxen? That might be proxy-editing-by-telepathy, though, because I strongly suspect Gerda_Arendt wrote the caption of this particular oil painting, what with all the references to obscure composers. See also, WP:WikiSpeak#Flow for a discussion of important new features. Hope this helps. :-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• That page is sick! Sad how much is true ... Yngvadottir (talk) 17:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Hafspajen (talk) 09:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• I am not against nudity. I am concerned about that Depictions of nudity - has mostly nothing that other articles do not have + has a big part on Children as subjects, Where is the line there between Children as subjects - and something much more unpleasant? A subtle or slight degree of difference? ... especially how it was put. (naked young boys). Here -> I removed a commons that was posted in the middle of the article, in the section. Hafspajen (talk) 16:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, I know you aren't. I saw your removal of that Commons link, and I do think we have one or two articles too many in that list. However, the line is indeed hard to draw: there have been artists who specialized in young boys bathing (you cut a sentence about that), just as there have been artists who specialized in nubile female nudes, and in both cases there are both recognized major artists and a fair number of purveyors of what I believe used to be called "gentleman's pictures". (Commons doesn't appear to have any examples by the Meister des deutschen Schamhaares, who is better known than the Victorian exponents of the genre; and then again there are the putti ...) The thing is, titillation is part of the topic and definitely part of how it's been discussed. That's why I'm not suggesting posting to the article's talk page. You could run your observations by someone else, but Drmies, who's usually ready and able with the scythe, doesn't do much with the visual arts. And there is an argument that articles with different emphases are useful to readers who come to a topic for a variety of reasons. (And attitudes to portrayals of unclothed young children have changed hugely in some places over the last few decades; then there's the gay rights/equal objectification aregument; it's a bit of a quicksand in which such paintings and photos have been hugely discussed, albeit often with illustrations avoided, so there is a legitimate topic or several. There's even the distinction between "nude" and "naked".) Sorry, I am apparently wishy washy this morning. Maybe someone else will weigh in. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Well I don't care about gay people either. I mean, gay adult people doing whatever they like with each other, it is just fine. As you know, in Sweden most people are quite tolerant about nakedness and gay people and whatnot. But this naked child thing is not exactly something I am tolerant about. Children should be children and left alone. I have never ever got across any university subject like nude children depicted during the centuries. Hafspajen (talk) 17:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Too late for DRmies scythe, I tried to hit them in their own field and filled the whole article with Greek deities -AND made the section into a controversy. Hafspajen (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Good for you! Some of those Greek statues are very naked indeed ... and discussion should ensue, out of which will come a more solid article. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
• If you have some spare time... I am afraid my sentences can occasionally sound kind of distorted. Could you please take a look at them ? Hafspajen (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Sure, but not for a few hours; absolute chaos here and I have to sleep soon, hence you see me just responding on talk pages and noodling around. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

rolling interviews for new ExecDir of WMF are continuing

Since you've expressed interest in WP:FLOW and such in the past... you might be interested in participating in this not-a-club activity... User_talk:Ahnoneemoos#redux, search for "Since the WMF is" just below the big green box. In a nutshell, the person with the *most* control over WP:FLOW in summer 2014 and also the future of VizEd, is going to be whomever is chosen as the new ExecDir.

  Therefore, I suggest that we seek out some nominations from DahCommuhnity™ using the scheme described there, in order to give ourselves the best chance of keeping the WMF from imposing madness in the form of a technological terror.  :-)   Whether the WMF-approved committee (see list inside the green box at link above) takes any cognizance of such vox-populi-generated nominees, is another matter entirely. But methinks it is worth doing, even if — perhaps especially if — the result of the effort is ignored. Sound like more fun than a barrel of monkeys? TFIW. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification, but probably not for me ... I don't know much about business executives, and while it would be nice if we got someone who actually wanted to help us make an encyclopedia, it's quite apparent that that's not what the WMF cares about. Even if by some miracle they choose someone who does care, they won't let them do so. Hopefully at least one person better networked and less despairing has this page watchlisted. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Everybody is welcome to pile in, certainly... even those who can only countenance such an action from within the pit of despair.  ;-)   No need to stop despairing is implied; the point of building the list of on-wiki nominees, and ranking them by their on-wiki bangvote-counts, is not really put forth in the hope that the process will have any impact whatsoever on the outcome of the WMF-executive-search-committee-decision. It is more of a protest vote that demonstrates two things: first, that we ... or I suppose, whether we ... can use on-wiki discussion in a reasonably mature fashion, to crowd-source a decent set of worthwhile candidates, and bangvote that list into a sort-order that is not laughably ludicrous.

  Second, and less important but not of negligible importance, is that if we do manage to generate a credible nominee-list, but the dozen folks on the Official WMF Secret Nominations And Secret Interviews Committee ignore that list and pick somebody else by fiat... we get to say, don't blame me, I bangvoted for Honorary ExecDir Linus Torvalds, all hail Finland.  :-)   Which is ha-ha-only-serious. WMF devs could use some management by perkele methinks, that would get the feature-set of WP:FLOW into shape right quickly. But I'm quite sure the last thing wikipedia needs is a "business executive" acting in the leadership role... unless you mean The Great Jimbo, by that phrase. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

this user can read some Russian words

  :-)   So, comrade, feel like helping translating (for talkpage wikiNotability-assessment purposes only!) some newspaper-articles[22][23][24] about some software written in Poland, which is now being used by the Russkies, Merikans, Chineze, Brits, and possibly Aussies (HiLo48 will be thrilled) in all their respective sekret aerospace laboratories? We are trying to roughly gauge whether these three sources help achieve SORCER/FIPRE/exertions/service-oriented-architectures in-depth, as opposed to mere WP:NOTEWORTHY, when considered as 'single' Russian source (we have other RS for the aussie/uk/zh/usa efforts). Da? Nyet? Dosvidanya! 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

I doubt I am a good choice! I'll have a look when I get home from work, off-wiki chaos permitting. But you would do better to ask someone like Ymblanter. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, way beyond my ability to intuit. It doesn't help that I am a notorious technical incompetent. Sorry. It is clearly notable! Yngvadottir (talk) 19:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, machine translation is not too painful... you visit translate.google.com or bing.com/translator, paste the URL you want mangled into the box on the left, and hit the enter-key. A few seconds later, you see the gawdawefull result, and you can hover the mouse-cursor over individual sentences, to see a popup of the original russian or chinese or german or whatever. Here is one such translation — http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http://vestnik_old.ulsu.ru/issues/878/4 — typically you can use this URL, and paste in your desired ending. Note the fallback to latinized words like "ulianovtsev" when the machine-translation-software fails, and of course, there are butcherings, like translating the acronym for Russian Academy of Sciences as "wounds" for some reason. One trick I use is to break up troublesome sentences into single-word-sentences, and then translate across multiple engines.

orig	goog: one-word-at-a-time trick	bing: one-word-at-a-time trick	goog: one full sentence	bing: one full sentence
Ульяновские.	Ulyanovsk.	Ulyanovsk.	Ulyanovsk	Ulyanovsk
ученые.	scientists.	scientists.	scientists	scientists
побывали.	visited.	visited.	visited	travelled
за.	for.	for.	the	( see below )
океаном.	ocean.	Ocean.	ocean	overseas
вместе.	together.	together.	together	( see below )
со.	with.	with.	with	with
своими.	its.	your.	their	his
коллегами.	colleagues.	colleagues.	colleagues	colleagues
из.	of	from.	from	of the
СГАУ.	SSAU.	SGAU.	SSAU	SGAU
и.	and.	and.	and	and
Института.	Institute.	The Institute.	Image Processing Systems Institute	image processing systems Institute
систем.	systems.	systems.	( see above )	( see above )
обработки.	processing.	processing.	( see above )	( see above )
изображений.	images.	images.	( see above )	( see above )
(ИСОИ).	(IPSI).	(ISOI).	(IPSI)	(ISOI)
РАН.	RAS.	RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.	RAS.	wounds.

Reading back to find out what "СГАУ" stands for, in this case Samara State University, we can write a reasonably-translated gloss, at the end of the day. " Ulyanovsk scientists traveled overseas with their colleagues of Samara State University (ru:СГАУ) and [the] Image Processing Systems Institute (ru:ИСОИ) [plus the?] Russian Academy of Sciences (ru:РАН)." Obviously, this is a ton of work, and we're *still* not sure that anybody from the РАН actually went on the trip, as opposed to other possibilities (maybe the ИСОИ is a subsidiary of the РАН?)... but we're pretty close. Anyhoo, thanks for taking a peek at the sources, HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yngvadottir. You have new messages at Ujjwal234goel's talk page.
Message added 10:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ujjwal234goel (talk) 10:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year! Hope you are having a wonderful time!!!! Fixed the challenge, thanks to you. Hafspajen (talk) 19:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :-) We still have a while to wait, here (backward environment '-) ) but all the best for 2014 to you, too. (And to any friendly talkpage stalkers!) Yngvadottir (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Can't help it, I just get more and more ideas. It is getting out of hands somehow... Hafspajen (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	For your courage and for exceling at maintaining civility in the midst of well - heated situations. Hafspajen (talk) 20:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Aww, thanks :-) Kind of ironic for someone who swears as much as me off-wiki tho' '-) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:29, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• But you should do that too. It is healthy to do so, in private. Nobody will hear that, eh? Hafspajen (talk) 20:34, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your kind advice and for your welcome. I decided to be bold and create that page according to the instructions that you provided, the article is basically a translation from de.Wikipedia. Regards. :) Nikolas Tales (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks....

...for fixing the author field for that ref on The Kitchen. I looked and looked, but couldn't find the name. BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 07:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

np, it was lurking at the end of Page 2 in the form of an e-mail address @ the publication. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Response

Thanks for the advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakandsig (talk • contribs) 20:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi, Sent you an e-mail. Thanks. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah.

How I hate people doing this. There are those butchers who run over lots and lots of peoples work, that they added and start shouting, no refs, and bucher away everything. As long as nobody starts asking for refs (as far as I know) so there is no need to ask, if it is not a controvery. This is one of the nice thing about Wikipedia that one can read about how other people do with they Christmas, breakfast and so on. Here went half of the breakfast article, for somebody found it unsupportablen not to have refs.->Unsourced_content_removed_from_article in most uncontroversial stuff. Things that are difficult to find in other places. And here we go, deleting lots of peoples work just because someone starts questioning stuff like this. Is this really so disputed? Why not find some refs before start deleting everything? This is just cruelty. Most probably finding refs for stuff like this is not hard at all. Is this really building a Wikipedia, deleting half of the the Chrismas worldwide? This guy is editing since 27 November 2013 and already deleted half of the article, "good job".. How really nice and cute... Hafspajen (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• Well, Finealt is blocked for an unrelated issue. Your restoration said "vandalism" and I don't agree with that term, but I do agree with your revert. It is, BTW, a really long article. God Jul, Drmies (talk) 03:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry about that Drmies, realised that myself, but I did belive that at the time thought it was unnoticed vandalism, thinking that it might be some high Chistmas traffic incident. Later when I went back to check who did it, thinking I need to leave a message on their talkpage and noticed this editor. But then it was to late, I was not able to undo my comment, because of the many edits I made, so it was "too late, that's it". Hafspajen (talk) 12:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah that was a bit of butchering of content. Like it or not, we have a lot of legacy content - some of it from before references were required - and it would be better for the encyclopedia if people looked for sources, added tags to some of what they are unable to source, and were more judicious in what they outright cut. You appear to have done a good job finding references. But I did restore one later bit of pruning in one section - I agree with Bonadea that it's undue to make a big deal out of an alternate date for Christmas in one particular country when several Eastern traditions share it. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• Exactly, it would be better for the encyclopedia if people looked for sources, added tags to some of what they are unable to source, aren't we building here an encyclopaedia wot or what? And if they were more judicious in what they outright cut, the Breakfast article would be still there, istead of like half of it, as it is now. A little pruning is fine with me. I restored the content by clicking on an older version, dec 18, so some of the good or justified additions went too, as it was wery difficult to see what happened and what not, due to the large removals all over the article. Hafspajen (talk) 12:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

scientific misconduct article

Hi,

I suspect you misunderstood my condemnation. Cluebot has been systematically deleting quite legitimate articles and I no longer care to contribute to Wikipedia because of this.

Separately, I have complaints about how the scientific misconduct article is composed. I could say a great deal about hand picking what one chooses to call suitable 3rd party references. I am convinced that stating the existence of signed documents that demonstrate how ethics committees and chancellors disagree is crucial to public perception. It calls into question how reliable some 3rd party information is or can be. — User_talk:79.102.63.209 at 21:09, 5 January 2014‎

I'll go have a chat with 79 about this rogue boht. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 22:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Pertaining Time: Thanks be the Width, for I need know naught of the Length

I am a new author and you are the first "seasoned" contributor, which I have had the joy of stumbling over. I feel as someone who might have said, "I knew, but now I see. This life, in vitro, tis' in front of me".

~I believe that nothing ever happens and is random, but that everything is random en route; Playing host to many connections all at once, where all are able to happen. SecondBorn2BLikeMe (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome :-) You'll find this is a very large community with some wonderful people in it. I'm going to put a welcome template on your talk page that will give you some links to read more about our rules and guidelines and where to look for ideas for what to work on. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Let Yngvadottir Sleep!

How's your flu now? Hafspajen (talk) 21:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

To whom it may concern: Yngvadottir has the flu she says it's only a bad cold, and she keeps fretting about stuff on Wikipedia. I'm trying to make her go to bed and stay there. Please don't encourage her bad habits. Kobnach (talk) 19:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Kobnach, pleasure to meet you, please call me 74. You can just twist Yngvadottir's arm, or earlobe as the case might be, and have them full-protect their own talkpage.  :-)   That should do the trick. But personally, I recommend a more drastic solution — just go to the basement, flip off the appropriate circuit-breakers, swipe the batteries from their computer hardware, to include phones and tablets and wii/xbox/ps4 and whatnots that might have internet access... finally, tell them to take two of these, drink plenty of fluids, and call you in 36 hours. Then barricade their doors and windows from the outside. (And don't forgot to leave them this for dealing with WP:FLOW.)

  If you really insist on being WP:NICE, you can leave them with a pencil (tape the word "save" on one side and "edit" on the other side of the pencil's body), and the hardback volume 'M' of the 1988 World Book print-encyclopedia (explain to them it uses an upgraded PhysualEditor software interface), plus give them a little spiral-bound notebook with TALKPAGE written on the cover. That way, they can WP:IMAGINE they are still editing an encyclopedia, and WP:RELAX enough to get better. Hope this helps, thanks for improving wikipedia, tell Yngvadottir no worries, the wikiFauna got things under control. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

We will manage without for a while. Hafspajen (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Pleased to meet you 74.192.84.101. The problem with disabling the household internet is that I've got just as severe an internet addiction, and if I merely disabled her machines, I'd come home and find her using mine ;-) I was happy to find her asleep when I got home from work. But she immediately bounced out of bed and the next thing I knew she was telling me to check this thread. Kobnach (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

• Out of sympathy with Yngvadottir, I might just turn off the netbook and crawl in next to Mrs. Drmies tonight, looking to flip that circuit-breaker. Drmies (talk) 02:41, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

All right, all right, I'll go back to bed. :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Natti natti--naptime here! Let Hafspajen hold the fort. Mrs. Drmies made a kind of orange roll, with a dough full of butter. Next time we'll thrown in some cardamom and pretend we're all Scandinavians called Ingrid. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Heh :-) I feel really strange and I find I forgot to do two important off-wiki things yesterday. Kobnach is trying to get me to go back to bed. I hope nothing complex comes up, wrestling with citation templates appears to be about my maximum level today. Sorry all. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

• My name is not Ingrid, dear Ingrid Drmies. Don't worry, Yngvadottir, Drmies will resolve everything, in his new Swedish mood. Hafspajen (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Bed! Now! Git! Kobnach (talk) 21:50, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Drink lots of warm drinks like hot tea with lemon, eggtoddy and eat garlic or if you don't like that eat lots of gorgonzola cheese, it is the same penicilin like the penicilin mould ordered by the doctors - and read a good book. Hafspajen (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Nice bed! Hafspajen (talk) 12:07, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

pictures of students

Pratham currently has the library-pic, and the yoga-pic. Are there any restrictions about uploading pictures of recognizable-individual-humans, without their explicit permission? We might have to wait a bit before we break this new heartbreaking news to him.  :-)   Glad he came back to talk, without needing to be blocked. There is yet hope. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

There is a guideline, but for group shots at some distance like those, it's more honored in the breach than the observance. More to the point, I fear he may not have taken those himself, either; I keep expecting some image maven to find originals. Since no one has, I'm ignoring them in hopes he did take them. If that makes any sense. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

On another subject, Clover is visiting their friend the Duromac CEO, to get shots of the cool machinery. Please sanity-check my advice, are they going to get insta-deleted from commons here? [25] Danke. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:46, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Commons is Commons, but I don't see why they would be; the only possible argument would be about brand-name equipment and I don't see why the manufacturer would object, so I would say go ahead and deal with those objections if and when they occur. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Please see, User_talk:Prathamprakash29#Possibly_unfree_File:Library_of_NRSJPS.jpg as of the 27th. Pratham last edited on the 5th, and is unlikely to notice this problem, until the imagefiles are deleted from mainspace per usual. When it is noticed...

1. we can try to explain again about taking pics personally, or about going through the copyright-assignment-regimen.
2. Our main question is whether the "newspaper such as Amar Ujala and Dainik Jagran" which Pratham mentioned have hyperlinks to the stories about the school; at least the first one of those newspapers *has* a website, that I found.
3. Also, you were wondering how many Class-9-thru-Class-12 students there were... roughly 47*4 based on the average-class-size, but of course, that average class size hardly squares with the 2500 students in 13-or-14-classes... so more information would be good.
4. Do we have more pending queries?

p.s. Any idea what human-language this might be?[26] 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:56, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

No idea, sorry. I'd kind of been waiting for the shoe to drop on those pics, since no camera info comes up at the bottom (and the exterior pic is the background on the school's Facebook page and also appears on the About Us page on this second official school site (!)). And I think we both agree it's probable that the New R.S.J. Public School as a whole has 2,500+ students, only some of whom are in the Senior Secondary years. This bears out the hunch. This one shows a lower-form classroom and may well have confirmatory audio - I don't have speakers hooked up - but obviously neither of those is citeable! There are several directory entries for the school online - it's operated by the Kumar Educational Society - and as I believe I've mentioned, a couple of news hits about students' performance in exams and a student petitioning to be allowed to take exams. I have no doubt it's notable, no matter what the actual enrollment. But I suspect the meat of the news coverage is in another alphabet. Unfortunately most of the balls are in Pratham's court, although if he stays away for a few weeks longer I'll cite stuff to that alternate website - it's better for our purposes. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC) ... ETA Dainik Jagran. Hindi, I'm almost certain. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Maybe the second website is intended for the under-construction branch? There is a sentence in the article about the location in Alladhabad of the new facility. Not having perused the youtube links, my hunch is that the 2500 includes predicted attendance in the new-under-construction-branch, plus maybe additional planned-student-growth for the current branch, and that the currently-open-branch has 47*13 ~== 600something actual students at present. Hard to say without folks on the ground. My understanding of wikiPolitics is that high school districts are "inherently wikiNotable" under the theory that they describe a physical/political location and as such get an article... and since there is one high school per school-district, generally, that is why schools failing to meet GNG-sourcing requirements still tend to get a free pass of sorts. But yes, agree that in the case of NRSJPS, the sources prolly actually exist, if we can find someone fluent to search for and grok them. Is there a WP:WikiProject_India person you know? Does Sitush speak the lingo, or maybe Kudpung? HTH. p.s. Worrisome, Dainik_Jagran#Paid_News. p.p.s. Ahem, Kumar Educational Society.  ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Not in my repertoire of languages I'm afraid, but it's a fair guess it's one used by tolls and teenagers - it's called vandalism. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Vandaleze, of course, cannot believe I missed that one! ;-)   You could well be right, however, since this was from the same city as the school, and just added a few words to the end of a random paragraph (i.e. not deleting anything), methinks possibly it was graffiti-just-testing-if-this-anyone-can-edit-thing-really-works-eze, rather than more devious forms of vandalism. The main contributor (and only local contributor) to the article has a small case of IDHT, so I'm hoping we can find additional folks local to the region that speak the language of the sources. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

--Pratham 17:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prathamprakash29 (talk • contribs)

Adolf Fredrik's music school

Dear Yngvadottir,

You were more than helpful with the article Erika Sunnegårdh a few weeks ago, so I thought I might test my luck asking for a piece of advice on another article that has now bounced twice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Adolf_Fredrik%27s_music_school

The reviewers don't like the article but I can't quite understand why. The way I see it this article has more and better references than 95% of the school articles I find on Wikipedia and I try to keep an objective tone. I have nothing whatsoever in common with Adolf Fredrik's music school other than our nationality. So, what is it I don't understand about writing articles? Andersneld (talk) 19:23, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, that's a bit of a puzzle; I don't see why the second reviewer finds the tone too informal. Have you asked him for examples? I do see a bit of a whiff of promotion - for example, there is no source that I can see on the statement that those who do sing barbershop prominently in Sweden all have a connection to the school. You might want to shorten the article by removing not very relevant things like that. Also most of your references are not very impressive - things like Facebook - on a quick glance I saw only one newspaper article. Can you find more newspaper and tv articles about the school, or if there are already more than I saw, make it clearer in the reference that that's what they are? (Write out name of newspaper in full and link to Wikipedia's article on it). A very well established rule of thumb on Wikipedia is that senior high schools and institutions of tertiary education are presumed notable, but schools for younger students have to demonstrate notability like any other organization. And this is a junior high school. So this article has to meet a notability/referencing standard that many school articles we have don't have to. I'll go ping 74, who is active in trying to get AfC articles accepted via collective effort; he/she may have some useful thoughts too, but unfortunately IPs don't have watch lists and I doubt he/she obsessively checks my talk page :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 19:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Hah! Wrong!  :-)   I actually came here to say, that Andersneld is on vacation for the next three/four days, per the note they left on my talkpage, and has given us carte-blanche to rewrite the article as we see fit. Methinks that what GorillaWarfare was prolly concerned about was the non-inline-cited superlatives, including several one-word-puffs in the first couple paragraphs. I also have a scheme in mind of using efn style "notes" section for all the WP:ABOUTSELF cites, so we can separate the independent third-party refs from the other stuff. (Also, many of the refs are doublets... google books in one place, and isbn in another place, for instance, which need to be condensed into a singleton.) If you get a chance before me, please feel free to dive in and start massaging the article. Thanks as always for improving wikipedia. And remember Wazowski... always watching, always watching.  ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Yngvadottir and 74, I'm back from my vacation and ready to edit :-) As an aside here is a quick summary of the classical music scene in Berlin:

• Go to Berlin to listen to opera (all three opera houses)
• Go to Berlin to listen to the Berlin Philharmonic
• Go to Stockholm to listen to choral music

First question, do we discuss the Adolf Fredrik's music school article here or on 74's talk page, or perhaps elsewhere? I have read your comments and tried to fix the article:

• Whiff of promotion. I plead guilty. My first version had none of this, but I got confused when the article was first turned down because of lack notoriety. I have now tried to be more impartial. Should I take away the second paragraph altogether?
• one-word-puffs. Guilty again, for the same reason. Now corrected I think.
• Barbershop references. Now added, and the text modified to reflect that there were two singers that I couldn't verify as having attended the Adolf Fredrik's music school.
• Oral sources. My source for the statement that all the members of the Swedish barbershop quartets have attended the Adolf Fredrik's music school is a well-known Swedish choral director, Bengt Ollén, that I met recently at a private party. Would this qualify as a reference? If so, how should the reference be phrased?
• Consider removing the barbershop reference. I'd rather not. Bengt Ollén tells me that winning all these barbershop prizes has put the school in the limelight of at least the US barbershop community.
• References not very impressive. I have deleted all Facebook references and tried to be clear on the rest of the references. They look a bit more impressive now, don't they?
• Doublets. How do I condense "google books in one place, and isbn in another place" into a singleton? Pls advice!

Cheers! Andersneld (talk) 12:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• separate the independent third-party refs. I suppose this refers to references #8, 10, 13 and 16 that link to the school's own home page? I look forward to learning what to do about this! Andersneld (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi again Andersneld, I'm going to ping 74 and get him/her here :-D Yngvadottir (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Yngvadottir, I clearly have a lot to learn: How do you ping someone on Wikipedia? Andersneld (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

With a registered editor, you link to their username and they get a red number at the top of their screen from the notification system: Andersneld, for example (I used the {{U|name}} template, but we used to use the longform like one sees in a signature). But since he/she is an IP, tehre are no notifications and I have to jump up and down on his/her talk page instead :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 18:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Since Yngvadottir is down with the worst case of the flu in six generations we should move this discussion to the AfC page, but the short answers are, oral sources are not WP:V but we can put *facts* into the article, inline citations are only required if somebody challenges the statement. That said, anything especially positive ("100% of the members of 100% of the barbershop quartets in the entire country of Sweden attended AFMS") are 'likely to be challenged'. I expect Yngvadottir already knows about the ref-condense and the WP:FOOTNOTE stuff, but the easiest way is showing you how, by doing it and then letting you see the result. Talk to you soon, thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 23:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Youpeee, the article is accepted at last :-) Thanks for all your help!! Andersneld (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh good, I'm glad! But it was 74 helped with this one :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Gaudiya Nritya

See Wikipedia:AN3#User:RupalDel_reported_by_User:Drmies_.28Result:_.29: the plot thickens. I think there's obvious socking going on. Drmies (talk) 19:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Mmm yeah, definitely an edit warrior; I cannot see why on earth my edit merited reversion. But I've now involved myself and besides, I freely admit I know next to nothing about Indian classical dance. Sigh. How they think this will benefit the article even before they started socking/meatpuppeting is a mystery to me. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't drop by to ask you to stick your pretty nose in it--I just thought it was funny. I haven't checked yet (after nap, groceries, dinner prep), but I gather something has happened. BTW, are you and Bish mutually intelligible? Drmies (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Considering Yngvadottir's impressive Babelbox collection, I'm betting she can understand Dinospeak. A little disappointingly, I also gather from the boxes that she's not as Icelandic as I thought, but a native English speaker, so "mutally", yes, I expect so. Bishonen | talk 00:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC).

Poor you. But the problem is solved. Hafspajen (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, Obiwan Bish :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

• Could be a nice new name for bishzilla and company... Hafspajen (talk) 21:51, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

She will love this page but the timeline is hopeless. Hafspajen (talk) 00:39, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gaudiya Nritya, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Vandalism from different IDs, Destructive towards a public article, what more!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sogkol (talk • contribs) 22:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

• I really like the Obiwan moniker… though Bishzilla, whose head has been addled by her monomaniacal fussing with the Victorian Poet's Corner of her pocket, nowadays insists that I should preferably be known as Percy Bish Shelley. Yngvadottir, since you've received a fourth-level vandalism warning, I've blocked you for a week. (And Sogkol indefinitely). Bishonen | talk 00:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC).

• That will thrill the off-wiki peanut gallery who say I should be blogging and translating :-D No but really, thanks Obiwan. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Entamoeba gingivalis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polynuclear (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) 09:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Finlands victims

Aggregate (uncorrected) risk of death can estimated to be 10⁻⁷ per visit in Finland. In essentially all cases, the victim had diabetes, a heart condition or other serious chronic disease. More than 50% were men over the age of 50, and 30% were over 70; furthermore, most often the victims were intoxicated.

I suppose all this would need to be cleaned out from that damn article. It is just hopeless, this Sauna- all of it. Hafspajen (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

That falls under the stringent rules for medical claims. I'd make claims like that, sourced to a newspaper, considerably less precise and certain and post to the talk page explaining why. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not the doctor but in this case I'm ordering the following cure: Leningrad Cowboys – "Sauna". Apply to ears when stressed from editing sauna-related articles. De728631 (talk) 20:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

LOL. I've hacked it about a bit but I think I will also drop a note to SandyGeorgia. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• GOsh, Yngvadottir - have mercy. The whole article is full of such - warnings - I guess the Finnish think we better warn those poor people - so they don't make misstakes. Such a BAD article. - I am - just can-'t handle it. Put some nice images in it and soon give up. Maybe listen a bit on those cowboys too....Hafspajen (talk) 20:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Step back and wait for one of the medical people to arrive with a scalpel. At least right now it's not telling people a sauna is a certain cure for fibromyalgia or a guaranteed immune booster. Or fatal if you have diabetes. (The warnings against intoxication are odd. When I was in Finland a great part of the point was convivial drinking of beer and eating of sausages cooked on the coals.) Now about that Konditorei, that was sad. But so was Manganaro's. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

OK. that will be good. OK - . But the problem is not that only I don't think that all medical things are trouble (sauna does help against certain things) but the overall article, the sentences, stupid formulations, same things duplicated, everything said twice, three.-frour times. No organisation, no nothing. I tried to help but now I stop. Hafspajen (talk) 22:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I may look at it some more. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:51, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• Leningrad Cowboys Yes, that Konditorei, that was sad, it was one of Mies favourite memories about Lund. It was the old type, like an old fashioned club, cosy, with bookshelfs, plenty of books and magasines to read, red brocade armchairs and small marble tables, wooden panels,... christal chandeliers, stuccos and guilded decoration on the ceilings, .. Now it is sold, and is divided in two small, cold, shiny hard, modern coffe bars, and just think, one of them has pink plastic flamingos in the bathroom... ugh. Hafspajen (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

  Ew. Yes, that was one of my favorite memories of Lund. Walking around in the church and on the campus was nice too. And I made it to second base on the beach close to Lomma. To be in south Sweden on a bicycle is a wonderful thing. Drmies (talk) 19:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

talkback

Prathamprakash29 I have added newspaper cutting on the school's talk page. Please see it.--Pratham 17:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prathamprakash29 (talk • contribs)

this is your first alert

That I butchered your user-talkpage comment to Pratham. You may of course revert, if you want no wikiFauna interfering, but I'd like to separate sony camera assertions, from picture-of-picture-derivative-works explanations, from satellite maps workarounds, from audiofiles-of-all-languages. Also, hid away the template-spams from the other folks, they are effectively worse than useless at this point methinks, but added image#12/#13/#14 to the List Of Questionable MediaFiles. HTH, glad you are feeling more spritely, or sprightly, or separately, or something.  ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Are you well ?

I don't understand this discussion, Since when Wikipedia sees pictures a a distraction in an article? I fail to understand the whole thing. Hafspajen (talk) 22:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

We kind of discussing it at Mies page. How is your health? Hafspajen (talk) 13:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Better than it was, thanks. I was able to finish an off-wiki task yesterday, so the peanut gallery has less reason to begrudge me my editing :-) I'm sorry he was so abrupt about it; it's a matter of taste, really. A lot of the articles I work on really aren't suited to having pictures, and I've been warned about excessive use of galleries; to a certain extent I feel that penalises one for using all 5 pictures in the Commons category when if the Commons category had 25, 5 would not seem excessive '-) Also so long as one doesn't pad the prose, wanting to fit in another pic or two can be a useful spur to find more information to include '-) And I think that rule about not making any pic larger than 225, or whatever the number is, is ridiculously absolute - it entirelyt depends on the picture and the number of pictures. One should keep in mind that some readers are on slow connections or mobile devices; part of the problem for them is templates, but not having a huge number of pics is something one can control to make it easier for them. However, what I always come back to is the particular article: whether it really needs pics for elucidation (Architecture of the night, where I used what I could find for the buildings mentioned in the text) and what will make it look good (sometimes we have several pics of the same thing (I polished someone's translation of Church of Notre-Dame of Dijon, but I think there are too many pics there - in particular I don't think we need two of the Jacquemart and a full set of the stained glass); sometimes we have an interesting variety (Janus Djurhuus; we have a youthful pic as well as an older one); sometimes I want to use the pics to show the range as fully as possible (John Stanley Coombe Beard, where I wish we had more; Munger Terrace, where we have a full set and I believe using all of them is justified to show the lack of repetition); and sometimes (often) I believe the article is better without a pic, at least until we get an adequate one (we don't have a pic of Árni Magnússon; someone added a pic of the Árni Magnússon Institute, now deleted for reasons of Icelandic law, but I didn't actually feel that was an improvement). So there are my thoughts and considerations - and disagreements with the guidelines - for what it's worth. But I believe it's much more an individual thing than many editors realise. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for answering. Hope you will be better soon. Having 1 gallery is not excessive use of galleries; this White is excessive use of galleries. Church of Notre-Dame of Dijon, INDEED is owewhelmed wit pics, do you wan't me to make the layout? Janus Djurhuus; and Munger Terrace not bad, but the gallery is uneven. No books would ever allow a gallery like that (studied grafics and layout in art school). And Árni Magnússon; he really needs a pic. About the policy, well, I am telling everybody al the thime that there was a consensus on this, but many people will or want to forget it; this one->Started with Removal of galleries and ended by rewording the policy in Why Galleries are useful. Wikipedia talk:Image use policy/Archive 12#Why Galleries are useful. Hafspajen (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Munger Terrace is an example where it will look different depending on the width of one's screen (or the window setting within it), so I decided to just line them up. If I were an esthetician I would probably go back and impose 2 rows of framed gallery to force balance; I've learnt how to do them since :-) Árni will have to wait till somebody finds a pic of him, unless someone else puts a building there, or a manuscript; but personally I feel only a portrait of the man is appropriate. As to distractions - I don't find pictures nearly as distracting as infoboxes. Those of us who are lucky enough to have eyesight can almost always learn something from a pic, but an infobox shouts out "This is what you should learn from this whole article!" I only use them in categories of article that are improved by them because of all the minutiae they can be used to store away: schools, ships, species, athletes ... Feel free to prune the pics in the church article; I avoid editing church articles so am unlikely to go back there, and I agree, it's excessive. (I also agree about White.) Yngvadottir (talk) 16:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
• User :Yngvadottir citation: I don't find pictures nearly as distracting as infoboxes. - well I DO AGREE. some of them are just huge and irritating. And - impose 2 rows of framed gallery to force balance; how do you do that? Hafspajen (talk) 16:40, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• The style of galleries I used at Märkisches Museum; two such rows one above the other would force the pictures to stay in rows of defined length. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh I see. But that is not the final solution, because this one allows different pic sizes to jump out the frame and it makes also things unbalanced. I don't understand why are thumb sizes different nowadays? We would need a combination of both. Hafspajen (talk) 17:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The aspect ration thing that we talked about before. But as it happens, all the gallery pics in Munger Terrace are the same size; I took them using a disposable camera. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hm. Yes, well. Hafspajen (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Hope this will do. Church of Notre-Dame of Dijon. Removed some windows, the whole article was only one big window. Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Better, thank you! Yngvadottir (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

..*Thank YOU. Wonder why am I biten time to time by people who think I am overly picturous. I think the Märkisches Museum gallery can't cope with the difference between square, laying down rectangle and upright rectangle pictures (if this is the right way of expressing what I mean). Here[27] something for you. Hafspajen (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Upright vs. horizontal, also called portrait vs. landscape. Nor can the unframed gallery type, but the framed one allows specification of image width, so one can compensate that way. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

  

  Vit passepartout - Like this

• By that framed one allows specification of image width, you mean that the upright and horizontal rectangles are kind of floating in space so it looks more even? Hafspajen (talk) 19:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
• I mean that you can even them out a bit by making some wider than others, although they will also be correspondingly taller. In the usual kind of gallery, there's no control over the size of the pictures. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, I understand what you mean. In the usual kind of gallery, one can even them out a bit by making some wider than others. What I think is good with the usual kind of gallery, there's that frame that gives them a relative - harmony. Hafspajen (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I might have messed things up a bit ...

Hi Yngvadottir, I've been looking at the Thor Heyerdahl Upper Secondary School nomination and I need your help. Silly question but do any of the refs tell us about it being named after Thor Heyerdahl as given in the lead - I can see the one used for the library, is that going to cover it? SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Nope, which is why I had initially not said that, but then someone added an edit explaining who Thor Heyerdahl was, so I saw the need to explain the town's connection to him in the lede. The children's home and school foundation years are taken from the no.wikipedia article on Operasjon Peru, BTW - the charity's own website is a bit of a mess, so don't use those specifics as the hook. I would have nominated it with my 3 suggested hooks being the tent, the second largest/new building design award nomination, and the fact the design includes a sports stadium that the school uses for phys ed. But I don't do DYK any more so probably shouldn't have said that ... Yngvadottir (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

• Hafspajen's newly added link references its being named for the explorer :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, just checked it's in. Hafspajen (talk) 17:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Where is it that stated that the the etymology goes first in the main.? I was reading the Manual of Style back and forward and can't find anything. Hafspajen (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Not sure I understand? I put the info about the name up top because Thor Heyerdahl turned out to be not as common knowledge as I'd thought, so it's a legitimate first question for a reader to have. Is that what you meant? The fact it was designed by schmidt hammer lassen is what drew my attention - you'd been editing that page and I saw the picture, spotted a contradiction as to where it was located, and in looking that up on Norwegian Wikipedia by seeing where else the Commons file was in use, noted that it was an interesting article as well as having a dynamite picture. But I don't think they should be mentioned in the lede; it didn't win the design award. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Gosh, Yngvadottir - I am sorry. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this article. My fault. It is an issue I got bitten see at my talkpage, monastry. Should have started a new section. I know about the link between the article and lassen. Wish I could made that title all minuscules. Hafspajen (talk) 19:24, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I see. No, I wasn't aware of any rule that the etymology section comes first. I can see why it would naturally be near the start if not in the lede, since it would crop up at the start of the History, but I think I've put "Name" sections in different places in the past ... Yngvadottir (talk) 19:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't either aware of any rule that the etymology section comes first. The question is - IS there any rule like that? I was reading the Manual of Style back and forward and can't find anything. Hafspajen (talk) 19:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I can't find it either: WP:ORDER is yet another shortcut like WP:FOOTER, to the order of the things at the end of an article, and a fast scan of the material linked from that page didn't find it either. It could be a WikiProject guideline; as I say, it will often naturally fall in that position. What I do notice is that the header you inserted was the same as the topic of the entire article - that's what I would have referred to in my edit summary if I'd been the one stepping in - but that's not the same issue at all. Dunno :-) Poor Hafspajen, at least after the back and forth the article has a more sensible opening. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

• Step in, but you are a person with a cool head, and I belive you, something I would not dare say about the other editor... Hafspajen (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

More advice please

Rays of light, symbolically represented as horns on the head of Moses (Michelangelo), can be a graphic symbol of Wisdom

Do you have any suggestions about how to deal with the continued attacks from Beyond My Ken. His latest action was quite offensive. I went to his talkpage to ask for help with understanding his mysterious attitude towards me, and he deleted my contribution without any response and with the summary: "I don't allow trolling socks to post here". Isn't that a gratuitous contravention of both the "assume good faith" and "no personal attacks" principles? And that on top of his other attacks elsewhere. Jaggee (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker):Listen, I would leave him alone. People do have the right to remove things from their own talkpage, you know. As Drmies said, try to find something else to do. Or try to forget the whole thing. Yngvadottir is probably not available because it is night in Europe now. There is plenty other things to do on the Wikipedia. Just take it easy. People were trying to tell you the right way to attack the copyvio problem, too. Hafspajen (talk) 22:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• Get wisdom, because it is better than gold: and purchase prudence, for it is more precious than silver.
  • The Bible, The Book of Proverbs 16:16 Hafspajen (talk) 22:46, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
• @Jaggee: Having dealt with BMK before, and knowing editors who have dealt with him, I suggest you ask Drmies for help. Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I got little to offer. If BMK doesn't want someone's comments on their talk page, they have the right to say so. One could call "trolling socks" a personal attack, but BMK believes, no doubt, he has good reason to say so, and thus one could argue it was a personal attack made in good faith, as odd as that may sound. We don't make the world and its inhabitants: we have to do the best with what's there. (For the record, BMK is a valued editor and has contributed greatly to our project.) I can't make someone behave, whatever "behave" means, according to whose standards. If I could, this place would look a lot different--and Yngvadottir would be in charge. Drmies (talk) 00:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

And there is an old party rule to keep in mind: If everybody is telling you you are drunk, you better belive it, go home and sleep. This is just a joke, but what I mean, sometimes is better to listen to what people say. There are a bunch of people here telling you the same thing basically: take it easy and drop the thing. Hafspajen (talk) 01:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I gather then that people who the administrators are afraid of can do as they please, as rudely as they please, despite what the policies may say. OTOH, no doubt, if anyone else behaved half as badly they would be harshly dealt with. Jaggee (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

That dismissal on his talkpage was rude, yes, but as Drmies told you, editors have wide latitude regarding their talk pages (some forbid unregistered editors to post there, for example, which is also contrary to our overall philosophy). To some extent it's personal space. I'm sorry you ran into so much hostility, but as I explained to you, your report came at a bad time when emotions were running high, and you escalated unwisely fast and used words that others found rude. To be frank ... while some editors have indeed built reputations here and are accorded respect for it, the overall situation is that this is a massive project that brings together many different kinds of people, from many different places, and with a surprisingly wide variety of interaction norms. Our philosophy is that one way of dealing with this - turning the environment into a massive bureaucracy - would be deleterious, so we try as far as we can to rely on people to be aware that there will be differences and disagreements, and to maintain a fundamental respect for their fellow editors. This is expressed in the civility requirement, and as I've said, I am sorry you were treated rudely, but you were also seen as being unduly brusque and then rude to the other editor. Now I'm asking you to please model what you are asking for, which is respect, and set this nasty interaction aside for now. It's a big project and you will meet many interesting and kind collaborators here; don't let rancour about a couple of people's interaction style fester, rather show them a better spirit, would be my counsel. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks like all those advices were in vain, he is at the Ani now, under the Proposal section. Hafspajen (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lara Bingle 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:

• accessdate=17 June 2011|newspaper=[[The Daily Telegraph (Australia)|''The Daily Telegraph'' (Australia]]|date=11 August 2010}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ernest A. Davidson 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:

• ''Environmental History'', Oct 1998, by James A. Pritchard], a book review of two books (''Wilderness by Design: Landscape Architecture and the National Park Service. ''By Ethan Carr.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tom Huck may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:

• American Art]], [[Spencer Museum of Art]], [[Nelson Atkins Museum of Art]], Saint Louis Art Museum]], [[Milwaukee Art Museum]], [[Minneapolis Institute of Art]], [[Fogg Art Museum]], and [[New York

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Christopher Porco may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• Porco case. In the story, a student (Bart Hansen) travels from [[Syracuse, New York|Syracuse]] to {{Rensselaer, New York|Rensselaer]] to commit a violent attack on his parents. The novella includes the same murder weapon, alleged

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Nick Jans

About Nick Jans author of The_Last_Light_Breaking We don't have an article. More books Why? Hafspajen (talk) 13:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I was going to say it might be analogous to the situation with the Vienna Museum and the National Gallery (Berlin), where I found people had written on all or most of the branches but I was the first to write about the entire institution - I'm noticing more and more articles about individual books, often very new. But then I realised your links both go to Goodreads, so it may just be that he hasn't been reviewed by many major newspapers? If he has, go for it - write him up :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 13:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Who, me? I read his books earlier. (But don't have the book any more.) Not a bad author. But I don't want to make an article on a book. I was only wondering why the author doesn't have an article. I don't know anything about the author - yet. I just remember I liked the book and it surprises me that we missed him. Recensions: This is kinda neat. It's autobiography, and as such is a great extended personal essay, a great example of the form. I'm not sure it could pass as scientific ethnology of the Eskimo; everything in it is so personal. But you certainly do know more about the Inuit after reading it than when you started. And as I say, it's a great example of autobiography, in this case the story of a young man who moved to Northern Alaska in 1979 and stayed 13 years. and This book is a collection of essays written about the author's experiences and life in this area during the 70s and 80s. Mining and oil and park authorities have and will continue to leave their imprint. The author worked in a store, been a basketball coach, taught in school, hunted and observed wildlife. He has been part of the Arctic community Hafspajen (talk) 13:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I get three usable references on the first page here and half a dozen on Highbeam. An OpEd he wrote in USA Today in 1997 got a response from a Congressman. So he probably squeaks by on notability. But I need to finish Kristiansand first, and do the artistic Karin Larsson, and things keep coming up ... Yngvadottir (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

You are a great detective! Hafspajen (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm stretched really thin, unfortunately! Look what just got AfD'd - click on the interwiki to the German version. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:33, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

'"His eyes wuz crossed, an' his nose wuz flat, An' his teef wuz out, but wat uv dat?" Hafspajen (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC) ^{Cotton Eye Joe}

Talk-page stalkers: Project 89 Kondor Minesweeper got kept. I will get to expanding it if no one else does, but I'm busy, please don't hold your breath. ok? Yngvadottir (talk) 04:18, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Tadao Ando

Tadao Ando is a fine architect , if you like architects. Hafspajen (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

• Yngvadottir private Tadao Ando gallery
• 
• File:Benesse house14bs5.jpg
• 
• 
• 

Wright

No, I'm afraid I don't - it seems to be hard-coded. Unless you can find an architectural company article that has it wider. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

• But were is that horse article?Hafspajen (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

• It got deleted 45 minutes later. It's a Swedish company that makes things like saddles, bridles, and saddle bags. Other than that and the name of the owner/CEO, the article didn't give any further info - no city, no year of foundation. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

No, nothing. I only find things like this... on Hippolife CEO. But I add some more exciting architecture. Hafspajen (talk) 20:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christopher Porco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Standard Time (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) 09:09, 22 January 2014 (UTC)