User:Cl3phact0/Archive 2

Hotel Chocolat

I'd hate to tell you this regarding your recent Hotel Chocolat edit, but there was a second series of 3 episodes for "Inside Hotel Chocolat", and Channel 4 also did a programme for "Hotel Chocolat at Easter" (in fact, the second Channel 4 Hotel Chocolat programme repurposed footage from the Easter one) Visokor (talk) 18:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. No malice intended. Previously, there was no mention of any of these documentaries on the page. (Just working my way through Newcomer tasks, as I'm very new to this.) Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022

Hi Cl3phact0! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Paola Antonelli that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 15:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Apologies. I'll re-read and try to apply the "Minor edit" definition more attentively. I made a series of edits to the article in fairly rapid succession—some were marked as minor, some not. I'll go back and review these to identify where I got it wrong. (I'll slow down a bit too.) Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Easily done. :) Give me a shout on my talk page if any issues. Keep up the good work overall though. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Will do and thank you. Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Photo deletion

Please see conversation on Talk:Livio Castiglioni re: photo deletion.

It would be a shame if the photographs used in this article were deleted. (They are also used in a number of other articles across many languages, Wikidata, etc.)

Also, please see: File:Livio Castiglioni.jpg - Wikipedia for reference.

Thanks Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi again! Not sure where to continue this part of our conversation, so here I am. The only person who's been "smoking" on Commons is me, and the reason I've nominated a number of files for deletion there is because I know from bitter experience that the uploader cannot be trusted in any way, for anything (I've never understood if that is because of a conscious desire to deceive, or a total inability to distinguish fact from fiction). I've added a mention of the it.wp image of Livio to my deletion nomination; unless the rationale on the Italian page is mistaken, I'd imagine that the Commons image will be either kept or replaced with the Italian one. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:41, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, and thanks for following up on this.

I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone with the "smoking" quip, especially you (honestly, I'm not even sure at this point into which thread that was woven, but again, it wasn't meant maliciously, just a bit of a frustrated shrug). I'm quite new to all this and fascinated by it all, but also confused as confused can be by some of the nuances and internecine feuds. The Smithson matter—L'affair Smithson, if I may—is out of my depth, I'm just miffed that I stepped in it. (Though, I do also wonder why anyone would bother consciously sowing confusion about such a non-controversial subject?)

Leaving all that aside, if there is any way I can be of help in preserving the Castiglioni images used in the article(s), I will gladly do so. I downloaded both and would be happy to re-upload them (if that is permitted)—I just don't have a grip on the IP rights restrictions or how to ensure that it's done correctly.

Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Dylan Chess.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Dylan Chess.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Tag added. Apologies for the oversight. Cheers

 Done Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Whpq:, please see reply on your Talk page. (Idem for the four items below). Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Added post script on your Talk page. Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Dylan Chess.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Dylan Chess.JPG. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see: Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG (above) and related discussion. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:2001 A Space Odyssey Chess.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:2001 A Space Odyssey Chess.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see: Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG (above) and related discussion. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Blader Runner Chess.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Blader Runner Chess.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see: Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG (above) and related discussion. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Star Trek 3D Chess.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Star Trek 3D Chess.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see: Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bogart Casablanca Chess.JPG (above) and related discussion. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Livio Castiglioni

Hello! Your submission of Livio Castiglioni at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Pbritti (talk) 19:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your note and review of the submission. I'm not wed to the portrait of the subject (though it is certainly an engaging and humorous picture). It was proposed for the two "alt" hooks, whereas the primary hook would use only the photo of the marble plaque on via Fratelli Castiglioni. My preference would actually be the first suggestion and the plaque.

[NB: There has also been ample discussion about the source of and rights to the image itself (and the original uploader—who is purportedly something of a troublemaker), much of which is beyond my skill level or knowledge of the nuances of the Wikiverse.]

Suffice to say that I would be absolutely thrilled to see the nomination accepted with either photo or any of the hooks! Cheers Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK was accepted! Thank you Cl3phact0 (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Clarification

Just wanted to make it clear that I am not actively accusing you of being a paid contributor, it's just a gut feeling I have had since our first interaction at Moke. I think it's better that I tell you, rather than to allow it to color our interactions without your knowing. I hope that makes sense. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  18:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't take offence. Understandable — I turned up out of nowhere last summer and have done a fair amount of work pretty quickly (some of the earlier stuff probably needs to be revisited, which I'm trying to do bit by bit as my skill level improves). I'm a little obsessive when I do something I like. Again, I like design (I like a lot of things). I was actually thinking about buying a (new) Moke and went down a rabbit hole. Still there.

As we are speaking candidly, I actually wondered the same thing about you at first (as you seemed so very focused on certain minute aspects of the Moke article). I took the time to look at some of your work (and photographs) and quickly realised that you have been doing this for a long time and are very focused on cars full stop, so my suspicion evaporated. I hope that in time, any suspicions you have about me will evaporate too. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

PS: Re: "namedropping", I added a similar brief text to the articles about some of the other authors too. As the collection was later published as a book, I thought that listing a few other "famous" people who had contributed added "why is this here" clarification to the inclusion. If this is a mistake, I'm happy to revise.

Yes, you're right - editors understanding wikisyntax right out of the box often triggers suspicion (it is often how WP:SOCKs reveal themselves). As for your question, I don't think it wise to add the names of other authors in a collection unless they collaborated very closely with the article subject, it often makes it seem like someone just tried to piggyback onto the page of a famous person. Anyhow, enough of that, and thanks for your lack of rancour.

I left a long response about the Moke on the other talkpage, but I think we ought to move that conversation to Moke (2013). Perhaps we can put our heads together and suss out the worthwhile information from these many many sources, most of which are not really up to WP:RS standards. I am not arguing to delete them - sources can be used in many ways, and a low grade or bad source can still provide useful information (sometimes in spite of themselves).  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Per your suggestion, I've started a discussion on the Talk page of Moke (2013) article and will put all future thoughts/questions on this subject there. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to London Metropolitan University. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Arjayay: Apologies, I should have checked the MOS beforehand. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

In this case, is it permitted to add a redlink for the subject (Yinka Ilori MBE, artist and designer) until the draft has been accepted? (My logic being that it might be helpful if editors who are interested in the institution itself are aware of this draft.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

(Please see: Talk:London Metropolitan University) -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 13:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brionvega, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radiogram. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Very helpful.  Done (I've just fixed the error.) -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:12, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Library

You now easily meet the eligibility requirements for a Wikipedia Library account. Could you please try to log in here and let me know how you get on? https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/ Cielquiparle (talk) 09:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Will do. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red

Hi there once again, Cl3phact0, and welcome to Women in Red. If you have not already done so, you might find it useful to look through some of our Essays, perhaps starting with our Primer. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 17:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Jennie Maizels

Hi, would you able to help with this draft? Kate Petty could also use some sprucing up (the first cite I believe has a lot to it). FloridaArmy (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I'd be happy to. I've added her both to my (ever growing) list. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Sebastian Bergne

Hi there! This page is on my watchlist because of an edit I made there in 2013 when I was sorting out the London art school mess. Just after that someone over-wrote the page with appalling promotional pap, which has been there ever since. I have now removed that along with a good deal of unsourced content. But in my zeal I seem to have swept away a sentence you wrote as well, my apologies for that. I haven't restored it, partly because I can't see the principal source (the FT) and partly because I'm not entirely sure that it's really encyclopaedic; but no objection if you want to. What that page needs now is some strong solid sources and a complete rewrite. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't remember off-hand what I added to the article, but I'll circle back to it and have a look (and also see if I can find better information and sourcing). Like many of the articles I've been working on, this one also lacks photographs of the designer's work, something which I would hope could be improved as well (this seems to have inadvertently become a theme of my work here). Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

PS: What, pray-tell, is/was "the London art school mess"?

It was a mess! Someone had conflated the historic constituent schools of Central Saint Martins into that recently-created school. It was fairly straightforward to create pages for them (here and here), but sorting out the alumni took a serious amount of research, time and energy. Bergne was one of those. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see... Sounds like a bit of a head-spinning Gordian Knot. If you are still at it, I just noticed that John Galliano is stated to have graduated from Central Saint Martins in 1984. (Not sure I have the stomach for this fruit.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 05:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Denis Santachiara

Hello, Cl3phact0. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Denis Santachiara, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLUDGEON

Currently you've made 31 replied at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 June 23#Template:WIR, and in doing so have repeated your points many times. Can I suggest that you step back from the discussion? BilledMammal (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

@BilledMammal: I trust that my points have been heard, though you might agree the circularity of some of the counter-arguments made, coupled with syntactical imprecision of some of the conversation leaves one with the distinct impression that repetition may be required in this case. How would you proceed? Obviously, the people who use these tools do not want them merged. This seems abundantly clear.

[NB: With c. 31 replies (of which some have been typo corrections, etc.), I am by no means at the top of the leader board!]

Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't check the others - I only looked at yours because your name kept popping up now that the page is on my watchlist.

I would suggest trusting that your point has been made, and that either it will convince others or not. Sometimes, consensus will go your way, sometimes it will go the other way - part of editing here is accepting that. BilledMammal (talk) 18:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Again, quite a few of my edits were either typo corrections, added nuance, or rhetorical asides to try to help keep things friendly and civil. As there is an undertone of something akin to obfuscation and almost implicit hostility that is really off-putting (in some of the discussion), I was also simply trying to mediate that a bit with "keep it honest" clarity and basic, light-hearted human decency. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

DYK Patricia Davies

Thanks for all your help! Balance person (talk) 14:46, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Balance person: Thanks for bringing the Outram Owtram sisters to my attention! -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi again! Do you happen to know how I can follow the progress of this DYK nomination as it goes along? I have tried various pages but can't seem to find it. Thanks! Balance person (talk) 08:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

The article's Talk page and the DYK Nomination Template itself (which I believe is simply mirrored on the former) should do the trick. There is also a general listing of all the DYK nominations (in which the Patricia Davies article is included – to assuage any lingering doubts you may have about seven day deadlines, etc.). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:35, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

@Balance person: As you've undoubtedly seen, I've done the DYK review (for better or worse – let's hope the former). I don't know how long these things take, but it might be worth communicating with more experienced DYK folks too. Thanks again for the motivation to actually do a QPQ. (I also filled in a few blanks on wikidata for both sisters, father, books, etc.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:13, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I am reliably informed that if there are no probs, it usually takes a couple of weeks to appear. Happy editing! Balance person (talk) 17:23, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

P.S. Can you change the wiki data to state that the two sisters were 'Child of Dorothy and Cary Owtram' please. Thanks. Balance person (talk) 17:28, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I did try. There is no Dorothy Owtram (nor Dorothy Daniel) item in wikidata (at least that I can find). I'm not terribly knowledgeable about wikidata, though I believe that similar notability criteria apply. I created wikidata:Q120055137 on the strength of the book (so, thanks again sisters). Anything to support creation of an item for Dorothy? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea how wikidata works but the book says, Dorothy nee Daniel known as Bunty was a Land Girl in WW1 driving a truck for the Women's Land Army. She was one of the first women in Preston to gain a driving licence. She took in evacuees at Newland Hall and became an Air Raid Precautions Warden in WW2.

I found the following on wikitree:

Dorothy Owtram formerly Daniel

Born 30 Jul 1896 in Lancaster, Lancashire, England

Daughter of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]

[sibling(s) unknown]

Wife of Henry Cary Owtram — married about Jul 1922 in Preston, Lancashire, England

Mother of Dorothy J (Owtram) Argles, Ethel P (Owtram) Davies and Charles Robert Cary Owtram

Died Apr 1989 at age 92 in Lancaster, Lancashire, England

Balance person (talk) 20:49, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I can try to create an item for her based on this (using the book as a reference). It seems is a bit thin vis-à-vis WP:NOTE. I don't really know how high the bar is on Wikidata. The fact that she is demonstrably linked to the other three items – all of whom are clearly notable – seems to give this some legitimacy in the context that you have rightly flagged (i.e., the sisters are the children of both Dorothy and Cary Owtram). There are heaps of British people in Wikidata who's only reference is "The Peerage", which seems rather thin gruel. Some have have a "genealogics.org person ID", "Geni.com profile ID", or similar, which Dorothy may too, but I wouldn't have a clue where to find these (your wikitree reference above suggests that it is probable). Let's see if it sticks. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

PS: There is an Owtram (wikidata:Q76245658) with a "WikiTree person ID" as a reference.

 Done (If you are able to fill in any of the blanks that are indicated with a flag icon, it may be helpful in making sure that the item is acceptable.) -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for trying. It is so crazy that a person who actually made two famous people in their own body should be left out of a mention of parentage. Fingers crossed that what you have done sticks! Balance person (talk) 09:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed your comment about the O S Act. I have no idea if one can continue to make changes to the hook once the DYK wagon has started rolling. What is the extra info that makes it worth considering the change, in case continued editing is okay? My PC is being overhauled this week so am slow to respond as it is syncing wrongly. Balance person (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I noticed this paragraph in the UK section of the OSA article and thought the law vs. contract aspect added context:

People working with sensitive information are commonly required to sign a statement to the effect that they agree to abide by the restrictions of the Official Secrets Act. This is popularly referred to as "signing the Official Secrets Act". Signing this has no effect on which actions are legal, as the act is a law, not a contract, and individuals are bound by it whether or not they have "signed" the act. Signing it is intended more as a reminder to the person that they are under such obligations.

Minor point. Probably best to leave the question re: post-review hook modification to DYK regulars anyhow. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

@Balance person: In case you haven't located the article in the queue, it's here: Template talk:Did you know/Approved. It looks as if all's well (I'm told that it could take a few weeks to appear). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:57, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Balance person (talk) 11:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Cheryl McKissack Daniel edits

Hello! This is Karen from the Cheryl McKissack Daniel Talk page. Back in late July you were active on her page and left a reply saying you'd return to the page in the future to evaluate the Minor edits request I made on the page. If you have any time, I would be grateful if you came back to that request and evaluated it. Thank you so much for your time, I do appreciate it. Karen at McKissack (talk) 11:11, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Pictures on WP: it can get worse

• Talk:Asquith_Xavier#Request_for_comment_on_images_in_this_article
• Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2023_January_24#File:Independence_Monument_(27506800337),_cropped,_Ärtogrul.jpg
• Talk:Donald_Trump#Mugshot

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Nothing at the bottom of a rabbit hole but rabbits (and their by-products, of course). Thanks for the links. Fascinating (rabbit holes). Some of the arguments bring to mind fringe examples such as this, this, or perhaps better still, this. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

It's rabbits all the way down. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Cl3phact0. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Ingenuity, I've gotten my feet wet here (maybe up to my knees) and find the NPP work interesting – it dovetails nicely with AfC process and is a fun way to explore the Wiki-verse. As the right was granted provisionally, and we're now approaching the end of the month-long trial period, I'm wondering if there's something I need to do in order to carry-on as a NPP reviewer? Lots to learn still, and I'm game to continue. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ingenuity: I've gone ahead and re-requested on the NPP Requests for permissions page. Hope this is the correct protocol. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:30, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to respond earlier. I'll take a look tomorrow. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 03:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. No rush. (I'll be off-line for a few days later in the week anyhow.) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 04:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Waterloo Round Tower

Hi @Cl3phact0, thank you for the help with Waterloo Round Tower submission, and for the diligence exercised in checking the facts (I'm referring to your comments here). I truly appreciate, and I'll review the dates once again, including researching Cork Library materials where I'm planning to spend some time next weekend. Also, thank you for assuming good faith in my citing of newspapers -- just letting know that I accessed them via the https://archive.irishnewsarchive.com to which I have paid access. Funnily enough one of the scanned newspapers I used has a wrong year printed originally by the publisher in the page header (2008 instead of 2009) which gave me a lot of head scratching regarding when the renovation actually happened... somehow one always subconsciously assumes the printed stuff is more reliable than online fun stuff while it may not be the case at all. Fun! Podstawko (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Needed Question

I see you reviewed Uwe Holmer, a page I helped to start. On the talk page assessment, it was listed as needing an infobox. Right now, I see an infobox on the main page. What infobox work does the article need, specifically? I would be willing to improve the article to help it meet standards. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 18:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh my, that "Wikiproject Germany" template is very through and detailed indeed! Don't see anything in particular that's "wrong" with the infobox as is (perhaps a maiden name for Sigrid, if known?). I hadn't spotted all the parameters that were generated (most of which seem superfluous in this case). I've tidied-up the banner shell a bit, but do add back parameters that seem relevant. Apologies for any confusion. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Is the Serrahn where Holmer passed away the same as Serrahn (Carpin)? We have Serrahn Hills and the article you linked (Kuchelmiß), however it might be worth writing a stub for the village itself if it is a different entity. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I'll delink it. I'm not from Germany so I'm not familiar with place names around there. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:44, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

What the heck!? How can there be so many Serrahns in Mecklenburg?? (or are they the same place?) I do not know which one it is. The sources didn't mentioned which one he lived. Sorry for writing an entire existential crisis on your talk page. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:50, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

As far as 'existential crisis' go, this hardly moves the needle. All good. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 06:24, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

It was an exaggeration. Thanks for the help. :) ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 16:35, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Fixing ref names

This is some heroic level WikiGnoming. Thank you.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:22, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Tip of the iceberg. I'm finding RefRenamer and Rater (and to a lesser degree, reFill, Dashes, Find link, etc.) to be oddly meditative – though I learned the hard way that when they are good, they are very good indeed; but when they are bad, they are horrid. One needs to keep an eye on them all the time, lest they become unruly. (BTW: Does that make me a WikiGnome?) Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 13:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Request

Hello Cl3phact0, could I request a rating for the Cadillac ATS article? Thinking it could possibly be GA or B-class but I'll leave it to you. 750h+ (talk) 07:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on British International Motor Show

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page British International Motor Show, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "generic title" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

The reFill tool seems to add errors that I didn't spot (now fixed, thanks to Ira Leviton). I'm now aware of this issue and will be particularly careful when using reFill in future. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:29, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, just saying, but the on the content assessment scale you added to the Mercedes-Benz B-Class (W246), will it ever change? Let’s say I improved it to the point it would be good article-worthy. Would the scale change? And is there a place I can make a assessment request if there’s no assessment or it needs updating? QuattrostagioniIV (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

You will find some helpful information here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment (and can request an assessment here). For what it's worth, I use the WP:RATER tool and then correct any errors based on the above (of which this section might interest you too). I've not waded too deep into the top-tier rating echelons yet, so you'll need to find someone with more experience for that. The article is obviously very well written and constructed. The only question one might ask is why this particular model gets a stand-alone article but not the others from the main Mercedes-Benz B-Class article. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:18, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

felipe garin llombart article

Dear user

The article Felipe garin was improved. i want to know what can be done to made it public. THANKS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Felipe_Garin_Llombart 79.16.86.34 (talk) 22:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello ip user, I will review and promote the article shortly. One question: do you know if the article originated as a translation of the Spanish, Catalan, Italian, or French Wikipedia articles (as appears to be the case)? Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:00, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

New article?

Check this one out. Officially partnered with Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bugatti, and others. I took a few pictures, see here.  Mr.choppers | ✎  23:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I suppose this company probably should have an article in this encyclopaedia (regardless of one's point of view about the spawn of the folks who've driven the prices of the actual cars into seven and even eight figure territory potting around mummy and daddy's country pile in a 3/4 knock-off that's got a six figure price tag). Happy to help. What's the build quality like? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:04, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

They look impressive closeup, much better than any other junior car since the Gilded Age and the Bugatti Type 52. And yep, definitely a harbinger of revolution.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:37, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Review

dear reviewer Thanks do much for the precious arrangement to different articles. Could you please have a look to this new entry i was working at?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rosa_Serrano

Cheers 79.16.86.34 (talk) 20:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Ford 021C

Always one of may favorite designs - I yelped when watching Zootopia with my daughter and one popped up on the screen.

I also took the photo used for the article; sadly I lost the original, flip phone photo and we are now stuck with a wee thumbnail that I texted to someone and managed to retrieve. Bah.  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Cl3phact0, need assitance

Hello Cl3phact0, need assistance to improve the article, can check the draft:João_Ferreira_Sardo that the local historical society is making about a regional individuality. Thank you very much for your time. GafanhadaNazaré (talk) 16:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)