User:Dr. Blofeld/July 2011

He looks more intellectual which may be a plus point.--Nvvchar. 14:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

This Burg Lockenhaus could be one. I have posted an infobox and also more text. Some translated text is available.--Nvvchar. 15:00, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I have edited National Museum of Archaeology (Bolivia) and some more by you should resolve the issue. Yes, this Livingstone Museum should also be of interest to you. You may be able to find the Museum Papers. By can you also help archive my page please. Thanks.--Nvvchar. 07:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

The official website of the castle when translated gives this information. May be the translation is not proper. In case you have doubts about it, we better delete it since I cannot substatniate this info any further as I did not find this info in any other book.--Nvvchar. 10:56, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a very shocking picture in the website of the castle which shows the lady lording (hope it is the right word?) over torturing women. You have to dwelve deep into the various sections linked to the main site. I searched in flickr but I could not get that picture.--Nvvchar. 11:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Llanwrthl

Hi there. Why on earth have you added the photo of lowly Dolgau as an example of Llanwrthl? A nice image, certainly. But surely one of the Vulcan Arms, or one of St.Gwrthwl's e.g. [1], or one of Penuel Chapel, might be more appropriate? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that anybody gave a shat about central Powys..♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:29, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

How incredibly rude of you. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Incredibly rude? How is that? I'm talking about Wikipedia's coverage of Powys, it speaks for itself. I was referring to fact that you don't expect to edit a Powys village and have somebody turn up on your talk page who could give a damn what you do, given how neglected and pitiful most articles on welsh villages are.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Gosh. How incredibly rude of me. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

LOL I care about central Powys and all of Wales, I'm Welsh myself. Just most people on here clearly don't, otherwise the coverage would be much better. I'm quite enjoying British geography at the moment and so much work to do on villages and B roads.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I understand there are now lots of geograph images loaded into Commons, which will be very useful. As you will see, I have resisted any significant edits to Llanwrthl, even though my ancestors are buried there, both at Penuel and at St. Gwrthwl's, as least as far back as 1500s and probably much, much further (the menhir suggests a ritual connection for the site streching back to maybe 1,000 - 2,000 BC). Sometimes surprising what we choose not to touch, just in case we damage. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes the vast majority of settlements need updating with geograph images and a few sources. Ultimately my goal for wikipedia is to have a consistently decent article on any town, village, and main road in the world. But the UK has the resources to make this possible at least for the UK and most of our articles should be way better than this. I've been getting up at the crack of dawn recently and going for some long drives so its sort of rekindled my interest in local and British geography which i admittedly in the past have been highly ignorant of in favour of more exotic parts of the world. I think settlements and roads are the most important articles at least in terms of trying to structure a coverage of the world. Having travelled down many a B road in rural Wales I would like to go anywhere in Wales or the UK, even northern Scotland and to have a decent article about the place/road you are on..♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:34, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, technology permitting, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The idea is that you drive absolutely anywhere in the UK and look up a locality or road on your mobile and to read everything there is to know about it. I try to think about wikipedia neutrally so that wherever you are the world you'll be able to read articles about that place.. Our scope is not bad for the UK of course but most of the articles are bog standard quality and unsourced, We need some proper research into each village rather like Clemenstone or at least to expand them beyond stubs with proper sources. Even most of our British town articles are unsourced and contain very few proper references....♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

A start would be to at least list the sum of all settlements by country like List of United Kingdom locations.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:04, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Great to see you on a wiki-mish, 'Blowers'. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Llanwrthwl: expanded it. Also Goman. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

p.s. are all Welsh (UK) villages now meant to be converted to look like this? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks OK, but for some reason not displaying the Template:Location map Wales Newport♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Lower Huxley Hall

Materialscientist (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jerbourg Point

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Ziegelburg

Hi Dr. I was away when this article was discussed and deleted. Can you remind me what it was (presumably a castle) and why it was deleted? I'm not fussed; just curious. I can't even find it on German Wiki. --Bermicourt (talk) 17:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Livingstone Museum

Is expanding this worth it. Can you find more references other than travel books (even Lonely Planet, Bradt and Frommers), which appears to be not acceptable for Wikipedia articles?--Nvvchar. 12:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The Susman's have my interest. Doing some research. Have to work through Mwaiseni. Will look at the hotel later. I'm on vacation this week because of Independence Day. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Bwana Mkubwa is pretty far along, but could use a bit of someone else's attention if you have the time. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Also Harry Wulfsohn. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh no! my friend. My fear is that is some DYK reviewer will tag it as commercial propaganda. I am going to start on Arreton Manor now. I have requested for release of images in flickr. Hopefully, someone will respond positively by tomorrow morning. --Nvvchar. 13:04, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I will add to Arreton Manor in the evening as I am very tense with some office work.--Nvvchar. 08:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

As you have seen over the years my interests are wide and varied. Of course forts, museums and lakes fascinate me. I will do the hotels also after Arreton Manor. --Nvvchar. 13:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Elie Susman needs just a bit more if you have the time for him; lots to be found in An African trading empire: the story of Susman Brothers & Wulfsohn, 1901-2005. Susman Brothers now needs someone else's hand; lots to be found in the same book. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

May I request you to nominate Livingstone Museum also? I will do the article you have just now listed. As regards the Great Budbridge Manor this reference appears to be useful [2] but I could not exactly decide what to take from there. You have much better understanding of the content as an Englishman (should I say Welshman) than me. I have also completed my inputs to the Otterburn Tower and Otterburn Hall articles. Bwana Mkubwa and ‎Arreton Manor are aslo done.--Nvvchar. 14:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I could not post the image of the Livingstone Museum at all. Have the rules changed? Could you help post it.--Nvvchar. 15:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't. I can only speak in Tamil and not read or write.--Nvvchar. 13:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments.--Nvvchar. 15:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Otterburn

Otterburn Hall Hotel: see this which makes distinction between the hall and the tower. Do you want to rename the article ("Otterburn Hall and Tower"), or split, or? --Rosiestep (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Otterburn Hall Hotel could be changed to "Otterburn Hall and Tower" as suggested by Rosie to avoid any controversial remarks on the hotel article.--Nvvchar. 10:04, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry... I was wrong... Otterburn Hall and Tower needs to be split, rather than re-named. Two different buildings. I'll do so now. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

So this is what I did, but please do a double-check to assure the content is in the correct article. Otterburn Hall is about the hall /hotel. Otterburn Tower is about the Grade II building that was a tower, but is now a castellated hotel. Otterburn Hall Hotel redirects to Otterburn Hall. Otterburn Hall and Tower is a dab. Both infoboxes have the same coords; can you please rmv one of them? Materialscientist cleaned up the edit history. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Great Budbridge Manor may interest you; much content can be found in the Isle of Wight County Archaeology and Historic Environment Service ref. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:33, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Coalhouse Fort haunted

I have reverted your addition of Coalhouse Fort to the category reputed haunted buildings since the article makes no metion of this. Rjm at sleepers (talk) 05:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Did you bother to actually google search it first to confirm it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article nom

We coincided recently in the revolving doors of the Paris Ritz GAN. I wonder if you might be interested in GA assessing my current candidate, Bernard Levin. Quite understand if you are too busy or not interested, but no harm in asking, I hope. Regards. Tim riley (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Excellent! No rush at all. Tim riley (talk) 10:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Sources - yes, it is indeed heavily based on Levin's own writing, but there really isn't anything else available. No biography other than the ODNB one, and not the smallest prospect of a book about him. That's why I have ignored suggestions at peer review (and what a peer review, phew!) of nominating the article for FA. Tim riley (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Gosh! That was fast. Thank you, Doctor, for your speedy and scrupulous attention. At your service if you want any future articles reviewed at GAN, PR or FAC. Best wishes, Tim riley (talk) 14:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Lake Burton, Antarctica: Wow! Sounds like Brianboulton territory, but I'll give it my best shot tomorrow. Zu Donnerstag! Tim riley (talk) 14:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Tautira

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Islands

I am sorry, but I was unable to reach Krakatoa or Legundi Island. If you are still interested in a picture of an island...

I have this composite photograph of Sebuku Island in South Lampung.

Cheers! Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Bernard Levin

I've given some of the pages a quick clean, and I reckon they're ok copyrightwise now. What I will say is that there is already a mechanic for melding photographs together without creating collages of thumbnails- see Template:Multiple image. That kind of thing would surely be preferable to the collages- it cuts out the middle man, allowing those interested to go directly to the (much larger) original images. J Milburn (talk) 11:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Translation Wikiproject

Hi Dr. Blofeld! I'm back from my crazy trial schedule! Now I've turned again to translation, and how editors can best be organized to get the info from other Wikipedias onto en.wiki... I nominated the awful Template:FAOL for deletion (if you comment, note that I mentioned that here), and I'm trying to figure out how to get people interested in doing translation. Your Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki is basically dead at the moment, because the bot plans never worked out. And we also have the dead WP:FAOL and WP:ECHO. I was thinking we could roll these into one larger translation project, maybe as subpages or ideas for eventual task forces (featured-article task force, bot-assisted stub creation task force for once a bot is coded). We also have the dead WP:SPATRA and WP:FCP, which could be informal task forces of some sort. So what I was thinking essentially is one core page (maybe transform Wikipedia:Translation into a wikiproject like Wikipedia:Wikify?), redirect a bunch of stuff (like all the subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki that don't have much content on them), start a list of possible ideas for places to start (the task forces), and have guides for each language (see Category:Wikipedia translation by language that incorporate stuff from the redirected intertranswiki subpages). And then we could notify everyone who has at some point signed up as a translator (we have lists going back years, as well as userpage templates) to get them to re-sign up, and then organize some sort of translation drive with tiered barnstars. Maybe a Signpost article too. Thoughts? I think there are enough people out there to help out (think how many signed up for your intertranswiki), we just need to generate some enthusiasm and show people what is possible. Imagine if we had a month-long translation drive with logged results. I think we could have a really impressive outcome. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I guess I disagree that the bot is the most important part... We already have way more human-tagged articles than we'll ever be able to process, plus we have the bot-generated list based on interwikis for German, French, and Spanish. If we wait around on a bot operator, we could be waiting a long time. I think what's really needed is some sort of community spirit, which I agree is lacking. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I agree re future potential. Maybe by the time a bot gets coded, Google translate will be providing error-free translations! hahaha... Mostly I want to get a new or revived Wikiproject looking nice, with well-defined priorities, then do a huge recruitment drive. I just went through collecting from various categories and lists, and we have nearly 600 unique editors who have previously signed up to participate in Spanish translations. Plus the thousands and thousands that have userboxes saying they speak Spanish or live in Spanish-speaking countries, and the hundreds who have signed up for various Latin America wikiprojects. I think we'd need a bot to do invites. Maybe for now we should just do a huge drive with one language as a proof-of-concept, to show that the invites are worthwhile and not just annoying spam. I think a friendly drive/competition could motivate people. Like the wikify project - people there aren't really unified and work independently, but it seemed to work well. If we had good results from one language, maybe we could get approval for a truly MASSIVE bot invitation system for all users signed up as speaking other languages. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ujarrás

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I have added img to Arreton Manor. It can be nominated now.--Nvvchar. 16:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Schooner Hotel

Will do. Might take a week or so, though. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Manor houses

No no, not too many -- it's fabulous when redlinkish articles surface. And I have extra time this week. I double nom'ed the tower and the hall, and as the hook was long, I didn't include an img, but if you think hook length isn't a problem, pls add an img. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Would love to. You know how some articles are more pleasing to work on than others? Country houses/manor houses/castles are pleasurable. I think manor houses should be subcategorized under country houses. I created cats for both types for UK, and some for elsewhere, i.e. Norway last night. Thought about asking Ser to assist using AWB but it became fun/mindless work to sort them out. Yup, a sandbox list would be very helpful. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Didn't know that about Ser; pity. According to wikipedia, LOL, a manor house is a country house, which has historically formed the administrative centre of a manor. If that's true, manor house should be a subcat of country house. And breakdown by England, Wales, Scotland and N Ireland. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, it appears we're both giving the cats a good go at it. How about: Cat:Houses in the United Kingdom should have the subcats: Cat:Houses in United Kingdom by type (Country houses in the United Kingdom, etc.) , AND, Cat:Houses in the United Kingdom by country (England, etc.). And, of course, this should then be replicated within the countries, though instead of Cat:Houses in England by country it would be Cat:Houses in England by place. Etc. Thoughts? --Rosiestep (talk) 21:26, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Good answer. In retrospect, it would also be so much work. Creating lists will be a lot of work, too. Great Budbridge Manor -- copyediting done, need to find a hook, then I'll nom it. Yes, Castle of X should feed into Country houses of X, me thinkst. Going out for a bit. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

In retrospect, I probably shouldn't have deleted some of the Country house cats and I'm sorry if that messed up with list making. Let me know if I should go back and add them. No more deleting for now. Otterburn Hall and Otterburn Tower: this morning's nom was inadvertently deleted by another editor, but it's been re-instated after I left a note on the dyk discussion pg. --Rosiestep (talk) 06:41, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Dr.B, I found a very interesting ghost story for the Feathers Hotel, Ludlow (a book source), which I have added now, in addition to some more reliable text. My inputs are now complete. I wish I can visit this hotel some day, of course not as ghost.--Nvvchar. 10:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Please check the coordinates for the Knighton Gorges Manor. I will add more text today and tomarrow. Lake Burton is now being reviewed for GA.--Nvvchar. 11:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Agree, I won't remove any more. See my note to you yesterday; do you want me to undo the ones that I removed? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Apologies for tagging on at the end here (or am I still butting in?) But which more Cats should this article be given? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

AWB

Honestly? I find I don't miss it all that much. Though I've been thinking about putting feelers out lately. We'll see...sometime soon, like as not. I do have occasion to think it would be helpful from time to time. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Now that's not true. I didn't deliberately set out to lose AWB. I got a bit overzealous, I overextended myself, and I thought it was good to take a break from the temptation.

Besides which, I'm not sure I'd be allowed to have it back in the first place... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

What, a nuisance? Not in the least. Put it this way - it doesn't matter to me one way or the other whether or not I have AWB. If I have it, I don't mind using it. If I don't have it...well, that just means I make fewer edits in the same amount of time. That's really all there is to it. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course I do. Look, I spend maybe an hour, an hour and a half online outside of working hours now. And during the day I barely have enough time to string together a coherent e-mail. I think I've initiated maybe one conversation of more than one line in the past three months, to anyone; I don't have the brainpower to do anything else when I get home. I just need a good kick in the pants now and again. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, that's the thing - I feel guilty making suggestions when I don't have anything substantial to offer in return. We'll see...maybe I'll ask tonight, or this weekend. When I think about it. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, you can always drill a few National Register stubs with the infobox generator. There's a lot of redlinks left to be filled there...I did a few this morning, when our servers were down. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Most rural counties in the US are low-hanging fruit. I only did ten new articles today, I think, but that was enough to cover the whole of King William County. I suspect most of the other Tidewater counties will be similar. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Duvidha.jpg

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The New Avengers.gif

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Category:Country houses in Scotland

Hi, just noticed this cat. Just to point out that while this cat is probably a handy one, certain of your inclusions don't merit entry, such as the fortresses of Edinburgh Castle, Stirling Castle etc. that have always been the foci of urban areas. Regards Brendandh (talk) 14:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

AWB

Sure thing - I'll have a look this evening. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, just let me know what you need from me and I'll do what I can to help. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I must confess, that's an area of English history that I don't know so well. All I know about Alfred is that he had cake issues, and that Donizetti wrote an opera about him. (OK, that's not all I know, but still. My pre-Hastings English history is pretty rickety.) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty well hazy on anything between 1066 and Henry VIII. Post-Tudor, I have some handle on most of the 17th century. I don't know a whole lot about the first and second Georges, and my view of the third is obviously rather skewed. :-) Anything after William IV I'm OK on, I think.

It's funny, really, how little the English Civil War influenced things over here. There were a few skirmishes in Maryland, as I recall, but otherwise the colonies seem to have muddled through happily as if nothing had happened. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Peter O'Toole, wasn't it?

Your curriculum sounds exactly like mine, if you replace the British history with American; 11th grade was focused pretty much on the colonies, the Revolution, and some aspects of the early Federal period/Mexican-American War, along with the American Civil War and the social history of the early twentieth century. Some of it stuck, some of it didn't - I've never been able to keep my Jacksonian Democrats straight. And I still have a very poor handle on the pre-Lincoln presidents in general, most especially the weenies between Taylor and Buchanan. But that's par for the course - they're really not much more than a footnote in American history, compared with Lincoln and Andrew Johnson. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:14, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Ach, I wouldn't even know where to begin with that one, I'm afraid... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Assuming nobody beats me to the punch. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:54, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Anthony Dillington

Anthony Dillington - I'll research him in a bit. Am working on some missing country/manor houses on the Isle of Wight, which may also interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Great project! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. Is there a cat:Manor houses on the Isle of Wight and/or cat:Country houses on the Isle of Wight? I didn't see them, but didn't want to create/delete cats at this time as I know you're working on them. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Follow the links from Feudal baron. Are these the feudal lords you're mentioning? --Rosiestep (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

A Stillness at Appomattox

that was easy

I have some questions you may be able to help me with on this article I started in May of 2008.

1. Is it proper to italize the article name?
2. Is it proper to italize the book name?
3. I would like to put in a book cover picture. I assume it would be under Fair Use. Can I just take a screenshot of the book cover off WorldCat?

http://www.worldcat.org/title/stillness-at-appomattox/oclc/21333484

Do you have wording of examples you used for book covers for Fair Use?

How best should I approach this to improve the article in these?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes I think italics for both are fine, I know italics is now used for film names too. I will upload a book cover for you and find an appropriate rationale for use to use in future articles. Good timing, I just finished the batch of manor houses in Victoria parish, Isle of Wight!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Done, howz that?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Where is that "Easy Button"? Thanks!--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Found it!! --Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Can I add that button to my evil organization's switchboard alongside the piranha tank bridge switch?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:09, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:11, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Oooh, I've got one of those, too. Sitting on my desk at work. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Thanks for ideas and help Doug Coldwell talk 19:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Chaucer coming in contact with Petrarch or Boccaccio

Low Priority (if at all).

I'm trying to bundle the references of a string of references on the first line of this article I started in Febuary of 2010. I can not seem to do it without messing up other parts of multiple references further down the article. I finally gave up, as it is too sophisticated for me. Trying to make 1-9 as just #1 with the others listed in a bundle. If you can not do it, that is alright. Please don't spend too much time on it as I can see with the temporary Watch I had on your Talk Page you are extremely busy. Thanks for at least glancing at it.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what you want, looks fine to me, although one would point out the lead is way too short and should effectively summarise the article and 9 references for one sentence is far too excessive..♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the constructive information.

Yes, the 9 references is what I am talking about (which I would like to have as a bundled one). But for the fact it is controversal I am covering that by the 9 references. I was able to bundle the references on another controversal article successfully on Beak doctor costume. Because of the number of references I have finally been able to convince most editors on the controversal points (i.e. The mask they wore had a protruded beak which contained aromatic herbs.[12] -AND- This popular seventeenth century poem written by Dr Nathaniel Hodges... [23] (refs for poem itself).

The lead does need improving. I'll work on that. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:56, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Expanded the lead. Bundled references. Thanks for constructive criticism. If you have any other ideas, let me know. As an old man I may be hard of hearing, but I can still read.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any thoughts on this concept (Chaucer coming in contact with Petrarch or Boccaccio)? Have you previously studied or researched this idea?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

How dare you? :)

What's up man... I like your substandard Hindi. Anyway, I've been to busy these days but soon I will be updating the Zinta article. The girl started making too man things which makes it too complicated. She branched out into television presenting early this year, and now she llso founded her own production company - that's too much for one woman isn't it. Now I'm wondering if I should reorganise the "other work" section. I thought of adding another section called "Production and television presenting". Tell me honestly, do you think this section should be removed completely or maybe incorporated into another section? Shahid • ^Talk2me 20:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey nice idea. I don't know why but at some point I thought it would be better to just delete column writing. Anyway, I'll see it later. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Eastwood photo

File:ClintEastwoodSept10TIFF.jpg looks like he is being hit to the forehead with some glass object, which is not ideal for the front image. I was thinking to remove it, but this would require some hair restoration (e.g. WP:OR). Materialscientist (talk) 22:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for National Museum of Archaeology (Bolivia)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Historic houses

Dr B, where have I told Rosie to do anything? I pointed out some possible problems, and offered some suggestions as to how to counteract this. As Rosie is an admin, I'd say that she has been around long enough not to be driven away by some constructive suggestions on how to create better quality articles in the first place. Personally, I aim to create at least a C class article wherever possible, and frequently create a B class article. Some of those are close to GA status, such as RMS Magdalena (1948), which went to GA with very little effort upon being reviewed. Why don't we now wait to hear from Rosie and see what she says? Mjroots (talk) 14:04, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I know we both have different styles of article creation. I'm not familiar with Rosie's editing style, but there was no intention to scoff or denegrate her editing. Now, why don't we both drop this until she replies? Mjroots (talk) 14:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:10, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I have completed my inputs to All Saints' Church, Newchurch and also Knighton Gorges Manor.--Nvvchar. 13:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Feather's Hotel is also not nominated.

Orphaned non-free image File:007ConneryDr.No.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:007ConneryDr.No.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

A-Z scan

Yes, I am going through every existing article on Uruguayan populted places from A-Z adding tables and location info as given by the INE pages with distances measured via Google Earth. While doing this I add all the missing stubs of over 500 population, and after I finish this round I will take all the coast from end to end and check if all the resorts and/or beaches have stubs. Luckily Losdedos has made an ultra excellent job on all rivers and streams, so I will follow suit when I am ready. Meanwhile, have a nice summer. Hoverfish Talk 16:07, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I posted a question/confirmation for you in the cfd. Hoverfish Talk 17:11, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Kanak people

I'll be happy to. Give me 24 hours or so. More anon. Tim riley (talk) 16:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Schooner Hotel

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

All Saints' Church, Newchurch

Is this the same church? --Rosiestep (talk) 05:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I have msotly completed my inputs to Castello Orsini-Odescalchi based on google translation of the official websites. Please check if my understanding of the odd traslations is allright>--Nvvchar. 11:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Houses-- agree. Nádasdy may interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I've finished up with All Saints' Church, Newchurch. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll nom it. Will look at the Kanak stuff, but not right now as I still have a flight to catch later today, so am trying to finish up other loose ends. --Rosiestep (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

No no, was off all week at my second home because of Independence Day; flight later today is work-related trip. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sir William Young, 1st Baronet

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sir William Young, 2nd Baronet

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Clemenstone

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

How predictable! My thought this morning.

I have completed my inputs to Castello Orsini-Odescalchi.--Nvvchar. 13:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Maps

Unfortunately, I don't think the guy is around much any more. I asked him about the other thing you wanted a few months back, and I never got a response. His last edit in ru_wiki was in February.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 11, 2011; 13:45 (UTC)

Further AWB

Sorry - I spent much less time by the computer yesterday than I'd planned on doing. And AWB is a little slower than it used to be, I think...or maybe my computer is slowing down a bit. But I am working towards it, don't worry. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:00, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I like having the shorter stub articles as basis for most articles about features. I think a lot more can be made of those than is being made. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sure - there are a few like that. But I think most have been folded into their parent articles by now. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:24, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of which...excellent work on the Yemen articles today. I didn't think it was possible... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I have a feeling it will take some time. Yemen isn't very well-covered online at the moment. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I can think of maybe one or two countries that don't have enough in them for separate stub categories. I wonder what San Marino's status on that count might be... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Some of them are so built up, though, that I'm not sure that it would be a problem. The Vatican, yes - Monaco, though? I'm sure eventually we'll have 60-odd structure stubs for Monaco. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Oooh, yes - I like the way it looks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Agreed - at least we can have a decent start. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:31, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Mmm. I take the point, but I don't think it's a good idea - it's an easy way to scare new people off. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Bot request

I noticed your bot request while checking up on a bot request of my own. What are you envisioning for the geonames-based articles? The contents of the database are easily downloaded and can just be manipulated in excel. I could whip some articles up for you based on the data. Do you want something that combines a lot of villages into a chart by low-level administrative district? What country would you like to start with? There is one table with every settlement globally with 1,000 or more people, with the name, coordinates, population, elevation, and administrative districts that we could use. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Something like this? I just whipped this up from the Peru coordinates. I'm not sure if it makes sense to stick to >1,000 pop settlements for now for maximum verifiability. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll see what something from the larger database dump looks like. It's going slower because there are a ton of rows. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The census date is not listed in the database. :/ Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

So, some bad news: the full Peru dump includes archeological sites like Machu Picchu and Chavín de Huantar, without distinguishing them from normal towns/villages/cities. What do you think: a bigger list that potentially contains unmarked archeological sites, or a smaller list that does not have this problem? Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there's any way of really knowing. Most of the entries on the list don't have any population listed. I don't know enough about Peruvian archeology to know which might be historical sites and which are actually present-day settlements. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm I also just noticed one train station marked as a settlement.... :/ Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:31, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I looked at around 40 of them (see User:Calliopejen1/sandbox/peru). Accuracy rate seems pretty bad. I think we should stick to the >1,000 for now. BTW, check out this awesome terracing! :) Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

There are only three villages for all of Peru that are 500-1000. Mostly if they are small, they don't have any population stats at all. So I think the best way to do it would just be to go off the 1000+ lists... Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Why do you think geonames is accurate at all? Now that i'm looking at the 1000+ Peru list it seems pretty questionable. Looking over the three biggest cities we didn't have articles for yet (all listed around 40,000 population), one in reality (based on more reliable sources) has 75,000 population and the other two around 5,000. Geonames seems to be pretty questionable all around. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure, honestly. What is your sense of the geonames data? It seems pretty crappy to me. Do you have other experience that suggests it's reliable? So far I have seen a ton of questionable settlements on the low end and wrong population numbers for bigger towns. It may be better than nothing, but perhaps not by much.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Livingstone Museum

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Batobus

If you have a chance, could you please copy edit Batobus? I have translated this from French but another set of eyes always helps. It is a subsidiary article to voguéo, which I had edited in user space and still a long way to go there. But as you know, sometimes you can't see the meat for the potatoes, so I would be glad of you to cast your eye over it quickly. Better than no article at all, I think.

Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 12:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I took the plunge and moved (copy pasted) from User:SimonTrew/Voguéo to mainspace at Voguéo. THis was perhaps premature but it is a long slog to translate that one, and at least in main other eyes have a chance to fix it up a bit. I myself spotted a number of silly typos etc but as always your expert eyes would be very much appreciated. Si Trew (talk) 07:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Kanak people

At present, I am in Bangalore on official business. I have replied two of the reviewer's observations. I will add more later in the night. --Nvvchar. 12:55, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Shriya Saran

Hi there. Can you take another look at Shriya Saran for me. I have improved the article with new sources, and more text in the career section. It should look less like a list of films now. I want to put it up for GA again. Another editor said it was close to GA quality even before my mods and suggested I might want to do a peer review first. Do you think that is necessary and would be useful in this case? BollyJeff || talk 15:10, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the Dolf article looks way more comprehensive, but I disagree that every film should be covered. In 10 years Shriya has already done more films than he has in 25. What about someone like Kamal Haasan who has done over 200 films? His article is GA, and it would be ridiculous to cover each film. I covered her only significant (from a successful film perspective) release in 2005, Chatrapathi. I could say that the other were bombs, but to list them individually seems like overkill; they are in the filmography. As for additional reviews, the problem is as I mentioned in the last GA review. The only reviews readily available, other than those I have included, are in sources that are considered unreliable by the last reviewer. What am I to do? I really want to get this one done, but I feel trapped. And yet nearly every Indian GA that I inspect has some of those same sources. You know how that makes me feel? I am actually going to ask for reassessments on a couple of them. I hate to give up on this again. What do you suggest. BollyJeff || talk 15:18, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to keep bugging you, but what are your thoughts on the quality of the sources? Is it better to have text with a questionable source, text without a source, or no text at all, given those choices? Also, I think maybe you are looking for FA rather than GA status. There is a difference. Notice "one of the original purposes of the GA process was to recognize good quality short articles". BollyJeff || talk 16:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Marilyn Monroe white dress.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Marilyn Monroe white dress.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jean-Baptiste Perrier

NW (Talk) 00:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Burg Lockenhaus and the Blood Countess

I just moved Burg Lockenhaus to Prep 1, but I notice the hook also links to Elizabeth Báthory, which has some tags on it. Do you have the time or the expertise to cope with some of those issues so that tags can come off before it is linked to from Main Page? Sharktopus ^talk 02:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Charles Roach Smith

Charles Roach Smith may interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:02, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the nom. The article needs a re-write; it has a construction sign on it. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tom Adams.jpg

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bwana Mkubwa

Thanks from the wiki Victuallers (talk) 08:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I have completed my inputs to Ghumdan Palace.--Nvvchar. 13:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Country houses

Oh, good - that list will make my life a lot easier, thanks. That should mean I can finish the job tonight. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You wouldn't happen to feel like creating a couple of stubs for Portuguese composers, would you? I made a few yesterday and this morning, enough to justify creating the stub category, but a couple more wouldn't hurt. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries - whenever you have time. There's quite a bit over at the Portuguese Wiki. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll work on that later. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Won't be a problem. As long as Category:Country houses in England is already on the page in question, AWB will just skip it. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure - I should be able to do it at the same time as I do the others. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Excellent work.

Incidentally, I'm no longer doing the country houses region by region; they're going alphabetically now. Should make it easier in the long run. I did a good chunk last night; I'll do more tonight, when I can. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:57, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Any time - always happy to be of help. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:04, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I'm late - sheep exploded. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:00, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, they show it on one of the local PBS affiliates with some regularity. Real regularity - they never show them in order, and I swear they've shown most of the first season over and over and over and over... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

It looks like quite a charming place - of course, the inhabitants are something else again. But it's quite beautiful, in the opening tracking shots. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Anytime. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Peer review

That's okay! --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 16:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Burg Lockenhaus

Calmer Waters 00:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Great Budworth

Yes, I'll add cat:List of historic houses in the United Kingdom. Copyedited the palace. Got started on Great Budworth but I have to call it a night. Tomorrow, I'll jump back on Great Bud and Kanak people. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Socialist Party USA: GAR

Hi Dr. Blofeld!

The article "Socialist Party USA" received GA status in a 2 day, 5-edit review. I have spent a lot of time fixing the first half of it, and I lack the energy to deal with its second half (which consists of cherry-picked news items favorable to the "Party").

IMHO, the gross problems of the first half, which can be seen upon comparing the latest version with the version of a month ago, demonstrates that there were serious biases and incompetent (and perhaps COI-impaired deliberate) scholarly shenanigans, of the first part. This suggests that the second part will have similar problems.

On the talk page, I note that TIAYN added a reference to a newspaper article, to provide a reference for an unreferenced claim (that had been inserted months earlier). TIAYN's edit also added a lot of material from the Party's website, also.

I don't have the energy to complain about the GA status, which seems to entail rewriting the article, at least to judge by my experience with its first half.

Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 06:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

P.S. There were similar problems at Socialist Party of America.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 06:50, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Why am I bothering you? I don't know how to do a GAR. It seemed simpler to rewrite the first half of the article than to document all the problems with the old article, frankly, and I'm hoping that you know how to simply remove the GA status, which should push the article's (original) editors to finish the job.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:15, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Dr. Blofeld, Thanks very much for your help! (I'm pretty tired now, and I shall return to edit the GAR tomorrow.) Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Somerset Houses

I've responded to your message at Talk:Somerset. As far as List of historic houses in the United Kingdom goes I'm not quite sure what the inclusion criteria are, however you may find others suitable for inclusion at Grade I listed buildings in Somerset and its 7 sub lists & the various sub cats of Category:Buildings and structures in Somerset particularly Category:Listed buildings in Somerset.— Rod ^talk 11:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to add some but there are several articles which are about X street, square, terrace, crescent etc which include more than one dwelling - do you want these included?— Rod ^talk 16:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I've added a load feel free to remove if they don't meet your criteria.— Rod ^talk 18:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

A few Bristol ones done as well.— Rod ^talk 20:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I know less about Devon & Cornwall (& Wilts) & have limited time (RL such as work & kids get in the way of wp time). I'm currently working on Category:Castles in Somerset and have Kennet and Avon Canal at FAC (if you fancied reviewing it). Would it be worth dividing Category:Country houses in England into counties (you might even get county wikiprojects populating it) & it is already a large category? as far as getting house in Somerset to GA I've been trying to get the primary author of Brympton d'Evercy to put it up for GA (or even FA with a bit more work) for years! Others which are not too far off include: Lytes Cary, Ven House, Montacute House etc but there are several others which could get there with some work.— Rod ^talk 20:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Sortable index

Hi Doc: List of populated places in Uruguay Opinion? Hoverfish Talk 17:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Grands Projets of François Mitterrand

My initial reaction is that this article is not yet near GA (much as I enjoyed it as one who visits Paris as often as possible). I don't suggest we judge GANs by the number of words – there are some articles, like your recent Antarctic lake, that are short but are still GA because they say all there is to be said – but the Grands Projects article seems to me at a first reading to lack specific gravity, if I may put it so fancifully. But please let me ponder overnight and report back tomorrow. Tim riley (talk) 21:10, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I have been very busy with official work in Bangalore. I will be back in Delhi this evening when I will work on other articles suggested by you. You may wish to add more to this Maglić (mountain) before posting on DYK today. Thanks for the editing for the GA upgrade of Kanak people--Nvvchar. 01:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Country houses in England

Category:Country houses in England, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bazj (talk) 07:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Great Budbridge Manor

Gatoclass (talk) 08:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Unfinished business

There's a number of requests from you, on my talk page, that were never resolved there, going back to French stations. Can you quickly note on each section if there's anything outstanding. I'm hoping to have some time Tuesday to clear some of this stuff up. Rich Farmbrough, 19:19, 15 July 2011 (UTC).

Coast templated

As said, I am now doing the Uruguayan coast. Actually the following is an idea I got from Góngora on the Catalan Wikipedia and since your advice on using templates worked with top results for populated places, I am doing now the same here: Template:Costa de Oro, Template:Coast of Maldonado, Template:Coast of Rocha, and will start now the western departments. Hoverfish Talk 20:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Great Budworth

It's copyedited and expanded; ready for nom. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:51, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

re: Actors

Sounds good to me. I raised a question with the film project about the disambig on article titles (should it be Sarah Smith (actor) or Sarah Smith (actress)?) Sadly, it got very little input. Lugnuts (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Dr. B - will add my comments shortly. Everything OK in your evil lair? Lugnuts (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

File:3rdDalaiLama.jpg listed for deletion on Wikimedia Commons

An image or media file you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons or altered there, 3rdDalaiLama.jpg, has been listed at Commons Deletion requests.

You can read and participate in the deletion discussion if you are interested or do not wish the file to be deleted. You may have to search for the title of the file to find its entry. Thank you. Martin H. (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Feathers Hotel, Ludlow

EncycloPetey (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You may like to expand this Sutjeska National Park.--Nvvchar. 07:47, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I have almost completed my inputs. There won't be edit clash now. You are free to edit and add.--Nvvchar. 14:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Kanak people a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. Here, have some bougna. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

DYK for Llanwrthwl

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey

That seems like a nice idea. Shahid • ^Talk2me 09:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

TV show articles

Hey!

I just wanted to give you a friendly heads-up with regards to the articles that you're currently creating about TV shows that are no longer being broadcast. MOS:TV instructs that references to the show be made in the present tense even when the show is no longer being aired. This is because the show still exists regardless of its on-air status. Eg, the correct sentence structure should be:

• Anja & Anton is a German family television series...

Hope everything's well! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC) Ah OK. Sorry about that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Pakistani cities

You know what it means - "rv"? Where did you see vandalism? [3] - I acted according to the rules, put the request to the sources and then remove the replicas without source. Please read this WP:AGF, and do not call the actions of other participants as "vandals". Good luck.Sentinel R (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I did not call you a vandal. Rv is also an abbreviation for Revert which is exactly what I intended it as. But if you actually considered scouting for sources instead of removing half decent content it would be much better. Pakistan has enough bad content as it is. The legible content if pretty well written should try to be salvaged with sources, not taking the easy option. You also clumsily removed decent content in Attock which you could have spent 5 minutes trying to source. I would not object to you removing barely legible info or gobbledy gook about clans as in many articles but the obvious half decent content should try to be sourced. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Why have you brought back the information without sources? In Attock population lives on less than 260.724. Why return false information?--Sentinel R (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Unless you can prove its false and find an official population source to actually prove it is wrong then I also suggest you read WP:AGF.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

for example.Sentinel R (talk) 15:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you that 260,000 seems way too high. But World Gazeteer is also an estimate. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

In 1998 the city had 69 588 people. This is the official population census in Pakistan.Sentinel R (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah we'll go with that but not 100% as it is secondary data. Please see my update.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok. The second point. Presently Attock District is sub divided into six Tehsil divisions. [Citation needed]- why in the article about the city information about the district? there is no source for this assertion.Sentinel R (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Relax mate. I agree, its not relevant to the article on the town. Good god I wish I had somebody like you actually helping me with the cleanup up of Pakistan articles. I began a while back but gave up as nobody would help. BTW not every sentence needs a source. It is OK to claim some things and let a citation needed tag sit on it to show it is not certain. Ideally every article on a Pakistani settlement would be GA class.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:46, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I am calm. Was unpleasantly surprised when my job to clean up articles was called "rv". If you think that I did something wrong, please write on my talk page.Sentinel R (talk) 15:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

You did do something wrong. You removed perfectly decent, important and indeed almost entirely accurate text which you could have sourced. You took the easy way out. Unless the article rambles on about a load of schools and clans and is full of unencyclopedic crap then it is worth researching.I agree in most cases though the articles need a jolly good cut and edit like this... Warbling about schools is one of the worst crimes of Pakistan/Indian articles. This edit or yours was more valid though based on the fact it warbles on and on. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

In an article, on the history of the city section resembles a bunch of garbage. In my opinion it is better to remove it.Sentinel R (talk) 11:05, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Done. What about this?Sentinel R (talk) 11:19, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

TFD

I don't think TFD is the best route for these. I think it makes more sense to convert them to wrappers for infobox settlement, with manual tweaks made to the articles as necessary. (E.g. misformatted areas (not just a number), image fields that take full image syntax.) Then all the information is preserved, the formatting is standardized (because infobox settlement is called by the random template), and how the template's fields correspond to the fields of infobox settlement is recorded. This way certain things can be standardized across a class of articles (e.g. the proper wikilink for the telephone area code can be hardcoded for all counties in Ireland). And if we ever want to replace the templates with infobox settlement in the future, a bot could do it easily, because now how the fields correspond is recorded in the template itself. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

How is that process any different than mine? I'm just converting them to wrappers rather than having plasticspork do it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I've converted probably 5 or 10 in the last week. That's to create a to-do category for me, or if anyone else interested stumbles upon it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Otterburn Tower

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Otterburn Hall

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Piva Monastery

You may be interested in expanding Piva Monastery. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Is the Rabotnitsa magazine still in circulation? I could not find any reference on its latest situation.--Nvvchar. 12:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC) I hope you will like my inputs to Rabotnitsa.--Nvvchar. 14:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:AlbertoLattuada.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:AlbertoLattuada.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:JohnHustonlater.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:JohnHustonlater.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:RobertAldrich.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:RobertAldrich.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:HorstBuchholz.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:HorstBuchholz.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:CharlesBrabin.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:CharlesBrabin.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:GeorgeDolenz.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:GeorgeDolenz.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:ClaraBlandick.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:ClaraBlandick.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:DavidLodgeactor.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:DavidLodgeactor.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:IngaArvad.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:IngaArvad.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:TomKeenespace'59.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TomKeenespace'59.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:MontaBell.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:MontaBell.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:AlanMacNaughtanavengers.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:AlanMacNaughtanavengers.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:RyszardBartel.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:RyszardBartel.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:DeeBarton.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:DeeBarton.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Bhagwan Dada.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bhagwan Dada.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:William Wyler.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:William Wyler.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Norman Krasna.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Norman Krasna.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Nino Manfredi.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Nino Manfredi.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Luigi Zampa.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Luigi Zampa.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 within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 08:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Filmbiorationale

Template:Filmbiorationale has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. SchuminWeb (Talk) 09:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

It will simply be replaced with another template. There is no suggestion that the rationale is invalid. Rich Farmbrough, 11:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC).

Russian magazines

I don't have anything specific, but if you have anything in mind for me to find, shoot. My mother used to subscribe to Rabotnitsa in Soviet times, by the way :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 19, 2011; 14:29 (UTC)

I just thought of requesting you to find a picture of the magazine cover. You have done it. Sudafed is a popular medicine in India too for sinus and cold.--Nvvchar. 14:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I can try. I don't think the English Wikipedia has many articles about Soviet magazines, though.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 19, 2011; 14:49 (UTC)

Here's one.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 19, 2011; 14:51 (UTC)

I've expanded Rabotnitsa; very interesting. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Sean Hoare.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sean Hoare.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 15:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

If you get time...

away from your cat, Dr. Blofeld. :-) please check out my draft Wikipedia:MOSGEO, which I feel was sorely lacking. Hack away or add to it, or whatever, or just leave me a note on what's right/wrong/a waste of bits. I'd like to solicit your comments first, then a couple of other editors deeply into geographic edits and then try to roll it out. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks, please do. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of I Hear A Sweet Voice Calling for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Hear A Sweet Voice Calling is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Hear A Sweet Voice Calling until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 20:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of I Gotta Know for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Gotta Know is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Gotta Know until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 20:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Arreton Manor

Thanks from me and the Wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Message

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. 01:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Bosnia

Sure thing - I'll get to it tonight. Sorry to kind of disappear on you, but the end of the day got very hectic here yesterday. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Why thank you. I'll have to polish up the awards case again sometime soon... --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure - that will be a good task for AWB tonight. I just have to finish creating a raft of talkpages and it'll be next on the list. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:23, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I may have time later - I'm not sure. Regardless: I should have time for AWB tonight, even if I go for a walk. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:50, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the barnstar. I'm not sure cloning is the answer.— Rod ^talk 17:32, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

very much.... That's moving - it's been long ago since I got one from you. :) What's up? Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for All Saints' Church, Newchurch

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the barnshuriken, Doctor. Bond will never expect it! Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Rabotnitsa

Nice work by all. I've nom'ed it. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:27, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I have almost finished my inputs to Tsukabaru Dam.--Nvvchar. 10:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I could not find any reference linking Timekeeper, (last line in the article) to location shooting in Castello Orsini-Odescalchi. There is a reviewer's observation in DYK. Can you locate the reference or otherwise the sentence has to be deleted?--Nvvchar. 02:00, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

A big thank you for creating North Star House (Grass Valley, California) -- I didn't realize it had received nrhp status. I've expanded and nom'ed it. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

The Mermaid Inn

Hi Dr B. Yes, I actually have quite a lot of stuff; I have been researching Rye recently (coincidentally – for the churches). The Mermaid is mentioned in numerous books. I'll add to the article over the next few days. (Good start, by the way!) Funnily enough I will be going to Rye next week: I am in the area all week taking pics for future articles. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for creating that cat; I've added a couple of other articles to it. Yes, I can get those photos; luckily Monday (the day of my visit) looks like a sunny day. I'll see what info I can find on the Olde Bell as well. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I think I will change the infobox on The Mermaid to the Template:Infobox historic site, as it is a Grade II* listed building (link). I'll be in Icklesham briefly the next day; have to walk there from Udimore, across a marsh! That should be fun... Also an hour in Winchelsea, which is similar to Rye in many ways. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that Queen's Head inn is in the centre of Icklesham. According to Donald Stuart in Old Sussex Inns, it's haunted by a straw-chewing farmworker. I'll try to get some pics when I'm there. Looks like it's worth an article. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 18:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The Mermaid Inn: it's probably ready for nom. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I have completed my inputs to Queen of Sheba's Palace and also to Tsukabaru Dam.--Nvvchar. 07:25, 23 July 2011 (UTC) Yes, I agree. I need to post a few more. Pl select our joint articles for posting for GA upgrade.--Nvvchar. 11:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I have nominated all three articles.--Nvvchar. 12:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

My barnstar

Many thanks, it's greatly appreciated! Regards, GiantSnowman 13:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Expansion of children's Caldecott Medal stubs

Question: can an article such as The Rooster Crows, the 1946 recipient of the Caldecott Medal for illustration, and others like it, be expanded from their stub state given the lack of information on the subject? If so, how? Albacore (talk) 00:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Try looking in google books?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:24, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ghumdan Palace

I have completed my inputs to Tsukabaru Dam which you ma like to post on DYK. I have also added to The Mermaid Inn article.--Nvvchar. 10:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, the hook was pulled off the main page. Don't take me rude for removing the credits, but DYK is being hit hard these days, mostly for quality issues, and Ghumdan Palace was pulled for the old reason of substandard referencing [4]. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 11:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Removing that DYK and credit isn't going to change the fact that DYKs generally are sub standard and issues could be identified with most articles which are nominated. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

According to Grabar, a reference I just added, the tower was legendary long after its fall. Sharktopus ^talk 11:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this just meant to tell you that there is a problem, and that regulars should show example of reliable facts in the hooks and reliable references. This hook was pulled of by a DYK-friendly admin, there are many who have much lower opinion about the project and are only waiting for any misstep. Materialscientist (talk) 11:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

How about a hook based on Grabar, he is surely a reliable source. ... that the tower of Ghumdan Palace, destroyed in the 7th century, was recalled in the 10th century as "flirting with the stars"? Anyway, not criticizing anybody for this, my hook would have been rejected as boring by our previous set of alien overlords. Sharktopus ^talk 11:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

dyk reform ce

• You forgot a close quotation mark after "not to mention boring hooks", and "Why I don't necessarily" should be "While I..."  – Ling.Nut 12:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Andres Segovia

Hi Dr. Blofeld, the lead section of the Andrés Segovia article should conform to Wikipedia:Lead section. Putting a non-neutral sentence in the lead and then trying to back it up with sources such as "Classical guitar for Dummies", "Lonely Planet" etc. is not the way things should be handled. I assume your revert is a slight "autopilot mistake". ;) Keep cool. Musical guitar prof (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

OK you have a point about the sources and I agree with you that his rubato was not the best and he was overated as a player. However he most certainly was the most influential and regarded as a maestro to many and was one of the most important in popularising the classical guitar. But your edit summaries and similar editing of late is suspicious and looks as if you anti-Segovia. You are now the subject of a sockpuppet investigation. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I have used the other account, it is true. But my intentions are not sinister, but aim at improving the article. Also: you misunderstand me, if you accuse me of being anti-Segovia. I respect the artist. I also happen to know a lot about him. It is in this context (of content, and only of content), that I seek to improve the article. I do not like your manner of opening up sockpuppet accusations, BEFORE commenting on content. Musical guitar prof (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

In fact, I'm rather disgusted at this, and leave you to do with the article what ever you want. Wiki's Segovia article just lost me as an editor, unless you find something valuable in my edit suggestion, and give it the benefit-of-the-doubt that it deserves. Musical guitar prof (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You have an agenda and you will be WP:Blocked. And the fact that for a stark "newbie" you have the nerve to cite Wikipedia:Lead section to one of wikipedia's most experienced editors indicates you also have other sock accounts. I couldn't give a damn if you are even John Williams or Julian Bream, your "sloppy rubato" comment indicates you think little of Segovia and are intent on inserting your own POV. I happen to agree with you that he was overated but was very influential and those sources were'nt the best but you approached this in a belligerent fashion with an agenda and you will be punished. If you are here to genuinely want to improve wikipedia and improve the quality of guitarist related articles by writing for us prove it. But turning up every few weeks with a new account just to revert will get you blocked. There's nothing I'd like more than for you to join and become an active contributor to guitarist related articles, we need you. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Look at my edit suggestion. There is no agenda, in that suggestion. I don't like that accusation. At all. I was just about to write the following "I will NEVER touch the Segovia article again. I'm too shocked at the accusation and am sorry to say that I feel threatened by you.", when I read your edit here which I find friendly, considering the circumstances. Musical guitar prof (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You aware of Wikipedia:Good articles? There's nothing I'd like more than this article to pass GA and have a level of quality. If you can begin adding biographical content using sources from google books and other related sourced content I will help you and I will drop your sock puppet investigation and assume good faith that you weren't aware of our sockpuppet policies and don't really have an agenda. As you clearly are very familiar with Segovia's work, perhaps you could show us this and help me write a neutral good article about him? ♦ Dr. Blofeld

Ok thanks. That's nice. I'll try. But please understand, that I just can't get myself to start on this task immediately. I want to let things cool off a bit. And this is a task which requires a lot of work. Is OK? Musical guitar prof (talk) 21:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Whenever you feel like it. But if I ever see you make constructive edits to the Segovia or any guitarist article I will be greatly surprised. I very much doubt I would see anything from you. I've seen editors like you before and they never come back or if they do it is for some revert or POV insertion. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

While you may think that my "sloppy rubato" edit summary indicates that I "think little of Segovia and are intent on inserting your own POV" as you wrote above, I would just like to point out that the rubato issue is a well-known one. Let me quote from the Talk page: "rubato issues ([5], [6])". Check those links: there we have views by Yehudi Menuhin, John Williams, The New York Times, Joel Flegler from Fanfare. Interesting, and hardly POV. I respect Segovia, but I try and keep a realistic view of the man. And a verifiable one. Musical guitar prof (talk) 21:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You're not User:Segovia was as well are you?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Would that be really bad? I mean... perhaps User:Segovia never wants to return again... Musical guitar prof (talk) 22:16, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Request: can you please drop the sock puppet investigation and give me a second chance? (I'm trying by best.) I would be mightily appreciated. Thank you. Musical guitar prof (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you help me incorporate information from this review. I'm asking because of the information given in the second and second-last paragraphs: they present a critical contemporary aspect of Segovia and the perception of him, that you may not be aware of. I believe it is important for the reader to know about this. An elegant way of incorporating this, would be to mention it under legacy: One could mention some of the critical views, and present it as an interesting aspect of how musical tastes differ and have changed. So today's player's are more accurate and strict etc. But then one could also present criticism of this modern strictness tendency -> quote from the article "One may listen to recordings of many of these artists and not be able to identify one player from another; musicality appears of secondary importance." So this again brings Segovia into a positive light. One could end with this quote which balances it all: "But more important than any label I can use to describe Segovia's "approach" is a certain general quality found in his playing which I think most music lovers would find almost irresistible: an intense identification with the music he is playing that breathes life and gives character to every note and phrase. Occasionally (or perhaps frequently, particularly with Bach) we may find the character inappropriate, due to changing taste and/or musicological evidence, but with Segovia the intention is always utterly sincere and deeply felt." ("The Art of Segovia (The H.M.V. Recordings; 1927-39)" by Gregory Dinger — ARSC JOURNAL Volume XIII, No. 3 (1981), p. 116-119.)
Opinions on this? Can I go ahead? Do you want to work on it together with me? Musical guitar prof (talk) 07:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

"User:Segovia was" appeared to be a POV pusher. The article was in a bad state after he edited it because it was stacked full of negative quotes towards Segovia. Some criticism is acceptable but only if balanced with praise. The article is most certainly not a place for listing every criticism made of him.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes. But if you sideline all criticism and intimidate users who want to improve the articles content, then who is the POV pusher? Sometimes there's an area which requires compromise from both sides, and also req. seeing good faith in others' edits and giving guidance and advice, plus a willingness to compromise. I willing, if you are. Musical guitar prof (talk) 09:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

The key is writing a balanced article. Quote stacking especially in bullet points is not the way to write articles. An ideal would be a reception section saying how many believe him to be one of the best classical guitarists but many have highlighted his flaws both in playing and in teaching. One thing I always noticed about him is that he frequently paused after certain phrases when he shouldn't have.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Thumbs up. Thanks. Musical guitar prof (talk) 09:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

First I think we should concentrate on building up the biography section. You can find info and sources in google books.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Above you alluded to the possibility of dropping the sock puppet investigation [7]. Was that sincere? Thanks. Musical guitar prof (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I will consider it if you continue editing constructively and promise not to edit like Segovia was and stack negative quotes in bullet points again and to only edit using your Music guitar prof account in the future.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will do that. Please just understand the following: I will not be editing 24/7. I don't want to be under pressure just because of demands. But anyway: I'll see what I can still do, to improve the Segovia article, when I find the time. I can be approached in a civil manner on talk pages (particularly regarding issues of content) and am fully understanding - there's no need to come armed with sock-puppet checks etc. By the way: Have you heard Segovia's recording of Duarte's English Suite Op. 31? Sheer musical and emotional mastery. Highly recommended! Musical guitar prof (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, so long as you don't now disappear and return under another sock account later down the line and do what you did this time without discussion. But if I see you coming back and adding a load of negatively and not working amicably on the article then you know that it is likely you would be permanently banned from editing the website as your sock investigation would turn up evidence. I would not like to see that, so happy editing, and please only edit under this account now. Jot down your account password so you don't forget it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Will due!! Thank you sincerely. Best wishes. Musical guitar prof (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK, then and now

I support you attempts to discus possible changes in DYK, although I haven't fully thought through what the revised direction should be. I'm sorry that your talk page discussion with Sandy hasn't (yet?) taken off the way you had hoped, but I hope you will continue to push. I just added a small blurb to User talk:Jimbo Wales which helps put some of the history in perspective. The DYK goals may have been entirely appropriate at the time the initiative started, but things have changed, and it makes sense to revisit the original goals (quantity creation) and question whether the goal is still paramount.--SPhilbrickT 15:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the thing is I feel we really do need a change. I've been one of the most active DYK contributors and all I've seen lately is negative comments and people identifying flaws with a lot of articles hitting the main page even my own. I have to admit that they are mostly right, even if I think some of the concerns are exagerrated and there is not a massive problem with every article. DYK was supposed to be fun, but I understand that the main page should have minimum standards and that there is a great fluctuation in article quality on the main page. I personally have had some negative comments about my own articles which has made me seriously question the whole process and the point of it. My feeling is that DYK should continue to go on but we take the pressures away of it appearing on the main page to restore its enjoyment once again and we leave the main page to articles which have a formal reviewed quality. There is no way we can change the way DYK works and there will never be enough people to maintain the sort of consistent quality that it is expected on the main page of wikipedia. So we simply move it to a sub page and make the page more customized and permit more photos and more hooks to appear at once. That would be a solution. The frustrating thing is many people are refusing to admit there is a fault with the current system and I can see this debate going on into next year much like we never got anywhere over main page redesign..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Rabotnitsa

There's a question at dyk regarding the img. Hoping you could assist? --Rosiestep (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Xien Ten Gong

I have started this on User:Nvvchar/Xien Ten Gong based on Google translations of the official website of the shrine. ‎The translations are of poor quality. I have requested the User talk:DAJF who started this article initially for help. --Nvvchar. 17:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I got your mail. Your suggestion review of DYK procedure of creating a subpage has been accepted and is now in force. The Sheba article is already under a different name of Dungar and the references have also been questioned. Hence, it would be better to withdraw it from DYK.--Nvvchar. 08:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Difficult to use the text from Dungur since it is based mostly on offline book sources. I will leave at that for now.--Nvvchar. 10:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

IMA GA review

Hello! Thanks for reviewing the Indianapolis Museum of Art's article. I've updated things per your suggestions. Let me know if there are any other issues. I appreciate it. LoriLee (talk) 19:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

		The GLAM Barnstar
		Thanks for your help promoting the Indianapolis Museum of Art article to Good Article status. Your contribution to the GLAM-Wiki project is appreciated! LoriLee (talk) 12:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm actually unaware if the GLAM barnstar we've been working on has gone through the necessary steps of formalization - but you'll have to forgive my excitement in wanting to share it with you, nonetheless. :) LoriLee (talk) 12:06, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

PS- The IMA's director, Maxwell L. Anderson, has already tweeted about it. Told you it was appreciated! LoriLee (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Karaoun v. Qaraoun

Hello Number one, Number six here, sorry to bother you but I have detected a rogue naming convention on some pages we've jointly been working on this year. Namely Karaoun.

I'm pretty sure that is a duplicate of your much better Qaraoun page, so I am going to turn it into a redirect and merge necessities there. I'll also rename and redirect my recently created Karaoun culture into the Qaraoun culture, which is I suggest played a critical role in the Neolithic Revolution and I hope to provide more coverage of soon. Any problems with that, or if you have any evidence of there being both a Karaoun and a Qaraoun in that district, please let me know. I prefer the Q, its Quinkier! Paul Bedson ❉talk❉ 23:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Qaraoun seems to be more used unless I'm wrong..♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Municipalities of the Dominican Republic

Template:Municipalities of the Dominican Republic has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Henry Mayes

hi Dr. Blofeld, Look and the Greek Article, Meyers had defeated and tennis matches in Greece. for this book : ATHENS LAWN TENNIS CLUB, 100 years — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.64.231.172 (talk) 14:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah you translated my article into Greek, how nice.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Reply

Blof I would love to do it but I do not really have time for long-time reviews. A personal matter is preventing me from editing WP on a regular basis and quite possibly in coming days I may also be offline totally. This is also the time to ask you to keep an eye on some Bollyarticles if you can when you're free. Great review, by the way. Finally someone gives a detailed and reasonable review. Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding, friend - well, the ones that should be watched are the regular ones which I think are in your watchlist already, like Zinta, Shahrukh Khan and Bollywood. I'm happy that Jeff is here - he's doing a great job. Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Castello Orsini-Odescalchi

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Populated places in India

The last days ", India" as disambiguator has been dropped, now the rule is in case of ambiguity to use at least the state level. But for a country like India more might be needed, and there is an alternative the districts, that e.g. in the U.S. with the counties does not exist. 630 district names are unique within India, 5 names representing 10 districts are not. Some more facts:

• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (India)#Disambiguation by state or district compared with dab in other countries - prposing a system that is similar in precision to the UK, France and the Philippines.
• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (India)#Census 2001 ambiguous names starting with Am - if names are ambiguous then they often are within states, one can see clusters by state. In several cases at least the district level is needed for disambiguation. If using it only "on demand" this would result in a mixture of systems, in listings it would look strange to have "X, Gujarat" and "X, Anjaw" next to each other.

I am contacting you because someone said you are experienced with geography articles and before he would like to hear what you think. I think using district level as default minimum is a good step to improve the precision and to reduce the likelihood of articles about one place created twice, or even thrice: Gonda, Aligarh - Gonda, Aligarh/version 2 - Gonda, Aligarh/version 3. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 16:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear me, please no. USA is irritating enough as it is with the state always having to be after the name even if it is called something like Yzzzz. Please lets only dab names unless they need to be. I strongly oppose move every title to state or district unless there ar emultiple place names in that country of that name. The way I see it is this. If there are more than two villages say called "Aran" in India and they are each located in a separate state simply dab by for example Aran, Gujurat, Aran, Uttar Pradesh etc. Only if there is more than one place name called Aran in any given province should we start dabbing by district. And then if there are multiple places names in that given district called Aran then by taluk. In extreme cases which may have multiple places names within a very small area then coordinates may have to be added to the title. But this system should work fine. I think we should stick to highest level possible unless there are multiple places in a given state under that name. If there is only one place with that name in the state, what is the point of moving to district in title? Most people looking will recognize the state but not the district. Gosh how irritating to have an article name Penzance, Cornwall etc or Mumbai, Mumbai City when there are no other places called that. Pointless. Who and where was this new "rule" made because it will not get underway as far as I'm concerned.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood.

• This is only meant to be used if disambiguation is needed in the first place. It would be a system like for the British Isles, they do not use "X, Republic of Ireland" or "X, Scotland" or "X, England" but use the county or council area NC UK. These units are much smaller than the average Indian state, see the section linked at the first bullet point above. Using the district would be similar to using the county, still it would be less precise. No need to call an article "X, district" in cases where "X" alone is sufficient. Hope I did clarify this now? You wouldn't use Cambridge, United States, would you?
• Also you seem to ignore the fact that using "X, state" is often pointless, since if there is ambiguity it very often exists within states, because India is a multilingual country and several country borders have been drawn a long linguistic lines. Uttar Pradesh has 199 000 000 inhabitants. Why be so imprecise with India and use the state? It is calling for article moves for a long time, always if someone creates an article that is ambiguous within a state extra moves are needed, including link fixes, disambiguation in other articles, where people referred to some "X, state" and then one has to define which district is meant. It is massive extra work. The UK/Ireland system would still be more precise than the system for India using the districts. But at least the system for India would not be so much off. For me this really looks like a bias. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm telling you full brunt that I think using "X, state" is often pointless. As I say below India is not the United States were state has major authority. If there is only one city in Uttar Pradesh called Lucknow, what would be the point of moving it to Lucknow, Lucknow district you tell me.♦ Dr. Blofeld

That's because for politically reasons the sub country thing is awkward to they go by county. In regards to India there is no subdivisional countries like this. Also US is different to every other country. Would I use Cambridge, Togo or Cambridge, Anguilla, or even Cambridge, France? Yes. But if a city in American is called Cambridge by default they've decided to use Cambridge, state name even if a dab isn't needed. Do I agree with this, not at all. But India does not need to be like UK and US. I think we should deifnitely use state name after place name is dab needed, unless there are multiple places with that name in that state in different districts. Districts of India as far as I'm aware so not have the sort of status US states and UK counties have.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Let's keep mandatory state-dab for the US out of the discussion. France uses departments, not ", France". Of course have districts another status than US states. And they are also more a recent creation than ceremonial counties in the UK. But hey, ceremonial counties are not even administrative, while the districts in India are. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

If there is only one city in France with a certain name it should most certainly be .xxx, France NOT ...., Department. Only if there are multiple places in France with that name should be use department. Please provide me with some examples and I will assess them or indicate where it was decided to use department for France even if there is only one city in the country with that name.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

First, they don't use region, which would be a higher level. You still have not addressed the fact, that the states are made along linguistic lines partially, and that India is much much bigger. What is the benefit of having unpredictable names? The district system is much more predictable, if you know the name and the district name then in case it is disambiguated in most cases you have the title. There still may be ambiguous name within districts but the problems are vastly reduced in number. But with using a mixture of district and states you have to check whether the article has already been moved to the district dab or still is under the state dab. Are you aware of the fact that there are more than 600 000 villages in India? Does France have as many duplicated names as India? See Category:Set indices on populated places in India and Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (India)#Census 2001 ambiguous names starting with Am. I repeat: I am not talking about cases where the article can be under the plain name. I am talking about ambiguous cases and look here: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (India)#Census 2001 ambiguous names starting with Am to see that in case there is ambiguity at all, there is mostly likely one within a state. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 17:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do not patronise with with edit summaries like "more, please make yourself more familiar with the situation in India" and comments like "Are you aware of the fact that there are more than 600 000 villages in India". I am well aware what I am dealing with. 638,000. No, France does not have as many dab names need as India but if there is only one place in India with that name and only one in France with that name it should be xxx, France and xxx, India. If there is only one place name with that name in a given state we should use state name. For instance if there was a place called Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh and in Kerala I think it should be dabbed Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, Kerala. Only if there was two places with that name within a given state should be resort to districts in title, e.g Lucknow, Lucknow district, Lucknow, Azamgarh district. You follow?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll do an example of Ama so you understand what I mean:

OK. Madhya Pradesh has two places with the name Ama. So we go by district, Ama, Panna district and Ama, Satna district. Only one place in Rajasthan called Ama so Ama, Rajasthan. Only one place in Uttar Pradesh called Ama so Ama, Uttar Pradesh Hokay?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I know what you meant. But you do not address the workload. With this system geography articles of India are much worse of compared with Ireland, UK, France and the Philippines. If there is only one place in the British Isles why not call it "X, British Isles", why be so precise and name the ceremonial county? It is unfair to give India such a imprecise system. You follow? Why is it Abbotsford, West Sussex and not Abbotsford, Europe - would be sufficient, not? Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 19:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

If I may butt in, the situation with U.S. names is unique & shouldn't be used as a model for any other country. Almost all U.S. inhabitants, if asked which city they live in, will usually answer out of habit in the form of "X, Y" (e.g., Bend, Oregon) -- even if disambiguation is not needed. It's similar to the situation with, say, Stow-on-the-Wold or Heidenheim an dem Brenz: the additional bit at the end is included, even if disambiguation is not needed, out of habit. Because the "X, Y" form is not understood to be analogous to these other examples, it comes up in the usual edit wars/flame-fests in competition with "X (Y)" as a way to disambiguate names. What is the usual method the locals refer to these places? As simply "X", "X, Y", "X in Y", or some other way -- that is how this issue should be approached. -- llywrch (talk) 20:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Locals will not necessarily use names that are suitable for article titles. If the next ambiguously named locality is out of your scope you will not add any Y. For the record, I have seen some articles been created as "X (Y)" where Y was the taluk which comes usually below the district level. In Census India calls this level sub-district in the population finder. So maybe using the sub-district level might be best. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The reason being is because we have Abbotsford, Cuddington and I'm pretty sure there are other places in the UK called this even if not actual villages... We could get away perhaps with an Abbotsford, England but Abbotsford, Europe is plain ridiculous, there is no settlement on wikipedia which is dabbed by continent. Besides UK county like West Sussex is equivalent to an Indian state not a district. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Probably in the beginning of Wikipedia you found it ridiculous to have an article about an Indian village because in the Wikipedia there was no article about any village? You were talking about levels, and Europe as a continent would be a higher level as would be the European Union. Back to the facts: What do you mean by "West Sussex" is equivalent to an Indian state? Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 00:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Not at all, every settlement is equal in my eyes, whatever the country. Obviously cities and towns are more important but I consider villages and hamlets in any contry equal. The top level division in India is state. The top level division in England is county. That's what I mean.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Your were saying an idea I mentioned is ridiculous because it is not done that way anywhere else in WP. That is why I mentioned it may have been looking ridiculous to you to have articles about Indian villages, since nowhere in WP there have been village articles. Exactly the fact that you consider some things to be equal, could lead to the fact that you would have opposed village articles. But well, the time without any village article in WP has passed. England is a constituent country of the UK. The top-level division of England is county. But, which kind of county? Not the ceremonial. But for disambiguation the ceremonial county is used. On top of all this, one has the European Union also ruling about some stuff in the UK. So you have 1) EU->2) UK-> 3) England (relevant for some purposes only, but for Scotland there is a parliament)->4) region(until 2011)->5) adm. county, and used it the ceremonial. Then compare India: 1) India-> 2)Zone (recently established, for cooperation)->3) State->4) District. Whatever the levels are, what is needed is an "addressing system". When you compare population and area then 2.5 West Sussex make up one average Indian district. I.e. even on the district level the UK system is more precise. India has so many ambiguous names, a good article naming system is needed, see the 200x Dharampur, India. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Queen of Sheba's Palace vs. Dungur

I'm doing okay, I guess. Jaded with Wikipedia -- I'm sure you'd understand -- & lacking enough time to make the contributions I'd like to. But in answer to your question, you pose an interesting dilemma. On the one hand, the version you help write is longer than the one at Dungur -- which should count for something. On the other, I believe the form that Stuart Munro-Hay favors -- who wrote an in-depth discussion of historical sites in Ethiopia -- is Dungur. (I happened to return the book to the library last night -- an unfortunate coincidence.) That's also the form Philip Briggs prefers in his Bradt Guide to Ethiopia -- although both Munro-Hay & Briggs note that "Queen of Sheba's Palace is the name the locals have given it since its discovery in 1950. And Yom, back when he was active, preferred Dungur -- he knows more about Ethiopia than I do. Then there is the issue that either form leads to numerous name collisions, & will lead to the inevitable creation of disambiguation pages. So maybe the best thing to do is to check Google to see which form is the most common & go with that one. -- llywrch (talk) 19:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

British Engineerium

Hi Dr B. I have responded to your comments on the GA review. PS. Will do some more Mermaid Inn work in a minute. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 17:04, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Date and pic done as well now. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 17:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your review. I hope to find a few more sources over time, especially for its early history, as you said. I've exhausted all the easily accessible material though; might have to go to the B&H Local History Centre, where there is a vast amount of stuff. Of my current Good Articles, it's probably the most obvious candidate for a possible future FAC, but more work is indeed needed. PS. Old Sussex Inns has some stuff on The Old Bell Inn; I'll check my other books when I get back on Friday. (I'll try to take some interior pics.) Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 21:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Great Budworth

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Poland etc.

Yes - the Polish Wikipedia is one of the best-developed, I've found. There's a lot there left to be translated. Pity I don't understand the language. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

There isn't much overlap, as I recall, between the Spanish and English Wikipedias. Again...pity I don't know the language. Else I could maybe make a stab at closing the gap sometime. Which reminds me...I have something to consider working on at lunch, maybe. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

OK - just let me know if you need anything AWBed. I might not have a lot of time tonight, but we'll see. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I was thinking more of talkpages, that sort of thing. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Those I can fill, definitely. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I can help out with that, then. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

OK - it's done for all the ones you've created thus far. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Right - I'll finish the lot shortly. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Campaignbox

Done. The template includes all the articles in the es.wiki one plus a couple we had and they didn't. For all the ones that are redlinked in en.wiki I made sure that there wasn't an interwiki going from Spanish to English. Still a lot of articles to be written! Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Maglić (mountain)

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I was away to Srinagar on official work. This needs Tsukabaru Dam your copy editing to go through. The new process for DYK nomination is not fully clear to me. I find that you are now on GA articles review mission.--Nvvchar. 11:51, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words on my talk page! Let's see how it pans out. I suspect the structure for proper reviewing will have several knock-on effects. And you've played a valuable role in this. Tony (talk) 03:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jamie Sadlowski ‎

The DYK project (nominate) 04:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sutjeska National Park

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 13:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rabotnitsa

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 06:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Dr. B. Thanks for all the articles we did together. Now, I have crossed the 500 DYK mark and received a left handed compliment from MS for all the efforts, I have decided not to edit on Wikipedia anymore. --Nvvchar. 12:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for North Star House (Grass Valley, California)

Thanks from the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 14:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

JC

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

Need help

Presently I have submitted a 2-in-1 DYK for Template talk:Did you know #Articles created/expanded on July 14. They are Cronaca Fiorentina, Baldassarre Bonaiuti for articles Cronaca fiorentina and Baldassarre Bonaiuti. I've tried to do the recommendations suggested by the main editor reviewing it, however now User:Moonraker has said the text is still too mangled to be worthy of the Main Page which is a general term that I am a little confused on. Every paragraph and almost every sentence has an inline reference where I got the material from. Maybe Cronaca fiorentina di Marchionne di Coppo Stefani needs a little copyediting - I don't know. Can you look over the article and perhaps you can make some copyedit improvements that might help meet the requirements of the reviewer. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I haven't anything to do with DYK anymore. If sometime you aim to promote to GA I'll gladly help copyedit then.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have responded to the DYK reviewing editor and I'll hope for the best. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

On another point: You seem to have access to Book Covers. On The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report that I started I took a picture of the book cover myself. It seemed to have come out alright. However a professional book cover picture might be better. What do you think: Leave well enough alone or if you could find that cover without too much time involved?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with the cover? Px in infobox could be bigger, but looks fine to me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the tips. I increased to 200 px and it looks better.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 12:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Nice one.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:41, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

I see you already have a cat and many barnstars, so I decided to thank you with something edible. "Ena baklavadaki, yiatré mu", as one would say in Greece. Hoverfish Talk 20:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Routes

Well, the next most important ones to cover are: 21 (with 24 redirecting to it), 26, 30 and 31. Hoverfish Talk 20:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Novaya Opera Theatre

I'll take a look at this one later today. I'm just being slow in returning to editing after the family visit. I think it's also because of the thing with nvv, and of course the atmosphere shift at dyk. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I've expanded Novaya Opera Theatre and have started Wildlife of South Sudan which may interest you. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Encouraging

Simply thank you for encouraging some, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)D

De nada. All active good content contributors here are deserving of praise. They provide the staple of the website's content which should be respected. Content is after all is what wikipedia is all about, not principles or rules. Many editors, yourself included, are of far more value in the long term to wikipedia than they realise. We need as broad a range of active editors as possible, the only way to actually increase their productivity or potential is to offer them incentives and encouragement. Wikipedia is supposed to be fun and a collaborative effort working together in peace. It has become quite the opposite. Nobody wants to write for something that is profoundly negative and only points out the flaws in people and their work. A healthy working environment and mutual respect between editors would go a long way to improving the website. Many more reforms are needed, particularly in its social framework, it not as if DYK is the only issue on this website. Editors should be driven by a love of knowledge above anything else.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Yes, thanks. It is disappointing to see good editors leave the project. What's wrong here? The social interaction here on Wikipedia seems to be quite problematic. I take editing here as an opportunity to learn something new. Most of us have to face terribly bad things in real life: stupid governments, bad taxes, lack of money etc. Working here should be relax and fun, and yet people are looking for conflict and drama. I don't understand. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that wikipedia is treated by many on here as this central government institution with an extremely strict code of conduct and clinical standards. While it is a good thing in wanting wikipedia to be much improved as a resource and more reliable it is at the end of the day a charity run by volunteers who aim to produce a good quality encyclopedia for free for people and the most important thing that learning and contributing is FUN. This is where we are going wrong. Whilst we should have plagiarism nots on here picking up potentially serious issues I think certain issues on this wikipedia are blown way out of proportion and have little meaning to the majority of our readers. Number 1 priority for this website is content. How many individuals do you know of Vejvančický who are 99% wiki bureacrats and 1% content contributors? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

مشروع الويكيبيديا بالعامية التونسية

ساهموا في تطوير و إنجاز الويكيبيديا بالدارجة أو العامية التي نشأنا عليها و علينا رد جزء من الجميل لها خاصة بعد الثورة. لذا انقروا هنا. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csisc (talk • contribs) 14:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)