Made a proposal at here for a concise edition of wikipedia which is formatted much like an old book encyclopedia with the bare main facts and a smallish word limit for articles as a reference point. Can't imagine all would support, but any input from anybody would be warmly welcome.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Not a bad idea but why should it be formatted like an old book? Maybe the first priority would be to define volume in terms of both length of individual articles and overall length of the publication. Maybe max. 500 words per article and 100,000 articles for the enterprise. --Ipigott (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I was thinking that, a virtual book. And yes, 400-500 words I was thinking of. Also proposed a scaling of the Geograph project to a global one, imagine having access to photos of every square kilometre of Danish islands for instance!! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
WikiGeograph (or perhaps WikiGeophotograph) seems a better name. I was not aware of the existence of the UK Geograph and have just been playing around with it. I found the navigation very easy and discovered lots of photos of places I know well. Yes, it would indeed be great to have the same approach for Denmark - and of course for Luxembourg too. But maybe it would be more manageable to take it one continent or country at a time, starting with Europe, at least to assist project management. --Ipigott (talk) 08:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Isn't that already kinda what Simple Wikipedia does? The articles are shorter, simpler and don't have all the details of the WP ones and if the person wants a longer one they can come here. Kumioko (talk) 09:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Not really. Simple wikipedia is simple English and articles may be as long as anybody wishes. Simple and concise are not the same thing.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I am fairly new to it but have been editing there quite a bit this month and it seems that the general attitude there is that the article should be simply written and short, lacking many of the deep in the weeds details that would be required for an article here to make it to FA. The general attitude seems to be that if the reader wants to get more details then they can simply go to the larger more complete article (presumably) here if they want more info. Kumioko (talk) 14:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
First, I am thrilled to see that you are still active, Kumioko. I have been thinking for some years about trying to do something there, but bloody things keep popping up on an almost daily basis here. Basically, my own impression, for what little that might be worth, is that a lot of the content there is, more or less, a bit longer than the lede sections in the main wikipedia are supposed to be. That is in no way bad, but I myself think, maybe, it might not be a bad goal to have most of the articles for a possible "concise wikipedia" to be basically about as long as our ledes here, with maybe some of the more involved articles, like United States, Christianity, Physics, and others a bit longer, serving as sort of an equivalent to the Britannica macropedia articles. Maybe. Anyway, Kumioko, if you ever deal with any content relating to Christianity over there, and think that maybe some discussion of it in the Christianity newsletter here would help, let me know, or, if you want, maybe even write out what you want to include in it. John Carter (talk) 01:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Kumioko (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, technically every wikipedia article should have a book encyclopedia type lead summary. Unfortunately the vast majority don't have a decent lead...
Since I don't keep track of going ons on Meta much, please keep me abreast of any developments in relation to this project. Thanks. Volunteer Marek 02:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Not likely much, the response has been a little underwhelming. When 10 times as many people comment on an RFA than a new encyclopedia proposal it makes you wonder why you bother...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:28, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I still think this is an excellent proposal. The only reason for my hesitation in becoming actively involved is that I tend to commit myself to too many things at the same time. But I am nevertheless a strong supporter of the idea. --Ipigott (talk) 21:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, I think we all have the same thoughts about commitment to such a project. but its just those who are interested in the concept initially I guess. Such a project would pick up contributors anyway if it was created.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
I think we do have enough support, but just not clarity in them. Maybe a plan on the issue might help. Everyone has different ideas about everything else. So a point-by-point discussion might help. (P.S. I dont check the meta much so it might help if you just tell me when something happens there) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 06:48, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Blofeld! I like your idea a lot, so I've been playing around a bit with a demo which I think you might find interesting: http://waldir.github.com/primerpedia/ Let me know your thoughts! --Waldirtalk 22:04, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This is an interesting idea; did you have something like Britannica’s micropedia in mind?
If the content would be similar to the introductory section WP articles are supposed to have, the project could get a head start by copying over the lead passages from all our FA and GA standard articles ( about 20,000 so far) and I suppose a push to fix the leads on our other articles, and adding to the concise collection could go hand in hand. Is that what you had in mind?
On a practical note, did you envisage having it open for anybody to edit, or having some kind of protection/semi-protection? If you did use FA leads, they should be about as good as we can get them already; the danger of unrestricted editing would be the quality would only go down. Another aspect to that question (by comparison with Simple WP, which has been mentioned) is that with a (probably) smaller group of committed editors, the proportion of crazies/editors-with-an-agenda is likely to go up; you don’t want it to become another refuge for dodgy opinions.
Anyway, good luck with it. Moonraker12 (talk) 14:03, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, somehow readability gets overlooked on wikipedia.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Add a population database by country to wikidata[edit]
Anybody reading this, his Evilness says hello! I noticed yesterday that World Gazetteer, a highly valuable population resource website by country has announced its closure in July. I feel it would be very important to try to salvage the data and process it into wikidata before the website is shutdown and we can continue to build it and eventually try to provide population data for most settlements in the world which is there for every wikipedia to use at their fingertips. Please comment at my proposal here if you see potential in this to get the ball rolling.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
On 1 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Liu-Wang Liming, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Liu-Wang Liming, a Chinese feminist, was imprisoned after being accused of being a spy of the CIA in 1966? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Liu-Wang Liming. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 1 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wang Huiwu, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Wang Huiwu has a memorial in Wuzhen, extolling her contribution to the cause of women in 20th century China? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wang Huiwu. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ankit MaityTalkContribs 12:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I have declined the above deletion, as it was a BLPprod for someone who died in the 1970s. However, I moved the page to User:Dr. Blofeld/Gottfried Grote as it was a poor, machine-translated article with near-incomprehensible results. "He arranged in his fields Wupper the 3rd time Heinricht contactor festival in Germany." should be something like "He arranged during his time at Wuppertal the 3rd Heinrich Schütz festival in Germany". Most of the rest of the article suffers from the same problems. Although something like "the Wupper fields Kantorei Choir at the Old Fields Church in Wuppertal Wupper." is rather funny, it isn't useful. Any reason why you didn't copy the one source the original German article had? Creating unsourced articles isn't really beneficial either. Fram (talk) 12:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Can't you wait a few minutes?? ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This obviously works both ways. Couldn't you wait a few minutes before bringing an article to the mainspace? First get it up to a minimum level of correctness perhaps? Fram (talk) 13:01, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Why does it matter if within 30 minutes the article is fully translated and sourced properly? You should know that "Creating unsourced articles isn't really beneficial either." is a dopey statement to make. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Dopey actions get dopey replies I suppose. Any indication what the notability of things like Amelia's Incline is supposed to be? This isn't some major tunnel, but this. Not every hole dug through a rock by the military (presumably) is a notable "road"; it is part of the "streets in Gibraltar" template, but clearly isn't a street. Your selection of which tunnels to include and which to exclude seems entirely random, some like the Fosse Way, Molesend Way or Dockyard tunnel are missing (perhaps correctly, but they seem at first glance more worthy of an article than this incline). Tripura Road Transport Corporation, by the way, is an unsourced article; it's almost a week old, I hope that's old enough to be allowed to mention it? Oh, and Gandhigram, Tripura. And Tripura Medical College. And Kherchi puja (which should be at Kharchi puja). And Garia puja... Fram (talk) 14:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh yes that's right you're our resident expert on content building and sourcing. In that case you'll be happy to expand my new Gibraltar road stubs using your superior researching and wikipedia building prowess to produce further Good articles like Flat Bastion Road.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 16:57, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
It isn't even a road. Have you even looked at what you created, or just blindly created it from some list without checking anything? Seems to be a habit. I don't get it, you are quite capable of creating good and great articles, you do it often enough, but inbetween, you produce total crap ones, filled with errors or devoid of any information, without any interest in establishing even the most basic claims to importance, and without any indication why such often quasi-identical articles weren't better of in a list. Fram (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I thinking of going to back to only creating total crap articles devoid of any information. Maybe if people started paying me for the time I put in here I'd come up with all good articles.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I just checked a few of your new road articles. I corrected the most blatant problems. Perhaps you need to slow down a bit, as it is not helpful at all if you introduce such basic errors with such frequency. Fram (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Yeah you're right, if I create completely empty new stubs then errors won't crop up thanks, I have User:Dr. Blofeld/Dutch painters to do now.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
So instead of replying to anything, at all, in a relevant manner, you go off on a tangent time after time, ignoring the real problems I highlighted? You feel that because you do loads of good work here, the real problems some of your other work has shouldn't be mentioned? You may freely mock my researching skills or mention the Flat Bastion Road GA (where I did more to get it to GA than you did, if only by pointing out all the rubbish that others had introduced in it but which you didn't seem to care about), but I hope that the research you put into your DYKs and your GAs is significantly better than what you did for those Gibraltar roads articles you invited me to, as these wouldn't even get accepted at AfC. Fram (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
You forget who you're speaking to Fram, if you stay away from me for a while I think you forget this. I don't tolerate haughty editors hounding me and my articles, you know this. I can be one of the most difficult assholes on here if I feel like it and right now I feel like it because of your attitude. I don't have to edit bugger all here, it would be different if this was my job but I'm under absolutely no obligation to contribute anything of quality or worth to the project which is essentially a charity. Why time and time again you think you're in a position to give orders to others and ransack every edit people make to get off your high horse and bully people baffles me. This isn't a workplace or law court, we're free individuals contributing whatever we feel like to wikipedia. You disappoint me Fram, I thought we'd clarified this between us but it seems you still don't get it.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
No, I didn't forget, I just don't care about your attitude. You have the same reaction every time again, you can't stand it when someone points out real problems and get all evasive about it and use the tired old "the attack is the best defense" tactic. "I'm under absolutely no obligation to contribute anything of quality or worth to the project " is true, but there is also no obligation for the project to accept work without any quality or worth. "we're free individuals contributing whatever we feel like to wikipedia." is hardly correct: people get in trouble for contributing things which are not in line with Wikipedia standards. If you contribute utter rubbish, you'll get a reaction about it. It seems that you only want to get praise when you deserve it, but don't want criticism when you deserve it as well. Perhaps some people turn a blind eye to your many problematic edits, because of the many very constructive ones you make; but that is not the way it is supposed to work here. Usually you calm down after one or a few days, and can ignore the user name that causes this initial reaction and look at the content of the message instead. I suppose the same will happen now as well. Fram (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
There is a difference between constructive, friendly criticism and downright rudeness and stalking of edits and contributions. The way you initially turned up here was fairly constructive in offering advice on how to construct articles which was fair enough, but you couldn't help yourself but to ransack through my articles and scoff at them to make your point. That's what made this turn nasty and your comments since have been rather impertinent haven't they? OK Fram, change of approach, thou art my master, Lord of all things Wiki. Thankyou master for pointing out my treachery and misconduct. Please give me a few cane whips on my bottom and put me in detention and I will return to Belgium and establish a wiki academy in your name for cultivating perfect editors Fram's Academy of Perfect Wikipedia Editors. This is what your goal on wikipedia is of course? ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Your first reply (to my "fairly constructive" comment"; "Can't you wait a few minutes??". Your second comment indicated that that "fairly constructive" comment was actually a "dopey statement". Perhaps consider whether you had anything to do with the negative turn this conversation had, instead of blaming it all on me. Fram (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
No, your advice for creating articles with sources and properly translated before creating was fine, I just thought you'd have been aware of mine and Gerda's approach to building German-related article and that the outcome is usually good and that I generally almost always sources my articles nowadays. That was why I said it was a dopey statement because of my work with Gerda, like that palace article, always gets sourced and proofed, see how many article on her user page have been produced in such a way. The Tripura stubs were created quickly as a fill in for red links on an article at FAC. On the day they were created I was heavily sidetracked with other things I had to do off wikipedia and haven't been all that focused on wikipedia of late so you digging those up to infer that I never source my articles I found rather irritating. Perhaps I shouldn't have created them without having the time to make them half decent.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
No, not aware of that approach (I don't follow your actions normally, I just noted that one of your articles was nominated for deletion due to your talk page being on my watchlist, and that's how I ended here). I never understood why having inadequate bluelinks would be better than having redlinks on a FA, but that's not something you have chosen either. And please, tomorrow or so, reread my comments here; I never tried to infer that you never source your articles or anything similar, I tried to include the respect I have for many of your contributions, which are exemplary (and better than most of mine); but they only make the relatively regular lapses (no sourcing, poor sourcing, lack of notability) more baffling. Note that KW finds pleasure in inserting himself in discussions which involve me in some capacity, to oppose my position no matter whether he knows or cares anything about the actual diszcussion. Probably a remnant of me having blocked im once. Feel free to deal with him as you see fit, I'll just ignore him. Fram (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
The thing is though you have a tendency to turn up to my talk page and alert me of errors, mistakes or prompt me for creating total crap. If once in a while you turned up here with some kind words about a GA or DYK I contributed to (or just for some friendly banter, I am open to all in that respect) instead of only turning up here in a negative situation I might think differently about your intentions.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I am not the most social person, I try to only comment when I have something Wikipedia-related to say. There are usually more than enough people spreading praise (everywhere, I don't mean here especially), but most people tend to ignore problems and seem to be afraid to utter criticism. I am a bit of the opposite. Doesn't make me very popular, but I am not on Wikipedia to be popular or to make friends (nor to make enemies, but for some people, it comes across that if you don't try to be friends, you are an enemy apparently). Like I said above, I have great respect for the quality and quantity of most of your work here. Fram (talk) 20:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough, but yes, the impression I and a lot of editors have of you is that you are here to only point out errors in other people's work. When I see the name Fram I almost always know it is going to be related to an error or complaint of somebody's editing. In a way I'm glad there are editors about like you who do a remarkable job of scrutinizing the work of others and identifying problems with articles, but at times it does look as if you have nothing but contempt for others and their contributions mostly by the way you dig out errors in people's work to get across your points. As I say it wasn't the fact you moved the article to the user space or your suggestion to create once translated here but the way you dug up one of my contributions and used it to get your point across. It made it look as if you watch everything I do and was a little creepy in all honesty that you are able to dig up just about anything like that in any given situation. That you are aware of seemingly everything I do here is impressive but at times a little irritating! I suppose the quality of my edits is often a reflection of my concentration on wikipedia. Some days I'm pretty busy and have wikipedia on in the background while doing something else so I might pop up and make some sporadic edits or some stubs which I haven't the time to properly research at the time of creation. But I've generally always tried to balance my contributions between proper writing and stub building which I think is important for growth on wikipedia and a lot of my work does encourage others to build on what I start which I see as a positive thing. Some days I scoff at anything less than a GA, other days I feel it is acceptable to create some rather poor stubs, I'm inconsistent, I know.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
(written before your expansion, will look at that tomorrow) For some reason I'm quite good at finding errors and problems. Rest assured that I don't keep lists of errors handy; everything I posted here, I found between one post and the next. It's some sleuth ability that makes it possible to swiftly find hoaxes and so on (remember the first time you encountered me on your talk page? Way, waaaaaay back?). I can imagine that it can be annoying though. It is not intentional, but intentions and results don't always match. I'm calling it a day now, good night! Fram (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
It was a dopey statement. Dr. B., just ignore him. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
On 2 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article COMINAK, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Akokan is one of Niger's two "uranium towns" located nearby the COMINAK and SOMAIRuranium mines? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 2 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SOMAIR, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Akokan is one of Niger's two "uranium towns" located nearby the COMINAK and SOMAIRuranium mines? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 2 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Akokan, Niger, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Akokan is one of Niger's two "uranium towns" located nearby the COMINAK and SOMAIRuranium mines? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Corinne Mentzelopoulos - no worries. But you'll have to put up with the panoramic of a rose garden for 24 hours as penance; LOL. Finally, the Akokan and uranium mine articles have cleared!! --Rosiestep (talk) 03:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
A to Z done. Please make link pages to USA (Alaska), [China]], Denmark (churches galore) and UK as we have done too many articles for these countries.NVV
Cheers Doc! I actually remember telling you when we started this project that I preferred it when people worked on articles in their sandbox to at least a start class before moving to mainspace but I now recognise how useful it is to have someone like yourself creating all of these little stubs. It's the first step and can attract various contributors to expand them. Otherwise it can literally take years before they appear - hell, just look at my own sandbox! :/ So much to do but so little time! Anyway, I'll add some bits to them as I go along. Thanks again! --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 11:18, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Will add to the navbox this evening (I'm just on my work lunch break at the moment!). As you know my main focus is on Gib; it's what I'm most knowledgeable in but I'm of course happy to lend a hand. Algeciras is a classic example that's just sat in my sandbox untouched as others have taken priority. I did promise to help though so do let me know when you make a start please. --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 11:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Pieter Goos at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NinaGreen (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dr.Blofeld,
Someone changed the original hook (not sure who), and I've left another note at DYK. Best, NinaGreen (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
On 4 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wildlife of Mali, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the threat due to deforestation in the wildlife of Mali(pictured) resulted in economic damage of an estimated 5.35 per cent of GDP, in 1997? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wildlife of Mali. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Eh, don't care. But, I might as well sing you a song. Bgwhite (talk) 21:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
.. ethnic food offering! Some left-overs from (yet another) very recent South Wales party. Is this your official wiki-birthday or the real one where you nip back to Sandringham for the weekend? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Nice one! Thanks!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:13, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Braaby Church at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 13:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
On 5 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Pascoe, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Fremont Hotel, originally managed by Thomas Pascoe, appeared in the background near the end of Charlie Chaplin's debut film, Making a Living, in 1914? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Alright, sure, but I never meant to sound oh all critical... Take your example, I didn't mean to criticize you, but the source did say March 8, which I assumed you misread so I helped you fix that.... Which is what a team should do! Like, you know, help one another. If my edit summaries come across as "snarky" to you, I apologise and I hope there will not be any hard feelings. ☯ BonkersThe Clown\(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:49, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Dr. B can you please fix a table (with a colurful heading similar to the one you have created for A-Z list for Protected areas of Namibia to incorporate, the area of the par/reserve. date of establishing it, an img or two, key details of flora and fauna with a colourful heading. Yjis will avoid lot of prose and also obviate any comments by reviewers as it happened with the Widlife of Rwanda article. Thanks. I will fill the table tomorrow.--Nvvchar. 15:45, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Sure thing. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Are you going to review Ra.One for FAC? You said you would do so about a week ago, and I've had no response. The FAC has slipped out of the current list and is now in a backlog. I would appreciate it if some progress could be seen. ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 15:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I have that and Tripura to do yes. Bear with me.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Heh. Bending over, maybe. Bending over backwards? Well, Perhaps you are a better student of the Kama Sutra than I, sirrah! -- Kendrick7talk 23:32, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Hey Doctor, I just came across this fella Robert Tatin, and I thought it might be the kind of thing you could start an article (or two or more) about. I would have a crack at it but my sandbox is occupied (and I've got a few other things in the pipeline), so can't give it my undivided attention just yet. It would be great if there were some pictures to accompany it. I found a fr.wikipedia entry and there are other sites:
No good deed goes unpunished. While you have been grappling with my stuff on the BBC SO Brianboulton and I have put Gustav Holst up for FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in there, we shall be glad of your comments. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I have two Indian ones to look at first, probably will be the weekend.17:10, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
...create twonew Gibraltarian biographies and not tell me about this!? You're very evil indeed! ;) --Gibmetal 77talk 2 me 11:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Hehe, I figured you'd see them very quickly, and I was right! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
poor old Dr B:-( am I ignoring you. I've expanded Lathbury and Christian Brothers. Ive been working through DiscoverGibraltar.com to see what we've missed. The biggest subject is diving and Great North Road. I'm having a go at "Underwater Gibraltar"..... If you are looking for stuff then have a skim down the index of DiscoverGibraltar.com Victuallers (talk) 19:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Since you originated the article, I wanted to give you a heads-up. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 13:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I think its highly concerning your prodding of such articles. Most articles need improving and you'll find virtually all my choices for article creations will be notable.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 05:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see you created Pan Pacific Vancouver Hotel. I also had admin create Pan Pacific Vancouver as a redirect to Canada place as it was marked as deleted long ago. I have an image and sound there of the Heritage Horns. We may wish to redirect Heritage Horns to the main article. Thoughts?--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Up to you. The hotel stubs are to be expanded sometime but some might be redirected.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 05:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I did the Italian and started adding sources, but haven't looked at the German yet. However, I see someone else is now recasting it, so I've left my hottest lead on the talkpage and will bow out. I'm finding it may be advisable to move it to Tower of the Winds (Vatican) (which I created as a redirect) regardless of the need for disambiguation; that seems to be a far more common term for it. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
No, I'll leave it alone, he was rearranging it and adding templates; I had the impression his additions were from added sources. I haven't even looked at the German, no idea how different it is. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I could not see the film yesterday since there was a disturbing new from USA. I saw it just now. I agree, the mystery film is interesting and the lady in the red looks stunningly beautiful. I still prefer Grace Kelly. Thanks. Is there any problem with my editing the above article? --Nvvchar. 10:30, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Could it have been a year? I have encountered this problem as well and it seems the account has "expired".--GilderienChat|List of good deeds 21:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Year already?? Mmm possibly, has gone extremely quickly then! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doc. I have it on good authority that the opposition was able, through their training, to neutralise beasts using only certain verbal commands popularised by a British operative. I am suspecting that Q may well be involved and your well-known animal monsters may cease to be a deterrent if he continues his research on the topic. Just a heads up. Best regards. Δρ.Κ.λόγοςπράξις 02:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
On 9 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Braaby Church, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the bowl of a font in Braaby Church has relief decorations of the magi, an angel holding back a hunter, and Satan in the form of an ape? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Braaby Church. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
The article as it stands is definitely a redirect. The usual policy for a new article is that it should stand up on its own to avoid being put up for speedy deletion (which would apply to the article as is). There was no sign that anyone was actively working on it or re-working it beyond what was already stated in the Simon Bolivar article. By restoring it without any changes, you haven't exactly given a reason not to leave it at a redirect. It is also advised that you can make an article in your own user space to get it up to snuff before transferring it over to the content space. Please also do not tell people that they are not allowed to do something again when they are clearly working in good faith. Cheers. Sasquatcht|c 16:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
If you are truly working on it, then why the revert without any actual addition of information? I agree that Wikipedia changes real fast, but there is literally no harm in leaving it as a redirect until you have enough to justify its own article. This is the de facto standard policy on new articles and the reason we have CSD and AfD. And I'm not sure calling other editors disruptive over one edit that you instantaneously reverted is inline with Wikiquette (speaking of biting people). I'm simply pointing out the reasoning on why me (and others) have a problem with the article as is because everything in it is currently covered in a different article (the exact definition of what makes a good redirect). The beauty of Wiki is that this state can change and I'm clearly letting you do so. I propose we just bury the hatchet on this one, eh? Cheers. Sasquatcht|c 17:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Alright, let me break this down for you from my point of view: Short article duplicating the exact content in an existing article is created. Another editor changes it to a redirect. Without using an edit summary, you revert the change and simply proceed to add categories without adding actual content or notifying anyone that you are going to actively expand the content (either through a template or talk page). I look at the changes and still see this as a good redirect candidate and do so. You revert again and then add the notice and only now add content not covered in the original article.
No one did anything wrong. It's a Wiki. There really was no need to be so hostile to me when I had no indication of what the plan for the article was. I didn't start an edit war over this. I understand from your perspective now that you wanted to expand the article but I think you can clearly see from my perspective, that there was no way I knew that at the time I changed it back to a redirect (which was perfectly inline with policy). All you had to do was simply put up the notice that you did and then continuing editing. Instead, you chose to be a little aggressive with me and call me disruptive. I hope you can understand now why I think that was unwarranted. I plan on calling the matter closed. I promise to be more wary of situations like this in the future. I hope you can be a little more patient in the future as well. Cheers. Sasquatcht|c 17:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it's completely reasonable to expect every editor to visit the talk page of another editor to find discussion on an article. The primary way to communicate information on an article is through the article itself using notification templates or the associated talk page of the article. There was no indication on either of these places what was going on. Sasquatcht|c 17:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Haha amazing. But time to go for another cultural icon: the Little Grey Fergie? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC) if only he could get "ITN-ed", sob
Hi! Sorry for bothering you so many times! Could you please follow up o your comments in the FAC? It seems the FAC has at least some chance now with Casliber providing excellent critique. Thanks.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Would have been great if you could have worked Mongolian wild ass into the hook , well done Doctor. I managed to snap a picture of the Vietnamese embassy in Ulaanbaatar yesterday. Hoping to get more embassy shots when I am in town in a week and a half, maybe Japanese, I know where the Turkish and French ones are if I am in the area too. Have you any plans to update any articles they could be used in? --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Eeks, don't google image Mongolian wild ass without the filter on, it might turn up something unsavory hehe!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Or quite savory, depending on your outlook ;) --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:03, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for one more award from you. The first car I bought when I was 50 years old. In my young age I used to gawk looking at this car driven by the rich and the famous of the town. By the way, on the DYK nomination of Birthplace of Simón Bolívar an alt img of Bolivar (If it is acceptably licensed) with the alt hook suggested by you would be better to get maximum attention.--Nvvchar. 10:01, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
oil wells, shipping or real estate... What would you like to have been? Everything you hate!
Love Citizen Kane. I can see why people think it's over-rated, and it does have a massive plot hole (if he dies alone, how does anyone know that Rosebud is his last word...?) Not seen The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. Will have to put it on my ever growing to-watch list, along with Bal (sorry I didn't get back to you about your earlier post). Always try to see the big winners at Berlin, Venice and Cannes, so Bal is another one to add to The List. Only seen one Turkish film, Uzak, which was a really good film. Trying to see at least one film from each film producing country, and I think I'm up to 25 or so countries so far. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 12:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
I think I've answered all your points (for which, thank you). Over to you. Tim riley (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, dear Doctor, for your time and patience. And for the new images, too. Bless you! Forget the FAC: it sailed through in record time. Tim riley (talk) 14:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 09:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I could not find any images for coffee plantations of Venezuela. We could load the following general images [2] and
[3]. My upload bot for flickr is not working. You my like to try.--Nvvchar. 09:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Of course I would add the highway name. The problem is history, especially the period you told. Not much reliable data on that.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Don't use an IPAD then! You evil Aussie hopping imbecile.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I removed the tag and removed the div col templates, I could barely make out half of the tables (not on an iPad). --kelapstick(bainuu) 17:46, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Looked fine on mine, probably better without columns though.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Not sure what the cause was, but a lot of the names were cut off on mine, some were missing. The section lines didn't line up (possible with the change they made to where the section edit button sits). Although I do have a pretty large monitor (that's what she said). --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
My monitor is a 26 inch widescreen TV! Did you see my example of Mongolian ass. Unsavory vs savory is certainly debatable, I mean, I think it might be a man who had the same surgeon as Kim Kardashian LOL... Scary...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I guess yours is bigger than mine! I didn't have a look, won't open here, but you will have to plan a trip to UB to check out the MWA for yourself, I know a couple good bars. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Ass or TV? LOL!!! Yeah advise not viewing the picture, blame it on Jimbo and Bomis... Started Mining in Mongolia.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Excellent, I will try and rally up some information for that, and see what I can find on Commons for pictures, I know there are a lot of pictures of Oyu Tolgoi mine there. We also mustn't leave out ninja miner. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll get the WP:RBN team onto it too.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Excellent, I have already started adding pictures and sections, just need some text to fill it. --kelapstick(bainuu) 18:30, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I have done some copy/pasting from Oyu Tolgoi and ninja miner, it could probably use some tweaking, I am having trouble with how to word some of the stuff for coal mining, as it really isn't my specialty, and there are a lot of hands in the pie. This is an excellent article idea Doctor, lots of potential, and lots of spin off potential as well. --kelapstick(bainuu) 19:54, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I think so, while copper, gold, and coal are the really sexy things being mined there right now, there is large uranium potential (although I think there might be a ban on uranium mining, but I don't know). You want it, they got it here. I am surprised how many "mining in x" don't exist, a major gap in coverage. --kelapstick(bainuu) 19:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Looks good, thanks! I'll let Nvv complete his inputs first before adding any more as he finds it easier to do the initial leg work I think. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Excellent, I think I am about spent for the day on this. Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:03, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Speaking of groovy, can you access any of these in Mongolia? It's my favourite TV series, I highly recommend it. First episode is [4]♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 20:06, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Because it's never not on topic, I have come to believe. Seriously - that thing is beginning to take over the world. That and the hideous dress she was wearing at the Met Gala. I swear, she reminded me of a sea slug in that thing. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:00, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
I know it by reputation only; it never took off in the States, somehow. I don't think I've ever caught a rerun being shown anywhere. But then, we take the longest time to get into things sometimes; it's only recently that Doctor Who has developed a cult following around here.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Kwan Kung Pavilion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Mootros (talk) 11:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined - A7 isn't for buildings. BencherliteTalk 11:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I've created Shah Hassan Khel, but it is slightly unbalanced, as nearly all the info is about one (very major) incident, and general info on the village is lacking. Any help in expanding the article is more than welcome! E.g. it is located between two streams, but I haven't gotten a clue which rivers this are supposed to be. Fram (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for all that. Yes, the rivers look rather dry on on some pictures (Google Earth), it's not really the most fertile area generally speaking. I stumbled upon this village while researching some other stuff, and while I'm quite aware that our coverage of the Western world is much better than that of less fortunate countries, I was still amazed that a village that had recently suffered such a huge attack didn't even have an article here, and that we even claimed that the attack happened in Lakki Marwat instead[6]. Well, what is 20 or 30 km when you are thousands of km away of course... The lack of easily available info explains the lack of articles, but this was taking things to extremes... I do regret though that while we can perhaps nominate this for DYK now, the only hook would be Taliban- or terrorism-related, and that would be rather typically Westernly biased again; nothing to say about these unless they get bombed. No idea how to solve that though. Fram (talk) 13:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, perhaps better not to DYK it at all then (hey, it's not as if you don't have enough DYKs otherwise!). Anyway, I'll drop a note when I have other topics where I think your help is more than welcome (well, it's welcome on all articles I work on, don't get me wrong, but I suppose you get what I mean). Fram (talk) 13:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 12:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Haven't had a moment to even look at those Micronesia stubs yet. We're knee deep in Current Articles. Randall & Hopkirk is availble on youtube in US without pay per view, at least the one episode I glanced at; is it any good? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Hooked. Tomorrow, E2. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
On 13 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Selworthy Beacon, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in the sixteenth century, Selworthy Beacon(pictured) in Somerset was used as a beacon location to warn of impending invasions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Selworthy Beacon. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Alison❤ 20:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Dude, seriously - one half-baked reference plus a serious BLP violating category (unsourced, of course). Has to go - Alison❤ 20:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Don't you dare "dude" me. Have you considered that articles can be expanded? "Has to go" rather than "must be expanded with sources" quite frankly represents the outlook of somebody wikipedia would be better off without, however much good you've done here. I'm not to be held responsible for content or "serious violating" categories added long after I create articles. Don't do this with me again. If you want something expanded kindly ask huh?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Keep your self-righteous indignation for someone else, dude. It's a one-liner stub article you created that someone else decided to make a BLP violation out of. If I see BLP vios or unsourced garbage, I will continue to remove them as I see fit. It's akin to cleaning someone else's poop; disgusting, but someone needs to do it for the benefit of others - Alison❤ 21:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Did you look at the Dutch wikipedia article here? Whatever claims were made seem to actually be completely true and easily passes GNG as a notable BLP. I'm not slating you for playing janitor and cleaning up BLPs but I am very concerned with people who run about the site thinking deletion is always the best solution to notable topics. Hyper sensitivity to unsourced BLPs is a threat to wikipedia and guys like yourself are often so engrossed in it as "cleaning up poop" that they fail to recognize notability. If an article can be fully expanded with multiple reliable sources confirming a subject, then why would deletion be the best solution for the encyclopedia? ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 21:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
If you'd put in ten seconds of research you'd have found the sentence somebody added was easily verifiable. As for being a serious BLP violation and damaging to her, this woman has even written a book documenting her turbulent early life and has made money out of it. She's also an anti-homosexual Christian which is well-documented in Dutch sources. Controversial person, yes, non notable she aint. By all means take it to AFD if you have that much of a problem with it but it doesn't stand a chance of being deelted. But expecting me to be held accountable for the additions everybody makes to anything I've ever started on wikipedia is a tall order. I already have 1010 articles on my watchlist and struggle to really keep up with changes on here. Expecting me to watch out for nearly 100k articles is impossible. Most articles can potentially attract serious BLP violations and actually in shorter stubs violations are far easier to spot than in long heavy articles which have been up for years and don't get much traffic. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
On 14 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tang Shu-wing, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Tang Shu-wing has been described as "one of the most talented theatre directors of Hong Kong"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tang Shu-wing. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
She's on my list, unless Ipigott gets to her first. Unfortunately I've got a lot of rough translations clamouring for my attention right now, one of which, like her, requires making sure there are a lot of solid sources. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
The List of national parks of Pakistan is a bit of a mess. I already removed one, but the sources aren't consistent. It looks like there are now 22 National Parks, but our article lists 28, including a few in Azad Kashmir, which may explain the discrepancies. I was going to write an article on Dhrun National Park, but it turned out to no longer exist (was merged with another park in 1997), so a cleaned list would be more inspirational to write articles on the redlinks... Any ida of what would be the most authoritative list for this? 13:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Pakistan probably needs the most cleanup work of any country on wikipedia, you've certainly taken on mammoth task. World Database on Protected Areas now hosted at http://protectedplanet.net/ is probably the most comprehensive site on the web for protected areas, which seems to be run by UNEP and often has dates, the IUCN category and area size for even small reserves. I'd say that would be a good place to start to assess if the parks listed are genuine, although I'd also look to see if there is a Pakistan government institution responsible for overlooking them which has a website in English.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
The problem (or one of the many problems) is that that site lists Dhrun as a national park[7], but other (aletr?) IUCN sources indicate that it was later merged with Hingol National Park (e.g. [8]), which is confirmed on the authoritative looking Wildlife of Pakistan site, in Spatial magazine, and DAWN.com. Unreliable sources give the same info in rather dubious terms: "Dhrun National Park forms the northern end of Hingol National Park." If it is this hard to confirm even the status of one National Park / part of a National Park, it may be better to ingore this for the time being and focus on slightly clearer topics... Thanks anyway! Fram (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Its headache material certainly, most like it is when admin divisions merge and you have try to work out what belongs to what again. I think I'd be more likely to use the IUCN source though, but it is possible it is dated.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
On 15 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ear Mountain, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that although Ear Mountain is located in an area long known for its tin deposits, its own were only confirmed in 1953–54 during a survey by the US Bureau of Mines? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ear Mountain. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi Dr. Blofeld, thanks for reviewing my DYK nomination. I've replied to your question posted on the DYK nomination template a few days ago. Please let me know if you have any more concerns. Cheers, -Zanhe (talk) 12:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Mariblanca Sabas Alomá at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Orlady (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
There is this small town called Rangely, Colorado. I live there and so because of that noticed its article is in complete. I was wondering if you could help fix it up. I would do it but don't have much time because of school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmerkInYourEyes (talk • contribs) 14:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
On 18 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Râpa Roșie, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the first report on finding the Coţofeni culture at Râpa Roșie(pictured) in Alba County,Romania was made in 1865? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 18 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mata-Utu, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that although it is the capital city of Wallis and Futuna, Mata-Utu doesn't have any street names? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mata-Utu. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Things in Salisbury Plain, South Georgia do indeed look a bit teejus. But seems not just Easter Island Eric was/is "One of the most flamboyant players ever to play the game.. " [9]. But don't fret... we'll always think of you as Groovy Dr Blo. Regards, Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Noemi Marone Cinzano at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harriastalk 12:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Matasiete is the more common spelling. :~) I will add some content and sources. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Its outside of my area of expertise, but thought you might be interested in expanding Liechtenstein women's suffrage referendum, 1971. Basically in 1971, a European country voted NOT to give women the vote. Seems like a utterly crazy thing in this day and age. There's also the 1984 article where they finally gave women the vote after less than 52% voted yes. Just thought it'd make a cracking DYK hook. Miyagawa (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Palacio Liévano at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Coinmanj (talk) 01:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
On 21 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Caldey Abbey, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that perfume critic Luca Turin considers the monks of Caldey Abbey to produce "simply the best lavender soliflore on earth"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Caldey Abbey. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Although the name of the section suggests that something interesting should be presented in it, i am gathering views from many that the section is basically just to present the new articles or something that the editors are working on. Then how about calling it "New/Fresh on Wikipedia"? The hooks can be rephrased probably like...
Caldey Abbey; according to perfume critic Luca Turin it's monks produce "simply the best lavender soliflore on earth"?
That way we don't have to look for interesting hooks. Then even dull articles which many editors don't submit for DYKs can go on main page. In those cases, just their basic notability can be mentioned, like...
I agree it should be "recent new articles" rather than did you know as frankly mostly people couldn't give toss about the facts.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Another advantage here would be that when dull articles also get chance of featuring, more number of articles would probably come up. We would then be able to feature more than 3 sets per day. Actually, that set thing should also go away. I would like a auto-scrolling list where new articles would be added as and when they are reviewed and passed. But that's more of aesthetics than content issue. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Bad, bad, bad idea. Copyvios and terrible grammar galore. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
No! Not immediately display them on main page. Its not going to be Special:NewPages. The review process would still remain same. (I wished to see GAs in DYK. But now if it is NOW (New on Wikipedia), then GAs would have to be accommodated somewhere else.) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict)For all its faults, the current process does work pretty well for improving new articles before they go on the front page, and whilst it might give a better picture of the average quality of a WP article, I hardly think it would be of benefit to our readers. Quality is more important than quality, and as the stats show, having an interesting hook greatly increases the views of an article. For that matter, why not allow new GAs to be featured as well since people are more likely to have heard of them and thus be more interested? --GilderienChat|List of good deeds 11:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Still leaves a greater chance for issues. If a bot were to move these articles from the DYK nom page to the main page, there would be no chance to have another set of eyes on an article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
You're free Dharma to propose changes but I think you'll find pretty quickly you'll never get anywhere with them...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Dharma about GAs, and it's a shame it never gets anywhere. But if he's going to suggest something like above it needs to be really explicit and well-thought out to even get a semblance of consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I wasn't proposing a bot should alone work here. Currently when admins think that the hook is okay, they move it to the prep area. Once there, the bot can immediately pick it up from there and add it. Not immediately, but maybe time it at a shorter interval than the 8 hours interval that we now have. We can have, say 10, hooks on auto-scroll. The new one would automatically remove the oldest one. The new addition would get a New tag. Or maybe some different way of highlight. New in new is odd. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Not just a static list. But something like a moving one. Something like a Marquee element would do. I tried doing that here, but doesnt work. Does anyone of you know how to do it? Or can you point to someone who could do it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cornelia Sorabji.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Embarrassing and unacceptable yes, but I don't think ANI is the solution...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:46, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I did not lodge the complaint, Blofeld, and I am fed up of this. Please suggest what to do. --smarojit(buzz me) 11:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Ignore it for now. All I can say is that Prashant is looking to get himself blocked by what he said on his talk page and going to ANI is one of the most foolish things he can do to raise attention to his own recent edits in reporting misconduct by another editor; his talk page message was disgraceful and he should be ashamed of himself for saying that.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Blofeld, how many times should I neglect those abusive messages? You are someone that I respect the most here, but the fact that I don't get any support from you on this matter is very disheartening. I don't have any idea who that IP editor is, and I surely don't think that you believe that I posted it. Then why push the extremely disgraceful thing that he posted about me, under the rug? I took the month long break from here, to calm myself down and to take a fresh start. Clearly, that was a stupid thing to do, as Prashant knows a way to drag me into any silly matter. Anyway, I have been back on Wikipedia for a while now, and have worked hard on Rani Mukerji's article. I wish we could collaborate on that together, but given the recent chain of events, I will just go ahead on my own. Thanks. --smarojit(buzz me) 10:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
As I said, I don't condone his behaviour and do believe you should be able to get on editing without hassle or personal attacks. But if you expect me to get up and start requesting that Prashant is banned from wikipedia I'm not going to do it. I've spoken to him, and urged him to move on too. If you can't too, then that's your problem. I've warned him that if he says that sort of thing again he's likely to be blocked for a long time. That's not taking sides or not supporting you, its just trying to block him in this instance isn't constructive. If he says that sort of thing again then let me know. If you can't see that my outlook has been fair on this and makes you not want to work with me you're a lot less mature than I had initially thought.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
That's not what I meant Blofeld. I don't want anyone to get blocked, but I just feel that people need to bear the consequences for what they have done. And I felt that you deleted his messages, instead of reporting his abusive behaviour. That's all. I respect you immensely, and always will. As I said before, I do want to work with you, and I really hope that we can. Maybe on Clint's "Million Dollar Baby". --smarojit(buzz me) 14:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes...I'll tell you if I'll get any other attacks but, that IP was constantly attacking me and accusing me of Chopra's secretary. What the hell? He even mentioned that I started working on Aashiqui 2 as everybody got suspicious of me. I mean why they don't leave me alone. I constantly do my work but some ppl are here to get me block. Also, Is it a co-incident that Smarojit decided to be back on the same day I replied bodly to that IP. This is because ....leave it. Smarojit has started this again and is telling everyone that I did personal attacks.....Im tired of this. Please, im here to edit and contribute and not for gossiping, grouping, clans and holding agenda against other.Prashant!(talk) 12:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Ignore it, honestly it is silly. I'm a big fan of Clint Eastwood, I'd be flattered quite frankly if somebody accused me of being paid by him to improve his article and films. Its pretty obvious that Chopra isn't hiring you and you're simply a fan, take it as a compliment that somebody considers your writing good enough quality to be a professional paid writer.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:11, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes you may be right. But, constant attacking. Well you know the entire episode. You were the one who respected to protect my user page seeing constant attacks. But, I bet he must have a link to Smarojit or Gleekvampire. It maybe a good compliment but hello! She don't need to pay anyone to write good things. Prashant!(talk) 12:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Not interested in tiffs, sorry, and please never talk in bold text on here again.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry! For that bold text. I pasted accidentally from copied post here!Prashant!(talk) 12:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
During introductions at the editathon, I mentioned you and Nvv as being my long-time article collaborators. I've added a couple of articles to our list: a Somali archaeologist and a rock art site. See what you think! I'm going to getting going with the Wildlife of Nepal soon. Can't believe the article is in such poor shape. --Rosiestep (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Sitting next to user:Nihil novi and talking about the Joseph Conrad article which he's done a lot of work on; he's a collaborator of User:Piotrus . --Rosiestep (talk) 20:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Tomb of King Tongmyong at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Zanhe (talk) 16:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I've today rescued an article from the death! Lilian Faithfull was (as Lilian faithfull) speedy deleted (A7, no importance), but contained some glimpses of possible notability. It turned out to be clearly the case, as she has an entry in the ODNB. I have expanded the article, but I have the feeling that more can be made of it, and that it can be turned into a nice DYK. I won't have the time to continue working on it until Monday (at the earliest).
If you have any interest in helping to shape this article and to show what can be made of articles that at first were tossed in the dustbin, feel free to work your magic. No problem if you don't of course, if it doesn't interest you or if you are working on somehting else. Fram (talk) 14:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Looks clearly notable with a dictionary entry. You seem to have done a pretty good job on it, not active on here at present... ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Yeh Gulistan Hamara, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources:"Yeh Gulistan Hamara" – news·books·scholar·JSTOR·free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 02:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Grotta di Lourdes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bloom6132 (talk) 02:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry that the removal of your DYK nom completely slipped my mind, as I had exams last week and only remembered today. If the article's info can be corrected, I'll be more than happy to give it a green tick. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 14:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Haha!! Yes it is! And the irony of them having a COI on wikipedia! They take themselves and wikipedia too seriously, you name it they've invented some conspiracy. Some of the contributors are decent, don't get me wrong, but it also attracts the trolls and the Jimbo Wales obsessives.. And yes, I'm Welsh, we generally don't take things too seriously as a nation...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:36, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
He finished 32nd place in the heats for heaven's sake! That's notable? Well, anyway, I hope you don't mind if I remove the underlinked tag, because there really aren't any more links.WQUlrich (talk) 19:36, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Ah! Then perhaps that should be mentioned.WQUlrich (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Read your link to Haaretz. That should definitely be in the article. I'll leave that up to you because, basically, I'm working on the wikilinks project and everything else I do is just collateral damage.WQUlrich (talk) 19:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Amir Ganiel is missing and is more notable than his son it seems! Imri though is a national record holder, that's notable..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:49, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
It appears that most of the information in the Hebrew-language articles for those persons is unsourced, so it cannot be used on the English Wikipedia. Are you looking for some specific information? I believe I would be able to provide that.
This list could be greatly expanded, but I'm, busy with the years lists at the moment. See List of shipwrecks of Cornwall for an example of an area list. "Gibraltar" will need to be defined - just Gibraltar itself, the Strait of Gibraltar, or a certain radius from Gibraltar, which would thus include some Spanish shipwrecks. Mjroots (talk) 10:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Dr. Blofeld. You have new messages at DarthBotto's talk page. Message added 19:09, 26 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
On 27 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gisselfeld, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Gisselfeld features a moat and a frog-embellished fountain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gisselfeld. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Bloggers and jazz-guitar discussants have stated that jazz-guitarists use 4 or fewer strings for their chords. Do you know of a reliable source for this claim, preferably with an intelligent discussion?
Don't know of a source but it's true. Off hand, I can think of only a Joe Pass lesson (likely on YouTube) when he says full vanilla bar-chords are "too thick" and too vanilla or something, Jazzers generally dislike the vanilla block bar-chords like your standard G7 and often use substitution/altered chords and if they play the bass note often use the thumb on the base to free up the others like G9/G11/G 13 flat 9 etc. Light comping in jazz in fact often uses just triads and two note chords in a staccato like fashion for fast swing music with a lot of changes. The 6/9 chords give a thick sound, often to end a piece and the full voicing covers all six strings but they often play it in a minor 7 type voicing on the top five strings which gives a lighter sound. I use the 13 chord more often than a straight 7 chord nowadays and that covers all 6 strings. But for melody you'll find that the top 4 strings are used the most with diminished chords often posing as flat 9 chords for the lower strings e.g G diminished on the top 4 substitutes E flat 7 flat 9 and G minor 7 flat 5 on the top 4 substitutes E flat 13, you have to get away from looking at the root of chords and look at the top voicings as the bass player and pianist will often cover the bottom notes..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:26, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Dr. B.! I annotated your latest scroll of wisdom for your fans! (Please revert if you wish....)
I think there has been discussion of various 3-4 string "chord systems" developed by various jazz-guitarists (e.g., Chuck Wayne).
I updated the guitar chords article last week, splitting the weirder stuff into an advanced section. It's brief but shows that some of the ideas already discussed have direct extensions (stacking thirds, stacking other intervals; circle of fifths progressions, progressions by 3rds, 2nds, 4ths, etc.). Now the intermediate section is cleaner, and your favorite chords have a brief mention.
It seems that most "music theory for guitarists" books paraphrase earlier books and have fewer examples of music and fewer discussions of guitar-playing than guitar chord. I'd love to find a counter-example.
I think it was the 1991 video where he's wearing a grey jumper, I have it on DVD, but as you see he also said it in that interview.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Joe Pass does use the bar a lot but he usually don't play full bar chords in the conventional sense that way but uses his thumb to play the bass notes and his fingers to play the melody notes of the chords so it doesn't come out as a full bar chord, there is a difference! Tal Farlow on the otherhand heavily relied upon his thumb to play the bass notes of chords see this. Pause at 1:39, that's a B flat 11 chord using the thumb and pause at 2:17 that's the upper voicing of 6/9 chords I was talking about above. Here's the full thick 6 string 6/9 chord pause here at 0:52-3 for a six string A flat 6/9 and 0:55-6 for the diminshed voicings on the top four strings, symmetrical shape move up every three frets. For the triad/two note staccato like comping see this, 1:54 he plays something to that effect.
Kiefer if you really want to learn more about how chordal structures work I can't recommend anything more than this book. I'm currently learning Misty from that book and while I already knew the basic chords from piano it has some astounding substitutions like B7 sharp 9 (Hendrix chord on the second fret) in place of E flat major 7 etc. Joe Pass's "Virtuoso Standards" also is a good way to work out a lot of the advanced chordal stuff that Joe Pass does. What I said about the bass note and the melody with the fingers you can even see right in the opening lines on page 4 of Have You Met Miss Jones! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
On 28 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Roholte Church, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a now nonexistent sixteenth-century crucifix inscription in Roholte Church(pictured) is considered to have been one of the oldest of its kind? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Roholte Church. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Please see the DYK nomination for these pages; someone left you a {{DYK?}} two days ago but forgot to notify you. Please also note that there's a minor problem with several citations on both of them — the page ranges for several sources aren't specified properly, as the beginning page numbers are given but the concluding page numbers aren't. Nyttend (talk) 13:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing this. Now that I have done the QPQ (which will be on the front page shortly), could you complete the review and give it the final "tick", so that it can move on. Thanks for your hard work. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
On 28 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article José Acevedo y Gómez, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that José Acevedo y Gómez was one of the group of patriots of Colombia who met on 20 July 1810 and made a proclamation of independence at the Viceroyalty of Mueva Granda? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/José Acevedo y Gómez. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
I have also tried for years to introduce proven techniques into WP (via Strategy Wiki), with mostly failed results, despite years of experience and expertise in these areas. I think you are on-track with the Concise WP concept, versus the current "ocean of cruft adrift" which is distracting thousands of editors to update marginal topics, and waste efforts better spent on rewriting the missing mainsteam topics. However, the structure of WMF is mirroring an "ageing bureaucracy" where people are more likely to bypass the "important tasks" so to focus on "tasks with import" and hence, someone would rather work on the revolutionary Wikidata Transformation, rather than cleverly summarize the top 100,000 most-viewed articles. Now we clearly have people with great (important) ideas as the "tail wagging the dog" but the dog has gained weight mired in thick mud (heavy in HTML 5 and CSS classes) and has developed a persona to seek the dog-limelight (every action must agrandize a "WMF initiative"), totally oblivious to the "little people" experts steering the dog by tail. For example, the current success which made WP reformat major articles 2x-3x faster, by rewriting the ultra-slow, convoluted wp:CS1 cite templates into Lua script, was a hard-fought struggle won by numerous tenuous inspirations (unplanned), and certainly total oblivion in most WMF plans. It was a classic case of "How the War Was Won" by lucky breaks, by some people writing faster prototype cite templates, while many people TfD'ed every attempt over 2 years for faster cites, not caring how major articles edit-previewed in 27-45 seconds (now 8 sec.), then Jimbo advocated (July 2012: dif953) to "experiment" with better methods which revealed complex shortcuts among 60 tedious cite parameters, which were totally misunderstood in the Lua rewrite, until the Lua writer left 3 months, and I rewrote the Lua cites with hundreds of details gained only by Jimbo-inspired experiments, to turn unusable Lua "Franken-cites" back to mimic the actual CS1 cite templates, and opened the door to acceptable levels of transitioning slow cites into 13x-faster Lua cites, within 6 weeks of Lua installation. While being an intertwined, winding "shaggy dog story" of massive WP improvement, it is also a dreadful horror tale of how WMF processes are nearly blind to the editing/reading of WP articles. Shorter horror story: "Quietly remove the orange new-messages bar needed to tell 50,000 active editors and 6,100 new editors (per month) why their edits failed". If someone wrote a novel, Imagine a World in Which Wikimedia..., then no one would believe the plot. Anyway, to enact real change, people must reach the controls of WMF policy planning. Meanwhile, the next high-priority WMF "improvement" for editors+readers is to drop support for any browsers not running the new HTML 5 markup. Yes, that is deemed crucially important, to ensure Wikipedia becomes the highest-quality system to ensure everyone is "given free access to the sum of all knowledge" and they actively hire people to drop support for browsers. At some point it is good to ask, "WWKPD - What Would Knowledgeable People Do?" and compare notes. Overall, the best advice comes from database management, where it is keenly noted, "In any system, the most important part is the data" because it can be re-collected and transformed by the next wave of computer technology. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:32, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
What an intelligent chap you are, "how WMF processes are nearly blind to the editing/reading of WP articles." Yes, that's it exactly. Regardless of what Kumioko and others think about the idea of concise wikipedia being a waste of time, that doesn't make the lack of readability and basic access to facts of every article across wikipedia somehow OK. I think its time we became more of an encyclopedia than an encyclopedia building project. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:37, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Need WikiProject as WMF swamped by Notifications bugs & wp:Flow: As others suspected, the WMF developers are completely, utterly overwhelmed by prior bugfixes and new wp:Notifications "(thank)" buttons, wp:Flow, and all their numerous ill-conceived bugs, denials, and user uproars on enwiki, dewiki and Commons. We must form a WikiProject, to simulate Concise WP, perhaps with clever templates or text-searching by Lua modules which could rapidly extract parts of other articles. I think we could encourage numerous members to join because the need is obvious: "Cogito ergo Wikcropedia" as anyone who thinks about the impact of Micropedia will soon realize how the short segments about 200,000 topics beats a 27-section article about "Tractor pull" or "Kim Kardashian" or "Moldova". We do not have a button to show "50 random facts" but we could write one with Lua, depending on member suggestions, and having "50 short micro pages" where every sentence was concise, to be displayed at random. Also, I am thinking to name concise pages as "Canada (micro)" which would be aggregated into the book-list format, or navboxes which run #ifexist to prefer to link page "~(micro)" when it has been written, else link current article. There are 240,000 notable footballers, so WP can store 200,000 major micro-pages. The initial task planning for the WikiProject would be simple: "Everyone write a micro-page for every major article you can find". And so, it begins... [QED]. Any thoughts? -Wikid77 15:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Right, I've got some time tonight to finish this GA review off as best I can. As I think I explained earlier, I've been busy the past few weeks writing, arranging and scoring a film soundtrack, which has taken up large amounts of my spare time, but is now "in the can" so to speak, so I've got a few days respite before I'm off touring overseas. Hope you didn't give up in despair that I wasn't going to finish this! Ritchie333(talk)(cont) 08:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
That's OK. I'm patient about certain things, just not patient with how any positive proposal for change on this website to improve it NEVER gets anywhere and every proposal seems to be a waste of time. As arrogant as this might sound, sometimes I feel my good ideas and positivity are wasted on a site such as wikipedia where "consensus" dictates and impedes us from progress.Everything I propose, however brilliant, seems to always have people opposing and always results in no consensus. Look at the main page for instance, failure for 5 years to change it when it is clear most people believe it needs improvement.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 09:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
It's worse than that: The streamlined wp:CS1 {{cite_quick}}, developed in 2012 as fast-cite before Lua was ready, and survived TfD as some said handled all real cites, was this year TfD-killed as "experimental don't use" despite being faster than Lua in some cases and easily translated into other languages. Beyond consensus, we must ensure competition of alternatives to progress, as realized in anti-trust laws, or Einstein's 1948 fight to stop "Militarization of all research" which planned to shutdown university researchers because any technology could be a weapon. -Wikid77 13:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Better to have proposals fall flat here than in personal life. ;) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Failing here is interesting study in failed collaborations. -Wikid77 13:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Good warning, and we know with Lua script or PHP, how LOTS means "hundreds of bugs" which require months of testing/recoding with multiple browsers (also see: wp:Notifications orange bar). -Wikid77 (talk) 13:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
According to our page on it, Lua's ordinal indexing on tables starts at 1, not 0. There's a lorry load of bugs waiting to be written right there. Ritchie333(talk)(cont) 13:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Templates softwarized as multi-module Lua methods: Beyond logic changes, some Lua modules have skipped the mere one-for-one rewrite of template #ifeq conditions as Lua if-then-else-end, and instead have encapsulated the redesign as arcane "object-orientedmethods with encoded identifiers" even to the point it took me 30 minutes to make a 2-minute change to a "softwarized" Lua module rewritten beyond the simple version I helped write. People who tend to write complified templates, which few could understand, will embrace the complexity of Lua to write modules (without internal algorithm comments) which they could not explain to others how to fix, months from now, as totally inaccessible to 99.99% of all Wikipedians. That is why software, for decades, has demanded documentation standards (for readability) else become totally obtuse to others. More than forcing people to use Lua, we needed to reset parameter values {{#set:x|45}} and expand template features to check keywords #then & #else & #endif to pinpoint unnested if-conditions, and teach people how to isolate rare parameters as 9x faster in subtemplates (or sub-infoboxes), not mega-expand every simple template to allow all-kitchen-sink possibilities. It's like trying to quicken large articles by rewriting as "Chineseglish" rather than having a 2nd page beyond basic article "Zzzz" scoped as "Zzzz (detailed)" for the large page. The solution to clutter is separation and pigeonholes, rather than developing cluttered tools for faster "clutterspeak". -Wikid77 16:08, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
The debate is funny. Is not. Is so. You're another. Is so. The outcome really does not matter. But it seems to me this site deserves an article - you may be interested. The website, or at least the name, gets widespread in-depth coverage. Clearly notable. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I would not assume it will be kept. The decision to delete the volapuk.wp article surprised me. This one is similar in some ways. The closing editor tries to assess strength of argument, not count votes. My simplistic view is that if there is non-trivial coverage of any subject, it is notable and the article should be kept. If there is no significant coverage, no discussion of a subject, it is not notable and should be deleted. That is the case here. I am willing to set the bar for "non-trivial" quite low, but somebody has to have said something more than just mentioning that the subject exists. The counterargument here is that if we delete an article about a site that criticizes WP we will look vindictive, so we should treat this as a special case. I dislike that because it opens the door for all sorts of other special cases. Of course, whether this particular article is kept or deleted is really unimportant. Very few people are going to notice it, and it is hard to see what harm it would do. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I´ve been through Mads Mikkelsen, adding missing refs and trying to avoid some of the plagiarism. The article was largely based on this from Mikkelsen's own site. As you have quite a background in films, etc., maybe you would like to take a look too.--Ipigott (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't think I can handle a "scientist gets religion" topic. I have been more in a steel girders and reinforced concrete mood lately... That sounds a bit harsh and dismissive. I feel for Dean and wish him well in his search. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
On 31 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gurlen, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Gurlen is a major centre for cotton production in Uzbekistan? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 31 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cotton production in Uzbekistan, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Gurlen is a major centre for cotton production in Uzbekistan? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 31 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Palacio Municipal de Caracas, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the edifice (pictured) was the focal point for the Constitutional Convention and signing of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela in the nineteenth century, hence known as the "cradle of independence”? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Palacio Municipal de Caracas. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, I thought I would drop you a note to say that I mentioned an article you worked on in this month's issue of Ichthus. If you wish to receive the full content in future, please drop me a note on my talk page.--GilderienChat|List of good deeds22:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Pieter Goos at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NinaGreen (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
, well done Doctor. I managed to snap a picture of the Vietnamese embassy in Ulaanbaatar yesterday. Hoping to get more embassy shots when I am in town in a week and a half, maybe Japanese, I know where the Turkish and French ones are if I am in the area too. Have you any plans to update any articles they could be used in? --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Yeh Gulistan Hamara, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "Yeh Gulistan Hamara" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 02:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)