User talk:Voceditenore/Archive 24: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 08:23, 31 May 2018

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page.
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page

yet more past topics...

Bradbury/Vedontakal Vrop

Hi there! I gave up on the image after Future Perfect's intemperate blast, but I don't see that this is a 'clear' NFCC violation, as you noted when re-removing the image (which I suppose was restored by some kind soul hoping to get me blocked). It is FP who in the discussion on this was imo 'wikilawyering', by stating his interpretation, and then declaring that it was the right and only interpretation, before getting on his high horse of denunciation. Not that I can be bothered to take it any further. Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smerus. The IP who kept restoring it is trolling and highly likely to be doing so because of a dispute with the administrator who removed it, rather than with you. They're probably a sock of a blocked user to boot. The image use in Vedontakal Vrop quite clearly violates Criterion 8. of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria: "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Not having a picture of the author of the novel in which the opera is mentioned is in no way detrimental to the understanding of the topic, i.e. the opera. The administrator who removed it is highly experienced in image licensing issues and is also an License reviewer on Commons. They aren't "wikilawyering", although I can see why editors who don't work in that area might perceive it as such. As someone who does a lot of work in copyright and fair use issues related to text, I know from experience that our actions can be unpopular with some editors, and there's a tendency to shoot the messenger

. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, a little bit of context makes a lot of difference! (although I still think FP@S could have used a bit of the old AGF). Anyway as I am presently in Kiev, there's a lot more exciting going on than WP.......Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Er... a lot more exciting! Stay safe, Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On my walk to work this morning......--Smerus (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cripes! Voceditenore (talk) 17:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hampstead Village Voice

Hi, and thanks for your help with the above. Very new to all this. FTR: The Press Gazzette's (ref 5) is not entirely correct. It was not a spoof edition but spoof front page on p.17 of Hampstead Village Voice edition 4 in 2008 (ref. Hard copy of Hampstead Village Voice edition 4). Also the Camden Review is a section of the local paper, Camden New Journal. I will try to prune and improve on existing as suggested but a bit of a Wikipedia novice, so all help much appreciated. Please have another look at it when you can. Kind regards, Sebastian Wocker. wocker@btinternet.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.35.166 (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sebastian, I've moved you message down here to the bottom of this page. (New talk page threads go at the bottom of the talk page. More about that at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.) Anyhow, I'm in Italy at the moment with very limited internet access. I'll have a look when I get back on the 9th. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi, Voceditenore. Many thanks for your assistance in creating Paolo Giubellino's article. I'm grateful for your clear explanation and helping to fix the citation reference problem. Your help is really appreciated and encouraging for new users. Great work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcharito (talk • contribs) 10:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of sweet strawberries for you!

Thankyou so much for your help with the Cafe Jacques article. You are a very bright star in the Wikipedia constellation! I certainly will enjoy investigating, and using the references.

I'm feeling a bit humble over here, because my research skills need to be honed to a sharper edge. Then again, you have given me some clues with your refs. By the way, I found your user page quite interesting. Have a great day. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 08:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind note, CaesarsPalaceDude! If you need any more help with your draft, do let know. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the Egg butter!

Just what the headline says. The references probably weren't the easiest to find - and hopefully someone will add more to the article. --Sander Säde 13:47, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Sander Säde and many thanks for your kind note. Voceditenore (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kanawishi: Five Against Venus

First, thank you for your encouragement and for the pointers you gave me. I never suspected that such resources existed for science fiction, especially the older stuff. However, I checked them out and even found some new ones. So now I believe that I may have my article on "Five Against Venus" ready for you to look at. If it comes up to Wikipedia standards, there are, on the Wikipedia list of science-fiction novels, almost two dozen titles in red that I can turn blue over the next few years. Please let me know how I did.Kanawishi (talk) 17:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kanawishi. Unfortunately, I'm about to be away for three weeks, but I'll be happy to look in on it when I get back and see how we fix it further. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IEP

Hi Voce. I see you're still very much on the ball with the IEP issue. Not that 16 months later has anyone in the Foundation really taken a blind bit of notice of what Torey said. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dauvergne

Hi. I was planning to create more than just stubs for those operas, but I've been too busy/off it recently. I do have the Rousset recording of Hercule mourant, so I'll try to improve that particular article over the next few weeks. Next year I might even be able to get my hands on Dratwicki's full-length biography of Dauvergne (extracts are accessible at Google Books). Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 09:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's brilliant that you've created these (stubs or not), thanks so much! I managed to find an illustration for Hercule mourant. I'll see what I can do for Canente and Polixène, if nothing else the title pages of the scores à la Énée et Lavinie. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks - and thanks for the nice image. Have you seen Livrets baroques? They have libretti for all four of these Dauvergne tragedies. Some of those pages contain images of the original costume designs, so they must have got them from somewhere. Also, I'm tempted to create a few other Dauvergne stubs, although it will break with my plan to focus on tragic French opera for the time being. Dauvergne's comédie-ballet La vénitienne was also recorded recently, but I don't have the discs. --Folantin (talk) 10:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(By "some of them", I really mean Canente [1]. Can't see much for the others). --Folantin (talk) 10:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Trevor Corry

Note to self: see archive

Robert Lyn Nelson

I saw your comment at ani. Despite your excellent cleanup so far, it remains supported only by thoroughly unreliable sources. I don't want to AfD it is you're still working on it. DGG ( talk ) 18:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG. No, I have no intention of trying to rescue it, or of adding any references. Coverage is largely marketing and press release-based sources discussing his work and him. I only cleaned it up because I didn't want that promotional drivel on Wikipedia in the interim. Today I've removed a few more unsupported "extraordinary" claims. A few years ago, I rescued Vladimir Kush (possibly the closest type of artist to Nelson on Wikipedia), but I was able to find sufficient independent sources covering not only him but his works in some depth + my impression was that it had been created by an admirer—not a PR agency. Having said that, Nelson might survive an AfD, given the exhibition at the Smithsonian which can be verified, and the fact that he did the cover art for the Beach Boys album Summer in Paradise. These sources are the best I could find: This verifies an exhibition at Lahaina Gallery in Hawaii and this one at some other galleries. This is an ad, but verifies the BB cover, "Painter Dives into 'Two Worlds' of the Oceans", Washington Times (March 31, 2001) verifies Smithsonian exhibition (press-release based though, and I note that the Washington Post had nothing to say about him or his art). This one shows one of his paintings as an illustration in Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals (Academic Press). This one from his hometown newspaper verifies some biographical information. This one verifies that he received a "local environmental hero" award. NOAA give out literally dozens every year. While he was VP, Gore used to pro forma sign all the award letters. Not quite what the WP article claimed: "United States Vice President, Al Gore, cited him an "Environmental Hero". Finally this one from Hawaii Business (February 1994) is very revealing:

"The result of his mid-day musings is today a $5 million art and publishing company known as Robert Lyn Nelson Studios, and one of the most widely recognized and profitable schools of popular art to come out of Hawaii. Nelson uses aggressive marketing—including infomercials and advertorials on Maui's visitor channels, ads in about a dozen print publications and on radio stations, and even a short documentary about his work and philosophies—to create demand for his paintings."

Perhaps change the lead to

"Robert Lyn Nelson (born 1965) is an American artist primarily known for his paintings of marine wildlife and aggressive marketing."

Just joking. Anyhow, I'm happy with whatever you decide. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:00, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will do as you, and fix it a little. further. DGG ( talk ) 03:44, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DGG. While we're on the subject... I'd appreciate your view on this article, recently accepted via AfC. It was created by a paid editor, who after this, this, this, etc. was strongly advised to go through AfC. I've copyedited it considerably, but in my view this may not pass WP:PROF. Several of the claims were/are rather inflated to enhance its qualification for acceptance. I imagine that the timing has do with the subject's forthcoming book. Voceditenore (talk) 06:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request your help

Hi Voceditenore, I just submitted suggested revisions for the Stetson University College of Law page. I'd edit this page myself but I work for Stetson University and there's a COI. Thanks for your help in the recent past! 24.73.119.194 (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See my replies at Talk:Stetson University College of Law#2014 program and ranking updates. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 11:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Libretto links

Many thanks for that source. I'm expanding the Poliuto article and it appears that no current recording in the French version contains an English/French libretto. This will help a lot, along with a combination of 5th form French and Google translate. All the best Viva-Verdi (talk) 21:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me again, please, with Café Jacques?

Hi Voceditenore, after many more edits, new inline citations (some from you), new sections, help from the Teahouse, and one or two edits from a friendly Bot, I'm submitting Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Café Jacques (band) again. Could you, please, have another look at it? I am seeking to establish notability on the basis of "two albums on a major label" and "two notable musicians in the ensemble". I am still not completely happy with the inline citations, however I'm sure it is a huge improvement compared to the last submission. Will the reviewers see evidence of notability? Do you have any suggestions re how, in general, to improve the article? Thanks again for your help in the past. Have a qreat day.CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 09:27, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CaesarsPalaceDude. I've moved it to article space. There's enough there to pass Criteria 5 of WP:MUSBIO supported by independent reliable sources. I'll leave more on your talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Voceditenore, Thankyou, thankyou, thankyou! I must admit to doing one or two cartwheels around the room. Have a great day.CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 18:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar archived here

Thank you, Liz! What a pleasant surprise! Yes, one does need nerves of steel over at the AfC Help Desk. After a while, I realized that it wasn't a case of simple misunderstanding, it was trolling, but I wasn't about to rise to the bait. Predictably, he (I'm sure it's only one person, not 2) went to ANI and wasted yet more editors' time, since they didn't know the background to the saga. There's more at the BLP Noticeboard. Click on the external link there which had been in his article as a "reference", and you'll see what I mean. On the other hand, the AfC desk can be really rewarding when you can help genuine newbies make their first article on Wikipedia, and hopefully want to stay. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Chris Glen article

Hi Voceditenore, I have taken up the baton to beat Chris Glen into shape by copy editing from top to bottom in one (long) session. At the moment, I'm tired, and I'm not sure I have any objectivity left. Could you take a look, please, because you might feel inclined to remove one or more of those (very appropriate) tags?

Also, could you explain to me, please, how the time-context tag applies in this case, and the actions I would need to take to resolve the issues? I can't seem to get my head around it (brain must be too small), kind regards,CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 10:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CaesarsPalaceDude. You've been doing some great work there. It's much improved! A great guide for copyediting in terms of style and tone is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. It explains about relative time constructs, peacockery, etc.. Also the style we use in biographies is to refer to the person by their full name only in the opening sentence with subsequent mentions either a pronoun or last name only, i.e. "Glen" or "he". When you think the problems are pretty much fixed, just go ahead and remove the tags. I'm off for the next three weeks, but when I get back, I'll take a look at it. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two pieces for wind quintet (Ropartz)

Could you perhaps help out with the discussion here. There's a general question involved. DGG ( talk ) 06:04, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:02, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Grecco

Thank you so much for your help with the Michael Grecco article, I'm not sure I would have been able to get it accepted without you! I will continue to do my best to improve it, thanks again! RonEwer 21:49, 29 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronewer (talk • contribs)

You're very welcome, Ronewer. I was happy to help and hope you'll enjoy working on Wikipedia. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts!

Barnstar archived here

Thank you, Carrite. That's very kind of you. I must confess that until I read the whole sentence, I was rather taken aback by "Your name came up on a Wikipediocracy thread...". Joking aside, people here often show their appreciation of content editors, albeit in quiet ways, but shiny things are nice too. Voceditenore (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A cupcake for you!

I saw your posts on WikiProject Medicine about the draft medical related articles at Afc and want to express my appreciation for the great work that you are doing to help new editors. Your sound advice given with a friendly attitude is a great welcome for new contributors. Sydney Poore/FloNight ♥♥♥♥ 16:46, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Sydney, that's very kind of you! AfC is a funny place. The vast majority of submissions are promotional dross, but hidden amongst them are promising new editors writing on encyclopedic topics who just need a little help. A decent experience there, finding someone who's willing to lend a hand, and seeing their article "go live" is a great way to recruit and keep new editors. It makes up for all the mind-numbingly awful stuff we have to plow through there. All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Greetings -- what is your opinion about this? I'm pretty sure it's who we think -- main problem is the change in geolocation, but the MO is the same. Antandrus (talk) 15:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antandrus! I'm almost positive it's the same, as per my comments here. The various (radical) changes of location, e.g. New York, Wisconsin, Australia are odd. Perhaps contact one of the checkusers at this Sockpuppet investigation to see if they have any ideas as to whether it's possible to pull off something like that? Observe the savvy demonstrated by one of his confirmed socks here. It's also possible that he lived in Wisconsin and has since moved to New York and had also been travelling in Australia. Or goes to boarding school in New York. Or shares his time between divorced parents. Who knows? But I'll eat my hat if it's not the same person. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR Survey (and an update)

Hi! Just a quick update that while JSTOR and The Wikipedia Library discuss expanding the partnership, they've gone ahead and extended the pilot access again, until May 31st. Thanks, JSTOR!

It would be really helpful for growing the program if you would fill out this short survey about your usage and experience with JSTOR:

SURVEY

Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prakhar Bindal

You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please, allow some time to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.197.211 (talk) 21:54, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks the heads-up, John. It's now been over two weeks with no significant improvement since the article was restored. Consequently, I took it to AfD today (Articles for deletion/Prakhar Bindal). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:05, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A spot of bother with Piped Links

Hi User:Voceditenore, I have done more edits on Chris Glen since I last talked to you, but I haven't had a chance to work on the citations, yet.

I did a pair of edits in which I created a piped link from Änglagård to a section in ProjeKcts, and then put a note !-- the article Änglagård links here -- beside the section heading in the ProjeKcts article. I did that because I read it in this quideline MOS Piped links. Woke up this morning to find that Bondegezou had reverted the edit which put the note beside the heading. I tried to persuade him to put it back, but he said "the note is not what the guidelines tell you to do".

I was hoping that you could take a quick look, please. Could you let me know, please, whether I am barking up the wrong tree, or just plain "barking"? That's all I need, unless you feel compelled to do something more.

How was your overseas tour? Kind regardsCaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 05:44, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CaesarsPalaceDude. It wasn't a "tour" really, but a lot of fun. We were in a gloriously sunny Northern California paying homage to our newest grandchild. Anyhow, you are right about the guideline. I put it back (just below the heading rather than in it) and left a note at the editor's talk page [2]. Having said that, very few editors think to leave the hidden note when piping or even know about that guidance (including me!), so the revert was understandable. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Voceditenore, it's great to know you had an outstanding visit, and a safe trip. I didn't know about that guidance either, and I stumbled onto it while I was trying to get the piped link syntax right. I gave you a call because I wasn't completely sure, and I didn't want to reverse it myself (make content not war). Thanks, yet again. Kind regardsCaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your response at the AfC help desk

Tiger award archived here

Thank you very much, Anon! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:53, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

really wonder whether this time the page waris mir goes beyond the red zone, but the help was big. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afirahamid (talk • contribs) 13:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Afirahamid. I think Draft:Waris Mir will be OK in the end. I will be away for the next three weeks, but when I return, I'll have a look and see how it's getting on, and if it's not an article yet, see what can be done. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear voceditenore plz help with draft of war is mir SOS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afirahamid (talk • contribs) 20:40, 23 April 2014‎

A little More Of Your Attention Needed/Request

Hi Voceditenore, I have recently added a few more References to my Article & would be grateful if you could help a bit more with format and correct placement of References in the Article, please also give your valuable opinion when convenient. I shall be waiting for your response eagerly. Stay Blessed! Regards.Azhartokyo (talk) 04:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Above was re Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Azhar Naazir. Voceditenore (talk) 08:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Todd Ferrier

Dear Voceditenore, thanks very much for your help with my feeble efforts for John Todd Ferrier... I was struggling to find any independent references, and starting to despair -indeed I had overlooked my finding Mary Kemmis' book a year or so ago (I don't have much time for this and distractions on other subjects aplenty)... much of my text started off as a translation from the Spanish wiki article but turned out to be from other places and in at least one case seemed better in the original words when I stumbled across it... but your re-write from a somewhat different perspective helps immensely. I'll see if I can squeeze in your references and re-submit asap... and will try to be more careful with my tenses in future! Best wishes and thanks again, -Nick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yadsalohcin (talk • contribs) 19:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help Please

Hello,

I am trying to submit a new article Draft:ACC Fast Track Countries Tournament about the cricket tournament which was run from 2004 to 2007. It's waiting for review. I have provided the links of the tournament conducted each year on the bottom of the page (External links). I'd like to request you to review and approve it and let me know about it.

Thanks! Asheshneupane95 (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asheshneupane95, I see someone else has approved it and moved it to ACC Fast Track Countries Tournament. Congratulations. I probably wouldn't have reviewed it though. It's not my area at all. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, someone else reviewed it. So will you please delete the draft page? I don't think it's necessary anymore. Asheshneupane95 (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asheshneupane95. The draft doesn't need deleting, it was simply moved to article space, i.e. re-named. This is what your draft page looks like now. In any case, I'm not an admin, so I can't delete anything :). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 03:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you so much for addressing my concerns in a polite and yet concrete way. Perfect, I will let my bosses know that that was the case with the plagiarism. Yes, I understand the conflict of interest now that you have explained it to me, unlike Orange Mike, who not only made me feel uneducated--but was extremely demeaning in his dialoge. There are articles that I hadn't linked yet to the article, because that article was merely a draft--and by no means ready for publication. We did not know that a conflict of interest would prevent the article from being published by me, albeit I understand since I intern here that makes me a classic case. Hopefully, someone will take it upon themselves to research the show and provide an accurate and unbiased article review based off of the articles about the show found on the web.

When the page was originally created (the one you mentioned prior), the show had just come out so no articles had been published about it. They were also not aware how or why them having an intern post it was a conflict of interest.

Now, through your help we understand--and I thank you for being professional and polite while explaining to me why everything has happened. As you may know, unless you are pretty familiar with html and syntax and the guidelines in and out--my questions were valid misunderstandings. Especially for someone who has never ever in their live created or even attempted to create a wiki page. Again, Thank you so much!

Lissheff (talk) 07:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I could help, Lissheff, but don't be too hard on the other editors. Sometimes editors who do a lot of the (very necessary) work of dealing with promotional articles, many of them by "paid for" editors, can be a bit "short" at times. Wikipedia is literally under siege from promotional editing. One estimate is that there are probably at least 100,000 such articles on Wikipedia, and more flooding in every day. It can become a little dispiriting for us all. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 17:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ada Cherry Kearton

DYK archived here. Voceditenore (talk) 09:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your views

Hello! I was reviewing an AfD about Rap opera and thought I'd ask for your opinion, since you seem knowledgeable on similar topics. Thanks! CesareAngelotti (talk) 18:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on your talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:John Austin (Jack) Victoreen

Hello Sir. I am new to Wikipedia and I am working on my first article, the subject of which is "John Austin (Jack) Victoreen". You have a page on L.S. Taylor, that mentions an interview with Victoreen and others in 1977. Can you give more details about that event, so I can include it in my article? Thanks in advance for your help.Zephyr7575 (talk) 22:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on your talk page [3]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grandfather Cuts Loose the Ponies

Dear Voceditenore, Thanks for writing the article "Grandfather Releases The Ponies". It was not about me writing the article. It was about the article being written. I'm happy that you felt that the monument deserved an article. You have given me more confidence in Wikipedia. Much thanks. I will write David Govedare and let him know about the article. Gigfisher (Gigfisher (talk) 10:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)) Dear Voceditenore, Unfortunately I received a terse message from the artist, David Govedare:The design portion of the article is completely wrong! The story is completely of my own origin, the basket is the cornucopia of the creative force in the universe. The story line has nothing to do with coyote or any past native legends...loosely or otherwise, where does all this persistent BS come from. The story I have written is attached...it is rooted in the present as far as authorship and timeless in its meaning. Please follow through and delete me from the BS already printed, and change the message . dave govedare[reply]

I will attach his story as soon as I figure it out how to do it. I'm sorry this has turned into a dilemma. I thought he'd like it. Thanks. Gigfisher (Gigfisher (talk) 22:47, 23 July 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Gigfisher. The source for the BS was this book. I must confess, I found it at variance with Grovedare's own comments on his sculpture and was having doubts about it myself. I've fixed it. Hopefully, he'll be happier now. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar re Robert Bonfiglio archived here

Thanked here. Voceditenore (talk) 11:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HELP NEEDED from Voceditenore

dear, you have helped me in the past with Mohammad Waris Mir , a page i created, my first actually. it has made its way to wiki but it has some problems that keep filling up the header and i dont understand how to resolve them. plz, if you have time and u r kind enough (u are actually kind enough) could you plz help me? thanks Afirahamid (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)afirahamidAfirahamid (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Afirahamid. I fixed it. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thanku sooooooooo much!!!

for waris mir page. regards Afirahamid (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)afirahamidAfirahamid (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Curiosity

You mentioned that you have no access to the AFC script. What is it that prevents it? Fiddle Faddle 14:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim. Don't know. I checked it on my gadgets but I still doesn't work and I don't feel like finding ways around it, particularly if they involve changing the settings on my computer which uses Windows Vista and already had a spectacular crash with loss of all my files about 2 years ago. At the AfC project I confine myself to manually moving appropriate drafts into article space or advising other reviewers. See section above. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC) PS. I remember rotary phones too

.Voceditenore (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And hand cranked sewing machines :) Fiddle Faddle 17:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3rd party look

Could you take a look at LGBT topics and Hinduism. A neutral party look would be helpful. I reverted Abhi's changes as most of the things look bogus from a quick glance. Removing things as copyvio when it is clearly referenced and in quotation marks, and saying only books by known authors and peer-reviewed by academics are acceptable. I haven't a clue about the Hinduism stuff, If you don't either and can get others to look. Note: Abhi has been blocked and banned before. Talk pages are full of "fun" stuff, so I understand if you don't want to get involved. Bgwhite (talk) 21:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bgwhite. I haven't a clue about Hinduism either nor about LGBT issues. So I'll give that a miss. I only ended up looking in detail at Lesbian Association of India when I saw the discussion at ANI and wondered if I could find archived versions of the dead links. I'm fairly proficient at that as I do a lot of copyright clean-up work. Anyhow, I've nominated it for deletion, following your comment on the talk page and one last unsuccessful search to see if I could find any other coverage of it. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You look thru ANI for fun? You are one sick puppy. I can't remember coming across your name before, but you have some great skills. I'll add your name to my list of experts I goto for help. Off to talk a Hindu monk and an Indian expert. Thank you for your help. Bgwhite (talk) 09:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BG, ANI is fun to read if you are a retired lecturer in sociolinguistics

. It's filled to bursting with brilliant examples of what we call in the trade "dysfunctional discourse", with often some "deviant discourse" thrown in as well. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:48, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What would you say here, sociolinguistically? Everyone knows that I couldn't possibly reply, with this blessing of 2 comments per discussion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the infamous "infobox discourse", a sub-genre of "time sink discourse"—the kind I studiously avoid. I'll just say here that I much prefer the current box rather than the one on the talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:58, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Waste of time is something that comes to mind a lot. In this case, I wanted to protect the seven years of tradition (not my article, not my box, not the question if I like it) resulting in this, changed NOW by someone who didn't edit the article before. I don't understand, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dysfunctional and deviant? How did you know those are the two words that describe me best? :) Bgwhite (talk) 06:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar archived here. Voceditenore (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editor thanksed here. Voceditenore (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you from Encyclopedious (re: disambiguated title - Chris Jennings (musician)

Thank you for your time and help, I really appreciate it as I anxiously await my page to be reviewed ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Encyclopedious (talk • contribs) 21:19, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Encyclopedious. I'm afraid I won't be able to review Draft:Chris Jennings, as I'm going to be way for the next month. I'll try to take a look when I get back, but I strongly suggest you work on improving the referencing in the meantime. WP:RELY has guidance on the kind of sources we require. Voceditenore (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, plus edit request

Thanks for your past assistance with my COI editing requests on the Stetson University College of Law Wikipedia page. I just posted a few new requests since someone representing an advocacy organization took down a bunch of objective content and replaced it with their own statistics. Would you mind considering my requests on the talk page?

THANKS for all you do! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TampaEditor (talk • contribs) 12:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:Stetson University College of Law in this section. Voceditenore (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Afd Article For Deletion (Speedy Delete)

whoh...
I have changed the Type of my Article from Music Chart to Music Media. I think u don't know the meaning of "MEDIA". It means to give the information about what is it. Thats why we give the latest info about punjabi singers, ptc punjabi awards winners list etc. Now i changed the type of the article. so please remove the afd. i will be very greatful to you.
thank you.
have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manpreet Singh Sach (talk • contribs) 15:02, 25 July 2014‎

Editor is referring to Punjabi Music Media deleted following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punjabi Music Media. - Voceditenore talk 17:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HighBeam Search

Is there a way for Wikipedia editors to obtain access to this (or other) search engines? This service would be very helpful for providing sources for articles that need them. Yamaguchi先生 15:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Yamaguchi. You can apply for a free one-year subscription to HighBeam through Wikipedia. Just go Wikipedia:HighBeam which has details about the requirements and a place to sign up. HighBeam isn't just a search engine, it contains full copies of articles and reference book entries. It's very useful. Wikipedia:TWL/Journals has the full list of journals and subscription archives for which free access is available through Wikipedia. There may be some others there that you'd also find useful. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will request to be subscribed. Yamaguchi先生 16:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Voceditenore. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have a barnstar

Greetings Voceditenore. This is the "yours is the most perfect AFD contribution I'd ever seen barnstar" ★ Very nicely done!—John Cline (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, John! I pretty much always try to give detailed rationales, especially for delete !votes. Alas though, the better crafted they are, the more often they prompt increasingly desperate tactics. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maldoror2. I'm not so sure this is a paid editor. In my experience, the level of desperation on display is generally a characteristic of editors with a close personal connection to the subject. Voceditenore (talk) 09:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re. infobox wider discussion preparation

Invitation at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes posted: [4] — tx for the suggestion, I missed that. See full list of where the invitations have been posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox#Invitations posted
Re. where question for the preparation: I think it important to have those very involved in infoboxes (and the arbcom case) on board from the start. In fact they should have started this already, and I still think they should do the bulk of the work. I'm not interested in infoboxes. Not in the least. Why should I do the work? I see my role primarily as keeping an eye on Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox staying out of ghetto waters (which is a stumble-block for remedy six enactment). --Francis Schonken (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

Hi, I was greatly interest in your comment here as I have had occasion to wade through lengthy arbcom proceedings before and found your comments stood out and were worth pondering. As I indicated on the case page I am not feeling well at the moment and am unable to discuss this at length right now, but I found your link quite interesting. Would you mind posting it at the GenderGap project page? I think it's something they should look over. Also I was quite taken aback by your accusation that I am "using insinuation, personal aspersion, and snide remarks as weapons"...can you tell me what that was about? Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 00:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neotarf. Are you talking about the link to Amanda Menking's project? It's an interesting one. I was one of the 30 interviewees in the first stage of her research. She followed it up with a shorter structured survey aiming at a broader base of respondents. I see that she posted a link to the survey and an overview of her research project at the GGTF three weeks ago inviting members to participate [5]. As to your second question, I think my point of view and my reasons for it are self-explanatory if you do a close reading the ArbCom workshop and talk pages. My comment here pretty much sums it up. Voceditenore (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks, I haven't really been paying much attention to it lately, but I will try to find the diffs for you later. This is new territory for me, trying to find a polite but accurate way to describe the "locker room brawl" atmosphere that is running wild here without making things even more disgusting than they are already. I'm not a member of the gender group, and I don't want to be, so maybe it's a mistake for me even to have tried to sort things out for them, since I don't really have any background for it, but I thought that maybe an uninvolved person might be able to calm things down. Also I have had some people contact me who want to remain anonymous, but are intimated about coming forward, because they fear either sexual harassment on line, or repercussions in real life, so I felt some obligation about that, to give them a voice. —Neotarf (talk) 02:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here are some diffs, and some conversations I find have a high "creep content".

([talking about Eric Corbett) If you look at his "disruption" edits versus "productive" edits, his "dick ratio", so to speak, he probably has us all shamed. I rather like that "dick ratio" concept, someone should pen an essay.

This is troubling on several levels. First is the use of genitalia-based descriptions. The assumption is that there is something intrinsically male about being rude. There is also a visual image of a male admin shoving his genitals to the forefront of the conversation, as a show of power, the way a cop might flaunt a gun. This attitude also smacks of "edits are more important than people". Is the project really of such an over-riding priority that it justifies doing dirt to real people, and creating an unpleasant work atmosphere for others who are volunteering their time to help the Project? And finally there is the image of a bunch of male editors standing around yucking it up over their crotches, "I like that notion of a dick ratio, made me laugh anyway." and "yeah...the dick ratio comment made me laugh as well." What does this say to new users, and how does it help build an encyclopedia?

I actually followed Mr. Corbett's' edits for a day, to see what the "content creator" fuss was about, and I saw him make a dozen or so routine "content edits", fixing punctuation, commas, and the like, for every talk page comment he made. The edits were accurate and competent, not like some people you see who just rephrase stuff, making it worse, just to increase their edit count.

Here are a couple more snippets, you should be able to find them by going to this diff and using the search function:

Corbett: I'm also reminded that you've yet to correct your obvious typo. What you meant to say was that I have a dick of porn star proportions. Lara: Nope. Not what I meant. I have not seen your bits, Eric. And despite years of grand effort, you have not seen mine either.

This is an admin talking: It does prove that we can all be dickish at times, to varying degrees, myself included.

I don't see any one of these edits as a problem in itself, and taken as a whole, it is a troubling comment on the direction of the emerging culture of the Project, especially since, once this type of language is worked out on the talk pages, it is then migrated to the drama boards.

So how do you describe this phenomenon in a sound bite, which you must most certainly do if you want to get your point across in a venue with a high signal-to-noise ratio? —Neotarf (talk) 17:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neotarf, there's no need to re-argue the Arbcom case on my page. I am thoroughly familiar with all the material you have quoted. I never comment there unless I am thoroughly familiar with what I am commenting on and the context in which it occurred. And no, "locker room brawl" is not appropriate either. Nor is any other negative characterisation based solely on the gender of the participants. Framing this as "them and us", "men against women" is a very counterproductive and poor way of communicating with people. Ditto descending to the level of those you are criticising. Ditto using preconceived sound bites and interacting with others based on them. In fact, I find that kind communication style to have the highest ratio of signal to noise of them all. Voceditenore (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you really don't have a problem with "If you look at Corbett's "disruption" edits versus "productive" edits, his "dick ratio", so to speak, he probably has us all shamed. I rather like that "dick ratio" concept., you are welcome to your opinion. But it does not justify you accusing me of "extensive use of insinuation, personal aspersion, and snide remarks". I trust you will be willing to redact your statement. —Neotarf (talk) 18:36, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not willing to redact my statement. It is based on my reading of the evidence page as well as that of at least one arbitrator. If you don't want that to be a potential finding of fact, I suggest you take it up with the drafting Arbitrators. Voceditenore (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's fair at all. These are only proposals, and have not been agreed on. When I was writing the arb report, I took great care not to damage any editor's reputation by publishing unproven accusations. I am disappointed to say that least that one arbitrator has already weighed in without waiting for the evidence, that is certainly not his usual style. But your point about sound bites is well taken, there are some arbitrators at least who will be willing to do a more in-depth reading. And you are European as I recall, you will not be able to appreciate the depth of the provocations here. Although these words are disturbing to all the women I have talked to, they are profoundly disturbing to the American women in particular, as I gather this type of language is part of a pattern of rape culture, and use of this language signals imminent physical danger. —Neotarf (talk) 20:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am an American who has lived in Europe for many years. So make of that what you will. Once again, it is not appropriate to re-argue the Arbcom case on my talk page, and I would appreciate it if you took these kinds of comments to the appropriate place—minus the stereotyping of Europeans. Voceditenore (talk) 06:12, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I had forgotten, my apologies. As an American myself, I'm not in a position to evaluate the various representations that have been made of BrE of the c-word being acceptable in Europe, and I am not aware of any scholarly linguistic research on the subject. I can only try to AGF of that viewpoint, even if I am skeptical, and say that in the version of AmE that I speak, it is not. —Neotarf (talk) 16:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How could you have "forgotten" that I was American? You never knew in the first place. I don't believe I've ever mentioned it on Wikipedia, because frankly, what difference does it make? You simply assumed I was "European" because I disagreed with you concerning your own behaviour and discourse style. I've never commented on the word in question. You should completely drop the cultural and gender stereotyping. It's very unconstructive and sets up barriers to effective communication. As to your question, there is multiple scholarly linguistic research on the subject of the "c-word". For example, one finding is that when used as a derogatory epithet in Modern British English, it is almost exclusively directed at male targets. See, McEnery et al. (1998). "Assessing claims about language use with corpus data – swearing and abuse". You might also find The Vagina: A Literary and Cultural History, by the British linguist Emma L. E. Rees, interesting. She devotes quite a lot space to debates about the word, its origins, and its semantic derogation which largely took place in the 19th century. And yes, it's also used amongst some British males to criticize friends "affectionately", as in "You forgot the beer? You silly cunt." Of course, that does not make its use acceptable in most British social contexts—it's still a generally taboo word. And needless to say, verbal abuse of any kind is not acceptable on Wikipedia. That's the key point, not which particular words are chosen for the abuse. Voceditenore (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kannada Language

On Kannada article - Wikipedia also comes under law. If wikipedia makes a mistake then it's our duty as it's users to correct it. Please don't assume 'God'ly respect. All my edits are open to correction if you can provide links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karnāṭa dēśamaṁ (talk • contribs) 11:43, 20 November 2014

Question

Greetings -- quick question as I was about to post to the Copyright problems page. A new editor has added a large copy-paste from this website to the English Renaissance article (e.g. here, the second time they've done so). The website says it licenses cc-by-sa version 4, but only for text authored by one 'Eben Moglen', an annotation which this text does not have. Can we use it? I hate to be a bureaucratic blowhard, as their site appears to be a wiki, and their intent is to add text to our encyclopedia in compliance with our policies, but it appears it's not quite right ... what do you think? Should I post on WP:CP so others can look at this? All the best! Antandrus (talk) 16:12, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antandrus. No it can't be used here given their current license. I've reverted it again and left an explanatory note plus some other suggestions at User talk:Jaa2204. Fell free to chime in there. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I appreciate your assistance with this. I'm at work and wouldn't have had time to do the research, etc. until this evening. Antandrus (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saint Lucia's Day!

Special Saint Lucia's Day celebration for you, little Tenor: Lucia coffee and buns from festively arrayed Bishzilla Lucia! ['Zilla twirls to display her becoming Lucia crown in the round.] bishzilla _ROARR!! 15:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Bishzilla Lucia
Cappuccino
Gingerbread
Saffron buns
Little helper bearing gift

Why thank you little 'Zilla! This is quite the most spectacular season's greeting I've ever received on Wikipedia . Voceditenore (talk) 09:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Voceditenore/Archive_24.