Jump to content

User talk:Ponyo/Archives/January/2011

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Ed Lumley

Sorry, I didn't realize it was a reference, it looked like it was just sitting at the bottom of the article. Since the parliament bio in most articles is listed an external link, I thought that was the intention. I won't put them in external link sections anymore. Cmr08 (talk) 04:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I completely understand - normally the parliament bio is tacked on as an EL and I was used to seeing it that way as well; but when I was looking at sources for the article I realized that the bio actually substantiated a great deal of information in the article and was actually a reliable source. Truth be told it would be preferable to cite the info inline, but that's really a style issue. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 04:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Getting the word out for 2010 Vancouver meetup

Hey Ponyo! Thanks for the shiny, sparkley thing. Would love your help rounding up bodies for the meetup. I have made an invitation template, please substitute your name for mine and we can tag team Category:Wikipedians in British Columbia. You want to start at the bottom, and I'll start at the A's?

The Interior cordially invites you to the Vancouver Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Meetup! It is being held at Benny's Bagels at 2505 W Broadway. Meetup will start at 6:30pm. Drop by for some Wikipedia-style conviviality and free gear! Feel free to forward this invitation to any Wikipedians who might be able to attend, and visit the discussion page to suggest activities. Hope to see you there and have a Happy 2011!

Thanks again, The Interior(Talk) 23:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that looks fantastic! I may not be able to make headway on the list until tomorrow morning, but make sure you leave the back half of the list for me and I will send out the invites in the a.m. I'm not 100% sure I can attend myself, but I'm trying to cash in some wiki-karma to make it happen. Cheers,--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 01:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Brilliant! Your help is appreciated. I'll try bat cleanup and hit editors who are not in the cats but have edited on Vancouver-related articles. But I think we've probably hit most active Vancouver editors. Whoot Whoot! Really hope you can make it, you have indeed earned much Wiki-Karma with your efforts. The Interior(Talk) 16:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I spammed the BC and Vancouver wikiprojects with the invite as well, so we should be covered. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Too bad I didn't put the date in the Template! Ouch. Hopefully most will click the links for the full info. The Interior(Talk) 16:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Oooops! Benny's Bagels is going to wonder why they've had an uptick of business, coincidentally occurring around 6:30pm daily. Honestly, I think anyone serious about attending will click the link to the meet-up page, so it's not a big deal. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

I was starting to feel I'd slipped down Lewis Carroll's rabbit hole. Your observations about the result of my nomination came at a most opportune moment. I lost a lot of sleep over this last night. Your note on my talk page was a tonic. I hereby award you 1000 non-redeemable, non-transferrable points. (Void where prohibited by law. Offer may not be available in all states. Some settling may have occured during shipment.) You Rock! David in DC (talk) 11:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Mmmmm....tonic...On a more serious note, you obviously had good intentions with the nom, not sure why the pitchforks came out. And nothing on-Wiki is worth losing sleep over. Ever. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Epass (talk) 20:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For the work on Daniel Cohen (economist), I had not thought of looking at the french version of WP--that's a good idea and I'll remember that for the future. --Nuujinn (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

It always helps if there is an interwiki language link, especially if you're trying to establish notability or find sources. Glad I could help with the tip. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Alex Nesic

I'll try to find some sources. I was in doubt if I should include them or if they were somewhat unnecessary, since it's a public person with some notoriety. But if not, then first thing tomorrow I'll make a search. It could be better just to add a citation needed tag for a while with a warning as you gave me instead of deleting but thanks for the warning anyway! Konakonian (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

The parentage/descent really does need a citation - especially when it's being used as part of categorization (see WP:EGRS). That being said, if you get stuck finding a reference for any particular piece of info that you really think needs to be included, please do drop me a note here (or on the article talk page) and I'll see if I can't dig something up. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand... what have I done to you to be reported as an alledged sockpuppeteer? Comparing my edits to those of the editor you accuse me of being I can't find anything besides the obvious, that we both edited on some Mediaeval and Tudor articles, and I've even undone and corrected some of his edits. I've even been civil, as I usually am. Are you going to report everyone who happens to make one edit on one not that known actors' article? How do you even have the patience to check every edit from every editor instead of simply doing your work? Also, User:Feuerrabe stood up for me on this. User:Kww seems to have blocked me without any reason. For what I've read about sockpuppetry it seems that either because I'm making edits to the same vast area of knowledge, or not so much, or because I'm using a public computer at my workplace that a blocked editor might have once used, maybe years ago, I'm getting blocked too. If this is the case, I've seen an IP in Bahrein or something being blocked for vandalism and when someone complainted that it would block half of the people of that country's city where they were, the Administrator simply answered that he or she should create an account. I have mine blocked. I don't want to believe that I am the only person in my country to like the Tudor period, among other things. It makes no sense to be mistaken with the person whose edits I've actually sometimes corrected or improved. You and others corrected and completed my edits and you weren't accused of anything. That is, people can't be blocked just because they make edits edits on articles where someone else also did. Also, apparently the absence of User:G.-M. Cupertino from this particular discussion if not anything else at least to stand for me might be dued to the fact that his discussion page where he is allowed to appeal from his blocked was blocked from being edited by him thanks to an overzealous Administrator and probably can't even edit his own user page, otherwise he'd most likely have done it by now. Konakonian Konakonian (talk) at 195.245.149.70 (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
If you would like to appeal your block, please contact the blocking administrator directly, or use the unblock template on your talk page. Note however that you should not be editing articles via an IP address while blocked - it is block evasion and may result in the IP address being restricted as well. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion!

Resolutely ignoring the snow and the packing I should be doing, I spent quite a bit of time expanding Oleg Grabar and also created a new article for his also-noted-art-historian father André Grabar.

In response to your edit summary at my talk page, there are a lot of museums, alumni associations, etc. who run tours and enlist people to amuse and/or educate the paying guests. The "payment" for lecturers is typically the free trip with all expenses paid, but said expenses typically run to many thousands of dollars. So if you have credentials plus a love of teaching and traveling, that might be something that you could also do yourself. :-) betsythedevine (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion, however my feet are firmly rooted at the moment. Glad that you enjoyed expanding the article, and I will keep you in mind should a similar article come across my path in the future. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
I just wish I knew more about the field of history. For example, in the sciences people get to be notable typically via some striking discovery or invention, so in an article about them you can mention somebody's particular maguffin, link to its article, and thus create a lot of information in a short space of verbiage. But for a scholar like either Grabar, it seems the achievement is based on accumulating a lot of knowledge and wisdom and shaping the understanding of other people in a much less localized way. I guess what I'm saying is that I wish some real art historians would take a look at those articles. I don't think I'm doing justice to my subjects, which makes me sad because they are clearly both influential and wise. Any ideas? betsythedevine (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
I understand the frustration - Wikipedia is very attuned to pop trivia and current events, but it can be difficult to do justice to less "sexy" articles. You could always drop a note to the talk page of a relevant wikiproject (e.g. WP:Wikiproject Archaeology, WP:Wikiproject history) - you're much more likely to entice interest in a more esoteric subject that way. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 03:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Jack Towers

After reading this discussion you participated in, I decided to compile an article on Jack Towers since I had already done sourcing for Duke Ellington at Fargo, 1940 Live. I had thought maybe WP:BLP1E precluded a separate article on Towers at the moment but a rummaged up another cite or two that should be enough. Please check the draft at User talk:AjaxSmack/Sandbox/Jack Towers if you're interested or have input. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 23:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Well done! It looks ready for Prime Time to me. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Owen the Kid

Hi. It looks like User:Owen the Kid was warned once before about creating inappropriate articles. I left him a stronger warning.

Owen definitely looks like a problem editor. I'll try to keep an eye on his contributions. If you see something, please let me know. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

GMC

No, you're right. I'll get on it.—Kww(talk) 04:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

andre talbot

Could you please refrain from updating Andre Talbots personal life to "married" as he is divorced.Harpsichord66 (talk) 22:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not updating the article to say he is married, I am restoring sourced content that was repeatedly blanked with no explanation (which I clearly explained in each of my edit summaries). Could you please provide a source to verify your statement that he is divorced? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 00:13, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

For your efforts...

Hopefully we can find an excuse for a party before then. How about Wikipedia 10.5 Anniversary? Seriously, though, we should do these meetups a bit more regular. The Interior(Talk) 01:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

What was the turn-out like? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 02:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
It was good. We had all ages, from 13-year olds to olds. probably about 20-25, including walk-in UBC students. Douglas Coupland showed up! No joke. turns out he's a big fan of Wikipedia. Fun was had, though we couldn't get a hold of Jimmy Wales on Skype. We tried. Some discussion was made on the establishment of a chapter of Wikimedia Canada, which I think would be cool. The beer-drinkers didn't wrap up til 11:00. The Interior(Talk)
Douglas Coupland showed up?! <beings weeping silently> I'm reading Player One right now. I was probably reading it while you guys were carousing at Benny's. Ah, my heart is broken! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Dry thy tears, there's always next time. I was pretty much shaking the whole time I was talking to him and probably gave him the impression that Wikipedians are stammering subnormals. He was only there for a bit. Have you seen the new Terry Fox memorial that he designed? I didn't know this, but he is a sculptor by training. The Interior(Talk) 18:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I have seen the artwork on the memorial, it looks fantastic. He also has Digital Orca down by the convention centre which is really neat. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
That is so cool. He is giving his writing skills a run for their money. A renaissance man. We're lucky to have such an expressive person help shape our civic identity. The Interior(Talk) 19:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree, and would have loved to shake his hand. Oh well, maybe some other time. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

The IP

I blocked them and mass reverted a load of their edits before I got back to my talk page and you'd removed your request. Have you changed your mind? Should I unblock? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Argh - you're too damn fast! The first edit I checked (which was actually on my watch list) was Josephine Abady, where the IP had added the category "American Jew" despite the fact that there was nothing in the article to support the contention. I checked the IP's history and sure enough they'd been blocked twice recently for the same issue. They are completely aware of the requirements for religious categorization and WP:EGRS, but added the category regardless. Once I began working through through the massive amount of edits the IP had compiled in a short period, it appears that he was working off a holocaust category list of some sort for the majority of the edits. The categories added seemed to be supported in most cases by article content, however many times it was not sourced article content, which is a requirement of EGRS. Long story short, no, they were not abiding by our policies and guidelines regarding religious and ethnic categorization, but they seemed to be making a stab at it. Truthfully I'm suspicious of any IP who's single purpose on Wikipedia is to categorize people by their religion or ethnicity. Perhaps leave them blocked for now and I will attempt to explain to them, again, the strict guidelines regarding such categorization. If they finally communicate and address other editors' concerns, perhaps the block can be lifted and their edits monitored to make sure they truly understand. AGF is fine and all, but I don't see this as a likely outcome. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. Let me know if you get anywhere with them and I'll unblock. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Kalimba (singer)‎

Kalimba (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi Ponyo, I see you working hard there, if I was admin I would be starting to consider some protection - personally imo pending protection would help keep any controversial stuff out, if it continues which imo it surely will, I think some protection will be needed. I see User:WhisperToMe has made a couple of edits and is administrator so good they are watching. Off2riorob (talk) 21:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm trying to keep a close eye on it and will definitely drop a note at RFPP if it gets out of hand. I asked Santa for pending changes on all BLPs for Christmas, but apparently I was more naughty than nice in 2010 because I'm still cleaning up BLP drive-by vandalism daily from my 7000+ watchlist. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 22:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
You should be better in 2011, perhaps you were good but I was naughty .. I would like to see a feeling that pending could be applied a little more liberally, HJ Mitchell has been adding it to a few for testing, and I had a couple of requested granted at RFPP, even watching with a large watchlist the vandal addition can get missed on the lesser watched , more obscure BLP articles. Off2riorob (talk) 20:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Well I'm certainly trying to be better, but the world holds many temptations ;). --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Strongly suspected for some time, but decided not to do anything about it as it becomes Whac-a-mole and keeping at current avatar would have saved effort of identifying new one. Agricolae (talk) 20:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hell Week?

Tis blue, remember not to transclude it at the end of an editing session, that way lies a 3am editing session. Save it, sleep on it, then do a quick proof read at the beginning of your next session. ϢereSpielChequers 14:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Best of luck! I was happy to see you nominated. Don't answer any questions hastily! J04n(talk page) 18:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the support and the advice Jo4n, it's really appreciated. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
It's about time somebody got around to nominating you! Best of luck! --j⚛e deckertalk 21:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Joe - what you wrote was very kind and humbling. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ponyo. You have new messages at All Hail The Muffin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

User:Jezebel's Ponyo

Hey, you realize that I can still register this account and imposter you, right? Redirecting the userpage doesn't prevent registration of the account. User:Jezebel'sPonyo might also need to be registered by you :) /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 23:08, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh snap! I new it was too easy - and it's obvious now that you've pointed it out. Thanks for the tip! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 23:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
I've corrected the oversight with User:Jezebel's Ponyo and will consider adding User:Jezebel'sPonyo as well. Thanks again! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 23:37, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
You don't have to worry about the lack of the space. Only somebody with the 'override-antispoof' user privilege (admins and accountcreators) can create an account where all that differs between its name and the name of the other is one space. I see those a lot of the time at ACC. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Perfect, I wasn't too keen on creating multiple variations if it could be avoided. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 13:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
For the record, I don't see anything wrong with your current username/signature, and hope you won't change it.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
It appears to be that the majority of people do not have an issue with the username, so I likely will let it remain as status quo unless it actually does pose a problem or confusion when communicating with others (it hasn't in the past). I have no issue with undergoing a CHU if it is necessary, however I certainly would not change it in order to gain a support vote, that would be a rather poor reflection on my character if I did. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Indeed. I changed my signature during my RFA, but that was because it was in upside-down Unicode, which made me pretty-much impossible to search for on a page. Accessibility was a lot more important than cuteness, after all. I don't see a similar problem here. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ghibli

Yeah, I noticed you predated the movie by about a year before I posted the question, but figured I'd ask anyway. :-) Do you have a favorite? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't ventured much into the world of anime film, my taste runs a little closer to Rainer Werner Fassbinder and old-school Herzog. That's not to say I don't also enjoy the occasional guilty pleasures. And everyone should watch Shaun of the Dead at least once in their lives. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Then try Grave of the Fireflies -- it's so depressing they had to work on My Neighbor Totoro at the same time to cheer the animators up. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
ooooh, I like depressing. Depressing and dark. Thank for the tip!--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Etiquette discussion

Hi there PONYO, VASCO here,

regarding the discussion which was brought up about my antics, i thank you for your notification and your reply therein. Regarding User:ECanalla, i was not so "lucky", look at his last message to me (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:VascoAmaral#Notification_-_WQA). I have replied to him, and will obviously respect his wishes.

Kind regards - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Vasco - if I'm reading your correspondence correctly, it looks like the two of you may have worked out an agreement. You asked ECanalla "If i have any questions or doubts regarding football questions, can i write to you?" and they respoded "yes" on your talk page. So perhaps now that you've agreed to tone down the edit summaries the two of you will be able to work together? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 01:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, I hope you don't change all of your ways - your desire to maintain the articles is a valuable asset. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 01:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! I noticed your RfA, which seems to be going very well, and I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 14:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Michael Weston article's edition on his ethnic background

All I did was adding the categories of him being Polish-American and Jewish-American. I think this is obvious that he is one, because his paternal grandfather Arthur Rubinstein was a Polish Jew and paternal grandmother Nela Rubinstein, nee Młynarska, was Polish. They identified themselves Polish, so you can read about Arthur Rubinstein's acts of patriotism in the article on him. If he had Polish and Polish-Jewish grandparents, isn't he an American of Polish descent and an American of Jewish descent (not an American Jew, as we don't know about his religious beliefs)?? His father is categorised as a Polish-American and you didn't change this. Why? dd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.28.14.121 (talk) 22:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The categorization of individuals by religion, ethnicity, and descent is more rigorous than most other categories as it must be supported by sourced content and it must be specifically relevant to the individual. If there were reliable sources included to support the fact that Weston was of Polish and Jewish descent and that he identified as such then the inclusion of the category would be supported. In this particular case the categories meet neither of these criteria so it was removed. With regard to your concerns that other articles are categorized without meeting these conditions, well, other stuff exists; the Michael Weston article happened to be on my watchlist so I was aware when the categories were added. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 22:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
So, if there is no doubt that Arthur Rubinstein was a Polish Jew and his wife Nelly Rubinstein was Polish and considered themselves as Poles (born and raised in Poland, etc., etc.; do you really need any links to that? It's like demanding a source for Mstsislav Rostropovich's Russian ethnicity, for example), their son and grandson may not be of Polish descent? If we have a source that the A person is English and we have a source that the B person is A's son, do we need a source that B is in any way and maybe in some part only, English? dd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.28.14.121 (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
If there is no doubt that Arthur Rubinstein and Nelly Rubinstein were Polish/Jewish and there are sources confirming such, then the categories are applicable for their articles. You cannot simply add the category to all of their descendents in perpetuity as it does not meet the second requirement - that the category is somehow related to the individual's notability and that they personally identify with their Polish (or Greek, Danish, Puerto Rican etc.) ancestry. For example, if Michael Weston had mentioned the importance of his Polish/Jewish ancestry in an interview, or if he acknowledged that his ancestry factored in to the roles he chose, then the categories would be valid. This is not the case here, and where biographies of living people are concerned, it is better to leave possibly contentious categories out when there is doubt as to whether they apply. If you still believe the categories are applicable in this case and should be added, you can leave a message at the biographies of living people noticeboard for additional opinions. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 00:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
I just don't understand what Weston's personal beliefs about his possible Polish-American or Jewish-Americanship have to with a simple fact that he is of Polish and Jewish descent and nothing can change it. He doesn't need to identify himself as Jewish or Polish American and doesn't care about it at all, but his ancestry is an unquestionable fact. dd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.28.14.121 (talk) 10:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia has many guidelines and rules, generally hammered-out through consensus over a of time. In this instance the self-identification requirement for ethnic background categories has been determined to be an important component in the use of the category in biography articles. If you would like to try to propose changes to the guidelines, then the village pump is a good place to start. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ponyo/Archives/January/2011&oldid=1090595438"