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.
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.
Hello, Crisco 1492. Please check your email; you've got mail! 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 {{
ygm}} template.
A few bits I hope you find useful! Cheers - SchroCat (talk
) 13:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you right kindly! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Nonrenewal tag?
Re our discussion on Commons and here re no-notice tags: Based on that discussion I regretfully tagged two photos taken from the movie trailer of The Band Wagon. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 February 17. The two photos were tagged with a "non-renewed" notice, but I figured that the same argument applied. But notice the objection that another editor posted. Is this a valid point? Because if so, it would seem to be a safe harbor for trailers generally. Coretheapple (talk) 15:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
I tend to avoid "no renewal" owing to my connection (opening the files takes forever), so I'm not too familiar with it. I believe Stefan may be right about them explicitly needing to mention the trailer... quite possible, though again not my area of specialty. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
If so, wouldn't it possible that the "Good News" trailer screenshot that we discussed in Commons could have been retained if it had a "non-renewed" tag? I notice that it was just deleted. But maybe I could re-upload with a different tag? Coretheapple (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Make sure you understand the copyright law before you do so. I am not sure if Stefan's explanation is correct, and if it is not (i.e. if the renewal of an unqualified "Good News" was enough for both trailer and film) then there is very little chance that the trailer would be PD. (BTW, to be absolutely safe I'd check in the renewal books for 27, 28, and 29 years after, just to be sure it was not renewed early/late (or the renewal was not published early/late)) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
It's probably safer to just look for an unambiguous PD image. But I was surprised by his comment. I'll be interested to see how this plays out, because it could set the precedent for many old movie trailers. I notice that he uses the position I took initially in Commons, which is that the notice did not apply specifically to the trailer. Coretheapple (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
"I notice that he uses the position I took initially in Commons, which is that the notice did not apply specifically to the trailer." - I don't see that in his comment on the deletion page. I see a (probably valid, as I said above) point that, if the trailer was published before the film, its renewal would have to be separate. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
But that's precisely my point as well. Trailers are almost always published before the film. The same can be said about the Good News trailer. It was clearly done prior to the film, just as the Band Wagon trailer was before the film. That's why it seems to me that if his point is valid for the two Band Wagon screenshots it would be true for the Good News screenshot, or any pre-78 trailer screenshot. Coretheapple (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm discussing the issue in Commons with the administrator there who deleted the photo. Perhaps you'd like to participate?[1]Coretheapple (talk) 20:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
That this applies to renewals does not mean that this applies to notices. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Silver Certificate ready for FLC. I have found references that discuss "Silver Certificates" as well as "silver certificates" in mid sentence. Which (for the purpose of FLC) is correct? Thanks-Godot13 (talk
) 01:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Did any other country have SCs? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I wondered how long it would take for that to come up... ;-) The Republic of Hawaii and the Philippines both had a silver certificate issue. The name of the article/list should probably be changed. Does Silver Certificate (United States) sound okay? Would one then consistently refer to "U.S. silver certificate(s)"? - Godot13 (talk) 04:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
In that case I'd keep Silver Certificates in the article, but Silver Certificate (United States) as the article title. If the sources most commonly capitalize both letters, I'd go with both. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks!-Godot13 (talk) 04:48, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
And many returns! (And many fingers crossed that I won't get more ash dumped on me!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Fingers crossed! -Godot13 (talk) 05:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Given the complete overhaul of the article, could you look at this draft and let me know if you think (in your opinion) it will fly or if large and small size should be separate submissions? Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
If they are all in the same article, I'd include them all together. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
), and so the various countries and ethnicities seem treated inconsistently. Is there a reason that the former links constitute overlinking while the latter do not?
Empire of Japan and Dutch East Indies are both defunct countries, whereas Indonesia is not (defunct countries, one would assume, are not recognized by as many of our readers). Native Indonesians is not written in full (it's simply written "native", to avoid the anachronism of having "Indonesia" when the country wasn't independent yet), and thus ambiguous, whereas Japanese is not. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
E.W. Hornung, who is only remembered nowadays for one of his characters, rather than the rest of his considerable output. There's no rush, so whenever you get the chance, it would be much appreciated! Cheers - SchroCat (talk
) 21:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll try and get there tomorrow or something. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Browsing through the "People" categories of FP, I realised, that this year is the 45th anniversary of the first moon landing. As the landing took place on 20 July, therefore File:Apollo 11.jpg should be scheduled for that day. What do you think? ArmbrustTheHomunculus 03:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Definitely. Do you want to schedule, or should I? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I want to see good articles with galleries in it! Galleries are not discuraged! Why do people think that like nowadays? There was a time back 2008 when people thought so, but the policy changed. Why are people still keep on with these prejudices? However, prejudice still exists in subtle—and sometimes blatant—forms.
Fair point. If I ever go to an orchard or something which would go good with a gallery, I'll try and make one. Most of my topics, however, don't really fit the criteria. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Happy to hear you are OK. [2]Hafspajen (talk) 10:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
But you make a lot of good pictures, no? So why not? Hafspajen (talk) 11:56, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
"the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images". Hard to do that with a lost film — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
??? Have lost your films? Or what do you mean? Hafspajen (talk) 14:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
How are yours ashes? See, now you know what I mean. Why on earth a textual article on one of the most fanmous (Really famous) artists of the whole art history [3]? This is just sick. And still no gallery (well, yet) Hafspajen (talk) 07:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
They are slowly but surely being wiped away (and I'm feeling wiped out). That would be a decent contender for a gallery, but I think 30-something images is a bit much. Allan Warren is another strong contender for galleries. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
True, there were to many images, but not that this would motivate this latent
WP:Preserve. And are you asking me too look at Allan Warren
?
Did you try going to the talk page? As for Warren's article, it has a decent gallery, especially for a living artist... primarily because he uploads some of his work to Commons. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Did looked. I might think a bit too many pictures. An those new style galleries are not making it any better, one start feeling seasick when looking at it. I really don't like those galleries, it gives you a feeling of unbalance and kind of like someone is hitting you in the head with those pics. I prefer the ones with Mat (picture framing). How do you mean going to the talk page?The person making the iconoclasm didn't left any messages. Hafspajen (talk) 09:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Per
WP:BRD usually it's the one who is reverted who goes to the talk page. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 09:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Oh don't you excuse him butchering that poor Cranach the Elder. Don't people have respect nowadays for the elderly? Worked a little bit on Warren's article, and tried to make those pictures sorted out after wirhs. Really, this new gallery type can look quite scarry with all withs mixed up. Hafspajen (talk) 10:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Traditional medicine
Yes, yes it can. Very much so. In other news... I can breathe again! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
70 years after publication isn't enough. For this poster, for an American film, copyright would have been 28 years plus a chance to renew it for another 28 years; copyright was extended even further afterwards. See
OK. You are the expert. I just remembered about one of my big we don't want no galleries because they are discuraged - gallery -fights: the
Teddybear article(see talk page)- the teddy bear gallery war. an article with only two teddybears and one more slaughtered. (Ok, some tank too, and a big dumped bear mountain. Hafspajen (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
..Really, see yourself. Think kids who want to see nice teddybears and find teddybears ... from the garbage. Hafspajen (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
.*Well, do YOU like that article? Or is it just me? Hafspajen (talk) 01:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
It needs some serious work, yes, but overall the images are alright. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Chrisco. Teddy bears are nice fluffy things!!! Hafspajen (talk) 01:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, and the images have some fluff. They are mostly short-hair bears (as opposed to bears short in hares), but they look fluffy enough. Old bears were a bit firmer, from my understanding. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes old bears are hard. There are there already. Why noy some new? I mean is the image of teddy bear complete with teddys from 1800 hundreds? This should be in the article Teddy bear. But it is going to be removed when I put it there. Hafspajen (talk) 02:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
For the newest bears, there are likely going to be some copyright issues. See COM:TOYS. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
.Oh, my good Chrisco. Go ahead and kill them. Hafspajen (talk) 02:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Can't. Roosevelt's spirit may just decide to come and kill me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
.Nice. But no, not Roosevelt. He was a good man. But I can predict thar if we put this into the article they will be reverted. I can bet on it. Do you really think they would not add to that article? Hafspajen (talk) 03:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
On a serious note? I'd put a piece of prose describing the varieties of teddy bears (costumed, firm, soft, long hair, short hair) etc. That would support a gallery well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
..Yes please do it. Show me how you would do it. It would be wery interesting to se how somone else would make a gallery like you describe it, someone who is good with pictures. I was just working a lot with Egon Shiele, and it was your fault. Saw your pic. Hope it will nor be reverted. Just tried to make that artist's works show up better. Hope there is not someone in love with the article as it was before, wasn't depicting his best works, I would say. Hafspajen (talk) 04:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I promised Victoria I'd have a look through Ezra Pound, so not today. Tomorrow perhaps. (Side note: I think Schiele just turned me off of sex for a while... her eyes...) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I understand what you mean. As an artist he is wery good, those lines and colours - some of those pictures are good, really; but - I got an increasing feeling of uneasiness, while working with it. He was weird somehow. But it is HIS problem. Hafspajen (talk) 07:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Types of teddy bears
Wrong label on commons for this picture. Now this is pretty sure that it is Alexander Roslin[4]; [5]; [6]
Anne Vallayer-Coster. The weird thing that we uploaded this as an ev, selfportrait of her...?
As a member of the Académie des Beaux-Arts Roslin had access to exhibit at the Salon. He came to exhibit since 1753 at 18 exhibitions at the biennial Art Salon in Paris.[1] At the 1783 exhibition Art Salon in Paris Roslin contributed with two paintings, one a self-portrait and the other was a painting of Anne Vallayer-Coster. The painting is depicting the artist's colleague, the painter Anne Vallayer-Coster and it was the first time this painting was shown to a wider audience.
Roslin's popularity with both the foreign and the Swedish audience during his lifetime but even today is undisputed. He enrolls in the Art history as one of the foremost portrait painters of his time. He was widely known was his masterful ability to reproduce the silks, lace, pearls and gold filaments in those times fashionable garments. But even Roslin's ability to capture the personality of the people he depicted made him popular among the clients and makes us even today, a few hundred years later, still feel we get close to the people he painted. He was flattering and beautified his models many times, according to the Rococo ideal. The depicted person follows the viewer with a wakeful eye and becomes present for the viewer through space and time. [2]The peculiar beauty of the portrait depicting Mme Anne Vallayer-Coster is more than an official artist's portraits; it's probably a gift for a painting she gave him, a painting he had in his possession. Many of Roslin's portraits from the same era represent today unknown beauties, from the Parisian high society, but he has managed to produce the Anne Vallayer-Coster 's personality as well as her beauty. This painting became much debated after the Salon such as in the Le Véridique au Salon, where it was described as the "belonged to the artist's best". The painting with its sophisticated composition and workmanship is characteristic for Roslin. He depicted his model in the gentle cool color scale; in green, white, and blue, with the artist attributes palette and brushes. The picture has been compared to the contemporary artist Elisabeth Vigée-Lebruns celebrated self-portrait. Thise painting was sometimes misinterpreted by art historians as a self-portrait. Made this for you, but when it is done, I put that into the article. Hafspajen (talk) 22:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Oh those are nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:19, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
A Lume Spento
I've been watching your work on
talk
) 03:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Banerjee, Ron D. K., "Dante through the Looking Glass: Rossetti, Pound, and Eliot", Comparative Literature, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Spring, 1972), pp. 136-149.
Dasenbrock, Reed Way, "Ezra Pound, the Last Ghibelline", Journal of Modern Literature, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Spring, 1990), pp. 511-533
Those look interesting. I'll bookmark this, but right now I want to help Victoriaearle fill in the (surprisingly numerous) unlinked redlinks in Pound's biography (she, Ceoil, and SlimVirgin are refurbishing the main Pound article in preparation for an FAC run). Victoria made a stub on Cathay, so I am likely to go there next so that she and the others can focus on the main article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I think Pound used to be a FAC if I recall correctly. I'd like to see where that goes. Keep me informed when it gets there, I look forward to it. I recently read a PhD dissertation on a forensic psychology analysis of early poems/work product and syntax to gain an insight on the early development/manifestation of his mental illness. A colleague of mine who advising sent me a copy.--
talk
) 03:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Butting in: no it was never FA. Crisco, I have at least 3000 pages of deadwood sources within an arm's reach, so I have a ton to add to Cathay - I'll get there. There's no deadline. Victoria (tk) 04:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Never an FA, but at FAC (I think that's what the Colonel means). Alright, I'll let Cathay be then. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, that came out a bit wrong. I'm thinking of rejigging the main page a bit is what I meant. And I don't want you feel burdened having to fill the red links, is all. Apologies for the late night crankiness. Victoria (tk) 17:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah. No worries about filling in the redlinks. The articles are fairly important, and are complementing the PR (I wouldn't have thought of a couple of the questions I asked without further reading into Pound and his relationships), which should hopefully give a better final article. Now if only Pound's work were readily available here... those dedications and whatnot would be quite useful for article writing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Bruno Mars
I have nominated this article a while ago as you can see it on it's talk page Talk page. The article as "vanished" from the featured list nominations and is nowhere to be found. Could you tell me what happend? You have asked also something to the reviewer regarding the article and I also answered it.
Thank You MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Precisely. It had already been up for well over two months and had received almost no attention. I suggest going through the list with a fine-toothed comb before nominating it again, and maybe reviewing other nominations to spur others into reviewing yours. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Abang Woodrich, anda diundang untuk memberikan suara di sini. Abang, kalau perbuatan mengirimkan undangan diskusi ke banyak pengguna seperti ini daat dikategorikan sebagai penganvasan? Terima kasih. Hanamanteo (talk) 01:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Saya anggap itu sebagai canvassing, ya. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
DYK prep to queue promotion?
Crisco, there isn't a queue ready, and the next promotion is in about 20 minutes. Prep 3 is ready to go; if you're still around and see this and no one else has gotten there first, it would be great if you could take care of this one. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Sure. A little break from Pound won't hurt. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Re: Ezra Pound
These all appear to be wire service photos and some are PD. The Library of Congress did some checking of the AP and UPI photos in their collections and found the following for both news services:
LOC's legal department researched copyrights for both and found that few, if any, of the old photos in their collection have registered copyrights and that those that did, weren't renewed.
" However, the Library’s legal office has advised the Division that photographs published with proper copyright notices between 1923-1963 may be protected if properly renewed, while works published after 1963 and unpublished photographs in the collection may be protected even if they were not registered with the Copyright Office."
So the deal is to look them up for renewals. I've just checked on the 2 photos for 1945:
Checked UPenn's copyright pages for artwork renewals in 1972 and 1973; there are no renewals for Associated Press. Will continue on with the rest and post the info here. We hope (talk) 14:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, We hope, for confirming my suspicions on that 1945 picture. I'll see if I can find a non-watermarked version for upload. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Checked copyright.gov and there are no 1985 or 1986 AP renewals for these. We hope (talk) 15:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Listen, if it's too much of a hassle for you you don't need to check the renewals... I just wanted to verify that you wouldn't have expected a copyright notice on these images (as you are usually the one who trawls Ebay) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
No UPI renewals at copyright.gov for this for 1988-1989. I probably would steer clear of the other two because there's no date on the back. ;) We hope (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
SCOTUS FLs
Sorry to take some time to respond to you ... my son is home on winter break and he monopolizes the computer a lot, so I've been prioritizing the article I've been working on.
I was, interestingly enough, thinking as I have been adding to it lately that List of United States Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment would make a good Fl someday, if we tableized like all the other ones. However, we'd want to make all the red links blue, and that could take time. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
An award given to you on behalf of people you have helped
There are dozens of people who have written and nominated fifty of there own articles. This is a major achievement, however the award that you get is not in my opinion the highest award given by the DYK project. The highest award are given to the people who nominate other peoples articles. Its a selfless task and it is not "easy" ... its tricky. You are one of the few with a fifty award. Brilliant! Well done! Victuallers (talk) 23:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Har har. Thanks, Victuallers! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Support that! (at #99, 100 will be a female philosopher with a history) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I started working on photos when I realized how many articles had none, and now it seems I never stop, as I see them and feel guilty If I don't do something with them! Really hope I can somehow get back to working more on articles and submit some I've worked a lot on over time for at least GA. Perry Como was submitted by someone who had apparently seen my working and working on it when I first came to WP, so I'm really a newbie in that respect. :) Thanks again! We hope (talk) 17:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
About talk pages, [7] cannot be good faith, you must check edit history of that user. He has registered only for trashing the talk page. OccultZone (Talk) 03:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
It's not necessarily assuming good faith, but rather that Twinkle only allows you to enter reasons for reverting with the "AGF" rollback. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
That's funny. I can also enter a reason if I click on "restore this version" and "rollback". (For the later you need to tick the box at "Prompt for reason for normal rollbacks" on Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences.) ArmbrustTheHomunculus 09:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah, that works. But I tend to click the "AGF rollback" first, and only use "Restore this version" if the entire thing is messed up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
FLC
Hello, I want to talk to you about my FLC of
Natalia Kills discography was still up for approvals but I did not know the rules; will this one slip through or will you close it? It's kind of awkward to have it just floating by. If its nomination won't be canceled, please tell me. Thank you. Prism△
11:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I wasn't planning on closing it, no. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
OK, thank you for your quick response. Prism△ 11:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Portrait name
Re our discussion of the name and capitalisation of the Streatham portrait, I would welcome your opinion as to what
this page that I've just started should be called. The lost painting of Bonnie Prince Charlie, the "lost painting" of Bonnie Prince Charlie, Portrait of Bonnie Prince Charlie, Portrait of Bonnie Prince Charlie (Ramsay), or use Charles Edward Stuart rather than BPC, etc, etc. I'm not sure if the current name (Lost Portrait > lost portrait?) is quite right, althought it was the name of the BBC programme last night. Thanks, Ericoides (talk
) 09:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
As "Lost portrait" is not part of a proper title, I'd certainly use sentence case there. (Quick note: PD-Art does not cover frames [which are 3D] and as such the picture needs to be cropped further) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I think you're right. I think lost portrait of Charles Edward Stuart is best pro tem. Thanks for the info re the frame; I didn't know that. Ericoides (talk) 13:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
It's not that well known, but it is certainly a pain when it comes to tracking down free images. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Albert Pound
Hi-I just started an article about Albert Pound who served in the Wisconsin State Assembly in 1873 and was also Mayor of Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin. Okay his brother was Thaddeus C. Pound who served in the United States Congress and the Wisconsin Legislature. Thaddeus Pound was the grandfather of Ezra Pound; Albert Pound was Ezra Pound's great uncle. I think Ezra Pound wrote Albert Pound in some of his poems. I thought you might be interested. Thank you-RFD (talk) 15:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Jane's sleeves
Apropos of very little, this image has sleeves very like those in the Streatham portrait. It's French, and we know it from a folio published in 1567, but the underlying drawing could be earlier. Curiouser and curiouser. Digging continues... :-) - PKM (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Fairly certain that the Benjamin West painting was the (inspiration) artwork for this U.S. National banknote design, the $10 Series 1882 Brown Back (much more my area than the lists I'm currently working on). If there is a way to tie these together to make the painting more encyclopedic let me know.-Godot13 (talk) 08:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Possible. If there were sources, in an article on the painting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Sources are tricky (Auction house descriptions), but I can cite this.-Godot13 (talk) 20:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I think that we may be able to cite auction houses, but I'm not sure. The source you've linked to doesn't make the connection. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Does this work? (p.122 in google book preview mode). There is also this, or this, or [these #44/45...-Godot13 (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
That Franklin's depicted with the kite, sure, but I'm still not seeing a connection to Benjamin West. That's the issue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, what I need I'm not going to find on line... I'll see if I can find any documentation at the Smithsonian...-Godot13 (talk) 00:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
See if I ever, EVER try to do a restoration for a TFA again. I'm getting complaints that, because I couldn't do an absolutely perfect restoration in the couple hours before I noticed it, that the far far far far more damaged version should be reverted to.
Ungrateful, ignorant pricks. Adam Cuerden(talk) 04:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
What the hell's happening? Where's the complaints? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I don't get what's going on in the article page, but thank you for taking it to talk. MSci has cleaned up the (other) image, and hopefully that's a good compromise for now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Just a lot of rude reverts. I honestly cannot take any more stress right now, I'm already hugely stressed out over events happening tomorrow. Adam Cuerden(talk) 05:05, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Tomorrow? Anywho, MSci is also talking on the talk page, and I've weighed in with my 2 cents... hopefully we can reach a consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Long story short, an interview with people who, last time I had an interview with them, lied about what I said to the point of screwing me over utterly. Adam Cuerden(talk) 05:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Ugh. Well, best of luck with that... sure hope things work out better this time. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:17, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
DYK for William Brooke Smith
nominate
) 10:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Chinese Malay literature
Good to see you've been venturing into this. Hazard a guess, how many articles potentially do you think there could be on novels and short stories etc? We have less than 10 at present. There's probably several hundreds novels at least right let alone short stories and other works?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Claudine Salmon counted 3,891 or something like that (I don't have my books in front of me). Of these, I'd say at least 50 are probably notable. Then we have the authors, who are poorly covered as well. I think we only have five or six authors so far. (BTW, check out njai if you have the time; something very different than what we face now). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah obviously some are more notable than others. Makes you wonder how many "hidden" topics there are on here for things like New Guinean literature and some of the more obscure island areas of Indonesia. Although I can't imagine some of the truly primitive areas of the country having much in the way of literature due to illiteracy, but art and crafts and other things maybe like Maluku art.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
If you ever get a chance, some British authors wrote considerably on Javanese and Malay manuscripts (now that's another undercovered topic). Raffles took a whole bunch back to England with him... I think they're in SOAS now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Can you give some examples of missing notable authors or whatever? Might look into starting a few this week.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll have a look later. Just started Tamu Agung which you might add to sometime when you're less busy.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:54, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I am about 99% sure that one was shown internationally, and about 80% sure it won some sort of award. I've got two booklets from Perfini on my computer, which should have some behind the scenes stuff, and there's always filmindonesia.or.id for the plot summary. I'll try and get to it before bed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
The name actually seems familiar, although it might be from Darah seeing it in the filmography. I'd imagine it would have more info than those early 40s films anyway!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
One would think... Actually, I may I have one or two articles about it in the collection of 1950s magazines I digitized at Sinematek Indonesia last year. Can't say I was paying attention to the films (was too busy squeeing at the free images) but it's the right period. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I've stubbed Tan Boen Soan. Probably riddled with errors and in wrong categories. Yep, could find nothing in English, I deciphered it. I won't create any more for now anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, Dr. B, I've added another 1000 characters and have an image coming. Sadly none of the magazines I scanned have an article on the film. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Looks good. I think I might consider creating all of Usmar's films sometime. They're central in many ways to Indonesian film of that period.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Very, if you believe the canon (which was written by people involved with Perfini, mostly, but that's just my inner cynic showing). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Left you a note. Drmies (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
One month?
Enjoy! Drmies (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Same as Materialscientist gave him. In other, better news, I will soon be Crisco, M.A. ... at least, if I don't blow my thesis defence. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
So...anything new? Drmies (talk) 05:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Need an admin, never had to report vandalism before
I suspect these two are the same user (same behaviour/action and same day), I was thinking of mentioning this at AN/I, but I hate going to the noticeboard.--
talk
) 23:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
User talk:206.208.180.240, an HBO IP address, has four times blanked a section at
WP:AIV, or contacting an admin you know who's online. IP blocked, as it continued even after the final warning. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 00:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks, now that Kafziel has been desysopped, I realized I didn't know many current admins until I saw that matter with HectorMoffet the other day. Makes me consider a RfA but I'd never pass it. I'll keep AIV in mind for future reference, I didn't remember that one.--
talk
) 02:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
It's a good board, a lot calmer than ANI, somehow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Likely because one was uploaded on Wikipedia, and not uploaded to Commons, whereas the other was only on Commons (where it did not have a naming conflict). Anyways, fixed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
.Thanks. Are you going to be online?Hafspajen (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
After scheduling POTD I plan to turn of the laptop and start wiping down the house... again. Still some leftover ash. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
[10]. Cleaning is over? Hafspajen (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Tamu Agung
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 Crisco-
Quick question- on this list are several countries that do not permit reproduction of their currency (e.g., Bulgaria, Chile, etc). After 75 or 100 years from the date of issue, does the copyright become moot (expire)?
PS Found a De Javasche Bank 5 Guilden note from 1866... Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 00:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not sufficiently familiar with those countries laws to give an answer. Some countries, such as the UK, allow a never-ending copyright for certain works (i.e. the novel Peter Pan and the
King James Bible are both still copyrighted in the UK). I think Adam's suggestion is probably the most practical. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 00:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I think the Bible one is due to expire in another few decades, finally. Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
" under transitional arrangements (Schedule I, section 13(1)) these printing rights do not fully expire until 2039." - Wow.. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Adam and Crisco, I appreciate both responses. Is there a way for me to load images onto English Wikipedia myself (understanding that it would only be for the PD-US-1923-abroad currency scenario)?-Godot13 (talk) 01:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
@Godot13: Oh, yeah. Special:Upload. It works pretty much identically to Commons', and has the same 100 MB limit, if I'm not mistaken. Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Fantastic, many thanks-Godot13 (talk) 01:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Though - have they fixed it to put the {{Information}} template in there for you yet, Crisco? Oh, and one other thing - you can create your own image categories, but ideally include the word "images" in the category name, and explain in the category description that the images can't be moved to commons, so making them easily navigatable is a useful goal. . Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Not too sure how they've got it set up. I just use the plain upload, and use a ready-made template. File:Bakrie Tower, Jakarta.jpeg was uploaded like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
So, if the printers made the mistake of issuing the album with only "Photos by Karl Ferris" it would in fact be PD in the US? GabeMc(talk|contribs) 00:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Assuming this is the US edition and there was no notice on the inside covers, and it was published before 1972 and not registered within 5 years. — Crisco 1492 (talk)
Its the US edition, which was published in 1967. How would I confirm whether or not it was registered within five years? Its my understanding that if the cover art were published without notice then its PD. Are you saying that even if it were published without a proper CRN in 1967 if it was registered by 1972 its not PD? GabeMc(talk|contribs) 18:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, I have the latest version from 2010, and the liner notes indicate that the lyrics and music are copyrighted, but it does not indicate that the cover art is. In fact, it states exactly what the original did, that the photos are by Karl Ferris, but not that they are copyrighted. GabeMc(talk|contribs) 18:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The danger with that is that the 2010 edition wouldn't have needed a notice to be assumed to be in copyright. Anything after... 1977... wouldn't have needed a notice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, but what do I have to do if I am going to prove that the album cover was issued without a CRN? The original does not have one, so what's the next step? GabeMc(talk|contribs) 22:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
You could try and check if copyright was renewed; if it was, then obviously there was copyright on the original cover. This gives an overview of how to do so. You'd be searching here, since renewal would have been after 1977. I have to go to campus shortly, so I can't do it for you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I see no evidence that a copyright on the album cover was ever renewed. So now there is no evidence that it was issued with a notice and no evidence that it a CR was renewed. What's next, because I'm pretty sure that it is in fact PD. GabeMc(talk|contribs) 18:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
It's possible, and looking increasingly likely. Just a question, though: did you click on the individual entries as well, to see what was included in the renewal? It may be that the cover was included with something else. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
I clicked on each entry and all of them pertain to music and lyrics. As with the original LP, all that is stated is that the photos are by Ferris. The only copyright symbol present is next to the Reprise logo. GabeMc(talk|contribs) 01:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Which symbol? (R) or (C) or (P)? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, then that is not a copyright, but a trademark notice. I must say, it appears that you are correct in that this is PD. If you upload to Commons, I strongly recommend noting exactly what you have looked through to determine that this cover is PD-no notice, to avoid further deletion debates. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Well, it would be nice if we could get the old file undeleted, because it was of a better quality then what I will be able to produce. If you do that I'll improve the justification so that it won't get deleted again. GabeMc(talk|contribs) 01:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm not an admin on Commons, so I cannot do that. I suggest talking to Fastily, who closed the deletion discussion, and ask him to restore the image, pointing to this discussion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
DYK for A Lume Spento
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.
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! Rosiestep (talk
) 06:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Hornung
Following a very productive and useful PR (for which, once again, my thanks),
E.W. Hornung has made his way to FAC for wider consideration. Any further thoughts or comments would be most welcome. - SchroCat (talk
) 13:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Will drop by soon. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not going to revert him again on this article. I had my 2 reverts. OccultZone (Talk) 12:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm... rather not interested in continuing to look over the article. It's like putting a finger in a dyke and hoping to hold out the ocean. Each individual has 3R, and if there are 5 editors consistently putting POV in, and only 2 or 3 trying to keep it out, then the editors trying to keep to NPOV are going to lose. Period. It's definitely not for the good of the encyclopedia, but we're boxed in like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
FLC
Hello Crisco 1492, by the advice of Axe21, I just want you to know that
List of songs recorded by Natalia Kills' FLC has reached consensus with 6 supports, so I think it is ready to be closed. Prism△
22:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll try and get by FLC later. A little busy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:58, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Early De Javasche Bank note
Crisco- Thought you might find this interesting.-Godot13 (talk) 06:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Thought you'd like it. I'm having difficulty with the correct license. Is there a PD-Netherlands tag that works? Unidentified works (currency) are PD after 70 years...-Godot13 (talk) 06:54, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
What about {{
Anonymous-EU}}? That's what the Dutch copyright would be. The Indonesian would be the government one, I believe. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 06:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you...-Godot13 (talk) 07:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Always glad to help. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
FLC closer
Hi, you got your point to archive this one but I had responded TRM and Vensatrys' concerns at February 8. Since then they didn't re-visit the page so I dropped them messages today with Vensatry responding. This was nearly to conclude, I guess! Regards, —ZiaKhan 04:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Vensatry replied that "There are quite a few concerns which still remain unaddressed", so I don't think it was quite there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, that's your call. If a user do not revisit the page how can I proceed with the discussion? —ZiaKhan 04:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Their talk pages, article talk page... both are open. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
You can ping him/her again, you know, especially if it's been two weeks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
If one clearly stops me to ping him or says that he is watching the page then how can I ping him? —ZiaKhan 04:52, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
A ping at the nomination, or on his talk page, after two weeks of "I'll get to it, I promise" is reasonable. After every time you reply... that would be an issue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
I think they've gotten a 'thank notification'. —ZiaKhan 05:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
@Sahara4u:You cannot expect reviewers to immediately respond the moment you ping, especially when you yourself took a break for about a week or so. In fact, I was there just before Crisco archived the nomination (check the history). Besides, I saw a few unaddressed comments which you presume to be resolved. The prose is still weak in many places. The list is not FL-worthy at the moment, probably needs a good c/e from a GOCE user. —Vensatry(Ping) 05:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
@Vensatry: Can I expect them within 20 days? I know the prose is still very weak, it would be much improved if the users have replied earlier. What do you think should I wait another 20 days to get your response? You didn't see these comments I drew your attention there today/last night! And who said that I took a wiki-break? —ZiaKhan 05:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
During my first visit, I had mentioned that apart from the listed out concerns the prose needs improvement. You did not make any copy-edits apart from fixing the listed out concerns. Isn't that enough to say that you were least bothered about improving the prose? Secondly, I said a spotcheck may be carried out, as I found a few sources failing WP:V. TRM had also mentioned about this before I did. In the end, you say that you're aware that the prose is "still very weak". Don't you think it's necessary to ensure that the article meets the criteria (at least with the prose) before nominating this list? FLC is not a place to improving articles from nothing to one of the finest works. We have other departments to do that. —Vensatry(Ping) 08:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
@Vensatry: You said all this in your first visit and forgot to revisit. In next 20 days they are playing in T20 world cup and you will ask a for spot-checking again, right? TRM also wanted me to update the list. —ZiaKhan 12:15, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
FLC question
Hey Crisco! I just wanted to know why my FLC was not promoted in your latest round of promotions. It already has 3 support votes and there appears to be no unresolved comments holding it up. However, if there's something missing or anything that still needs to be addressed, please tell me and I'll be more than happy to fix it. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
I didn't get that far up the list, that's all. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh, OK. In that case, take your time and don't worry about it :) —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Another Yorkshire cricketer
Bobby Peel, a rather obscure Victorian cricketer is at PR at the moment. If you have the time or inclination, your comments would be welcome here. No problem if you are too busy (or sickened by reviewing cricketers!) Sarastro1 (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do, but I've got a translation order I'm dealing with right now. Maybe sometime next week. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
When you get a chance on the Peel review, I replied to your image concerns but had a question or two as well. Mainly on the Hawke image. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Njai
On 1 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Njai, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Dutch East India Company attempted to eliminate the njai by importing orphaned girls from the Netherlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Njai. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 23:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Question
First of all, I want to thank you for support you have given me. In my recent successful RfA, I promised to be opened to recall with specific terms similar to User:TParis/Recall. Before I make any edits that require the mop, I wanted to cement my own recall process, including a list of editors who can specifically call for the recall of my administrative rights. Due to my high level of respect for you and your opinion, I wanted to know if I could include you on said list. Thanks, -- TLSuda (talk) 20:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
If you want to include me, I don't mind. I doubt it will be necessary, but I understand if you want to play it safe. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Chris- I suspect you expected this, but I'm just coming here to protest your closure. New information was introduced at the end of the nomination which likely undermined the reasons used for support, and at least a good case for holding the nomination while research/inquiries were ongoing. There is good precedent for not closing when new information is introduced- can I humbly suggest that you overturn the closure and put it on hold for further discussion/consideration? If this isn't done, I'm going to do a little further research myself and will perhaps nominate the image for delisting within a week, which I'm not sure is in anyone's interests. J Milburn (talk) 12:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I did rather expect it, yes. For my answer, I've looked to precedent of what happens when existing FPs are of something which is thought possibly misidentified. There was one, a fungus shot by JJ Harrison, which stayed at
WP:POTD/Unused for a long time before it was delisted for not being in an article. JJ asked me to hold back another, File:Actinidia chinensis - Austins Ferry.jpg, as he's not sure he identified it correctly. An image thought to be of Ebony Bones was delisted after it was found that the individual was misidentified (it was actually a backing singer), and there was not enough EV there for the image to retain its status. Now, for this image: from the discussion on the nomination page, it is clear to me that this image would have good value in Species complex (possibly even enough to warrant FP on its own merits) and, if it is found to be misidentified, the article Stereum hirsutum could use a decent image as well. As such, rather than delisting I think that (if it is found to be misidentified) the proper step would just be to change the target article. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 15:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
It's potentially an example of a species complex, but I'm not sure it's the best example. It's certainly an example of that particular species complex, but we've no article on that. Just so we're clear, Sasata has already made a fix on FP page and changed the picture in the article, with good reason. It's already unused. I'm not sure what the next step is going to be, but it's hardly the ideal situation for a newly promoted FP! J Milburn (talk) 20:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Stereum does not have a good image, and that's a good place for information on the species complex to be written. Would Sasata be willing to write a paragraph or two on the similarities of the two species? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:57, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes … eventually. BTW, I checked another source with global distribution maps of both species; S. hirsutum is found just about everywhere, while S. ostrea is found just about everywhere except Europe! Sasata (talk) 22:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
In that case I'll move the image into the Stereum article and species in complex, where it still has EV. Sasata, I may make a mistake in the image caption, so I would appreciate it if you check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations on Today's featured article
Congratulations on having the article you helped improve to
Thanks Cirt! But you've put up a hard act to follow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, but certainly all
Featured Article contributors across topics should deserve credit for the effort they put in to quality improvement projects on Wikipedia. Thanks again for your high quality contributions, — Cirt (talk
Oh, so there you were whimpering about how inadequate you felt this article to be, and now you've got the balls to plaster it on FAC, eh? Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:14, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh, that was so two weeks ago. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:54, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Criscooo!
You may remove it. Just seeking some attention at Phil's page.
Oh, I don't think he minds. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
New article
I just wanted to ask your advice about a new article I have just written. I'd like to submit it for DYK, but it's pretty gruesome and the impact on Hong Kong is highly negative. I'd appreciate your advice on how I should present Knife attack on Kevin Lau, and a suitable hook would be most appreciated. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 08:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Hmm... has anyone called Hong Kong a bastion of free speech in China or something like that? Contrasting two statements (free speech / press censorship) might be pretty effective. Cirt may have ideas as well, as topics like this are right up his alley — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
It looks quite well-sourced to good references. — Cirt (talk) 16:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, can I ask you to give this a quick once-over? The original reviewer was an IP who went through two addresses in a two-part review, and was willing to pass this even with "citation needed" templates, showing that while this person knows about Wikipedia (based on the IP histories of those addresses), this is not someone who knows DYK rules. Although the templates have been dealt with, I'm worried that other issues might be lurking. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:07, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
I am uncomfortable with
WP:MEDRS (i.e. don't quite understand it), and the topic is a bit above me as well. Perhaps another reviewer would be willing to take this? — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 17:45, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Ida
We still on for the Ida FPs on the 31st? I'll try to get Flint updated for the 4 April second half, if that's still alright.
Yeah, Ida's still on. Haven't gotten that far in scheduling. Regarding Ukraine... I think it best to avoid pushing those onto the MP ASAP, as it is possible that people may think (perhaps rightly) "Oh, this was only featured because it's in the news right now" and "Don't they know people are dying right now? And yet they still show these pictures." Sorry if that reasoning isn't very clear. I really should be in bed (blasted master's thesis) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, I've just posted my second copyvio warning template on User talk:Twotimer17; it's the third one on this user's talk page in the past five weeks. (The copying edit was this one.) Last time I told the user that a block would be forthcoming, but I'm damned if I can find what page to report it to. I don't think this is a bad person, just enthusiastic, wanting to be first with the latest info, and somewhat heedless. Still, this is unacceptable behavior, and needs to be stopped. I think a block would do that.
Should I report this somewhere, or is it the case that I need to find an admin (such as yourself) to take the appropriate action? Thanks for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
You can generally ping an admin, I'd say. If it's a serial copyvio editor, then Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations is where you'd go for clean-up... but that's usually pretty backed up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Crisco, and thanks for taking care of it. I don't run into this often, so with luck I'll remember that it's an admin request for non-major cases. I'll keep an eye out when Twotimer returns after the block to make sure the behavior doesn't recur; I'm guessing that CCI would be overkill—and, as you note, it's backed up, and they recently lost one of their best contributors, Wizardman, to retirement. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Before I got the mop (I know you don't want it, but it helps) I basically memorized the on-Wiki schedules of some active admins. Generally I pinged MaterialScientist (we were active at similar times) though I also bugged MRG et al.. Something similar may help, though obviously you've done something like this for DYK. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Your post[13] was removed, so I'll reply here: it isn't my requested move.
talk
) 09:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
An accidental removal (as part of an edit conflict): my apologies, Crisco! - SchroCat (talk) 10:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Mackintosh TFAR
As the image issue has been resolved, perhaps you would strike your oppose – or add further reasons why this should not be TFA? Brianboulton (talk) 11:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Just the image. Be right there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Reliable sources question
Another of my "little secrets"
WMAQ (AM). Asked for input here Talk:WMAQ (AM) because the information was discovered in an unusual way and there's still no idea as to who the writer was. Based on my findings that the information was used in ads by the station, I believe the account could be considered a RS. However, there's something else re: RSs. latest "addition" and also added here. The information is not yet published and there appears to be a COI. Can you help, please? Thanks, We hope (talk
) 00:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Not reliable, no. Don't think I need to step in though, unless he reverts your revert. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks much! Any opinion on the talk page information would be appreciated. My feeling is that since other information discovered backs it up, we could consider the Gootee writings as reliable. We hope (talk) 13:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I would not cite a yet-to-be-published book, as the contents and page numbers can change dramatically between revisions. As I'm planning to publish my master's thesis, I'm getting first-hand experience with that baloney. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I wish Samuels would publish what he has in a book! Will just have to keep searching for info that mirrors what was written back then. Thanks! We hope (talk) 14:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
New FLC question
Hello Crisco, as you know my FLC nomination which has reached consensus is taking awhile to be approved by the bot, so I was wondering, when can I send a new nomination? Prism△ 17:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, once an article has been promoted by a delegate you are free to make a new nomination. You do not have to wait for the bot. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Peel at FAC
Just to let you know that Mr Peel is now at FAC. The review is here if you wish to comment further. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:33, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, might you be able to sort this one out? It's a proposed April Fools Day hook by The C of E, and there appears to be a major objection by O'Dea to part of the article content and the hook proposals. Thanks for anything you can do. (PS: I've asked Orlady to take a look at that Cranial nerve DYK.) BlueMoonset (talk) 16:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey, Crisco, what do you think of this as a GA candidate? It's on the short side, but seems fairly decent. Adam Cuerden(talk) 09:01, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, for one thing that eyesore of a fair-use image needs to go. Upload a freely licensed image locally, as English Wikipedia only needs to recognize US FOP laws. Compare File:Moscow State University crop.jpg.
As for prose... I'm not all that well versed on stadiums. Looks decent, for now, not that much shorter than National Press Monument. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:09, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
We don't actually have an image more freely-licensed than that. I agree it's ugly, but it's better than nothing. Adam Cuerden(talk) 09:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Then I don't think it's ready for GAC.
WP:NFCC#1 and all that. Odd how we have interior shots but no exteriors. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 09:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I'd suspect it's because any freely-licensed ones got deleted off of Commons. Adam Cuerden(talk) 09:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Are you still an admin on Commons? You'd probably be able to rescue one or two. Or we can ask someone else. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Srigala Item
Bang, Anda diundang untuk memberikan suara di sini dan sini. Terima kasih. Hanamanteo (talk) 10:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Appreciate your inquiry. I'm in LA, the final stop on my slow trip home (with the poor weather at home, I have been in no hurry as I'm in no position to maneuver on ice). My hotel is not far from Venice Beach, where I can get my walking in while dodging skateboarders, Segways, and those who wish you to purchase a medical marijuana recommendation from tame doctors. The arm is slowly healing, apparently the break was not trivial, still the doctor seemed pleased with progress and I'll see one in Virginia early next week. At least I can type without pain.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I hear you... wow, that sounds like a drag. At least LA is sunny, even with all the smog. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Swift return of service
I have just put the article on John Gielgud up for peer review, and if you have time and inclination to comment there, I shall be even further in your debt than I am already after all your help with the images. Tim riley (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Saw that. Will try and get a few words in after I deal with this copyediting order ($30 for maybe an hour and a half's work, with the Indonesian cost of living (a bottle of Coke being $0.40)? Sometimes I love being a native speaker) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I own this booklet. It was actually pretty cheap. My copy is in far better condition, but, while certainly worth scanning, do ye think it'd fly at FP? Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
"Pretty cheap" for a 1915 booklet in decent condition? (Better than that, at least?) Sounds good. Re: image: I think we could push for the EV value of a first edition cover. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
uncleaned
cleaned
Whatcha think? Colours are about right on the booklet itself, though you could probably lighten or darken it slightly to reflect different lightings. Adam Cuerden(talk) 14:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hmm... there is probably room for a bit more flyspecking, and I see a light line in the restoration that wasn't in the original (viewer's top left corner, about 1000px in; there's a halo about 400 px south of that). Mostly pretty good, although I'm getting the feeling that the scanner was OOF in some places (did the book not lay flat? see the top edge)... curious as to why the crop is so loose, but considering how it's frayed can't really help that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure I quite follow your light line directions. 1000px to the right or down? Also, my scanner tends to create lines when the view is highly out of focus, so I did blur around the edges a bit; I thought I avoided the top edge, but may have screwed it up - trivial to redo. If you'd like, I'll send you the original TIFF to play with. Or maybe I'll rescan it against a black background? Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Thousand pix in, viewer's right. I'm headed to bed right now, but I'd be happy to do a bit more flyspecking etc. tomorrow or Sunday. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Sleep well, talk to you then. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:21, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Delisted featured lists that still say they are featured
Hi,
On February 18th, you removed discussions for FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives, List of Yozakura Quartet episodes, and List of Virtual Boy games from Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates with an edit summary of "delist 3", and you also removed those lists from Wikipedia:Featured lists. However, when I check those three pages, they all still have a star at the top, and all three say on the talk page that they are featured lists that are up for discussion at featured list removal candidates. I'm thinking that you just forgot to remove the tags from the pages themselves. I wasn't sure if I should remove the tags myself, so I figured I would let you know about those lists. Calathan (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Already being discussed above. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:22, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Featured list removal candidates
Hi Crisco,
I just noticed that, in this edit, you removed three featured list removal candidates from the featured list removal candidates page, but that all three discussions are still active and the articles have not been demoted. Do you intend to close the discussions and demote the articles, or should I readd the discussions to the official page?
Doesn't the bot handle those? If not I'll close them. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
It has been a few weeks since you removed the discussions, so I would assume that the bot doesn't close the discussions or demote the articles. Have you removed FLRC discussions from the page in the past? Neelix (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I demoted the articles in our lists of articles, but have not touched the pages.
Alright, I'll remove them tonight (my time). Will possibly be going to an orchard. Sky is clear enough, so quite a few opportunities for decent pictures. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, old image?
This image, Flora is now different and the old one is gone. I mean it is under it on the file but no way to chose if you want the old one.Bonus image
This image, above, is now different and the old one is gone. Somebody fixed it. I prefer the old one and want that back, please is it a way to get that one back? The new one has now weird strong colours and it jumps out tremendously from the gallery at Alexander Roslin; where initially was put to show a resemblance with other similar pictures. Doubt that the original look like this too. Hafspajen (talk) 15:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
@Hafspajen: I fixed it. Just a matter of hopping over to Commons, hitting "revert", and politely explaining why. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 17:33, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey, love you. Nice!! This was ras really making me depressed. What a relief!! Mmmm, nice user page you have there, Adam. Might go ower to take a good look... Hafspajen (talk) 17:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I love that Helen Allingham image, by the way. If I can get definite proof it's from before 1923, and we can get an article on her, methinks I see Featured picture. Adam Cuerden(talk) 17:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Crisco, I happened across this edit where a new editor has uploaded the info box image - should that image be used as it has the lab name rather prominently? It's certainly not an area I know anything about and I only landed on it as the editor had put an image in
watermarking, which is heavily discouraged. It can be removed rather easily. If nobody has gotten there tonight (my time) I'll give it a go. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 23:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Tjioeng Wanara
Bang, Anda diundang untuk memberikan suara di sini. Terima kasih! Hanamanteo (talk) 09:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, you might want please to join in the discussion on my talk page? Section Need poodle... Need expertise.
Bonus imageAh, I like this fruit
What a lovely place is where you live, Crisco. Nice girls, nice fruits... Ah... Hafspajen (talk) 16:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Talk Page Stalkers: We have a technical glitch as well as an image issue, anyone who knows how to do portal templates and stuff, could you pop by and give WP Animals some technical advice on how to fix this? This was Montanabw's comment.
Looks like it lives at Module:Portal/images/a. You'll need an admin or template editor to change it, but once y'all decide on a good replacement image, just have them change the line ["animals"] = "Sow with piglet.jpg", to whatever the name of the image is (minus the "File:", obviously). It's line 97 in the code. this was Writ Keeper
The first thing is to select an animal... I made a crude attempt to get it started. Cheers said Jim1138.
The first thing is to suggest an animal, that was my bit. So I made some suggestions, and from now on I am not really competentto fix the rest. I guess we need to have some images selected, and than how the rest works, don't know. Hafspajen (talk) 18:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)(Montanabw's talk page)
Yes, I saw that. Thank you for removing it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
The Image Man Award
Crisco the Man
Because you are wonderful just the way you are. And when you smile, the whole world stops and stares for a while Hafspajen (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Har har. Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Tjioeng Wanara
Climb, reach for the skies!
It would be a pleasure. It may be a day or two before I get there, but should be soon. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. No worries about the wait, I'm a bit busy uploading pictures from yesterday (which is why I haven't been able to touch Wehwalt's paper bills yet). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
SamUK01
Hi Crisco, this user has been create a couple of pages which are copies of other WP pages, such as 'Disco Mix (band)', a copy of Little Mix. I gave him a warning, but he blanked his talk. Is there anything to do other than keep an eye on him? Thanks, Matty.007 13:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Removing the notification is his/her prerogative. If issues continue, another warning, then if they continue further, ask for admin intervention. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the help. Matty.007 13:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Crisco. I'm not going to make much of an issue of the whole thing, but could you explain the thinking behind emptying the category "Indonesian collaborators with Imperial Japan", thus causing it to probably be deleted? I mean, were there no Indonesians who collaborated with Imperial Japan, and was it not collaboration to serve in
The issue, for me at least, is that "collaborator" is often equated with wholeheartedly supporting a position. If joining PETA was a criterion for being a collaborator, then Supriyadi would have qualified as well... and it's safe to say that he didn't agree with Japan's policies (and was probably killed by Japan for his uprising). Sudirman was imprisoned by Japan for fears that he would rebel, and Sukarno/Hatta essentially tried to use Japan's coming to their own benefit; the didn't care the least what Japan got out of it, just went around nodding their heads while planning to get their own power base.
It would be safer to say "Members of PETA" or "Members of the Keimin Bunka Shidōsho/Poesat Keboedajaan", as those are objective measurements, whereas "Indonesian collaborators with Imperial Japan" is ill-defined at best and quite possibly contentious. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:58, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Also, I should note that Japan (smartly) advertised PETA as being for the Indonesian people, and not the Japanese people. Kami, Perempuan offers a good literary example of people being taken in by that argument. Not that I think Sudirman was under any illusions, but clearly joining PETA was not clear-cut collaboration. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, yes, that's what I thought. Still, that could be argued for most people who collaborated with occupying forces. And much of the time the occupiers would argue that their organizations were for the best of the occupied populations. Most people who collaborated would probably have claimed higher, national, goals too. Many people who collaborated might also have swapped positions after a while, but that doesn't remove the fact that they didn't at first collaborate. Wholeheartedness really doesn't have much to do with it. I do agree, though, that there should also be a "Members of the Keimin Bunka Shidōsho" category. Manxruler (talk) 13:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Question: Did Japan establish a "Keimin Bunka Shidōsho" in other occupied areas, or just the Indies? I'm not very familiar with the Empire's actions outside of the Indies. If they had an organization with the same or similar title in other areas, I'd go with the Indonesian name. "Members of Pembela Tanah Air" or something similar ("Soldiers"?) is more or less ready to go (and we've got tons, last I checked).
As I mentioned above, I think "collaborators" requires too much guesswork regarding motivations and whatnot to be used in articles. However, if we were to classify "Members of Pembela Tanah Air" as part of "Category:Pembela Tanah Air", as part of "Category:Japanese Occupation of Indonesia", the implication would still be there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
I too have little knowledge about any organizations like the "Keimin Bunka Shidōsho" in other parts of the Japanese-occupied areas. I think that having categories called "Category:Members of Pembela Tanah Air" and "Category:Pembela Tanah Air" is a very good idea, and would work very well. Manxruler (talk) 14:33, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do this week, but as I just got my schedule to defend my master's thesis (i.e. I will soon be Crisco 1492, M.A.) I'm going to be devoting my time to RL stuff. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:37, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh wow, good luck!!! — Cirt (talk) 08:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. The topic dovetails nicely with my Wikipedia work, too: "Ekranisasi Awal: Bringing Novels to the Silver Screen in the Dutch East Indies". Apparently if its good enough the university might be willing to publish it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:36, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
FA congratulations
Well done, great achievement, FAs in many different subject areas, outstanding editor, blah blah blah, nominate them at
Hmmm... I am tempted to do an experiment: one FA with no infobox, one FA with an infobox, one FA with no infobox then an infobox added while on the MP, and one FA with an infobox which must be removed while it is on the MP. Which will prepare me for the most popcorn? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I see you pop up on that article every once in a while to add some Indonesian or far eastern poetry works--would you be able to take a few minutes when you get the chance and add more? I have had much time for this article recently, but eventually, I hope this list becomes far more comprehensive and cosmopolitan. Right now, it skews heavily English/American. Any suggestions on ways to improve the scope of the list (I doubt it'll ever be an FL-worthy list, but that shouldn't stop us from improving the quality of presentation). Thanks. --
talk
) 16:24, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll try to add a few, once I get the chance. I think
Rendra's stuff will likely be worth an entry (we've added Chairil Anwar already, right?), but I can't name his collections off the top of my head. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 00:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
As for how to improve it... only thing I can think of is to improve the definition and background. You may want to consider breaking the list into 26 lists, by letter, once it's long enough, but we're not there quite yet. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:09, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
As it gets larger, I was thinking 26 letter sections will eventually be warranted. It only had one long list when I came upon the article, when I started editing I started off with two...A-L, M-Z...and within that first day or two broke it up into the arrangement it is currently. I see it becoming an incredibly longer list (given the idiots today publishing crap poetry without any barriers because of POD, etc., adding their entries and as I go through the more serious established poets for their lists). I haven't had much time to play with the list in recent months (i.e. work on other articles, real life work, upcoming fatherhood) but when I do it will likely expand to 26 sections in short order. It might take a few weeks, but I'll think of how to augment the definition/background--I actually read the definition for the first time in months yesterday and said "I could write this better".--
talk
) 15:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. BTW I added one by Enid Blyton yesterday. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:00, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
After some reflection I simply decided you are right, specifically, I wish to be collaborative and help to model the page after the multiple other
WP:FLs
of Bibliographies that you cited.
This has since been Done, as I modified the article and transitioned it away from the prior Background sect model and instead just moved some of that info to the lede.
Hopefully this is now satisfactory?
Thanks again for your most kind and polite demeanor throughout, it is most appreciated !
It looks great, Cirt. I'm promoting now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, thanks very much! — Cirt (talk) 03:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Just curious, is it alright for me to add the {{featured list}} star to the page, and/or how long would it be for the bot to come by and do that and update the article history? Or would it also be alright for me to update the article history manually? :) — Cirt (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Best I know, doing that could do weird things to the bot. Just wait for it to run. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, no problems, will do. :) — Cirt (talk) 03:13, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
archivebottom}} to indicate the discussion is closed? Thank you, — Cirt (talk
) 18:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, you did put links on something like 15 different nominations. Anyways, as far as I understand doing so would do something to the bot.
Hahc21 seems more familiar with the bot than I; perhaps he has more insight. — Crisco 1492 (talk
) 00:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Actually, the bot was designed to do things if they haven't been done yet. If the FL start was added, then the bot will skip that step. Or at least these were the instructions I gave to the bot owner. —
Call me Hahc21
00:13, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Heh, okay, no worries. I saw that method used on FAC by another user and asked their permission to use it in the future ... mind drawing a blank on who that was. Anyways, no problems, I'll do some of the steps and then hopefully per
Done, hopefully that works. :) — Cirt (talk) 00:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Just an FYI, I remembered who I had gotten the "Having stumbled here from..." idea from, it was Hurricanehink, at diff. I remember I'd asked his permission to use that method in the future, and he'd said it was fine. :) Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah. Interesting idea. It worked, too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Yep, many thanks to Hurricanehink for the idea! :) — Cirt (talk) 23:31, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
pro-Japanese propaganda – including literature. The single most-published writer in Asia Raja was Rosihan Anwar, a recent senior high school graduate, who published seven poems and nine short stories while working for the newspaper. Andjar Asmara
, a former film director, published the most serials; both of his serials were based on films he had made before the occupation.
Responded to your comments at the FAC page. Thank you, they were most helpful, — Cirt (talk) 06:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Elly Yunara
On 11 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elly Yunara, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Elly Yunara(pictured) went from film star to housewife after her marriage to Djamaluddin Malik, only to become a producer after his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elly Yunara. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Princess Ida
Updated the descriptions; check for length - even after I started trimming I kept adding bits in, so they might be a little on the long side. Adam Cuerden(talk) 15:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
There are some errors in the description, but I don't understand how to edit it. Can you give me a link please? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Ssilvers, thank you for the edits, but please ensure that the first paragraph remains the same for all subpages. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
OK, I have made the same minor clarifications to all the subpages, but frankly, I think that one of Crisco's original sentences was better than what Adam changed it to, because the show is about the princess, not about Prince Hilarion (hence the name of the opera). Crisco had written: "concerns a princess who founds a women's university and teaches that women are superior to men and should rule in their stead, before her husband comes to collect her and a battle of the sexes begins." I would edit it slightly as follows: "concerns a princess who founds a woman's university and teaches that women are superior to men and should rule in their stead. When Prince Hilarion, to whom she was wed in infancy, arrives disguised as a woman, his true identity is accidentally revealed, and a battle of the sexes ensues." What do you think? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Your phrasing works, I think. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
If it's ok with Adam, can you make the change? I don't want to step on his toes. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Off to bed now, but in the morning I can do it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
@Ssilvers: The trouble with that is that it confuses chronological order. Ida doesn't appear first, Hilarion and his friends do. Adam Cuerden(talk) 20:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I think the idea is to give a blurb that reflects the focus of the opera, not to replicate the chronological introduction of the characters. If you wanted to describe Hamlet, you wouldn't start off by saying it's a story about Bernardo seeing a ghost, even though that happens before Hamlet arrives. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, it's not like Hilarion is Bernardo. He's the lead male role. Adam Cuerden(talk) 21:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
In any case, what you say is not even chronologically correct, because Ida does found the woman's university and teach that women are superior to men long before Hilarion goes there -- In Act I, we learn about this, and then Hilarion decides to go there. And, it is arguable that Hilarion is the leading male role. Many would say that Gama is the lead male role. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Remember that the description of the plot has to explain the illustrations. I don't think any of the illustrations, outside of Ida enters, reading a book, are put in context by your description. Mine fails to fully explain the first two, but at least gets 3, 4, and 5 sufficiently. I do think your proposal would be very good for the second set, which starts at "Walls and Fences scaling", covers, "Though I am but a girl", and "Where are your rifles, pray" - and would suggest saving it for there, where it would be absolutely perfect. Adam Cuerden(talk) 21:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
[Left]. I think that your description of the opera is inherently confused – it doesn't even make clear that Ida is the head of the women's college or that she teaches that women are superior to men, which are the key premises of the opera. However, you uploaded and nominated the images, and I understand that you want the plot summary to explain why the image was chosen. I think that is letting the tail wag the dog, to some extent, but I have made my case about as well as I can. I leave it to you and Crisco to decide. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll have another look in the morning. Adam Cuerden(talk) 22:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Question: Adam, shouldn't the job of the second paragraph be about why the image was chosen, rather than the first? The first is intended as a general overview of the play. Now, I'm not particularly familiar with G&S's work, but I think SSilvers summary does get this gist across a bit better. Putting the illustrations in context can be done with the second paragraph. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, the thing is that Idais most decidedly an ensemble piece. Ida is important, but she only has four big songs (including "To yield at once" in the Act II Finale), one of them a quartet where she sings the lead line. Hilarion has a lot of his songs as trios with Florian and Cyril, his friends, but has two big solos (one in the Act II finale, and three trios (one in the act II finale), the big quintet, and a couple of harmony lines in the quartets mid-act II. He probably has more stage time than the princess. Ida is a showcase part, and stands at the heart of the opera, but I think Ssilvers is exaggerating when he diminishes Hilarion (and particularly when he names Gama as the lead male). I don't know. I'll look at it in the morning, and work in more focus on Ida, but the teaching women are superior to men is a lot more generalized than just Ida teaching it, indeed, Ida only teaches it in a speech; Psyche has two whole songs teaching it.
I suppose, in the end, I want to make sure it sounds like something people would want to see. I mean, if you talk about teaching women are superior to men, it makes it sound didactic, when the show itself shows a lesson where it uses the sexist language behind terms like "man evolved from monkeys" to separate women off from that as being perfect creations, unlike men, who are just monkeys. It's a lot cleverer than the blunt statement will make people think. Adam Cuerden(talk) 23:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't doubt that it's a lot cleverer than a two-line summary makes it seem; most works of literature are like that, which is why the best reviews / plot summaries can have several hundred words or more. However, we do have severely limited space, and that is why I recommend getting the gist of the plot across in the first paragraph, with more specific information in the second paragraph (as the specific context is related to the image being shown). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, are you willing to take this on as a review? I realize that—technically—you proposed the most recent ALT, but it was identical in wording to the one proposed by Victuallers, with only the wikilinks differing. It's been sitting there for four months, and April Fools Day isn't all that far away. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
POTD issue
Sorry about that, as I realized to my horror when I was dozing off to sleep last night that that hadn't occurred yet. Oh well, off to the nominations process!
talk
) 04:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
No worries. It is a pretty good picture, but process first. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
TFAR
You're dead right. Silly old Bencherlite. OK, so he's a flawed genius. --Dweller (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Aren't we all? But perhaps the wigs are squeezing too tightly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah, you're a genius, but I'm just flawed. --Dweller (talk) 15:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Nah, I think you've got it the other way around. I couldn't have built a list like that. No patience. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Wow. You may want to double check the languages though: Malay was sometimes written in the Jawi script, which is very similar to Arabic. Though my Jawi is quite rusty. I'll try and see if I can make it out. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, Godot13, that's Jawi alright. Notice the use of ڠ (nga), which is not found in Arabic. يڠ is yang, which is decidedly not an Arabic word. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I'll make the change. Interesting, because that means the reference book is wrong...--Godot13 (talk) 03:53, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Of course, not if you beat me to it ;-) --Godot13 (talk) 03:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
It's possible that they did not have an Arabic speaker on hand, and just recognized that the script is almost Arabic (the text here has none of the diacritics found in standard Arabic either). Keilana is better than I am at Arabic, so maybe she can verify one way or the other. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Hah, my Arabic is pretty bad but there are a couple of letters that are definitely not Arabic. Neither are the numerals. Hope that helps! Keilana|Parlez ici 16:02, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Kei. Alright, then it's most likely Malay written in the Jawi script. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
S Waldy ran away from home to join the theatre even though his parents were actors? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/S Waldy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
You have entered into illustrious company. Congratulations! Remember to user your power only for good--when folks are watching, of course. Be in the church basement at midnight when the moon is full for your full initiation. Drmies (talk) 13:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
I am rather busy in RL (I will be defending my master's thesis tomorrow) so I don't know if I'll be able to get to FLC today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Good luck with the thesis - just glad that's all behind me now! I'll pick up on this list in the morning. - SchroCat (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Schro! To be safe I'm going to be bringing many of the books I cited to campus (they sometimes ask to check, to make sure we're not making stuff out of whole cloth). Since my bibliography ended up at ten pages, with 120 entries, there's quite a few books I'll need to bring. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I hope your back managed to stand up to the strain of carrying all your stuff around, and that it went well generally. I've sorted to Ellis-Bextor article, so no need for you to do anything there. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Still tomorrow (14 March, UTC+7). I've got two backpacks filled with books... I'd say at least 20kg. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
20kg per backpack or combined? Good luck with the defence of your thesis. ArmbrustTheHomunculus 12:13, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The one with Max Weber's books is probably 12 or 13, the other is 9 or 10. And I've also got scans etc. to get ready (newspaper articles from 1928, etc.). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:14, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
That's about it, yeah. (Wow, feels good to have found a soul mate!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, I passed. They gave me an A, although I still have elements that I want to polish. One year and six or seven months. Not bad. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Fantastic! Excellent news and I'm sure well worth it all in the end. Thinking of a PhD, or calling it quits now? - SchroCat (talk) 13:50, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Would be nice to be a PhD before 30... and I do want to finish a history of the screen adaptation process in Indonesia... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:51, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Big Fish, Little Fish (play)
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! Coretheapple (talk
) 18:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
A beer for you!
Just something for you to celebrate getting your M.A. - well done!
A nice friendly pet for you on the great occasion. Hafspajen (talk) 19:39, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Traffic report exclusions
The Signpost top 10 is not the main focus of the traffic project. The
Top 25 report is. If you wish to see the rationales for any exclusions, please see that article, or its talk page. I hate to have to make so personal a request but apparently a link and direction in the opening paragraph which includes the word "exclusions" isn't enough. Serendipodous
18:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
I have been following the discussion at the talk page. You should realize that readers will rarely follow links (check pretty much any study of how readers use Wikipedia), and thus a footnote may be warranted. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Aesthetics & functionality
Hi Crisco-
I'm preparing images for list on early American currency (paper). I have always prepared currency images with the obverse and reverse as a single image. This is because the front and back of currency are generally oriented the same way (both are either horizontal or vertical). With U.S. Colonial and Continental currency, the opposite is true: the majority of the time both sides appear to have different orientations. The result would not be very aesthetic.
For these early issues I think it is better to have separate images for the front and back (each oriented with the text/image upright), and link the front to the back as additional versions in the image information. I would likely submit all these images as FPC (but do not have to), only requesting that the obverse of each pair be considered as a nomination. Does this image idea seem reasonable?
Also, I noticed above, that you defended your thesis - congratulations, that is fantastic news! -- Godot13 (talk) 21:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I think it's fine to present the scans as different images, so long as a note is made about orientation (I mean, all currency I've seen [though admittedly I haven't seen much] has the obverse and reverse in the same orientation, so readers may not realize that this was not true for the Colonial US). As for using only the obverses, I think that would be acceptable, but it would still be nice to have reverses as well. What if you were to split the image field in the table, so that both could be included? (Is that even technically possible?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh yes, I had intended to make two side by side columns, the first with the obverse and the second with the reverse. While not part of the same physical image, they would be presented together. Again, congrats, it's a big deal! - Godot13 (talk) 00:14, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
That sounds good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:15, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
SoR
First, huge congrats on the successful thesis defense! I bet you're happy that's behind you! Second, this is a busy user page! Okay - now to SoR. I took a look at the notes I have in my sandbox, bolded some, but they make little sense even to me, so will probably make less sense to you. Luckily I was just shutting down my computer earlier today when those comments popped up at Ezra's talk page, so I decided against returning the newest book of criticism that for some reason the library would like to have back. (I'd buy it, but it's a pricey book). I'll spend the rest of the day today pulling info from that book and at some point either post to my sandbox or edit the article directly, but it's a fair amount of reading so give me a bit of time. I tweaked The Spirit of Romance a little, and littered it with refs not formatted in sfn style, but I did find the connection between Pound's thesis and SoR - so that's good. Generally I find it takes a while to assemble all the little bits and pieces into a coherent picture, and SoR is particularly difficult - which is why I hadn't yet started the article. You've done a good job with SoR and it looks as if that one one source was slightly unclear. As for Pound's other attempts to submit a thesis, I'd need to do more research and will have to get the biographies I have already returned sent back out to me, so it will take time. Generally the biographies are more clear in terms of why he was doing what when, if that makes sense, and g-books has locked me out completely from anything to do with Pound. I was thrilled though to be able to see that source you used in the foreign language g-books! Don't hesitate to ping if you have questions. I have visitors arriving tomorrow and so might be slow to respond but I'll be keeping an eye out and trying to add when I can. Take care. Victoria (tk) 20:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Victoria, thanks for the ping. It seems Homer, Pound's father, submitted the Spirit of Romance to the university in 1920 on Pound's behalf, but they said no. Some details in Gail McDonald, The Ezra Pound Encyclopedia, p. 91, and A. David Moody, Ezra Pound: Poet: The Young Genius 1885-1920, p. 33. Moody says Pound tried again for the PhD in 1931 with Guido Cavalcanti Rime. SlimVirgin(talk) 20:33, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks SV - I didn't read all the way to the end of the chapter. Crisco, Moody is the better source, imo, so I've swapped out what was there and rewritten a bit. Victoria (tk) 22:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks both. Alright Victoria, I will play with the reference formatting after I've done a bit of revising to my thesis (the Faculty publishes one thesis every year, and selects that thesis from all theses which are given an A; although I am not required to revise, I certainly want my thesis to be able to compete!), and look forward to any further information you can find. I must say, Homer certainly had a pretty good relationship with Pound, or at least appears to have been proud of him; I believe I read somewhere that Guido Cavalcanti Rime was submitted by him as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, I see above that you were awarded your MA. Congratulations! Definitely take care of your thesis before Pound. I hope they choose yours to publish. SlimVirgin(talk) 00:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I agree with SV - academics before WP! Pound will wait and it's hard and often time-consuming to tease some of these bits apart anyway. No hurry and all that! I hope they choose yours to publish too - that's quite an opportunity. Victoria (tk) 00:38, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, SV and Victoria! This is certainly an opportunity, although I may be able to convince Sinematek Indonesia to hook me up with Komunitas Bambu in Jakarta (the publishers of Sejarah Film 1900–1950 and a couple other books on the history of Indonesian cinema) if the Faculty competition falls through. Sinematek's collection helped enormously (I got access to Pertjatoeran Doenia dan Film and Doenia Film there, as well as several scans from newspapers such as Pewarta Soerabaia and Pemandangan), and the topic is right up their alley. I am also tracking a probable release title for Karnadi Anemer Bangkong (the article title is what most sources give, but it is based on someone's memory), which I may attempt to publish as a journal article if it's of a wide-enough scope for the UGM History Department's journal. Reach for the skies, indeed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from Chinese Wikipedia. Few months ago, I translated the article into Chinese, and incorporated it with the original Chinese version of it. Now there is a peer review concerning my article, when some suggest that the sections named "Public opinion" and "Awards and recognition" respectively should be merged. I don't understand how the arrangement to keep this two. I knew that you are the editor of the article mentioned above, thus I would like to seek advice from you. Much thanks! Best wishes, --Spring Roll Conan ( Talk · Contributions ) 06:51, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that's an unreasonable suggestion. Merging would be doable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, can I ask you to take a look at this one? I'm a bit worried about the Wikipedia sourcing (it's about a Wikipedian, so I'm not entirely sure how that comes into play—whether this actually counts as primary sourcing), and wondering if the sourcing in general needs another look. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:16, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
That's a bit more doable. Will finish up my DYK hoops for "Roll, Jordan, Roll", then I'll get on that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:30, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Ahmad Tohari
Whatever came of your opportunity to photograph Ahmad Tohari? Just wondering as the article still doesn't have an image. Ðiliff«»(Talk) 10:13, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
No news yet, sadly. I haven't had much of a chance to follow up, either, as a 200 page paper was waiting for some TLC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Panjebar Semangat
Why did you state that the magazine
WP:RS does not require sources to be books. --Lambiam
23:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
You are using a Javanese-language popular source, based in Surabaya (at least, originally), for information on a Minahasa writer (who used Malay) in Batavia. That does not give you pause? Furthermore, the Panjebar Semangat article appears to have been written as an editorial, most probably not by a historian, but a journalist, who may or may not be relying on hearsay and things half remembered. That is a very weak source for facts. I specifically requested a book because those tend to have better reliability, although journal articles (like the Dutch one you've added) are also okay. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, MA
I'd like to thank everyone who has congratulated me on successfully defending my thesis. If any talk page stalkers are interested in my topic of study, my abstract is included below. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:16, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Ekranisasi Awal: Adapting Novels to the Silver Screen in the Dutch East Indies
ABSTRACT
This study discusses the social act of adapting films from novels, as found in the Dutch East Indies, where this phenomenon began in 1927 with the adaptation of Eulis Atjih by G. Krugers and ended in 1942—before the Japanese occupation—with the adaptation of Siti Noerbaja by Lie Tek Swie. The adaptation process from this period is little understood, yet important for understanding the history of screen adaptations, which are quickly becoming the most lucrative type of film in Indonesia. As such, this research was conducted in order to better understand the origins of this phenomenon and the earliest considerations in making the social act.
This study uses Weber's concept of the social act, a rational action conducted by an individual in order to interact with society and reach a certain goal. Data used is predominantly from primary and secondary sources. Primary sources used include contemporary newspapers and novels that were adapted to film (keeping in mind that the films themselves are lost), whereas secondary sources used include journals, articles, books, and the internet.
A total of eleven films were adapted from eight novels in the Indies. Only one author had multiple works adapted, and two novels were adapted more than once. The nine producers and directors involved in adapting novels came from a variety of ethnicities. The works adapted, meanwhile, were generally popular in wide society—though often best known through stage performances and adaptations.
During the period covered, the Indies was a colony in flux. Greater access to education meant that the financial elite were increasingly literate, leading to a growth in the literary industry. The lower class, meanwhile, was highly fond of stage performances—oral literature for the illiterate which often loosely adapted famous novels. The film industry itself was attempting to find a successful formula, and in its early years faced heavy completion from the theatre. Educated women called for greater women’s rights and protection of women’s welfare, changes which began to be implemented in the 1940s. Meanwhile, after the Great Depression the economy began to transform from one based on the production of raw goods to one based in manufacturing.
The rationalization process behind ekranisasi was a highly practical one, oriented not towards the creative adaptation of a creative work, but the exploitation of popular works to reach wider audiences, with modifications to take advantage of the medium and shifts in societal mores. Filmmakers were familiar with the predominantly oral nature of their audience, and thus consistently drew on works which had previously been adapted to the stage – and thus reaching wider audiences than the original novels. Further selection criteria included the popularity of a work, its position in relation to the different races in the Indies – particularly the target audience – and themes. Ultimately, ekranisasi was an instrumental act, influenced more by the need to achieve a profit than individual creative concerns by filmmakers. However, in later years works adapted from novels were, financially and critically, indistinct from works based on original stories.
Keywords: Dutch East Indies, film history, Indonesian cinema, Indonesian literature
I don't stalk talk pages much, so I missed this. Congrats! Curly Turkey (gobble) 02:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Sure, I have some decent sources, especially with the HBW subscription, so I should be able to get it to GA, possibly FA if the spirit moves me. I'm a bit busy at the present, both in real life (one daughter about to give birth, the other moving house) and on wiki (a current FAC and another in preparation), but I'll see what I can do. If you haven't seen anything in a couple of weeks' time, prod me with a sharp stick to remind me Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
As the other involved party, thank you in advance! Ðiliff«»(Talk) 13:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Jim, and congrats on the upcoming grandchild! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your good wishes. I might start on the duck and run in in parallel with
Eurasian Nuthatch at least while the nightjar is at FAC. The nuthatch is nowhere near ready anyway. At least that will get some content going. Jimfbleak - talk to me?
15:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Alright. I'll revisit the nightjar review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks
… for this [16]. I was rushed earlier, on my way to teach, and couldn't see that anything constructive was about to come from that conversation. That said, I might have been hasty in my intervention because clearly some of it is deeply worrying. Dunno what to do. Maybe I'll just go away as I meant to a few weeks ago. Victoria (tk) 20:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Don't mention it. I saw how it was going, and I realized that you were 100% correct... it was clear that there'd be no consensus for such a restriction, and anything more was just fanning the flames. If you need to take a break, that's no problem. Health first, Wikipedia a distant 495th. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:54, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
3000x4000 > 1200x1600. Your move ;) Adam Cuerden(talk) 09:46, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Dating to (note the "was at the time")? This is a very detailed scan... shame I suck at straightening lines like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
You know I show my restorations to my mother, right? Oh, god... ;) Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I generally post my new FPs / FAs on Facebook. Since I'm a teacher IRL (among other things), I have avoided posting anything like this. (Perhaps this needs an encrypted ZIP folder?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Heh. We laughed about the Kipling butts. I suspect this might be a bit much, though. Heh. Maybe it's time to break Shoemaker's Holiday back out for a one-off return. Adam Cuerden(talk) 12:30, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I've renominated, as the last one didn't get the requisite number. This is probably a violation of some rule, but the fact this wasn't delisted feels like a violation of common sense to me, so there you go. I'd appreciate it if you'd drop by again. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, can you please take a look to determine whether this is indeed eligible for DYK, and if so, put an "again" icon on it so reviewers know it needs to be checked? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
On 21 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Joehana, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Akhmad Bassah was best known by his adopted daughter's name? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Joehana. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
J. K. Farnell teddy bear
Teddy bear 1960
Handmade teddy bear
op
l
Like — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_-_cleaned.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[12]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/c/c8/20140302032250%21Alfred_T._Palmer_-_Assembling_the_North_American_B-25_Mitchell_at_Kansas_City%2C_Kansas_%28USA%29.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}