User talk:GrammarEnthusiast/Archive 3

I think there may be a way of contacting Mr Shoa requesting that he gives consent via his email as you have outlined. Whew. Well we are nearly there. Arttalk1984 (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Through a contact, Mr Shoa has I believe emailed Permissions etc giving his consent for licensing the depictions of his five photographs of his artwork. I trust he did it correctly.Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:24, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

That's great news! I'll see if there's a way we can check whether the emails were received ahead of them being reviewed by the Permissions team at Commons. Thanks for handling this end of things,

^talk

11:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

The hook you proposed is fine. I hope that Mr Shoa's consent email gets sorted giving permission etc. His images in the Article Nahem Shoa, of some of the many Black people he has painted demonstrates that he has been trying the rectify the lack of Black images in Galleries...what the hook is about?Arttalk1984 (talk) 11:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Below is what is showing on commons.wikimedia on all of Mr Shoa's photographs of his artwork. It is unclear to me whether I as the uploader have to do anything re the files. What do you understand GrammarFascist from the info in the link below?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:OTRS_pending Arttalk1984 (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't panic,

^talk

16:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay...no panic. Arttalk1984 (talk) 23:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC).

I have since found out that Mr Shoa has received an email re: images and consent and photographer. I believe that he confirmed that I Arttalk1984 took the photos. Arttalk1984 (talk) 08:23, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

I have just read that the file below may be deleted. Can I try and get Mr Shoa to give /email consent to, as he is the artist who created the painting? What else can you or I do? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%27Giant_Head_of_Ben%27_by_Nahem_Shoa_-_photo_by_Yaffa_Phillips.jpg Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

The file

^talk

12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Below is what I have been able to get hold of RE: Mr Shoa and his images and copyright.

06-10-2015 09:24 - Nahem Shoa schreef:

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [1]

[Nahem Shoa next to his Giant Portrait of Ben, Hartlepool Art Gallery.jpg].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [2]

[Close up of Giant Head of Desiree.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [3]

[Nahem Shoa's portrait of Desmond Haughton.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [4]

[Facing Yourself Exhbition at Bury Museum 2007.jpg ].

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]

I hereby affirm that [I, (Nahem Shoa), am] the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of [5]

[Nahem Shoa]

["Copyright Holder"]

[6.10.2015]±

Has he done it all correctly? Arttalk1984 (talk) 10:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Arttalk1984. I have no experience in evaluating OTRS submissions, so you should not take anything I say about this as authoritative. Mr Shoa appears to have filled in the basic form appropriately; however, because in these photos there are two copyright holders (him, the artist who created the paintings, and you and the other photographer who took the photos) it may be necessary for him to specify that he created the artwork, not the photos of the artwork. I believe that if such clarification is needed, OTRS evaluators from Wikimedia Commons will email Mr Shoa to request that clarification. But again, my understanding of the OTRS process is limited.

(P.S. I see that your email program uses "schreef"; do you understand Dutch?) —

^talk

12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

schreef is probably a mistake is the copying and pasting. I have found out that Mr Shoa is being asked for the name a person who took the photographs which is Arttalk1984, me. I will ask Mr Shoa to review the template he filled in. Arttalk1984 (talk) 14:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

Mr Shoa is I believe, asap confirming consent of Yaffa Phillip's jpeg you found on Flikr. Thanks Arttalk1984 (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC).

I think that permission has now been granted for the Yaffa Phillip's jpeg

Will you have to reinsert it GrammarFascist? Two other images you inserted are accepted now. The three other images I photographed, it seems that I have to fill in a permissions release form? I will do it today. Arttalk1984 (talk) 09:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC).

I have sent the following but received non confirmation from Commons WikiMedia. I think what I did is correct? [Ticket#: 2015100910024321].

Hello,

^talk

11:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

It is frustrating regarding the final 3 images. The sections of artwork have been approved, The Yaffa Phillips photograph has also been approved. Shall I see if I can copy and paste the file in where you had it before, or do you wish to do it?

Whew, now all the images are approved!!!! Now everything is okay. Encountering your generosity in helping has given me hope for humanity. I mean it. Arttalk1984 (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC).

Well, as you know and I have just found out. The image of Nahem Shoa in front of the Giant Head of Ben is about to be deleted. So frustrating. I have asked on the person's Talk page for info and for a solution, so as to avoid deletion.Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

The image isn't "about to be deleted" — it's been nominated for deletion, which means that

^talk

21:48, 11 October 2015 (UTC).

The nomination for deletion of the image has been removed, as you know. Thanks Arttalk1984 (talk) 15:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes,

^talk

16:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

I wonder what will happen RE: DYK? Thanks againArttalk1984 (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Eventually a DYK reviewer will pick the article and review it. Then, if they identify any issues with the nomination, those issues would need to be addressed. Once there are no outstanding issues, the nomination will be promoted to the staging area, and then it will appear on the "front" or

^talk 18:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Well done. Whatever happens Re: DYK nomination - Nahem Shoa I have been on a fascinating, frustrating journey of discovery about how Wikipedia. operates. Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk) 21:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC). Hello GrammarFascist, RE: DYK Nahem Shoa. I have recently read the comments by reviewers/editors and am completely none the wiser what they are talking about. Thanks for nominating the hooks, but maybe they won't pass interesting enough? Thanks. Arttalk1984 (talk

) 09:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm very pleased to tell you (as the usual bot message hasn't appeared here, for some reason) that the article is now promoted to GA. It was a pleasure to review. Warm congrats. Tim riley talk 15:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

What GA is --

talk

) 04:42, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

^talk

05:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Funny you should mention this as I'm having this same argudiscussion with someone else at the moment. What we usually like is that if the intro mentions the fact used for the hook, it should be cited there notwithstanding citations elsewhere in the article. Or so I've been told on multiple occasions regarding my own nominations.

The MOS policy section you're thinking of in

fringe theories, I think it has relevance beyond there, and whenever I've written an article that makes some sort of extraordinary claim about the subject in the intro (usually that it is in some way superlative or unique or original), I put the cite in the intro (often because I'm submitting that as a possible DYK hook) as well as the body. To me, a DYK hook fact, no matter how otherwise unexeceptional it is, becomes exceptional in the context of the article because it will be used to entice a reader to look at the article from the Main Page. It will thus be subject to greater scrutiny than it otherwise might be. Therefore, it needs to be cited. Daniel Case (talk

) 02:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

This rationale makes perfect sense to me,

^talk

03:04, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

GrammarFascist, another issue has been raised; I hope it wasn't my failure to spot a relevant passage in the article. Please respond at the review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi @

Hello,

Aryan hindustan. I have corrected the date formats on Høybråten

— for numbers only the allowed format is YYYY-MM-DD, not D-MM-YYYY. Other allowed formats are Month D, YYYY or D Month YYYY (which I prefer). So today can be given as 2015-10-02 or October 2, 2015 or 2 October 2015. Other fornmats throw an error, as you saw.

Most importantly, PLEASE (see how annoying that is?) change your signature so that it is a normal text size; text that large is not allowed in signatures. I would also personally appreciate it if you changed the background color to be less bright, as that #00FFFF cyan is giving me a headache. Thanks and talk to you tomorrow. —

^talk

05:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

thanks @

talk

) 10:02, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

sir there is a simmilar problem at " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jail_Yatra_(1947_film) "

talk

) 10:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

Aryan hindustan. I have corrected the citations at Jail Yatra (1947 film)

.

• To make doing citations easier, I recommend using the forms you can easily fill in. These are accessed by clicking "Cite" at the far right of the blue bar at the the top of any page's edit window, and then clicking "Templates" at the far left of the second blue bar which will then appear. You can use "Cite web" for most sources, or use "Cite news" for newspapers or "Cite book" for books.
• The "page=" field should not be used for websites; it is only for books and magazines that have numbered pages, and the number to use is the page which relevant content appears on, not the total number of pages in the book or article.
• The warnings in red when there is an error in a citation's format tell you what is wrong. The message "Missing or empty |title=" told you that the "title=" field had not been filled in, but is required — so, the solution was to fill in the title= field. Each of those warnings also has a "(help)" link in it, which will explain more about the problem so you can fix it yourself.

Also, please do not address me as sir (or madam, or any other honorific which indicates a gender). It is not appropriate. You can just call me GrammarFascist, or GF for short if you must. —

^talk

18:29, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

ok GF

talk

) 09:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you again!Majorityverb (talk) 12:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, Majorityverb, helping newer users is one of my favorite things to do on Wikipedia. We all started as newbies.

I removed the flag icon for you (in future all you need do is find {{flagicon|UK}} and delete it). I also changed most instances of "Andy" to "Paxton"; on Wikipedia, after the first mention of their full name, we refer to people by their last names, except with people known overwhelmingly by their first name, like Bjork or Madonna. By the way, is C Mr Paxton's middle name, or should it be C. to indicate that his middle name is longer than a single letter? —

^talk

13:20, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey GrammarFascist! I took at look at the above article because of the Teahouse post about it, but I don't want to touch it while you're involved in a major revision. So I thought I'd just let you know that it appears much of the Economy section is a wholesale copyright violation (see here). I don't know if you're familiar with how to address that and am just dropping this note to tell you this so that you don't waste time on involved edits to that particular section, when it that is likely to be removed or greatly pared back soon. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Ooh, great catch,

^talk

15:43, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

A lot of it is just becoming attuned to various indicia of copying when you do a lot of work in the area. Much of it is really commonsensical—what anyone would think to look for if apprised of the issue and tasked to do so (and has a writer's/reader's fine-tuned ear for language), but are not naturally on alert for if unaware of the problem or have never focused on it. Once you're attuned, start to have a "spidey-sense" for it, you start to see the massiveness of it. It's so much more prevalent than most know. It often goes undiscovered because most people are not attuned. For example, the percentage of new articles that are tagged under

CSD G11, that are also unchecked and undiscovered copyvios, is staggering. A lot of it is "flavor", from a gestalt of factors – not easily quantified – but indicia include (and they're just indicia, you can't affirm the consequent

):

I do mostly use Google searches and there's a bit of an art to it, though nothing earth shattering. Try to use short but unique segments in quotation marks and if not unique (is likely going to find lots of false-positives) place the topic at issue, say a last name, outside the quotes; avoid including portions that are more likely to be modified slightly, thereby producing a false-negative – like pronouns, last name (which might have been switched from first names); often avoid the beginning of a sentence – take your snippet from the middle of flowing text. A problem in older topic like this one is separating the wheat – original source(s) of copying – from large scale chaff in the form of numerous websites that are copying Wikipedia content (you must click on "repeat the search with the omitted results included" as a baseline since often the source is found there, so your results will be all the more larger). There's various ways: try a book search to see if there's a paper source but if not; exclude Wikipedia from (web) search results; exclude certain phrases that appear and are unlikely to be in the original (-"external links"); recognizing sites immediately that are mirrors and so forth. Some people use Earwig's tool. I've never had much use for it. Oh, and the Wayback Machine is very useful for checking or making sure the apparent source is not a backwards copyvio.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I should mention that, in an older article like this one, I find Wikiblame invaluable in targeting when certain text was added.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all the tips! I'll try to get a better feel for it — I have found copyvio before, and just rewritten it to no longer be plagiarizing since it wasn't a huge section, but it was like you describe, I got a feeling from the way things were worded that sent me Googling. I suppose spotting likely copyvio is somewhat like spotting grammatical errors, in that you have to already know what you're looking for in order to spot it.

("indicia", "apprised", "gestalt" ...by all means continue to talk erudite to me on my talk page,

^talk

22:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you again you really are a great help! What a nice introduction to the wiki community :-) I have found out the C is for 'Charles'. Birth name Andrew Charles Saxton. Also will I be able to upload photos when 5 days have past? I just want 1 photo per wiki page really to show the artist/band.

Thanks again :-) you are awesome! Majorityverb (talk) 17:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, Majorityverb. Remember not to put his full middle name into the article unless you can find a published source stating it. I have placed the full stop in the article and also in the title (this required doing what we call moving a page, rather than renaming).

I do want to be sure you understand

the importance of finding multiple sources from reliable publishers that have treated the subject of the article in depth

, for each of the articles you are creating. It would be a shame to put a lot of effort into an article whose subject does not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline.

As for uploading photos, the short answer is that I believe autoconfirmed users can upload, and autoconfirmation requires the account to be 4 days old and to have made at least 10 edits. The more complex answer is that you will need to be sure you have the right to upload specific images to Wikipedia. If you took the photos yourself, then yes, you may. If someone else took them and gave you permission to upload them here, you may not upload them to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. People wanting to donate images to Wikipedia/Wikimedia without uploading their images themselves must email a legal declaration to the Wikimedia Foundation. Copyright is taken very seriously here. All that said, any photos you have taken yourself are welcome, provided they are appropriate for illustrating an encyclopedia article.

Thank you again for your contributions to Wikipedia, and don't hesitate to ask if you have more questions. —

^talk

22:57, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:TodayTix. Thanks! Worldbruce (talk

) 02:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Lavdrim Muhaxheri, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to

create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation

if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Yann (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Yann. I was not the creator of the draft, just the user who addressed issues with it so it could pass AfC review. When I work on drafts that have previously failed AfC review, I either wait for the creator (or other contributor/s) to resubmit them, or resubmit them myself, because I don't meet the requirements to be an AfC reviewer yet and therefore don't feel I should move the drafts to mainspace on my own.

I have copied the above notice to

Hi GrammarFascist: I saw that the Zinfandel Advocates and Producers article that we worked on last week has been removed from deletion discussion and is now an accepted article. What I was wondering is if it also should be no longer classified as a stub? In my reading on this, it doesn't appear to have any hard and fast rules on the difference between a stub and an article, although from what I could glean the current ZAP piece seems complete enough to be an article. Will this be some sort of automatic process where some editors routinely peruse the stub listings and change status as necessary or is it something that someone needs to specifically make a point of doing? Thanks again for your help!PH Solution (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

^talk

18:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi GrammarFascist, regarding your comments about my article on Lavdrim Muhaxheri, I added it as an open draft prior to submitting it, then other users have been able to edit it. I will check the references and update any missing reference. I'll have this done later this week. Thank you for your input and pardon the missing references. Regards, Kewin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinLiam (talk • contribs) 19:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello KewinLiam, I guess this is the account you prefer to use to discuss the article rather than KewinRozz? It's really a team effort now, with a number of contributors, including Werldwayd and several other users who made minor edits like fixing links that needed disambiguation. Arjayay has been doing great work keeping a persistent vand maker of unconstructive contributions to the article at bay. Speaking of which, you might want to be careful to check what edits were made most recently before beginning your own edits — I'm going to have to revert some more unconstructives manually, because your intervening edits mean that I can't just use the "undo" feature. Not a big deal, but something I wanted to be sure you were aware of.

Also, you shouldn't remove sources (like you did with the sources substantiating which countries' media had covered Muhaxheri) unless the sources added by another editor are unreliable sources, or are inappropriate for some other reason. At the very least you should give a reason for deleting a source in the edit summary, on the article talk page, or both.

Anyway, thanks for creating the article and continuing to work on it! To be honest I found the subject unpleasant, but worked on the draft because Muhaxheri seemed like someone there should be a Wikipedia article about. But I'll keep an eye out for as long as the unconstructive IP editor seems determined to make the article worse. And if you want help with anything, do feel free to ask. —

^talk

20:33, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi again GrammarFacist, KewinRozz it is. About the references that I removed from the Lavdrim Muhaxheri article, please note that the international media that published the story first, Daily Mail and Independent http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3090886/ISIS-execute-man-BAZOOKA-shocking-new-video.html, Dailymail, BusinessInsiders and so on haven't stated that Lavdrim Muhaxheri appears in the video called Bazooka or RPG video, Independent also explicitly stated that the video is uncensored http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-purportedly-executes-man-with-a-bazooka-in-disturbing-propaganda-video-10267322.html. It's a good thing to point out to other editors since it's often confused by some media outlets but it's not reliable information. Regards Kewin — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 21:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see your point. Regardless, because other reliable media established that the bazooka/RPG video was believed to depict Muhaxheri, I considered it worthwhile to include coverage of the video even if it didn't mention Muhaxheri by name, just to show that Muhaxheri's video was covered by media in the various countries; it's still him in the video, and apparently him who released the video online. I got confused there; all the sources in the sentence "The vast majority of publications on Muhaxheri come from Kosovo and Serbian media, but his case has also been highlighted by Arab, Australian, German, Greek, Italian, Kurdish, Spanish, Turkish, and UK media." do mention Muhaxheri by name. So I'm not clear on your objection there. If you disagree, perhaps we should take this to the article's talk page and invite other editors into the discussion there.

Regarding the Independent article, I just don't see where you're getting "uncensored" there. I've read the article 5 or 6 times now looking for it, and even used Firefox's find-in-page function, and cannot find any mention of "censored", "uncensored" or any variation. Could you maybe tell me the exact sentence you're looking at?

I just finished making an edit to the article, mostly to revert/correct the IP user's interpolations, but I changed some of your edits too, I think. I didn't see your message above until after I made the edits, or I would have taken that part of my edits to the talk page before making them. Ships passing in the night. Sorry if the timing caused you any distaste. —

^talk

21:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I have made some other edits to the Lavdrim Muhaxheri article, KewinRozz. Mostly I was fixing citation formatting. Note that the title= field should always be the exact title given in the source (I recommend copy & paste to avoid typos) rather than your personal description of what the source is or says. Also be careful when replacing one source with another that you don't leave behind stray information that isn't correct for the new source, such as publication dates.

Thank you for adding category tags to the page.

I restored the LiveLeak source. I believe it's okay to cite in the context of what it's cited for, even though it's an unreliable source and ought to remain marked as such; it would be good to supplement it with other, reliable sources, but it doesn't need to be replaced. The source you used to replace it (which I have left in the article for now) does not substantiate the claim that the "authenticity of the video has been questioned" in the preceding question, whereas the LiveLeak source does substantiate that.

Actually, the other source you added does not substantiate the claim it follows either.

^talk

23:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi GrammarFacist, the media refered to initially in "Media coverage of Muhaxheri in 2014 and beyond" is in general about the publication of Lavdrim Muhaxheri.

The Independent and the others who wrote about the RPG video do not mention Lavdrim Muhaxheri. Here's the part about the verification of the RPG video which they state hasn't been independently verified, meaning it's uncensored; "The shocking footage, which has not been independently verified, was reportedly filmed in Syria’s eastern province of Deir Ezzor on Wednesday."http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-purportedly-executes-man-with-a-bazooka-in-disturbing-propaganda-video-10267322.html

Regarding the article about it, article that I changed reference to had a description of the content was an actual article so why not keep it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 00:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

---

This conversation has been moved to Talk:Lavdrim Muhaxheri. Please respond there rather than here.

Hi GrammarFacist, first, the Liveleak post that you're referring to is a post that I wrote, (Liam00 is my user account on Liveleak). This is what I wrote "The video doesn't show images of the subjects face after the attack since he's faced down on the ground". I'd recommend a reference to an article that claims editing to say those are more accurate references to the text about parts being cut out. Secondly, I would recommend to email and ask the Independent, they replied to my email about it on the 26th may and this is what they replied about it "as the article states this video and the details contained within it have not been independently verified". Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=820_1432489194#El8dOXaD3buKGO2b.99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by KewinRozz (talk • contribs) 08:17, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

I replied to your comments

Hi! I replied to your comment on Teahouse, please check it. DashaG11 (talk) 09:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(

^talk

13:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

About scripts and other helpful things

Hello my friend, thought I'd drop by your talk page for a change. :) I was thinking that since you are now out and about editing on many places on our dear WP, you could do with some things that makes editing easier for you. One of those things are something called scripts. I mentioned them earlier to you. A script is a help program you activate by adding one or two lines of text to a special subpage. If you don't like the script, you simply remove the lines again to de-activate it.

I thought I could start with a useful one called Linkclassifier. When you activate it, all the links that are now just blue turn into different colors depending on what kind of links they are. That is how I can so quickly see if something is wrong on a page and what needs fixing. People who like to fix things find this script good to have, editors who just want read the WP find it distracting. Anyway, being the lazybones that I am, I'm copying text here that I wrote some time ago when I helped another editor to start with scripts, I hope you don't mind, as well as adding a link to where I explain how it is activated:

"As for the scripts, they are not as dangerous as they sound. :) At least not the one I was thinking about for you. It is simply a code that is put on a subpage, much like a "sandbox2". Mine are located here User:W.carter/common.js. Two of these codes makes all links shine in different colors depending on what kind of link it is. If you look at the screenshot of Barlingbo Church here, you can see what it looks like with the script installed. All normal links are blue, "Diocese of Visby" is purple since it is a stub and all the green ones are links to redirected pages (they will turn blue if the link is corrected). There are many more colors, you can see them at the end of this page. It works on most web browsers."

And to activate, see: User talk:Yakikaki#Scripts. Try it out if you want to, otherwise I apologize for meddling. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 19:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay,

^talk

19:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

It takes some time to get used to working with scripts so it is always best to take them one at the time. This is also because some scripts will make new functions pop up on pages and if you install many at once, you will not know which function belongs to which script. But if you try this one and are comfortable with it, I will present the scripts I find useful for you. It may also be good to know that a script can slow down your computer some milliseconds so you don't want a whole bunch of unnecessary ones slowing you down further. Let me know if/when you are ready for the next and we'll take it from there. Oh, and I don't know that much about Twinkle since I don't use it myself, that one is mainly for keeping the order at the WP whereas the ones I use are for writing articles. I suggest you wait a while before you consider that one. w.carter-Talk 19:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your exceptional development as an editor, and the ensuing large amount of good edits, since you became seriously active on this Wikipedia a couple of months ago. I don't think I've ever coached a "newbie" who grasped things so quickly! w.carter-Talk 09:07, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much,

^talk

12:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks, for helping me with my first article Joshua Ferdinand. Pippathecat (talk) 08:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

All Star Mr & Mrs

Hi GrammarFascist. Thanks for all your help and advice concerning the vandalism on the All Star Mr & Mrs page. I honestly only thought at first I would have only gotten some advice on how to handle it. I was just about to get bak to you as I just noticed the semi block. So, if I decide to register with an account tonight let's say, I wouldn't be able to start editing right away on this page? I would have to wait for a few days. Did you mean on any page or just the semi protected ones?

I also wanted to apologize about how I edited the page on the day of the last episode's airing. It's just the way that I've seen other registered and well revered editors in the realm of the British game or panel show. Source the upcoming episodes and remove the source once the episode has aired. I don't mind leaving the sources there, just as long as there isn't a radical transformation of the page. As for sources, I know that TheRedPenOfDoom mentioned primary sources, but apart from actual Youtube links, the only ones I can think of for shows like that are from the ITV press office which brings out the earliest confirmation on Monday or Tuesday or Tv listings. Otherwise, there might be a list on the bottom from places like IMDB.

I do find editing on Wikipedia a bit of a challenge, especially for me who is starting to lead a busier life. I think every page and editor, particularly, in the British Television section hs their own vision of how to edit. Ever since AldezD and other likeminded editors, did a crackdown on Game show episode listings ( for shows with regular and celebrity episodes), there have been a couple of editors who remain unregistered who try to emulate AldezD, but who seem to not trust any sources such as TvListings that I put on certain pages once that AldezD would accept. It's just a bit of a pain to always get reverted for instances where I have assurance that I'm right, but there is always that one random editor that always likes to create arguments. It's these instances that are turning me off from editing although I do admit editing is a bit addictive especially for certain shows.

OK enough rambling. Have a good weekend.66.130.12.185 (talk) 21:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)samusek2

Hello, samusek2 (I presume I may refer to you by that string, since you use it after your automatic signatures?) — as I said, there is a way to apply for expedited autoconfirmed status, and I think your edit history would, on balance, count in your favor if you applied. But the worst case scenario is still only a four-day wait.

I haven't looked closely at the edit of yours that TRPoD reverted. I'm not well-versed in the conventions for editing such information about currently-airing TV programs; TRPoD has much more experience as an editor than I do, though it's possible your edit was presumed malicious simply because of the vandalism taking place on the page.

As for reliable secondary sources for the article, do newspapers not publish program listings in the UK, and is there nothing like the US's TV Guide? Either would be a reliable secondary source. Remember that sources cited on Wikipedia do not have to be online, so if there are listings in a print newspaper that don't appear on the paper's website, those can still be cited. You may also find brief blurb articles online mentioning which guest stars will be / were on a particular episode of All Star Mr & Mrs.

If you have a conflict with another editor, you should always try to resolve it through talk page discussion first. There are several options to have uninvolved editors mediate between editors with a dispute, but they all require previous attempts at resolving the conflict on your own. Don't forget to assume good faith (though I know it can be hard when someone annoys you). I wish you a good weekend as well! —

^talk

02:08, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Howard Sims DYK nom

I did see your notes ... just figured that BlueMoonset should be the one to respond since he raised the issue (as it is, I'm fine with your response). Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay,

^talk

11:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

A page you started (Baeomyces rufus) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Baeomyces rufus, GrammarFascist!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I don't know if a separate section for "Research" is needed- research is involved in all aspects of biology. Perhaps calling the section "classification" or "taxonomic history" would be more specific.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about

page curation

.

Your stamppot image

Hi there GrammarFascist, The image of Boerenkool stamppot that you placed as the main image of article stamppot looks very tasty but that is actually the problem, because it isn't representative at all of Dutch "stamppot boerenkool". A quick image search on Google shows that in Dutch stamppot boerenkool, the curly kale is thoroughly cooked but the veggies in your photo still look fresh and green, even uncooked. Did you make that dish yourself in the Netherlands or elsewhere? - Takeaway (talk) 22:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Takeaway. I learned to make stamppot (including boerenkool stamppot, which is my favorite) when I lived in the Netherlands in the mid-1990s, although I am not Dutch and have not lived there for many years. In my experience different people cook the kale for stamppot for different lengths of time. While in the Netherlands, I encountered thoroughly-cooked-greens stamppot, lightly-cooked-greens stamppot, and stamppots in between, both cooked by friends at home and at restaurants including the university cafeteria.

Certainly when the kale and potatoes are cooked together the kale becomes a duller, yellower green. But the article mentions that the modern method is to cook the leafy greens separately from the potatoes and then mash them together, which is how the pictured stamppot was prepared. (And the article has the second image, the one with rookworst, depicting the traditional one-pot method. I'm not opposed to swapping the placement of the two boerenkool stamppot photos.) You can actually tell that the kale in my photo is not completely uncooked, as kale first gets brighter when cooked, as shown, before becoming dull and yellowish. Raw kale also is not translucent like the kale in the photo.

Does this answer your questions? —

^talk

23:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

For stamppotten using soft-leaved vegetables, such as andijvie/endive, it is indeed customary nowadays to undercook the vegetables, or even to not cook them at all but to just mix them into the hot mashed potatoes. But as you can see in the images with the link to Google Image Search that I provided above, all of the images of stamppot boerenkool look much mushier than your version and are recognisable as stamppot boerenkool by every Dutch person, which, unfortunately, your version isn't. Seeing that you have lived in the Netherlands, you will know that traditional Dutch dishes aren't really renowned for their subtlety, nor for their tasty presentation. ;-) - Takeaway (talk) 23:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

LOL, I actually quite enjoy a lot of Dutch cuisine, Takeaway... but I can't argue your points.

As for the article, I have adjusted the image so that the kale is not such a bright green.

^talk

00:25, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

My point was that your version of stamppot boerenkool doesn't look like a normal Dutch stamppot boerenkool. People come to wikipedia to find information of what a dish normally should look like, and not to find what it sometimes can look like. Your version falls in the latter category. The vegetable is cut much more coarse than is usual in the Netherlands, where the standard method is to nearly have it minced, at least for kale, and as I already mentioned before, it just doesn't look anywhere as mushy as is usual in the Netherlands. Changing the colour green a bit still doesn't change the fact that it doesn't look like a normal stamppot boerenkool. As such it shouldn't feature as the main image as it's a highly individual version of this dish. All the stamppot boerenkool images in Google Search more or less look like one another, but they just don't look like what you've made. - Takeaway (talk) 00:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay,

^talk

01:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

It's only boerenkool which is sliced very thin, whereas other leaf vegetables that are used in a stamppot, are sliced more coarsely. It's not a regional thing, at least not in my experience (and I have lived in many parts of the Netherlands). I absolutely agree with you that the previous image in the article just looked disgustingly grey, probably due to the camera using the wrong colour temperature by incorrectly adjusting for what it thought was a green hue to become a neutral grey. It is normal that the mashed potatoes in stamppot boerenkool do not stay "potato-coloured" but turn greenish due to the juices coming from the kale.

I suggest to put the image of the stamppot boerenkool with rookworst up as the main image (it's not very sharp but when viewed as a thumbnail it's still ok) or otherwise this image, which I have just a few minutes ago enhanced to look somewhat more appetizing. I'll try to make a new photo of a Dutch stamppot a.s.a.p. though. It's getting cold here in NL so I'm sure I'll be eating some sooner or later.

As for your photo: As I said, and as you can see when you see images of stamppot boerenkool on Google Image Search, it doesn't really look like how a stamppot boerenkool should look like so however appealing-looking it is, it just is not representative of a Dutch stamppot. I view images such as yours (of non-representative versions of traditional foodstuffs) as something that can be interesting for posterity and it will be kept of course on Wikimedia just in case someone will write something about variations on stamppot boerenkool. For files like yours, I've created Category:Dutch food in foreign countries but in addition, it would also be nice to know where it was made. Too often here on wikipedia, I have seen strange and (literally) outlandish versions of food items, that try to pass themselves off as the real thing. See for example File:Panangbeefcurry.jpg, which featured on the Phanaeng article for a very long time until I replaced it with an image of what a phanaeng curry really looks like in Thailand, which is something very different altogether. - Takeaway (talk) 02:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Takeaway. I have made some edits to Stamppot, adding some content and referencing (though much of it is still unreferenced), and also replaced the main image. I think that one is not too bad, though of course a better one would be welcome. (I thought the one you touched up was too blurry, but if you disagree go ahead and make it the main image.) The photo I took is now below the hutspot photo, opposite the section Similar dishes, and its caption reflects that it was not cooked in the traditional manner. If you're not satisfied with that, I propose taking this conversation to the article's talk page and seeking input from other Dutch users of English Wikipedia, so consensus can be developed.

(Your pork phanaeng photo is gorgeous and looks delicious, even to a non-pork-eater. I'm a bit jealous of your travels in Asia. I'm very fond of Thai food (or at least the versions available here in the U.S.) and I would love to someday have Thai food in Thailand.)

Thanks for bringing the issue to my attention and discussing it with me. —

^talk

14:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nahem Shoa

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! Mhhossein (talk

) 02:16, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dibaeis baeomyces

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! Kevmin §

21:11, 12 October 2015 (UTC)