User talk:Scope creep/Archive 12

Hi Scope Creep, trust you had a good Christmas, and would like to wish you and your family a Happy New Year. We can make it that way, even if the weather is not too bright at the moment! Kind regards, Neils51 (talk) 21:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Neils51: Thanks. I hope you and your family have a great year in 2023. scope_creep^Talk 21:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award
		For over 1,000 article reviews during 2022. Well done! Keep up the good work! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Scope creep,

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous

WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed

are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see

WP:RFD

.

Discussions with the WMF The

revamping the landing pages

that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this
  short poll
  about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Hello, @Scope creep !

I trust you are doing well. In the past few months, I have been participating in the Women in Red project to help increase the number and bridge the gap in women's representation on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, creating content on Women in the down South have never been easy.

I recently submitted

Hi @Atibrarian: I see it has been promoted. If you have any problems the next time, please ping me. scope_creep^Talk 12:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your willingness to help! I Will sure keep in touch.

In the meantime, you might want to see this if there is a way to help with it.

Thanks for your time and effort. Regards

Atibrarian (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Atibrarian: I see it has been rejected. Once its too four reviews and its not improved, its rejected. I can't do nothing here. scope_creep^Talk 23:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Castellane was once on the PNT list and never got re-reviewed after I finished it. I am pretty sure it isn't start class any more. I wonder if you would submit it for me, then let me know how to do this myself, as there are one or two others I might want to submit; I find myself wanting validation after being so so falsely disparaged in the RfA. As in, Jublains archeological site was cut and pasted French and therefore was draftified, mumble. But whatever. I don't care much about gold stars in the abstract but maybe a few would come in handy the next time someone says I "claim" to be a translator. Elinruby (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: That seems to be article that is already in mainspace. scope_creep^Talk 23:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is but it has changed a great deal since it was rated. It's not start class, right? How do I go about getting it re-rated? Elinruby (talk) 23:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

come to think of it the Jublains article was submitted through AfC, do I understand your point that this one doesn't need to be submitted and so might not be what you do. Should I nominate it as a good article? I am sure it has formatting problems that I would then be expected to fix though. Any suggestions? Elinruby (talk) 23:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can rerate it yourself using the Wikipedia:Content assessment. Its unlikely anybody will rerate it again, so do it yourself. I think it is probably a C-class. It has a couple of citations needed added and the images at the bottom needed to added into a gallery, so they are displayed properly. I would remove the "In the city of Castellane" image as it looks like a road junction, and move all the left-hand images into the gallery. I don't think it needs a map, since it already has a set of coords. In fact it has two coords and one needs removed. Once that is done, it will probably be good enough for b-class rating. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 23:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does, thank you. Elinruby (talk) 01:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see the coordinates in the infobox; where were the other ones? I was going to just take care of that suggestion while I ave the article open, but I don't see it. On an unrelated note, I need a definition of "fit to work on". It is sounding to me that you want to come in when it's more finished and work on format? Is that a correct assessment? Rubricaire now has 4-5 references besides Mërimée, but I wouldn't call it fully referenced, especially now that I've discovered that the bishops had a beef with Herbert Wake-the-Dogs, Count of Maine. THAT seems worthy of inclusion ;) ByTheDarkBlueSea on the other hand seems to want to do translation and isn't available this week, so if I am going to explore sources and leave the translation to him, it will be a week or two. Is the point where I should ping when it isn't a rough translation anymore and it doesn't need a copy-edit? Just let me know; there is no correct answer to this question. Thanks. 02:27, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Its a single coord. It seems to be fine. My mistake. scope_creep^Talk 13:20, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok. Thanks for the follow-up. Elinruby (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for tidying Ihor Huk (surgeon). I noticed you removed the infobox. I also know that there is, sometimes, some controversy about infoboxen. Would you mind saying why it went, please? I have no strong feelings either way, I find them a useful summary, but inessential. I'm interested, not disputing. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

Filaret (Denysenko). That section is a serries of events instead of a biographical block. I think it needs a serious copyedit. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 16:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

It does. Thank you. I felt, too, that it was a borderline accept, but that it would get the attention it needs in mainspace, or find itself at AfD. Your points of criticism are all valid. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:52, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent post about Vichy France at Mathglot's page reminded me: I noticed Rote Kapelle on your user page and wondered what is going down on with that. When I was working on Liberation of France with Mathglot I volunteered for the part about the maquis, and encountered a whole list of "escape lines" for downed servicemen and/or Jewish civilians, and wondered if you found that, or were interested. I can probably put my hands on it rather quickly if you are still interested but haven't seen it.

On Jublains, I haven't heard from ByTheDarkBlueSea. I'll check to see if they have started work but just haven't pinged anyone. If not, would you like me to move one of the drafts forward, and if so which one? If you're happy with what you're doing right now that's fine too, of course .Elinruby (talk)

@Elinruby: Yes, I'm still working on the Red Orchestra stuff. I've mostly done the main article Red Orchestra over the last couple of year, but still to do the Rote Drei article at some point, perhaps later on in the year. I'm still working through the red orchestra people, you can see on the list, the templates at the bottom, there is loads of folk that need articles, including the ones of my user page. The last article I did there was Medardo Griotto as it an article on the web. Käte Voelkner could be done quite quick as it has a de wp article. There is plenty to do there. I would really appreciate any help in that area. The maquis stuff, I've too much going on but something to look at later on. I don't known if anybody has looked at that. Its a really interesting subject. You've piqued my interest. I also don't mind working on one of the drafts. scope_creep^Talk 00:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

well, I hadn't heard of the Red Orchestra to know if they had direct ties to the maquis, but it seems possible since some of the escape lines went through the low countries for servicemen trying to get back to England. I'll see if I can shoot you a link or two sometime soon. I didn't get too deeply into that at the time, as we were more focussed on colonial solders in Algeria, or at least I was. It caught my attention though, since apparently one of the houses we lived in in France was part of one of these underground railroad lines. Just something the neighbors told us. Anyway, I might well be interested in helping, but my German is nowhere near as good as my French. I'll do some reading, though, and see if I have any intelligent suggestions to make. Elinruby (talk) 00:26, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Slightly related: had you heard of this story? Rescue of the Danish Jews Elinruby (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: No. Could be worth updating. It seems to need a ton of references. Fancy working on that? scope_creep^Talk 12:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I could. Haven't actually looked at the article. Was intrigued by the story when I found a book about it. But if it's interesting and needs work, that's kind of my niche. I could take a look at the referencing and see what would be involved, I guess. Elinruby (talk) 18:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Allangrange Mains has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unclear what the claim to notability is for this farm. The only reference is to a map depicting it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tagishsimon (talk) 19:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I note you have offered an opinion on several "List of songs in Foo by Bar" articles. I'm afraid I nominated a significant number yesterday. Your opinion is welcome whether the same as or different from mine on any others you choose to comment upon. I hope some are worth saving.

I may continue later by nominating some more today. It feels churlish to do so, yet I feel bound to nominate those which I feel unlikely to merit inclusion. It is still my hope that others may find them worth improving such that they can be kept. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fiddle Faddle: I sent one of these list articles to Afd last year, in the year before I reviewed one on a NPP review, and I have another one currently at afd. so I feel as though I'm involved. I think they are all slightly different but most of them unsourced. You can't in this day and age have list article and not have all the line entries sourced. That is the consensus. I' working on updating Cameron Prize for Therapeutics of the University of Edinburgh to add a ref per line. That article has been on my todo list for about 5 years, so its not a new consensus, its much older than that. 2014-2015 was about the first I heard you had to ref each entry. So there is no reason to create these lists in that manner, apart from expediency. I was done as fast as possible. On your second point, Yes, I understand. That is reason I never !voted on the original Telegu list article you Afd'd, the ones in the songs in the Telegu language. It was well ref'd. Its very hard to update these list articles and it puts folks off, as it take a huge amount of time to reference them properly. You have a duty of care to nominate them, if its necessary and let the community decide. You can't leave a mess hanging around. scope_creep^Talk 12:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fiddle Faddle: I would maybe wait until these pan out, see what the reaction is. scope_creep^Talk 12:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I chose not to wait, on a purely arbitrary basis. I saw that your signature failed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kannada songs recorded by P. Susheela, and wonder if you would take a moment to regularise it.

By firing a shotgun at them I chose to let the community make a great many decisions. I am sure it will get some right and others wrong. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have upset a small niche set of editors by nominating this lot. It's perplexing that an editor who joined in 2006 has less grasp than they ought of policy, and such a strangely thin skin to consider what you said to be a personal attack.

Anyway, there's a whole slew more on the 24th 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fiddle Faddle: I will take a look at them. You always upset somebody eventually, vested interests effectively. It is one of the vectors that perhap end up killing Wikipedia. scope_creep^Talk 22:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when it does kill it, I think we can say "It was good while it lasted"

I treat this place as a very weird and arcane hobby, and one that actually does good beyond what we all do.

I don't mind upsetting folk, but I also work in the basis that I care enough to try to get things right, but not that much that I get bent out of shape over things where the lunatics are running the asylum. After all, we might be the lunatics! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BTW great work on the Prizewinners list. I looked at helping out and failed to find refs for the couple I tried 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it takes a ton of work to find references for lists like this. Slow work. I'm look at the 24th. See what I can see. scope_creep^Talk 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering whether the creating editor needs an editing restriction to prevent their creating articles in mainspace. I tend to detest those since they make de facto extra AFC work, plus a tedious AN/I discussion. It is also a

WP:CIR matter, conceivably NOTHERE and ICANTYHEARYOU 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

It could potentially be a CIR issue. It might be worth mentioning it at the admin noticeboard, not the incident noticeboard. It does seem more and more work is being created for folk and nothing has been done about it. scope_creep^Talk 14:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would probably be politically wise to away the close of the numerous AfDs, of which two more today 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, it would be best see how it pans out. scope_creep^Talk 14:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A useful intervention. "No consensus"surprised me as well. As, I think, did weighting policy based arguments equally with ILIKEIT arguments. Time will tell.

I never mind a close based on an obvious policy based consensus even when I am in full disagreement with the application or interpretation of those policies 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had a chat with Vanamode93 about the closes. I thought they should have been left open to try and get some kind of conensus formed for deletion or redirect. I think it was moving in that direction. Seven of them have been deleted and there seemed to be conseneus for those didn't have attached

WP:DRV today, probably, if I get time to see what the outcome is. I don't think there is any problem about re-Afding them at some point. We do need to have discussion regarding the editor and why he is creating these types of articles. The editor obviously think they are important, but the way they way they are pressented on WP is useless effectively from an encyclopeadic standpoint. scope_creep^Talk 17:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

As nominator I think I will watch the DRV you choose with interest. I may or may not participate.

I'm still awaiting outcome of the majority of the discussions before wandering over to (eg) AN. What I don't particularly wish to do is to make the discussion behaviour based. I'd rather it were topic based, and ended offering guidance, not sanctions 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent: I think it needs to be topic based. The editor is more than capable of writing good to excellent articles that are well referenced, they are capable of doing it. In the case I suspect it was the size and complexity of tracking these songs down and reference each one individually, the enormity of the work that is the core of it. It would take weeks or more likely months to do each article. Yip, Topic based is ideal get them refocused somewhere else. scope_creep^Talk 09:39, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's moot, now. The editor concerned has been sock blocked. Somehow this was always going to happen. This or something else to make the choice too lose their editing privileges. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent: So I see. It was madness, socking like that to save those articles. I understand why he did it, but so blatant. scope_creep^Talk 19:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most are gone, but a surprising number have been either retained or no consensus was reached. Some remain to close soon.

Not really sure what to do next to remove the remaining ones. I don't think I can re-AFD without being seen to be pointy 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will send this article List of songs recorded by Geeta Dutt to Afd now and see what what happens. The last Afd on this didn't address policy questions. scope_creep^Talk 18:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is it sent. scope_creep^Talk 18:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are times when the closer really needs a supervote in order to seek to enforce policy, but I accept all the reasons why it is a bad idea. I have added my opinion about WP:V 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:49, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See what happen I guess. An admin may close and then it will be case of waiting a month or two to try again, explaining how nothing has changed. scope_creep^Talk 18:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent: That's it closed. Some admin will let it run to try and gain consensus but closing admin that wasn't interested. It's closed in a no-consensus state, so that mess will be left for some months with nobody to work on it, or update the article, since the creation editor is blocked. I guess its a matter of waiting and do another set of Afd's in 3 or 4 months time. I would keep a list of those articles that are in that state for the moment and bide your time. There is not much else you can do. scope_creep^Talk 13:40, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The list is in my AfD stats. I suppose there was an inevitability about it 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:25, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I reverted your move to draft at SC Staaken--the creator actually already opened an AfD to preempt further moves to draft, so at this point it's clear that they object to moves to draft and you should proceed to AfD. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @

WP:IAR, as they are no effective sources on that article and it shouldn't be in mainspace. All the source are off database generated pages, which effectively makes it a copy and paste article. scope_creep^Talk 22:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Given that the AfD page looked like this, I figured the best solution would be to close the AfD and anticipate that either Onel would open an AfD or that the next reviewer would note the history and move to AfD rather than draft in the event that it didn't pass review. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried my best User:Rosguill to follow the afd format. I followed the directions and it didn't work.KatoKungLee (talk) 02:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259 Online events: New: Alphabet run O & P | Black women | Justice | Folklore Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: Explore Wikipedia for all variations of the woman's name (birth name, married name, re-married name, pen name, nickname) Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Katherine Singer Kovács Prize, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Diana Taylor and William Rowe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2600:6C65:7B7F:B34B:9D:179E:1FC7:9607 (talk) 21:59, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as you have voted for deletion of the article

]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello, Scope creep! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! scope_creepTalk 19:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

Upon further reflection, my tone regarding your comment was perhaps too initially defensive. We may disagree on whether or not a particular article is acceptable for keeping on Wikipedia, but that does not mean that I do not like you, or disparage your contributions to Wikipedia. Please accept these Stroopwafels as a peace offering. — Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:39, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Moops: There was never a loss of peace at any stage, but thanks. scope_creep^Talk

Well stroopwafels, in my experience, never hurt anyway. :) — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 21:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261 Online events: New: Geofocus Mediterranean | Art + Activism | Alphabet run Q & R Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | Folklore See also: #Visible Wiki Women Wikimedia challenge to add more images of women to Commons Tip of the month: Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine! Include something to keep people reading. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I applaud you, genuinely, for your withdrawal of the nomination on that MfD. It takes a rare editor to be able to self reflect and take action in that manner, especially as quickly as you did. :) — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 01:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amen, further applause. Hopefully no hard feelings, and I can see how you thought the essay was written because of your AfD, so it was me who wasn't assuming good faith. Came by to ask you and

the essay. I've edited it quite a bit since yesterday (you did spurn me on to do that - thanks! - and were correct that it was in pretty bad shape) and would enjoy some feedback. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Moops: Thanks. @Randy Kryn: I shouldn't have nominated it and wasted your time. scope_creep^Talk 22:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

? Not wasted at all. It made me go in and work on the essay, trimming it, editing, etc. That's worth a thanks. I know you probably won't agree with the content but would appreciate your comments or criticism. I've got a See also I'll add in. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rubricaire, a related site to Jublains, is in mainspace now. It's a more technical article, mostly about the baths, but I thought I'd let you know.

It has a number of references, but rather few for its length, and is correctly flagged for that. I am not sure if English-language references exist, but it's still a close translation of very stiff French, if you are in the mood to copy-edit.

If not, no worries; I am working on it slowly. I need a break from the edicts of Charlemagne right now but I am confident that the French being the French, all of the factual statements are sourceable from Gallica if nothing else, so don't delete any claims for that yet. Elinruby (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I see why it would be slowly. I'll take a look. Good bit of work to decode a lot of it. Where was it translated from? scope_creep^Talk 19:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

French Wikipedia. I've already deleted some meaningless Frenchness, and encourage you to do that if it seems appropriate (see last sentence for example). Please also feel free to ask questions/flag confusing text. The major question in my mind would be whether that one phrase means bricks edging the road or bricks whose edges have something unusual about them. I am pretty sure it's the former, but it's a question I had. Elinruby (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

oh and ... there are several references to saints, a title en-wikipedia seems to avoid, so if you know what MoS says about that exactly... ? Elinruby (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Scope creep, thank you so much for your comments on my draft! Could you be so kind as to tell me how the article can be improved (apart from the comments you have left on the draft review)? Even though I’ve thoroughly read WP:NPOV, I’m struggling to understand the parts of the article that aren’t neutral. Have I editorialised something by mistake? Or given undue weight? I wrote the article chronologically aiming to meet WP:GNG and not WP:NACTOR, but I can fix that by bringing all notable points to the top. I plan to rewrite the draft later today in a much much more neutral tone. May I ping you to take a look after I'm done? It’s been months of work verifying the offline sources and trying to match the tone and style of other businesswomen articles on Wikipedia. Or would it be advisable for me to instead revert the draft to a stub which was what I started with and just leave the bare minimum WP:THREE references that make the subject notable? 2405:201:1006:E279:AD51:5B41:14A4:8ECE (talk) 06:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ the article

If you can spare time for paraphrasing better and need to discuss original source, I can support with original quotes as required. Seeking your help in making the sentence more nuanced.

Bookku (talk) 05:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry Halliday (paediatrician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chronic lung disease.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

of the second law article: what's a clausus? At first glance does not appear to be a legal term. Classes? Elinruby (talk) 13:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sp, clause. Spelling mistake.Clauses. scope_creep^Talk 13:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Have you submitted this at wikisource yet? If not, I have a little time now if you'd like me to take another look. Elinruby (talk) 05:21, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I've got the go ahead and some help, so i'll to do it later on this afternoon. I had a really busy yesterday with work. Please do. It is in better condition now you have updated it slightly. scope_creep^Talk 05:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

😉 on it. Give me about an hour, as much screen-switching will be involved. Will let you know when done Elinruby (talk) 05:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: Its very early in the morning in Scotland, so plenty of time. scope_creep^Talk 05:59, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✌️ need a reason to procrastinate on sourcing Marxist dialectic, which dies need to be done in this instance, but right now sounds like less fun than sticking a fork in my eye Elinruby (talk) 06:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of bunyuro kitara kingdom and its method of surgery despite its link.The link is in the talk page of article history of surgery named bunyuro kitara kingdom Ppppphgtygd (talk) 06:02, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ppppphgtygd: What article does this concern? You really need to put the article name in. scope_creep^Talk 06:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

History of surgery article,talk page bunyuro kitara kingdom were the reference Ppppphgtygd (talk) 06:15, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Legion of Honour" goes to "Legion of Honour" but as a redirect from "Legion of Honor", which probably means that the redirects have a headache. Just noting my amusement at this. Also "The Grand Chancery" very probably but not certainly really is "conseil" in this instance but apparently you can't make the wikilinks go down two levels, or I have forgotten how. If you're keeping the wikilinks, do what you think about this Elinruby (talk) 08:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I see what you mean. I'm also not sure that links work on wikisource. I thought it would just be the raw text that was needed? scope_creep^Talk 09:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what wikisource does. I will take all the links back out when I am done if you like, but this helps me keep track of what I have already checked. I know what I am doing probably seems like a fine example of overthinking, but one or more well-meaning somebodies conflated the civil law (Napoleonic} system and the common law legal systems (composed of a criminal and a civil law branch) systems at some point in the past.

What I am doing is making sure we don't perpetuate this (since this is a source document). The en.wikipedia believe me is not to be trusted on the subject. On the other hand, if Wikisource has an established style for the translation of given terms then it is probably based on some EU glossary that somebody or somebodies like the Académie Française already thought way too hard about, and yeah, the Académie Française is more expert about the French language than I am. Does that make sense?

It is also good to document stuff like that weird redirect so we can get to it eventually, because I am not going to go down the rabbit hole tonight of fixing erroneous links with respect to the French legal system or I will still be here doing that next week.

I guess we've never talked about this before? This is why Mathglot had to write a glossary for Brazil and we're having to do the same thing for France. Getting javacript weirdness again, have to reboot. Beginning to understand the anger about the skin chanes. Brb. Let me know if you want me to take the links back out when i am done. I can also convert them to interproject links if desired but need to look the syntax up. Elinruby (talk) 09:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so... I am back. I saw you reviewed changes. Are there any that you disagree with, like verb tense? This is a style choice and I can live with present tense if you hate the imperative. Ditto for the rest of this actually, except I am really

sure mandat is not mandate in this case, unless this is a matter of ENGVAR. Mine is rather... idiosyncratic. I do try for consistency though and I assume that we should use standard British English? Going to go gawk at something for a minute, let me know Elinruby (talk) 10:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: Yes and yes. I didn't know that was the reason for the French law terms glossary. I do know they proof read it on wikisource. I found a list of current jobs and they're must be more than just editor guidance, they've got they're own standard I guess which probably includes some kind of style guides and other system specfic guidance, but its like a black box at the moment. I'll find out no doubt when I copy it across. I'll ask koavf is they can be left in, or what the process is on them. I will do it now. On the 2nd message, I wil check it before it goes after you are finished. scope_creep^Talk 10:33, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Très bien, merci. I don't actually care whether we leave the links in or not. ("can be") On an emotional level, that is. I want the finished result to reflect what everybody wants, and have no problem with making that happen. My checks are just kind of painstaking is all especially since I know that en.wikipedia contains errors. IMO a better question is whether or not they want links to English Wikipedia and if so is the syntax displayname? Since I don't know whether this is new to you, sorry if this is a ridiculous question, but you did get the part about civil law vs common law (composed of civil and criminal law)? This is the part that English Wikipedia is confused about. And yeah, the thing with the glossary is because of that and because the reference template fr.wikipedia uses doesn't work here. Or something. I am sure Mathglot is right about whatever the issue with that template is. As you're probably gathering, it's a don't get me started kind of issue. Elinruby (talk) 10:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: Only English language text with no markup. So the links will need to be removed when finished. scope_creep^Talk 10:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very good. Making it so. Going back to work on it now. It will go much faster once I get done with these agency names. Elinruby (talk) 10:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and is imperative ok? If you hate it I will save us both some work and quit doing that. Like I say, you're the one submitting it. Elinruby (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Re-reading) yes you hate it, and yes British English, lol? Sorry to bug if you are doing something, Just let me know when convenient. Elinruby (talk) 11:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I was fixing refs but her now. I didn't know that but it reflect my own experience on how bad the software is. The British English, I'm not too bothered about. scope_creep^Talk 11:04, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks more like like power making a decision being handed down as the language is tightened up. scope_creep^Talk 11:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm? Didn't understand that. On format and style I am fine with whatever you and they want. Since they don't want wl but they help me I will put them in then take them out. I just want to check the translation for confusion about the two legal systems. Once you get it back from me you can check me for typos and anything else that grinds your gears. Elinruby (talk) 11:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I see you mean now. I didn't even consider that to be honest. scope_creep^Talk 11:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well I gather you just now discovered the Napoleonic system right? Not to worry, the collective English wikipedia didn't realize that when I started on Operation Car Wash. We're working on it. it's actually the most prevalent system globally, which is where Brazil comes into it. (They had a Bonaparte emperor for a while)

But I came in to ask you about "control corps". Is this a military term I just don't know? Like the joint chiefs of staff? Moving on for the moment. Going faster now that I am past the stuff with en Wikipedia articles Elinruby (talk) 12:46, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think its probably that. The inner core of command folk of the general staff that decide how the war is fought. It not a term I know but it might be uniquely French. I hadn't seen that Operation Car Wash article. That is a major scandal and not heard of it. That is very complex article. I will chip in when I can, although I have a lot on. I read about Napoleon and the wars quite extensively when I was younger, but not much of Napoleonic code. I think it probably something that happened as countries moved from feudal system to nation states that industrialised. scope_creep^Talk 13:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• More or less. The Bonapartes had a lot to do with it also, which is why I usually call it the Napoleonic code, to distinguish it from the meaning of "civil law" related to a subset of common law.
• I see now that the reply I didn't understand was about "control corps". Ok. Just what we need, another untranslatable French vocabulary word. <g> But yeah,that is more or less the sense of it that I am getting too.
• One of the appeals of civil law to the French was that its regulatory approach to jurisprudence eliminates the unknown of obscure caselaw being brought to bear out of left field. Also the French knew a thing or two about mad kings that we should all take note of.

• If you are interested in Brazil, and they just had their own January 6, I would suggest List of scandals in Brazil as a place to start that has just barely made it out of draft. But you could also throw a dart at anything in Operation Car Wash or any spinoff of it and find something that needs a copy edit, verification or translation, most likely all three Elinruby (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I'll take a look but I have a lot of other stuff on and i've got long todo list with about 40-60 artticles to do on it. Did you finish the Second law on the status of Jews. It certainly looks a lot better. scope_creep^Talk 09:17, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distracted by deadline at arbcom. I was working myself up to go in there, but if you're busy anyway I would actually prefer to do this in the morning, would you mind? I have not yet rm the wikilinks and I haven't done the pension calculation part yet. I bet that was fun. Elinruby (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I probably won't be able to sleep anyway, nm. Headed there now Elinruby (talk) 09:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: Its quality work your doing so no rush. I see you were included in Arbcom. I didn't think you were part of it. I'm heading away for four days to relax so it can wait, although might take my laptop and do some work. scope_creep^Talk 10:10, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not, actually, but I don't think I am supposed to talk about it. If adding me allows some progress with this then whatever, shrug. I am just glad they took the case. I will see how far I get on this tonight, but I'll stop if my eyes get tired or I starting making typos. It's good work to chill out on, sort of zen Elinruby (talk) 10:32, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: You have to rest and let the brain recharge. That is reason I'm going to away. I'm doing the most basic work at the moment and have core work needing done on the Joseph Lister article. scope_creep^Talk 10:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you. I will, don't worry. But I just read some of the stuff they're talking about adding and it's pretty vile stuff is all

. Elinruby (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266 Online events: New: Gender studies | Health | Dance | Alphabet run S & T | Books by women Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | See also: Women in Red is supporting Every Book Its Reader through our Books by women event. Tip of the month: When writing about a book, check WP:POETRYSTANDARDS for guidance. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Mathglot seems to be saying at the article talk page that the law text has already been translated and provided a page number. Please let me know if you want to just check this article against that translation. Meanwhile I have decided that "démarcheur" does seem to be a door-to-door salesman.

Great work with the page number problems at Collaboration with the Axis powers.Elinruby (talk) 13:21, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I had a look at the De Gryuter entry last night, but never downloaded the book. I still plan to copy the text up to Wikisource and index it, so its available for folk, if needed. The stuff in the book is likely copyrighted as a derivative work and it won't be accepted at Wikisource. I'll take a look this afternoon. It would be nice to see how well we are actually doing compared to professional translators even if only an exercise. scope_creep^Talk 14:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it, I not sure, don't know if there is any other considerations about we need to think about. scope_creep^Talk 14:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok. I don't mind finishing up, I just dont want to do it if nobody else else wants me to. I'll switch back to this, then, want to finish it. Did you find all those page numbers by hand or do you have a tool for that? Elinruby (talk) 14:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manually and searches mostly. I couldn't find that Jackson page number yesterday. A really cool book on archive.org. I spent 2 to 3 hours just reading various sections looking for the page ref but couldn't see it anywhere. Even using 20-30 odd combinations of search terms, it wouldn't just surface. It peeved me off. scope_creep^Talk</sup 14:47, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I am in awe. i was pretty sure a lot of those page numbers were findable, but it wasn't something i could overlook on that scale given the accusations of deliberate distortion. And my point was that the reader shouldn't need forensic methods.

You've already done a lot of remedying on this, but I don't suppose you remember if Eichmann in Jerusalem was one of the sources where you found a page number? it came up several times but the three of us who were talking about it all had different editions. If not, don't go look for it at this point, as some of the evidence about the historiography seems to say that she is now believed to have been mistaken on the specific topic where she was quoted, the Judenräte. Of course (let me get this down while I am thinking it), in 1963 she would not have known about the role of IBM, which only recently came to light, nor, depending on how recently the historiographical consensus changed, would you necessarily expect random wikipedia editors to have noted the change in historiographical consensus. There were definitely people arguing the Polish party line in 2018 and 2019, but somebody like Slatersteven, or hell, me, would probably consider it an eminent source and completely fail to suspect that an author famous for coining the phrase "banality of evil" is now considered to have somewhat overstated its extent. Unless the author that said this is himself considered one of the nationalist party-line authors, since apparently there really are such authors?

in any event

In this article wrt the text I have left you just one problem, since I am really not sure and you will be the person submitting the text, so your call.

• In article 7, all of the calculations about pensions are pretty straightforward with the exception of a mention of "alienated capital". I could make several guesses along the apparent meaning of divestiture, but I think that in this context, where they are talking about double payments to the national pension plan (employer contributions?) they are saying that the people at a certain level of contributions would only receive credit for contributions made from their own funds. If "alienated capital" has some other meaning I am not aware of, then by all means go with that, if you think it's right. But I am having trouble conceiving of another meaning that fits. There's a meaning to "alienate" of loss or seizure but that doesn't fit the sentence and this doesn't seem to have anything to do with overseas accounts.

• A few other things I hesitated over: "licensed and unlicensed professions" is my best shot, and occurs in the lists of professions no longer open to Jews, in Article 3 I think. There are several occupation names I thought were too literally translated in the lists, and I made a number of smallish changes. However I wound up using the word "broker" a lot, only to find it by itself at the end of the list. So we have mortgage brokers and real estate brokers and stockbrokers and just plain brokers, which seems a bit silly. If you don't check anything else, check these occupation names. And take a look at "alienated capital". Hope that helps. I am completely confident about the rest of the text.

Not that other wordings aren't possible. Mathglot does not think I should translate the subjunctive tense with "shall" for example, but that's what it freaking says if you ask me, although I think there are good arguments for just using the present tense in the interests of readability. Elinruby (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow you. What article is the Eichmann in Jerusalem source in? scope_creep^Talk 22:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: Broker is accurate. I'll take a look at tommorrow. 23:04, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eichmann in Jerusalem is/was one of the page number problems in the collaboration article. It was a problem we were having. Don't worry about it -- if it wasn't something you looked at the other night, maybe Marcelus' rewrite of the Jewish collaboration section eliminated it as a source. I should check, but I've got it if you don't know anything about this off the top of your head.

Let me know if you need me to explain the subjunctive thing to you, but TL DR Mathglot isn't wrong but I think my translation better conveys that this is a decree not a description or a suggestion. Also, after the talk page discussion I decided not to obsess over why they would say antecedents instead of just parents. It's a very peripheral point and usually this would mean the parents. Also I have reconsidered "those who have died for France" in favor of your original translation of war veteran. It is true that they now include victims of terrorism in this definition, but that was undreamt of at the time of this edict so your original translation is smoother and less over-thought. Unlike everything else I've mentioned above on these musings, this point IMHO does require action on your part, assuming you agree, as I decided this after sending you the "finished" check. Elinruby (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I searched for the Eichmann in Jerusalem ref. Its not in there. I think we are going to move the text wikisource as soon as possible, and work on it, as its taking too much time. I looked at the source on the TWL book and its very close. scope_creep^Talk 08:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for all your work and comments. I will attend to them! Thanks again. Balance person (talk) 12:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you for raising the quality concerns about Global Privacy Enforcement Network. You know I think it was (and is) a poor candidate for deletion, but honestly the AfD nomination was a good thing because the article was in need of improvement.

While I can see how the article could have, at the time, appeared not a good fit for inclusion I took up your criticism and improved the article. Such improvements are an important part of the AfD process, and I pointed sources out with specific examples. Obviously I disagree with your appraisal of the changes. But if editors don't discuss things we never come closer to consensus, right?

So I was taken aback by the suggestion I was somehow uncivil or disruptive (note that bludgeoning is not policy, but a catch-all allegation of inappropriate conduct). I did respond to some of your comments, which included among other things a lengthy point-by-point rebuttal of every source cited (at the time) in the article.

If I offended you, I’m sorry. If this goes beyond making comments, and I've done something specific do let me know and I'll take it into consideration.

I’m hoping your accusations and threats are just bluster and frustration. If ANI is something you think is necessary, that may speak more of you than of me; I’m very comfortable having my conduct scrutinised.Oblivy (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scope creep are you accusing me of sockpuppetry? If so, your accusation is untrue and without basis. If not, I suggest you clarify at the AfD discussion page. Oblivy (talk) 00:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oblivy: I plan to open an SPI when I get back today. What should have been a simple Afd lasing a week has turned into a complete farce. Having done 1000's of these I feel as though there is something weird going on. scope_creep^Talk 08:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am just adding a comment on the talk page for Beech if you could take a look when you have a minute? Thanks.Balance person (talk) 12:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above page has in its editing page a warning that "One or more {{cite journal}}: Empty citation (help) templates have errors." In the past 2 days, I havee given appropriate citations to 3 cites which requested citations. How do I correct and/or remove this error message? Thank you, joflaher (talk) 3:05, PM 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Joflaher: How are you? I just finish this citation and I'll be there is about 10 minutes. scope_creep^Talk 15:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was the upshot of the discussion at Second law on the status of Jews that we don't ever host full texts? I was kinda preoccupied at the time. I ask because this is seemingly what I just encountered at Tripura Merger Agreement. I am not sure whether to delete the text, especially since an html comment says that it was proofread against a specific published version. I'm surmising that you may know who to ask about this. LMK? No rush on this, it's just a question I had while wikignoming. Thanks Elinruby (talk) 23:18, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evening @Elinruby: I'm not sure. I was quite a difficult process and while the wikisource project were very helpful, it did require a lot of work and i'm unsure of the benefits outway the actual work involved. I do see there is a version on Wikisource already. Its a 1950 paper and not likely changed in the interim, even if the originating editor states it was checked against a published version. I would likely remove it as I see no real reason for it to be on Wikipedia. The Wikisource entry is perfectly valid. On another note, I was plannning to join you this weekend, but couldn't see anything to collaborate on. I did look at some stuff on the nazi's in Lithuania that were not getting prosecuted article, but there wasn't much there. scope_creep^Talk 23:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was sort of wandering around in non-contentious topics this weekend. I'm pretty much done with the AC case though; it's now in the refuting-evidence phase but the evidence about me amounts to 1) I worked on the Collaboration article after February 12 2023 and 2) I worked on the collaboration article. Lol. I am not feeling a need to refute that. Otoh In other news I am now apparently in Bishzilla's pocket, which is apparently a good thing (?)

I did get through with editing the page on the 1st Cossacks, and found a source, which I haven't dug into too deep yet. It seems that this unit had a heavy infusion of POWs. But they were definitely also involved in massacres. So I'm dithering.

I do think that it is time to do some spinoffs there. Possibly as a bold move, since a lot of people have individually agreed that it seems like a good idea, but I can't seem to get everyone to do it in the same section. Elinruby (talk) 03:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the text and left the Wikisource banner btw. Just wanted a second opinion.

As to your other comment I think I will start a to-do list at collaboration and on my personal page for situations like those where energy is looking for a place to go. I have an archeological site in Aragón if you are interested. (Caspe). There are still some translation problems and I don't know how you are with Spanish and Occitan though. But it's there if you start getting referencing urges, and probably still will be next weekend and the one after that. It came off the needs-a-copyedit list so there is no special deadline. There do seem to be some interesting points about the history of that government, but I hadn't finished that section the last time I took a break from it, if Andalusian sources and Visigoths tribes pique your interest. Elinruby (talk) 05:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Morning @Elinruby: I've put that Rubricaire article on my long term todo. I spent a lot of time, at the time looking for sources, at the time, and found a couple, but it took a lot of time, so I parked it for the moment. I suspect nearer the time it would need expert. It might possible to post it to some wikiproject on archealogy perhaps. I'll see whats what. I've often thought of keeping a diary as some of the articles I've been working on. Maybe just a sentence on what article you going to work on, the day before, so folk can catch it and plan. With no planning, its hard to herd folk. I see your problem. I plan to write a section or an article on collaboration for that vichy article, i.e. what is collaboration. I've got a couple of articles that define what it is and why folk decided outwith the obvious peer group, fiduary concerns, worried about being shot, safety and so on, to do it. There seems to be genuines psychological reasons for doing it, and they go into quite some details, and there isn;t an article on it. But its on my todo list, with many other articles that are on the go, it will take some time. So your in Bishzilla's pocket then. From a uk perspective I don't think it can be a good thing. It generally means your either under their influence or youll do what they tell you. More likely the latter. I've not spoke that editor before but like every editor now, they are now under the Code of Conduct so I wouldn't worry about it too much. Although he could be actually be checking your contributions. I'll check and see whats going on. scope_creep^Talk 10:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: I think bishzilla is likely keeping an eye on your interactions. I would probably keep away from TB. Follow the IBAN rules, even though its not in place. It seems they way the editor is using multiple accounts to visually indicate what they're thinking is really cool. I've not seen that before. The editor seems to be show his displeasure/i'm the admin visually, so that folk on his talk page know how he feels. Very cool. scope_creep^Talk 11:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. it may not always be possible to avoid the arrival of Darwinzilla, lol. However, I am taking the pocket thing to mean that I am no longer lunch, which is an improvement. There's wifi. As for scrutiny, that's just fine. Used to it, welcome it, sincerely don't want to do stupid stuff so if someone stops me before I do, then great. I just backspaced out an explanation of how insane that i-ban is though -- that's the part I told you I couldn't talk about once -- but bottom line it's voluntary, and as I said, let them scrutinize. However it's annoying me and I've been told to take it to Barkeep49, which I am happy to do, but he is sort of busy right now.

So on to business then. I like what you're saying about collaboration, and have found some interesting material about this at Sciences Po, and another page that is I guess open on the other phone. I've been looking at that because I rewrote the lede in a bold but uncontested move, and wanted to make sure I am within the mainstream there. As I have said elsewhere, I wrote it carefully but it should be considered a draft like anything else on wikipedia. I am not one of those "my-deathless-prose" editors. In fact, my general attitude is that I should concentrate on what I am better at than some other editors, which is reading english by non-english speakers, and improving it to where other people can read it also. Don't worry about Rubricaire. Some site somewhere has figured out I am interested, or maybe I subscribed, and us emailing me papers a about it. But it's mainly of interest afaik in terms of the engineering, and the details of the baths, which is pretty dry stuff. If I were to choose, I would rather Jublains upgraded, and using those gorgeous images. But your call and you are a volunteer etc. I have occasional outbreaks of bossiness. Feel free to tell me to sod off if it seems appropriate ;)

I had a list already set up in my sandbox and moved it to my talk page, of things I am trying to get to and/or wish someone would do. If I get a better idea what you are interested in I may start sending you suggestions; Mathglot for example seems to like Catalan folk culture and I sometimes ping him on random stuff about that. I do a lot of punctuation-fairy type work from the lists that tagging creates, as I like the randomness/discovery aspects of that.

If you're working on the high-level philosophical part of collaboration I think I'll go back to dealing with the big hairy problem nobody else is tackling, ie these "volunteers" and how voluntary they were. Currently looking at the Georgian Legion and a Sanjak militia. This is a big messy problem but I guess I should start by familiarization, one unit at a time (?) Any sources you find that address them as a whole would be welcome. Elinruby (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270 Online events: New: Alphabet run U, V, W | Disability | Women in Education | CEE women Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | See also: Wikimedia CEE Spring 2023/CEE Women - Wikimedia contest with postcards and prizes The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of bays of the Orkney Islands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamnavoe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit here. It's not a question of what is grammatically correct, or what is British English (and there is nothing particularly British about it). It's a question of

@Escape Orbit: Yes, I know your right, but the problem with date format not being in a British format and the grammer around gets me every time. scope_creep^Talk 14:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Think of it this way. How dates are written, and how you read them, is entirely up to the reader. No-one reads "12/05/2023" as "twelve slash zero five slash two thousand and twenty three". They convert it to a date in the format they prefer. The same applies to whether you want to add a "the" at the start. If the reader hasn't made the day number an ordinal, in their head, the "the" is out of place. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Escape Orbit: Yes. That is quite a cool rationalisation. No doubt it will go back to what the copyeditor wanted, either today or tommorrow when I forgotten about it. scope_creep^Talk 18:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ping Elinruby (talk) 04:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Draft:Amparo Fortuny

.

I fixed the harv on the missing citatations (Ref 2,9,17), also replaced Ref 38, 39 for something better and used ill template to another wp. So giving you a shout in case you can have a look. Thanks! Filmnewtool (talk) 16:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shukubo dead links

I fixed up

Draft:Shukubo. What did you mean by dead links? I cannot find any. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 17:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

• News and notes: Golden parachutes: Record severance payments at Wikimedia Foundation

• In the media: History, propaganda and censorship

• Arbitration report: Final decision in "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland"

• Recent research: Create or curate, cooperate or compete? Game theory for Wikipedia editors

• Featured content: A very musical week for featured articles

• Traffic report: Coronation, chatbot, celebs

• WikiProject report: Wikipedians Convene for Queering Wikipedia 2023: The First International LGBT+ Wikipedia Conference

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273 Online events: New: Alphabet run X, Y & Z | LGBTQ+ women | Wiki Loves Pride | Women in Music Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman See also: Women in Green: June 2023 GA Editathon event page Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride/2023 global campaign The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

• News and notes: WMRU director forks new 'pedia, birds flap in top '22 piccy, WMF weighs in on Indian gov's map axe plea

• In the media: Section 230 stands tall, WP vs. UK bill, Miss Information dissed again

• Featured content: Poetry under pressure

• Traffic report: Celebs, controversies and a chatbot in the public eye

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:22, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing GPR120 Wiki page

Scope Creep: I updated and greatly expanded the page GPR120 and then renamed it Free fatty acid receptor 4 (FFAR4). GPR120 was renamed several years ago and now commonly recognized as Free fatty acid receptor 4. However, there still remains the very short page PGR120. Could we (i.e. you) delete the PGR120 page? Many thanks for you help. joflaher (talk) 5:10, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

@Joflaher: Can you put a link in here so I can find it? I can't locate it scope_creep

Scoop Creep: here's its link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_fatty_acid_receptor_4. When I enter Free Fatty acid receptor 4 it may not show up on the list of suggested sites but just clicking free fatty acid receptor 4 brings me to its page.Talk 17:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

GPR 120? Thats only 3k long and its got to go. scope_creep^Talk 17:37, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I will redirect it to Free fatty acid receptor 4. scope_creep^Talk 17:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thats it done. scope_creep^Talk 17:41, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Scoop creep. Have a great day. Jow Joflaher (talk) 17:56, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Historical Dictionary of Switzerland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hauterive.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translated text at Roger Masson

Hi, following your reference desk query, I had a look at the article. Should parts of the article, such as Roger Masson#German press campaign against Switzerland, be attributed in an edit summary as a translation or close paraphrase of de:Roger Masson? See Help:Translation#License requirements for details. I am aware that you are a more experienced editor than I am. TSventon (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon: I'm not sure to be honest, if there is a seperate licencing requirements for seperate sections. There is trans tag in the talk page that attributes that specific de version. I would assume that would be enough, per previous conversations with Diannaa but don't know. scope_creep^Talk 15:36, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scope creep, I wanted to encourage you to disclose the attribution as an edit summary, as recommended in Help:Translation, rather than only on the talk page. I wasn't suggesting attributing section by section. I somehow managed to miss the attribution on the very short talk page, otherwise I would have mentioned it. TSventon (talk) 09:13, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon: I'm wondering if you have access to the Gruchmann article. I see you updated the referencee. I wonder if it possible if you can post up the original German text of the quote mentioned in the Masson article. In that way I'll be able to get an idiomatic translation done. I don't think the quote that mentioned in the article is accurate. scope_creep^Talk 13:28, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted two links on the article talk page. I also made a further comment on the reference desk thread. TSventon (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vusi Thembekwayo

Hi Scope creep firstly, thank you for all your help in tweaking this article and I also appreciate your steer and advice about my subsequent work. Considering all the tweaks you have done including the ones I did subsequently, is it ok now for me to remove the tag on the page? Your thoughts on this will be highly appreciated. Kind Regards Oceanview1590 (talk) 06:38, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oceanview1590: How goes it. I'll take a look at the article today. scope_creep^Talk 07:36, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Scope creep,

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The

WT:NPPR

when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at

AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed

, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at

draftspace is optional

, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own

WP:ARTIST

4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this
  short poll
  about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Leopold Trepper revision

Hi! I saw that a revision I'd made to Leopold Trepper's article had been reverted and wanted to discuss it with you.

I understand what you mean but the reason I made the revision was because his father's death is actually mentioned earlier in the article where it pins his death around 1916, when Trepper was 12. The mention of his father's death in the later section was to note that he had joined Hashomer Hatzair around the same time but its inclusion there confuses the timeline.

Mentioning his father's death after all those earlier events (ie. his schooling in Lwow, his attendance at University, his work in the mines and later imprisonment for being involved in the miners' strikes) made it seem like he had done all those things before his father had died in 1916, which is ridiculous.

I wasn't contesting the content itself, which is referenced correctly, but just wanted to clarify the timeline. Is that alright? Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 22:27, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jasonkwe: I'm glad your taking an interest in it. The timeline follows one datetime after another, although it could be date itself that is wrong. I'll check. scope_creep^Talk 23:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

see what you mean. Its mentioned twice for some reason. The copyedit has failed. I wonder why I got it into my head that it related to him joining that organisation after he was jailed. Something to do with family. They're is obviously something seriously wrong.I will need to check the references properly next week and find proper dates of being imprisoned and proper details around that block. Kudos for spotting it. scope_creep^Talk 23:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasonkwe: Unless you fancy doing it? scope_creep^Talk 00:04, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the references and I think it's mainly that a previous editor must have added the bit about his father dying to anchor the date when he joined Hashomer Hatzair.

The general timeline seems to be this:

--Sent to Lwow for schooling (unsure about exact date). While at school, his father dies in 1916. He also joins Hashomer Hatzair in 1916.

--Age 18: goes to University of Krakow (Jagiellonian) for higher education. Eventually leaves around age 20 as the economic situation d/t the Polish-Soviet War becomes very bad.

--At some point in 1924 he is back in Lwow and meets Luba, his future wife

--Works at the mines in Katowice.

--Works at Dombrova. Encourages a strike and is jailed for it (at age 22, ie. 1926).

--Briefly goes back to Krakow looking for work.

--Chosen by hashomer Hatzair to emigrate to Palestine in 1926.

The bit about him leaving Poland in April 1924 seems to be incorrect and is not corroborated by the cited source. Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 03:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasonkwe: That looks like its got some merit. Would you add it in and I'll try and find something about the father's death to clarify why its been done thay way. I try and find something about when he left Poland. I think it was because of the pogroms but not sure. I've done a few articles with folk leaving around the same time. You wouldn't be up for a copyedit on the article, would you? I think its needing an external copyedit as well. scope_creep^Talk 07:25, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, was MIA for a little while. I can do some copyedit but not sure I'm up for a top to bottom of the whole page lol. I think the page and sources mention he left Poland because he was basically unemployable after having participated in the strikes in Dombrova.

I think the main points I'm fuzzy on were when he went back to Krakow looking for work (after being jailed in 1926) and when it was he was that he met his wife Luba in Lwow (since he was there for early schooling but left for Krakow at age 18). Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 16:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A plea for civility

The tone of your comments here[1] and here[2] are out of proportion to me stating my opinion (with reasons given, and 100% consistent with

WP:ORGIND

) that a newspaper article built on information from multiple sources including the subject can be independent reporting. I suggested you take your complaint to my talk page but you just intensified your comments without explaining what exactly you think I got wrong.
This isn't the first time you've taken issue with my editing, and based on your comments here[3] you're keeping some kind of score. The last time was you bleating on about sockpuppets because some random editor decided to agree with me; after you started making threats they changed their vote, and I never saw that SPI.
You don't have to agree with me. You don't have to respect my contributions. You can even dislike me. But you are expected to be

civil. Oblivy (talk) 05:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@

WP:HEYMANN standard, that should be there. If there was coverage. If there was any validity in your arguments, I would close that Afd is a New York minute, but you have no argument has been made for keep, just that misrepresentation of policy. If HighKing told me that the article was valid I close that Afd immediately. I withdraw Afd's all the time if somebody presents valid coverage. Lastly, I have a question, why are pushing this argument, when two editors with massive experience in this area are telling you its wrong and your pushing it? It is a bit of puzzlement. scope_creep^Talk 07:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't see a misrepresentation, or a spurious argument, and again please keep your language civil and live up to your claim that you AGF.

The company gets coverage but it's small coverage. Bangladesh is a small country, with small companies. It's one of two local companies making agri-equipment, they work with international organizations, they get a boost from the government here and there. I said it was a bit thin. I did the research, I made the edits, I made my argument, and if people disagree about notability and it gets deleted that's OK. The only reason I was still commenting was HighKing saying the Daily Express Star article was not independent. As you probably have noticed, that nominator's AfD's have been riddled with allegations about lack of independence, so maybe I was a bit sensitive about that, but I don't think I'm wrong (and even if I am it's a good faith kind of wrong).

That claim (and your defense of it) is not an inescapable conclusion. For sure, the journalists at Daily Express Star have Alim's management in their contacts list (I've done the searches - they get quoted quite often). Yes, the company I'm sure contacted them before this article was written. But that's how every article about a product or new feature originates. The question is what the journalist does after getting that call. This is not and I'm we've both seen a ton of them, an article that just re-writes (or copies) a press release.

As for arguing with experts, no doubt you've done a lot of these, but I can assure you from real world experience people who look at the same things all day, every day, sometimes see things the wrong way. And I should not have to hold back if I see that happening, as long as I keep it civil. Oblivy (talk) 07:45, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:AGF. The Daily Express is non-rs. My opinion of you now is quite poor. scope_creep^Talk 08:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

You keep talking about there being a hard-fought consensus around

WP:ORGIND

but you and I can both read the plain language and it doesn't say that an article is not independent just because part of its content is provided by a company. If you want to point me to the specific language I'll have a look and if I'm wrong I'll say so.

One place I was wrong was in saying "Daily Express" - it's the Daily Star. Which is not a perennial-source non-RS source. Apologies for that.

I'm not sure what you're saying about HighKing and AGF. I never said HighKing was not independent. And I never said I was a journalist - want to keep guessing?Oblivy (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

• News and notes: WMF Terms of Use now in force, new Creative Commons licensing

• In the media: English WP editor glocked after BLP row on Italian 'pedia

• Featured content: Content, featured

• Recent research: Hoaxers prefer currently-popular topics

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Kim Philby

On

AntientNestor (talk) 15:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

License tagging for File:Upturned boat and rocky pier on Loch Osgaig.jpg

Thanks for uploading

image copyright tags

to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from

this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

License tagging for File:The top pool of the River Osgaig below Loch Badaghaill.jpg

Thanks for uploading

image copyright tags

to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from

this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Striking votes

Hello, Scope creep,

Please do not strike the comments of a blocked editor, like CastJared, in an AFD discussion unless they are blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet. While their opinion may not be thoughtfully given, it doesn't deserve to be struck unless you know of a policy that I'm unaware of. A closer of the discussion can take their block into consideration and plus, there are better uses of your time than striking all of an editor's AFD comments. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

@

WP:ANI specifically for this. They weren't thoughfully given or even rationale discussions reviewing particular points but general responsives to other people !votes, that made no sense at the best of times. I don't think I was the only person removing them either. That editor won't be back. I'll keep your comment in mind. scope_creep^Talk 05:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Liz: And I only struck one of them. I can't see where you get the idea that I struck all the editors Afd comments. scope_creep^Talk 21:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I will keep it in the mind for the future. Sorry. scope_creep^Talk 07:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeology topics

At one point we were discussing French archaeology topics, and I blanked on the name of a chateau I was trying to suggest. (It would be architecture or maybe history, since the building is intact, but it seemed related.)

It was

Chateau de Meudon

; the copy-editing tag has indeed been removed but it has acquired one for references, an area where you seem to like to work. No pressure -- I mention this merely in case it would amuse either you or BytheDarkBlueSea to work on it. Just some random gorgeousness, in case you are interested. If not I will probably circle back around to it eventually.

Speaking of gorgeousness, someone seems to have added some more images to Jublains archeological site. If that was you, thank you.

Good day to you from the wilds of the Pacific time zone <g> Elinruby (talk) 17:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

actually, whoever took off the copy-edit tag should not have done so. It isn't gibberish, though, just really bad translation. Chipping away at it.Feel free to look if/when you care to Elinruby (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

Wikipedia:Resource requests but it came through right away, which was excellent. It might be something we can do with that Rubricaire article we were going to work on. At the time I couldn't find anything on it that wasn't locked up in an article. There was one ref on the guy who discovered it. scope_creep^Talk 07:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Rubricsire has progressed a bit since then. It does have sources out there and apparently is kind of important if you are a fan of Gallo-Roman plumbing. Working on it slowly. It's what I call a pro bono article, one to which I am more or less indifferent but which I think os important for some reason, in this case the relationship with Jublains. Now Jublains on the other hand has some lovely images going for it, and who would not be fascinated by the fact that the Archbiship of Le Mans fled there from somebody known as Wake-dog? It sort of brings the period to life. At the moment I am preoccupied with The intersection of Brazilian politics and the Napoleonic code, where the soap opera factor is high. Just found out there's a cocaine smuggling and prison gang aspect to that as well. I can share a draft if you are interested -- I am writing this one from scratch -- but I think you are more interested in a later stage of article development. The draft isn't even at the he stage of complete sentences yet ;) Ditto the glossary of French administrative law, although that one is timely because it includes the provisions that protect the citizen against government abuses of power, which is.what all the riots are about in France. I mean, getting shot in a traffic stop is probably an abuse of power, right?

I came over here however to see whether you are still working on 'what is collaboration". That kid the other day wouldn't be the first to say that certain groups weren't collaborators, they were nationalists, and maybe it's time for a formal review of the literature on this topic. This nationalist theme comes up quite a bit -- Burma, Ukraine, Czechoslovakia and Serbia come to mind -- and so far we've been treating them as collaborators if they at any point voluntarily took concrete action coordinated with or in the name of the Nazis. But that is my own criteripn, and although I usually write/rewrite by doing a lot of reading first, I don't think I can point to a source that says this at the moment. The definition of "voluntary" is also fuzzy. What if you voluntarily joined a German unit because you were starving in a POW.camp, but you and your entire unit deserted and joined the Free French the minute you got the chance to do so? There was at least some of that. I have been reading and wikignoming around in articles on individual units and it's a lot more complicated than it was portrayed to be in the article when I got there. I eventually just deleted those.lists of collaborating military units as unsourced fingerpointing, but I'm not happy about that either.

There definitely were some enthusiastic Nazi supporters among the foreign troops in the German army. A lot of them were nationalists, as it happens. Let me know. If you, like me, have merely been mulling and reading about this, maybe I should start a draft where we could build a bibliography and put some words on paper to further discussion? I think Shakescene may have had a point about there being a continuum starting from trying to conduct business as usual, all the way up to joining tbe maquis. For example, the French resistance was highly glorified in the Hollywood versions of the history, but seems a lot less noble when it seems the triggering event was the institution of compulsory work in German arms factories, not for example the dehumanization of Jews. Let me know your thoughts?

PS I also have a couple of start-class archaeology articles on the back burner, if you want to hear about those. One was written from scratch but not journal articles, and is about a newly-discovered pre-Inca civilization; the other is a mostly-fixed bad translation about a pre-Roman tribe in Catalonia. That one has some pictures. Elinruby (talk) 23:52, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Provisional Representative Body of East Indonesia

Hi. You moved this page on 9 July 2022 because "Not ready for mainspace, incubate in draftspace. Barely sourced. A mess." It was deleted from draftspace as per G13 after languishing there for 6 months. I would like to recreate the article, but am contacting you first just to make sure. I have a number of references, and have identified images that could be used (including a photo I took at the old parliament building in Makassar last week). I believe the article would provide useful further information about the State of East Indonesia, a topic that I have quite a few edits on. Would you have a problem if I recreated the article? I would rather do it this way than request an undeletion/G13 so it's a fresh start, and not building on a "mess". Tnhanks. Davidelit (Talk) 07:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davidelit: How goes it. No, not at all. Definently not. If you need to undelete it at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/G13 or Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion crack on. Articles are subject to evolution, so if they need to be rewitten, then all the better I've done it myself in mainspace several times. The thing has been completly redone as a its a complete mess, several times. Unfortunately I can't remember what was up with Provisional Representative Body of East Indonesia but if you need help with formatting or referencing in the future or anything else I can help you with, ping me. scope_creep^Talk 07:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your response. I have recreated the article. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 08:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fixes. Hi I took the liberty of undoing your change to the "Anak Agung Gede Agung" name in the citation. It's an Indonesian name, and does not follow western forename-surname conventions. Anak Agung is how he is usually referred to in English. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 13:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I re-added the full name of "Ide Anak Agung Gde Agung" to the article references. If the template doesn't allow for this type of name, I guess we'll have to learn to live with the "harv error", whatever that actually means. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 07:48, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Davidelit: You can't do it. Its broken all your references and linking no longer works, leaving 9 errors. They are real thing, shows up as linter errors that is reported to a maintenance area and the wmf. Either a bot will come along along and try and fix it, make several attempts or a wikignome will come along and attempt to fix it. I would suggest expanding sfn's tags out to some like sfn{{Ide Anak Agung Gde Agung| and see if that works. Otherwise it just leaves the page in an indeterminate state with linter errors. scope_creep^Talk 07:58, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red July 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276 Online events: New: Women in Red's 8th anniversary | Alphabet run A & B | Sports Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: Look out for contributors interested in writing about women and invite them to join Women in Red Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Casting aspersions

Hello, Scope creep,

You have an awful lot of experience participating in AFDs but I was disappointed in seeing your insinuations in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accel-KKR, first bringing up AFD stats (as if most editors know what that is) and then asking another editor if they were a paid editor because they had a different interpretation than you did. I understand that AFDs can be a tense area of the project but please remember to AGF and do not feel personally challenged should an editor have a different perspective than you do. You don't have to "call them out", just disagree in a civil manner. You have been on the project for many years and please remember that you are setting an example for newer editors.

Thank you for all of your many contributions to the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Liz: I'm going to come out of it for a while. scope_creep^Talk 07:37, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol needs your help!

Hello Scope creep,

The

New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed

. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

• News and notes: Online Safety Bill: Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK launch open letter

• Disinformation report: Imploded submersible outfit foiled trying to sing own praises on Wikipedia

• In the media: Journo proposes mass Wiki dox, sponsored articles on Fandom, Section 230 discussed

• Featured content: Incensed

• Traffic report: Are you afraid of spiders? Arnold? The Idol? ChatGPT?

• Humour: United Nations dispatches peacekeeping force to Wikipedia policy discussions

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Major-General David Stewart.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Major-General David Stewart.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Hi "Scope creep". Some of your recent contributions at

WP:AGF, be civil, and stop attacking me personally. Wikipedia requires collaboration, which requires interaction in a polite and respectful manner. Thank you. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:A70C:5171:67B1:92A0 (talk

) 06:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC) Also, if you believe I am conducting undisclosed paid editing as defined by

WP:PAID - which I am not - you should report it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:A70C:5171:67B1:92A0 (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi @2001:1C06:19CA:D600:A70C:5171:67B1:92A0: That is not a personal attack. I can assure you. It is a reply. scope_creep^Talk 07:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @2001:1C06:19CA:D600:A70C:5171:67B1:92A0: I just noticed on the Afd that you state you have the whole IPv6 IP adddress range and that you have been editing Wikipedia for years. How it is possible for somebody to determine that. An admin even put a welcome message on the 2001:1C06:19CA:D600:BCB1:BFE1:C37F:5C6A account. I suggest you create full account to avoid confusion in the future and I think your also breaking one of the core editing policies around copyright and the ability to determine who exactly is editing Wikipedia. scope_creep^Talk 07:34, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Scope Creep. Can't remember how I got here, but I noticed the discussion with the IP. The range they say they have assigned is a /64 - very narrow, in IPv6 terms. It's not unusual for a range that narrow to be assigned to a single user, and it's not unusual for it to be assigned on a long-term basis. This is so common that if in blocking an IPv6 address, I usually block its /64 just to be on the safe side. Don't have any other comment on the discussion, but thought you might like to know that. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 19:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More info:

WP:64 Girth Summit _(blether) 19:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Alexis

Sad to see that advertising is now allowed when backed up by a low quality spammy source. Where is the time that quality sources were needed to assert notability. The Banner talk 23:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@The Banner: It is impossible to delete them now, even though they are some of the worst trash articles I've seen with some worst references I've seen, and level of intellectual discussion.I've never seen more promotional being saved. It seems that there is concerned effort to keep them in Wikipedia. The original vision is lost really. And it is happening everywhere. I've started to notice that UPE's that have created their own wee junk article turn up to !vote in these things. I think it is an attempt to lower the bar of what is acceptable. scope_creep^Talk 09:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They have no idea about what is relevant and what is not. And due to their ganging up against opponents they will get their way, to the detriment of Wikipedia. The Banner talk 09:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

• News and notes: Big bux hidden beneath wine-dark sea as we wait for the Tides to go out?

• In the media: Tentacles of Emirates plot attempt to ensnare Wikipedia

• Obituary: David Thomsen (Dthomsen8) and Ingo Koll (Kipala)

• News from the WMF: ABC for Fundraising: Advancing Banner Collaboration for fundraising campaigns

• In focus: Are the children of celebrities over-represented in French cinema?

• Tips and tricks: What automation can do for you (and your WikiProject)

• Recent research: Wikipedia-grounded chatbot "outperforms all baselines" on factual accuracy

• Humour: New fringe theories to be introduced

• Cobwebs: If you're reading this, you're probably on a desktop

• Featured content: Scrollin', scrollin', scrollin', keep those readers scrollin', got to keep on scrollin', Rawhide!

• Traffic report: The Idol becomes the Master

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

	Women in Red 8th Anniversary
	In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Your sig

Could you please change your sig? Maybe I'm the only one who has a problem with it, but all that blur of color under the lettering makes it extremely difficult to read. Thanks for your consideration of this request. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've had the same signature for a decade. I created so I could find my text. scope_creep^Talk 19:25, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Scope creep, it would be a tragedy to markedly change your signature. Would certainly get my vote in a "favourite Wikipedia signature" competition. Well-chosen, colour co-ordinated shades of blue underlain by a grey, fuzzy 3D shadow effect, elevates your signature above all others. The brilliantly conceived design together with the legendary "Scope creep" nom-de-plume makes for an unbeatable combination. Sincerely. Rupples (talk) 22:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Rupples: scope_creep^Talk 09:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change it or not, it’s totally up to you, but i agree with BeyondMyKen, it is difficult to read. That said, it can be figured out. Just looks kind of like a smudged-up signature on a wet napkin, lol. — Jacona (talk) 00:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I point you to
  WP:SIGAPP: As some users have vision problems, be conscious of color and contrast issues. If you use different colors in your signature, please ensure that the result will be readable by people with color blindness, defective color vision, and other visual disabilities.

  There are myriad other ways of being able to find your text without using a scheme which is hard for some other editors to read. I'd ask you to reconsider. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I am partially sighted and that is reason I use it. You are the only person to comment on it since I started editing in 2004. The only person. scope_creep^Talk 16:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you yourself are partially sighted, I would think that you would have some empathy for other editors having visual problems with it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:10, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was patronising and does not help your argument, Beyond My Ken. This horse has died, please cease flogging it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:14, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was not at all intended to be patronizing, just to point out the similarities in our situations. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you did not mention any similarities. Please edit some articles rather than continuing to berate this editor about their signature. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:23, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Similarities: Scope creep's partial sightedness, my visual difficulty with reading their sig. As for "berating", I am not berating anyone, I am trying to solve a problem, something with which you are not really helping. I suggest that you allow Scope Creep and myself to discuss this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scope creep: Looking at your sig again, I think my problem would be solved if your account name was in a darker color, perhaps a darker shade of blue? Then you'd still have the smear of color to help you identify your contributions. How about that? Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard Fischer(Professor): Career

you said: Needs rewritten.  13:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

please be more specific Haleden (talk) 18:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red August 2023

Women in Red August 2023, Vol 9, Iss 8, Nos 251, 252, 277, 278, 279, 280 Online events: New: Alphabet run C & D | Indigenous women | Film and stage | Geofocus: Arab League Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman See also: Wikimania 2023 will be held in Singapore, 16–19 August, and will be facilitated by the affiliates in the ESEAP (East/South East/Asia/Pacific) region. Tip of the month: Read the essay Determining Native American and Indigenous Canadian identities to understand the criteria for status as Native American or Indigenous Canadian. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

• News and notes: City officials attempt to doxx Wikipedians, Ruwiki founder banned, WMF launches Mastodon server

• In the media: Truth, AI, bull from politicians, and climate change

• Disinformation report: Hot climate, hot hit, hot money, hot news hot off the presses!

• Obituary: Donald Cram, Peter McCawley, and Eagleash

• Tips and tricks: Citation tools for dummies!

• Humour: Does Wikipedia present neutral perspectives?

• In focus: Journals cited by Wikipedia

• Opinion: Are global bans the last step?

• Featured content: Featured Content, 1 to 15 July

• Traffic report: Come on Oppie, let's go party

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For quiet and highly pertinent help

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Especially for rescuing Jublains archeological site from abandoned drafts, but also for quite a number of WW2 articles since.Elinruby (talk) 02:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Elinruby: Thanks for that. I've not had one. I didn't think I'd ever get it as I usually work alone on pretty obscure subjects. Its really appreciated. I really enjoy our working with you. scope_creep^Talk 02:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's nothing but the truth ;)

You probably deserve a whole other barnstar for formating the enormous pile of bad referencing that was at Collaboration with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy when first we came to it. The surreal barnstar comes to mind for that actually. I will come back to that though; I want to make sure I have thanked everyone who contributed to that article cleanup first; apparently nobody else is going to...Elinruby (talk)

Its a nice gesture and important its made, as I was reminded recently in my day work. I think there is still a lot of work on the Collaboration article still to do. I was planning to convert all the refs to sfn tags after they were repaired. There is still a ton of work to do on that article, even on the refs, and the collaboration article update, which is still on my todo list. As I predicted, after you left, it would stall. I plan to work on that new article your doing. The fr version seems to be fairly well written. I'm busy reading these collaboration books but its one many things to do. scope_creep^Talk 02:54, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Fiona Robinson (artist)

Hello @Scope creep,

Many thanks for your review in June (

Draft:Fiona Robinson (artist)

), I've now added a brief Biography section and am looking forward to your thoughts.

Best,

ArtDataArt (talk) 11:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

• News and notes: Dude, Where's My Donations? Wikimedia Foundation announces another million in grants for non-Wikimedia-related projects

• In the media: An accusation of bias from Brazil, a lawsuit from Portugal, plagiarism from Florida

• In focus: 2023 Good Article Nomination drive is underway: get your barnstars here!

• Special report: Thirteen years later, why are most administrators still from 2005?

• Tips and tricks: How to find images for your articles, check their copyright, upload them, and restore them

• Cobwebs: Getting serious about writing

• Opinion: Copyright trolls, or the last beautiful free souls on this planet?

• Serendipity: Why I stopped taking photographs almost altogether

• Featured content: Barbenheimer confirmed

• Humour: Arbitration Committee to accept case against Right Honorable Frimbley Cantingham, 15th Viscount Bellington-upon-Porkshire

• Traffic report: 'Cause today it just goes with the fashion

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mollie Milligan AFD

Amazing that yours went through with no keep !votes, while mine was a no consensus. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evening @UtherSRG: I was quite suprised. I think folk were looking for some kind of consensus on it, that is why they never !voted, after it was opened a third time. scope_creep^Talk 19:12, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Everything okay?

Hello, Scope creep,

I look over all of the AFDs nearly every day and I noticed that you recently voted "Keep" in several, something I don't think I've witnessed before. Just wondered what has changed for you, that you went from a full-throated deletionist to arguing that marginal articles should be preserved and improved. It was just a suprise to see. Generally, I think editors should strike a balance, helping get rid of the waste and junk while preserving articles that still have some potential. But I carry out consensus, whatever that turns out to be. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evening @Liz: I'm fine. Thanks for the concern. Its very endearing. Are you talking about Matthew Glass. I thought he was notable as there seemed to be reams of coverage. One of the these folk, theatre folk that everybody seems to know. On Holos, I rememeber that it was a very big and very expensive bit of software that nobody seemed able to afford. It seemed almost magical in its capabilies that make it worth having an article. scope_creep^Talk 19:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Round Table Family of clubs. Do these articles give you any ideas? Don't miss the Table Plus.—Alalch E. 17:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Moshe Datz

Hey, I noticed your revert of the stub I made. I am aware that as of that first version the article was very lacking, but there is a LOT of room to expand it by anyone who can actually read Hebrew. I will let you know though that your assertion in your edit comment that the news articles says Datz is "a(n) actor, screenwriter and presenter" is incorrect; That part is talking about Kobi Mahat, not Datz. I will be working on expanding the article I already wrote to showcase the notability of the subject, but I would've appreciated if you hit me up on my talk page when you did revert my edit. All the best. Hecseur (talk) 17:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:V that the person is is notable. Your free to remove the prod but I'll send it to Afd. That will give it 7 days for which you can update it with some inline citations that prove the person is notable. You know its well established as process. I would suggest start looking for sources to reference it. scope_creep^Talk 17:48, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@

WP:SECONDARY. If your not referenceing when your creating an article, you'll likely get blocked. scope_creep^Talk 17:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I am well aware of policy, all information I add will be properly referenced. I will add a WIP template to the article if I cannot complete the work in one edit. Cheers. Hecseur (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Tines

Hi Scope Creep, I noticed you marked one of my articles AFD with reason: "Corporation with no evidence of notability. Sourcing is churnalism and non-RSes. A WP:BEFORE shows press releases; no RS coverage with WP:NCORP required for notability"

Not sure where you are getting this from? None of the sources for the article are press releases-- they come from The Times (major newspaper in UK), TechCrunch, local media such as Irish Times among others. The company was also included in WIRED magazine's "Hottest Startups in Europe" roundup. How are those not reliable sources? Salsakesh (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @

WP:NCORP. Its a brochure advertising article for a non-notable company and it will be deleted. scope_creep^Talk 16:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

On what basis are you making that claim? It is a major player in the low-code development space. It is as notable as the companies on this list, and one of the top companies in its space based in Europe. Salsakesh (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whether is one of the top low code development companies in the world is neither here nor there. Its the references that count, per

WP:NCORP and they don't meet that policy. I'm an ex-software engineer. I started in C, then Delphi, then done a load of SQL, then moved to C++, then Pro-c with some tcl, ksh, with some VB, then C# and more sql for a long while, so I'm really interested in this whole low-code development model. So I'm interested in these kinds of companies. But when loking at it on Wikipedia, the references that are there are routine in nature. There is nothing special about them. Most of the news associated with that company is generated from the company itself. I urge to Afd and make your comments there. Follow the Afd etiquette. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 17:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

It's great that you have a developer background-- I also know C, C++, Java, PHP, SQL etc if we are comparing notes. I've added further references to support the notability of the company in the low-code/no code space. There are notable references from The Times, WIRED, TechCrunch, Irish Times, etc. No press releases. The intent is definitely not to create a brochure or ad, the article is barely a stub. But it is a notable company in the space, one of the "Hottest Startups in Europe" and a notable tech company from the Irish tech scene, as evidenced from all the coverage. Salsakesh (talk) 19:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Translating French citations

 Courtesy link: Talk:Black market in wartime France § Translator module

Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 22:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023 at Women in Red

Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283 Online events: New: Alphabet run E & F | Women writers & their works | Geofocus: Celtic nations Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: The books she wrote might be notable, too; learn 5 quick tips about about book articles. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Threats at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tines

Please consider carefully whether it is appropriate to threaten other editors over disagreements in a

WP:AfD, and I think we need more editors involved in deletion, don't you? — Jacona (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Jacona: That administrator called me a liar, as though I'm new at Afd. I have no time for him. I didn't threaten him. I told him what would happen if they kept it up, nothing more or less. scope_creep^Talk 17:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I more or less posted simultaneously on their talk page. IMO, you both could have been more kind. — Jacona (talk) 18:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Black market in wartime France, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Equity.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notability opinion

I wrote up a shell of a draft at Draft:Tellus (app). Aside from the sources currently there (only #2, #3, #4, and #6 might potentially contribute towards notability), there are sources online like A, B, and C that I can find that might be useful in adding content (the draft is nowhere near complete), but I'm not sure they add much to notability.

I had initially gained an interest in the company after reading the Barron's cover story (#4), though it's my understanding that the notability of the firm is borderline. Do you have any advice for source digging and/or whether or not that might be a futile exercise? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: Its a brand new startup effectively, which means most of the information about its existance comes from the company. There is almost no information that makes it a natural target for an encyclopeadic article. Of the references, the Barrons refs comes closest. I remember there was a Tellus app article, I think it was deleted, vaguelly remember something. The rationality for keeping was that it was under investigation by a senate committee, that should have been enough but it wasn't. Interactions between an government agency and the company are not independent. I would look for Google book references, as long as its not a publisher who contacted the company for information on the products, or a trade publisher who works in that area, or recordings from a conference paper made up to real book. Another good reference that is independent are research reports. These are often created by banks prior to investment and as they don't speak to the company, so they make a good reference. Looking at the rest, some of them are particularly poor like Business Insider, reflects what the company says (not independent and states in the article. You can see it), Techcrunch who often speak to the company directly (not independent). There is arguments for the others being particularly poor. scope_creep^Talk 07:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

re: Prod of Ladies' Circle International

Would you care to take a peek at [[:Round Table Family of clubs]]? Some of the other stand-alone articles are as weak as the LCI article. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 18:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

• From the editor: Beta version of signpost.news now online

• News and notes: You like RecentChanges?

• In the media: Taking it sleazy

• Recent research: The five barriers that impede "stitching" collaboration between Commons and Wikipedia

• Draftspace: Bad Jokes and Other Draftspace Novelties

• Humour: The Dehumourification Plan

• Traffic report: Raise your drinking glass, here's to yesterday

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion invitation

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gyurkovicsarna. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article Heavily Relies on Primary v/s Secondary Sources?

Can you please tell me which sources in the current

moneycontrol.com

article are primary?
Currently, the list of 13 sources include references to the following media:

Livemint.com

business-standard.com

exchange4media.com

newslaundry.com

businessworld.in

Press Trust of India

stockify.net

byte-man.com

indiacontentleadership.com

bestmediainfo.in

Please clarify.
Thank you. BombaiyyaMag (talk) 20:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Map_workshop/Archive/2017/Oct_2017#Conversion_of_several_images,_representing_a_hand_written_map_into_a_proper_map

Hello. I would like to discuss with you the licensed status of the files (or you can just stamp them with the {{

db-author}} if they are no longer of value): how did you determine that the document was created in the UK? — Ирука¹³ 22:06, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi @Iruka13: I'll do that now. scope_creep^Talk 07:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elke Jeinsen

Hi there. You contacted me about edits I have made to

blp unreferenced}}. If you have any further issues, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, JacobTheRox (talk) 09:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Scope creep please may you take a look at Elke Jeinsen as I have now added six sources. Admittedly, the first two do not comply with Wikipedia's standards but I am keeping them there until I find worthy alternatives. However, I would like you to confirm that you are happy with text itself, as before you labelled it as promotional. I personally do not see it as promotional, because I am adding all content in the sources, not just the good bits. However, I would like you to give a third-party opinion. JacobTheRox (talk) 10:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please submit it for review and wait until somebody who is not involved can review. If you move it to mainspace I will send it to

WP:AFD immediately. scope_creep^Talk 10:08, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Ciné+ proposed deletion

Hi, Scope creep. I saw Ciné+ on the PROD list and checked the French Wikipedia article. It has some refs you may want to check out:

• fr:Ciné+#Références

This channel is likely notable; I think AfD is a better venue if you still want to delete this.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:ANI in the past for similar behaviour. I've no time for you. scope_creep^Talk 06:54, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

CAT:PROD and the list of AfDs daily. I check the CSD list several times a day. There's a recent discussion on my talk page

where I discuss what my routine is - you can read it and then look at my contributions for the day to see the consistency.

Honestly, I was surprised when I saw your name on those CSDs - it just didn't seem like something you'd do. As for the Ciné+ ‎, I was just going to add it to the television and France deletion sorting lists and move on. It was when I looked at fr:Ciné+ that I removed the PROD and suggested AfD. I always check our foreign language articles when looking at deletions about foreign topics.

As for my comments at WP:ANI - yes I follow ANI each day, too. And I definitely have concerns about your treatment of other editors, starting with the time you insinuated I was a paid editor. If someone else starts a discussion of your behaviour on a noticeboard, then yes, I will bring up those concerns. And I also do notice when you repeat this behaviour with others even if I don't comment. But no, I'm not the Wikipedia hall monitor. I don't "follow" you. I've got other priorities. Content mostly.

Besides content, I’m very concerned about paid, coordinated sectarian editing on South Asian topics (you'll see comments on my talk page) but that's a huge problem that's way bigger than I can deal with. Maybe you can look at it, too.

If you think my editing requires others' attention at one of the noticeboards, that's your call. I'll stand by my work and let the facts speak for themselves. I'm pretty much an open book.

Just be nice to people is all I ask.

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A. B.: Thats cool. scope_creep^Talk 17:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will confess I've briefly skimmed your contributions in the past (but not dwelt on them). I do this with a lot of editors I interact with; I also look at their user pages just to get a sense of the other person. Two comments

• I appreciate what you do with draft reviews
• You write really important World War II content

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 17:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Vorhaus

Can you explain me why my edit on David Vorhaus was not constructive? I tried my best, added some references ets. Is the subject bad? 194.211.118.11 (talk) 09:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@194.211.118.11: The references weren't particularly good. While the soundonsound references is an in-depth interview, it is still an interview and can't be used to establish notability. The rest of the references which are social media links are non-rs. As an electronic pioneer he is definently worthy of an article. I would check out Google Books and remove the social media links. scope_creep^Talk 20:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your recent ANI

Hi @Scope creep. I don't believe we have ever interacted or worked together and I realize my opinion might not mean much to you. But for it's worth, I found your recent ANI thread advocating for the removal of autopatrol rights from @Ɱ completely unnecessary if not outright retaliatory.

I re-read their original post on the NPP discussion board and they never asked, at least in that instance, for any of your rights to be removed, even though some editors had previously expressed their doubts about your NPP conduct. I haven't been here nearly as long as you have, but I did review one of Ɱ's recent GA nominations on 945 Madison Avenue and thought that they work was very impressive and thorough.

This is, I believe, consistent with the overall quality of their content. A quick glance at their top edit count shows 20 GAs and 2 FAs and that's without even scrolling all the way down. I realize you're a tenured user with a variety of contributions across the project, but I was quite surprised to see that the same cursory search of your top edit count does not return any GA-level or FA-level articles.

See, it's easy to pile up on someone who is already on edge and feeling cornered. They are more likely to snap and their erratic behavior can easily overshadow any rational arguments they may have previously made. I am certainly not excusing some of Ɱ's inflammatory rhetoric or their recent blunders. I am also not coming here to pick a fight, which I hope that's clear. Rather, I am simply very disheartened with how quickly things have unraveled, pushing away an accomplished editor whose work I happen to appreciate dearly.

Ppt91^talk 03:51, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dude. What exactly do you want me to say on this? What exactly were you looking for? Does the fact that he has GA articles and I don't, somehow make him better? Do you think producing GA artcles on relatively uncomplex feature articles like

WP:NPP and that was it. Don't come back here. I don't want you leaving messages on my talk page again. scope_creep^Talk 08:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I too value Ɱ's contributions and admire their work, the same applies to Scope_Creep, but at the end of the day it is Ɱ's own decision as to whether they wish to make further contributions to Wikipedia. No one pushed them off. No one suggested a block or ban. As was explained at the ANI discussion, the 'sanction', if it can be called that, has no effect on their editing experience. Ɱ is free at any time to resume contributing to the encyclopedia. Having said this, I understand and have some empathy with Ɱ's feelings, but unfortunately, what Ɱ has posted on their user page as a parting shot is in my view, not helpful. I'm assuming @Scope creep doesn't mind me replying here — should this not be so, delete this and tell me to sod off and mind my own business! Rupples (talk) 17:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]