User talk:Gorthian/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 → Archive 10

Indefinite articles on dab pages

Hi, I'm looking at this and I'm wondering why you've removed the indefinite articles from the descriptions. The dab pages I've seen so far all contain them whenever grammatical, and the only systematic exception I know of is about persons. Uanfala (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Uanfala. I think I started out doing that because of the guidance at MOS:DABPEOPLE. Then I saw another disambiguator removing the indefinite articles on other types of entries, so I tried it out and found it worked well most of the time. I use it for efficiency and for making descriptions as short as possible while still imparting the information needed. There's no particular guidance involved. I guess you could say it's an editing "style". — Gorthian (talk) 17:35, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, I find the lack of determiners a bit disorienting and I'm not sure the extra bit of confusability is worth the little gain in brevity. The exception about people is there probably because a long list of entities of the same type sets enough of the scene to preclude any confusion about referentiality. At any rate, I'm not the one to judge English usage, and by all means would I support wikipedians using their own styles on the pages they create, but I think changing the dominant style of already existing pages is something that could do with some kind of consensus. Uanfala (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Hm. If you find it confusing, probably others do, too. I'll stop doing it that way.
Is English not your native language, Uanfala? Your use of it is superb. — Gorthian (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! English isn't my native language, and I mean that in a "full disclosure" kind of way: if I find something confusing, then it might be just the effect of my L1 (ouch, what a dab page). So it might be wise to take my comments above with a pinch or two of salt. Uanfala (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

nonconstructive edit to Shield_(geology)

Hi, you recently made an edit to an article where you removed Category:Geology_terminology from the article.

Not only is the article about a geological term (word/phrase) like other articles in the category, it contains relevant information on how the term came to be used in geology The term shield, used to describe this type of geographic region, appears in the 1901 English translation of Eduard Suess's Face of Earth by H. B. C. Sollas, and comes from the shape "not unlike a flat shield"[1] of the Canadian Shield which has an outline that "suggests the shape of the shields carried by soldiers in the days of hand-to-hand combat."[2]

Please use the talk page to discuss your edit to this article.

There's not a lot of articles in the Category:Geology_terminology and it may be redundant with Category:Geology and Glossary_of_geology. Deleting the Category:Geology_terminology may actually be constructive, but removing the category from Shield_(geology) (n.b. how 'geology' is in the title to indicate it is about geological sense of the term) is not constructive. --IPeditor (talk) 04:08, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://archive.org/stream/faceearthdasant02suesgoog/faceearthdasant02suesgoog_djvu.txt
  2. ^ http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/geological-regions/

Constructive edit to Talk:Shield_(geology)

Thank you for taking the time to contribute to the talk page!!! You explained yourself well, and I totally related to what you were saying! I made a big comment (addressed to you) on the article talk page, paraphrased: I think the category geology terminology is a little stupid as is, but would be ok if it was basically an index of articles from the geology glossary.

Thank you again! (no reply neccesary) --IPeditor (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

RE: Zika cases updates

Good morning Gorthian. Thank you for letting me know, I didn't notice that field. I updated the date for yesterday's edit and from now on I'll keep doing the same :). Kind regards, Torne (talk) 07:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Gorthian. You have new messages at Talk:England (disambiguation).
Message added 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jr8825 • Talk 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

Hi, re this revert: please check its effect on WP:RFC/POLICY compared to how it was first shown. My edit would have caused it to display similarly to how it appeared in September, albeit with a new timestamp.

Also please observe what this edit has done to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Unsorted. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Oh, boy, what a mess! I'm sorry I created it, and sorry you had to spend time fixing it.
We need some clear guidance on how to extend time for an RFC, as well as better documentation for the templates. I was doing the best I could figure out with what is there. — Gorthian (talk) 17:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
OK... so what are we going to do to get the RfC listed in a non-cryptic fashion? --Redrose64 (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Redrose64, would it work to revert everything to the version before I started my edits? And then proceed properly from there? With your guidance, of course; obviously, I don't know what I'm doing. — Gorthian (talk) 17:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
If we do a straight revert, we'll lose all the comments that have happened since, which is not a good idea. I think that if we remove the floated {{RFC countdown}} (which isn't used very much) and then this edit is redone, it'll preserve the new comments, produce a useful listing at WP:RFC/POLICY, and keep the expiry at 22:19, 19 October 2016 + 30 days, i.e. 22:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC). --Redrose64 (talk) 14:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Redrose64, okay, I've done that, with some formatting tweaks. The listing at WP:RFC/POLICY hasn't changed; I suppose that will be taken care of by the bot?
Too bad that countdown template doesn't get used; I think it would be very helpful. I didn't realize that it can be used as an alternative to the regular RFC template. It startled me when the bot came by and gave it an ID number! — Gorthian (talk) 19:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
It's not an alternative, but it's possibly rarely used because of a bug in Legobot (talk · contribs). The five-character sequence consisting of two opening braces immediately followed by the three letters "RFC" (case-insensitive) is interpreted by that bot as an open RfC, hence edits like this or these. BTW I amended your edit because Legobot can't properly handle dates in any format other than the standard one produced by four or five tildes. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:39, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Opposition Party DAB Project?

Are they fixed? I just tried to use the tool and it said it wasn't available...InformationvsInjustice (talk) 17:26, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@InformationvsInjustice: The tool goes down for short periods. Usually, if you wait five minutes or so, it'll be back. I just checked, and it's back up now. — Gorthian (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Hmm... still not opening. Suggestions?InformationvsInjustice (talk) 19:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I haven't been able to get online today till now. InformationvsInjustice, tell me exactly where you're starting, so we're on the same page (heh). — Gorthian (talk) 02:03, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I've been going from the top.InformationvsInjustice (talk) 02:34, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I just checked in on the list, and I saw it was down to the H's. I tried a couple, but didn't get very far. :-P I'm glad you're making progress. Did you get Dab solver to work? — Gorthian (talk) 02:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to you. And thanks for my first ever Barnstar! I don't know what to say :-) Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 20:53, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
@InformationvsInjustice: You certainly earned it. Tell me, what does "Info ob injuria" mean? I always meant to get into Latin, but never managed it. — Gorthian (talk) 00:12, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Popular election

Is Popular election really necessarily universal suffrage? Would the term not apply to any wide electoral base (even if it excluded, for example, women or particular minorities or social groups). Even if our modern standards require uni-suff, would not Abe Lincoln, and (numerous other pre-modern politicians) not be described as having been elected by 'popular election'? The term would necessarily involve a broad-based electorate (popular=of the people), but universal suffrage? Pincrete (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@Pincrete: You're asking the wrong person, and in the wrong place. I'm the wrong person because I don't understand the term "popular election" (it apparently can mean several things), and it's the wrong place because there's an RFC concerning the subject at Talk:Popular election. There are others there who might be able to help. — Gorthian (talk) 06:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't know what it means either, because, I suspect, the term is imprecise and its specific use only made clear by context. I was aware of the RfC and intended to comment when I had formed an opinion. Pincrete (talk) 09:57, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Ondine

Redirecting this back to Undine is a pedantic distinction that is confusing to most users. It is true that Ondine started out as a variation of Undine, but the term has taken on a life and history of its own. This legalistic insistence on forcing Ondine searchers to wade through Undine to get to what they are really looking for (novel, song, play, film, etc.) is a bad idea, and is only of interest to a few classical scholars. The relation of the two terms was perfectly clear the way I had it.

Please reconsider this change.--Toploftical (talk) 09:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Would your redirect jail to gaol?
  • Would your redirect Hamlet to The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark?
  • Would your redirect sulfur to sulphur?
  • Would your redirect article to artycle?
  • Would your redirect fruit to fruyte?
  • Would your redirect fair to Fayre?
Toploftical, you make a poetic argument. :-)
There's another aspect to my revert. Having Ondine redirect to Ondine (disambiguation) is backwards, what's called a malplaced disambiguation. The two pages need to be swapped, so WP:RM would be the way to go. Good luck! — Gorthian (talk) 10:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Zachistka (disambiguation)

No. G8 is for "pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page", and non-subpage redirects to existing pages are not dependent on non-existent or deleted pages. Nyttend (talk) 01:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

JJC

"Deletion by redirect" is a new one for me, but I see what you're getting at - an attempt to preempt a deletion discussion, on which I express no opinion here.

Anyway, your fix allowed me to repair a kludge fixing a link to the DAB page, and to link JJC to DE and NL Wikis, where it's WP:PRIMARY :-) Narky Blert (talk) 23:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gorthian. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Gorthian. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geology#Shaanxi tiankeng cluster.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Bejnar (talk) 06:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Lava stringer

You were interested in pictures being added to the Lava stringer page. They're finally up! Sorry for the wait. Leitmotiv (talk) 16:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


Dost Mohammad

--Gorthian (talk • contribs) 22:41, 2 December 2016‎ (UTC)

63rd Nova Scotia general election (disambiguation) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 63rd Nova Scotia general election (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the 63rd Nova Scotia general election (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 117Avenue (talk) 19:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Redirects with possibilities

In edits like this one, you bypassed the redirect. That redirect has possibilities. Mind you, I don't foresee us creating that as a separate article, but we do have such articles, like U.S. Route 41 Business (Marquette, Michigan). If in the future that article were created, we'd have to find all of the bypassed redirects to repoint them back to the original link. Imzadi 1979 → 00:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@Imzadi1979: See your talk page. — Gorthian (talk) 01:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

maffick

I wasn't thinking of "mafic" as the mispelling, but "maffick" being a likely misspelling for mafic. I wasn't sure whether a redirect for "maffick" would be proper, as it would lead the reader away from Mafic. --Bejnar (talk) 02:07, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Bejnar: How common is the word "maffick"? I'd never heard of it before, but then I'm an American, so what do I know? ;-) — Gorthian (talk) 01:09, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Urdaneta

Hi, just to let you know that there is a town called Urdaneta in Spain, named after Andres de Urdaneta. Search for "Urdaneta town Gipuzkoa" similar in Google to find out. Try to find it in google maps as well. Hopefully this link works for you: https://www.google.com/search?num=100&newwindow=1&client=ubuntu&hs=Yio&channel=fs&q=urdaneta+spain+google+maps&oq=urdaneta+spain+google+maps&gs_l=serp.3..0i7i30k1j0i30k1j0i5i30k1j0i8i30k1.4092.4697.0.4835.6.5.0.0.0.0.218.364.0j1j1.2.0....0...1c.1.64.serp..5.1.145.FykXEgu8LjM Walnut77 (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Walnut77: I don't doubt that it exists, but to be on a dab page, there has to be an article first. Disambiguation pages are meant to be quick navigation aids to existing articles. They aren't for explaining or conveying information, so everything on the page is set up for speed, not for reading. — Gorthian (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Ok, except there were other entries there without a direct page, only that one was removed. The town is mentioned in the spanish page for the municipality of Aia, which is where this town is located. Maybe the english article for this municipality will be expanded to mention it. Walnut77 (talk) 06:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Maybe I will just expand the article and then the edit will make sense Walnut77 (talk) 06:52, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Earth Photo removal

Dab

Hi. Excuse me but I don't comprehend the purpose of your revision. As Patar knight puts it: "there's no one that would clearly be the primary topic for this name." Personally, I suggest to convert the title Elena Nikolaeva into a disambiguation page (viz., move Elena Nikolaeva to Yelena Nikolayeva (disambiguation)) and transfer its present content under the title Elena Nikolaeva (journalist). As far as I understand, my suggestion has received a unanimous support from other users here (see especially Patar knight's arguments). I was about to realise my intention when I ran across your revision. Is my suggestion erroneous? Salam aleikum (talk) 19:41, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Salam aleikum, I made that revision because I assumed that the journalist was the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name, so I was updating the page to reflect that. Now I see from the discussion that there actually is no primary topic. I wasn't aware of the discussion till now—thanks for bringing it to my attention. But wait until the discussion is closed before moving anything. I will go make some suggestions there now. — Gorthian (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

@Gorthian: thanks for your explanation and yor comment. Unlike Catherine I of Russia, Yelena Nikolayeva (journalist) is too young to be Elena Nikolaeva the First. That does not, of course, prevent her from her being the first in other respects. Salam aleikum (talk) 08:30, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Ondine disambiguation page

On November 14, 2016 you said:

There's another aspect to my revert. Having Ondine redirect to Ondine (disambiguation) is backwards, what's called a malplaced disambiguation. The two pages need to be swapped, so WP:RM would be the way to go. Good luck! — Gorthian (talk) 10:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I am going to take your advice.

Step 1: I will move the page Ondine to Ondine (water nymph). This first step is necessary so that Step 2 is possible.
Step 2: I will move Ondine (disambiguation) to Ondine.
At this point the two pages will have been effectively swapped using WP:RM as you suggested.

Is this all right with you?

This issue is important to me because I sometimes teach the play and the novel Ondine, and my students are often baffled when they end up on the Undine page in Wikipedia. Yes, they should read the hat note – but they don't!
Another issue is that sometimes editors include statements such as "When she starred in the play Ondine, she..." If Ondine is the disambiguation page, this kind of error is caught automatically. But as it stands, the careless editor may never notice the ambiguous reference.

Thank you for your help on this.--Toploftical (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

@Toploftical: Wow, I barely remember this. :-) Usually, WP:RM is a collaborative process where editors get consensus on a page move (or not). After about a week, an admin closes the discussion and moves the page(s) (or not). Has this already happened somewhere?
I see that right now, there's no WP:MALPLACED dab page. Things are set up so that Undine is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, Ondine is a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, and the disambiguation page is at Ondine (disambiguation). A requested move would only be necessary if you wanted to make Ondine the primary topic, instead of Undine.
(The teacher makes an interesting point, but that wasn't my comment.)
Happy New Year! — Gorthian (talk) 22:00, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Leonard Cohen

Sorry I messed up.. got a fever of 102.6 heading for hospital.. zonked out.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 08:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Yikes! Hope you get well soon. — Gorthian (talk) 08:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, my ride hasn't showed yet, but I do appreciate the kind way you left the message. Means a lot, especially with a lot of newer editors who really need guidance to be less confrontational and playing nice-- teamwork! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

George Seddon

Thanks for fixing my dud edit at George Seddon. I never spotted that additional letter... Schwede66 18:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

VEI colour changes

Hi Gorthian - I edited the background colours as I think it looked better than the old colour scheme. I also edited the background colours in some other pages to reflect the edits on the main VEI page. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael parkergraphix (talk • contribs) 03:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Browns, Missouri

This is an appropriate disambiguation page for an exact title. If you think otherwise, please take it to WP:AFD. You should be aware, by the way, that we have an entire disambiguation project dedicated to rooting out overly narrow disambiguation redirects. bd2412 T 13:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Move request for Thomas Vincent

Hello,

This move was completed successfully.

Thanks! -- Dane talk 00:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast! Thank you. — Gorthian (talk) 00:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Uris Brothers

Hi Gorthian, on your revert of my redirect to Uris Buildings Corporation - I think you are not seeing this right. Uris Brothers was the business (company) name they operated under before forming the corporation:

"Uris Brothers eventually became one of the largest building companies in the United States, and when its various real estate and building holdings were merged into the Uris Buildings Corporation in 1960" from Encyclopedia.com (which I presume is reliable).

Googling also turns up books that reference the predecessor company (like this [1].

I think it is implausible that Uris Brothers does not most likely mean the company. Note that "B" is capitalized. As a search term for two people who happen to be brothers, it should be "Uris brothers". I really can't imagine anyone searching for two people at once using a term like that. Furthermore, when I fixed all the incoming links to the DAB page, I found that everyone of them meant the company - as in this building was developed by Uris Brothers. So I resolved the disambiguation by changing them all to the corp. This is another indication that there is little usage of the term to truly mean the two brothers as individuals.

Can you give an example of any other DAB page were two people are listed as "surname brothers" or "surname sisters". I know of one such titled article Sullivan brothers, but is is an article about the five brothers, not a DAB. I propose putting my redirect back. MB 02:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@MB: Well, I found Winters Brothers (disambiguation), but it's a feeble example. I had missed the part that said Uris Brothers was the business (company) name they operated under before forming the corporation. I'm not sure I was very thorough at all in evaluating that redirect, and I've reverted my revert. Thank you for your compelling research. — Gorthian (talk) 05:50, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Another obvious example is the Wright brothers. Not a DAB, but still two people sharing the same article. There is no page on either brother, Orville Wright and Wilbur Wright are redirects. Following this precedent, we could get merge the three Uris articles together and redirect everything to one article. I'm not going to do that, and until/if anyone does that everything is fine the way it is right now. MB 22:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Qubic

You changed this DAB page to a simple redirect, citing TWODABS.

I think neither page can be considered a primary topic, therefore TWODABS calls for a redirect. Jeh (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The material were placed by other users and reported for violation kindly reinstate original material below.

The material were placed by other users and reported for violation kindly reinstate original material below. 92.8.62.6 (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

RE: To inq on my talk page

I guess i was a little late, the link u posted was already deleted. Need further help, leave a message --Glacious (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm glad to see you, Glacious! The page was moved; you can find that discussion at Talk:Inguraidhoo#Requested move 5 January 2017. If you have any ideas, we can discuss it there. Thanks! — Gorthian (talk) 01:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Allaverdy

Sorry, I thought I'd checked for any mention of the ship! But "patrol boat" as a section doesn't work as it's duplicated - that list is a bit of a nightmare but I've linked to a broader heading which at least is accurate. Thanks for your work on this one. PamD 23:58, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the link! That list is odd; I couldn't figure out how it was supposed to work, but didn't want to spend lots of time on it. — Gorthian (talk) 01:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

A couple more page hijackings

Don't know if you are interested, but two other hijackings that I reported to ani.

Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Jim1138! I just added those to my page. At least you caught them red-handed (so to speak). I'm working from an old list, so all the ones I've found have been pretty stale. — Gorthian (talk) 04:41, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
I spend way too much time on huggle... Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:52, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Policies and guidelines listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Policies and guidelines. Since you had some involvement with the Policies and guidelines redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 65.94.168.229 (talk) 06:50, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

The Soviet (disambiguation) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Soviet (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the The Soviet (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 05:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Mercury Sable merger

I've started a discussion on the Mercury Sable talk page to merge it with Ford Taurus. I'd welcome your contribution to the discussion if you'd like. Reattacollector (talk) 15:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Kislyak

You would be right if they were both Russian. But they're not. Belarus has its own language. The two are not ambiguous any more than John Smith and Johann Schmidt.

Even if they were ambiguous, the ambassador would be the primary use and the footballer can be a hat note. -- Y not? 16:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Journal abbreviations

Hi there, just wanted to drop you a line about the edit to the Farallon Plate page. I changed "Earth Planetary Science Letters" to "Earth Planet. Sci. Lett." as that seems to be the name of choice for that journal on Wikipedia (37 citations with the abbreviation, only 1 with it fully spelled out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/E2), and I figured that consistency was worth it. I've changed it to Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. (i.e., abbreviated but with a link to the journal page) to maintain consistency while avoiding the confusion that you mentioned as a reason for having the full name. I think that's a good solution, but feel free to change it back if you disagree. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Teresa May

You became involved at Teresa May and posted once at Talk:Theresa May.  Do you agree that there is a six-editor consensus that supports a twodabs solution at Teresa May, at least for now?  Unscintillating (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Skeptoid

It's posted to a lot of external links. It might be spam. It's really just some guy's personal website. External links should favor official sources, or reputable sources like PBS, National Geographic, etc. I might want to take it to the external links noticeboard. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 04:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

@Harizotoh9: I couldn't figure out what you were doing until you added the edit summary. Thanks for explaining! — Gorthian (talk) 04:34, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Making of an article

Hello, could you please email me on xxxx@gmail.com as i am new to this whole 'talk page' things. i would love to discuss a few things — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.104.236.104 (talk) 06:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

You did fine adding this message to my talk page, except you need to sign what you write. You do that by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. I'll email you to let you know I've answered, but I'd rather have the discussion here. — Gorthian (talk) 17:46, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
I also removed your email address here because giving out personal information like that is something you should do only with very careful consideration. You might want to read Wikipedia:Personal security practices, especially this section. — Gorthian (talk) 18:03, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Please reinstate the earlier version of igala people

Please reinstate the earlier version of igala people 92.8.62.6 (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

I cannot do that because it is under investigation as a copyright violation. You can rewrite it (see below for instructions) but it must be in your own words. Copying from another website (or book, or newspaper, etc.) is a violation of that website's copyright and is illegal, just like stealing is. The investigation may take a while, but there are no deadlines here.
If you do want to write a new version of the article, go to the article page and look at the investigation notice there. In the section called "Can you help resolve this issue?", there are three highlighted options. On the third option ("Otherwise, you may write a new article..."), click on the link labeled "show" at the right side. Read and carefully follow the instructions there. — Gorthian (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).

Administrator changes

Amortias • Deckiller • BU Rob13
Ronnotel • Islander • Chamal N • Isomorphic • Keeper76 • Lord Voldemort • Shereth • Bdesham • Pjacobi

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A recent query shows that only 16% of administrators on the English Wikipedia have enabled two-factor authentication. If you haven't already enabled it please consider doing so.
  • Cookie blocks should be deployed to the English Wikipedia soon. This will extend the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user after they switch accounts under a new IP.
  • A bot will now automatically place a protection template on protected pages when admins forget to do so.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

London Treaty (disambiguation) / Treaty of London

You have left no explanation for your assertion, so it's impossible to devine what you might be complaining about. Please explain in order that I may address your concern(s). Pdfpdf (talk) 13:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

And Now it has disappeared, making it even more difficult! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Pdfpdf: I'm not sure what assertion you're referring to. Treaty of London is not a dab page, though another editor has reverted my edit there. I tagged London Treaty (disambiguation) for speedy deletion because it targeted a (at that time) non-dab page. I will start a discussion on Talk:Treaty of London, so please join me there. — Gorthian (talk) 18:27, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Treaty of London is about as obvious a dab page as can be found. It lists articles of similar titles that re disambiguated by the use of a date in brackets. DuncanHill (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Removal of direct link on 2/28 - "Harbor Defenses of Portland'

Gorthian,

I was hoping that you could reinstate the modification of the "links" section on the "Harbor Defenses of Portland (Me.) page.

These two volumes ("The Modern Defenses of the Coast of Maine, 1891 - 1945")reside in hard copies in our collection and these have been digitalized in our online "Maine Collection" of the University of Southern Maine Digital Commons.

These studies were prepared by the Maine State Historic Preservation Commission, Augusta, Maine, an authorized state agency and fall within the class of Government issued documents for general public use. The author, Joel Eastman, was also a full professor here at USM during the time these were put together.

They are especially germane to this particular page on coastal defenses. Although of general poor quality, I still think they are quite valuable to students of this subject.

Thanks for your consideration.

Gakubun Max Calderwood USM Digital Commons "Maine Collection". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gakubun (talk • contribs) 20:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

@Gakubun: I have reverted that edit. Most of your edits have added external links to the same site; this can be seen as problematic because: 1) it looks like spam, 2) it looks like promotion, 3) you may have a conflict of interest and 4) you may be seen as not here to build an encyclopedia. It would help these perceptions if you did more editing of different kinds.
Please be sure to read our guidelines on external links as well as the other pages I linked to. In particular, if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia, whether specifically for a project or as part of your job, read and scrupulously follow the legal policy at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
One last thing: when you post on a talk page, always sign by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your text. I will also post a template at your talk page that links to many commonly used pages so that you'll have a guide to editing here. — Gorthian (talk) 21:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

no option to create a page-dis ambiguous page always comes up

cannot get to the option to create a page to express biocentrism as a rational idea. It is expressed as theoretical science, ethics and politics but no literal expression. How can create this page?

Woopiewoo (talk) 15:28, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@Woopiewoo: I highly recommend starting with small edits on existing articles first, to learn how editing and Wikipedia works. Don't try to create a whole new article yet—get some practice. When you're ready (give it a few months) to make a new article, go to this link: Wikipedia:Your first article. Read the information there—it's all important.
I also edited your message here to remove the "comment" tags. When text is between <!-- and -->, it is hidden from readers of the page. — Gorthian (talk) 20:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Rcat shell

Thank you, Gorthian, for all your contributions and especially for your help categorizing redirects! I notice that you're still using the deprecated template {{Redr}} to tag redirects. That has been replaced by the {{Rcat shell}} template. So if you tag redirects with... 

#REDIRECT [[(target title)]]

{{Rcat shell}}

...that will do the same thing as the Redr template and place the redirect in Category:Miscellaneous redirects. Again, thanks and Best of Everything to You and Yours!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  00:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: And here I thought I was using the latest and greatest. :-P I'll use the Rcat shell from now on. Thanks for the heads up! — Gorthian (talk) 01:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Pleasure! Paine  

Relationship

 – — Gorthian (talk) 03:09, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

my DAB, cloud system

This is what I was trying to avoid, [[2]]; for reference I'd seen other pages which seemed to show that was valid e.g. precipitation going on to list many other types of precipitation. My thinking was the term 'cloud system' can mean hardware or software (etc), and there are many subtypes.

With only 2 options, someone else might come along and delete it.. then we're back to square one with the hazard of cloud system being assumed to be one or the other use case.

Any more ideas or advice on this?

MfortyoneA (talk) 02:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@MfortyoneA: There are plenty of short, two-entry dab pages around. It won't get deleted because it's short. And it doesn't qualify as WP:TWODABS because there is no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. What you had in there at first were all partial-title matches, which need to be avoided. Basically, if you can't refer to an entry as a "cloud system", period, then it doesn't belong on the page.
The problematic part of the page is that there is no discussion at either article about "cloud systems". The phrase is only tenuously mentioned in both. I would be a lot more comfortable with those redirects if they actually targeted something of substance. — Gorthian (talk) 02:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for confirming that this isn't 2dabs, maybe I can lose my fear of creating those. my intuition was: when the phrase cloud system appears in text, it is sometimes implicitly something more specific , based on the context. Even if the target article doesn't actually say that, thats what the writer was refering to; the words 'system' and 'cloud' get thrown around an awful lot in computing. Hence an attempt to actually mention 'cloud (file) system', '(private) cloud system' etc.MfortyoneA (talk) 03:07, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
That's what piping is for. :-) But try to avoid making dab pages that have only two entries when hatnotes at the articles can work.
One of the rules for dab pages is that each entry must be mentioned in the article it links to. Disambiguation page formatting is very narrow and strict, which is why reading about it is essential. Most people don't realize that they are not articles at all; they're meant only for navigation. — Gorthian (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Mark as reviewed?

Hi Gorthian - I've been reviewing articles, (oldest first), and noticed you've speedied a few. Would it not save others' time if you marked them as reviewed as soon as you've speedied? Just asking cos not sure if I should mark same as reviewed myself. Thanks - MarkDask 10:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@Markdask: I'd be happy to do that, but don't I need reviewing rights? I haven't paid any attention to reviewing ever since new-page reviewers became a separate group. I didn't bother to ask to be part of that because I don't seek out pages to review. I used to have automatic review whenever I edited a page, but that seems to have changed. — Gorthian (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Gorthian:Okie dokie Gorthian, I will assume that, whenever I come upon a housekeeping speedy, or perhaps any speedy, I will mark it as reviewed. Apologies - I overestimated your authority. MarkDask 19:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Markdask: I thought only new pages got reviewed...? — Gorthian (talk) 19:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Nope. I was a reviewer since forever - then the rules changed so I had to reapply, (about 3 months ago). The new regime is actually quite a lot better than the old - simpler application. Thing is there are corpselike articles, such as those you speedied, that new reviewers are supposed to address. In the list of pages that need reviewing one can choose whether to review newest or oldest in the list; I choose oldest 'cos far less stressful, hence our meeting. You should reapply, if only to make your housekeeping more thorough :) MarkDask 20:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion that may be relevant to you

I know you tag a lot of pages for deletion that are redirects with "(disambiguation)" in the title, so you might be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Possible improper use of page move redirect suppression (ignore the title, it's more about about "(disambiguation)" titles that redirects to set indexes). Jenks24 (talk) 15:24, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 21

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • #1lib1ref 2017
  • Wikipedia Library User Group
  • Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
  • Spotlight: Library Card Platform

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Cleaning up a set index article

Hey, I was wondering if I could get your thoughts on Routledge (surname). It's clearly a genealogy of the family name, and a teeny tiny little list of recent surnames. Should the majority of the content be split into something like Genealogy of the Routledge family or History of the Routledge family, with the actual "list of surnames" kept at the current location? Primefac (talk) 14:40, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't see you were on break. I'll take it over to WT:WPNAMES. Primefac (talk) 14:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Page fix

Hi User:Gorthian, can you add some info to Maiorana article please, and the links might have to be removed, I don't want to make mistakes on article, but I'm fair sure you can help, thanks if you can.--Theo Mandela (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

added Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
removed Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2016 Cure Award
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Assistance with proposed move

I've proposed moving Medical cannabis in the United States to Medical marijuana in the United States. My position is that there is no such thing as "Medical cannabis" in the US. Frankly, it's not much of a thing elsewhere. The only reason for the current title is that at some point, for what are no doubt reasonable motives, all pages on WP use cannabis per MOS:CONSISTENCY. To me, arguing for the move is MOS:JARGON, WP:TITLEVAR, WP:COMMONNAME, MOS:COMMONALITY, MOS:STRONGNAT, & WP:IGNORE. It may not be in your wheelhouse, but if you could point me toward any useful essays, policies or discussions, or if you'd like to comment or vote, it would be much appreciated.

I do not assume your support. Agree or disagree, your involvement would be most appreciated. Thanks Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 02:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

added Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
removed ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

  • New and expanded research accounts
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gorthian/Archive_3&oldid=1140192915"