User talk:Fourthords/Archive 12

6 June 2019 – 11 February 2021

• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• Archive 12
• 13

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dan Johnson (Kentucky politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anti-Islam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Osborne_Reef

Edit Osborne_Reef. Sir ! Of course artificial reef is NOT a seamount. It's definitely so !!! What I've done simply used template for UNDER the sea level structure. The other option will be to use Template:Infobox islands which in my view is more appropriate for something ABOVE the sea level. Unfortunately there are no infoboxes for reefs. Please provide your suggestions. Thank you ! User:Abune (talk) 18:07, 7 June 2019 (UTC) P.S. There is also Template:Infobox landform which some articles use for artificial reefs. But landform ≠ seaform !!! Also I feel that ALL types of reefs should preferably use the same sea related infobox. Suggestions ? User:Abune (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I would recommend either (a) collaborating with the appropriate WikiProject (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceans) to develop {{infobox reef}} or something similarly appropriate, or (b) not implementing an infobox at Osborne Reef at all, since nobody has needed and created one in the last 18.4 years. — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:43, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Do you know who can help to build {{infobox reef}}  ? I haven't build infoboxes yet ( and I'm here since 2006 ) As to use Template:Infobox seamount it actually has option to indicate origin of the "mountain" and I specifically indicated there – artificial reef. Besides someone with background in GEOLOGY actually thanked me for work I have done ! So there are different opinions on how to proceed. User:Abune (talk) 19:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't know anybody who builds infoboxes; you may want to check at Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes. You may also find that no such template has been made because either there's no need, or there may be a contingent of editors in opposition to such (see Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes). There's also {{infobox}} itself—I've used it occasionally when I felt an infobox would be helpful, but couldn't find an appropriate one. — fourthords | =Λ= | 19:22, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Very interesting read - Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes ! I need to study this as I'm generally PRO infoboxes. Need to know arguments of opposition !!! As to your argument "because either there's no need" that's a weak argument ... it's amazing how many things are still very poorly developed in Wikipedia. And definitely reefs are among these poorly developed subjects. I'll check with Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceans if they are interested in creating {{infobox reef}} or Template:Infobox seamount with indication artificial reef will serve the purpose just fine. Depending on the outcome of discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceans I might reverse Osborne_Reef back to my edit. User:Abune (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Canada–Philippines waste dispute

Hey, Fourthords! This article was tagged for an update after the hook was moved to prep, so an admin moved it out of queue at DYK. Would you be able to update the page? The hook is currently in prep 6, which won't go back into queue for several days, so no huge urgency, but I thought I'd give you a heads up! --valereee (talk) 10:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

I entirely forgot about that after I nominated it! There was an update in the incident itself at the end of May, but I haven't sifted through those sources yet. Thanks for the heads-up! — fourthords | =Λ= | 23:08, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Glad to help! --valereee (talk) 13:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

I've given the article an update with sources as recently as today! — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Great, it's in prep now, should go to queue in the next couple days! --valereee (talk) 21:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Canada–Philippines waste dispute

On 22 June 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Canada–Philippines waste dispute, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Canada–Philippines waste dispute, Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte threatened to declare war on Canada over 103 mislabeled shipping containers of household trash? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Canada–Philippines waste dispute. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Canada–Philippines waste dispute), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! — fourthords | =Λ= | 00:57, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Corporal Frank S. Scott, USAF.jpg

The file File:Corporal Frank S. Scott, USAF.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I have no objections considering File:CPL Frank S. Scott & PFC James O'Brien (cropped).jpg. — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Mark Dice

Thank you, you did an awesome job on this. Let's see what will happen next by the people trying to keep the article to a minimum though. Bollyjeff | talk 01:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I used all the reliable sourcing from the previous version, and just tried to spit-and-polish everything. — fourthords | =Λ= | 01:56, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited George (dog), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heart condition (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I swear I checked that page, and it wasn't a DAB. No worries; I've removed the link. — fourthords | =Λ= | 15:26, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi my friend

Thank you for supporting me. My interest in true crime is a specialist subject not an obsession. An obsession you cannot control. I feel that victims should have a voice after the media spotlight has changed. Love and care to you, my friend. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 09:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Paul. I generally try to avoid drama, but that was getting out of hand (and in wild violation of the rules), and I just tattled to the authorities. All the best, mate. — fourthords | =Λ= | 16:39, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The L&N Don't Stop Here Anymore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hollow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:10, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Got it! — fourthords | =Λ= | 14:59, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Italics in hatnote--why did you do that?

Apparently, the About hatnote template (like all hatnotes) italicizes all text by default. Why do you insist on adding "{{!}}" to "Apollo 13 (film)", which has the effect of removing the italics areund "Apollo 13"? I don't think it makes sense to try to mess with italizication of a movie title inside a hatnote. Apparently no one else does either, since the hatnote has existed for a long time without the "!". If you have a good reason for this, please educate me. JustinTime55 (talk) 18:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I tried to explain in my edit summary ("IAW WP:HAT#Examples of proper use & italic type#Italics within italics"), but I'll elaborate further here. (a) At the Wikipedia:Hatnote editing guideline, it has examples of properly using hatnotes; one of them deals with an italicized article target, and employs the coded piping to add disitalicization to the name: WP:HAT#Hatnote(s) above maintenance tags. (b) Then, at our own artcle on italic type, it says "If something within a run of italics needs to be italicised itself, the type is normally switched back to non-italicized (roman) type: 'I think The Scarlet Letter had a chapter about that, thought Mary.' In this example, the title ('The Scarlet Letter') is within an italicised thought process and therefore this title is non-italicised." Does this make sense? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. If that's the recommended way, I think it should be made more prominent. The topic of handling italicized article titles should be explicitly called out in WP:Hatnote, and not just depending on users to infer it from an example. And if switching back to unitalicized within italicized is our recommended style, it should also be mentioned in MOS:ITALICS, not just in Italic type. JustinTime55 (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Coincidentally, that explicit clarification was added only 88 minutes after your reply here! It's located at WP:HAT#Hatnotes with italics in the links. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:48, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Monica Witt

Is she a hacker? Personisgaming (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Nothing in the article nor its reliable sources describes her as such. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Since your notice I made the Charming Kitten Page --Personisgaming (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Abbreviations for Star Trek

What is the disruption? DIS is the community based abbreviation for Discovery, in the same way that ENT is for Enterprise and VOY for Voyager, PIC for Picard.

Shows with one word titles have abbreviations using the first three letters of said title, whereas shows with multiple word titles such as The Next Generation have abbreviations consisting of the first letter of each word, TNG, DS9. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.99.51 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

The abbreviations used on Star Trek articles have been determined by consensus at the Star Trek WikiProject. We're not declaring that any given abbreviation is 'right' or 'official', we're just agreeing on them for consistency in the articles where {{Star Trek abbreviations}} is transcluded.

(a) "DIS" is in contravention of consensus; you should take it up with WT:TREK if you feel it should be changed. (b) That's unlikely because John Van Citters has gone on record that "DSC" is the official abbreviation for Discovery. (c) For the transcluding pages to use "DSC", but for the legend to say "DIS", is patently problematic. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:56, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Considering that you appear to be the main person making said changes and are the one that is threatening me with the proposed banning of editing I brought it up with you, particularly since it seems you are the person making decisions regarding it on the WTTRek page. Furthermore, I'm not saying to only use it there, but throughout the Trek pages. Furthermore, don't attempt to use John's Twitter for defense of DSC when you argued against it regarding VGR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.99.51 (talk) 22:00, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

If you want the abbreviation for Star Trek: Discovery to be "DIS" across the English Wikipedia as opposed to "DSC", especially in the face of an official CBS-connected verification of the latter, you will need to bring it up for discussion at WT:TREK. Don't think that CBS→SOP, but instead consensus→SOP, with CBS influencing consensus. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:15, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Clearly you want to be in charge of your little fiefdom, so I'm done trying to debate it with you. But considering that Wikipedia is losing money, this site won't go on forever. So have fun while it lasts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.99.51 (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea to what you're referring, across the board.

Clearly you want to be in charge of your little fiefdom First of all, feudalism died circa the 15th century. Secondly, how do you interpret "gain consensus" (an English Wikipedia policy) as WP:OWNership? But considering that Wikipedia is losing money, this site won't go on forever. Wikipedia is a project of the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit and charitable organization. It's not in the business of making money. As for its revenues, however, they went from US$91.2 million in 2017 to $104.5M in 2018, an increase of 15 percent. As for "go[ing] on forever", you're correct in that nothing will. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Salvo (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:17, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh for goodness' sake! I knew better. Thank you; I've fixed it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Second Sacred War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Sacred Wars (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

That was actually intentional this time! Thank you, though. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Exemplar of enwp article lacking UI elements.png

Thanks for uploading File:Exemplar of enwp article lacking UI elements.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 22:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

That was apparently a typo, accidentally typing {{cc-by-sa-30}} instead of {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}. I didn't realize the uploader would accept invalid licenses, so I didn't check after the fact. I've fixed it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:06, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bubba Cathy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southlake Mall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! I've fixed it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:28, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Dang, you and Deepfriedokra are fast

@Fourthords and Deepfriedokra:

Thank you to you both for your edits at Talk:Sunshine Mall. I was just going to add the {{olddelrev}} tag to the article, but noticed Deepfriedokra had already added the old AfD tag and you added an article history template (of which I was not aware). This article, indeed, has some interesting history when you consider:

• its result at the 2007 AfD was to delete;
• it was re-created in 2019 and incorrectly speedy deleted by A7 per Bbb23;
• consensus was virtually unanimous that A7 didn't apply and it was overturned at DRV on 27 January 2020; and,
• as Deepfriedokra mentioned, TenPoundHammer was, ironically, both the original AfD nominator and a passionate advocate at DRV to overturn the A7 speedy deletion following its re-creation

Very interesting! Nevertheless, it's proof positive that consensus can change at any time, sometimes with surprising turns of events. ;)

Cheers,
--Doug Mehus T·C 15:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Dmehus, I think you mean Ten Pound hammer, not myself :)CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 15:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, Yep, sorry, just corrected it now. My bad. You were the nom of the DRV. Thanks for doing that, by the way! One of the most unanimous DRV overturn decisions I've seen. Doug Mehus T·C 15:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Just a case of right place at the right time. When I commented at the DRV, I put the page on my watchlist to alert me of the consensus decision. I happened to check right after the restoration, so I added the {{article history}} since I saw it lacking. I'm always happy to contribute! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:30, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reference in Talk:American_submarine_NR-1#source(s)

Your suggested reference of 21:02, 26 July 201(UTC) in the talk page is now in the article, and also in USS_Akron#Aftermath_of_loss. Thanks! Lent (talk) 09:09, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

No problem! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Alexis Georgoulis Page

Hi , why were the sections on Personal Life, Career and Filmography removed from Alexis Georgoulis page ? The information is based on valid references .

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loneather (talk • contribs) 18:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Everything removed in this edit wasn't cited to any reliable sources in the article. I removed it IAW the verifiability policy, and then re-built the article with the reliable sources that were present. I'm also currently (literally, right now) harvesting other sources to expand the article, so some of that removed information may return, but only if I (or anyone else) can cite it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:26, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Ok got it , sorry I thought the content was removed permanently . Ι found this source in Greek with biographic information , it's on the website of one of the schools he was a part of , its also included in his page on the greek wiki . Tell me if it meets the verifiability criteria , I can add it to the career section . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loneather (talk • contribs) 19:53, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

That appears to be the website for Iasmos Higher Drama School. I have no reason to suspect it of being unreliable, so it would be appropriate for including in the article, yes. In fact, I've added the source and citation to the article, already; to source more prose to that page, just copy-and-paste the new citation. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:07, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry Hicks (geologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asylum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

You'd think I'd be better at catching these by now. I'll fix it later from work; I'm currently IP-blocked and don't have time to rectify that. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 13:45, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Love this reply. It's good to see our bot overlords getting due respect. Regarding the IP block, perhaps you just need to have your IP block exemption updated? (talk page stalker) Doug Mehus T·C 13:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I figure there're people behind these bots (they don't code themselves …yet), so I'm appreciating them. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:35, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

DPL bot,  Done for Fourthords. Doug Mehus T·C 13:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:35, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joshua Schulte, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Metropolitan Correctional Center (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 16:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Seriously‽ Why am I so bad at that‽  ::sigh:: Thanks, I've fixed it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:42, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

The Pet Goat

Could you please clarify why "Fictional goats" is an incorrect category for The Pet Goat? The goat in the story is clearly fictional, and most of the things in the category are about works prominently featuring fictional goats rather than the goat characters themselves (who in most cases don't have their own article.) Smartyllama (talk) 13:14, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

"The Pet Goat" would belong in category:fiction about goats (or perhaps category:fiction about mammals or category:fiction about pets) if it existed. Category:Fictional goats would be for Chef Gustav, Butter (The Timbertoes), Gobo (Big Barn Farm), and Asriel Dreemurr (Undertale): goats that are fictional. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 19:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Many of the pages in that category (and equivalents for other animals) are indeed "fiction about goats." Smartyllama (talk) 20:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Be bold and rectify that. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 03:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not "fixing" literally hundreds of categories when it's clear consensus is to keep them as is. Smartyllama (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I have elected to go the opposite approach and list the category at CFD to rename it to reflect its actual and established usage. You are welcome to participate. Smartyllama (talk) 13:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Tyler Honeycutt

Hi there. Your edit at Tyler Honeycutt cited "unverified claims", but I was able to find sources and restored the material (with a minor tweak or two). Perhaps this was just a one-off, in which case you can ignore this, but unsourced text can be handled per WP:FAILEDVERIFICATION—tagging the text as unsourced and inviting others to WP:PRESERVE and source it. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

The claims I removed had no reliable sourcing; the verifiability policy says that "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source." As such, I typically remove unverified material everywhere I see it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rick Dantzler

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rick Dantzler you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh! Thank you very much! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 23:41, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for The McLain Family Band

On 29 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The McLain Family Band, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a young Ruth McLain Smith, member of The McLain Family Band (pictured), had been playing the Appalachian dulcimer for only two weeks when she performed at the White House on national television? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The McLain Family Band. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The McLain Family Band), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

File:Mini gate.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mini gate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Wow, that's a 13.5-year-old blast from the past. You'll get no objections from me, of course! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

MOS:TENSE changes

You made an edit to the TV Zone article, citing MOS:TENSE for your changes. There is on ongoing discussion on the MOS:TENSE talk page concerning the correct verb tense for magazines. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 17:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rick Dantzler

The article Rick Dantzler you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Rick Dantzler for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

10-4, I've replied there. Thanks for the heads-up. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 19:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Rick Dantzler/GA1

Hi there, just a note that there are still two things left to discuss on this GA review. Hope all is well! Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey! I haven't had much dedicatable time for Wikipedia stuff, so I was putting off the GA until I had a good chunk. Turns out I didn't need to, and it was only a few little things that needed attending. My apologies for the unnecessary delay! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 23:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

That's perfectly fine, but for the future most reviewers would appreciate it if you took a minute to drop them a line on the GA page or their talk saying something along the lines of 'I have seen these and intend to respond when I have time on DATE'. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Rick Dantzler

The article Rick Dantzler you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rick Dantzler for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 13:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Eagle Eye

It appears that the editor did not take the hint. I have rangeblocked 2601:18F:602:6970:0:0:0:0/64 x 1 week. If there is any more trouble let me know. "There comes a point where forbearance ceases to be a virtue." -Edmund Burke... -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for following up on that while I've been offline! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 03:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Tuvix

Was it intentional to replace the OGV version with includes audio+video, with a WEBM version that includes video only? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 03:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

It was. The reliably-sourced commentary specifically discusses Mulgrew's acting/performance, but only that. Stripping the audio brings the file better into compliance with WP:NFCC#3b. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 05:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Astronaut Kim

Hello, we have followed a patterned infobox for degrees, but I am always open to listen/read. Can you please explain why you reverted Johnny Kim's infobox degrees? I am used to #university #(abbrev). Thank you. Snowfalcon cu (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

The only SOP of which I'm aware is the template's instructions themselves, which say for |education=: Education, e.g., degree, institution and graduation year, if relevant. If very little information is available or relevant, the |alma_mater= parameter may be more appropriate. So I read that as (for example): "BA, UMSL (2015)" or "PhD, WashU (2015)"; degree, institution, and graduation year in that order.

Also, this version of the Kim article included <small>...</small> tags, but the manual of style says that Reduced or enlarged font sizes should be used sparingly, […] Avoid using smaller font sizes within elements that already use a smaller font size, such as infoboxes, navboxes, and reference sections. This means that <small>...</small> tags, and templates such as {{small}} and {{smaller}}, should not be applied to plain text within those elements. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 00:10, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Source of birth date

You added a birth date for Bridgette Andersen. I can't find an online copy of that article. Do you have access to it still? Can you confirm that it contains the birth date? Thanks. Mo Billings (talk) 20:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that article from the Statesman Journal gave a date of birth for Ms. Andersen. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:02, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. By any chance do you have a copy of it or a link to it? Mo Billings (talk) 21:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

If I use a newspaper source without an online link, it's usually because I accessed it via my local public library or my academic library, and not online. On rare occasions I will contact sources themselves and have received PDFs of articles, but there's nothing in my collection like that for the Andersen article. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 00:11, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I was hoping if it had a birth date it might also have a place of birth. Thanks for checking. Mo Billings (talk) 02:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brigette Lundy-Paine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah drat. I've fixed it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 15:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Michael Landes article

Hello! Thank you for the warning and for correcting my mistake. I am new to wikipedia, but I'll do my best to learn quickly. Regarding the edits, I found the date and place of birth on Landes' imdb page, which was already linked under external, so I assumed that that was enough. Thank you again, I'll try to edit it the right way. Eva Auer Zigman (talk) 10:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

No worries! There are a lot of rules, guidelines, policies, manuals, and more to consider at times. (Almost 16 years later, I'm still stumbling across stuff I didn't know before!) Regarding that edit, one of the English Wikipedia's more important policies is that everything must be verified to reliable secondary sources. I'd love to have Landes' date-of-birth in that article, but I didn't find any good sources for it. Because the IMDb is a user-editiable source, our consensus is that it can't be used to cite articles. Does that make sense? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

O;Neill and Redskins

Re this edit, I'm not following this and Twitter is an unreliable source, but I did some googling out of curiosity and found this. I just thought I would mention it. Cheers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:18, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I was saying that the source described O'Neill's fandom when the team was so-named, and to say that he's a fan of the sports team under the new name would be saying he's a fan as of a later date. It would be anachronistic. However, we can cite that tweet under WP:ABOUTSELF, saying that "O'Neill said in July 2020 that if the team changed its name^[1]—as it did four days later^[2]—he would cease supporting the team.^[1]" First cite to the tweet IAW ABOUTSELF, the second to cite the name-change. What think ye? (Lastly, this all might be undue; I'm aware I lean towards including everything and anything I can source.) — Fourthords | =Λ= | 19:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Contested PROD

Hi, Fourthords, I have contested your PROD of Gang of Four (Afghanistan) and sourced it. Feel free to take to AFD if you want. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

No objections at all! It appears to be completely verified, now. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 01:16, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Query

Hi Fourthords, I noticed that you deleted a large chunk of the Simutronics article, including the removal of some major products, which themselves have their own Wikipedia articles, such as DragonRealms, Lara Croft: Relic Run, and CyberStrike 2.[1] I'm not going to revert, since it's a company that I worked at several years ago. However, I'm curious why you took the drastic action of deleting so much, rather than simply adding a couple {{cn}} tags? There are definitely plenty of sources that could easily be found on a quick search, or pulling them in from the linked articles. --Elonka 17:17, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

The verifiability policy says that "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source." While it does provide for "consider[ing] adding a citation needed tag as an interim step", that is not a requirement. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:V is indeed one of the core policies of Wikipedia, you are correct. However, in actual practice, citations are generally only essential for direct quotes, negative items, or things that are likely to be challenged. In this case, it seems that a large amount of fairly neutral information was removed without warning, without a request for citations, and without any attempt to engage in discussion on the talkpage. Be aware that "section blanking may be considered vandalism", see WP:MINREF. Note that I am not accusing you of vandalism, as I do not believe that that was your intent.

For now, would you be willing to restore the information, and allow an opportunity to provide sources to those things that you had questions about? --Elonka 22:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Because of its cruciality to the project's goals, we don't take the verifiability policy and its implementation lightly. At Wikipedia:Inline citation#When you must use inline citations, it says that they're needed for "[a]ny statement that has been challenged (e.g., by being removed[).]" I have so challenged. I've never seen anyone concerned that contributors couldn't find the page history, but I've placed the removed claims on that article's talk page, now. As for concerns of vandalism, I try to be consistent and thorough with my edit summaries to avoid others drawing that conclusion. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 00:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

The McLain Family Band

This revert and this revert both have the same edit summary as the empty parameter is intentional;. The bot wouldn't have made the second edit except that a human, me, copied the underscore-separated form of the article name into the bot's skip list when it should have been the space separated form.

Still, my question to you is: how is any bot, or, for that matter, a human, supposed to know that |year= in this template:

{{cite AV media notes|title=On the Road |year= |type=[[Liner notes]] |publisher=Country Life Records |location=[[Berea, Kentucky]]}}

is intentionally empty. The follow-on question is: why does it matter? cs1|2 ignores empty parameters so what it the importance?

And, since I'm asking questions, what is the meaning of all of the <!--exhausted--> comments?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I should think that the three edit summaries in the article history would explain the intentionality sufficiently. [W]hy does it matter? That's a bit more philosophically deeper than I'm going to ponder, but the parameter's purpose is to remind myself and other editors that the datum is available for that source, and it should be included. (I should be getting my hands on it soon after COVID-19 isn't restricting travel, but another contributor might have it handy sooner.)

The "exhausted" comments that follow sources denote that the preceding source is exhausted. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, but what I meant is how is a bot or a human editor supposed to know that a value for |year= is available and that the empty parameter is serving as a reminder? Bots don't and, I suspect, humans don't read article history listings before they make edits. A |year=<!--don't-delete-message-here--> might be a good idea (if the message is unique-ish to you, insource: cirrus searches can help you keep track of them). If you have other articles employing this sort of aide-mémoire, give me a list of them and I will add them to the bot's skip list.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, I rarely have incomplete sources available to me, I've never seen anybody editing out empty citation parameters, and it's really just never come up before. You're right to ask. I can't think of any other incompletely-filled-out sources lingering in the Wikiaether, but if I intentionally leave such in the future, I'll definitely try and remember to leave a comment as you suggested. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Star Trek Generations FAC

After the better part of a decade since you assisted, finally got around to getting Generations to FAC. If you had the time I'd love your input or review. Hope you're having as best a holiday season as possible in 2020, cheers. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 14:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Heh, I'm happy to help! I do want to ask, first: are we allowed or supposed to make suggested edits ourselves, or should we note them all in the nomination page? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 23:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

You can make edits yourself; especially if they're not really significant (prose stuff etc) it's probably faster to do them yourself, but some reviewers prefer not to really touch it much themselves. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 14:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha. When I have some time (maybe this evening), I'll do a deep-dive and try to help! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Just checking in to see if you were still planning on looking. If you're busy with the holiday, that's fine. Sorry to put you on the spot, I was bad and didn't really bother shaking the trees for reviews until late in the process. Happy new year! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

No no no, you're fine! I made my way through the article up to the "Production" section, meaning to go back, but I forgot! So sorry! I'm free today, so lemme lend some time to it now. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Ta- and -da! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I followed up on your comments on the FAC page. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 01:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

…am I supposed to give some sort of ultimate judgent at the FAC? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 01:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

If you support it meeting the criteria, it's helpful to note that in your heading. If you don't have any further comments, that's fine too. Happy new year, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 15:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm on it. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Cor

Regarding Cor. I'm sorry but I reverted your edit, but wanted to explain so you don't feel your efforts are wasted. Disambiguation pages have a specific set of guidelines and while there is plenty of room for interpretations, almost none of your set of changes was an improvement to the style. You may find WP:LONGDAB helpful for headers on longer pages. Good headers are "Arts, entertainment and media" (not just Media, which has as specific meaning), and "Other uses" not "Other". Regards, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:40, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
9,999		Renée Zellweger (talk)	Add sources
18		Johnson Sea Link accident (talk)	Add sources
94		Sharkskin (talk)	Add sources
127		Modern animation in the United States (talk)	Add sources
24		French Woods Festival of the Performing Arts (talk)	Add sources
980		Andrew Stanton (talk)	Add sources
2		Frederick C. Hawes (talk)	Cleanup
10		Shary Boyle (talk)	Cleanup
148		Thermal lance (talk)	Cleanup
21		Robert Le Vigan (talk)	Expand
48		Motorised Submersible Canoe (talk)	Expand
210		Artificial reef (talk)	Expand
90		Vestfold og Telemark (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
1,138		Shapeshifting (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
173		Mariupol (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
35		Legal financing (talk)	Merge
321		The Incredibles (franchise) (talk)	Merge
25		Service module (talk)	Merge
36		Defense against swimmer incursions (talk)	Wikify
127		Sigmaringen enclave (talk)	Wikify
16		Hans Carossa (talk)	Wikify
3		Arandu Arakuaa (talk)	Orphan
2		E. C. Tully (talk)	Orphan
2		T. Fenton Knight (talk)	Orphan
28		Drill Master diving accident (talk)	Stub
132		The Pixar Story (talk)	Stub
6		Hamilton, South Australia (talk)	Stub
50		Wet sub (talk)	Stub
13		TI-55 (talk)	Stub
5		Bastrop High School (Louisiana) (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

"Spider-Man 11" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Spider-Man 11. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 23#Spider-Man 11 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Dominicmgm (talk) 05:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Bypassing redirects

Greetings. I noticed that you recently added piped links in order to bypass redirects on several pages, including Cara Dune and Pizzagate conspiracy theory. This is generally not recommended where the redirect is a term that fits well within the text. Linking via redirects reduces visual clutter for editors and helps identify redirects with possibilities. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The Manual of Style on piping and redirects says not to pipe redirects because articles may later be written at those redirects' page, and it indicates that the redirect is an article that is wanted. The category of redirects with possibilities is making the same argument. I generally pipe to bypass redirects when experience tells me that the redirect doesn't meet those qualifiers.

For example, in the "Cara Dune" edit, I bypassed a link to tap dancing because jazz dancing was already piped immediately in the text; furthermore, I've never seen where we've preferred an article to be at verb of noun rather than noun itself. In the "Pizzagate conspiracy theory" edit, adjectives like antisemitic and white supremacist have longstanding consensus to always have those articles at their noun counterparts, instead. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Regardless, it's still not ideal to add unnecessary piped links, since it makes the article more difficult to read in page source form. We have templates like {{R from verb}} and {{R from adjective}} to categorize such parts of speech; therefore, such redirects are clearly seen as useful and shouldn't be bypassed unnecessarily. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)