Please add new discussions at the bottom of the page!

I've moved earlier discussions to archive pages (as listed below). A few of the items I've simply got rid of - if I have, it's simply that it was trivial and/or stuff which has been dealt with, and is therefore no longer relevant. The deletion is not a reflection of my opinion of the writers!


10/04-01/05 02/05 03-04/05 04-05/05
05/05 06/05 07/05: 1 07/05: 2
08/05 09/05: 1 09/05: 2 10/05
11/05 12/05 01/06 02/06
03-04/06 05-06/06 07-08/06 09-10/06
11-12/06 01/07 02-03/07 04-05/07
06/07 07-08/07 09-10/07 11-12/07
01-02/08 03-04/08 05/08 06-07/08
08-09/08 10/08 11-12/08 01/09
02-03/09 04-05/09 06-07/09 08/09-6 Jan 2010
01-06/10 07-11/10 12/10-02/11 03-12/11
2012 01-06/13 07-12/13 2014
2015 2016 01-09/2017 10-12/2017
01-06/2018 07-12/2018 2019* *
* * * *
* * * *

* = still to archive

List of bays of ScotlandEdit

Hi @Grutness: I think some of the links you put in are misses. It Scotland. scope_creepTalk 00:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I've just been correcting all the links - someone else put them in. Grutness...wha? 00:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Walked into that one with my eyes open. Sorry, Start again. Excellent work. Thanks. How are you? scope_creepTalk 01:03, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Not bad - thanks for starting the bays list. There's going to be a lot to add from the northwest of the country! Grutness...wha? 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

List of contemporary ethnic groups.Edit

Hi! I just saw your discussion on the Talk:List of contemporary ethnic groups, and I just want to ask: can you clarify what you mean? Rjrya395 (talk) 01:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

"Contemporary" has two meanings. It's come to mean "present day", but its earlier and still more widespread meaning, particularly in archaeology and anthropology, is "at the same time". So while you're actually trying to list present-day ethnic groups, many of the more likely users of the page might expect the page to be lists of ethnic groups who were contemporaries with each other.Grutness...wha? 05:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
I guess that makes sense, but I'm just an editor who ended up taking full control of that page. Rjrya395 (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
No-one "takes full control" of a page - it's against Wikipedia policies to do so (see WP:OWN). Grutness...wha? 23:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Chicago school architectureEdit

Thanks for going through and categorizing buildings into Category:Chicago school architecture in Illinois. Are you planning to categorize buildings in other states as well? I ask because there are three existing categories for the style that call it the Commercial style: one's for Illinois, which should probably be merged into your new category, but Iowa and Wyoming don't have corresponding categories yet, and we may want to just rename the existing categories. TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 14:51, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't know about tat. Currently I'm going through all the "what links here" on Chicago school. With any luck i'll have time tomorrow to do a few more state categories. "Commercial architecture" is a bit of a problem - some buildings seem to have been classified as that simply because they're old-style brick strip malls and don't have much connection with Chicago style - but it certainly does make sense to change category names rather than do a whole new parallel set-up. Grutness...wha? 14:54, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
The brick strip malls are a quirk of how the National Register of Historic Places categorizes its architectural styles. It tends to use "Commercial" for both more traditional Chicago school buildings and smaller-scale buildings from the same era that used similar design principles, which is fine but also covers a lot of early 20th century Midwestern commercial buildings. To confuse matters though, it also categorizes some buildings as "Early Commercial", and nobody on WikiProject National Register of Historic Places has ever quite been sure what that means. I'll leave a comment there to see if anyone has thoughts about the category structure here. TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 15:08, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Grutness...wha? 15:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:John F. Kennedy memorialsEdit

Hey there, Just wanted to let you know that I replied to your note on my talk page a few days ago. (I even pinged you, guess it didn't get your attention.) Regards, Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Oops - sorry - heading there now :) Grutness...wha? 00:46, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Tariki, New ZealandEdit

Hello, Grutness,

Thanks for creating Tariki, New Zealand! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 20:52, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Heh. Hi @Boleyn: Yeah, I simply created a temporary stub to fix a redlink. I'm hoping to get onto expanding it soon. No offence, but it's always wise to check a user's history before suggestions they know well - thanks anyway :) Grutness...wha? 01:29, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

American presidential building categoriesEdit

I saw your work on categories like Category:Presidential libraries. I'm wondering if you have any opinion on how to handle the categorization of a different kind of American president, the President of the CSA, Jefferson Davis. We have articles on Jefferson Davis Presidential Library and Museum and his home, Beauvoir (Biloxi, Mississippi). Is it OK to categorize them under the American categories, which have descriptions specifying that they apply to USA presidents? If so, should we change the description? Or is it better to create single-article categories for a defunct-if-it-ever-existed nation? See Category talk:Presidential homes in the United States. Mobi Ditch (talk) 20:26, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Mmmmm. Good question. To be honest, I'm not sure. Technically, he's an American President even though he was never a President of the USA. And being the only holder of that office, a parent category would be deleted because of WP:SMALLCAT. I think I'd hedge my bets and just leave him where he is in Category:Monuments and memorials by person and Category:Confederate States of America monuments and memorials. Grutness...wha? 01:50, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your helpful reply. I had some vague impression about the rules, but now that I look at WP:SMALLCAT I see that there may be an exemption for categories that are part of a larger category scheme. It gives the example of Category:Flags by country, which contains the single entry category Category:Flags of Namibia. If there was an overall category for "Presidential libraries by country", then it'd make sense to have a CSA entry. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Anyway, I guess I'll just leave those categorizations as they are. The CSA's status as a short-lived, unrecognized nation makes it hard to fit into any tidy scheme. Mobi Ditch (talk) 22:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
As you say, it's part of an overall scheme with lots of countries, which is the main difference. Also it's not impossible that Namibia will some day have a different flag. I don't think many countries other than the US (if any) have official presidential libraries, and there's never any likelihood of another one. Grutness...wha? 02:53, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!Edit

hi Grutness, wow! cats added within 2mins of article creation, thanks!:))

Coolabahapple (talk) 06:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Aww - that's cute :) Thank you! Grutness...wha? 06:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Red LinksEdit

Thank you for letting me know in regards to red links! Appreciate it :) --TheDomain (talk) 07:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Fred StrachanEdit

This chap hasn't got an article yet (he sure is notable!) and he's not the youngest person either. Maybe it's a good idea to take a photo of him at some point 'just in case'. Do you think you might come across him? Schwede66 08:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd not heard of him... I don't think there's much chance I'd see him, to be honest. It's possible some other Dunedin Wikipedian might though... User:Dushan Jugum, perhaps? 08:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Ok, you are clearly not interested in rowing then. He's had a significant contribution with the 1972 New Zealand eight. He's still at it! Schwede66 09:01, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Not really. I categorised a few rowing articles recently, but it's not really an interest of mine. Grutness...wha? 09:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I couldn't really explain why the sport interests me as I've never been involved in it myself. In fact it's a mystery to me. But I am fascinated by it. Schwede66 09:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

James RossEdit

Hi Grutness, just wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit to James Ross because guidelines say that red-linked entries should have a link to an existing article (MOS:DABRED) and that they should not contain external links (MOS:DABEXT). Leschnei (talk) 00:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Leschnei: - guidelines must have changed at some point! For the past ten years or more, redlinks have been encouraged if there were also redlinks from other articles pointing to the same target, and standard procedure was to link them with an external link to show notability! I agree that there should also be a blue link to an existing article though. Grutness...wha? 01:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I've only been on Wikipedia for a couple of years, so I'm still trying to get a grip on the ins and outs. As I understand it, the (current) idea behind disambiguation pages is to guide readers to existing content, so orphan red links and links that leave Wikipedia are not useful. Leschnei (talk) 02:19, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Makes sense. Redlinks in articles are much more useful, since they point out articles which need to be made. Grutness...wha? 02:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
By the way PamD found an article for James Ross (artist) that I missed, so that one has been put back. Leschnei (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Barnstar of Diligence
This is for your hard work and valuable contributions in Wikipedia. Thank you for your selfless service. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 09:11, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! :) Grutness...wha? 09:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Avon river named after the Stratford Avon?Edit

I am curious who these people are who believe the river is named after the Stratford Avon. I have lived over in Diamond Harbour for several years and have family in St Martins and I have never heard mention of this analogy. Are there sources to corroborate this ? Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   13:36, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

It's a pretty common belief. I've definitely been told by people from Christchurch that that was the reason for the name. I'll see if I can find any sources. Grutness...wha? 13:38, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Heh. Ironically, the first source I looked at for the name origin confusion claimed that it's sometimes believed that it's named for the River Avon which runs through Christchurch in Hampshire! I think I've found where my Christchurch friends' idea came from though - [1]. Grutness...wha? 13:45, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


You could look Fontarón please? DJose Méndez (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@DJose Méndez: Looks OK to me - I've added a template saying there is more information at the Spanish-language Wikipedia which could be translated for use here. Other than that, it's a reasonable stub article with enough references. Grutness...wha? 04:54, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Māori people stubsEdit

Kia ora, Grutness. Per your suggestion I've removed the speedy renaming request for Category:Māori people stubs and I've listed it at CfD for full discussion. Feel free to comment there. I also left a comment at Stub sorting/Proposals regarding the Indigenous North American bio stub templates. Ngā mihi. Liveste (talkedits) 14:02, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Ka pai. Thanks :) Grutness...wha? 14:20, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


What I know of Croughton is that it has an air base covered with American radio comms masts, just like its partner along the B4031, RAF Barford St John - which we could see out the kitchen window of Mum's old house in Barford St Michael.

Do you still live in the area? There is a meetup in Oxford in nine days time. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

@Redrose64: No - couldn't be much further away in fact - I'm in New Zealand! I still keep up with a few of my old schoolfriends in the area, though. The air base has grown a lot since I was in the area (we were in the non-military part of the village). I remember that the shop that my parents ran accepted both sterling and dollars. My parents almost moved to closer to your mum's place, Deddington. Grutness...wha? 12:06, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
I was at Deddington Primary School, 1969-76. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
I was at Croughton C of E primary at about the same time! Grutness...wha? 00:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
On the matter of RAF Croughton, did the news services in NZ cover this story? It was on the UK nationals for a day or two, and BBC South Today are still covering it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes, but only as a small item - made the newspapers but I don't think it was covered on TV news. They didn't mention it was Croughton, but it was easy to put two and two together. Grutness...wha? 03:08, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Bank of OtagoEdit

Remembering your (still unresolved in WP) concepts of stock and station agents am watching your edits with much interest. Please would you fix up poor old Larnach. Eddaido (talk) 12:49, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Happy First edit day!Edit

Thank you! Grutness...wha? 03:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year SocietyEdit

Dear Grutness,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 00:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

I might jut d that - thanks :) Grutness...wha? 03:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Addition of pseudoscientific categoryEdit

Hello! Recently I've noticed that you've added a category designating various aquatic creatures and purported monsters as "cryptids". As cryptozoology is a pseudoscience and this promotes the notion these these creatures are what adherents of the subculture calls "cryptids", this falls in the category of WP:PROFRINGE. I've since removed these categories. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Erm - you do realise there is a long-standing family tree of cryptids in Wikipedia, and that as such these articles should be part of it? This is in no way a promotion of fringe theories as per WP:PROFRINGE, which I suggest you read before correcting any more valid edits. Grutness...wha? 02:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
None of those articles contain a single reliable source discussing cryptozoologist interest in these topics, and the application of categories claiming any particular entity is what cryptozoologists call a "cryptid" certainly falls well into he category of promotion of fringe theories. We don't allow it for Young Earthers or any other pseudoscience proponents, and I don't see why we should be making any exceptions for this particular subculture. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:48, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
What? No cryptozoological interest in the Loch Ness Monster? Or in the Waitoreke (which I was involved in a scientific search for)? Surely you jest. And whether you don't see why or not is irrelevant to an existing scheme on Wikipedia which has passed muster from a host of other editors. If you have any objections to the categories and their population, take it through proper channels to WP:CFD or some related process page. Don't simply decide on your own whim that they have no place in Wikipedia and depopulate them. Grutness...wha? 02:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Find a reliable source discussing cryptozoologist interest in these topics, and we can include the category. In the mean time, I ask that you please self-revert your reversions. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Let's take one at random - the last one I reverted: Steller's sea ape. That has an entire section on the research history of the cryptid, yet you clearly didn't think that was enough for it to be regarded as a cryptid. Several others that I reverted had similar sections. Your blanket de-categrisation points to you taking no account for scientific research interest, so bringing it up now seems a bit strange. Grutness...wha? 03:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
That article says nothing about fringe proponents such as cryptozoologists—you're introducing the term "cryptid". Folklorists, biologists, and historians do not use the term "cryptid"—they do not assume there's really sneaky dinosaur or monster hiding somewhere and decide to employ all sorts of fanciful notions of monster hunting. Instead, they take into account a creature or claim's cultural context and history without the need for pseudoscientific terminology. As for looking at what you're blanket reverting, your blanket reversions restored several fringe sources along the way that I had removed (like this one, and you even managed to revert a vote I made on an article for deletion. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
That was an accident for which I apologise. As for restoring those sources, again it was my mistake, but if it appears that one editor is going on a lone crusade then that is liable to happen when their edits are reverted. Grutness...wha? 03:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
To get back to an earlier claim of yours that other fringe groups are not catered to with categories on Wikipedia, have y taken a look at Category:Paranormal and its subcategories? They are heavily populated with items that are at least as fringe as cryptozoology. Perhaps you'd like them all deleted? Grutness...wha? 03:26, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Please don't blame me for your mistakes. That is no way to have a conversation. Additionally, please go back and remove th fringe stuff you've restored after I took the time to check them out and remove them.
I regularly edit in pseudoscience categories, and the term "paranormal" is not the byproduct of a pseudoscientific subculture (everyday people use the term "monster", bot the faux-science-y "cryptid", for example). Folklorists regularly write about belief in the concept of paranormal, which is widespread and not restricted to pseudoscientific approaches such as ghost hunting. We write about what reliable sources have to say on the topic, just as we do anything else. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm not blaming you for my mistakes. And I thoroughly agree with the problems of patrolling categories (something I've been doing here for a long time). The problem seems to arise from the use of the term cryptid for those categories. If the categories were titled, for example, Category:Lake monsters rather than Category:Lake cryptids, it might cause less contention. But as things stand, the term cryptid is used for the categories, and so those are the categories used. If you wish to change the names of the categories (I certainly would support that move if you did), then -as mentioned before - WP:CFD is the place to go. As you yourself say, using "cryptid" categories suggests some support of fringe theories, even if that is not in any way intended. Grutness...wha? 03:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
No worries about said mistakes and I think you're right about CFD. To be clear, I don't suspect you're intentionally promoting any sort of fringe theories or anything like that. Really, "lake monster" is the category we should be using here for a lot of these, and we do have some holdovers from previous attempts by cryptozoologist users long ago on the site to turn the site into a sort of pseudoscience compendium, and so those categories need to be replaced with something more accurate (it seems to happen with all fringe stuff, and some of them appear to have left the subculture behind for folklore studies, actually). The step you recommend is wholly reasonable, and I probably should have been done it a long time ago. However, I think it'd be appropriate to just swap the categories for more accurate categories in the mean time, like the one you propose above. I'll go ahead and create it. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:46, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Excellent :) Last thing I want is to get into a serious argument with another experienced editor! A bulk CfD proposal would definitely be worth doing soon though. Grutness...wha? 03:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Certainly and agreed. Thank you for insight and recommendation, Grutness. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
No problem, and again apologies for any annoyance caused! Grutness...wha? 05:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
  • (talk page watcher) What a pleasure to read a talkpage discussion where two editors begin in conflict and have a rational conversation ending in agreement. Sadly rare, both on-wiki and elsewhere. Season's greetings to you both! PamD 07:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks - you too! :) Grutness...wha? 08:48, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Yuletide cheer to you both! :) :bloodofox: (talk) 17:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
And to you! Grutness...wha? 23:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve KaingaEdit

Hello, Grutness,

Thank you for creating Kainga.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 07:42, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Boleyn: I did not create that article, I created a redirect on that page to an article which I had created at kāinga. Someone else later turned it into a stub. Also, with due respect, after nearly 15 years in Wikipedia and some quarter of a million edits, I have some idea how to create an article ;) Grutness...wha? 07:57, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I will expand the article a little and add some sources. Grutness...wha? 08:02, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Smoke CommentEdit

Hi Grutness,
I hear we in Oz have become the 'Land of the Big Smoke', and have been 'sharing' it with you guys. Sorry about that! ☹️
I am actually sitting outside using the free city wi-fi, wearing a dust mask at this moment, and it is very smoky.--220 of Borg 04:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Yeah - we had a brown morning sky the other day, and Auckland's copped it today. Just gives some indication of how bad it must be across the ditch. Hope things improve over there soon! Grutness...wha? 05:48, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Well it stayed very smoky till later that night, but then cleared up greatly in the early AM(?) and is far better today (Monday 6/1).
I am about 110 km due west of a number of the coastal fires, so if an easterly wind comes in the smoke just flows in!
But 25 people (so far) have died, so the smoke isn't too much to 'endure', though apparently one elderly persons' death in Canberra is attributed to the smoke. [2] 220 of Borg 05:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 1929 New Zealand cycloneEdit

 On 12 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1929 New Zealand cyclone, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that one person died during the 1929 New Zealand cyclone when a railway locomotive fell from washed-out track into the Taieri River? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1929 New Zealand cyclone. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1929 New Zealand cyclone), 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) 00:01, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Editor's Barnstar
Dear Grutness,Thanks for your incredible efforts in editing and improving Wikipedia links. Mrloopitus (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! :) Grutness...wha? 02:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!Edit

Thanks! :) Grutness...wha? 06:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


Hey friend, I reverted you on Berisha, because there was is bibliography that connects that name to a Slavic etymology. From the work I've done on Ottoman defters, I've never seen a change from /r/ to /l/ mid-sentence in Albanian. Nor is there some tradition that says that "Berisha i Bardh" is "real Berisha", or to any connection with "fair-skinned people". The Slavic Bel- in Albanian hasn't entered as "white", but as a term for a very specific breed of white sheep. So a "belja" for example refers to that breed. The Slavic term for white never entered in Albanian as a loanword that replaced that Albanian term bardh. For example, the Montenegrin tribe Bjelopavlići (descendants of White Paul) in Albanian is knows as Palabardhi. Lastly, the -ić suffix in Slavic, becomes -iqi in Albanian. -Isha is cognate to Latin -issius, which how Berisha incidentally is recorded in Latin. Best.--Maleschreiber (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

These are the reasons that make me think that what you wrote is very improbable, but I'm open to discussion if there is bilbiography.--Maleschreiber (talk) 10:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Agree with Maleschreiber. But actually all of the reasoning is kind of pointless because, admin or not, what you added was OR. --Calthinus (talk) 19:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Understood - though it's not OR. My problem is that I have read it in a book several years ago, but the title and authors name elude me. Grutness...wha? 03:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Tip of the hat to youEdit

Grutness, thanks for the heads up and your work. Brunswicknic (talk) 07:27, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

No probs - and thanks! Grutness...wha? 11:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

List of shipwrecks in September 1863Edit

The entry for 14 September contains an unreferenced entry for Spirit. Is this a vessel listed by Gaines? Mjroots (talk) 17:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I've no idea -: I was simply adding the Ingram and Wheatley information (which is all New Zealand-related) - I don't have a copy of Gaines. Grutness...wha? 04:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I'll have to trawl through the article history and find out who added the Gaines info. Mjroots (talk) 05:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Photographic pages, links, genres, structureEdit

I expect I was wronging you, please disregard. There's something weird or broken in the linking and finding articles department. Midgley (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Yup - it was nothing to do with me. No prob, though :) Grutness...wha? 04:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
I think the problem was that the link added to the draft article used uppercase for the second word. Links are case sensitive apart from the first character.-gadfium 05:45, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Waka stats.jpgEdit


The file File:Waka stats.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused free use image with no clear use on the Wiki.

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. fuzzy510 (talk) 09:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Had to look this up to work out what it was. It was used in a RM discussion... seven years ago. I doubt it's much use any longer. Grutness...wha? 15:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!Edit

Thank you! Grutness...wha? 00:26, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


Hey G! How are things Down Under? I was just closing a bunch of stub proposals, some of which raised the question of diacritics in stub templates, and the only discussion of this I could find was in an OLD archive: here. The consensus seems to have been to form templates without diacritics with redirects from the "diacritical" versions. Can you confirm? (I'm gonna put a sentence on the naming conventions page in regard thereto.) Cheers, Her Pegship (?) 23:29, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Peg - not bad down here (spending less time online - looking after an elderly parent takes a lot of my time) - hope things are good with you. Yeah, as far as I remember that's pretty much it, or the other way round - doesn't really matter which. As long as the unaccented version and the "correct" version both link to the template, then everything's happy. Grutness...wha? 02:20, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Tool for finding city-basketball player intersection?Edit

Hi Grutness, I noticed that you created a number of city-basketball player categories recently. Thank you for this. Do you have a tool that allows you to find the intersection quickly? I've been manually sorting Category:Sportspeople from Los Angeles and other sportspeople from X categories and it is very tedious.--User:Namiba 16:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Namiba, yes there's a tool called Petscan which I use - it saves a lot of time. It also guarantees that I've got enough articles for a category before I start. Here's a link to it [3]. Grutness...wha? 02:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I tried to use it but I couldn't figure out how to find results. Is there a how-to guide on using it? Can you give me a brief overview? Thanks for your help.--User:Namiba 16:33, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
sure - it's pretty straightforward. First make sure that languages is set to "en" and project is "Wikipedia" (that should happen automatically). Then just put two categories (without the "category:") into the category's field (e.g., "Basketball players" and "Sportspeople from Seattle"). Set depth to about three (so that it scans subcategories up to three levels down), and press "Do it". You should get a list of article names and links underneath. (in the Seattle example it yielded 70 articles). Grutness...wha? 03:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Basketball players from ZadarEdit

Please stop creating these categories, at least for now. They are not helpful. I would revert you, but I am working to set up an RfC with Namiba on this. Thanks. SportingFlyer T·C 15:41, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually they're extremely helpful and I'm only continuing a scheme which others have already started, and with category types which recently passed CFD as keep. I'll pause for now, but since consensus is to keep them going, and since there's very useful on Wikipedia both for navigation and to cut down very large categories, I don't see any reason why you should want to stop them being created. Grutness...wha? 15:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll make sure to ping you into the further discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 15:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
@SportingFlyer:, can you please ping me too for the upcoming RFC? Thanks. - Darwinek (talk) 02:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Sure. I'm not sure it's in the cards at the moment (and am taking a break for the holidays) but I'll ping if I set it up. SportingFlyer T·C 11:45, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou for your vote on countries and establishment yearEdit

I have spent a huge amount of energy trying to improve this category tree and make it accurately reflect the situation on the ground when things were set up and also correctly reflect where things were set up. The fact some are trying to delete this huge tree makes me feel like there is an attempt to destroy much of my work helping Wikipedia. It is also odd to me that this proposal to delete can be done without posting notice on most of the thousands of categories invoolved.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:01, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

No prob. Grutness...wha? 02:42, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!Edit

That's 16 years. Mate, you've been around! Happy anniversary. Schwede66 07:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you! Grutness...wha? 08:03, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Australian and New Zealand advertising characters for deletionEdit


A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Australian and New Zealand advertising characters, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American advertising characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:OtagoKitesurf.jpgEdit


The file File:OtagoKitesurf.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused and low res

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. MGA73 (talk) 13:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ngauruhoe from Desert Road.jpgEdit


The file File:Ngauruhoe from Desert Road.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

low resolution and unused

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. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

"Caketin" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Caketin. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 5#Caketin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. (talk) 13:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Works of Robert Lawson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Logan Park.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar!Edit

Thank you for the barnstar, Grutness, it is much appreciated! Yes, I am fellow Dunedinite. I feel like I may have met you a long time ago at one of Mike D's fleeting visits? But it was back when I was brand new to this whole Wiki thing so I may be mistaken. Anyway, I am planning on working on more local content this year, no matter how much is done there always seem to be so many gaps! DrThneed (talk) 05:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

It's possible - I did go to a couple of those (one was at Otago Museum I remember). And yes, there's always more worth adding :) Grutness...wha? 11:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Stub categoriesEdit

What is the minimum number of stub articles for a category? From memory I think it might be 30, but I can't find anything about this. Is the number set down in a policy or guideline somewhere? Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:16, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Not as policy but as a guideline. It's usually 50-60 unless there's an associated WikiProject, in which case it can be as low as about 30. From memory, it's all covered at WP:STUB#Guidelines. Grutness...wha? 12:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Islamic organizations established in 1962Edit


A tag has been placed on Category:Islamic organizations established in 1962 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 15:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

It's no longer empty. Grutness...wha? 02:39, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Mass media in Bydgoszcz has been nominated for mergingEdit


Category:Mass media in Bydgoszcz has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:51, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Refrencing of Mim bour Article improvedEdit

Hi Admin, could you review my article " Mim bour" and recommend for approval? Boadu Emma (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

OK - I'll have a look. Grutness...wha? 03:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Grutness,many thanks for your assistance.

You're such a wonderful Admin.

Mim Bour is on Google now. How can the star photo of my article appear after Google search?

Pls how can my Boadu Emma (talk) 12:36, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Unfortunately I don't know how to get that photo on Google. Grutness...wha? 15:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Most grateful for your response Boadu Emma (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to disturb you sirEdit

I just read more about you. It appears you're a very busy person since you're an editor of such prestigious newspaper.

Grutness, Please if you find any spare time, kindly attend to me on below two questions so I can finish up my next article.Boadu Emma (talk) 15:41, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

1. After getting the geographical coordinates of a mountain, Is there a special tool for calculating the height of that mountain?

2. After getting coordinates of two places, is there a tool to calculate the length or distance between them?Boadu Emma (talk) 15:41, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

The answer to the first question is no - you'd need to find a source for the height. As to the second question, there might be, but if there is I don't know what it is. Grutness...wha? 02:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Sir Grutness, thanks for the response sir. I asked because of the recent help you offered me on my article on Mim Bour. You provided the elevations of the mountains for me. So I was wondering how you got it and if you could share with me so it can guide me in future articles. Much love sirBoadu Emma (talk) 21:47, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

You can get an approximate height from Google maps' "Terrain" layer, which shows contour lines, but for anything more accurate you'd need to find a website which gives the height. Grutness...wha? 04:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Sir Grutness, I am most grateful for the assistanceBoadu Emma (talk) 06:51, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Urgent Assistance needed.Edit

Hi sir, pls I have published an article about Mim Lake.

There are certain dimensions which I will need your help.

Here's the coordinates of the lake =6|55|10|N|2|37|15|W|

Google image of the lake is online. You can use your expertise to obtain me the size of the lake. Boadu Emma (talk) 12:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm. I've tidied it a little, but unless there's a source actually listing the area, it can't really be added to the article. Grutness...wha? 14:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry sir. Saw your reply very late Boadu Emma (talk) 21:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

They are asking me to do some more edits and republish it for consideration Boadu Emma (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

If I get your point, you're saying for example, the place has to be indicated on a map as a lake before.

Hope that's what you mean sir? Boadu Emma (talk) 21:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lake Rotoroa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


I can't believe we both made an article at the same time for this! I'll merge the content from your version shortly, but please feel free to keep working on it. --Prosperosity (talk) 03:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Coincidences happen :) I got a notification to a change on the Awhitu Peninsula page I'd made, and noticed that Cornwallis Beach was redlinked, so I decided to do something about it. Your article is a lot more thorough than mine - good work :) Grutness...wha? 03:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)