User talk:Spellcast/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Canton (1856)

Dear Spellcast, long time no see. But I found that you created the battle of Canton which is not a good idea. Because I considered that this battle is too small. Here are the detail of the battle.

1. The British army wasn't allow to invade Canton under the UK's order. Bowring just commands his army to attack.
2. The Chinese didn't fight. I have read a related Chinese book, Ye Mingchen didn't send army to fight. He only closed the trade and retreated all Qing army to somewhere else. One more thing, Yeh didn't get normal soldiers because Emperor Xianfeng transferred Qing army from Canton during the Taiping Rebellion.
3. This is not a battle. The British army invade and retreated Canton in few days. No strategic goal was achieved. The battle (if it was) happens before the second opium war. It shouldn't be called a battle.

Let me say it clear, I think the article should be removed. It's hardly possible to expand it as I could do. The battle was niggling, no notable fight between the British and Qing armies. Only few Chinese junks hit British warships. The Chinese army are not trained, they didn't even fight. --俠刀行 (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

You said the same things about Battle of Canton (1857). This article is definitely possible to expand. Military conflicts typically start with the title "Battle of" or "Capture of" by default if there isn't a more common name for it. This battle being one-sided is irrelevant to the title. Spellcast (talk) 23:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Public Welfare Medal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Porter. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Kanye West/archive1

I have nominated List of awards and nominations received by Kanye West for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cowlibob (talk) 20:36, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Karel Martens

Hello,

I believe the page you deleted on Karel Martens should not have been deleted: The reason you gave was "not a notable graphic designer" which is not true.

Here are a few references that show how notable he is: He teaches for Yale: He founded the Werkplaats school: He won the prestigous Noordzij Prize: His books are highly reveared and collectable: He is included in a list of “one hundred of history's leading practitioners” in book “The Designer Says”: along with other notable graphic designers like Ellen Lupton, Erik Spiekermann, and Jan Tschichold who are listed on the Wikipedia page for Graphic Design: These are just a few of the many references showing how Karel Martens is an extremely notable graphic designer. Please let me know if you need any other information.

Thanks, Cdunn1981 (talk) 17:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

References

Please remove page creation protection from Jeff Wells

Way back in 2008, you or someone like you deleted and then create-protected Jeff Wells, probably for a very good reason. I have created an article for a notable person named Jeff Wells at User:Jonesey95/sandbox2. Can you please remove the page creation protection on Jeff Wells so that I can start this article? I'll clean up the articles that are linking to the page once it is created, since they are not all for the same Jeff Wells. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

It is possible that Jmlk17 protected this page, but that editor appears to be inactive. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Done. Spellcast (talk) 08:04, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick turnaround, and your many contributions to WP. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:35, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Policy discussion in progress

There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects the capitalization of "Can I Have It Like That", A Girl like Me, &c., a question in which you previously participated. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — LlywelynII 14:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Humphrey Fleming Senhouse

Hi, You reverted a link on the Humphrey Fleming Senhouse page to the WikiSource version of the Naval Biographical Dictionary. As far as I can see the link was correct - the reference is to the footnote on the article for Senhouse Edward Cooper. The WikiSource link correctly displays the footnote in context, the Archive.org one displays double page spread and it it not clear what the source is. GreyHead (talk) 12:36, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Whoops, fixed. Spellcast (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

East India trade

Hello! Since you seem to have some interest in some of the articles I've started, I thought I'd drop by. The Swedish East India Company and articles related to it is an on and off project of mine, one I hope to resume as soon as I've finished tidying up the Goland articles. During this work I discovered some maps that might be of interest to you. I use my sandbox as a note book for all things related, and you'll find them there. There is a bit of discussion done about them on the sandbox's talk page. Also lately, I became involved in bringing this article to GA. It's now listed at Peer review for an upcoming FAC. Any input about the article from an Australian editor would be appreciated, if you should feel so inclined. :) Best, w.carter-Talk 22:32, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

The military history of the Opium Wars are an interest and side project of mine too, so I can see why we'd overlap. The article looks excellent and I'll let you know if I get the time to review it in more detail since the weekend has just come! Spellcast (talk) 23:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Layard (priest), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francis Wheatley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:21, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there

Hi Spellcast. I want to apologise to that minor 'edit war' we had on Humen, where I've been again replacing some historical spellings of places with their current pinyin names. I didn't mean to cause any inconvenience to you. All I wanted to do was to reduce the amount of bias on this website. I don't prefer pinyin over any other Chinese language romanisation, nor do I prefer simplified over traditional Chinese characters. Its just that I think its better to use the conventional spelling in the subject's context. Hence for historical articles, I think you have a point--I agree that the former spellings should be used instead of pinyin. For places/things that still exists today, however, I consider that would be another case. Nonetheless, to avoid such a thing happening again, I would first discuss any issues I noticed on the talk page. Regards, Wishva de Silva | Talk 06:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your message. I wouldn't call this an edit war :P Yeah I also don't care if it's pinyin or not, I just go with the most common, popular English terms. It's obviously OK to add modern spellings, but if an older one is just as popular (or more so), I don't think it should be removed. I'm all for fixing bias but I don't think anyone deliberately intended that in the Humen article. Wikipedia follows common names for articles, not official ones. And what makes the Humen strait notable in English is more because of its past history than current history, which is why it seems to have been created under the older name. Spellcast (talk) 08:05, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Korean War

You reverted my edit stating that International Law doesnt need a Treaty etc. It states in the article itself "The fighting ended on 27 July 1953, when an armistice was signed. The agreement created the Korean Demilitarized Zone to separate North and South Korea, and allowed the return of prisoners. However, no peace treaty has been signed, and the two Koreas are technically still at war. Periodic clashes, many of which were deadly, have continued to the present."

I have reverted your edit because of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basetornado (talk • contribs) 18:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. There was debate on the talk page on whether it should be considered 'over' or still 'ongoing' with a ceasefire. Basically, the consensus was the former despite the popular media phrase of "technically still at war". Many wars have ended without a treaty. Here, it ended with an armistice, which although is not as 'final' as a peace treaty, is not as temporary as a ceasefire. Spellcast (talk) 10:51, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Archives

Hello! Do you have an archive list and searchable box somewhere? Best. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:50, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Nah, but what you after? You can enter whatever it is you're looking for before the "prefix" here.[1] Spellcast (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Spellcast. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Spellcast.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Spellcast. 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)

Article creation

Hello! I would like to publish an article on King Dest (a.k.a Maputo Dest), do you think the article will be accepted? Thank you!--Ane wiki (talk) 20:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

As long as it meets the general notability guidelines. Spellcast (talk) 14:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your answer. Many times this type of artists have repercussion in specialized media, not mass media. I'm afraid they are not suitable for reference as they are web pages...--Ane wiki (talk) 07:39, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Fair Use in Australia discussion

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

Your GA nomination of Battle of Kowloon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Kowloon 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 Indy beetle -- Indy beetle (talk) 01:21, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Kowloon

The article Battle of Kowloon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Kowloon 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 Indy beetle -- Indy beetle (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2017 (UTC)