Jump to content

User talk:Graham87/Archive 36

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37Archive 38→Archive 40

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colossus of Ostermunzel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nienburg. 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) 10:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
because i can and also, nice AMA you did on Reddit a while ago. Winterysteppe (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Triangular trade may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • triangle to this, called the ''[[volta do mar]]'' was already being used by the Portuguese, before [[Christopher Columbus' voyage, to sail to the [[Canary Islands]] and the [[Azores]]. Columbus

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:57, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 18 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

sorry for mistake

Ok buddy , you are welcome , thank you for message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedzc (talk • contribs) 14:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Wind power boom

Thanks, Graham, for your recent note. The wind power industry in Texas also has a very long history and renewable energy is displacing fossil fuels. I thought this could have been worth a mention at the very end of the article. But it probably wasn't as well-written as it could have been, and I'm happy to defer to you in this case. Happy editing, Johnfos (talk) 07:01, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Article: Laurent Grison

Thanks, Graham, for your recent note. I have added many things to improve the article. Is that alright now? Thanks again. --A. Sise (talk) 07:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

TFA

For your album: Wikipedia:Main Page history/2016 March 27, with thanks (you are #8 in the contributors' stats)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Wow, cool! Graham87 06:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 30 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Many thanks for transcribing the interview with Katherine! --Ori Livneh (talk) 05:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Potions in Harry Potter

The article Potions in Harry Potter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Was deleted years ago for failing WP:FICT and WP:PLOT, among other reasons (see discussion). I prompted editors to improve the article back in November 2015. No improvement since. Still suffers from exactly the same problems today. Not precisely a candidate for CSD, so using PROD as the least painful method of deltion.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Hammersoft (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

  • I expected the prod would be denied, but felt it had to be done. I intend on AfD'ing the article. I'll pause for now. But, if you want this article to sustain, it needs a complete, massive rewrite. As is, it's nothing but fan fiction. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
@Hammersoft: Thanks. As you know, I wouldn't mind if the content was merged somewhere else, as I mostly care about link integrity; that's why I wanted to have an official discussion about it. Graham87 02:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
  • It's not the location that is the problem. It's the content itself. It so intensely violates writing about fiction that merging it beyond the bare mention of the names of the potions and a slight description of their intent would be just moving the problem elsewhere. This problem has existed for a decade now. It needs to end. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Attention: Potions in Harry Potter will be placed for AfD on June 4, 2016

(You are receiving this notice due to your having made some edits to the article discussed or its talk page sometime during its history)

In November of 2007 Potions in Harry Potter was deleted as a the result of a deletion discussion due to its failure of WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, WP:WAF, and other issues. On June 4, 2015 the article was recreated from content then currently existing on the Magical objects in Harry Potter article. A discussion followed regarding the appropriateness of the recreation. An attempt was made to return this article to a redirect, which was undone a day later. Some months later, a notice was placed on the article's talk page indicating the article would be placed for deletion. A few days ago, the article was placed for proposed deletion. This too was undone.

Throughout the history of the article, which spans more than a decade, it has never had any references. It has always been written in in-universe style. No outside universe perspective has ever been provided. As of June 2016, it will have been tagged for both of these problems for a year. I have asked, begged, and pleaded with people to rewrite this article to no avail. As the article stands (and has always stood), it continues to fail WP:FICT, WP:PLOT, and WP:WAF. There have been suggestions to merge the content back to Magical objects in Harry Potter, but this completely fails to address the failures noted. Where the content exists, either in its own article or as part of another, matters not. The issue is the content itself.

Barring a massive rewrite of the entire article into something that is encyclopedic in its treatment of the subject, I will be placing it for deletion on June 4, 2016. This notice is being sent as a last ditch attempt to find one or more people willing to do something to fix the serious problems extant in this content. Thank you for your attention, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Yehudi Menuhin

Thanks for the message about the recent updates to the Yehudi Menuhin page. I was aware of the previous edit, but was not sure if it was vandalism or not – eventually I took a decision I was not quite happy about (which was the wrong decision). I am aware of the problem of vandalism, which particularly affects high-profile pages. AtticTapestry (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

This one's for you!

Thank you for looking into the archiving-conversion issues at User talk:Chicbyaccident and placing that code for the archive box there. I think it's all good now! Shearonink (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
@Shearonink: No worries, and thanks for the barnstar! Graham87 09:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

import of a german article

Dear Graham87, I would like to import the German Wikipedia-article "Erich Kirchler" as I like to translate it in English (I'll receive the native translation of the text within the next days). Can you please tell me how I can arrange this?! Best wishes, Schätzchen277 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schätzchen277 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

(watching:) There is no Import procedure. You write the article Erich Kirchler in English and use {{translated}} on the article talk page, - for an example see Philipp Wolfrum, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Yes there is; in fact I created it. However I'm most interested in importing edits from places like the Nostalgia Wikipedia, and not so much from other language Wikipedias, but I don't mind doing the latter every now and then. The use of {{translated}} is fine though. Graham87 14:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, always learning! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:08, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Auxiliary label

Hello. Thank you for your help with Auxiliary label. However, I see you applied the Pharmacology stub. Wouldn't this be more under Pharmacy rather than Pharmacology? -- TOW  07:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

@Tow: No worries. Re the stub tag: I was thinking that myself, but Template:Pharmacy-stub redirects to the pharmacology stub template, so that's why I added it. Graham87 07:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
I am gonna see if I can request a stub template specifically for Pharmacy. -- TOW  07:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thank you so much for all your amazing work on Wikipedia.  TOW  06:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Tow: Thank you very much. Graham87 06:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

In Todes Banden

What do you think of the move from Christ lag in Todes Banden, BWV 4 to "Todesbanden"? "Todes Banden" is by Martin Luther, the printed edition of the Neue Bach-Ausgabe, Dürr-Jones. See article talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I don't have any strong opinions one way or the other. Graham87 09:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I think it should not be our opinions. The Luther hymn has two words, the Bach-Ausgabe (19th century) had one, the Neue Bach-Ausgabe (20th century) returned to the original, and I believe so should we. Unfortunately, Amazon shows one word next to the title page with two words. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Whistleblower Protection Act

Thanks for your contributions. I'm doing this for a school project so I added better and more relevant information under the "Legal Cases" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by J w145 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joan Armatrading may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • perform at the Radio 2 Folk Awards 2016|publisher=BBC|date=24 March 2016|accessdate=28 April 2016}}}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/38672dad-b73c-4324-b118-
  • //australian-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Joan+Armatrading|title=australian-charts.com > Discography Joan Armatrading|publisher=Hung Medien|accessdate=13 January 2016}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Mathematical equations

Graham, if you have a few moments free, would you drop by the discussion at m:Wikimedia Forum#Enable speakText for Extension:Math and see if you can help them figure out what's best? Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:14, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I've replied there. Graham87 05:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Adding alt img text to the images that are lacking it

G'day, Graham87. I would encourage you to take a look at this important IEG proposal. If you like it, please add your support and rationale. If you do not like it, please fix it, or add your constructive comments to the talk page. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:21, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I've gone and supported it. Graham87 07:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Erich Kirchler

Dear Graham87, thank you for your help in transporting the German page "Erich Kirchler" to the English Wikipedia "User:Schätzchen277/Erich Kirchler". I translated everything in English but do not know/understand how I can delete the part of the name "User: Schätzchen277/" so that it is named "Erich Kirchler" (like in the German version). The other thing I don't know is how to delete the sayings "(in German)" as I updated the links to English versions of the pages. I am sorry, but I am really not used in working/creating in Wikipedia. I hope you can help me! Best wishes, Schätzchen277 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schätzchen277 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Aunt Em

I wonder about your intelligence, or lack thereof. I wouldn't have thought I'd encounter an admin with less of a brain than Liz but, here we are. You are intentionally adding errors and lies to multiple pages on an encyclopedia. There's something wrong with you.Cebr1979 (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is a miracle that I have three college degrees when I only have 45% of my brain. A portion was removed because my skull couldn't contain it all, my brain was too full. Luckily, I was able to donate most of it to the needy although many of them now have a peculiar preference for Echo and the Bunnymen and Mango pickle. Liz Read! Talk! 00:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
By the by, Cebr1979, you are still subject to a block so I'm going to block this IP for block evasion. Sockpuppeting won't get your block lifted, you know. Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't want my block lifted. I'm perfectly happy IP'ing it. Ecstatic, in fact!Cebr1979 (talk) 00:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Hehehehehe, thanks Liz! Graham87 06:36, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

thxs

Many thanks again for your help! It looks great now! Best, Schätzchen277 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schätzchen277 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Schubert

Thanks for correcting me, Graham! I have clarified that caption so people in future will not make the same mistake I did. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:30, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

@Anythingyouwant: No worries. I think your first edit was enough for reasons I said in my edit summary. Graham87 06:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Amanda Reid

You need to leave Amanda Reid page the way it was because you are putting her in great danger of you use the last name fowler n anything to do with swimming so if anything happens to her it will be on your shoulder I hope you know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolpanda1234 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Edits

Hello, Why did you revert my edits. You didn't even explain it. Most talk pages have a talk header and a wiki banner. Why should the pages you reverted be different? - 01:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiraroshi1976 (talk • contribs)

Amanda Reid

Ah I found an admin who is awake. Would you please fully protect Amanda Reid? SOCKING and edit warring going on. I filed for PP and an SPI but no action. thx. Jytdog (talk) 08:01, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@Jytdog: I've done the protection. I'll take a look at everything else. Ironically I didn't get your message until now because I was cleaning up another Australian Paralympic article that was subject to edits from someone closely related to the subject; that case ended happily, however. Graham87 08:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! They finally got exhausted and went away. I went way past 3RR, ack. Anyway, thanks. Jytdog (talk) 09:01, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

A fan for you!

Fan!

Spidersmilk has given you a Fan! Fans are good for two reasons: They blow air and allow hot wikipedians to cool off, and also cheer them on when they need it, Just like a fan of a football or basketball team. Cool off, and enjoy the cheering and the breeze. Hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread "WikiLove" and "wikicheers" by giving someone else some a fan, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or someone who just needs a some fan to cheer them on and/or a good, refreshing breeze.


To spread the goodness of fans, you can add {{subst:fan}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or enjoy the breeze or cheering on the giver's talk page with {{subst:Breeze}}!

Spidersmilk (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for improving Template:fan

@Spidersmilk: No worries and thank for the fan! Graham87 15:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Apitherapy

Hi Graham - thanks for your vigilance on the Apitherapy Wiki. You mentioned that "We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations." as references. I only added my article to "Further Reading" because I saw that another blog article was listed there, and what I've written on the subject is both more current (by 14 years) and more comprehensive in summarizing the existing review articles and positions statements than that blog article. I felt it made significant contribution to the current understanding of the evidence for Apitherapy. If you could perhaps take another look and reconsider the edit, I would very much appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasPirelli (talk • contribs) 07:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Obviously I'm new to Wikipedia, so I hope you'll forgive my ignorance. I don't see where I've contravened the guidelines on conflicts of interest that you linked me to. That page says "Subject-matter experts are welcome to contribute within their areas of expertise, subject to the guidance on financial conflict of interest". I have no financial stake in Apitherapy, nor in the website that published my piece on it. Certainly my popularity is not that of Stephen Novella, but is that truly the reason why my more comprehensive, more up to date analysis of the research on the subject shouldn't be allowed on the page? If you put the two articles next to one another and say that mine adds no additional value, I would completely understand the removal. The quality of the article - or the value for Wikipedia readers - doesn't depend on my popularity. It depends on the amount of research compiled and quality or depth of the analysis performed. Or maybe this is where I'm wrong? Any additional insight you can provide would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasPirelli (talk • contribs) 17:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Graham87/Archive_36&oldid=1141184152"