User talk:Aiken drum/Archive 4

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, List of Eyewitness Books, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 20:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Next meetups in North England
Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in: If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!
 * Leeds on 12th April 2015
 * Manchester on 26th April 2015
 * Liverpool on 24th May 2015

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Oppose at RfB
That's a well-reasoned comment. I just wondered if you wouldn't mind turning it into a question - to ask how SoWhy would deal with such a candidate. I know that my behaviour as a participant at RfA and a Crat at RfA is very different. Especially because you seem to have a generally good view of the candidate, it might be worth asking him how he'd handle it? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps but seeing as my oppose is being mocked in a completely nonsensical way I'd rather not venture any further into it. One of many reasons why I quit Wikipedia for 4 years. I rarely touch adminny areas now but when I do, it's still the same old bullies I'd wanted to avoid. Aiken D 20:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's mocking, I think that's people looking at what you're saying and then suggesting that's the opposite to what they want from an 'crat; it may be diametrically opposite to what you want, but that's life. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * But you haven't suggested anything, just said you agree with what I'm saying (which is what 'per' generally means at RfA) but you'll support and not oppose. So to me, that makes no sense especially with what I said. Aiken D 20:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I happen to believe that all the things you have objected to make a good 'crat. Hence my vote.  Diff'rent Strokes Arnold, different folks....  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Then perhaps it might be worth saying that you don't agree they are reasons to oppose, as part of your support. To me 'per Aiken' as a support when I opposed looks like it's mocking. Aiken D 21:03, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Well it isn't. It's "I support per Aiken's well reasoned discussion with which I happen to wholeheartedly disagree".  I used shorthand.  It makes sense to most people, and I'm sorry if you felt it was "mocking".  It isn't.  It's just plain disagreement.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, well it didn't come across that way to me, but I believe you if you say that's not what the intention was. Aiken D 21:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know you, anything about you, or your intentions, edit history, contributions, but I do know that I disagree 100% with what you said. That's it.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that's not true. For example, I'm sure you don't disagree with "SoWhy is certainly one of our best admins..." :) Aiken D 21:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with that, but you didn't say that. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I was referring to my actual oppose comment. Apologies. Aiken D 21:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Alright, listen, no mocking here from me, alles klar? Different opinions.  You're a dude.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate you reconsidering your !vote. I don't perceive TRM's contribution as bullying you, or mocking you. I've seen many such !votes in the past and may possibly have made one or two similar ones myself in the distant past (I !voted frequently before passing RfB). I'd encourage you to continue voicing your thoughts on Wikipedia, you clearly have a good faith approach and have a lot to offer, but perhaps try (I know it's hard) not to feel an emotional response when others disagree. Apologies if that's patronising... I care about Wikipedians, they are our most valuable resource, far more important than some RfB and for me comments like "I quit Wikipedia for 4 years" make me concerned and want to help you to stay. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:40, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

The Secret Seven
I'm on the Wikipedia Typo Team and noticed your recent reversion of my edit on The Secret Seven page. I'm currently on a project to correct the many duplications of the word 'the' on Wikipedia, and this was a duplicate. I recognize that 'The' is part of the title of The Secret Seven. However, 'the' should not be repeated if a following title or phrase starts with 'The.' For instance, if the Beatles were giving a concert, I wouldn't go to the The Beatles concert, I would go to the Beatles concert (or maybe The Beatles concert or the Beatles' concert).

It looks like the italics you added are correct, for those who use that style. To be consistent, it looks like italics should be used in many other places on the page, but I'll leave that to others.

Please let me know what to do about the duplicated 'the.'

Ira

Ira Leviton (talk) 11:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, you are probably correct in this case and am fine with it being removed, as it's the way for other examples on the page, but I also agree that the title should be italicised for consistency. Aiken D 12:28, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Didsbury Campus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Didsbury Campus 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 Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 16:02, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Didsbury Campus
The article Didsbury Campus 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:Didsbury Campus for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 20:21, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Didsbury Campus
The article Didsbury Campus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Didsbury Campus 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 Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of :List of Eyewitness Books


The article :List of Eyewitness Books has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Does not meet notability guidelines, not an up-to-date list and not sourced"

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 notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing 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. Supervegan (talk) 08:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Three Standing Figures 1947, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polaroid ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Three_Standing_Figures_1947 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Three_Standing_Figures_1947?client=notify 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) 09:11, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Roger Bannister
Hi there! A lot of the referencing has been updated on Roger Bannister, so would you be able to take a look at it and let me know if you are happy for the article now to go to RD? Thank you! — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 09:03, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I’ve replied there. Aiken D 18:56, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Corrie Image
The image is fine of Faye because her portrayer Ellie and Faye have both grown up from a 14-year-old, unlike say Bethany Platt who has been portrayed by an adult since her 2015 return. And the image has the right license thing that's used on all soaps. Grangehilllover (talk) 22:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Redirects
Hi, I've restored the redirects for the Now! articles as it has been extensively discussed as you can see in both the editing history and talk pages, as well as at AfD. The creations and restoration of content was done by socks. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, please point exactly where it was discussed as there's nothing on the talk page and no link given when the original redirect was put in place. I'm amazed that these number one albums wouldn't have their own article. In fact, they have done so for years. Aiken D 13:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * consensus has been that these individual albums are not generally notable as standalones. Here is an example of 1 out of several dozen: afd. I'm pinging who has been involved in a number of these as I'm mobile currently and can't dig through everything. The history of the article - and current protection of several of these due to socks restoring this content in violation of the TOS should be indication enough. If you wish to restore them, discuss it on the talk page but please review the long history of the articles in question.  CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:08, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Also see this. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * All I'm seeing is redirections but with no links to actual discussions, other than to a couple of AfDs. I've looked through several of the AfDs, and many of them are old and relate to the albums before they were released so were rightfully deleted/redirected. Others such as for Now 83 and 86 consensus is clear to keep the articles. Plus it seems nonsensical to have articles on most of the Now albums but redirect a few. Aiken D 13:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There are literally dozens of discussions on the various articles that pertain to all of them, particularly the diff in which I linked you which talks about the merge discussions. These are creations by socks, in any case. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:20, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Other than one AfD, you've not shown me a single actual discussion on a talk page about this - the diff you linked to again just shows someone saying "per merged material" which is not a discussion or consensus. There is nothing on the talk page of Now 72 or 73 about merging or redirecting, and neither article has had an AfD, that I can see. If people are going to redirect or merge, they need to link to the discussions where there was consensus to do so for those articles. Anyway, I'm bringing this up for discussion on the discography page. Aiken D 13:26, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * And actually pinging this time since they have far more experience with this.  CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Now That's What I Call Music Discography
I have a question regarding the hugely successful Now That's What I Call Music series. There used to be an individual entry for each release, with a full track listing. On trying to access them today, I'm just being redirected to the main page. Are there plans to re instate the individual pages please as it's very informative.

Minors2018 (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I tried to argue this point a while ago but it fell on deaf ears. One user decided, on the basis of other deletion discussions, that some Now albums weren’t notable enough. This was done without any discussion for those articles, and when I attempted to restore the articles I was reverted and scolded. I’m not going back there. Aiken D 14:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Aiken

Thank you for getting back to me. Do you think there would be any point in adding my voice to the argument to have these pages reinstated? In my honest opinion it was a high handed, very unthinking action. Many people used these pages to check the details of individual Now! releases.

Minors2018 (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I do that, and it’s how I discovered many (but bizarrely, not all, so picking and choosing) had been redirected. Looking into it further, I discovered one editor had made the decision on their own. Yes, we encourage people to be bold in making changes but major changes to long-standing articles like that should have had consensus. By all means, voice your argument and I will happily back you up, as it was a poor decision. Aiken D 17:22, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Babes in the Wood murders (Wild Park)
Hi,

Sorry for the revert on the Babes in the Wood murders (Wild Park) article. I meant to click "diff" on my watchlist and clicked the wrong link.--  Gourami Watcher Talk 20:55, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries. Aiken D 20:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Manchester meetup - 9 June 2019
This is an invite to/reminder of the Manchester Meetup on 9 June 2019. Starting at about 1pm on Sunday 9 June in the Sir Ralph Abercombie, 35 Bootle Street, Manchester. Full details are on the Meta page at m:Meetup/Manchester/36. It would be useful if you could say whether you're likely to be coming so we have a rough idea of how many to people expect and how large a table to reserve. Thanks, and hope to see you there. Thryduulf (talk) 13:34, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Kate Petty
Hello, Aiken drum,

Thanks for creating Kate Petty! 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:-

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. 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) 21:05, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for The Tale of Mr. Tod
The Tale of Mr. Tod has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:30, 16 March 2023 (UTC)