User talk:All Hail The Muffin/Archive 1

António Castanheira Neves
Hi there. I do have (really) dozens of books or articles mentioning this guy, although they're all written in Portuguese. But adding some decent sources to the article now would cost me more time than I can reasonably spend (for instance, it's 2:55 a.m. here now and I should be in bed). Couldn't you just believe me? Velho (talk) 03:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Some advice
As you seem to be blindly prodding ANY lacking article for deletion, even if they are obviously notable I strongly recommend you try doing a search in google books first and try adding a source or two yourself. ♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well firstly let me say; how very rude of you! A cursory look at my contributions and you would have seen that I have referenced almost the same number of articles as I have PRODed for deletion in the last few days. I am PRODding things regardless of their apparent notability, I'll give you that - but you will notice (I hope), that these are all articles which have completely failed WP:V sinceApril 2010 and which I have been unable to reference thoroughly (by which I mean find reliable sources with in-depth coverage) on my own merit. Now you will notice (again, if you look at my contributions!) that any articles which have been taken to AfD and then sourced (therefore fixing the issue) I have happily withdrawn my nomination from. Similarly, if someone looks at an article I have PRODed and fixes the problem I will happily leave that article alone. Please WP:AGF and check my contributions next time you wish to leave snarky remarks on my talk page. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I am PRODding things regardless of their apparent notability, I'll give you that . Nothing rude about it, the fact is you are causing disruption by being lazy.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If something claims notability but completely fails WP:V - do you still qualify it as notable under Wikipedia guidelines? I don't. We deal in verifiability not truth. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Guy Delcourt (editor) is and always will be notable as a French publisher. It is easily verifiable. It just needs translation from French wikipedia and sourcing. Google books shows up a large number of hits. Why then didn't you source this?? ♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't check google books. I checked Lexis Nexis and ProQuest and JSTOR instead and the man came up with nothing. That was clearly a mistake on my part and I can offer you my apologies for that if you'd like. However, the insinuation that I am lazy when I am thoroughly checking my sources (all powerful though they are not), and that I am PRODding anything is an insinuation that you are assuming bad faith of me when I am doing nothing to disrupt the project. I missed what appears to be a single source for one of the frankly hundreds of articles I've been dealing with over the past few days. I PRODed it, the problem was....well, not fixed...but it's a start! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

If time is an issue a friendly world of advice.. I recommend google the name of the person in google books. Paste the url of good book sources into here. It will make a citations for you and then you just simply insert it into the article... It would be a lot more productive than prodding articles when often the creator is inactive on wikipedia nobody is around to save it. SO a prod is not a start, is a worry... I'm not saying this is the case with every article you assess but in this case you really should have picked up the hits for Guy Delcourt.... See here Turns out he is one of the biggest comic publishers in France.. All you'd have to do is paste the url of any of the book hits into the citation makers and bob's your uncle!! Hope this helps you....♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I promise, when I find a source, and I do check my databases thoroughly, I add it in using the proper citation templates. Time isn't the issue here, the issue is a simple mistake on my part which again, I apologise for. I should've picked up that guy. I wasn't meaning to say that the PROD is a start, but the one source that is now in the article definitely is just a start. Please don't assume deliberate negligence on my part. People make mistakes, and other people pick them up on those mistakes (but hopefully with an assumption of good faith), that's the great thing about Wikipedia! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh! Time has changed, now there are three before I could even look at the link. Thank you! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 12:00, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, no worries. Just to add I support prodding but only if there are no hits in google books. We have thousands of biographies which really aren't notable... Obviously like contemporary Moroccan footballers won't have hits but if people are really notable they should have coverage in books... Personally I think google books is an excellent way to assess notability. Its quick and easy and if it picks up hits then using the ref maker I provided it can be sourced within seconds... Regards♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

As you appear to do a lot of work with BLP sourcing I can show you how to add a link to both google book and the ref maker in your top itinery if you like.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I would love that! Yes please! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 12:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, what wiki skin and web browser do you use?♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Monobook and Firefox. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 12:22, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Go into your preferences. Click monobook js at the end. Copy the follow text and paste it in: The first is a quick link to google books to save you having to go externally. The second is your google book ref tools to quick draw up citations:

addOnloadHook(function {   addPortletLink('p-cactions','http://books.google.com/','GB','ca-gb');  }); addOnloadHook(function { addPortletLink('p-cactions','http://reftag.appspot.com/','GB ref','ca-gb ref');  });

OK save it. Now hold down Ctrl, Shift (upwards arrow on mine) and r. Now move on and the two highly useful links should be reasily accesible at the top of your toolbar next to history, move, watch etc.♦ ♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Script locked and loaded! Thank you so much! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 16:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You seem to have a misconception about the notability of authors and other creative professionals. They become notable because they create important works, which are shown to be important usually by reviews, and, often, by prizes, placement on best seller lists, etc. . (one can regard these reviews as the necessary secondary coverage for GNG, as an alternative to WP:author). They are not notable because of their personal lives, unlike some popular celebrities,and there is no need to find second party biographical sources on them--for the basic facts of their bio, their own web sites/publishers description/etc. are usable sources--such things do not of course prove notability -- it's the reviews that do.) (An easy place to find reviews for popular authors is Google News Archive--the professional sources, Book Review Index and Book Review Digest, are available in all academic and mediium size public libraries). You don't have to take my word for it: see WP:CREATIVE.    DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note and a big thanks for your patience. I think I'm just going to take a break from this whole business for a while. Referencing and adding information is the way to go! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 18:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Oi!
Come on IRC! :D Ironholds (talk) 19:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

stub tags
Hi, Please don't add stub tags to articles like Apantomancy which already have them, and if you are adding a stub tag please remember it goes at the end, after everything except interwiki links (see WP:LAYOUT). (If you'd been putting it in the right place you might have spotted the existing, correctly placed, subject-specific stub tag). Thanks. PamD (talk) 16:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * My bad! I missed that one. No problemo. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 18:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Arithmancy
The bit about Pythagoras and the Iliad seems quite dubious, and in any case would belong on the Isopsephy article, not the Arithmancy article... You do know that Pythagoras lived several centuries after the writing of the Iliad, and over five centuries after when the events of the Iliad are supposed to have taken place? -- AnonMoos (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh...well that's my bad rather than the sources. It says In the story of the Trojan wars, the victory of Achilles blah blah blah. I assumed it was the Illiad. Mind if I changed it but kept the general sentiment in? It seems like a reliable source to me. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 18:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I strongly object to including it on the Arithmancy article because it's fundamentally not about Arithmancy, but about Isopsephy. However, if you don't make it much more clear than before what connection Pythagoras is supposed to have to the Trojan war, then it probably won't be welcome on the Isopsephy article either... AnonMoos (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No, that makes sense. But I hope maybe the full text will help. It's: 'The father of arithmancy was Pythagoras, who believed there were connections between gods, man and numbers that could be decoded and used to foretell the future of an individual and the outcome of certain events. Ancient Greeks would examine the numbers and values of letters between two combatants to predict who would be victorious. In the story of the Trojan wars, the victory of Achilles over Hector was predicted in this way. If you still have a problem with this being included in either article, I will happily look at the reference this was quoted from in the bibliography (though that will take a while, it's long!). If it's still a problem, would you please let me know why? I apologise for being a little slow at the moment but I'm not sure what the issue is. Thanking you in advance! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 18:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, but now it seems it's about ancient Greek αριθμομαντεια arithmomanteia, which included Isopsephy and also other things, but which is not really directly the same as modern numerological "arithmancy". It might be nice to have a general article on ancient Greek arithmomanteia (see my past comment of "6 January 2007" on Talk:Arithmancy), but that's not what the current article is.  Note that the original form of the quote doesn't directly connect Pythagoras and the Trojan war, in the way that the text you added to Arithmancy seemed to do...  By the way, at the time of the Trojan war, there was no Greek alphabet, only vague memories of Linear B and possibly an early form of the Cypriot syllabary. AnonMoos (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Gris-gris (talisman)
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   18:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Ouch.
The fundraiser notice you left on DAEaton's talk page apparently contained a non-free image. I'm sure you weren't the one responsible, but DASHBot pointed it out. mechamind 9  0  08:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah big ouch. But thank you for the message! I love that people pick up on these things. Changed now :) All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 13:19, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Imperial
Thanks for the invite to Imperial. But, I don't attend there - so I wont join. Colt .55 (talk) 10:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well you're welcome to come anyway but thank you for your RSVP. Happy editing! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 10:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
For the invite! You may wish to use "==" instead of &lt;h2> in future! Rich Farmbrough, 10:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC).

Imperial
Hi, thanks for the invite to the Imperial meetup - I was wondering, is there an agenda that sets out what will be happening during the day? (I'll probably be covering some BUCS fixtures in the afternoon/evening of the 9th, but would still like to attend the meetup).

On a not entirely unrelated (or, more sensibly, "on a related") subject - How would one go about arranging one of these meet-ups at ones own university (UEL in my case)? Cheers Darigan (talk) 11:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * We would absolutely love to arrange a meet-up at your university! Hopefully we'll be coming to loads soon and there's a whole heap of things we've got planned for each one. This is just the first run. There isn't a set agenda with timetables yet but between about 12:30-3pm we're going to be wandering about campus handing out leaflets and talking to people and from 6pm we'll be in the Student Union talking to people and encouraging them to join us! If you'd like to come, please do sign up and I'll email you the fixed agenda when we have it. (I'll also email you about your university some time after Wednesday as, like I said, we'd love to come!) All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks All Hail The Muffin - I'll put my name down as soon as I can confirm, cheers Darigan (talk) 13:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, All Hail The Muffin, I have been away for several days and have only just returned. I am also slightly superannuated, you might not want me on your team, although I still do a certain amount of editing. Thank you nevertheless. Dieter Simon (talk) 01:01, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry dude, I've not logged in for an age and missed the drive. I'm up north at uni but I'd love to come to another in future. Cheers! Nimoranthu (talk) 08:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)