User talk:BDD/Archive 6

Talk:The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
You have a reply. --George Ho (talk) 07:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you know nomination
Are there still any problems with Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Ellison? Not sure if there is more I need to do, it's been ages since I nominated something for DYK. Thanks, - Shudde  talk 08:40, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

That album
Support, but very small tentative request, isn't there a better word than "bastardization" - that's pretty strong language outside US. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ I didn't realize that. I've changed it to better reflect my intent for non-US users. --BDD (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ta, not too strong in itself but has a ring because the B-word itself is fighting talk and a strong insult in Aus/NZ/UK. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Inter Milan
Join the discussion!--Dipralb (talk) 12:28, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Duane Nellis
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, TB
T ofutwitch11  (T ALK ) 01:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Properly repersented
We're talking about the title where it specifically says must be in English. Must be the most common name, and WP diacritics states they must not be used when the most common version of the name given in most English RS's are accent free. It is not wrong to suggest a move, but it is certainly wrong as you state to exclude the proper title from the article (note not the title just the article). But as the way others edit it is also wrong to exclude the common/proper English name, as we are after all on the English Wikipedia (again not the title just the article). GAtechnical (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * My question on your talk page was genuine. I'm sorry you interpreted it otherwise. --BDD (talk) 19:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah sorry dude I thought you were taking the piss. GAtechnical (talk) 22:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/American Cheerleading
Good close, here - but when you do Non-admin close something simple like this, don't forget to remove the AFD tag. Thanks for helping out! UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey BDD; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thorp, Washington
Hi there. I noticed you had nominated Throp, Washington for good article status after I just nominated the article Omak, Washington there as well. Perhaps I could review Throp and you could review Omak if possible. Take care! TB randley  (review) 06:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see why not. I'm completely new to the GA process, however. I just happened across the Thorp article and thought it deserved recognition; I've never edited it myself. But sure, I'll take a look at Omak. --BDD (talk) 07:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. TB  randley  (review) 07:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Jan z Jani
Greetings. I saw that You have redirected the article to Jan z Jani and added this: its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. First, could You define what sources are unclear so I can help? Second, it is completely ignorant to not take to account correct spelling of the name on en:wiki. It have to be clear that those that voted for Jan z Jani have very poor knowledge about the subject which they prooved by thinking that de in Jan de Jani is french spelling, the lack of knowledge is almost embarrising. I will of course start discussion again about this again and then write to administrators to change to "Jan of Janie" as it is only correct (except latin spelling) spelling, unless You or someone else make necessary correction. Best regards, camdan (talk) 16:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi camdan, first of all, you should know that my having the article moved/renamed was not a matter of opinion for me. I closed the discussion as an uninvolved editor because the consensus was clear; you were the only one who favored the "Jan de Jani" spelling, and unanimity is not required for consensus. While I have no doubt you feel your position was stronger than the five editors who favored the move, a legitimate lack of sources for the old title meant their arguments were legitimate. While you are welcome to start a new RM with new information, if you can only restate your position, you're very unlikely to be successful, and the RM may be quickly closed on procedural grounds since the issue had just been discussed. If you think my close was procedurally invalid, you can take the case to move review, though please note that that is not a forum for re-arguing the initial question.
 * As for the tag on the article, I placed that because there are many sources listed in the External links section, though I suspect some of them are being used as references. If so, they should be converted to inline citations. If not, the section could use trimming, per WP:EL; it's taking up enough space as the entire body of the article. I've taken a first step on that. There were book sources listed as external links without actual links, so I moved them to a new Further reading section. I also noticed one of these sources was already used as an inline reference, so I removed it from the Further reading section. If you'd like any help working to convert these sources to inline citations, just let me know. --BDD (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I totally missed Your responce because You did not write back on my page as You should, so I would get notification of Your respond. As I did not see any respond from You, I judged it as ignorance. Reading Your responce now, I would never put in on the board like I did. Now I understand why Your reaction, I hope that You understand mine. So lets go back to the issue, I start with saying that Im greatfull for Your offer to help and I appologize for my strong reaction, it origin from that Im to tired of all errors in publications and of people that vote not having relevant knowledge. I have been reading subject of medieval history for 27 years and past 2 years, I had to come to conclusion that it will take 10 years to correct all errors I learn from publications, incl professors to go forward. What a waste of time but also what a good lesson! I study philosophy on Oxford whre they teach me to be open minded and critic and still Im so stupid! Two day ago I was arguing with PhD that was researching certain medieval matter for5 years and I gave him reference to 3 professors in Poland and asked him to confront - he gave me 4 hours of reading original sources and that I surrendered and again was stupid to trust 3 professors that stated nonsens. I cannot make any changes jet on several questions on wiki because the publication under supervision of prof. Piech, the absolute authority on the subject, will be published in 3-4 month time, so after that I will make more correctons on several subjects. I hope that this message will make You forgive me for my reaction, maybee I became allergic to errors ;) Thank You for taking time to answer and taking time for reading this! Sincerely, camdan (talk) 04:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I requested end of discussion on the board since I found Your respond and also finally received answer from Piotrus. I will now discuss matter in order way to find some general consensus that is also according to wiki rules so we will not have this kind of discussions again. If any question, You are most welcome, I also kindly ask You to write on my talk page whe You answer so I can see it, otheriwse I might not see Your respond and You also would maybe feel that there is no responce from my side which could possibly make You think that I ignore Your point of view. Sincerely, camdan (talk) 04:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. Like many editors, I prefer to keep discussion centralized instead of going back and forth between talk pages, so I left you a talkback, a form of notification that I had responded to you here. --BDD (talk) 22:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Jan z Jani". {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;"
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 16:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Michu (footballer)


A tag has been placed on Michu (footballer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, or user talk page from the article space.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DASHBot (talk) 00:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:General sanctions
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:General sanctions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Eagle (Roman military standard)#Second survey
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Eagle (Roman military standard). — Sowlos 09:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Paul Frampton cleanup
Hi BDD. I saw that you did a ref cleanup of the conviction section I rewrote at Paul Frampton. Thanks a lot for your help in working to improve the article. I assume you're aware of all the problems we had with an editor at BLP/N (Tramadul), who ended up permanently blocked following reports at AN/I and then SPI, which revealed he was using more than 10 accounts. Anyway, I just wanted to ask you something. As you're obviously aware, I attached the NY Times cite to every sentence in that section because I thought it was necessary, particuarly in light of the fact that (1) it's a BLP, (2) the content is contentious, and (3) we just got finished stopping all the vandalism that was going on. I just don't want any future editors to look at any unsourced sentences in that section and challenge or even remove them simply because no source is attached. I'm assuming they may not even look at the cite at the end of each paragraph and therefore not realize that it verifies the entire paragraph, not just the last sentence of each paragraph. I just wanted to let you know my concern and see if you can alleviate my concerns. Is there a rule that every sentence cannot or should not be cited? Fortunately, that NY Times article is extremely detailed and well-researched, so it's great to have such a solid reliable source. Anyway, thanks again for your help in maintaining the integrity of the article. Several editors have worked very hard over the past few days to stop all the problem editing. I notified all three admins involved in the original AN/I block of the editor about the rewrite I did, and then one of them protected the article for one year, which I was happy to see (even though I can no longer edit it as an IP haha). Hopefully, great editors like yourself can keep an eye on it. Have a great evening! --76.189.111.2 (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I made those changes per WP:CITEFOOT. With the offending editor blocked, I thought the footnotes after every sentence were excessive, though I appreciate the intent. Perhaps an HTML comment would be appropriate. We need not choose between an eyesore and unclear sourcing. Better yet, we could find another good source to include citations for. We're relying pretty heavily on that one as is. --BDD (talk) 23:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that NY Times story is an amazing source because no reporter was more familiar with the case than Swann. I'll support whatever you think is best as far as the cites. I just don't want to give any editors an easy excuse to improperly delete any of those sentences, particularly because each one was carefully written, based on the sourcing, to clearly explain this very complex incident chronologically and put it into proper context so readers can easily understand what happened. As I said, my only concern is editors seeing all those sentences that have no source attached. Based on the fact that I see you've been editing for over eight years and have a blank block log, I totally trust your judgement in how to handle the matter. That's a very impressive accomplishment. :) 76.189.111.2 (talk) 00:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. You've been doing good work yourself; you should consider creating an account. --BDD (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Thanks for the review; addressed or replied to all of your concerns.  TB randley  05:20, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hideki Tojo
Thank you for the heads-up; the article appears to be ok now, after the intervention of another admin. It is not clear to me what happened; the page history appears to show that I made the same move three times, which I am fairly certain I did not!--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 11:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your help on my rollover issues :p Mathijsvs (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Jan z Jani controversy
Two things:
 * First: I placed a reference on Jan z Jani describing the Medieval Latin/French/Dutch origins of that spelling of the name with sources that I had mentioned in the WP:RM/WP:DRN over the last few weeks. Please review.
 * Second: Apparently, after days of hearing User:camdan telling me my opinions didn't matter be I was (according to him) "uneducated" and that my contributions to the discussion were without value, he's now asking at WP:AN asked that I be banned from editing or participating in anything remotely related to Jan z Jani...and all because I responded (once) to call him a półgłówek after his three-day tirade of abusive belittling comments directed at silencing me for disagreeing with him. If you'd like to comment there, I'd appreciate it.--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit from 2010
The article Hazrat Najeeb Sultan just popped up in the list of articles needing copyedit. The page is a copy of a user page that was created in 2010, and the template moved along with the article.

Here is what I have found:

User:Luckyaim same as Hazrat Najeeb Sultan

User talk:Luckyaim same as Talk:Hazrat Najeeb Sultan

There is a link on the article talk page that points to User:Luckyaim's user page.

Something is messed up here. Any ideas?  Buster40004  Talk 21:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I wasn't quite sure what to think, but the situation seems to have been cleaned up. In case you were asking about this, if an old copy edit tag ever pops up like that during a drive, it's fair game and can be considered an old article for the purposes of the 50% bonus. It's happened before. --BDD (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Conflict Resolution
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Conflict Resolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Sealo
I would appreciate it if you responded to my comment at the above linked page.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  22:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Help
Hi BDD ! I'm a rookie Copy Editor. Is there a way to get my edits reviewed by a coordinator ? I've made a few changes to Acclaim Entertainment as part of the March Backlog Elimination drive. Please tell me if any review is required, thanks for your time !

Memento mori (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

CSS classes
Thank you for moving Ambox classes. Please would you revisit Wikipedia talk:Catalogue of CSS classes, where the same issues apply. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry Andy, that closing and moving was just a recognition of consensus, not a position on the question. The other closed RM will have to remain such. It may be appropriate for you to start a new RM on that page, however. The successful move can be part of your argument. I'm afraid I barely understand the substantial question, so my role will have to be restricted to that of umpire. --BDD (talk) 19:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem; thanks. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

SPI
Great minds think alike :P IRWolfie- (talk) 22:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers. I wish Twinkle could've detected the conflict somehow, but the duplication was easily fixed. Glad to know I'm not the only one suspicious here. Taking someone to SPI is never fun. --BDD (talk) 22:21, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You don't need to notify the parties, and it's generally a bad idea as it just leads to a lot of shouting. I've asked for CU, so what they say isn't really that relevant. IRWolfie- (talk) 22:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * As you can see from Josophie's comment at SPI. It's not worth the effort. They just deny it without adding to the discussion. IRWolfie- (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on MediaWiki talk:Bad image list
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on MediaWiki talk:Bad image list. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Controversial close of Talk:Wolverine (comics)
Please revert the move from Wolverine (character) to Wolverine (comics) and reopen the move discussion so that it can be debated more thoroughly, until a clear consensus emerges. Non-admins should not close controversial RfCs like that one. There were four editors supporting the (character) title, counting both move discussions. Diego (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I've never heard of closing editors aggregating RMs like that, nor does that view seem to be supported by documentation at WP:RMCI. I've seen editors participating in an RM make arguments from the result of previous ones, but what you're asking seems extraordinary. All I did, as an uninvolved editor, was look over the current discussion to see if there was consensus. There was, so I acted accordingly. I don't think reversion would be appropriate. You're welcome to start a new RM or take the matter to WP:MRV, though note that the latter is not a forum for re-arguing the merits of a discussion; you'd have to argue for your opinion that votes in older RMs should be counted. I don't think you'll have much success with that option, but it is available to you. --BDD (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Concerns with User:FoCuSandLeArN
I've raised some concerns with 's copy edits over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/March 2013. I don't know the best way to handle this, but I think all of his copy edits will need to be reviewed and the template either replaced or the article fixed. Ryan Vesey 22:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Happy Easter!!!
So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Review provided.  TB randley  23:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reminder.  TB randley  01:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

?
Hi, you're a good good editor, but is this the best response? if you hadn't left text there I would have contacted an admin to close it. A single edit user who can capably go straight to WP:RM is obviously either a banned editor or a sock, and a banned editor or sock who finds antisemitism funny isn't the sort of banned editor or sock we need to feed. Could you perhaps pull your support, then it's easier to ask it to be closed as in bad faith. Just a suggestion... In ictu oculi (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's just an April Fools' Day joke. Whoever the editor was (not me, of course), his or her user name is "April1" backwards. I don't think it's about finding antisemitism funny; I saw it as a lampoon of legalistic interpretations of Wikipedia rules, as though WP:USEENGLISH means we have to translate everything on sight. See also today's WP:RFA. You can still ask to have the RM closed, or even do an RM yourself. It's obviously a joke, so maybe we could let it run the duration of the day. --BDD (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm aware it's April Fools. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I hope I haven't offended. Go ahead and close if you find the joke in poor taste. --BDD (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's okay, you haven't. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Help for Calico Dome
I have recently created new article on Calico Dome and listed it at DYK nominations. I am not so good at english so request you to copyedit whole article. It is a small article on a geodesic dome situated at Ahmedabad, India. Thanks in advance. Cheers. --Nizil (talk) 19:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks like someone has already copy edited it. Do you think it needs further review? --BDD (talk) 23:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, someone else have copyedited it but still I wish you to review it as it is going for DYK. You may improve it further. --Nizil (talk) 05:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

In regards to your recent response(s) on WP:RFD for "List of bus route"-related articles
Hi,

A recent discussion that you had participated in on Redirects for discussion regarding articles with "List of bus routes in..." has been relisted due to the amount of redundant requests submitted. This discussion has been centralized and has been posted at Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 4. You input regarding these redirects as a whole is welcomed. Steel1943 (talk) 02:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

John Wilmot move
Hello BDD. I see you already opened a move discussion at Talk:John Wilmot, so I removed your proposal from the technical move list. I don't see any problem with it myself. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hm. Actually, Anthony Appleyard did that. May have been his polite way of contesting without actually opposing. I'll check in with him. --BDD (talk) 22:03, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PIGS (economics)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PIGS (economics). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2012 Packers–Seahawks officiating controversy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2012 Packers–Seahawks officiating controversy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
BDD, thanks for advising me on moving my UP. I'm doing that right now! TheOneSean &#124; Talk to me 23:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Consensus reached on "Integrational Linguistics"
It seems that consensus has been reached and the last idea formulated by BDD ("we move the existing Integrational linguistics to Integrationism (currently a redirect to Racial integration with one mainspace link) and this page to Integrational linguistics, after fixing the incoming links") can be adopted as a solution. Would Ignatzmice or BDD go ahead with the move? Thanks and regards, Mo Tat 2013 (talk) 20:19, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I generally don't close RM discussions that I've participated in, even when consensus is unanimous. But given that this was initially a dispute between you and Ignatzmice, that there seems to be unanimous consent here, and that the request has already gone beyond a full listing period, I can probably safely do so. I'll take care of that now. --BDD (talk) 21:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Please stop
... tagging articles as unreferenced when they're full of references. It's disruptive, and is wasting my time reverting you. — kwami (talk) 21:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Have I tagged anything as unreferenced that has sources? I know I've tagged articles with no footnotes when they have references but not footnotes. --BDD (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I see you've actually removed unreferenced tags from articles lacking references, such as here. Could you explain your rationale here? --BDD (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You tagged a couple language and family articles as having no refs when they reference and link to Ethnologue. Granted, Ethn. isn't the best source, but the articles are at least referenced to a site which often has further references. Burmeso was one. You could tag them as 'ref improve', I suppose, but we have thousands of articles which are minimally referenced to Ethnologue like this, so I don't think it would accomplish anything.
 * The "no footnote" tag is a misnomer: According to the text it displays to the reader, it isn't actually for no footnotes, but for no inline citations. Those articles have inline citations. — kwami (talk) 21:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I see. I actually hadn't considered that parenthetical citations without ref tags could be considered inline citations. I suppose format footnotes would be more appropriate for those articles.
 * Looking further into the Burmeso article, for example, there's only an indirect link to Ethnologue (this itself contains a link to the Ethnologue page).
 * I still don't like the sourcing of these articles. Parenthetical citations may be acceptable, but I think wiki-formatted footnotes rule for a reason. Still, you make fair points. I'll stop adding those tags. --BDD (talk) 22:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that the references and formatting are subpar. Still, I spent several years creating stubs or redirects for all of the 7,000+ languages which have ISO codes, and maybe a thousand which don't, and in order to get through that they were necessarily rather minimal. I've tried organizing a project to verify the numbers of speakers, add the date of the publication the numbers are taken from, and add a proper footnote once that is done, but that would require bot support to get through it easily, and adding support for footnotes has proven to be too controversial for bot approval. I partially got around that by using the language template to trick another bot into adding the reference sections, which got a couple people really upset, but I haven't had any takers on teaming up to verify the data in 7,000 articles. — kwami (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, this is good work you've done, but it really might be worthwhile to find some time to improve the referencing. I notice at Meriam language another editor added a no footnotes tag a few years back. I've removed it (and at least now, that one actually has a wiki-formatted footnote), but other well-meaning editors may continue to tag these articles as they come across them in their current state. --BDD (talk) 22:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Adding footnotes would solve that, but the articles need to be reviewed first, as some of the numbers have been fudged. — kwami (talk) 06:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Long story short...
Are you ready to be nominated at WP:RFA? Steel1943 (talk) 01:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Anyways, if you are, please respond on my talk page (so I do not miss your message in my flood of pages on my watchlist.) Another long story short, I thought you were an admin one of the first days I had edited Wikipedia, and when I realized that you were not, I was a bit shocked. Steel1943  (talk) 07:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Response moved from Steel1943's talk page.
 * , I get what you mean. I should be able to do so in the next day or so, the earliest being about 8 hours from now. Steel1943  (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Video and Interactive Tutorials
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Video and Interactive Tutorials. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Many thanks, BDD, for taking care of the "Integrational linguistics" move! Best, Mo Tat 2013 (talk) 05:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Steel1943 (talk) 08:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Radamel Falcao
Hi BDD. I see you've closed the move request but the article is still at the old title; are you able to make the move? As it was previously at the the title Radamel Falcao I think an admin may need to make the move, is there a procedure for notifying one, or wait until they see the closed discussion where one will move it? Cheers. Zarcadia (talk) 19:54, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've tagged it with db-move, per the instructions for non-admin RM closes at Requested moves/Closing instructions. So the redirect holding up the move is already on the admins' radar for speedy deletion. Most admins who delete pages like that go ahead and make the move, but I'm watching it in case they don't. I'll follow up after the move as necessary. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Excellent, looks like you're on top of things! Zarcadia (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

RfA
--Cúchullain t/ c 20:01, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Good luck BDD! Your RFA nomination has now been posted on WP:RFA. Looks like there's a couple of questions on there for ya'. Here goes! :) Steel1943  (talk) 21:20, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops. I guess I was a bit too excited to see your RfA start. I forgot you need to accept the nomination first! Steel1943  (talk) 21:29, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

BDD, I hope you accept. I look forward to supporting you. Ryan Vesey 21:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if non-admins can vote, but if they can I would heartily recommend BDD, a great editor who I see a lot in requested moves who is always unbiased and looking to improve the Wikipedia project. Zarcadia (talk) 22:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You bet non-admins can vote; they can also nominate!  Mini  apolis  01:03, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * (non-admin co-nominator) You said it! Steel1943  (talk) 01:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

After supporting you where it counts :-), I just wanted to wish you the very best of luck. It's a stressful week, but try to keep busy with other stuff and you'll get through it fine. All the best,  Mini  apolis  01:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't expect it to go public so fast, I hadn't even added my signature to the "support" section! Miniapolis has it right. Both Steel and I will be staying on top of it so just let one or the other of us know if you need anything.--Cúchullain t/ c 01:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly! BDD accepted the nomination, and it started ... it all happened in a matter of minutes! So essentially, ditto to Cuchullain's comment! Steel1943  (talk) 02:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well BDD it seems that a rush of people like you. Well deserved. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:04, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I've mentioned you in a discussion on ANI
here. Best regards LittleBen (talk) 07:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I mentioned you too. You're not the only one who noticed the unusual nature of LBW's "reliable sources" template. He obviously cherry-picked sources that he knows don't use diacritics, even though reliable sources for diacritics can easily be found. He has been violating his own TBAN literally hundreds of times but has to date only been blocked twice ... Konjakupoet (talk) 07:54, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you both for bringing this to my attention. I'll look into this more closely in the next couple of days and see if I have anything to add to the ANI discussion. --BDD (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion about seemingly abandoned copy-edit requests
Hi BDD, I've made a suggestion here about requests that are accepted and apparently abandoned. Your thoughts are most welcome. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Michael Jackson and Bubbles (sculpture)
Hello! Your submission of Michael Jackson and Bubbles (sculpture) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  12:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Untitled
Where do I ask you a question or leave you a message Onelawforall (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Line
Hi BDD! Regarding your post on Reward board, I'd be happy to make the changes, but I suggest you first you post on Talk:The Line and/or Talk:Line to make sure there's consensus for this move. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:31, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I fixed a few articles that should link to The Line (TV series), and noticed that many of the links to The Line are coming from Template:Heroes season 2. GoingBatty (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose I should just put in an RM, yes. I had already modified the template to point to the disambiguated title, but I was reverted since it was causing unbolding on the page itself. Trivial, but that's true until the page is moved. If you'd like to watch the RM, you can still have priority for collecting the reward, but if I finish Heroes before the RM closes, I'll do it. --BDD (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll keep an eye out - thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of disasters in the United States by death toll
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of disasters in the United States by death toll. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

May need eyes
I'm honestly not quite sure what to make of it (hence I have not taken this to any formal review processes), but there is an interesting though rather strange article at Taiwanese Chicken Beheading Rituals. The article apparently included this picture at one point. I have my doubts that the picture is actually Public Domain, but I'm not sure what to do with that. I usually leave the licensing stuff to others more knowledgeable. Wilhelm Meis (&#9742; Diskuss &#124; &#x270D; Beiträge) 04:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is appropriately licensed. I don't know the copyright laws of Taiwan offhand, but I doubt a work from 1999 is going to be in the public domain unless specifically released as such. I'll take a closer look later. --BDD (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Thought I would say congrats before it became official. You're sure to forget the existence of RMnac soon enough! Steel1943 (talk) 23:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, a much deserved congratulations! You will do great in your new role.--Cúchullain t/ c 23:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I've closed your RfA as successful. Good luck with your new tools.  Maxim (talk)  00:15, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations, BDD! There is a lot of talk about what an ordeal RfA's have become, but they can also be an opportunity to collect a lot of compliments. I imagine you enjoyed yours. RockMagnetist (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It has been a longer road than most realize. I'm sure you will put the new tools to good use, friend.  Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 00:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats. - Dank (push to talk) 00:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! :) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 01:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. I look forward to seeing you around the AFD's and now I fully expect you to be my CSD 'admin slave' (kidding). Mkdw talk 01:34, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations. Best of luck, Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 01:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations (and enjoy your recovery! :-)) All the best,  Mini  apolis  02:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers, and sorry for ranting in your RfA. :) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  03:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 03:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * High five to you, my friend. Thank you for your continued dedication and hard work! MJ94 (talk) 05:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, and thanks for your efforts to improve English Wikipedia! Northamerica1000(talk) 11:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats! :) Arctic   Kangaroo  12:04, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Dang, looks like I missed the party. Congratulations on your demotion! ;) —Torchiest talkedits 12:58, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations - good luck out there! hmssolent \You rang? ship's log 14:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats - makes me not the newest kid on the block :-) NtheP (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations and all the best with the new tools. Tolly  4  bolly  19:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations - very excited for you. Nothing like a good mop to complement your wardrobe! Tiggerjay (talk) 14:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Northamerica1000(talk) 11:50, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Taiwan relations moves done
Hey BDD. Congratulations on your new responsibilities! Don't go crazy. While I'm here, I closed that move discussion at Talk:Belize–Taiwan relations which you opened. The articles are now moved, but their text may need updating to go with the new title. Also, the move dialog asks me if I want to update Wikidata. Not sure whether ignoring that will have good results or not. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

XF Moves
That's fine, I'll be able to move the rest of the pages in the morning. WikiRedactor (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Northamerica1000(talk) 01:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * }