User talk:Baffle gab1978/Archives/2022

Autobahn
Thanks for copy-editing Autobahn for me. :) I really appreciate it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem; it's an interesting article and I enjoyed copy-editing it. Good luck with your planned GA nomination. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  18:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Question on GOCE template
@Baffle gab1978 I'd like to post the template GOCEtb on the talk pages of editors who've requested a copy edit when I'm finished. A number of them have inquired, particularly when their request is removed. But I cannot figure out how to make the template work. How do I add the article title? Thanks Cleveland Todd (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @Cleveland Todd: You need to add the  parameter in the template. Be sure to add the   parameter as well. You can learn more by reading the documentation at GOCEtb. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:01, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That's pretty easy, all I had to do was click the link on the Templates page. Cleveland Todd (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Sima Yi
Thank you for taking care of Sima Yi at GOCE/R. It originated as a request on my talk page which I diverted to the Guild so I feel partially responsible for your ordeal. Consider this the verbal equivalent of a. Ruбlov (talk) 13:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. There's no need to feel guilty, we're all volunteers on Wikipedia. I did feel overwhelmed by the amount of footnotes n the article to convert but I found a way to convert them quickly, which made the copy-edit much easier. I learnt A Thing, the article got improved and I also gained almost 17,000 words for the drive, so it's not all bad! :) Thanks again and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  18:50, 30 March 2022 (UTC).

RE: review of Hippopotamus for GOCE drive
I saw that you reviewed my edits to Hippopotamus as partly done, and I agree I was focusing much less on style and flow than I should have. Thank you for your work reviewing and I will be sure to focus on these areas more in the future rather than simply correcting grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. I've gone through and done another copy edit on the article. If you have the time, would you be willing to review again and let me know if you would consider it complete now? I appreciate your time and apologies for the sloppy work. Sushi725 (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. No worries, thank you for revisiting the article, I'll be happy to re-review your copy-edit there. I'll take a look tonight but I may not get there before the drive closes. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:43, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Baffle gab1978, no problem at all – I am fine even if its not counted for the drive or if you don't have time to re-review. Sushi725 (talk) 21:57, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I re-reviewed the c/e; I agree your new changes have made the text less awkward, so I've marked it Done. I was concerned because this is a featured article and the prose should be of a professional level. I did some work on the "blood-sweat" paragraph, which I thought was still awkward in places, and removed unnecessary instances of "that". Style and flow can be just as important as grammar and spelling; things like convoluted text and redundancy can really make a difference. Maybe switching from the Visual Editor to the source editor may be helpful; you can then edit by section, which I find reduces distractions (although the wiki-markup can often get in the way). Anyway, I hope to see you around the Guild in future; good luck and happy editing,  Baffle☿gab  01:10, 1 April 2022 (UTC).
 * @Baffle gab1978, thank you so much for your time and attention, and for further improving the article. I was tackling the Requests list to try and help clean them up, but have since realized that those require much more attention as many are candidates for FA and GA. Now that I know that I will try to spend some time building my skills by cleaning up articles that have simply been tagged with copy edit. I will revisit the other requested articles I copy-edited as well to see if I can make further improvements. Thanks again and yes, I hope to continue to be active in the Guild! Sushi725 (talk) 16:38, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Removing seasons
Hi, thanks for your copyedit of A.C. Monza! I wanted to ask: is there a specific reason why you replaced "summer" and "winter" with "mid" and "late"? Thanks, Nehme1499 11:39, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * See MOS:SEASON. The winter season comes at different times of year in the northern and southern hemispheres, so it is best to be unambiguous. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, thanks. Nehme1499 17:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Also re: GOCE drive "Partly Done" marking
Hi! I noticed that you marked my copy-edit of Wanrong as Partly Done, and said that there were few changes made and text was still awkward in some places. Would you mind being more descriptive of what specific changes would have made this fully "Done", and what sections left you struggling re: readability? I definitely agree that the text was pretty dense, but I don't see removing sourced material as within the scope of copy-editing for these drives, and looking at the diffs I'm not sure what else should have been modified. Thanks! ɯ ɐ ɔ 💬 05:15, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message and copy-edits. Your changes are useful and improved the article but I marked the c/e partly done because I thought there were too few changes made to a >6,000 word article in only two edits (diff). Some long-winded passages of text could have been condensed, there are contractions and unnecessary instances of "that" that could have been removed, and I noted a lengthy direct quotation that might have been placed in blockquotes. You're correct in saying cited material shouldn't be removed without a good reason. I hope that's useful feedback; please don't feel discouraged by my comments. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:07, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Definitely not discouraged but I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree here. I might have been more lighthanded on edits because without being a subject-matter expert, it's hard to tell what information could have been condensed further without causing controversy/not abiding by WP:CON. This is the first time I've encountered a comment like this on one of my copy-edits, so I appreciate the gradient of done-ness here and it'll definitely be something I keep in mind for the future, I suppose. ɯ ɐ ɔ  💬 02:29, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Newsletters/March 2022
Hello, Baffle gab1978,

This page you created has been tagged for speedy deletion and you should have received a notice but you didn't. If you agree with the tagging, maybe you could tag it CSD G7. Let me know if you still have a use for the page. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi ; no problem, I'm aware of the G7 tag and I agree the page is surplus to requirement. I was about to tag it myself but Reidgreg got there first. Please see the conversation here. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:10, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

GOCE script
I may have asked you before, but would you like me to email you the script and instructions? All the best,  Mini  apolis  17:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Miniapolis; yes please, it might come in handy one day, although I don't use Windows as my daily OS so I may need to use it offline. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  07:02, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Check your inbox. I sent it to the email address I have instead of through WP, attaching the script (as a text file) and instructions. Let me know if you don't get it, and I'll resend the whole shebang through WP. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Miniapolis; I've received the email and downloaded the files. I'll have a play and to run it offline with old data. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Check your inbox (again)
 Mini  apolis  22:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply; done and notified. All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

GOCE drive numbers
Hi, how do I update the numbers for outstanding tags on the drive/blitz pages? Thanks, &#124; Zippybonzo &#124;  Talk &#124;  11:47, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi ; first open the subsec "Progress --> Progress chart". You'll find both the graph (top) and the chart (below). Next, look at the Tagged articles category page; you'll see a table of itemized months on the right (this table is also on the drive page). I find it easiest to work with both pages open in different browser windows.


 * Look at the tags table and note both the target months and the grand total. Add together the totals for the target months.

Find the first two lines that look like this:
 * |x=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30


 * y=185,180,176,173,167,165,
 * The total number of target articles goes at the end of the "y=" line, followed by a comma.
 * Next, find the second set of lines that look like the above; the total number of articles in the c/e category also goes at the end of the "y=" line, followed by a comma.


 * Next, scroll to the progress chart; you'll find explanatory notes on the page. Find the first line that looks like

First, remove  <!--  from the top line and move it to the following line; this hides the remainder of the table.
 * The total number of articles in the target months goes in the first space; remove "xx".
 * The total number of articles in the c/e category goes in the second space; remove "xx".
 * On the line below, put the total number of articles in the c/e category in the third space on the line below; this line will be used for the following day's update.
 * Finally, save your edit. Probably best to preview before saving!

I hope that's clear enough; do get back to me if there's anything you don't understand. Blitz pages are very similar. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:59, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Also, what time do the figures get updated? At the end of the day or the start of the day. &#124; Zippybonzo &#124;  Talk</b> &#124;  08:21, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * , daily updates are done at or soon after 00:00 UTC, or as close to midnight UTC as possible. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:40, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks
I came here to post barnstar, but saw a message here, which led me change my thoughts. Anyways, thanks a lot for your work on Ashok Mahto gang.Admantine123 (talk) 09:26, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * no worries, happy to help. Yes, I'm not a big fan of barnstars... :) Good luck with the article and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:03, 20 July 2022 (UTC).

Huh?
"If it was tagged in Add target months here"...in terms of listing my total articles, what does that mean?--Bddmagic (talk) 19:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * , oops, obviously a placeholder text. It should read "if it was tagged in the target month(s)"; I've corrected the text now, thanks for pointing it out. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:09, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Copyedit
Hi, Dear Future Husband already passed its FAC so the copyedit will no longer be necessary. Sorry I forgot to remove it from the requests page. It is to appear on the main page very, very soon so it is probably best it stays stable. Thanks.--<b style="color:purple">N</b><b style="color:teal">Ø</b> 12:25, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. A copy-edit doesn't make the article unstable since I'm not adding or removing material in a major way. An article can always be improved, even if it's an FA. IMO, the FA process isn't as rigorous as it should be, and I think this article was waved through rather too easily –&#32;FAs are supposed to be the best-written articles on Wikipedia and Dear Future Husband clearly isn't one of those. I found loads to copy-edit so there's probably loads more to be done. There's no reason for the GOCE to decline this request but I've placed the request on hold. You can withdraw the request (just mark it with withdrawn) –&#32;or I can pause for a few days and return when it's off the main page. Whatever you decide, I hope the c/e has been useful anyway. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The point is the request was left there accidentally as I forgot about it. Since it did take me a whopping three months to get a response, I think it would be best if your precious time is spent on an article that needs it more. Hope there are no hard feelings!--<b style="color:purple">N</b><b style="color:teal">Ø</b> 02:31, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * thanks; no feelings were hurt. Congratulations on getting it to FA status; I know it's a lot of work. All requests are worthy of my time, including new FAs. I accepted your request in good faith and I've already spent some hours working on it, which I hope was worthwhile and won't get reverted. Thanks for withdrawing the request. I'm sorry about the three-month wait but we're short of skilled copy-editors at this time. Good luck and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:18, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Pl. do suggest, requesting revisit and input
Greetings @Baffle gab1978

Many thanks for your recent GOCE support to the article Anarkali. There is some small RS issue while using an alternative term


 * : Earlier: ".. The earliest Western accounts about the love  affair between Salim and Anarkali were written by two British travellers .."     after your change →  ".. The earliest Western accounts about the sexual  relationship between Salim and Anarkali were written by British travellers"
 * : Earlier: ".. Anarkali had an affair with Prince Salim (Jahangir). .." after your change →  ".. Anarkali had a  sexual relationship with Prince Salim (Jahangir). .."

While I am all for calling spade a spade, over the previous week I explored good number of scholarly RS, in this specific case of Anarkali legend the most scholarship seem to find flaws, hence IMHO its seems, it would be difficult to use wording 'sexual relationship' in place of affair / love affair in Wikivoice specially when RS scholarly source do not seem to support such contention but likely to get challenged at some point. If you find wording affair / love affair not comfortable then may be we will need to think over some other phrase.

IMHO In fiction section some literature or movie review refers or I get any scholarly source then in such instance we should go for phrase 'sexual relationship'.

Pl. do suggest, requesting your revisit and inputs

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for your message. Obviously I didn't check the sources but I changed "affair / love affair" to "sexual relationship" because the former is a euphemism that de facto means a sexual relationship with a person other than one's regular partner or spouse. If multiple RSs say "affair" or "love affair", I'd assume the relationship was sexual but I haven't seen those sources so it's difficult to judge the context of their words. There could also be a cultural difference; "affair / love affair" might mean something else in South Asia. If there's no evidence the relationship was sexual, you could use "a friendship", "a close friendship", "an intimate friendship" or "a platonic relationship". Feel free to change the article as you wish. Good luck and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:18, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks @Baffle gab1978 for all your support and understanding. I wished to give you a little more background which will help other users too, but I am bit distracted. As I write more I will keep you informed. Thanks and warm regards &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 05:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Great Wave
I hope you are going to check through your edits very carefully. So far you seem to be introducing new mistakes. Johnbod (talk) 00:27, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. Please indicate these new mistakes and I'll go back to the original and fix them. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No, you look first. Johnbod (talk) 00:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * , that's not a helpful reply. I do my best not to make mistakes, though they sometimes arise where text isn't clear and can be misinterpreted. If I've misinterpreted something, please indicate.  Baffle☿gab  00:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No, you just made careless mistakes. If you can't see them if you actually check your work then you shouldn't be doing copyediting. Johnbod (talk) 03:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I went over the edits and found no obvious mistakes. I could fix it if you could let me know.
 * Anyway, I came here to thank : Great Wave is quite a sizable article and I was worried no one at GOCE would pick it up, but you've done a great work on the article. Many thanks! — Golden  call me maybe? 05:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries, ; one does one's best and sometimes one makes a silly typo, though I went back and fixed them. :) I'm glad the c/e was useful. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeh, right: " where it inspired f the Impressionists. Several museums throughout the world hold copies of The Great Wave, many of which came from 9th-century, private, collections of Japanese prints." But I see one of you found those. Johnbod (talk) 12:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

SuperSonics c/e
Thank you for the copyedit on the Seattle SuperSonics article. It is very appreciated. Soulbust (talk) 03:48, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries, good luck with your development of the article. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  15:52, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Iyarkai
Hi there, you did a copy edit for this page. When I went over the page, I feel that it is flooded with references (is 1 better than 2?) and the flow of sentences/grammar is messed up/awkward. I don't know if it can become a good article (is it long enough), should i just wait till the film is reviewed? DareshMohan (talk) 02:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. I think the article is long enough for a GA. I agree some of the article is awkwardly phrased, and a GA reviewer may fail it for that reason. My copy-edit was in March '22 here, since when there have been many edits, mainly from you and one other editor. I don't think it's "flooded with references" –&#32;I've seen lots worse –&#32;but if you want to remove refs, you should remove the least-reliable ones (see this guideline) and perhaps some of the non-English ones where reliable English sources exist. You should probably discuss it with the other main editor, who is experienced with Good Articles. Good luck and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi. One more question: do I need source the cast? The IMDb entry has some wrong character names meaning that other online databases will have wrong information. The page currently has the credits as the source. Currently, all the people named in the intro credits are listed. Should the unnamed characters be removed? Also should original research be removed. The article says based on "Vennira Iravugal", but couldn't find that in English-language sources. DareshMohan (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)


 * , have a look at the MOS guidelines for films. I'll answer your questions separately:
 * a) Yes. Using the film credits as a source for the cast section is fine; it's a primary source but is considered reliable. Any additional text other than the credited names and roles must be cited by reliable, third-party sources. This includes uncredited roles. The IMDB is not generally considered reliable.
 * b) Yes, the names of the actors who play foreigners should be removed unless they can be reliably sourced. The current source here doesn't mention any actors' names, it merely says: "The coloured and white foreigners who play minor parts add levity to the proceedings. As far as one can remember this is the first time that foreigners are used in an appealing and plausible manner in a Tamil film."
 * c) Original research should always be removed if it cannot be reliably sourced. Non-English sources can be used as long as they're reliable (see above); if the text "It is loosely based on "Vennira Iravugal", the Tamil translation of Fyodor Dostoevsky's 1848 short story "White Nights" "—which is only present in the lead btw—can't be found in any reliable source in any language, it should be removed.
 * I hope that's useful. Good luck with the article. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you so much for everything. The introduction credits do not list the character names, but just the names of cast members. Other than "Marudhu, Mukundan, Nancy, Mercy, priest, Nandu", the rest of the names are not in reviews. Should the other roles be removed (Hawala Arumugam, Nandu, magician, satan preacher, dancer) because they are all original research? Also, should names like "priest" be linked to its wikipedia article.


 * Can I include omit/delete all the minor roles because they are original research? Sorry if that was confusing but currently the character names of Senthil,Chinni Jayanth, Crane Manohar, Suruli Manohar, Kumaravel, Abhinayashree, Freddy Odiyo, Antony Paul, and Ahmad Adam are unsourced. DareshMohan (talk) 00:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
 * , what about the closing credits? Closing credits usually list characters' names. If the actors are credited in either credits, they can be included; if not, and if they cannot be properly sourced, they should be removed. No, we don't need to wikilink "priest", "satan preacher (which should be "Satan preacher", btw), "magician" and "dancer"; most—if not all—readers know what these words mean. See here. I've already answered you last question in my reply above; if it's not in the credits (either end) and you can't source it, take it out. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok. will remove. Found the end credits (only mentions story credits, etc.), but generally in this language of Indian films, the character names are not cited in both the beginning and end credits.DareshMohan (talk) 00:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Blake's 7 book by Nazzaro & Wells
Hello Baffle gab1978 -- I note you wrote nearly a decade ago on the talk page of the B7 episode list that you had a copy of the Joe Nazzaro & Sheelagh Wells book, and wondered if you still had it to hand? I've been working with editors from Women in Red to save Mary Ridge (director of "Terminal", "Blake" and other episodes) from deletion; now safe, I think, but if the Nazzaro & Wells book had any further details about her or the direction in her episodes that might be helpful. Sorry to bother you out of the blue, but I've found the book is now retailing secondhand for ~£50 and that's more than I'm prepared to spend even for Blake's 7! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 03:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message, wow that was a long time ago! Yes, I still have that book but I'm not sure what it says about Ridge, I know she talks about the B7 eps she directed but idk if it mentions her other work. I'll drag it out tonight and have a look; if there's anything useful I could scan the pages and e-mail them to you. I think I also have the Tony Attwood book somewhere. Well done for saving the article. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  07:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Baffle gab1978 -- Sometimes I can't believe how long I've been on Wikipedia! Scans of key pages would be extremely helpful if you had a moment, particularly if it could be used to expand her other career elements, which are a bit thin. Thanks a lot! Espresso Addict (talk) 18:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , I've just flicked through the Wells/Nazzaro book; sadly it doesn't give any useful biographical information about Mary Ridge, it's almost all about production of the episodes. Neither does the Attwood book, though it has short sections covering the writers and actors. Not a lot of use for the Ridge article, really!
 * I think I have one of the Together Again cassettes, in which Ridge talks with other B7 crew and actors. I don't have it in digital format though. It would be a primary source, and maybe not a reliable one. It might have been uploaded to YouTube or elsewhere on the web but obviously I can't link to it here. I may dust off and wind up a cassette player one night this week... Sorry I can't really help but good luck with fleshing out the article. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Never mind -- thanks muchly for looking. I'll look out for the Together Again episode (I think it's this one ); Judith Proctor's review suggests it might have some usable quotations. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , I've just listened to the tape (although my cassette player tried to eat it!). Most of Ridge's talk is anecdotes about the show's production; much of it also appears in the book. There's a short section where she briefly talks about her theatrical background; if you think this might be useful, I can capture it and send it by e-mail. Or I could transcribe it; it's only a minute or so long. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi there -- Impressed you still have a working cassette player! I think mine got lost in our move up to Scotland. I don't think there's a problem with quoting Ridge on her own background as long as the text makes it obvious that's what one is doing, so either would be wonderful! I believe you can't e-mail attachments via the mail this user link -- I'd have to mail you and then you reply. Let me know if you'd like me to do this. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , that's nothing, I have a Betamax VCR gathering dust too! :D Cassette players can still be bought, I saw a new, CD-and-cassette-based "ghetto blaster" for sale locally last week. Not bad for a "dead" format! :D Anyway I've captured the audio of Ridge (58 secs), I've e-mailed you from WP. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  10:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks -- I've just responded, sorry for the delay. Might have to look into buying some form of tape to mp3 converter; I've got a lot of oop language tapes that I'd love to resurrect. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 00:52, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries; I've sent you the file - it is very short but I hope it's useful. I just sample using a cable into my computer's sound card, though if you don't have a cassette player to start with, a converter would be a good way to go. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  09:55, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks! I've added a few tidbits to the article. I've no idea how one goes about adding fair use media samples to articles so if you think that's appropriate, go for it! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * PS Are you sure it was David Moloney? Hermit states Pennant Roberts and Judith Proctor's usually quite good with details. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:36, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, you're correct, it is Pennant Roberts, not Moloney. My mistake, sorry, I didn't intend to mislead you. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

IPBE
I've extended it for two years. Cheers, OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Ohnoitsjamie. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  18:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Iyarkai
Sorry for asking so much, but do you know the approximate time the film article will get a review? Months? DareshMohan (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , no I don't. There's no request of that title listed at REQ. You may be asking the incorrect person.  Baffle☿gab  00:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the confusion, I meant GA review (Good_article_nominations). DareshMohan (talk) 04:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * , then you are asking the wrong person; I'm not a GA reviewer. You should ask somebody who works on the GA process. I can't help you with that, sorry, but my best guess is "when a reviewer chooses to review it". Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  12:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Return to Lumines: Puzzle Fusion?
I made some changes based on what was requested of me on the second FAC, but now they are asking I go to GOCE again for the changes that were required. Most of the order of information on top of adding new information. I wish I knew exactly what makes the writing unprofessional or not engaging.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 12:44, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. Writing high-quality, encyclopaedic prose is difficult, though I can't comment on the current FA review.


 * I notice a few things going on with this article. I'll walk you through the first paragraph of the "Develoment and release" section here (permalink) minus refs as I'd copy-edit it; this paragraph has redundancy, missing information, irrelevant information and waffle or padding—words that are used to increase the word count but add no meaningful information:

Lumines: Puzzle Fusion was the first game developed by Q Entertainment with Tetsuya Mizuguchi serving as the designer.
 * "serving" is redundant; Mizuguchi was the designer. Cut out "serving".
 * Ok so subtle redundancies don't make a better article. I'll look out for them more. Thank you.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Mizuguchi was part of the studio's founding following his departure from Sega after they dissolved United Game Artists, Mizuguchi's previous venture.
 * Why is Mizuguchi's past career relevant here? The lede also mentions he worked at Sega; why should we care?
 * In the FAC, David Fuch thought it was necessary to reference United Game Artist (previously AM9) because Mizuguchi's previous works under that company/studio such as Rez and Space Channel 5 were mentioned in the article. It was because of the closure of his subsidiary company that led him to quit Sega and found his own studio (Q Entertainment). Lumines ended up being the first game released under his new company. It's mostly background or pre-development information. Do you still consider it trivial in the article? Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks; i think it's fairly trivial but if it had an effect on the development of Lumines, by all means leave it in. You could explain

Mizuguchi is a co-founder but try not to add lots of detail there.  Baffle☿gab  04:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

The game was developed by six people over the course of a year.
 * "over the course of" is waffle. --> "The game was developed in a year by six people", "The game was developed by six people in a year", or "Six people developed the game in a year".
 * Understood. I thought it was risky to interpret "over a year" as just "a year". but I'll keep this advice in mind. Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

By the time the game was officially announced at the Tokyo Game Show 2004, it was 75% complete.
 * Why "by the time..."? Was the game's development delayed? If it was delayed, say so; otherwise --> "The game was 75% complete when it was announced at the Tokyo Game Show 2004.
 * I see, so "by the time" adds other implications. I didn't know this at all. Thank you again. I'll look out for any verbiage that may imply something else.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, "by the time" usually emphasizes that someone or something is late or delayed: we might say "By the time my bus arrived, night had fallen" or "By the time I arrived at work, I was late".  Baffle☿gab  04:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Mizuguchi was inspired to make a puzzle game with music when he first learned about the PlayStation Portable (PSP). He described the PSP as an "interactive Walkman" and considered it the ideal device for his game because it was one of the few handheld video game consoles to feature a headphone jack and high-quality sound.
 * This is long-winded and waffly. These two sentences can be shortened: --> "When he first learned about the PlayStation Portable (PSP), Mizuguchi was inspired to make a puzzle game with music for the device, which he described as an "interactive Walkman". He considered it ideal for his game because it was one of the few handheld consoles to have a headphone jack and high-quality sound."
 * I should've had the confidence to make the adjustments myself. I also thought this sentence was choppy and long-winded. I'm not sure how it snuck passed me but I thought it was part of the copy edits so I left it alone. I'll trust my instincts a little more with sentences such as these.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

To attract casual players, Mizuguchi wanted to develop an audio-visual puzzle game that was less daunting to play than his earlier titles Rez and Space Channel 5.
 * There is redundancy here; we already know he wanted to make a puzzle game. --> "To attract casual players, Mizuguchi wanted his new game to be less daunting to play than his earlier titles Rez and Space Channel 5
 * Oh I see the redundancy issue more clearly.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Originally, he wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris-style game but problems with licensing led him to create a new concept.
 * This sentence is fine.

Mizuguchi didn't consider the PSP difficult to develop games and began working on the game before any PSP software tools were provided.
 * This sentence is awkwardly phrased. Don't use contractions in articles; "didn't" --> "did not". --> "Mizuguchi did not consider developing games for the PSP difficult and began working on the game before any PSP software tools were provided."
 * This was an obvious mistake. I should've known better. Thank you for bringing it up though.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

The game's title was derived from "Lumine", meaning to illuminate.
 * In which language does Lumine mean illuminate?
 * Lumine is an outdated English word, someone at FAC copyedited the "English". I thought it wasn't obvious either. Do you think it's best to add it back in?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, you could say it's an archaic English word meaning "to illuminate".  Baffle☿gab  04:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

The subtitle "Puzzle Fusion" intended to reflect the mixture of music-based gameplay.
 * The verb "is" is missing here. The "mixture of music-based gameplay" and what? If something is a mixture, you need to state the other thing in the mixture. Otherwise it's not a mixture!
 * Can't believe I missed the word "is". The original version of the sentence said that it was meant to reflect a fusion of gameplay and music. I'll make the changes to reflect something closer to what I intended.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I hope the above is useful to you. This is just the way I'd copy-edit the paragraph; other copy-editors would write it differently. Generally though, I aim to simplify text without removing meaning and nuance. Good luck with your ongoing FA nomination and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This was very helpful. I now know what I need to look out for. Some things are obvious and that was my mistake though.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I attempted to implement the principles of your advice: .Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 06:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks I've made a few comments above. Breaking down a paragraph like this is deffo more involved than copy-editing it; this is one reason I don't go GA reviews. :)  Good luck with the article. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution
@Baffle gab1978 Given your preferences, I wasn't sure whether to ask these questions in the copyedit discussion or here, so please delete one or the other: in addition to word count reduction and editing the wiki-article, I reviewed said article for my own technical writing and will next review third-party source prose (in quotations). I only have two concluding questions: 1) Can I (or an editor) update or remove at least one of the boxes, either now or after I review the third-party source prose? I ask because of community ownership, of which I'm a member, as well as box overlap WP:MTR and my preference for community expansion of sections as the specific "clean up;" 2) Can I (or an editor) place an Under Construction box in the appropriate section or at the top of the wiki-article, especially while I edit or add content? If you prefer not to answer these questions for whatever reason, I can go elsewhere. I appreciate your time and consideration. Bustamove1 (talk) 04:45, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, it's no problem to ask me here. I'll answer here to avoid unduly clutter at REQ talk. It was me who placed the "Multiple issues" and "Cleanup" tags, by the way (page maintenance templates are often called "tags" here).


 * 1) Any editor may remove maintenance tags if they believe the tags no longer apply. I just had a brief look at the article; it still looks like an academic paper rather than an encyclopaedia article, and it still needs rewriting, so those tags should stay in place for the time being.
 * 2) In my opinion, the "Under construction" template should be avoided in the mainspace. If you are worried about getting edit conflicts, you can place In use while you're working but it shouldn't remain more than a few hours, and should be removed when you're finished.
 * To avoid any problems with live articles, many editors prefer to work in their own user-space sandboxes until they're ready to publish. This also avoids edit conflicts.

I hope that's a useful answer. As an aside, you might find it useful to look at the WikiProjcts Books guide to article structure for non-fiction; they also have a list of articles you might find useful as a guide. Cheers and good luck,  Baffle☿gab  08:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Baffle gab1978 I was aware that you placed certain tags---hence the reply to both editors in the copy-edit discussion. I will use your non-fiction guide headers, revise or delete every sentence in the wiki-article, complete the last two sections, and then request copy-editing to determine exactly which sentences (including, for most sentences, third-party/Bailyn quotations) are a better fit for an academic paper. I bookmarked the non-fiction guide, so you can delete this discussion, if you wish. Many thanks! Bustamove1 (talk) 08:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , I've just taken a look and I see you've removed a lot of the troubling text, and the article now looks rather better than it did this morning. I'll remove my "Cleanup" tag anyway, I think it's still a little too academic but you'll likely fix that in due course. Cheers, and good luck,  Baffle☿gab  19:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Texas A&M
Starting this as a place where we can discuss changes. How can I help? Buffs (talk) 19:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Words cannot express how grateful I am. Thank you so very, very much. Buffs (talk) 19:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. Please feel free to bring up anything I've changed in the course of the c/e. I tend to work through the article section-by-section in a linear fashion so it should be easy to follow. One major change I'm making is "school" --> "college" and/or "university"; I'm seeing mixed usage in the early stages. Since I'm not a speaker/writer of American English, I should ask which is the correct, formal term to use here. It wouldn't be onerous to change it back at this stage but we should be consistent. I'll look over the old FA reviews and see if I can glean anything useful from those. I can't promise my c/e will lead to an FAC pass, btw. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not putting FAC on your shoulders, just having a second set of eyes from a non-American English speaker is immensely helpful. Thank you. As for school vice college or university, that's merely a variation in word choice. If you feel it is imprecise, change away. I will not object. Buffs (talk) 21:08, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm a little concerned with the term "Aggie" being removed in favor of the term "graduates". Many of those who served never finished their degrees, but are considered alumni all the same. Buffs (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'll go back over and correct the term. Thanks for your feedback. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your eyes on this project. It's made a huge difference already. I've made some changes to word choice. Likewise, the terms "university" and "school" should be preceded with "the" especially when leading a sentence. Even as a proper noun a missing "The" sounds improper if you drop the prepositional phrase
 * John Smith studied at the School of Law and Sciences. <-Good
 * John Smith studied at School of Law and Sciences. <- Awkward
 * Again, thank you for all of your efforts. Buffs (talk) 19:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem, well it's slowly getting there... "the" is fine in some contexts but not in others; you don't have "the Texas A&M" so why have "the Texas A&M Health Science Center" and "the Texas A&M Maritime Academy" (in "Campus"; third and fourth paras)? Perhaps it's a cultural difference; I usually avoid "the" unless it's part of an official name or title but I do accept your point above and I'll be more careful when I continue. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:48, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * In those instances, "Texas A&M" effectively functions as an adjective, not a noun.
 * I went to Texas A&M
 * I went to the Texas A&M Veterinary College.
 * One is a proper noun. The other is an adjective. Buffs (talk) 15:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ. You're correct if the full, official name of the veterinary college is "Veterinary College". If the full, official name is "Texas A&M Veterinary College", the whole name is an indivisible proper noun, like "London School of Economics". Anyway, arguing about grammar doesn't get the job done! :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  15:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Mmight just be an Americanism/idiosynchrasy. Not a hill worth dying on. Buffs (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz error?
Hi!

Just got the GOCE Newsletter and it says the Blitz will start on December 17, while the Blitz page itself says it starts on December 11? Just want to make sure I keep an eye on the right week :)

- Mathijsvs (talk) 07:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, the Blitz page is correct, it will start on the 11th. The newsletter has a typo; I'll send out an errata notice later. This is what happens when I'm tired! Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Oopsie
Not your fault; one of us should have picked that up. Thanks for the newsletter and all the best,  Mini  apolis  22:28, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Miniapolis, though I should have checked it more thoroughly. It's always good to have someone else check it through, though. Not to worry, lesson learnt, I hope. :-/ Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * In the grand scheme of things (even here), it's meaningless. Hope you're brave enough to stand for coordinator again . All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:58, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries; hopefully there's no brickbats or fish-slaps incoming! Yes, I've nominated myself for another term, though I may step down in the summer to give someone else a chance; I'm starting to feel like I'm one of the old guard. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  13:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Possible glitch on January drive page
Happy holidays, Baffle, and thanks for creating the January drive page. I was able to tweak the signup section to prevent custom signatures, but when I tried to sign up by clicking on "Publish changes" the page saved (twice) as the January 2022 drive; I have no idea why. Any help appreciated and all the best,  Mini  apolis  16:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Found the problem and fixed it; must be a CURRENTYEAR thing . We'll put the points of our heads together at WT:GOCE/COORD for the drive scope.  Mini  apolis  16:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem was the old "unable to write the new year on our bank checks" phenomenon familiar to us aged people who remember the days before Venmo. Baffle inserted "January 2022" in the this-drive parameter, because whose brain can really believe that it's about to be 2023? Not mine. I remember 1988 like it was yesterday. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Oops... sorry about that, thanks both for catching my error. I must have set the wrong parameters in the template. D'oh! Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)