User talk:Boleyn/Archive 27

Speedy deletion nomination of Jeremy Bell (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Jeremy Bell (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Tim Sweeney (baseball) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tim Sweeney (baseball) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Tim Sweeney (baseball) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Bgsu98 (talk) 08:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"Charles Osbourne" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Charles Osbourne and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 27 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"Roger Davies (Harry Potter)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Roger Davies (Harry Potter) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 17 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 19:03, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Sebastian Cole
Hello, Boleyn, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Jamiebuba, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Sebastian Cole, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Sebastian Cole (2nd nomination).

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Jamiebuba (talk) 18:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Richard Foxton (Leicester MP)


The article Richard Foxton (Leicester MP) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "no claim to notability made"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ITBF (talk) 13:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alexander Curtis


The article Alexander Curtis has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "This page does not meet the notability criteria, and appears to be WP:COI self-promotion"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited City of York (UK Parliament constituency), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Morton and John Blackburn.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Boleyn
The user Norprobr is constantly vandalizing several articles referring to the Dominican Republic, I wrote him a message to stop doing that, he did not want to read it and even deleted it from his discussion page, do you know an administrator who you can contact to talk to him and block it for vandalism? Oli (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * , try this page: :) Boleyn (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

== [[William Helmsley

]] ==

There seems to be text misplaced inside a ref ... Pam D  04:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

"Mayor of Calais" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mayor of Calais and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Fram (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John ? (MP for City of York)


The article John ? (MP for City of York) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No surname so cannot be researched much."

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wikieditor019 (talk) 14:50, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of John ? (MP for City of York) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John ? (MP for City of York) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/John ? (MP for City of York) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Fram (talk) 15:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Refs
When creating articles like Thomas Santon, please take the time to format the reference properly rather than leave a bare URL for someone else to tidy up after you. You've got the source in front of you and are familiar with it, so it will be so much less work for you than for someone else coming to the article later. Thanks. Pam D  08:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, Pam, the link works perfectly fine, and doesn't need a tidy. If anyone knows how to make it look better, has the time and wants to do it, they can, but that isn't me and the reader has all they need. Boleyn (talk) 09:06, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I find that very disappointing: WP:BAREURLS is an information page rather than a guideline, but most experienced editors understand that a bare URL is not an acceptable reference. Please reconsider your stance and provide a proper reference: either treating "History of parliament" as a website or, as I've done for Robert Holme (died 1433), treating it as a chapter from the print book, as set out in the header of the article. Thanks. Pam  D  16:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * We have had this conversation before, Pam, and am just going to have to agree to disagree. Boleyn (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Boleyn!


Happy New Year! Boleyn, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 20:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

T-mobilitat
Hello, Boleyn,

Please do not move an article from main space to Draft space more than once. It is not appropriate. Article creators have the option to object and move an article that has been draftified back to main space and you shouldn't move-war about it. This especially true with articles that have been created by experienced editors and, in this case, an administrator. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you, I am surprised an admin's creation wouldn't be autopatrolled, and also that an admin would create an unreferenced article on the mainspace. I hadn't realised it had been moved twice though - no edit war was intended. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

List of pareidolia in astronomy, biology, and geology
Frankly, I'm not surprised when I see that my (experimental) list of pareidolia is, since january the 4th, "not really" in Wikipedia (as a temporary draft page). I only want to see if other astronomy-related Wikipedians know much more than I do and know lots of reliable, independent sources to put them in this page. I (myself) discover one after the other exquisite astronomy-related Wikipedia articles with named astronomical objects in them, and a couple of days ago I thought: Why not create an alphabetic overview of these named objects, especially those which show pareidolia? And immediately after I was thinking about this I had a list! Reliable and independent sources... that's indeed the problem (sigh). Well, let's see what happens with the draft page. If no one feels something to put reliable and independent sources into this page, then this list is a sinking ship. DannyCaes (talk) 18:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC) @Hi, thanks for working on this. Where did you get the information to create the page? Kind regards, Boleyn (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)


 * First of all, I have to mention only one reliable (printed) source that I know of, and that is: GLOSSARY OF SELECTED ASTRONOMICAL NAMES, which is a section in the book SKY CATALOGUE 2000.0, VOLUME 2: Double Stars, Variable Stars, and Nonstellar Objects (Edited by Alan Hirshfeld and Roger W. Sinnott, 1985). That book contains a very interesting alphabetic overview of names and nicknames of astronomical objects such as star clusters, nebulae, and galaxies. Of course, we are the year 2023 now, and since 1985 many new names of recently discovered astronomical objects appeared in lots of monthly magazines such as Sky & Telescope and Astronomy. Since 1994 or so we have also the internet, full of astronomy-related websites which contain all sorts of names and nicknames of astronomical objects. And now, thanks to Wikipedia, these names also appear in astronomy-related Wiki articles. Many names in my draft-list are "click-able" to get these Wikipedia articles, and many of them do indeed show these names. Unfortunately, the sources of these names are (in these articles) not mentioned. Who invented these names? Where? When? Why? Unanswered questions which can't linger on in Wikipedia. It (my draft-list) could be a very interesting overview of pareidolia in nature (especially astronomy-related pareidolia), BUT... as far as I know there's only one reliable source: the above mentioned book which was printed in the year 1985. DannyCaes (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The article PAREIDOLIA has still a red colored "link" to my draft list. I think it's my duty to re-install the original small list of Other examples in Nature which show the geology-related pareidolia and only few pareidolia in astronomy, plus one example in biology (the crab). It was this list which was expanding rather quickly (my contributions), to become almost as large as the largest thing we know: the universe (sorry, I was a bit too motivated). DannyCaes (talk) 15:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @DannyCaes Aren't most constellations pareidolia? The Zodiac signs, Orion (constellation) with his belt, the Plough / Big Dipper / Great Bear, etc? And then many flower names, like monkey-flower? Interesting topic, I'd never heard the word before - every day a school day on Wikipedia, as they say.  Pam  D  16:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course! And there are also telescopic asterisms which show up as very small constellations (open star clusters which contain less than a dozen stars, they are only visible through telescopes). By the way, the monkey-flower is indeed a very interesting example. I create a link to this article in my draft-list, or perhaps in the original list of Other examples in Nature. Thanks!!! P.S.: much more examples of biology-related pareidolia are always welcome! DannyCaes (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @DannyCaes Will reply on your talk page rather than clutter Boleyn's. Pam  D  16:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * O.K., I understand. DannyCaes (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It all sounds very interesting - it isn't a word I had ever come across before either. Thanks for your contributions, Boleyn (talk) 09:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)