User talk:Clarityfiend/2020

Bertha Boronda
If you had simply modified what was said (to your level of clarity, so to speak), rather than deleting the section and refernce, all of this brouhaha could have been avoided. Just sayin' ... for future reference. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 20:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Not "foreshadowing" nor a "precursor", just a crime of the same sort. The source does not make either claim, so you are indulging in WP:OR. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:54, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * And you still couldn't fix it. "Like" Oh well.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 21:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of List of The Andy Griffith Show guest stars for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of The Andy Griffith Show guest stars 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/List of The Andy Griffith Show guest stars& 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. – sgeureka t•c 13:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Lady Margaret Sackville (1562–1591)
Just to say thanks for nominating this for deletion as it made me think harder about it and seek out additional facts and references. Deb (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear Clarityfiend.

Happy New Year.

There is now a sizable website www.colinbennettanomalies.com that displays many and various articles written in flagship UFO and Anomalies sites or magazines like UFO magazine, Fortean Times (and books)- often with the cover of the magazine displayed. These are proof that Colin Bennettt's contribution to his field is not just a matter of passing references to him, but all these articles and papers plus 3 published non-fiction books on UFOs and Anomalies that have been praised by many famous experts of the field from Jacques Vallee to Uri Geller to John Keel.

Can you confirm to me now that the array of articles shown in this site provide sufficient independent proof of Bennett's contribution to merit my revising the submitted entry again for possible approval?

Thank you very much for your attention.

Good wishes,

Philomena Muinzer — Preceding unsigned comment added by PPh1lomena (talk • contribs) 14:12, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:18:55, 28 January 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by PPh1lomena
PPh1lomena (talk) 14:18, 28 January 2020 (UTC)


 * You haven't edited the draft since I rejected it, so I'm puzzled as to what assistance I can provide. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:46, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Hell Drivers
Hi. As you are probably aware, I declined your speedy deletion request of Hell Drivers as I felt it was within neither the spirit nor the letter of CSD criterion G6 as it would be a backdoor deletion of the article which originally resided there.

You might want to hold off for a few days on any further action as I've asked at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Motorsport whether the WikiProject thinks the original article is worth saving, whether "hell drivers" is a 'thing' or original research, and if they have the sources to perform a rescue if they want to do it. If they want to save it we'd probably have to move the rescued article and replace it with a disambiguation page.

You could of course leave things as they are, but here are a few alternative approaches you could consider if the original article is not to be rescued:


 * Restore the original article and re-nominate it for deletion. The AfD could explore whether Hell Drivers (film) should be moved to Hell Drivers or whether Hell Drivers should be a dab page, but if it does not - and the page is deleted - you can go ahead with your plan to boldy move the article about the film.
 * Restore the original article, and move it to a new disambiguated name such as Hell Drivers (show) or Hell Drivers (motorsport). Make Hell Drivers a disambiguation page. Then either fix up the original article or nominate it for deletion.
 * Replace the redirect at Hell Drivers with a disambiguation page, effectively over-writing the old article without deleting it

If rescuing the original article is out of the question, I think my preferred plan would be one of:


 * Restore the article, nominate at AfD, and ask AfD to also consider whether Hell Drivers should be a dab page or whether the film article should be moved there


 * Restore the original article, move it to a new name and nominate it for deletion. Make a dab page at Hell Drivers, with links to the original article (whilst it remains extant), Hell Drivers (film), Joie Chitwood, and Lucky Teter/Lucky Teter and His Hell Drivers. Even if the original article is deleted, you're still disambiguating three pages

I hope that helps. I don't need any reply, but if you do reply please reply here and ping me. Thank you. --kingboyk (talk) 15:09, 14 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've restored the article and renominated it for Afd. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

"Hildor" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hildor. Since you had some involvement with the Hildor redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Capitalising card ranks
Hi Clarityfiend, thanks for your help with Puss in the Corner. Following your latest edit, I surveyed 15 card game compendia and it turns out that there is a roughly even split between those that capitalise card ranks (Ace, Ten, etc) and those that don't. In fact 8 used capitals and 7 didn't. The latter were all US publications, whereas the former were a mix. There is a small advantage in capitalising in that it helps to separate ranks and quantities e.g. "four Fours". And "removing all fours" means "removing all quartets" whereas "removing all Fours" means "removing all cards with the rank of Four". The truth is there is no hard and fast rule out there, but perhaps a regional US bias towards lower case. Bermicourt (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Deleted films in Lost film
Hi Clarityfiend,

You deleted several films I added several I added in lost films in the 1980s section. While I do cite a book and documentary, that you would have to buy for yourself to see. It is not the first time I see citations from books that aren't available for other editors to see, unless one would buy them and double check. Personally I never thought anything of it.

In Charlie Chaplin's article (who's a featured one), there is a ton of books being cited that you can't read. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Chaplin#Works_cited

Unless there is a rule regarding that I skipped, or any other reasoning behind this let me know.

Take care.Filmman3000 (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Just saw your note in the Partially lost films' history page. "No article, so no entry".

Now I won't go in war edit mode I am currently dealing with someone else elsewhere. In my opinion I don't think "No article, so no entry", I do not see a decision made by users in the "List of Lost film" talk page (could be me skipping it) regarding this. Obviously if in the Wiki guidelines there is something said on the matter, while disagreeing I won't challenge it.

If it's on approach that we disagree let's have a friendly chat.Filmman3000 (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)


 * It has nothing to do with if the sources are offline. While some lists (because their subject matter) include entries that don't have articles, e.g. List of fatal cougar attacks in North America, this isn't one of them, as is made clear by the very first sentence: "The following is a list of notable films that are incomplete or partially lost." (bolding mine) If that still doesn't satisfy you, then you should start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes I figured it after I posted my stuff. No worries and thanks.Filmman3000 (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Great American Novel
After editing the Great American Novel for a while, I can understand how frustrating it is when people add novels without a reliable source. If subpar sources were allowed, the list could easily become bloated. I'm currently trying to get the article up to Featured List status and I've been thinking about what should be the bar for exclusion. In looking for sources, I've found some reliable sources which mention random and trivial novels. I don't think a novel is worthy of being the GAN simply because someone wrote an editorial. If a novel is a real contender for GAN, it would make sense for multiple people to be talking about it. That's why I think it would be wise for it to be mandated that an entry must have two reliable sources for inclusion. Interested to see what you think. Thanks! ~ HAL  333  00:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm all for your proposal. It shouldn't present a problem for the usual suspects. Gone with the Wind may be in some danger, but then it's really more the Great Confederate Novel . Clarityfiend (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Gone with the Wind is no big loss - I'm more partial to Moby Dick and Blood Meridian. ~ HAL  333  05:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Your change on Albert II Von Mecklenburg
The IP user was right about Albert II Von Mecklenburg... https://books.google.com/books?id=mohTAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA183&dq=albrecht+II+der+große+Mecklenburg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj396fK8NDpAhVBcq0KHX5aBvoQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q=albrecht%20II%20der%20große%20Mecklenburg&f=false Mecklenburg98 (talk) 06:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh? Just what am I supposed to see in that book? And if the IP was right, how come Albert II, Duke of Mecklenburg makes no mention of his "Great"ness? Clarityfiend (talk) 06:23, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Look up Albrecht II "der Große" Herzog von Mecklenburg or simple Albrecht II der grosse Von Mecklenburg Most German Sources, and old literature doesn't refer to him without adding in "The Great"...The issue is, finding a google books source were the information is accessible, and not in preview mode...My issue, is...Which do i source, considering the Title is tied to his name in most places,including the state? Part of this problem is I can't use my Antique books that haven't been printed in over a century, as a source, since they aren't especially publicly accessible. Here are some links, though https://www.google.com/books/edition/Handbuch_der_deutschen_Geschichte_Bd_Von/4XWCAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Albrecht+II+der+grosse+Von+Mecklenburg&pg=PA501&printsec=frontcover https://www.google.com/books/edition/Zum_Leben_Albrechts_III_dem_K%C3%B6nig_von_S/JSbOg3O5SCEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Albrecht+II+der+grosse+Von+Mecklenburg&pg=PA2&printsec=frontcover https://www.geni.com/people/Albert-II-duke-of-Mecklenburg-Schwerin/6000000003858754511 https://data.cerl.org/thesaurus/cnp01454371 https://books.google.com/books?id=f_V3DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT123&lpg=PT123&dq=Albrecht+II+der+Gro%C3%9Fe+Herzog+von+Mecklenburg&source=bl&ots=rcDyamTv_C&sig=ACfU3U0TEm4D2G9CHsa3YjXIW9tu15AbhA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiT2eWJreDpAhVSRKwKHR2DBWQQ6AEwBnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=Albrecht%20II%20der%20Gro%C3%9Fe%20Herzog%20von%20Mecklenburg&f=false http://www.royaltombs.dk/mecklenburg.html http://www.solhellingadata.no/Rune/Slekt/html/fam/fam04937.html https://www.tacitus.nu/historical-atlas/regents/germany/mecklenburg.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mecklenburg98 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Copied to Talk:List of people known as "the Great" and added further comment. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Hilliard's Legion
Hi. I took care of your request at WP:RM/TR, but just wanted you to know, in case you don't already, that you should be able to do these kinds of moves yourself. As long as there is not more than one edit at the redirect that points back to the article to be moved, any autoconfirmed editor should be able to move the article over the redirect. Station1 (talk) 05:55, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh! I didn't know that. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:03, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Swede Vejtasa
Hi. I just thought I'd give a little clarification here. You seem to have the view that the Navy Cross citation is a definitive statement, and that changing the text seemingly devalues it. Medal citations are certainly useful in terms of what he was given the award for, but while they certainly reflect the view at the time, they do not always reflect reality (VT-8's pilots, for instance, all received citations stating they "contributed materially" to the Japanese defeat at Midway when they in fact scored no hits whatsoever). It it true that he was credited with seven planes in one mission, and he certainly fired at that many. However, postwar analysis (see John B. Lundstrom's First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign) has determined through records of Japanese losses that he most likely got four - two Vals and two Kates. Hence why I put the word "claimed" in - it states that he claimed that many, and was recognised as having shot down that many, but that research has since determined differently.

That doesn't mean the remaining three should be removed from his tally, though - disallowing victory claims is generally not done. And it certainly doesn't make him a liar - he definitely believed he got them. But, as this is a factual encyclopedia, it helps to distinguish between citations and what really happened without invalidating either. All the best. 2A02:C7F:C2A:2100:8C0F:FD12:F469:1E30 (talk) 12:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

dab deletions
Thanks. Perhaps you want to do the honors of deleting here as well, since you are an expert? And should the deleted pages be see alsos? --2604:2000:E010:1100:B984:6CB9:D3C5:2BE1 (talk) 20:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Servants of the Wankh
I understand if I added too much but the plot summary for the page is, in my opinion, too bare bones. The sea voyage and eventual conflict with Dordolio forms a sizeable part of the first half of the book and I think his actions at least deserve a mention. 12.169.83.178 (talk) 12:20, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've added a bit about Dordolio, but you should take care not to add your own interpretation/commentary (e.g "Rather than the peaceful society they expected, they find a decadent and hostile place full of intrigue and excess.") Clarityfiend (talk) 22:56, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Isaias
You recently edited Isaias (given name) to remove the hurricane. Can you please explain why? If it's appropriate for Isaiah (disambiguation), then it seems like it should be appropriate for the equivalent page that honors the same spelling, despite the fact that it is parenthesized "(given name)" rather than "(disambiguation)." I concede that your new hatnote on Isaiah does an awful lot of work that helps here. Thanks. jhawkinson (talk) 23:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * As far as I can recall, given name lists never include hurricanes. They appear in dab pages. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:09, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * That doesn't seem to be true. For many hurricane names, there isn't a specific "given name" page because the name can be both a given name and a surname; e.g. Cristóbal, which links the storm. And it's not common for there to be a redirect over the name itself, like how Isaias goes to Isaiah which is not a disambiguation page but a bibilical figure page; that just makes everything confusing (but see Rebekah to Rebecca; but given that there was no major storm of that name, it's not helpful). But for given names, e.g., see Chantal, Humberto, etc. where the storm is indeed linked. This is clearly distinguishable from, say, Nestor where that page is a disambiguation page that links to the storm's page as well as given name page; since almost everyone going to Nestor (given name) gets there through Nestor, there's no need to link the storm on the given name page. Precedent isn't 100% clear, but it seems to favor linking the storm, as I had done. I think removing it might make sense in a month, but not before. jhawkinson (talk) 05:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh? In Humberto, it is in the See also section, not part of the list. Cristóbal is a dab page (although it should really be a name list, with the two non-personal name entries moved to a hatnote). Chantal is also a dab page. And so on. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:37, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've split off entries from Chantal to Chantal (disambiguation). Clarityfiend (talk) 06:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've found enough previously unlisted entries to create Cristóbal (disambiguation). Clarityfiend (talk) 06:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Mach
Why did you revert my edit? Vmavanti (talk) 12:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Vmavanti (talk) 23:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 11:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 11:42, 11 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 14:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 11:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 11:52, 12 August 2020 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 11:55, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You removed all of the organization (scrambled order of entries, deleted sections) and deleted at least one valid entry. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete the organization. I organized it. Did you see the the dismabig barnstar I have? That wasn't a "Gee, you're so nice" Award or "Thanks for agreeing with me" Award. It was for actual work. A lot of work in a short amount of time. You need to have better reasons if you are going to revert an entire page of edits. For one thing, what do you have against alphabetical headers? I hope you are not one of those "deleting is bad" editors, because I have done editing in the real world which isn't nearly as squeamish or arbitrary about the delete key.
 * Huuh? You got rid of five sections and put the entries in no discernible order. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Aha, I see what you did there. You put six entries in alphabetical order by disambiguation. That makes no sense whatsoever. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I also have a disambiguator's barnstar (in 2012). There's a policy, guideline or essay somewhere that states you shouldn't try to "pull rank" in disagreements. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * WTF? You don't know the difference between policy and an essay? You accuse me of "pulling rank" because I demonstrate my experience? You are against listing headers alphabetically and you say alphabetical order "makes no sense whatsoever?" You say I used "no discernable order" when obviously there was? You think it's OK to create categories with only two or three items? Where in the world are you getting these nutty ideas? You seem to be making up your own rules as you go along. You can fix your ridiculous methods by restoring my edits. You're in a deep enough hole already. You don't know what you're doing.
 * Are you a native speaker of English?
 * From the MOS: "Long disambiguation pages should be grouped into subject sections, and even subsections as necessary, as described below. These sections (and any subsections) should typically be in alphabetical order"
 * Curb your insults, per WP:No personal attacks. Why would you question my mastery of English (and what would it matter anyway)? I am a professional editor/proofreader. In fact, my English is obviously better than yours, since you have shown that you don't understand what sections are. For example, the "(surname)" in Mach (surname) is not a section. Sections are what you call categories. And you deleted most of those, so that pretty much invalidates your entire MOS argument. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I didn't say "pull rank". I said "try to". I believe I have considerably more experience than you: nearly 100K more edits, and 2806 pages created to your 0(?). Clarityfiend (talk) 06:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You did not address my points. Instead you call them insults. They are not insults. You did not answer my question: Is English your native language? Please address all the points I have made.
 * What are you talking about? I don't know what sections are? I quoted from the documentation about alphabetical order and you act like you have never heard of such a thing. What does it matter that English is not your native language? Because you are on the English Wikipedia which requires precise and exact use of English. The way you respond to my questions suggests something is getting lost in translation. I suggest you stay away from disambig pages.
 * This page is full of people telling you that you are doing things wrong. Why is that?
 * Enough. Your behavior is unacceptable. I have copied this all to Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Hello. I think the information should be included in the article and I provided the sources to support the claims. If you think it was "not an improvement", perhaps could you help me do it correctly, please? Thanks. --89.66.254.10 (talk) 11:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * None of the sources are acceptable. The David Morgan/montypython.com review only states it "sends up costume picture clichés", not medieval films; Vincent Canby's New York Times review says it "sends up ... costume movies"; and an anonymous quote on a DVD cover is neither neutral nor reliable. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Electrical element
Why did you remove the hatnote here? A meaning of electrical element is indeed an electrical heating element, an entirely different subject from electrical element, which is concerned with abstract concepts in network theory. Disambiguation is therefore required. SpinningSpark 20:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. I've reverted myself. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:02, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Monty
Can you explain the reason for this edit? In that case, the name is a stage name, which is a variety of nickname or personal name, so why should it not be included in the personal name list? Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Per Nickname, "As a concept, it is distinct from both pseudonym and stage name". Clarityfiend (talk) 22:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't think that's particularly relevant. The disambiguation page covers nicknames, first names, surnames, and fictional characters - which is a wide range, but they are all names by which someone (real or imaginary) is referred to.  The same apples to Monty.  Has the scope of name disambiguation pages been discussed anywhere, or is it simply your own interpretation?  (Obviously it's not really a big deal, but we may as well get it right!)  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:33, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * That's the way I've seen it handled in lots of other dab pages. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Well, it seems counterintuitive and wrong to me. I've raised the question at WT:MOSDAB.   Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stephanie Stahl


The article Stephanie Stahl has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Being a trade magazine editor is not the kind of editorship addressed by WP:PROF, and while her previous editorship at InformationWeek and later position at Content Marketing can be verified from primary sources, I'm not seeing the in-depth reliable independent sourcing required for WP:GNG (especially for GNG for someone in marketing, where spam sources and copied-press-release journalism are common)"

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. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Big Three (tennis) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Big Three (tennis) 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/Big Three (tennis) 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.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Taken
Just a quick note to say that your copy editing on the Taken page was excellent and has improved the article significantly. Thanks.NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Non-existent categories
Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Máirtín Mór Ó Máille, please make sure that the category page actually exists. In some cases, it may be appropriate to create a new category in accordance with Wikipedia's categorization guidelines, but it is usually better to use the most specific available existing category. It is never appropriate to leave a page categorised in a non-existent category, i.e. one whose link displays in red. You may find it helpful to use the gadget HotCat, which tests whether a category exists before saving a change. Thank you. . -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 13:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The category exists; it was just misspelled. A little checking would have shown you that (e.g. checking the subcategories of Category:Duellists). Clarityfiend (talk) 22:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * @Clarityfiend, it is not my responsibility to go burrowing around trying to figure whether your edit was another of the hundreds of non-existent categories I encounter every week, or a variant of an existing category which you didn't bother to fix after it appeared as a redlink when you saved the page. There's a clear visual warning, which you ignored or overlooked or whatever.
 * And, no, the category which you actually added did not exist. It is your responsibility to check your own edits, and I posted here to politely remind you to check this issue.  Most editors reply with an "oops, thanks", and we all move on. Sadly, instead of accepting any responsibility, you have chosen try to pin blame on me.  That's not nice, so please do not do that. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 23:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * . You call it "polite". I call it "lecturing" someone who already knows how to suck eggs. And your second response I would characterize as "overzealous hectoring". I made a simple mistake, and you chose to make a federal case of it. Seriously, don't you have better uses for your time (and mine)? Clarityfiend (talk) 23:14, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I did not make a federal case of it. I left a note in your talk, which includes a helpful suggestion on how to avoid this sort of error.
 * You then chose not to say "oops, thanks", and started attacking me. If you don't want to waste anyone's time, the best way to do respond to an error being identified is to say "thanks" and fix it and move on. That option is still open to you. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 23:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You seem to be fixated on my apologizing for an honest mistake. You really should think over your overreaction and patronizing attitude. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Far from it. You made an error. I fixed it, I notified you, and moved on to the many hundreds of similar errors I fixed today.
 * You have chosen to take offence at my good faith effort to alert you to what I assumed was a good faith error, and you chose to make a drama out of it ... both of which are entirely your choice. I don't want thanks, I just want you to stop making a drama.
 * Anyway, you have made your hostility clear, so I won't repeat my mistake of wasting my time alerting you. Next time I see your name beside such an edit, I will simply remove the redlinked category and move on without notifying you.
 * Goodbye. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 23:41, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Nope. You chose to escalate this by your second response. I merely informed you what happened. You're the one who couldn't drop it. These days, I spend the majority of my time correcting minor mistakes. If I notified every editor responsible, I'd be wasting at least half my time. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Chef Jacob Bickelhaupt.jpg
Sorry to bother you but I'm way out of my league here. In this edit you rightly reverted additions by a spammer. One of the additions was a photo of the subject of the article, and I thought, well, we could at least use the photo, right? But no, it appears to be a copyright violation. It was uploaded to Wikipedia by the spammer with a CC license, and even has a copyright notice in the exif data.


 * File:Chef Jacob Bickelhaupt.jpg
 * 

So being new here I went down a rabbit hole and discovered the photo is actually at Wikimedia Commons, a place I know almost nothing about. Is there someone I should notify or should I just drop this? GA-RT-22 (talk) 18:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)


 * If you believe there is a copyright violation, you can click on the "Nominate for deletion" link near the bottom left of . Clarityfiend (talk) 22:52, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I missed that link before. GA-RT-22 (talk) 23:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Arliss
Hello, Clarityfiend. When you moved Arliss to a new title and then changed the old title from a redirect into a disambiguation page, you may not have been aware of WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:
 * When creating disambiguation pages, fix all resulting mis-directed links.
 * Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Arliss" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 23:57, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do know what I'm supposed to do. There were a lot of links. I did as many as I could in the time I had available and was going to finish up later. What is it lately with people trying to give me lessons on Wikipedia? I've been here for a very long time. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:46, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Category:Plays which debuted after the writer& has been nominated for deletion
Category:Plays which debuted after the writer& has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I do think it would be make a good list article though. In case this nomination passes and it gets deleted, here are the current contents so none of your work is lost:
 * The Fugitive (Ugo Betti play)
 * Les Gracques
 * Ideal (play)
 * Irydion
 * The Living Corpse
 * Nrusinhavatar
 * The Undivine Comedy
 * - RevelationDirect (talk) 11:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Request on 10:42:46, 4 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Robzoid
I give up. He is obviously a notable actor from the early 90s and is linked and attributed in multiple TV and film entries across Wikipedia. Because his acting career was at its peak when the internet wasn't as prolific as it is now, it is obviously harder to find internet based sources but he was even on the front cover of the Radio Times. But I'm done. I even tried linking newspaper articles and that wasn't enough. You win Wikipedia.

Robzoid (talk) 10:42, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Passing mentions aren't enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 08:04:56, 6 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Bofk
I'm just wondering what additional references I need to include so this article can qualify to be published. I included a link to what I thought was a significant biographical reference in this article (https://medium.com/authority-magazine/rising-star-crystal-loverro-embrace-your-imperfections-your-quirks-are-what-make-you-unique-and-cb77f4d08453). I also mentioned a podcast where the subject of my article was interviewed but I neglected to include a link to the podcast. Would that have made a difference to include that as well as links to the subject's films, where available? I can update this draft as I do further research about the subject. Thank you for your help.

Bofk (talk) 08:04, 6 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Interviews are of little use. We need independent (and substantial) media coverage/verification of her. At this point in her career, it's WP:TOOSOON. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:09, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Jethro Waters article
Hello Clarityfiend, I'm trying to begin editing and adding articles, mostly centered in film and photography. The first article I'm working on creating is on director Jethro Waters, and it has been denied twice. I'm not sure why it is being denied, as I've cited articles directly featuring him by The New York Times, LA Weekly, and others which are not "passing mentions" as is suggested by the article rejection note, and his films have been in cinemas all over the U.S. and are currently streaming on major services.

Any suggestions?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by W00lst00 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The NYT and LA Weekly articles aren't about him; they're about Burk Uzzle (what a name). And yes, when they only mention Waters' name once or twice, they are passing mentions. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * F1 and Be There seems to deserve an article, so you could get him at least credited there, but that's about it. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:04, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Immigration
I'm won't oppose you if you persist, but I reverted this edit. —teb728 t c 10:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Re: Jethro Waters draft
That makes sense. I'll work on the F11 and Be There article instead. Thank you Clarityfiend. Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by W00lst00 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


★Trekker (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding ~ to your friends' talk pages.

★Trekker (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)