User talk:Fram/Archive 20

Dave D'Mello
This article was in the Maidstone Adscene Newspaper on the 6th March 2008. It was also online at www.thisiskent.co.uk for well over a year but has now been archived. It is also very common knowlegde and not something that Dave Fisher has ever hidden or kept a secret. He has been a very well known footballer in the UK and everybody knows about his battle with cancer. If you have any queries please contact the Maidstone Adscene to verify.--217.44.139.104 (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing this article further to my attention. I have now decided to nominate it for deletion as he is not notable at all as a DJ, and there is no evidence anywhere that the DJ and the non notable footballer have any relation to each other anyway. Fram (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Dave D'Mello last year came 21st in the UK on the highly respected TheDjList.com. The site also confirms his real name and so does the also very highly respected discogs.com. I am not sure why you are so upset at people trying to help on wikipedia but must realise that we are only trying to help, of which you currently seem to be trying to stop. http://thedjlist.com/djs/DAVE_D'MELLO/ http://www.discogs.com/artist/Dave+D%27Mello Please do the decent thing and stop the deletion of this page and try and work together to make it correct. Thanks in advance 217.44.139.104 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.139.104 (talk) 10:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Dave D'Mello currently is rated #3801 at DJlist... Heis a Dave Fisher from Maidstone. Whether he is the same as the soccer player is not mentioned though (nor is it mentioned anywhere else outside Wikipedia). I am not upset, nominating articles for deletion when the subjects appears to be not that notable is a routine procedure. Discogs.com is a user-redacted site (a wiki), DJlist is user-submitted but admin-approved contents. Neither make any claim to have criteria to be included there. Fram (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

It is actually No.3,145 at present, and that is in the world out of over a quarter of a million DJ's. He is currently 200th in the UK if you look at the correct address. Do you have DJ's in Belguim or do you just like deleting pages cos you have never heard of him? Dave D'Mello search on google brings up over 1.5 million articles so am not sure where you info is coming from. You continue what you doing if you believe that you are being a helpful user. 217.44.139.104 (talk) 11:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC) 217.44.139.104
 * Ah, probably one person who voted just now. When you look at the general ranks, you need a score of 40,000 to be #1, score 2,000 to be #50, score 1,000 to be #100, and score 300 to be #500. Dave d'Mello has a score of 47, which is so low that the slightest chance in score means a huge chance in position, and that one or two users coming along can boost the position seriously. It doesn't reflect on the actual popularity of the DJ. Furthermore, as WP:BIO indicates, popularity is in itself not a measure we use, coverage in good sources is what we need. User-generated websites like DJlist and Discogs are not such sources. Fram (talk) 11:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I started this page after knowing of Dave Fisher via his football career and knowing he had become a DJ/record producer. I was one of the many many thousands whom bought M.I.A - Bucky Done Gun remix he did which launched him as a remixer and producer. Fram from Belguim, what are you 20, 25 years old? If you dont know your history and english people then i suggest you leave Wikipedia well alone. This page has sat he nicely ever since it was made, and you even edited it way back in Nov 2009 so dont tell me you have got a problem now. You are just being awkward due to the above user undoing your deletions. Be fair my old son Johnedwardspb (talk) 12:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Who or what I am is irrelevant, and "my history" stretches farther back than 2007, when Dave Fisher released the M.I.A. remix. Whether it outsold other mixes or not, I have no idea: there are no independent and even slightly reliable sources about this fact, only Dave Fisher- or fan-controlled sources. I edited the page in 2009 to get rid of some very nasty vandalism, butdidn't check it any further then. Now, confronted with a very persistent editor, I checked the actual contents, and found it severely lacking. Instead of focusing on me and what you suppose are myreasons for doing this, it would be more fruitful if you provided good sources. Articles in DJ Magazine would be good. Charted hits, even solely on a Dance chart, would help as well. But none of these things is available. Fram (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Fram, Please email me direct on johnedwards@publicist.com as have info etc that i cant post on here. Many thanks. Johnedwardspb (talk) 12:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Info you can't post here will not help you to keep the article here. WP:V is a core policy of Wikipedia. First-hand info, personal info, unpublished documents, ... are not useful for us. Fram (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol, what a surprise. Sorry lads, we have a interferring Beguim do gooder here. Enough said.Johnedwardspb (talk) 12:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Remove the tag to delete this page, as its really helpful and is linked on Facebook to the real Dave D'Mello, and just cos you may not know him but we all do. Also this is what wiki is about, finding real information on people we may not all know. 81.152.246.17 (talk) 14:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Why do you need a Wikipedia page to link a Facebook page to a real person? Why not link to his official homepage directly? Anyway, ease of use of Facebook is not the purpose of Wikipedia. Fram (talk) 14:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry you are very much mistaken since Facebook and Wikipedia signed up together to link all the pages on Facebook for the reason to keep people and fans informed. I can see everyone elses problem now, there is just no reasoning with you. Also, you seem so behind the times. 81.152.246.17 (talk) 14:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Please explain
Hi, I noticed you moved my page Randy Ellefson back to my user area (Firegemini). Can you tell me why and how to get this thing published? Every time I try someone just pushes it back without explaining.

Firegemini (talk) 02:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)Firegemini


 * You moved User talk:Firegemini instead of User:Firegemini/Randy Ellefson. Yo have to move the latter to mainspace, asthat is your article, not the former wich is your user talk page. Fram (talk) 06:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Editor assistance needed
Hi, I noticed that you are one of the editors kind enough to list themselves at Editor Assistance. I have a perhaps unusual request: I have some problems with another editor, who is either deliberately trolling or otherwise desperately in need of editor assistance. I started out the wrong way with him or her, so my advice will probably only be counterproductive. Would you be willing to see if there is anything you can do?

....

I personally don't believe one can make that many different mistakes by accident (it's not as if they are buried in his contributions: they are the vast majority), but I'm not the most patient admin, and I have had a discussion with him or her, so I am probablyno longer objective or uninvolved. Any advice is welcome! Fram (talk) 07:46, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I've had a look. It appears that Mod mmg is an enthusiastic and well meaning new contributor to Wikipedia who hasn't yet become familiar with our procedures and philosophies. Most new users do have difficulties with our complex processes, and it can take years to fully understand the main issues and specific consensus. There is a concern that the user is not learning from observation, and instead tends to argue, though even that can be the result of the more experienced users not explaining process and consensus clearly enough when undoing or repairing Mod mmg's edits. I'll drop a word on Mod mmg's talkpage and suggest Mod mmg requests a mentor.  SilkTork  *YES! 12:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. While I'm not as confident about it all as you are, I'll wait and see how it goes (otherwise there was no point in coming to you, of course). Fram (talk) 12:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Do not make antagonistic edits in a manner that suggests they are written by me to my userspace pages again. That edit violates WP:AGF and WP:POINT. On that particular page, I only list discussions that are complete. I do not list the handful of discussions that will eventually be overturned by deletion reviews. Once those articles are restored via deletion review or normal editing and are therefore complete, then they will be added. Otherwise that list reminds me which ones I do not have to worry about. Thank you. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * AGF? Hah, only when I don't have a reason not to. You deliberately omit those AfDs where the closure went against your opinion. Deletion review is for incorrect closures, you wouldn't need to wait months and months to start one. Many of those articles will never be added to the encyclopedia again, as you are well aware. You link to that page in public discussions (e.g. Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:Reevaluation), so it should be correct (certainly when you present it in the way you did in Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Kww 2, i.e "Sure, people can offer good faith suggestions for further improvement and I am open to that, but please see User:A Nobody/Deletion discussions, I don't comment in AfDs anywhere near as much as I used to and since I have been renamed every one I have commented in has had a more or less acceptable conclusion.") You are presenting incorrect, one-sided information to give a better impression of yourself than what reality would present (probably the reason it is also linked from your editor review). You are lecturing people on morality, but would do better to start looking at your own actions in an objective manner. Don't come running to me for help anymore,and please keep your seasons greetings and other "friendly" edits from my talk from now on. Oh, and please reread WP:POINT: "disruptively applying reasoning with which you disagree" Which "policy or guideline" have I tried to illustrate as being bad by doing the opposite of it? Right, I thought so. One more on the long list of Wikipedia pages you should thoroughly read before using them willy-nilly on discussions. Fram (talk) 07:56, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

HistorianOfLogic block
Hi, Fram. Would you mind telling me why you assume User:HistorianofLogic is a sock of Peter Damian? Checkuser? Regards, Bishonen | talk 22:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC).

30 film
Hi FRAM. I did not create this wikipedia article, but was obviously alerted to its presence once someone else had. I noticed you posted it for deletion though, but it adheres to the rules as far as I can tell. there is a very notable actress making her first film in over twenty years. I am not too saavy on how to edit properly on this site as I only joined to fix this matter yesterday, but I believe this is the reference you are looking for. PLease let me know if there is any other info I can supply you with.

Aileen Quinn also had a supporting role. Her first live-action film as an adult since Annie (1982). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Curtispollock (talk • contribs) 00:40, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I should also point out that Aileen's role in this movie was of great interest to many, many people, as I've had an overwhelming number of requests from both fans of hers as well as news and media organizations inquiring about her performance in the movie, even to this day.Curtispollock (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

parameter stops the redirect having an effect
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eden_Primary_School,_Carrickfergus&action=history
 * The  parameter shows page history (i.e. versions) rather than just the latest
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eden_Primary_School,_Carrickfergus&oldid=355555051
 * The  parameter gives a specific version from the history (the last here with content)
 * Andy Dingley (talk) 12:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Derek Allen
I'm no fonder of some of their tactics than you are, but please don't edit closed AfDs. 07:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I read it before the close, and when I pressed edit, I didn't notice that meanwhile, it had been closed (correctly). I am not going to edit war over it, it won't change the outcome, but that source was so thoroughly wrong and so typical that to let it stand unchallenged is not desirable, even in an archive that hardly anyone is going to read from now on. Fram (talk) 08:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Trust me, I know. Thanks for not edit-warring over it. AniMate  08:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Seriously, your actions do not seem like those that an administrator should be taking. You should clearly know how AfDs work with your position. Silver seren C 08:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps divert your attention to your fellow ARS'er and make clear that such extremely poor source checking is not the kind of action an experienced ARS'er should be taking instead. Fram (talk) 08:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Me being a part of the Article Rescue Squadron has nothing to do with your actions on the AfD. The discussion ended as delete as it is, so it doesn't matter what sources were there because they are gone now. Dream Focus and I have rescued dozens of articles from deletion by adding reliably sourced information. If we mess up on one or two here and there, I really don't see it as a big deal. Regardless of that, your comment made on the AfD after it closed shouldn't be there, according to AfD policy, so Dream Focus was right to remove it. Silver  seren C 08:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think you and I are going to agree on the average quality of the rescue efforts of Dream Focus. It is obvious from this (and other) AfD's that he has no idea of what is and what isn't a reliable and/or independent source. Afd comments he recently made like "Keep Any coverage is enough, and it receives some." or "Keep The writer of notable books, is notable for being the writer of said books. What's wrong with the Google news results? They walk about him and his work." for an author of one single book. He doesn't check whether the sources are about the subject under discussion, or whether the sources are in any way reliable (see e.g. Articles for deletion/International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science). He mainly follows your rescue tags and votes keep every time, no matter if it is truly rescueable (which it often is) or not, and with little good work done in rescuing the article or presenting good sources. He has made 21 mainspace edits this week, and he has made 26 keep votes in AfDs. At first sight, he has made no edits to any of the articles he wanted to keep (the only exception being Derek Allen, which is now deleted). So "rescued dozens of articles from deletion by adding reliably sourced information. " is not really an accurate description of his current work. Fram (talk) 08:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

mpkomara talk page
can you please remove your comments from my talk page? i have become a more responsible wikipedian now, and i won't commit errors like the one you corrected in 2008. thanks! Mpkomara (talk) 13:07, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have removed it. Good luck with the editing! Fram (talk) 13:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright
Dude, you can not copywrite infringe your own work! Stop deleting my post refering to the web site content that I created! This is not copywrite infringe ent. Please get a life.
 * We have no evidence at all that the one posting it here is the one that thas the copyright on the information. Apart from that, the page seems to fail WP:N and would be deleted as a non notable organization anyway. No reliable independent sources have given attention to the project. Fram (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:NOTPLOT
Thanks for directing me to the WP:NOTPLOT guidelines for the X-Files Blood article I submitted. --Group27 (talk) 02:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

ITN for Leterme II Government
--Well done :) Best, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   20:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Request for extension of page protection
Thank you for protecting my talkpage, however, I fear the attacks on me may continue once the protection of my talk has expired, can you protect it infinitely? Thank you. Btzkillerv (talk) 13:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've extended it now for a year, we can see again then how the situation is. Fram (talk) 06:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Dancing with the Stars (U.S. TV series) scoring statistics
Hello Fram, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Dancing with the Stars (U.S. TV series) scoring statistics has been removed. It was removed by 76.248.89.208 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 76.248.89.208 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Gratitude
Thanks for adding the catergories to the Willoughby of Parham articles. "Rovington (talk) 03:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)"

Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers enlarged by George Stanley
Excellent work on these. I'd like to help out some, but I want to make sure I don't step on any toes; are you creating the articles according to any particular rule, or are you just plunging in and copy-pasting them alphabetically? -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Alphabetically. I only take the painters, I don't know or care enough about engravers, and I only take those for which there seems to be more than "X was a painter" available from other sources. I also try to place the article at the most commonly used name, not necessarily at the name used by Bryan (but I create a redirect from the Bryan name to the current one). You are free to help with this, of course. Perhaps the easiest would be if you take another letter (e.g. B), or if you'ld prefer to take all the Italians, I can focuse on the Dutch, French, Danish, German, Spanish, ... It's up to you! Fram (talk) 14:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, no, I'll take another letter. I like playing around with "Q", for starters. :-)
 * All depends on when I can get to it, of course; my article creation is somewhat come-and-go, depending on my mood. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, it will be a while before I arrive at the Q anyway (I only do a few a day, generally). If you need any help or have any advice for me, feel free to drop a note of course. Fram (talk) 14:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. I can take some of the smaller letters (one of my oddities - I love chasing Q's, X's, and Z's) and pick up the S's and T's and such. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I see you started, thanks! By the way, in case you can use it, I use for the original text, and  to copypaste the actual text (needs some copyediting afterwards based on the first link though, the OCR isn't always perfect). Fram (talk) 13:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what I do, actually. Great minds, and all. :-)
 * By the way, there seem to be three versions of Bryan's book floating out there on Google Books - there's a more comprehensive version from 1889 (I think? 1880-something), and another one still from 1904. I've used the 1889 version for some things - both should be in the public domain, correct?  Just to let you know, in case you're looking for something with more depth. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And an older, original version as well, which is apparently not available through Google books. The 1865 edition seems to be identical to the 1849 one, but there is an 1866 supplement of some 180 pages. My search didn't yield the newer ones, that's why I didn't use them. The 1903 edition is available through Archive.org though. Perhaps it's better to use that one, if we can make certain that it is public domain. Considering that the second author lived until 1942, that may still be tricky (death plus seventy years = 2012!). Perhaps a question for our copyright board or soemthing? The 1849 one is certainly save for work ;-) Fram (talk) 14:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't delved into the 1903 one yet, as there's ample material in the 1889 version for upload. And that should be public domain, near as I can tell.  If not...then, oops. :-)  (No big harm done, as most of the stuff I've written can be translated, if need be, from other Wikis.)  It has a supplement, too - not a large one, just about twenty pages or so. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed the 1889 one. I can't see any objection to using that one. Perhaps I'll change my 1849 articles to that one as well, as soon as I can find some easy-to-use links. Original text of part 1, part 2. I can't find a good copyable text source though, the text version at archive.org is dreadful, and I'm not going to transcribe those entries. Do you have a good method of getting the etxt from the 1886 version into Wikipedia? Otherwise I'll stick to the 1849 one after all. Fram (talk) 15:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's Volume 1 (A-K), and here's Volume 2 (L-Z), from Google Books; both have pretty good plain-text versions.
 * Also, if you're interesting, I found this, published in 1873 in Philadelphia by one Shearjashub Spooner. Might be some more fodder for articles there. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Bizarre. I get "no preview available" for the links you give to the Bryan version. Perhaps these are for some reason not viewable in Belgium, despite them being public domain? No idea, I'll try again tomorrow, to be certain that it isn't some page-per-day limit or other error on my part. Fram (talk) 15:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Bizarre indeed - I don't have any trouble with them whatsoever. I can't think what the issue might be. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Same problem this morning. The only thing I can imagine is that, despite going through Google.com, they use some public domain definition dependent on my country (Belgium), and somehow they don't believe that the book is available for me yet (or the uploader has given the rights for full view to some countries, but not to others). Google books are sometimes fickle in that regard. Anyway, having thought about it, we should really use the 1889 source instead of the 149 one, because it is more complete and (probably) more accurate, so I'll change the Bryan template to relect this, and will change all articles I have created based on Bryan so far. I'll not touch the ones you wrote, I hope that's allright? Fram (talk) 06:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfectly. One more thought - here's a plain-text link to the first volume, and here's the second, also plain-text.  By any chance might they work for you?
 * I might also play around with Mr. Spooner's book and see what comes up. (Remarkably, he has an article of his very own.  Who knew?) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, they don't work for me either, but thanks anyway. And I believe that everyone who has such an unusual name as Shearjashub Spooner should get an article :-) Fram (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more (what is it with American politicians? Seriously?).  Maybe I'll work up a template for Dr. Spooner, and transfer some of his content later, too.  It makes a change. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Spooner - what do you think? There's not a whole lot of stuff that isn't covered by Bryan, but there's enough that this is useful. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Good! We should have as complete as possible coverage of those painters. I have just updated Antoine Ansiaux, and considering where his work is located (or was at the time), it is good that we finally have something on him, even if it is an old text for the time being. Seeing that there are many similar artists missing, every effort and source to cover more is to be lauded. Fram (talk) 14:42, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

There are actually significant numbers of them covered on other Wikipedias, I've found: Albert, Max, and Robert, and Richard Zimmermann; Pieter Quast; Lorenzo Comendich; and Clemens von Zimmermann, to name a few. I'm not familiar with any (my art history degree notwithstanding :-)), but some evidently have some following, still, in their home countries. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

experienced enough
Hello! As you stated that you are experienced enough, you might be interested in this long-term experience. -- Matthead Discuß   13:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that they are the same (but I'm far from convinced that they aren't either). If you have more evidence, perhaps filing an SPI would be more useful, as no admin will block HP-1740B on an unsubstantiated claim alone. I will not take any admin actions against him, having been involved with both HP-1740B and Rex Germanus. I do notice that Dutch people was the last article Rex edited at length, and that he had serious problems with using sources correctly, and some other similarities, so they are certainly similar, but if there's more to this, I don't know. A sockpuppet investigation or an ANI report may help, perhaps. Fram (talk) 13:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Dan Maes Page
Fram: Can you please explain to me why the page keeps getting deleted? If the reason was a lack on my part to site the source for the image, please let me correct that. I didn't notice a requirement for that when i uploaded it. Can you restore that page or restore it to my personal site, so i can get it cleaned up? I had put some effort into that, and thought it was pretty clean. Thank you Eckirchn (talk) 17:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The text was a near-straight copy from the campaign website, which is a copyright violation (not allowed on Wikipedia at all), and creates a promotional, non-neutral article as well, which violates WP:NPOV and WP:SPS. Articles should not contain copyrighted text, and should be written in a neutral, objective tone, containng all relevant aspects (positive, neutral and negative), based on reliable, independent sources. The reason for the deletion was the copyright violation of the text, but the other aspects need a lot of work as well. Fram (talk) 06:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Bryan/Spooner redux
I took the liberty of mentioning both books over at WP:MEA: here's what I wrote. I thought there might be some people there with an interest in both books; I hope you don't mind. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Argumentum Ad Jimbonian
While your comment was probably meant well....I think that that the reference on Jimbo's page by Camelbinky were correct []. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

You didn't understand
My comment was in no way a insult to Wales. I approve of what he's doing completely. I was remarking though that moving out of the silent majority opens you to things like ArbCom sanctions. It was a insult toward a behavior of a group of people and not in anyways directed at Wales. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Depending on who you suppose is the "silent majority", your comment could be read both ways, and equally applicable in many ways. Fram (talk) 13:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've actually urged Jimbo to make some way to protect children without ocmplete censorship. In this case while it can mean several things it only means agrement and bagging on Arbcom bungling. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Polish Jura Chain
The word Chain should be deleted from the expression "Polish Jura Chain", because it resulted from wrong translation of the phrase "łańcuch górski" (=mountain range, not chain!!).--Sylwia Ufnalska (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Malamanteau
You should not have undeleted that page. Prodego talk  20:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. It was not my creation of a redirect, it was the restoration of an earlier redirect by someone else. Correct attribution is one of the main aspects of our licensing, and should be respected wherever possible. Perhaps you need to reread more than just our blocking policies... Fram (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Fram?
Noticed your name and wondered whether it was a hommage to this Norwegian ship. -Nomen Nescio(talk) 11:27, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it is from the Dutch word framboos - raspberry. Cuz he's Belgian. 86.89.146.118 (talk) 19:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the info :)---  Nomen Nescio  Gnothi seauton  contributions  14:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

India – Syria relations
Concerning the above page you deleted I was wondering why this was the case because numerous articels like Brazil–India relations was also a copy of the MEA info (reads like WP:OR). Instead the info could be tagged/removed with calls for more citations. Isn't that a better alternative than taking the page out? Documents by the state are in the public domain too.

I was wondering if there was a copy of the page before it was deleted around? Lihaas (talk) 14:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't believe a copy of the page is still available through Google cache or a Wikipedia mirror. Anyway, articles where are the versions (history) are partly or mostly coptyright violations shouldn't be improved and cnleaned, they are deleted and should be restarted. This also means that a page that is deleted for copyright violation can always be recreated (without the copyright violations) without any problem. Fram (talk) 14:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

BerndGalama
I've unblocked BerndGalama. You are absolutely not to block him again without speaking to me. If a user requests an unblock request, saying they want to edit constructively, we assume good faith and give them a second chance. The user informed me he no longer has the password to his old account, and so long as he makes good edits, WP:CLEANSTART applies. I left a note on the talk page of the account he informed me was his old account, User:Mrlob. Prodego talk  15:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why did you unblock a sock of an indeffed blocked editor? He has plenty of old accounts, has he forgotten the password to all of them? As I said, you should really, really reread policies before taking any more actions (not only related to this, but any admin actions at all), since you don't even apply WP:CLEANSTART correctly: "A clean start is permitted only if there are no bans, blocks or active sanctions in place against your old account". Fram (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * An indef block which I would have removed, if he had still had the password to his old account. So you can consider the old block 'lifted'. Worst case is he gets blocked again, best case he edits constructively. There really is nothing to lose. Prodego  talk  15:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a novel appraoch of cleanstart, unblock the old account (just one of them though, not all of them), and then claim that there are no active blocks... AGF is all very nice, but not when an account has socked and vandalized over and over again. Have you seen our blocking policy: "Except in cases of unambiguous error, administrators should avoid unblocking users without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator and discuss the matter with them." Furthermore, you indicated that he contacted you complaining about the blocks I made. This is not the behaviour of someone wanting to improve their act, that is the behaviour of womeone who just wants to continue stirring up trouble. Fram (talk) 15:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fram I never have been a vandal. I always edited in good faith and on my last account every single edit I made was sourced. All I wanted was to make a fresh new start, and you made that impossible for me. So I contacted someone who was willing to give me what I wanted. And so I am back, and I am here to stay. Deal with it - as long as I do no vandalism I cannot and will not be blocked. The block of my IP, btw, has run out already. Have a good day, BerndGalama (talk) 20:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I took it to ANI, Fram. I hope you will accept I am right and you are wrong and apologize to me. Kind regards, BerndGalama (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * FYI: ANI. – xeno talk 20:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Almost neutral observer:

I have to declare that I have a love of Belgium. I have been to Belgium several times. Some of those times, I was only technically in Belgium because I was only in at the airport in Zaventem.

I must say that I encourage camraderie and cooperation in Wikipedia. "You are absolutely not to block him again without speaking to me." sounds too rude and blunt to me.

On the other hand, administrators should clearly explain the reasons for block on the blocked person's user page. Simply making a declaration that they are a sock is not enough. In the USA in the 1950's, it was common to accuse someone of being a communist and their career was ruined. Under Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, simply wearing glasses was proof of being pro-Western and reason to be killed. A summary of evidence (not necessarily diff's but a simple explanation) is helpful to all. If this person is considered a sock, then the disruption should be explained. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Beware of Godwin's law. This is not life or death, it's only a website. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

"Lists of county governors of Norway" name change
There is a discussion on Talk:Lists of county governors of Norway about the name of the article, where you may want to contribute. Lampman (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Roamin' Bones
Hello-

I would like to know what can be modified about the Roamin' Bones page in order to restore it. 97.102.250.65 (talk) 23:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It would need to meet WP:N, i.e. you need significant coverage (not passing mentions) in reliable, independent sources (not student newspapers or local papers and the like, not webfora, but solid sourcing). Fram (talk) 06:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, well is there a way to retrieve the text from the page? I have no intention of restoring it, but I would like the text for posterity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.80.132.37 (talk) 14:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

What next
I would like to ask you... what do I do next? All my accounts are blocked and I wish to contribute. The block of my IP is over now, luckily, but I cannot edit properly from my IP-adress. Will I be allowed, with your approval, to create another account and tell you the name of it so you know about it? Or am I supposed to edit under my IP-adress now? 86.89.146.118 (talk) 11:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * You could of course, havingblown numerous chances here over and over again, just not edit here. Or at least stay away for more than a few months, and then come back acknowledging that you were correctly blocked (instead of claiming to never have vandalized and to have been incorrectly blocked, as you did just this week). If you can then also show some months (six or so) of constructive work on another Wikipedia version (or Wikisource, Commons, ...), then that would be a bonus. Considering that you have been blocked here in January, that you were also blocked in that period on the Duthc Wikipedia, and that you were still pleading total innocence the past few days, I don't believe the time is right to let you return (see e.g. the ANI thread you started). I don't think that telling what the account is that you claim has been editing the Dutch Wikipedia would significantly change this refusal, but it can hardly do any harm (I am not an admin at the Dutch Wikipedia, so I can't block you there in any case). I supposse you are nl:Gebruiker:Dr. Magnus, who has again tried to get Donia as a featured article and acts surprised when it is rejected, and who is now retired? Anyway, stay away for six months or more, and then present your case (e.g. with an unblock request at User talk:86.89.146.118) in a fair and complete manner. I will now reblock your IP address, you are free to post an earlier unblock request of course, but I wouldn't expect too much success if I were you. Fram (talk) 12:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Beans
I believe that is a known issue, filed in bugzilla somewhere. For obvious reasons, it's best not to talk about it publicly... – xeno talk 14:04, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, our posts crossed. I'll try to find it in bugzilla, but that's not really my favourite territory. Fram (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble finding it too. Surprised. – xeno talk 14:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Oil
When I see your name in debates about blocking or not, I'm reminded of Fram (oil filter) and their slogan, "Pay now, or pay later." :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I prefer thinking that I'm an incarnation of Fram, meaning Forward, which would give me my own museum :-) I'm glad that you are not one of those editors who take one negative encounter with another editor on Wikipedia as the start of a never-ending vendetta. Fram (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, that sounds like a personal attack! I will fight you to the death over it!
 * Come to think of it, I won't fight you to the death over it. I'm not allowed to do anything to the death. Doctor's orders. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Gelijkgeaard
Hi Fram,

You wrote ''"Gelijkgeaard" is "Likeminded", or "similar". "Common" is something different.''

Being Dutch I tend to disagree with this translation. 'aard' comes closer to the English word character than to mind. The literal translation of 'gelijk' is equal. Together one probably means similar or close, nearly the same. Hope you get the gist. My €0.02  Patio (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I gave "similar" as one of two possibilities. To get "common", one would neet "gemeenschappelijk" instead of "gelijkgeaard". "Similar" would normally be "gelijkaardig", not "gelijkgeaard". "Of a similar character" is perhaps the best approximation. Fram (talk) 14:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

on-and-off e-mail
This provides a clue about receiving spam with no e-mail account. Possibly. Or maybe not, I am losing the will to live following this saga. pablo hablo. 23:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Non-orphan language articles
Hi Fram,

You recently moved Non-orphan language articles to my user space. Problem is, that negates its effect, which is to prevent the orphan bot from tagging non-orphan articles as orphans. (These articles on very minor languages are linked through their linguistic classification, and that's all that any of them are likely to ever be linked to, unless s.o. creates corresponding articles on ethnicities, which are similarly obscure.)

Ideally, we'd simply tag the articles so that the orphan bot would ignore them, and could delete this faux 'article' altogether. Do you know of any way to do that? — kwami (talk) 20:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Can't you create a "real" article, e.g. list of languages, or Index of language articles? These are acceptable. An article specifically made for Wikipedia purposes only is not acceptable though. Are these orphan articles included in the List of languages by name? That may solve the problem as well. Fram (talk) 06:47, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, that may do it. I'd avoided that list as largely meaningless. — kwami (talk) 08:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeh, I don't know it is a useful list, but it is acceptable, which is the only thing we need now. I noticed that at least some of the articles on the orphan page are already included in it. Fram (talk) 08:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Laeken move
Hello! It occurred to me today that you are perhaps the only administrator who is familiar with Belgian topics. I would therefore like to ask you to help correct something that's been perpetuated only because of inertia and technical restrictions.

The community reached a consensus on language use in Brussels articles, found at WikiProject Belgium/Brussels naming conventions. Some time ago, User:Westermarck unilaterally moved Laeken to Laken, and used the scorched-earth tactic of giving it an edit history so nobody could move it back. See here (I tried to fix it; it didn't work). Westermarck has a long history of disruptive editing and unilateral moves; see his contributions and his talk page's history if you're interested in details. At any rate, once we had reached the consensus on naming Brussels-related articles, I put Laken as a requested move, but nobody really participated except Westermarck, who objected to using French names at all, so he just stonewalled the discussion, completely ignoring the consensus.

Could you please move Laken to Laeken? I know you're a Dutch-speaker and the topic is sensitive, but that's why we agreed on reaching a consensus on this sort of issue. It would be great if we could finally get this fixed, and if you have any questions or comments, please let me know. Cheers!  Oreo Priest  talk 19:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Moved. It was included (but buried deep inside) the naming survey, and it is pretty obvious that Laeken is by far the most common name in English. Fram (talk) 07:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  Oreo Priest  talk 18:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So apparently Westermarck also did the same thing to Royal Castle of Laken. Would you mind fixing it too? Thanks,  Oreo Priest  talk 16:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. His method of preventing removes is rather disruptive, and Google Books makes it very obvious that not one real book uses the Laken spelling (the two books returned are "books" made by pasting together Wikipedia pages). Fram (talk) 06:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Brussels
You have again reverted me at Brussels, removing Lang templates and removing information from the body of the article. Please fix both matters. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I had not removed info from the body of the article at all, the sentence you included in brackets in a barely relevant place duplicated info contained (in a better way) in the very next subsection. I have added the ref from the infobox there as well, as that would have been an improvement, instead of removing it from the infobox. I have also readded the invisible languagie indiactors, while keeping the visible ones. We are writing for human Wikipedia readers in the first place, not primarily for search engines, semantic bots, ... If you can combine them without loss of info for the reader, fine. Otherwise, please don't bother. Fram (talk) 12:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

InterPals
About an hour ago you made and a corresponding one on the article talk page. The newbie SPA IP editor who made those posts also left a on my user talk page, which I've reverted for the same reasons that you did those. (I've also asked the oversight folks whether they might want to oversight it, so it might disappear before you see it, but if it does, it was essentially similar to the ones you deleted.) I fully agree that they needed to be removed, but I'm concerned that he was making, at least, a credible sockpuppet claim about his antagonist using an IP address and a username. I've looked at the posts and I think that the question of whether the alleged puppeteer was just forgetting to sign in or was attempting to game the system is a pretty close call. Did you look at that issue? If not, would you? I'm concerned that the evidence is not clear enough to start an SPI, but I wonder if it's not at least clear enough to justify a warning. What do you think? Best regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 14:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC) I have also asked oversight for the pages I reverted. As for the actual issue, the page he wants included will soon be deleted through AfD, making most other concerns moot. If he continues, then it may become worthwile to investigate possible socking, but for now it doesn't seem worth the trouble. Fram (talk) 14:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Game of Mr Paint and Mrs Correct
Hi Fram. I created the above article and you put a delete tag on it. Where is the best place to discuss the issue? Best wishes, Robinh (talk) 12:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've replied on the talk page of the article, which is the best place for this. Fram (talk) 12:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

County governors
Hiya! Just letting you know of a question at Talk:Lists of county governors of Norway. Cheers,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 19:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Peter Damian here
Correcting a spelling mistake. Please feel free to revert back, and to block this IP. The Burley article needs a lot of work. 86.182.216.133 (talk) 08:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

You may have caught another sock ...
... with your Meezu block. See here (I just declined unblock-auto on those grounds). Daniel Case (talk) 16:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

AFD for Articles for deletion/Mixing in the Food Industry
You commented on a similar AFD here: Articles for deletion/Mixing in Consumer Products. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

History of Logic
I note that you undid the edit by Peter Damian in History of Logic, in accordance with the policy on banned users, however, the edit itself has merit. Would it be alright by you if I restored it? I am not trying to edit on behalf of a banned user here, my only concern is the article, which was messed up by an ignorant, fanatical POV-pusher. I will take full responsibility for the edit. Regards, Athenean (talk) 18:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Be bold. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, people may always redo a change by a banned users if they believe that it is a good edit they want to do themselves. Fram (talk) 06:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Rank Names vs rank names vs Rank names
Hi! I see you've renamed Brigadier General to Brigadier general (presumably because WP won't let you rename it to brigadier general). In case you weren't aware, this was, at one time, a fiercely argued topic. (e.g. see talk: rear admiral.) Once-upon-a-time I would have argued long and hard with you, but now I'm somewhat resigned to the fact. However, the reason I'm here is to point out to that, as far as I'm aware, rear admiral and (now) brigadier general are the only ranks so named, and ALL the other two-word-named-ranks are still "Xxxx Yyyy". Are you planning to rename ALL of them? Don't you think it might be a good idea to canvass opinions and discuss the matter first? I'll be interested to read your reply. Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I came across the article through an unrelated report on WP:ANI (or WP:AN). I noticed that it was incorrectly capitalized, just like Rear admiral was, long ago. I didn't plan to move all the other ones at the same time (there are some tricky ones, where it is more of a title than a job, like Master of the Horses). Note, by the way, that Brigadier general (United States) has been at that capitalization for a long time yet (since july 2008, and not moved by me), so it's not as if the move was unprecedented. Fram (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "so it's not as if the move was unprecedented" - I wasn't trying to imply that it was - sorry if I was ambiguous.
 * Never-the-less:
 * Are you planning to rename ALL of the "non-tricky" ones?
 * Don't you think it might be a good idea to canvass opinions and discuss the matter first?
 * I'll be interested to read your reply.
 * Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no fixed plans for the moment. I have noticed a few years ago that many editors of the MilHist project (or at least those that respond to earlier move discussions) seem to be rather entrenched in their nomenclature, even when it conflicts with general Wikipedia rules. But I have also noticed that once an article is moved, most editors don't seem to care one way or another, and the move sticks (as evidenced by e.g. the Brigadier general (United States) example above). So this seems to be a situation where a fait accompli is more useful than starting with a discussion. Just using WP:BRD, basically. Fram (talk) 06:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Although it isn't my POV, I find I must agree with your highly pragmatic observations. (I said I would be interested to read your reply!) Many thanks. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Explanation of deletion
Can you please explain why you deleted the article on Josh Hill. It was created using genuine references, pinpointing the sources as per guidelines. All facts and figues were correct and, as far as I can tell, was in no way breaching the terms of this site.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord depravus (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * We just had a deletion discussion about this article, resulting in the deletion on June 9 of this page: Articles for deletion/Joshua Hill (racing driver). To instantly recreate this page, with some primary sources (websites for organisations he races for or with), is not sufficient to ignore this discussion. You can always try your luck at WP:DRV though, or you can create a page in your own userspace, adding all reliable, independent sources you can find, before discussing this again. Fram (talk) 06:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Overleg over archaïsche verbuigingen in het Nederland
Hoi Fram, Enkele collegae hebben in nl:Wikipedia:Taalcafé overlegd over achterhaalde verbuigingen. Zou ook hier (Archaic Dutch declension) verbetering behoeven. Wil je daarbij helpen? Alvast bedankt, Patio (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Trecento
"Trecento painters" means painters from the 14th century. By your intervention we lose the nationality catagorization. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Trecento is specifically about Italy: "The Trecento (Italian for 300, or from "mille trecento," 1300) refers to the 14th century in Italian cultural history." It is made as a parallel to the category Category:Quattrocento painters, which has existed for three years now (and with which I wasn't involved). Furthermore, Trecento painters is a subcategory of Italian painters, so everyone looking for Italian painters wil come across it. But instead of needing to search through 2000 articles, they are now all grouped. Fram (talk) 13:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, but I think this is a typical Anglophone deformation, and I seem it doesn't infere immediately "Italian". In Italy "Trecento" means 14th century. Let me know... --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 13:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really a deformation, just an adaptation. When discussing in English (and Dutch, and as far as I know most languages apart from Italian) the Trecento, Ducento, Quattrocento, it is (nearly) always used to mean an artistic period in Italy. No one will discuss the Trecento painters of France or the Quattrocento architecture of Flanders. Fram (talk) 13:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strange. In Italy we say "Trecento" also for France, Flanders etc. Anyway, this is an English encyclopedia, so I live with English errors ;) Joking. Ciao and good work. --&#39;&#39;&#39;Attilios&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem! I understand your concern, but obviously non-Italians knwo better what Italian words mean than Italians do :-) Similarly, what we call "Flemish primitives" in Flanders has become "Early Netherlandish painting" in English. Art history does strange things to people and languages... Fram (talk) 14:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As the writer of Italian Renaissance painting, and the major contributor to Giotto, Fra Angelico, Leonardo, Sistine Chapel ceiling, and Renaissance architecture, I would like to state that I consider it inappropriate to categorize painters by the Italian terms "trecento" etc. Can I remind you that this is an English encyclopedia?  While professors and university students of Fine Arts (specifically) may be expected to have the term "trecento" in their vocabulary, no-one else does! The whole idea of categories is to make Wikipedia accessible. Please categorise them under a century. In English. Amandajm (talk) 08:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And yet, we have had the sazme category for the Quattrocento for years, and this is the universally accepted term for this art period, also used in e.g. Template:Art of Italy or Music of the Trecento (not "thirteenth century music of Italy") and the accompanying category Category:Trecento composers. So thisnew category fits perfectly in the existing scheme of categories, both for painters and for the period. We shouldn't be dumbing down Wikipedia. An explanatory note can be added to the category if you think this is necessary though. Fram (talk) 09:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page?
Your such a c*nt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgefarr (talk • contribs) 16:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete this Category:Wikipedia possible inappropriate reviews
This is a list for the flagged revisions trial. People can report if they think a flagged revision was too strict or not strict enough along with diffs. This is not controversial but will let use have the facts when the trial is over in 2 months, rather than just say "I think it worked" or "I think it did not work". Please restore this or let me know why it is disruptive. I'm not going to fight over this, though. Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2010 (UTC) I see that you want a noticeboard. Fine with me! It has been created by someone elese. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not that I want a noticeboard, or that I think it is disruptive. It is that you can only add current, active versions of pages to categories. You can not populate a category with diffs, which was what you were planning. This meant that the category would effectively stay empty forever, and so was a speedy deletion candidate. Fram (talk) 06:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics and Template:Infobox graphic novel
Hi, Fram.

I've mentioned the above wikiproject and template as well as a whole category of templates at: which is a sort of workshop for an RfC (or multiple RfCs) concerning the whole issue of colour use, and wikiproject authority. I see you've been heavily involved in this and am letting you know; a few other interested parties, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * User talk:Moonriddengirl/RfC

Consensus discussion on source reliability/notability
Hi. I've started a consensus discussion here. Would you please participate? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

/* Nils Rosén von Rosenstein */
At Template talk:Did you know, I have pointed out a couple of things in the article that appear to me to be incorrect, but I don't have access to Blunt and don't know if these are your mistakes or Blunt's. I think you ought to double-check Blunt and any other sources you may have used. --Hegvald (talk) 04:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Conversion does not have to be central to someone's notability to be listed
By your logic we would only list birth years, schools attended and many other things if these were "central to a person's notability". Conversion from Judaism is part of a person's notability because it is similar to things like "Americans of Italian descent". As long as the conversion is spoken of in the article it is clearly notable enough to be categorized.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The category description disagrees, and I agree with how that category is set up. We don't make categories for everyone that moved from one state to another or one city to another, we don't make categories for everyone who becomes a widower or a widow, we don't categorize tons of verifiable information about people despite it being included in their articles (cat:people without children, peopel with one child, people with two children, ...). When something is true about a person, but not really something they are known for, then it shouldn't be the basis for their categorization, except for a few agreed upon things (living or not, year of birth and death). From WP:CAT: "Categories should be useful for readers to find and navigate sets of related articles. They should be the categories under which readers would most likely look if they were not sure of where to find an article on a given subject. They should be based on essential, "defining" features of article subjects, such as nationality or notable profession (in the case of people) [...]" For those people where I reverted your addition of the cat, their conversion was not an essential, defining feature of the subject, but something that also happened in their life. Overcategorization is the ruling guideline here. It contains "people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career." Please stop adding religious categories to people where it had no significance in their career (no matter if it was important in their personal life: if it has no significance in their career, it shouldn't be a category. A theologian who converts, or C.S. Lewis, or Muhammad Ali, are obvious people where the cats should be included. In most other cases, it shouldn't. Fram (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

GNFE at AfD
Hi Fram, I'm really pleased to see this article back at AfD, you've made a much stronger case than I did the first time - I guess I thought that it was obvious that it was all self-glorification, but I got outvoted by the SPAs. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Another hand in the GNFE circle-jerk
Hi Fram. I wanted to verify for myself your assertion about the circular dependence of notability between GNFE and WOSCO and came across another site by the good 'professor doctor' : IC Geochange. And further, the good 'doctor' is also claiming an affiliation with NATO: http://www.sfp-982167.org/ on which he is hawking his magical earthquake detecting machine in a 60 odd page what looks like sales brochure http://www.sfp-982167.org/Images/broshura.pdf. Mtiffany71 (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Nils Rosén von Rosenstein
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Tiësto
Hi Fram. I note that you accepted this change to Tiësto. I don't know much about Dutch pronunciation, but this change removes the "T" sound at the beginning of his name, so I don't think it's correct. Besides, the same change had previously been rejected by User:deliriousandlost. Is this change in phonetics definitely correct? Thanks, CLW (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I am here to ask the same thing: can you please explain why i am wrong. I spent a long time looking into it before rejecting it as i don't speak the language. It looks like the pronunciation is changed to what would be written in English as Hësto. Then there is the significant changes to the pronunciation of his birth name. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 13:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * No, I am not claiming that it is definitely correct, however, pending changes is for articles "being checked for vandalism and clear errors": this change was not (obvious) vandalism) not a clear error (Tiësto can possibly be pronounced ti-esto or Tsi-esto or Tjesto or Tsjesto or ...) My accepting the pending change does not endorse this version over the previous one, it only indicates that it is a possibly productive edit, assuming good faith of the editor. You are free to improve, reverse, ... without feeling contradicted by my action. And by the way, the accepted change would not be soemthing like Hësto, but Chesto (with an English ch linke in chip). This is comparable to my "spelling of Tsjesto above. No idea if it is correct, but it is a quite possible pronunciation. Fram (talk) 13:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looking at the other changes I accepted, it looks to me as if the change to the "l" in Michiel is an improvement, the change to the "ij" sound is also an improvement, I am unsure whether IPA includes "'" to indicate the stress, but if it does, these changes as well are an improvement... Tiësto I would personally pronounce with IPA "tj", not "ti" or "c", but that's a content dispute that should not be settled by not accepting the changes of one side of the dispute. All in all, I see no reason not to accept these changes. Fram (talk) 14:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I did make a typo in writing "Hësto". It should have been "Chesto". Until you approved it i thought it nothing more than sneaky vandalism as i have never once heard it pronounced that way. It may be odd to mention but in slightly archaic English an "ë" was used to mark the second of consecutive vowels (in this case an "e") that are to be pronounced separately - cooperation, co-operation, or coöperation. I happen to be one of the few in the world these days to write coöperation. Looking at the Dutch and Afrikaans IPA, "i" like the English "deep" is how i have heard Tiësto pronounced almost exclusively by others and always by the man himself. Hence the change is odd to me as it seems to be saying he doesn't know how to pronounce his own nickname, which he made up. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 14:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no idea how he pronounces his own nickname, and am not disputing that you are correct there. I based my comments on what I heard on the radio (and TV, didn't he play at the opening of the Olympics?) and how I would transcribe those pronunciations. Considering that his other changes seem to be defendable, I believe that his change to the Tiësto pronunciation is also well intentioned. An article talk page discussion may be the best solution here (and a note on the IP talk page as well perhaps). Fram (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2010 (UTC)