User talk:GhostofSuperslum

Clarence Ransom Edwards and Bureau of Insular Affairs
Great job linking from my new article Bureau of Insular Affairs to Clarence Ransom Edwards. I had thought there might be an article on General Edwards based on his accomplishments during World War I, but I tried "Clarence Edwards" and "Clarence R. Edwards" without success, and didn't think to try "Clarence Ransom Edwards." Just out of curiosity, may I ask how you found my new article (I created it just an hour ago) so quickly? Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick reply. When you have the basics done for the McIntyre article, I'll add some information I have about his work at Insular Affairs. Though pretty much forgotten today, he was a major figure in the political life of Puerto Rico and the Philippines for almost 20 years. I will try to beef up the Edwards article a bit more as well. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

List of African-American firsts
Please do not violate Wikipedia rules of civility. One should no longer call the article here "dumb" any more than one should call your comment "ignorant" or "racist." If you'll look through Wikipedia, you'll find many encyclopedic lists. The purpose of this particular one is given in the article lead.

Welcome to the Wikipedia community, and we encourage you to make meaningful contibutions to this noble attempt at making knowledge and information freely and readily accessible to people all ove the world.--Tenebrae 14:27, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Mary Anne Everett Green
Coincidence - I'd started to write about MAE Green a few days ago and just as I finished, I found you'd already made a start! Couldn't find anything about her being a philanthropist, though. I wonder if that could be one of the NIE's errors? --HJMG 22:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. Yes, I see what you mean - though she was paid. (less than the men!) I'll stick philanthropy back in and see if I can find out more some time. --HJMG 08:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Darwinek 22:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

List of people by name: Ande
Thanks for your many useful-looking additions. But i reverted the 2nd of your two edits to List of people by name: Ande. If you think the incompleteness of the information on LoPbN is troublesome, please feel free to add entries lk'g to other WP bios, but Thanks. --Jerzy•t 05:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Don't remove valid entries as you did, and
 * 2) Don't insert links (other than inside commented-out markup) to articles that are not bios -- not even to Dab pages that list bios.

Hermann Munk
Hi GhostofSuperslum,

I noticed you recently created the article about Hermann Munk. I just wanted to let you know that you can announce any new Germany-related articles at Portal:Germany/New article announcements and Portal:Germany/New articles. That way other users interested in the topic can see them and might improve them.

You may also be interested in the WikiProject Germany.

Thanks,

--Carabinieri 2024

Errors in the New International Encyclopedia
In errors, you recently noted Prince George County, Virginia issues - just as an FYI they may be referring to Prince George's County, Maryland which is extremely close. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 15:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

LoPbN
Thanks for your diligent additions to LoPbN, but please don't include lks other than to the bio article on the person the entry is about. The list is a navigational tool, which ideally would have no more than the person's name in cases where there is no chance of confusion between similar names. (The vital stats, nationality, and calling of primary notability are a compromise with two realities: The situation is similar to that of one of the two most prominent types of nav pages, the Dabs, so viewing WP:MOSDAB and its talk page and talk archives can offer perspective. In contrast to articles, where florid wikification is a virtue, nav pages should be as focused as is feasible on the style of nav'n that justifies their existence; extra text and extra lks are just visual and mental clutter and distractions that impede navigation. I keep noticing your LoPbN work, and i hope you'll keep it up. Thanks again, --Jerzy•t 20:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) We're not that good at anticipating where confusion is moderately likely, so having a little more avoids a lot user effort.
 * 2) Having 99% of entries in the same format seems to help reduce efforts by users to compress the bio article into 10 or 100 or i suppose, if there were enuf 100-word examples, 1000 words in the LoPbN entry.)
 * Yeah, i'm surprised all over again daily by the rocks that i turn over. Today, after subdividing the section "Howa" on List of people by name: How, because it got too long, i checked before saving, to be sure there weren't any surnames, other than Howard, beginning Howa... on Category:Living people. I ended up adding 7 new headings beyond the two within Howard.
 * My response above was to your G.W. Cutter entry, altho i had glanced at the diffs for your LoPbN Schm edits & noted that they also need attention. Rather than giving you chapter & verse, i'm about to convert them (and the WS bio & Dab pages) to established format, and invite you to ask for specific explanations or make cases for new formats. --Jerzy•t 22:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * WP would not be what it is, if WP:BOLD were not such an effective approach for learning! And let me repeat, lest you use me to discourage yourself, that (even tho the scope of such changes would be hundreds pages) these formats are barely endorsed by the editing community beyond relative silence meaning relative consent. In fact, the questions raised in the last month or so have been more substantial than for a long time, and your ideas may be part of a welcome groundswell that could lead to a formal WP:MOS page for LoPbN, perhaps covering other Lists of people. Your name is the first on a written list of possibly interested editors, which i'll flesh out by reviewing the recent history of my talk page for exact spellings against the list in my head. --Jerzy•t 23:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Here i am again, i suppose nagging. There's nothing that holy on LoPbN about our putting a comma after the bio'd person's vital stats (and BTW, as you're already doing, not before them), but consistent format is valuable, so your doing so when you remember will save edits. And, not-entirely-BTW, the Tl LoPbN Entry one of our colleagues has put together may save you both effort and slips of the pen, once you've used it a few times & start to remember its name. A typical example of its use is *Theodore Dru Alison producing --Jerzy•t 05:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * | Theodore Dru Alison American zoologist

Statesman
_ _ 1911 EB is one source of description of people as "statesman", but IMO it is, 96 years later, archaic except in speeches of praise: note the invariably positive terms "statesmanship" and "statesman-like". "Politician" can be used negatively, but is much less inherantly PoV than "statesman" has become. Thus the p word is by far more suitable to WP in general, and necessary on LoPbN, where (in contrast to a bio article) there is no room for providing nuance & clarification. _ _ If you disagree, and the s word is important to you, raise it on Talk:LoPbN so it can be considered as a list-wide issue rather than article by article. The p one is strongly predominant in LoPbN and is gradually becoming moreso: it is a de facto standard. Letting individual changes to s stand would be chaotic, and a source of PoV, as advocates seek "statesman" status for their favorites. Thanks for asking. --Jerzy•t 23:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * _ _ I know what you mean by
 * the "What links here" part in the toolbox
 * but not what you mean by
 * I use the lists to fulfill [it].
 * _ _ Look at the entries you added on Jones, and the edit that, i think among other things, removed all those rdlks. Are those what you spoke of on my talk page? Also see Talk:Red link. Consider learning to use the facilities i've just demonstrated, perhaps via the tutorials listed above, and more importantly, how i knew where to apply those facilities. (You've passed 1000 edits, and IMO you'll multiply your influence and value here by learning more rapidly, even at the cost of contributing a little more slowly.)
 * _ _ I am an advocate for rd-lks, and if i've removed any of yours on LoPbN-tree pages, i'd be glad to discuss some individual cases; "I've been mistaken before, and it could happen a second time." I'll do my best to note & defend (sensible sounding) rdlks for real people (including all those i glanced at among those Jones removals) that you add to the LoPbN tree, unless someone makes a claim of non-notability that makes it credible that they've been individually evaluated for notability -- especially so if you find it worthwhile to put Google-test results or mention of your source in either comments at the end of the entry's line or on the talk page. But i don't think i want to become a hired gun for that, by carrying it beyond the pages i focus on.
 * _ _ Re the format conventions that you mention your adoption of, i'm not sure any of them have been arrived at by as wide a consensus as most WP:MOS ones, but it think all are backed up by at least wide use and lack of substantial objection. IMO most and perhaps any of them could be changed by a solid consensus at WP:MOSBIO or, if not relevant or not decided there, even just Talk:LoPbN. While i think stability and consensus before change are crucial, nearly the only principle i consider worth a hard fight for is "low-resolution terminology", based on navigation as the sole indispensible purpose of LoPbN (even, really, as to rdlks on it), and brevity as a support for nav'l ease. So don't take my format pronunciamentos too seriously.
 * _ _ One variation on the dates convention you've inferred is e.g.
 * (1949/50-2000)
 * for someone who's known only to have died in 2000 (whether specific day of year or not) at the age of 50. I recall being apologetic abt it, perhaps in a discussion of disapproving the vital-stats variation you mention, and being told that consecutive years were not a target of that disapproval.
 * _ _ What you say about "politician" is interesting and IMO potentially important, tho i'm pretty sure you're the first to suggest it. Don't hesitate to start a discussion beyond us two.
 * _ _ I've been getting away w/o writing down in one place the standards i apply in reviewing recent LoPbN edits, let alone keeping track of where on the range between learning from others and inventing they arose, so i hope you won't feel too bad abt asking why occasionally in the future. --Jerzy•t 07:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, and don't forget to consider writing a stub that satisfies the rd lk you want to add. I remember doing that for one of the Chaplins (could it have been Josephine?) when i removed the IMDb lk from her LoPbN entry, and having it speedied, but i think it's now easier to know what is not speediable (and the deleter eventually went away mad from WP -- i think not due to me). --Jerzy•t 07:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It was actually a 31 March 2005 revision of Victoria Chaplin, that i don't think you'd be able to see. --Jerzy•t 07:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Andrade
Checking; not sure whether i'll have to ask you questions. --Jerzy•t 03:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

See List of people by name: Andf-Andz. I'm not sure what you couldn't do, but i converted numeric char representations to (i think) Unicode, which i think is preferred. Should the old entry be discarded in favor of the one i coded? Do the articles or Rdrs need adjustment in some way? --Jerzy•t 03:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

All's well that ends well. --Jerzy•t 04:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Andrews (surname)
Please do not add unhelpful and non-constructive information to Wikipedia. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. worthawholebean talkcontribs 11:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject France
Hi ! I have noticed that you have recently created several articles related to France. Kindly do announce such artilces on the WikiProject France/New article announcements page. This helps other editors interested in France-related topics to contribute and help improve artciles. Happy editing, STTW (talk)  22:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for announcing the articles, have a look at WP:MOSNUM on how to link dates on articles. STTW (talk)  13:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Siegfried Jacobsen
Have a look here. Ekki01 17:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Lks on LoPbN to Dabs
The LoPbN tree has been a list of bios for longer than its history can be traced, and the nature of Dab articles for a name does not suit lks to them for fulfilling the purposes that have evolved for the list. Your interest in these cases is admirable, but creating LoPbN-style entries that point to Dabs is counterproductive, bcz it leaves the impression that such lks are an appropriate permanent feature of the list, whereas in fact they would at best be stopgaps. Here are three other suggestions: --Jerzy•t 15:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Create LoPbN-syle entries on LoPbN pages covering the people on the Dab pages.
 * 2) Make sure there are lks to Dabs rich in names suitable to a given page or given part of a page, hidden in cmts: tho they don't render on the corresponding page, these lks are useful for lk'g via the Pop-up editing tools. That will encourage editors to add such names &/or check whether new ones have appeared, & will facilitate their doing so if they choose.
 * 3) Propose language for a template, analogous to stub templates, that would, temporarily, specifically invite editors to enhance a give LoPbN page or section by adding names missing from that place but known to be on the Dab. However, bear in mind that this would entail WP:SELF, and thus require oversight well beyond what is called for by creation of more typical templates.

BROWN
_ _ (You wrote:
 * I placed some names at BROWN that are still broken (red) links. After I submit as many articles at those broken (red) links as I possibly can,  I shall henceforth refrain from introducing broken (red) links into the lists.  It generates too many discombobulations within the lists.  The lists are far too complex for me to understand.   GhostofSuperslum 01:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps my writing you a few hours earlier, about your adding LoPbN entries to List of people by name: Brown, raised for you the thought of writing me about your apparent frustrations -- but AFAI can tell, this is a change of topic, and i won't try to connect your msg to mine.) _ _ I also sometimes see things going on on WP that i suspect i just don't get. I'm not sure what aspect of LoPbN is involved in your own understanding gap, and in any case, i'm not always good at trying to clarify tough spots that i think i understand to others -- tho i can try, if you want to be more concrete. _ _ But as to rd-lks, i don't think you should feel obligated to add an article just bcz you created the rd-lk to it. WP thrives on one person creating a rd-lk and another creating at least a stub to satisfy it. IMO, WP and LoPbN are likely to suffer if you forgo adding rd-lks for notable people, just bcz you don't have time to also write the bio -- after all, except for topics so non-notable that they never emerge from orphan-hood, doing a really thorough job on any article would theoretically require checking virtually every other article (and making improvements it most of them!). Of course, it's you who must be satisfied with whatever pattern of loose ends you leave to your colleagues -- so, as always, while i am a dedicated assignment editor, there's only one WP editor under my direction. _ _ Thanks for you work, and your effort, if i understand what you're saying, to be as responsible editor as possible. --Jerzy•t 15:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This P.S. may be an irrelevant last thot, but it occurred to me that one possible connection between rd-lks and discombobulations is that there is no well-established means of getting rd-lks that would apply to the same topic together. But WP:TPFR does work reasonably well, and it's a lot easier to use now, especially with bio articles, in light of the new tpfr.  If it looks relevant, but the instructions aren't clear enuf, ask me a question. --Jerzy•t 15:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Departing
Why? Ekki01 18:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I thoroughly endorse this departure. I guess I'm just not a fan of racism. --Chris Griswold (  ☎  ☓  ) 23:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Repost of Dan King (physician)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dan King (physician), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dan King (physician) was previously deleted as a result of an articles for deletion (or another XfD) To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dan King (physician), please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Dan King (physician) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

An invitation
I speak on the behalf of Magnus. Magnus is a respected wikipedian, and he invites you personally to join his esteemed clan for he enjoyed your contribution to this page. This will, I assure you, be beneficial to you. If you want to take up this rare oppertunity, you will contact me on MY talk page. Do not contact Magnus himself, he is a very busy man. I must point out that should you contact Magnus directly, your invitation will be voided. I hope to hear from you soon. Kindest regards, D&#39;ragos Morgul (Messenger of Magnus) 13:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
Magnus thanks you. You will be notified when Magnus has a task for you. It will be within the next 24 hours. May Magnus guide you always. D&#39;ragos Morgul (Messenger of Magnus) 21:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The time has come
Magnus is sorry for the delay. He has a task for you. Tell me when you are ready to accept. May Magnus guide you always. D&#39;ragos Morgul (Messenger of Magnus) (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Nelson Beach


The article David Nelson Beach has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Apparently no claim to notability under WP:GNG

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LordVetinari (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

You're invited to join WikiProject Women artists!
SarahStierch (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Officially missing
You have been listed at Missing Wikipedians. Should you ever return, please remove your name from the list. If you do not wish to be listed, please leave a note indicating such. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 02:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roy Stuart Brown


The article Roy Stuart Brown has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "not finding significant coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. Junior ranking officer so does not meet WP:SOLDIER"

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. Dumelow (talk) 14:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)