User talk:Havelock Jones

Hello, and welcome
In the circumstances, a welcome template seems redundant; but you've boldly dared the quaking bogs, morasses and abysses of Great Goddesses and their like. Kudos for clarity and scholarly rigour! Haploidavey (talk) 15:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you: I took heart from your having cleared away some of the denser thickets from around Gaia.Havelock Jones (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Occupy Movement Article updates
Hello,

I am working on updating the Occupy Movement and other related articles, and back in 2014 you suggested that the page needed updating. I appreciate any insight you have to offer on improvements. Can I ask what you would like to see updated in order for the notice at the top to be removed? I hope that you can get back to me in a timely manner as my project is due this coming Saturday.

Thank you!Zootberg (talk) 20:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Orchid RM
Hi Havelock Jones, thanks for closing the RM at Talk:Orchidaceae. However, I disagree with your close. A lot of the opposes said something along the lines of "orchids can mean other things". I think those !votes should be discounted because the status quo is that the plant family is already the primary topic for "orchid". The main other opposing argument was WP:CONSISTENCY. However, other editors and me showed many examples of plant taxons using the vernacular name, like cactus, fern and oak. The main policy to consider is NCFLORA, which says to use the vernacular name when the plant has agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany. To sum up, I think considering the policy and strength of the arguments the consensus is in favour of the move. Vpab15 (talk) 11:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In my judgment, "orchids can mean other things" is a statement that the proposed new title was not WP:PRECISE. The existence of a primary redirect implies a consensus that the subject is WP:PRIMARY, but it doesn't follow that it precisely scopes the article.  Some editors considered it did and other editors considered it didn't, so there was no consensus.Havelock Jones (talk) 11:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think WP:PRECISE applies here. The whole point of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is that there is no need for disambiguation. Vpab15 (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no disambiguation, since there's a primary redirect. A user searching for "Orchid" will arrive the right place.  I understand that you think some opposing editors were making an irrelevant point, but that is not how I read their comments.  You made this point during the RM, but you did not convice the opposing editors to change their position.  Of course you can take the matter to WP:MR, but to me the discussion very clearly reached no consensus. Havelock Jones (talk) 11:36, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Move review for Orchidaceae
An editor has asked for a Move review of Orchidaceae. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. Vpab15 (talk) 11:51, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:Requested moves/Closing instructions
I am concerned about your RM closing. I recommend two.

1. At the end of your comments mark your signature.

2. Under your RM closing comments use horizontal rules.

See your edition Special:Permalink/1045762881. Many were confused. Who did write comments from "This is an unusual" to "(non-admin closure)"? What was the request details? I expect that User:Paine Ellsworth is of the same opinion per. I want you to understand some circumstances. Regards. Sawol (talk) 18:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I have worked out what the problem is: I was doing: resultBlah blah blah. but I need the first pair of closing braces to move to end, thus: resultBlah blah blah. Thank you for correcting so many of my errors. I have done the few you missed, so I hope it looks ok now. Havelock Jones (talk) 20:54, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm also very thankful for editors like, editors who helped me when I first started closing discussions. Key is doing a thorough preview before you save/publish your closure. I still sometimes make little mistakes, for example, , which just shows how I now like to check and double check my closes. We continue to learn, and making mistakes helps us do so. Best to you both!  P.I. Ellsworth &numsp;- ed.  put'r there 02:21, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Haurun
Hey thanks for that change [| right here] at Haurun. Sorry I didn’t know the source was talking about that guy to be honest. (I was looking at that source through google books and the preview wouldn’t show much).CycoMa (talk) 22:16, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Page mover?
Hi. Since you have engaged recently in closing a lot of Requested Moves, I urge you to apply for the WP:Page mover permission, which is routinely granted to editors above a certain sanity level, which you seem to fulfill. As a part of the package, you can add one of page-swapping user scripts mentioned there to your portfolio, so you can execute most of "blocked" page moves yourself instead of asking at RM/TR. Cheers, No such user (talk) 13:23, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation tool DisamAssist
Hi, thanks for closing Micrometer RM. Not sure if you are aware, but there is a tool called DisamAssist that I find very helpful to fix dab links when an existing article is moved to a dab page. It can be found User:Qwertyytrewqqwerty/DisamAssist. Hope it helps. Vpab15 (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Vpab15. It did quite a long time to fix the links (and I noticed you fixed two I missed, for which thanks), so I'll take a look. Havelock Jones (talk) 17:28, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Rename page Abenobashi Terminal Building to Abeno Harukas
Hello, I noticed you closed the discussion to rename this page on 6 November 2021. I explained the reason to rename the page is = "Request rename of the page to Abeno Harukas (because the old name is outdated). It is now called Abeno Harukas in Japan. "terminal building" is the predecessor name. The "Abenobashi Terminal Building" is the predecessor of the current "Abeno Harukas". So the page should be renamed to Abeno Harukas. The Japanese page says: "The Abenobashi Terminal Building (Abenobashi Terminal Building) is a commercial complex that once existed in Abenosuji 1-chome, Abeno-ku, Osaka City, Osaka Prefecture. It is the predecessor of the current Abeno Harukas." There is a separate Japanese page for Abeno Harukas ja:あべのハルカス. However, it's better to combine it by renaming this page to Abeno Harukas." So the Abenoshima Terminal Building was rebuilt as a 300 meter tall skyscraper called Abeno Harukas (completed on March 7, 2014). -Artanisen (talk) 15:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what, if anything, you're asking me to do. If you have sources which show that the article subject is usually known in English as Abeno Harukas, I suggest you open a fresh RM. Havelock Jones (talk) 02:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)