User talk:Hoary/Archive32

Persistent unproductive editing
Hello Hoary! How are you? (I mean, in real life as well?)

We have an odd non-productive editor in User:Scott Bell-Moss, who made a number of apparently good faith edits, but persistently ignores pointers to the MOS. Two or three editors (as well as me) have been reverting these -- now there is a lookalike in the form of an IP Special:Contributions/92.17.186.182 making the exact same edits, with the same edit summaries. Perhaps both should be blocked? For us non-admins, what is the correct way to report this sort of problem? Imaginatorium (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Let's see if this does the job. -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

You reverted my edits on Todd Hido
Hi. Apart from "turning a reference into a note", you reverted a range of my recent with this edit. Is that a mistake on your part, or am I misunderstanding? Thanks. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The former. (Very strange.) Sorry! -- Hoary (talk) 06:20, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries. Thank you. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:23, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Perry Ogden
Hi. Please help. I have written Draft:Perry Ogden and would like to move it to Perry Ogden. However Perry Ogden already exists as a redirect. Is it possible for that redirect page to be removed so that I can move my draft into article space, whilst (vainly) retaining myself as the originator? Thank you. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sounded reasonable (when I was sleepy), so I deleted it. Now that I'm not so sleepy, it no longer seems an adequate reason for deletion. So I've restored it. Anyone interested will see that in reality you created the article. (And even if it had been created by somebody else, well, consider this, this and this, just three examples of my significant, I think, improvements to what had been mere stubs.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Hachijō-jima
Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Word processor
Thanks for your edit.

There is much more to do. One relevant Wikiproject listed Word processor as a vital article, and yet its appalling state, describing obsolete machinery and largely ignoring the last fifty years of development, had been flagged for four years without any action whatsoever.

Most urgently, the stub at word processor needs to be filled out, with references of course. Some material from the article now at word processor (electronic device) can probably be used.

Or there may be better ways forward. Happy to discuss other suggestions. Andrewa (talk) 10:45, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * There are a number of problems with any notion that I might make more than trivial edits to articles on word processing. One is that I expect to be very busy till early August; until then, I plan to limit my participation here to such straightforward matters as reverting blatant silliness. Another is that I have access to very few sources, if any, on the matter. (I really don't want to get bogged down in the introductions to a number of Turbo [brand name] Unleashed for Dummies: Platinum Edition books, even if I can find them: the unthinking and prolix enthusiasm of their authors is too dreary.) And lastly, I find the history of word processing a sorry and depressing affair: for me, a major tragedy was the inability of the splendid XyWrite to cope with UTF-8 (which I need), leaving me to work with LibreOffice, which I grudgingly tolerate. -- Hoary (talk) 11:04, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Fair enough! Agree 100% re LibreOffice, I use it too.


 * It's ironical, the main reason that MS-Word supplanted WordPerfect was that it ran seamlessly on non-MS operating systems... Apple! No retraining required. And there was a problem that WordPerfect came with its own printer drivers, which complicated maintenance if you used them (but they were optional). Even with the Microsoft-supplied and supported drivers WordPerfect was a far better desktop publishing program than MS-Publisher, and with them it really rocked. But again and again, an executive would load the (superior) WordPerfect drivers without warning their techies that they were violating the instructions they'd been given, and then complain that WordPerfect was crashing (because the print server and their workstation were now running incompatible code).


 * I was there! But I can't source any of this for the moment. Pity, it's a fascinating story.


 * Thanks again for your contribution. Many hands are needed! If we all do our bit we'll get there. Andrewa (talk) 18:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Jennings (British author), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dunlop ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Paul_Jennings_%28British_author%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Paul_Jennings_%28British_author%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Bishop
Absolutely beautiful job rewriting and expanding Morris Bishop. I did some copyediting, not because it was really necessary, but I sort of automatically do it when I read anything here. --and it was a great treat for me to have the chance to work on a fundamentally good article about something interesting to me, instead of my usual mission of trying to rescue something just barely literate on a subject I don't even care much about. . Any chance of finding a free picture--it would then I think meet GA.  DGG ( talk ) 06:34, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words, DGG; but if you edited it, do you perhaps still the unsaved result in an open browser tab? I don't think that anyone has saved a revision to it since January. &para; Yes, I think I can dig up a (non-copyleft) photo of the man. Give me a couple of days. -- Hoary (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the actual edit, DGG. On balance, certainly an improvement. However, I thought that emboldening the book titles within the text was a rather good, if slightly idiosyncratic, way of making them easy to find, while being less tiresome for the extensive and careful reader -- Do our articles have any? -- than are multiple subsubheaders. Indeed, I still think so, though I can't get worked up about the matter. ¶ I've found and scanned a photo of the man. I'm willing to explain how its use in this article would be fair. But I'm out of practice in doing this, and don't want any sleepy "fair use" plea to go off at half cock; I'll therefore wait till I have time to concentrate and to get it right. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 13 July 2018 (UTC)


 * It's a style convention here -- see WP:MOS Section 7.1      DGG ( talk ) 04:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

But DGG, MOS is just a guideline. Further, what it says (after markup-stripping) is:
 * Boldface or capitals are not normally used for emphasis; use italics instead, but sparingly: overuse of emphasis reduces its effectiveness.

The boldface wasn't used for emphasis, but for signposting; and there wasn't much of it. (And what me write a normal article?) So all in all I still rather mourn its loss. But being a well-behaved little editor, I haven't readded it. I have, however, added two crappy little photos. I'm a little worried by the photo of MB: it might inspire somebody to dehance the article with a biographical "infobox". As for the photo of books, I don't have a copy of Spilt Milk: I haven't yet found one for a decent price, once postage is added. -- Hoary (talk) 00:38, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanq for block IP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/106.76.200.97

Request : Please close the edit war discussion for prevent further damage

(Lamesiam (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC))
 * FTR, the filer (Lamesiam) is the same user as the IP - long-term sockpuppeteer and abusive troll Nsmutte who is community banned. As the report included a personal attack against myself I have removed it per WP:BANREVERT / WP:DENY. If it ends up in the archives, odds are rather low that Nsmutte will start a new series of disruption of various talk pages, pointing to that archived page as "evidence". No need to provide the troll with that kind of food. --bonadea contributions talk 09:11, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

2601:1C0:4401:24A0:9F5:CF6C:FF83:D5E3
Hi, why did you block 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:9F5:CF6C:FF83:D5E3? They weren't warned, and they certainly didn't edit disruptively as all they did were report people to AIV (all of which were blocked). Was it accidental or am I missing something?  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  04:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I now realize that I was wrong to have blocked. I noticed this IP because he deleted a message on this very user talk page; the user who posted it is now blocked, but wasn't (or didn't seem to be) when the message was posted. With so much fast-paced silliness going on, I must confess that on occasion I block first and think later (if at all). Anyway, the IP is now unblocked, with my apologies. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, it may have been a good block - the sockmaster involved uses a lot of good-hand/bad-hand accounts and IPs, and does a lot of weird disruptive stuff including reporting his other socks/IPsocks to AIV, 3RR, and ANI. (I'm not advocating re-blocking the account, given that he'll have moved on by now, but it's good to be aware of that. And it might have been a different user this time - it's less unmistakable than usual.) Per WP:BANREVERT I removed the posts from the two IPs in the section above, since those were very obvious IPsocks of the user in question. --bonadea contributions talk 08:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. (What sad little lives these people must lead.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, so was our IP friend not really our friend? That's disappointing.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  09:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Gururaj Deshpande
I found the reference and made an entry on the read page, sorry for making beginner mistakesSteve Brackett (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maddur, Mandya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rava ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Maddur%2C_Mandya check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Maddur%2C_Mandya?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Bell & Ross
It's baaaaack! I'm looking at the references, but I'll be going to bed soon. Bishonen &#124; talk 20:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
 * See Articles for deletion/Bell & Ross. The text isn't the same exactly, this time round, but the article was deleted for lack of reliable, non-promotional sources, and this version certainly doesn't have more of them. Less, if anything. I've tagged it for speedy. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
 * Oh, sorry Bishonen, I've been away from the interwebs for a few hours and all this has taken place while I was away. On reflection, I don't think that the B&R article was much worse than many (most?) others about wristwatch brands. Most are junk. There's just something about wristwatches that encourages those interested to write bullshit. Putting aside what the pricier wristwatches were or did a half-century or more ago, they're now primarily costume jewelry for men who'd bridle at the notion of wearing costume jewelry and who instead prefer to wallow in fantasies of precision, machinery, sports, masculinity, etc (all those office workers wearing "diver" or "aviator" watches!) -- but generally without specifying the precision, degree of shockproofness, etc, because mere facts would hardly differentiate between cheap quartz watches and expensive ones, and would put cheap quartz watches ahead of expensive mechanical ones. (Pardon the rantlet.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Ref desk troll
Hi. Can you please redact this and this revision? ― Abelmoschus  Esculentus  07:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on Bruce Davidson
Thank you for your detailed attention to this article. It's shaping up nicely and since he is such an important photographer needs still more work to make it the 'A' class article that he deserves. Jamesmcardle(talk) 07:04, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Ah, but I'm merely looking at the detail. This was prompted primarily by the activity visible on my watchlist, but a secondary prompt was your thanks to me for having kicked off the article all those years ago. I had utterly forgotten that I had started it; and when I looked at how I'd started it, I was ashamed by my laziness. It's a prime example of the kind of selfish complacency that most irritates me about many new articles: "I'll just write a sentence or two and let other people do the hard work of turning it into an article that would actually be of interest/use." -- Hoary (talk) 07:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Starting an article, however cursorily, on someone who ought to be in WP deserves thanks...got to start somewhere! I'm still astonished at finding significant mid-century photographers...Thurston Hopkins, Sabine Weiss, Cas Oorthuys, Jakob Tuggener, for example, (until recently) absent from the from the encyclopaedia. Your contributions on Hiroshi Watanabe, Rob Hornstra, Shomei Tomatsu and so many others are invaluable! Jamesmcardle(talk) 22:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Flattery always appreciated! OK, let's compare my start to the article on Davidson to my start to the article on Tōmatsu. The latter is an unsourced, messy first stab at an article. The unsourcedness: well, back in those days, WP in general and I in particular had a much more casual approach to sourcing than now; I suppose something like "Specify the source for a statement if somebody might have reasonable grounds to disbelieve it or, with one or two good books devoted to the subject lying in front of them, might not find evidence for it in one of these books." In retrospect, I'm embarrassed about this aspect. But the messiness and perfunctoriness: I'm not embarrassed about these. That first draft does actually manage to say something that might be of use or interest to a reader. &para; I'm sorry to learn that Jakob Tuggener didn't have an article until recently, but not at all surprised. I'm now looking at the article for the first time. This is how you left it before anyone else (or any bot) stepped in; and it was vastly better than the state in which I left the Tōmatsu article. Many thanks! &para; As for coverage here of photographers, one thing I'm waiting for is for somebody lucky enough to have a lot of time on their hands to create the [l-o-n-g] Araki equivalent of Gianni Berengo Gardin bibliography. But that editor would have to be a monomaniac. You'll find about as much energy, but combined with sanity (and good taste in photography), from the editor who's most conspicuous in this history among many others. -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes Lopifalko's frequency of appearance in edit histories must be record-breaking, with an enviable attention to detail and energy ...and your recent edits on Tuggener are evidence of my lack of that finesse. It's tremendously encouraging to discover people of like minds about photography here.Jamesmcardle(talk) 00:51, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Erm, yes [cough], the Tuggener article. A couple of the references within it aren't merely to German-language sources, they're actually in German: no "p(age)" but instead S[eite] (I think). Is this part perhaps hurriedly translated from the German-language WP article on Tuggener or some other German-language source? If the former, then Talk:Jakob Tuggener may well need "" . -- Hoary (talk) 01:15, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, haste...my Achilles Heel. No the Tuggener article is not a translation of the German article, but it did guide me to references and added some facts to what I already had, so thank you for picking up those errors. Could find very little on him in English—and I need to do more research there— so in the meantime I relied on machine translation of the German. —Jamesmcardle(talk) 01:41, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Machine translation, uhhhh..... I think that in January (when the library reopens), I'll have access to a minor but non-neglible English-language source on Tuggener. If you hear nothing from me about this by mid January, I may have forgotten, so do please feel free to nudge me. -- Hoary (talk) 09:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Will do...thank you, and Happy New Year!--Jamesmcardle(talk) 11:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

FYI on Paul Couvrette
FYI, I have nominated Paul Couvrette for deletion. Letting you know as you made extensive contribs to the article and the previous AFD.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Kikai persona1.jpg


The file File:Kikai persona1.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-free book cover being used in a decorative manner in Hiroh Kikai. While non-free book covers are generally allowed to be used for primary identification purposes at the top of or in the main infoboxes of stand-alone articles about the books in questions, their non-free usage in other articles, such as an article about the book's author, etc., tends to be much harder to justify as explained in WP:NFC. Although there is some discussion about the book in the article, there is no real sourced critical commentary related to the cover art itself; so, the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC is lacking. Moreover, the brief content about the book in Hiroh Kikai doesn't really require that the reader see the books cover art to be understand; therefore, omitting the image is not really going to be detrimental to the reader's understanding of what is written about the book."

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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Graham (photographer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbia College ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Paul_Graham_%28photographer%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Paul_Graham_%28photographer%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your observation!
Thanks for your observation regarding the capitalization of Japanese words! Actually, I hadn't introduced the capitalizations; I've just arrived later to the article and copy-pasted from the article the text as it was. :-)

I will certainly look into the capitalization of Japanese words in a few articles I am editing!

Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 19:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John Harding (photographer)
Hello! Your submission of John Harding (photographer) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see new note on your DYK nomination. (This is a note written by me; the above is a boilerplate template.) Yoninah (talk) 23:31, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * I sent that, and the COCA link, on to my linguistics students. Who knows, I might get a paper out of it that does some corpus linguistics. Thanks again. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad to help, Drmies. NB COCA is just one of several corpora that are hosted at the same place. Your students or you may also get some use out of the following free-of-charge resources: Antconc, etc, UCREL, and Lexical Tutor. -- Hoary (talk) 04:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for John Harding (photographer)
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Question about requested articles
Good morning Hoary -

Today at WP:RA, you pinged me in a message about not striking through requested articles. It was actually two other editors who struck through the request (unless I’m missing something), but I’m glad you brought it up. It looks like at least one of the editors added “WIP” next to the strikethrough, which makes me think they are “claiming” it as a work in progress (an article that this editor is going to write).

My question is whether there’s an acceptable way to indicate that a request at WP:RA is being fulfilled even though it’s not a blue link yet. When I’ve worked with WP:RA requests in the past, I’ve just left the red link on the WP:RA list until I was finished turning it blue. If you know the appropriate way for an editor might indicate his or her intentions, it sounds like they might need some help with that. Thanks! Larry Hockett (Talk) 08:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for asking, Larry Hockett. The problem with deleting a name but leaving the rest of the entry is that it's not at all clear why the name is deleted. (If the person doesn't merit an article, why is the item there at all? If the person does/might merit one, why is the name deleted?) I tend to think: If it's junk, delete it. &para; I haven't heard of anyone going through this page looking for ideas, finding an item, and creating an article. I've asked about this before (example) but there's been little response. I infer that the primary function that the page fulfills is allowing people who want to have an article about themselves or their spouses, parents, employers, etc, to delude themselves that somebody is going to do this PR work for them (and without pay, too). If such a delusion helps would-be publicists to think that they've made a meaningful step towards creation of an article and therefore that they can now go away, happy that it will be created, then I suppose the page has a certain value. -- Hoary (talk) 13:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Haha - you’re right. That’s a good point. I can’t imagine that it results in an actual article in very many cases. Larry Hockett (Talk) 20:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Howdy and thanks
Thanks for the tip off on Stillfried & Andersen! It’s great to see you’re active here and continuing to improve this beast! I feel I’ve been living in a cave for a long time but might soon emerge... Pinkville (talk) 01:46, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Glad to help. Um . . . on a separate matter, please check [what used to be] your email address. -- Hoary (talk) 05:37, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

"compliance with BEFORE"
Re this. Responding here, since I suspect your talk page will prove less hostile than an AFD where I've already been on the receiving end of some pretty blatant trolling and received no support.

For what it's worth, saying the nominator lazily ignored BEFORE (often with the exact words "No compliance with WP:BEFORE" is something 7&6 does in pretty much all AFDs where the nominator doesn't list a dozen sources he found that don't cover the topic in enough detail (or whatever). I don't keep a record of the diffs, but here are four where he did so in the edit summary. Here are some more that I specifically called him out on. Asking him why he does this has historically proven pretty fruitless.

Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 11:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


 * This does seem a curious article. I am satisfied that yes, there's ample, reliable documentation for the biographee's having been treated skillfully and successfully by Magdi Yacoub and his team. If convinced that the article was worthwhile, I'd make certain changes within it, but basically it seems well done. However, this patient still doesn't seem to me to have any other significance: I think an article on him is ruled out by WP:ONEEVENT. But unlike very many biographies that shouldn't be in Wikipedia, this one can hardly be promotional, so I don't worry very much about the prospect of its survival. I'm fascinated by the notion of deleting as "imposing the Wikipedia equivalent of capital punishment": I hope that my own death could be later disputed in a death review and perhaps reversed (if possible with a fresh new body).-- Hoary (talk) 05:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, thank you for the reminder, Gerda Arendt.


 * Well well, how far I have come. Back then I was merely awesome; now (if I may say it myself) I surely qualify as awful. -- Hoary (talk) 22:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular
   

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:23, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

1.144.106.133
Thanks. This is the guy who keeps adding random events to DOTY articles and roams from one IP to another. Deb (talk) 11:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

From Japanese to English
Please, can you help me with some of those translations, because I'm too busy? Thank you. --82.52.174.149 14:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.52.174.149 (talk)
 * If you'd like to discuss this, please do so at WP talk:WP Japan. -- Hoary (talk) 13:16, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Shinzo Abe
I just wanted to tell you that if I sounded rude it wasn't meant to you. I was simply frustrated at idiots who add words which are not supported by sources and really don't feel the need to further edit on that draft which I profusely regret of creating. Kindest regards. --LLcentury (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No, I never thought you were at all rude, . (And anyway I am very thick-skinned.) The whole affair has been unfortunate, but what worries me most is that es:WP has been hosting a semi-fictional account. I very much hope that somebody -- you or ? -- posts to Discusión:Política externa del gobierno de Shinzō Abe and somewhere that's likely to be read, pointing this out. (Unfortunately, Wikiproyecto Discusión:Japón is moribund.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Morris Schwartz


A tag has been placed on Morris Schwartz requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Qono (talk) 00:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)


 * , I'm so sad. (Sniff!) But thank you for the courtesy ping. -- Hoary (talk) 01:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Creating a wikipedia page
Can you create a wikipedia page on Indian chemist Jogendra Chandra Bardhan who created a method to synthesise phenenthrene by Bardhan-Sengupta synthesis. Ritvik0 (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2019 (UTC)


 * No I can't; but if it's possible to create an article on this person that follows with Wikipedia policies, then you can. Start at User:Ritvik0/Draft. When you think your draft might qualify as an article, move it to Draft:Jogendra Chandra Bardhan. If an experienced editor thinks that it qualifies as an article, it will be moved a second time and made into an article. -- Hoary (talk) 03:17, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Sultan Choudhury and User:Majidii1234

 * I'm fascinated by your use of "we" ... How many of you are there? — You at WP:BLPN

It almost feels like the "we" is about a PR-department worth of people, the way they've been scrubbing any connection of Choudhury to his former employer from articles. —C.Fred (talk) 12:06, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * It almost does, doesn't it? -- Hoary (talk) 12:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * And now Articles for deletion/Sultan Choudhury. -- Hoary (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Flagged as spa. Let's see what happens when the AfD patrollers take a look. —C.Fred (talk) 14:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Various things have already happened, and none of them has come as a surprise. -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Page (Sandbox) / Erroneous Copyright Violation Claim
Hoary- you deleted a musical group/band page (via sandbox) I created for The Expanders. You cited this link which is a ticket link for a past show the band performed at. That written copy you're citing is the band's official biography and thus it is used on all their show/ticket links description. The biography/copy/photos are 100% owned by the band (The Expanders) and do not violate any copyright laws. I manage the band and have access to their website and social pages if further verification is needed. Rams (talk) 02:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * (talk page stalker) @Ramss: So, are you asserting that the band's biography is irrevocably under a free license so that anybody can use it for any purpose, including commercial reuse? If so, is there a copyright notice at the band's website noting that it is under Creative Commons or a similar free license? —C.Fred (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, what said. Oh, and it can't just be a copyleft license similar to CC; the license must be either this or that variety of CC, or GFDL. (Although the material could instead be explicitly donated to the public domain: the copyright holder explicitly and irrevocably waives any copyright.)


 * And there are other problems. First, official biographies don't belong in Wikipedia. Material should instead come from published, reliable, disinterested (independent) sources. Please see this. Secondly, if you're the manager, you have a conflict of interest. Please see this. -- Hoary (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Atsushi Fujiwara
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Kaijin Akashi
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for keeping a swift eye of retribution on my page. I've blocked the nice little range 185.194.187.0/24 for a month. Bishonen &#124; talk 10:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC).

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Photography museums and galleries in Korea


A tag has been placed on Category:Photography museums and galleries in Korea requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Grutness... wha?   10:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Be my guest, . I'd happily zap it myself. (It's clear that it has been reincarnated as Category:Photography museums and galleries in South Korea.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:11, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've been on Facebook too much - I was looking for the thumbs-up symbol as a reply :) Grutness... wha?   03:45, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
Dear ,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 11:20, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

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

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:42, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Category for Photo League members?
Hoary, I saw you were editing the Photo League. What would you think of a category for Photo League members? Or perhaps one of those footer boxes (templates?). I have zero experience in those areas so though I would ask you. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:46, 8 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I'd be happy if there already were a category, but I have no stomach for adding it to half a dozen bio articles, let alone to more. Anyway, it doesn't obviously seem useful, given that the article Photo League already has a list, that it's not overburdened by the list, that it's most unlikely that the list will get significantly longer and overburden the article, and that the list is well sourced. (Uhhh ... bluntly, the list appears to have simply been copied and pasted. This is a discovery I made only after doing a bit of work on it, and the discovery made/makes me feel queasy.)


 * If there were a category, somebody might say that the list was superfluous. To the objection "But some of these people don't have articles", a counter-objection: "That's right, they don't. And WP articles shouldn't be repositories of mere trivia. So delete the names of people who don't have articles. You've done that? Thank you. Right, now you have a list that is rendered superfluous by the category, so zap the list."


 * As for a footer box, it's a bit horrible in a bio. (Don't get me started on bio and various other "infoboxes".)


 * Have to say that your work on Sonia Handelman Meyer pleases me more than a new category would. If you can create more articles on Photo League photographers, that would be most welcome. -- Hoary (talk) 01:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * thanks, this was the advice I was looking for. Making these stubs is easy work. I am good at finding and noticing the notable ones, but not so good at expansion. But at least they are there now. 03:33, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Help
Hi, I need your help in restoring some information. Please visit Talk:Shamsheer Vayalil for more information. Thanks. (223.230.130.24 (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2019 (UTC))


 * If you can present reliable sources for what you want to add, you should be able to add it. I'm not going to look for such sources, as I'm not interested in how rich this person is. What other help do you hope to get from me? -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry that you misunderstood the matter. I'll explain the whole matter in brief; that one of editor has removed "Stieve Award 2011" statement from Shamsheer Vayalil article because he couldn't find about it in the archived version. But I am sure in the archived version the information about the "Stevie Awards 2011" is present. I had made a separate section as "Stevie   Awards 2011" on talk page of the article.Please visit Talk:Shamsheer Vayalil for further details. Thanks. (223.230.130.24 (talk) 10:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC))😇😇😇😇


 * I hadn't heard of the Stevie awards. The article on them says "The Stevie Awards are a set of hundreds of business awards given annually by the American Business Awards organization." Hundreds of them. Also, it says that application costs hundreds of dollars, and that a large percentage of applicants get prizes. All in all, it sounds like a good moneymaker for "the American Business Awards organization", but whether somebody did or didn't get a Stevie award doesn't seem (to me) to matter at all. -- Hoary (talk)

Happy Holidays

 * Oh, thank you, ! A snail for you too! Oh no, perhaps the snail was a gentle allusion to my rate of creating/improving articles; this would certainly not apply to you. Well, firmly clamped in my vise I do have the highly unsatisfactory little-more-than-stub of something that I'm slowly transforming. The power tools and protective eyewear are ready; I just need a few extra components and then I can start some serious work on this thing. It'll be ready for upload within a month, I hope. (NB not within this month.) Happy hols! -- Hoary (talk) 07:11, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hoary: no allusions intended, just a nice wintery sculpture! If anything it might indicate the snail's pace of Wikipedia's improvement-- but it's the pace of giant snail that cannot be stopped!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:50, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

kwanzaa
Could you lend an eye there? I'm feeling annoyed enough to perhaps not be impartial enough. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 20:45, 27 December 2019 (UTC)