User talk:KJP1/Archive 12

A.C. Monza FA candidate
Hey, how's it going? I see you've reviewed football-related articles for FA in recent years. A.C. Monza has been a candidate for over three weeks, and there are almost no comments. I would really appreciate it if you took some time to leave a comment (it doesn't necessarily have to be a full review) :) Nehme1499 21:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * - Really sorry, but I have zero knowledge of/interest in football. The FAs in that area I’ve reviewed have generally been Cardiff related, which is why I’ve picked them up. I know, from bitter experience!, how disheartening it can be when an article you’ve sweated blood over doesn’t generate interest at FAC. Them’s the breaks, as someone once said. Peer review is a good suggestion, although that’s been rather moribund for a while. The alternative is just to wait a while and resubmit. I’ve one from 2020 which also got no further than an image review. I wish you all the very best with Monza. KJP1 (talk) 21:44, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help + kind words! I guess I'll try a PR next time. Nehme1499 21:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Next steps Palladian
We are still in good shape for August 13 as planned. Nikkimaria (FAR Coord) almost always goes through on Fridays or Saturdays, so even if the FAR doesn't close this weekend, we're still in time for the next. If someone comes in with an awful review, indicating a delay in the FAR close, then we would ping in the TFA schedulers with a heads up, and they might opt to change the TFA (I don't see that happening). I saw somewhere (can't recall where) a proposed TFA blurb that wasn't quite up to snuff, so you should watchlist now Today's featured article/August 13, 2022, so that as soon as something goes in, you have a first look, and can suggest improvements (on talk or directly). The important instructions are: I usually ping in the scheduler with my suggestions on talk, rather than change it myself (unless obvious and easy), just to avoid ruffled feathers. Good luck! Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * We use one paragraph only, with no reference tags or alternative names; the only thing bolded is the first link to the article title. The length when previewed is between 925 and 1025 characters including spaces, " (Full article...)" and the featured topic link if applicable.


 * The blurb is up now, Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:28, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Kelms
I recently uploaded my stroll around Kelmscott Manor. Brilliantly remote with a real sense of space. Does feel a bit John Lewis'd though in its chintzy perfection. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:00, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * - A lovely place, and absolutely gorgeous photos! We really should have a stronger article. KJP1 (talk) 17:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Palladian architecture
The article is class; respect and well done given the huge effort involved in a condensed time-frame. You may rest on laurels for 24 hours, really impressive work. Ceoil (talk) 02:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for having helped rescuing Palladian architecture for FA, - great to see it today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Great job KJP!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, splendid work! --Tryptofish (talk) 15:27, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks all, for the compliments but also for your own efforts. It was a great pleasure, and I much enjoyed the collaborative nature of the endeavour. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Look at the church where I heard VOCES8, 1915 architecture. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Meet up
Life and events got the better of me, With regret that I didn't give you a respect farewell,, here is a nice tune instead and best wishes as always. . Ceoil (talk) 00:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * - Sorry not to see you. You missed cóisir iontach. KJP1 (talk) 06:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I know, and am sorry. Events, dear....Hope ye had a nice shindig, and we might catch up again sometime. Ceoil (talk) 04:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
Your addition to T. Harri Jones has been removed or altered, as it appears to closely paraphrase a copyrighted source. Limited close paraphrasing or quotation is appropriate within reason, so long as the material is clearly attributed in the text. However, longer paraphrases which are not attributed to their source may constitute copyright violation or plagiarism, and are not acceptable on Wikipedia. Such content cannot be hosted here for legal reasons; please do not upload it. You may use external websites or printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If you own the copyright to the text, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the copyright but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. – ♠Vamí _IV†♠  22:06, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't want this to go to ANI, so let me explain my reasoning. This is a close paraphrase, thus a copyright violation, because your rendition is a superficial modification of the source sentence, [...], Jones was the son of a road worker and servant girl, and the grandson of a shepherd who predicted, at his birth, that he would become a poet. (source for attribution) for some synonyms. It also reproduces an anecdote that doesn't need to be in our article, and makes up half the paraphrased sentence. – ♠Vamí _IV†♠  22:06, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I find it very hard to believe that an editor as skilled as KJP1 would do a copyvio. Please be very sure that this is a correct accusation. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * - we will have to disagree, both on whether it is appropriate to include what the source says, and on whether my rendition of what the source says is a copyright violation. I have tried a further re-wording which may meet your concerns. KJP1 (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll drop the stick, since CLOSEPARA isn't policy and you are attributing. I still think that anecdote about Jones' grandfather being a shepherd and predicting his success is superfluous and shouldn't be in the article. That's the meat of my argument here. Without it, I think, the sentence is OK. – ♠Vamí _IV†♠  22:26, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Henry Stock
Hello! Your submission of Henry Stock 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Wasted Time R (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

 * - my pleasure, Geograph can be a most excellent source, if Commons fails. KJP1 (talk) 11:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Stowe Gardens
Hello! Thanks so much for the edits to Stowe Gardens - I expect you have a lot of projects on the go, but in case you fancy another, I'm going to try to get this article to GA in the Autumn, and wondered if you'd like to collaborate? Lajmmoore (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * - The thing that took the most time was getting the links to Grade I listed buildings in Buckinghamshire. There are just so many! I love a collaboration and Stowe Gardens is a fantastic topic. Can I say a provisional yes. My only issues:
 * timing - I don’t want to delay anything but I am away for 3 weeks starting mid-October;
 * sources - I’ve got a fair bit on Stowe, guides etc., but not a substantial book (not counting Pevsner). Is the Bevington the most recent/comprehensive and do you have access to it?
 * Let me know. I absolutely don’t want to delay you and will quite understand if my timings don’t work. KJP1 (talk) 17:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello! @KJP1 I would still have November to work on it too, but might get going while you're on holiday, if that's alright? I'm going to try to come up with a list of things that need expansion on the page today, so I will ping you when I have started that. Looking forward to working on it together Lajmmoore (talk) 10:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * - That will be just fine. You push on, and then I’ll take a look when I’m back. It actually looks pretty close to GA as it stands. KJP1 (talk) 07:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello @KJP1 - I've worked more on this article and made a GA nomination. If you have time, it would be excellent for another pair of eyes to look over it. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 20:11, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello @KJP1 you wouldn't be interested in reviewing the article, would you? Lajmmoore (talk) 17:23, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - As I’ve said, it’s a lovely article and you’ve done a great job on it. But it’s just too big for me to pick up the review before Christmas. I’ll take a look after Boxing Day, when it may be possible. All the best for the festive season. KJP1 (talk) 07:49, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Henry Stock
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

St John’s Farm, Ely
Four Grade Is. KJP1 (talk) 06:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Dene Park
Are you able to add anything to the article from Pevsner? Mjroots (talk) 08:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * - Done, hope it meets the need. KJP1 (talk) 08:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

John Nash article
I am aware you put a LOT of time into the article today! Nice work. It is much better for it. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:20, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated, and my pleasure. KJP1 (talk) 13:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Tara Brooch
Obviously I'm going to call you in, but as owe u so many favours, am trying to subtly weave you in for the polish and icing on the cake...AFTER the heavy lifting.
 * ps, dont tell KJP1 about my plotting. Oh wait; drat:) Ceoil (talk) 11:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * - My absolute pleasure. Happy to take a look at any time, though off to the Spanish sun very shortly. KJP1 (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Long may you enjoy it. Mad jealous. gruble grumble from rainy Cork city, although anytime I see you on my watchlist, for any article, its...score! Ceoil (talk) 11:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

TVs in St Michael's
Some years ago the church did away with hymn books and orders of services and did everything with projection. Because of the pillars, a single projector was not sufficient to be visible from all vantage points. To me, the logical solution, used in other churches, was to use three projectors, one in each aisle. However, the person advising them told them this would be much more expensive than wiring up bracket mounted CRT TVs. These, then, were used to project to side aisles.

I cannot help feel that they were ill advised (and indeed, I may well have told them so at the time!) This was in the early days of digital projection when each projector cost thousands of pounds, but it was equally clear the price would come down rapidly, and also it was clear that CRT TVs were end stage technology. I suspect the person who sold them the system could get cheap TVs because people were starting to replace them with flat screens.

In any case, they went with the advice of the installer and now they are stuck with them. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They’re certainly a mistake architecturally. And probably technically, as you say. That said, one has considerable sympathy with these enormous Victorian churches. They’re vast, and so far beyond the means, and the needs, of 21st-century congregations. The Holy Name, in my town, can hold a thousand, and yet its normal congregation rarely exceeds a dozen. KJP1 (talk) 21:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, and the pillars do cause issues with obstructed sightlines. At the time, St Michael's was actually fairly full each week, so they needed to do something for people in the side aisles. The Holy Name looks like a grand piece of architecture. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:45, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Church of St Benedict, Ardwick
Vanamonde 12:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Norwich Cathedral Close
Two Grade Is and an absolute haul of Grade II*s. KJP1 (talk) 12:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Dedications for Wikipedia articles
Hi KJP1, we came across each other yesterday on the Haden Hill Talk page where I expressed my disagreement with some of your comments. Hope you don’t mind me posting these thoughts on your Talk page as I’m unsure whether or not they should go on the Haden Hill Talk page. Anyway, it puzzled me why you’re adamant that the Haden Hill article is a ‘Memorial’ article – as I didn’t see it that way. Because you’re a lot more experienced Wikipedia contributor than me, I thought maybe I have it wrong.

As a Wikipedia reader, who hasn’t read the Talk page I still don’t see the Haden Hill article as a memorial article. However, as a Wikipedia contributor who has read the Talk page I can now see a different interpretation. I initially thought it was a “nice gesture” to dedicate the Wikipedia article. Now, I’m tending towards the opposite view. I don’t think it is good practice for an individual contributor to dedicate a Wikipedia article in this way. Yes, books often have a dedication but the published content is static and has an individual author. Wikipedia article’s are subject to change by many contributors. It could be interpreted that an author making such a dedication is attempting to claim ownership of the article and deter others from making major revisions. I understand it’s difficult to argue this on the article talk page without casting aspersions on the author’s motivations so you were probably right not to engage further and just stick to your viewpoint. I’ve tried searching for ‘dedications’ for Wikipedia articles but found nothing of relevance. It’s the only instance I’ve seen of such a dedication but wonder whether you’ve come across others?

On your second point re local enthusiastic historians, you’ve been immediately vindicated by an error I found reading a book on Rowley Regis published in 2006. The author stated that “the Riddins Mound tower blocks were spectacularly blown up. . .”. In fact, only one of three has been demolished (back in 1996) - the other two remain in situ! Rupples (talk) 18:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * - Thanks for dropping by. And no problem at all, either with your posting here or with your disagreeing with my comments at the Haden Hill Park Talkpage. Wikipedia’s very frequently improved by, civil, disagreement. Let me try and briefly summarise my view:
 * NOTMEMORIAL - You’re right that, strictly defined, Haden Hill Park isn’t a memorial to the main author’s father. But I think it actually is, particularly in the main author’s mind. Their posting creates a sense of OWN, which I think is unhelpful, for many of the reasons you outline above. And the main author actually acknowledges this - “I have written this article as a tribute to my father”.
 * Summary style - The main author’s desire to create a “suitable” memorial (see above) has led them to create a very long article on a pretty unimportant municipal park. For example, we are given a whole section on Pet graves. In my view, the subject just doesn’t warrant the detail of the content.
 * Reliable sources - I get absolutely your point re. the value of enthusiastic local historians. I love, and use, Fred Hando, who wasn’t a trained historian but was a very well-informed amateur. However, almost the entirety of the article is sourced to one local historian, in a, probably self-published, book and a YouTube video. These just aren’t sources on which I think you can largely base an article for the world’s most-read on-line encyclopaedia. The duty to our readers should outweigh the desire to create a suitable “memorial” (see above).
 * Tone - Having said all of the above - and this is a longer reply than I usually like to write as I try to follow a summary style in Talkpage discussions - I think my exchanges with the main author became unduly terse. I should have recognised the importance the article had to them, and should have replied in a more sympathetic way. Wikipedia, in its very essence, is a collaborative enterprise, and in my experience it ALWAYS functions best when editors treat each other with courtesy and respect, especially when they disagree. KJP1 (talk) 18:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the trouble to write such an in-depth reply. I'm only a sporadic Wikipedia contributor so it's useful to read (and in some cases re-read) the links you've provided. Rupples (talk) 19:09, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

 * I place this here because your thoughtful comment above is precious. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Iain Macleod
Thanks. Discussions of that kind can easily develop into pile-ons of drive-by nitwits with their zero cents worth, and predictably the first to chip in was one of them. The discussion now appears to have died of old age. I probably owe you one. Paulturtle (talk) 02:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
 * - No problem at all. It’s now slipped into the archive, so we’re probably safe! All the best. KJP1 (talk) 06:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Brocklesby Hall
KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Parks & Gardens
 * Handed On
 * Di Camillo
 * HE

Nadezhda Alliluyeva
Soviet Ends Silence on Stalin Wife's Suicide 14-Apr-1988 -https://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/14/world/soviet-ends-silence-on-stalin-wife-s-suicide.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambo XTerminator (talk • contribs) 08:03, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - use headings for new topics / sign your posts / don’t leave bare urls / discuss the issue on the article Talkpage, not here. KJP1 (talk) 08:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * p.s. - You’ve been here 4 days and made two edits in main space. Front page FAs aren’t a good place to be learning how Wikipedia works. KJP1 (talk) 08:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Piers Court
Thank you for expanding my very stubby Piers Court stub. It was late and I was tired, and thought I might return tomorrow, but you have kindly stepped in. Edwardx (talk) 09:39, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - My pleasure and thanks for starting it. I read the same Guardian piece this morning, and was surprised to see we didn't have an article. It's a real pity neither we nor Geograph have an image. The current sales story is rather rum - you pay £2.5M but can't see inside! Due to a sitting tenant, who appears to owe a very large sum to the Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park, London, incidentally Waugh's favourite London hotel. Would make an interesting expansion, requiring VERY SOUND reliable sources! All the best. KJP1 (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - p.s. And sorry about those curly quotes. I shouldn't edit on the iPad. KJP1 (talk) 10:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Church of St Giles, Stoke Poges
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

 * And to you, and others, compliments of the season and all best wishes for 2023. KJP1 (talk) 09:23, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination – Successful
Hey KJP1,

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandise@undefinedwikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!

On behalf of the Merchandise Giveaway program,

-- janbery (talk) 00:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * , - I greatly appreciate Seth's nomination, and the kind comments of other editors. It's always encouraging to get confirmation that others even read one's efforts on here, let alone enjoy them! Now, whether your t-shirt will fit my ever-expanding frame... I'll send you a mail. KJP1 (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

70 Theobald's Road

 * - this one? KJP1 (talk) 13:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That's the one! 2A02:C7C:A400:EF00:CC90:4A60:F4BD:CCB4 (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Seems to be the Griffin Building(s), home of Matrix Chambers, and not listed. But who designed it, I can't yet say. KJP1 (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Please keep civil and respectful
Your phrasing "unreadable dog's breakfast of badly written" should never be used as it is offensive, you had hind-sight to this before you replied in the mari lwyd talk page, but you went ahead and published it anyway without care.. how can "unreadable dog's breakfast of badly written" be beneficial for editors to contribute further in Wiki if people like yourself put them down?, I have dyslexia, and it takes me hours to a full day of my time to write my contributions, all I want is positive feedback and to have other editors work together to make our contributions better, but I can only view your attitude as bullish, you have no idea how your remarks changes a person's entire day.Hogyncymru (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Your assertion that "all I want is positive feedback" seems unreasonable. KJP1 didn't attack anyone's personhood. This is a content issue about how the article is written. You have no right to refuse criticism even . I cannot find compassion for folks who expect to be mollycoddled. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 18:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * mocking someone's contribution is mocking the person themselves, it's just rude. Hogyncymru (talk) 18:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * - You're an editor of seven-years standing, and describe yourself as experienced on Wikipedia, as well as a researcher and a historian. As such, you must see that a culture where we only gave positive feedback wouldn't work. I try to keep my criticisms to content, not contributors but from my experience at Gwrych Castle, you are not inclined to listen. Take today - we are in a discussion about the use of primary sources on Mari Lwyd, and you create Lady Grizel Winifred Louisa Cochrane. There is absolutely no indication of Notability, there is not a single Secondary source used, and none of the five Primary sources used is more recent than 1920! In short, you've done exactly what you did at Mari Lywd, and continue to do elsewhere. You've taken a bunch of, very old, newspaper reports, interpreted them and synthesised their content into an unsuitable article. Which is also grammatically weak, even to the basics of using capitals where they're not appropriate, e.g. "Hippopotamus, Wildebeest, Leopard, Rhinoceros, Waterbuck, Cape Buffalo, Killed", and not using them where they are, e.g. Lent, the starting words of sentences. Ultimately, we're here to build an encyclopedia, not to give each other positive reinforcement. And our interests, particularly in Welsh history/culture/buildings, overlap. So I will continue to critique your contributions where I don't think they improve the encyclopedia. Exactly as I would expect others to do of mine. Regards. KJP1 (talk) 19:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you not see "unreadable dog's breakfast of badly written" as being an insult? Hogyncymru (talk) 19:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Frankly, no. I think it’s a fair description of a very poor article which currently does a disservice to our readers. KJP1 (talk) 01:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, KJP1!


Happy New Year! KJP1, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Abishe (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)