User talk:Koavf/Archive034

Article
If you have no objection, I'll like to create a mainspace article on you. You have been widely covered in the media. -- Supernova Explosion   Talk  09:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Harness Racing vs. Thoroughbred Racing
They're not the same but here you put a thoroughbred tag in on the talk page for a harness racing category. I don't know if the TB project covers harness, but looking around at some other harness racing talk pages, American harness racers is the only one I see with the TB project link on the talk page....William 18:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Respones to edit
We do not categorize by language sung in when the lamnguage in question is the premier language in the place in question. For example, we do not categorize American singers as English-language singers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:33, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Log/2012 April 26
Hi, I noticed that you nominated three large Wikipedias. Such an action almost always fails, as you should know. Bearian (talk) 16:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Erroneous categories
You tagged this 1970s sports article with Category:English-language albums and Category:2012 albums. Did an automated edit go awry? Maybe there are other mistakes. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa  (talk) 01:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

You also put The Smashing Pumpkins in the Category "Musical Trios". I would recommend slowing down. Ridernyc (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

From WP:CATEGORY '''A central concept used in categorising articles is that of the defining characteristics of a subject of the article. A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define[1] the subject as having—such as nationality or notable profession (in the case of people), type of location or region (in the case of places), etc. For example, here: "Caravaggio, an Italian artist of the Baroque movement ...", Italian, artist, and Baroque may all be considered to be defining characteristics of the subject Caravaggio. A category embodies one or more defining characteristic—how this is achieved in practice is described in the following sections.'''

In other words simply because band may have played as a trio for 6 months while they were looking for a drummer there is not justification to put them in the category musical trios. Once again slow down. Ridernyc (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

hEY
Can you link the page where i can request to be an Admin on here! N64dude (talk) 19:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

hi
Would you be willing to change your proposal to merge to here: Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_April_26? --KarlB (talk) 21:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Here Lies Love article, soundtrack album vs concept album
Hi, you said that the album was a soundtrack album because it was used in a musical and that there are sources in the article? but I cannot find it. I've done my research online and found nothing about Here Lies Love being a musical/broadway play on any theater.

Remember what a soundtrack album is: "any album that incorporates music directly recorded from the soundtrack of a particular feature film or broadway musical". Do not confuse a concept album with a soundtrack album. Soundtracks are those that were used in motion picture, book, television program or video game. Concept albums on the other hand are "unified by a theme, which can be instrumental, narrative, or lyrical." They tend to incorporate a musical-like album with all of its songs contributing to a single overall story of an album.

A good example is Jay-Z's studio album American Gangster (album) which was inspired by film of the same name. Keep in mind that none of its songs were included/played on the film of the same name. It is also considered a 'studio' album and not a soundtrack album for that matter so the same should apply for Here Lies Love.

Hope you understand their differences.Bleubeatle (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!!
Thank you for helping me on my article on St. John's Lutheran Church :)Grasch2014 (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, really? Seems like you did more... that is what it has on the history though. Thank you always---Grasch2014 (talk) 23:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Content dispute
Hi. Would you like to comment at this discussion? Dan56 (talk) 01:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Jehovah's Witnesses Practices
You have recently archived the entire talk page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_practices even though some of the threads are not very old. Could you please revert your edit as this was an unnecessary action, perhaps consider a 180d or older archive....thanks. Willietell (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Tagging with {diffuse}
Why did you tag Category:1960s albums and a few related cats with {diffuse}? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Alt text question
Justin, I saw your post at Template talk:Infobox album and have a question. I frequently add album cover images but don't add alt text. For an album cover would you just put 'image of album x cover art' or actualy describe the image? Thanks J04n(talk page) 14:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying makes perfect sense, thanks J04n(talk page) 19:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Philatelists
Hi, was this just a slip with HotCat, changing when you meant to add? – Fayenatic L ondon (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * – Fayenatic L ondon (talk)

Everything That Happens... FAC
Hey Justin, you'll notice that I have opposed the nomination and offered to work with you on a peer review. I think the reason I gave (lots of minor issues) might be the reason you're not attracting many reviewers – it's why I did nothing a month ago when I saw you re-nominated. I scanned the article and saw more issues than I wanted to help you work through in a FAC, but they were all minor, so I was reluctant to oppose. So I ultimately decided to leave it to the more committed reviewers I thought were sure to show up. Of course, if everyone felt that way nothing would get accomplished, which seems to be where we are.

Anyway, if you start the peer review, let me know.  Two Hearted River  ( paddle /  fish ) 11:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Responded.
--Niemti (talk) 22:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey
You can remove this note, because I don't care about it that much actually. I'm done with it, you can just revert if you want, problem solved I guess. --Niemti (talk) 01:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Images
So you're trying to get my images taken down? Why? Let Me Eat Cake (talk) 18:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

A request
I don't care anymore about ANY other categories, but everything under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Video_game_characters needs to stay clear of redirects. As it is right now.

We're doing really hard work to have only notable articles in these categories. And every year there are thousands of new games, each featuring multiple individual characters (even hundreds or thousands, in some cases).

Please cooperate. --Niemti (talk) 07:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

No, really. We had thousands of video game characters redirected (there are only over 300 that still exist), but there are no redirects in any categories. Seriously. And it' not even because of me, that's how it is for years, and it was a good thing. Please don't change it all of sudden. --Niemti (talk) 07:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

BECAUSE that's how it was for YEARS, since the merging began in 2007, due to an unspoken agreement between all the editors. Go and check, there are just no redirects there. If something is there, it's either notable or not merged yet. The is ABSOLUTELY no reason for it to be messed. Look, I specifically created http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Video_game_characters_by_year_of_introduction (like there's a similar article for comic book characters) few days ago so they won't be lost in the sea of redirect in the general categories. Can't you really cooperate? I don't mind ANY other categories, which is over 99%. --Niemti (talk) 08:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

And we care so much that User:Kung Fu Man is even removing video game-related categories from the comic book or film characters that are also in games, becuase these categories are kept short, containing only the essential content (notable characters originating in the games). So just don't do it here now PLEASE. Is what I ask too much, really? --Niemti (talk) 08:15, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Because that's how it ALWAYS was, and because I ask you (that's only you who's doing it). --Niemti (talk) 08:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

No, you're wrong, they were actually always being categorized by their way of introduction. But you know what, I'm tired of all this pleading like that. Are you really so un-cooperative that you can't do such even a minor thing when someone asks you nicely? --Niemti (talk) 08:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

One, actually yes, I would, probably. Two, if you don't even really know what I ask you for, then never mind, I'll take care of it myself. It's not any big thing after all, just please don't disrupt. EOD and have a nice day. --Niemti (talk) 08:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

And on a final sidenote, just let me quote Categorizing redirects:

"Most redirects should not be placed in article categories. There are, however, maintenance categories specifically for redirects, and most should be in one of those."

That's what it reads, italics as in original. You must have totally misunderstood it, because you're doing the opposite. Anyway, I don't care about other categories outside of video games, so you might keep doing it despite this clear directive to not be doing it (no, really I don't care, just telling you that you can stop right now if you want). Good bye. --Niemti (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

"image is not discussed critically"
Hi there. Please stop nominating non-free content with the reasoning "image is not discussed critically". WP:NFCC does not require a critical discussion of an image in order for it to be usable on Wikipedia (in fact, some images like movie posters or album covers are almost never critically discussed but there is rock-solid consensus that their use in infoboxes is still NFCC-compatible), so listing images for that reason does not mean that they should be deleted. If you really believe that you are aiding the project by such mass-nominations, then please make an individual argument for each file explaining how exactly it violates our policies. As you are certainly well aware, just claiming that the FUR is invalid does not mean that it is. Regards  So Why  16:08, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh? NFCI explicitly states: "Film and television screenshots: For critical commentary and discussion of the work in question." Hundreds of screenshots that were purely ornamental were deleted for this exact reason--see e.g. Files_for_deletion/2012_February_14. What am I missing here? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. The image is for discussing the work. But the image itself does not have to be discussed. It's sufficient that the text alludes to the image's content and the image is helpful for the reader to better understand what the text is talking about. Regards  So Why  19:39, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair use But by that rationale, couldn't we include dozens of screencaps on each of these articles that illustrate all manner of things being discussed? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:40, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Reverting my edits
Why did you revert my edits of the Essential Records categories? Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 19:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Seasons in English cricket
Hi, thanks for your mail about your proposal and sorry I didn't get involved but I rarely use the site now as I'm too busy. I see your proposal was in any event rejected which is good because the logic, as a few people pointed out, is in the historical context. I don't do century years. There is a cricket history reason for 1787, etc. Century years look neat but they make no sense. Jack | talk page 21:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

UNDUE discussion
Hi. I'm looking for an objective opinion for this discussion on whether certain content in the lead is giving undue weight or not. It's similar to my previous comment. Would you be interested in commenting? Dan56 (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey


Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Main Page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article George Orwell bibliography know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on June 4, 2012. You can view the TFL blurb at Today's featured list/June 4, 2012. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors, or , or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  05:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

 

The bibliography of George Orwell includes journalism, essays, books, and fiction written by the British writer Eric Arthur Blair (pictured), pen name George Orwell. Orwell first achieved widespread acclaim with his fictional novella Animal Farm and cemented his place in history as a novelist with the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four shortly before his death. While fiction accounts for a small fraction of his total output, these two novels are his best-selling works, having sold almost fifty million copies in sixty-two languages by 2007—more than any other pair of books by a twentieth-century author. In addition, Orwell wrote book-length investigations of poverty in Britain in the form of Down and Out in Paris and London and The Road to Wigan Pier and one of the first retrospectives on the Spanish Civil War in Homage to Catalonia. The impact of Orwell's large corpus is manifested in additions to the Western canon and the adoption of "Orwellian" as a description of totalitarian societies.


 * The main problem with the Wikimania date is that it will be on Thursday (TFLs are only on Mondays). The nearest dates are July 9, 2012, which already has selected an article, and July 16. If you want the date changed, you can contact, or  and they'll do so.  Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  05:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Moved, per your request. Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Honestly, no need to say thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Stubs?
I noticed that you have recently designated the article Diasystem as a "stub" on the assessment quality scale, but through its length and breadth, it doesn't seem like it fits the criteria of a stub. A quick glance at your recent contributions show similar issues at other articles. Am I missing something? — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 14:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Same with Hantsavichy Radar Station. It's clearly start class - you just copied the stub from the old WP Russia template? There's no point in making edits like this. Secretlondon (talk) 21:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Olympic sport templates
Why did you redirect this template without comment? Did you realise that the two templates have different link sets? SFB 18:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Because one links to the sport and the other links to that sport at the Olympics?? SFB 19:26, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The original navbox remains transcluded on all of the articles linked on it. That navbox serves as a link between the main descriptions of those sports, rather than the Olympic specific ones. Many readers want to traverse between different Olympic sports articles (such as Athletics (sport) to Swimming (sport) to Archery) rather than just having the option to move between only the more narrowly focused Athletics at the Summer Olympics, Swimming at the Summer Olympics and Archery at the Summer Olympics? Surely you must see that a reader interested in the Olympics would like to jump from the general descriptions of Taekwondo to Rowing (sport)? SFB 19:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW I have no issue with expanding the former template to include the other sports not yet added, although one could argue that Frisian handball has very very little to do with the Olympics. SFB 19:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm reverting the template and opening up a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics to see whether there is consensus to redirect. SFB 19:43, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

STOP!
Please stop randomly tagging articles as stubs! You are clearly not checking them before you are doing it - and you certainly won't have read the guidelines for each wikiproject (which vary). If you continue you are in danger of being blocked. Secretlondon (talk) 22:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I've blogged about you!
Hello Dear Friend,

I'm Muddyb, Wikipedian based in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania - hereby letting you know that I've blogged about you on my blog. That's all. Thanks!!!--'''Mwanaharakati(Longa) 10:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The pleasure is all mine, Justin! You're welcome!!!--'''Mwanaharakati(Longa) 10:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Country soundtracks
Category:Country soundtracks, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Another Chat with a fellow Christian Vegetarian
Greetings, you, being a vegetarian may be interested in the fact I got my daily recommended intake of protein in just thirty minutes in purely vegetarian sources... I ate just two 420g cans of baked beans and 500mls of Milk and this contains the recommended daily intake of protein and has a good distribution of amino acids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuse809 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

An Asset for you on your trip to Attaining a Healthy Vegan Diet
This website: http://nutritiondata.self.com/ is truly a blessing. It contains information not only on the protein content of foods but the distribution of the amino acids in a food. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuse809 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * is this advertising spam dude?Happy monsoon day (talk)

fast
how did you revert me so fast? i didnt even get a chance to add a source to the gotye page~ well i added it now alreadyHappy monsoon day (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Rhodanine
This edit was just plain dumb. Any med chemist knows that rhodanines are the prototypical "frequent hitter" that test positive for anything in any kind of assay. Check here for example - yes, this blog is amongst the reputable ones in the trade.

I do have the sneaking suspicion that you have no idea about rhodanines, medicininal chemistry or anything else. If you do it doesn't show in your Wikikpedia contributions.

Thank you for your attention, and see you again next week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.130.21 (talk) 01:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:People by city or town in Western Sahara
Hi, do you know how Category:People by city or town in Western Sahara became empty, please? There was at least one sub-cat when I created it. RSVP here. – Fayenatic L ondon (talk) 06:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry I replaced it with Category:People by city in Western Sahara‎ and I thought I had made Category:People by city or town in Western Sahara (as I've made most of that category structure...) so I figured it would be a non-controversial move. If you want to move the subcategories back and then have me mark my category with db-author, I will. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for notifying me--I just made a sloppy assumption. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, I've deleted the empty one. I trust you have no problem with the new one being a sub-cat of Category:Sahrawi people, which I have added? – Fayenatic L ondon (talk) 13:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Categories That's fine, but mildly ridiculous to me. The Sahrawi people are an ethnic group and not every person who lives in that city is actually from that people (e.g. Acacio Valbuena Rodríguez and Félix Erviti Barcelona, who are Spaniards--and the latter is almost certainly Basque.) But it seems like this is commonly accepted, no matter how nonsensical, so I don't object on those grounds. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:British Ecological Society publications
Category:British Ecological Society publications, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

USA Tagging
Hey Koavf, I was just curious how you go about finding the USA articles so effectively and tag them with the USA articles appropriately. I have been working on assessing their quality, but I've noted you have done quite a large amount on May 20th. The articles are almost perfect in tagging, but they are consistently missing the importance= tag for WP:USA, but they have the state variant importance, which is a good thing. I still have a sneaking suspicion more then a million articles for WP:USA are not tagged under their banner and as a part of the 1.0 team, completeness is key. I wish you could show me how you do this and work on categories. I'm running out of work to do and I see you are very prolific in those areas. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Atheists in religion category trees
I think removing the categories for atheists from the "people by religion" trees should probably be discussed before implemented. I understand the idea that atheism is not a religion, but it seems logical to me to categorize people who are atheists in the same category with those who profess specific religious beliefs. To me, upmerging them all to "FOOian people" instead of "FOOian people by religion" doesn't seem to be an improvement for navigation. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you! 2
Quite welcome. I have the uttermost respect for editors on here who take a step back and view the project as a whole and are willing to work on most topics and make edits to the benefit of the whole project. You, Aymatth2, Rosiestep, Ipigott, Emirjp seem to share this perspective with me and exactly what wikipedia can be or develop to be without systematic bias or limitation as an encyclopedia of this magnitude should be.♦ Dr. Blofeld  08:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)