User talk:Marshelec/Archive 6

Precious
You are recipient no. 2704 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted
Hi Marshelec, I just wanted to let you know that I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User%3AMarshelec added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions.

As you know, I'm very familiar with your content creation. However, I've looked over the last ten articles you created to make sure that there aren't any outstanding issues. The only thing I spotted was a maintenance tag placed a week ago. That particular article was not an orphan and I did not check whether the incoming links have been created during the last week or whether the tag had been placed in error. What I encourage you to do is to deal with maintenance tags when they get placed on articles that you created (assuming that you have those articles on your watchlist). That was really the only issue I spotted. Happy editing!  Schwede 66  23:25, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Should the article titled "Wellington" be about the City of Wellington or the Wellington metropolitan area ?
Hi, I would appreciate your thoughts on this topic, since you do so much work that involves district and regional boundaries etc. This question is particularly important to me at present because several of the Wellington Wikipedians are looking for a group project, and getting the Wellington article to GA status is a leading candidate. However, we need to be certain about the scope, to avoid wasted effort.

There has been a discussion on Talk:Wellington about the scope of the article. Changes made by one editor that take content in the existing article towards coverage of the metropolitan area have been reverted by others. At present, there is a separate article about the Greater Wellington Region, and separate articles about the cities of Porirua, Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt. The lead of each of article about these three cities describe them as being "one of the four cities that constitute the Wellington metropolitan area.". The wikilink for Wellington metropolitan area goes to a section of the article "Wellington" that describes the metropolitan area.

My view initially was that the article titled Wellington should be just about the city as defined by the boundaries of Wellilngton City Council. However, I decided to look at the treatment of some other cities. Benchmarking is not always conclusive, but is a relevant consideration. Here is what I have found so far:

This table does not include "Region" articles, but there are many, eg: Grand Paris

It appears that there are divergent approaches. I am drawn to the "Australian" model, but still mulling it over.Marshelec (talk) 06:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * (EC) I think it would be entirely appropriate if we had three articles: one on Wellington City ie the area governed by WCC, one on Wellington Region as we have, and one on the Wellington metropolitan area. I'm not particularly interested at this point in what the city and metropolitan area articles are called, although "City of Wellington" sounds unnatural to me and I would prefer "Wellington City". The metropolitan area could be titled just "Wellington" unless there's a feeling that should be used for the WCC area. Since the region styles itself as "Greater Wellington" we can not use that name for the metropolitan area. My suggestion, then, is to call the article on the WCC area "Wellington City" and the article on the combined metropolitan area of the four city councils "Wellington".- gadfium 07:15, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The Australian comparison isn’t relevant. Their councils are tiny. They’ve never gone through a local government reform.  Schwede 66  07:33, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject update - Performing Arts Aotearoa 12 May 2022
A year after the Performing Arts Aotearoa project started and as we are coming into winter (a busier editing time for many) here is an update.

The Performing Arts Aotearoa Wikiproject now lives on the WikiProject New Zealand page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_Zealand/Performing_Arts_Aotearoa

I have added new articles created as part of the Pacific Arts Aotearoa Wikiproject. These articles by new editors include Lusi Faiva, Suli Moa, Edith Amituanai and Amanaki Prescott-Faletau, who was interviewed on Radio New Zealand last Sunday. The reporter let me know the article was valuable for the interview research – great feedback for all of us creating and improving content in Wikipedia.

On the project page is highlighted plenty of articles to create or improve. I invite you to have a look and contribute if you can. There are many long-standing festivals in Aotearoa without articles such as the Hawkes Bay Arts Festival, Tauranga Festival of the Arts, Taranaki International Arts Festival, Nelson Arts Festival and the Christchurch Arts Festival. Creating these Wikipedia pages or Wikidata items allows links to biographies and strengthens the weaving of Wikipedia.

Other suggestions for new articles:
 * Notable women - Jane Yonge, Amber Cureen, Eleanor Bishop (director)
 * Director of the Te Tairāwhiti Arts Festival and musician - Tama Waipara
 * Notable theatre companies - Prayas Theatre, The Conch (theatre company), Barbarian Productions

Reach out to me if you want guidance on any aspects of Wikipedia, or a collegial conversation about writing encyclopaedic entries on performing arts. I can set up a zoom, or direct you to places for help.

Please try to remember to add any relevant articles improved or created to the lists on the project page so the impact can be seen. Take your name off the project page if you don’t want to get these sporadic updates. I will keep an eye on new articles and I have an ongoing campaign to get more images uploaded so we can illustrate the articles too. I have resources on Wikimedia Commons if you are interested. Feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Pakoire (talk) 02:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Beck (engineer)
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

DYK reviews
Reviewed Spy Princess Marshelec (talk) 02:20, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Paparoa Track
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Nice work, Marshelec! Was delighted to see this in such a prominent position on the main page. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Munida gregaria
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Evans Bay Patent Slip
Kia ora. I have begun building up a new category of photos in Commons. See: c:Category:Evans Bay Patent Slip. I have downloaded all these images from the National Library collection. As far as I can determine, these ones are all in the public domain, because of the date (1927 or earlier). One issue I wrestled with was whether to call the category "Evans Bay Patent Slip", or "Patent Slip, Evans Bay". I eventually settled on the former. I hope you agree, and will also be happy with that as the title of the planned new article ?. I am also working on an Infobox that could be used in the new article, and will send a link to that shortly. Cheers --Marshelec (talk) 01:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have prepared a table showing some significant incidents at the Patent Slip that made the news. See: User:Marshelec/sandbox2.  Is this worth including this table when a new article is created ? There would be a brief introduction prior to the table. What do you think ? --Marshelec (talk) 04:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Here are links to newspaper articles from 1907 I came across that describes an aspect of the history of ownership of the Patent Slip that is not covered in the article at present. See: and  . Would you like to incorporate this twist in the tale, or shall I go ahead ? --Marshelec (talk) 04:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * For the new article, it would be great to have a good photo of the current site, to put alongside the historic images that we can choose from the new commons category. An image like this one would be good:, except taken on a bright day :), or this one: . I have a reasonable camera, so could possibly take some shots, if I can be available when the weather is suitable. --Marshelec (talk) 06:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Please go ahead. I prefer Evans Bay Patent Slip as a title too. I'm a bit nervous about splitting into a new article - do you want to do that? Do everything you have suggested, I'm sure it will be great. If we get a sunny day I can take some photos too, but not for a couple of weeks. I have asked WCC Archives if they can confirm the location of the first slip, and they will get back to me in a week or so. I thought I might try making an infobox for the Evans Bay page. Wainuiomartian (talk) 20:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC).
 * I'm going on holiday so please add the USSCo info. I worked out how to make a suburb infobox for the Evans Bay page, but is it reasonable to include it, since the article is mostly about activity around the bay itself, not the suburb? Wainuiomartian (talk) 18:30, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Dandenong Ranges Botanic Gardens
Hi, I have just visited this large and popular botanic gardens in hills to the east of Melbourne. Checking it out on Wikipedia, I was surprised to find only a short stub article, and that it was named National Rhododendron Gardens. I have made a proposal for a page move on the Talk page. I think the move is un-controversial, and that I could just proceed. However, can you review please ? Also, what is involved in (a) changing the Category name in Commons, and (b) getting rid of the unhelpful redirect from National Rhododendron Garden (singular) that goes to the article for the town in the area Olinda. ? --Marshelec (talk) 04:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Foulden Maar
. Kia ora, I understand from User:Schwede66 that the article Foulden Maar (and the associated controversy about plans to mine the site) may have been one of the things that drew you in to the Wikimedia world.😃 I have recently purchased the newly published book Fossil Treasures of Foulden Maar, and found it absolutely fascinating. I plan to expand and update several aspects in the existing article. Would you like to help out ? I understand we all have our own priorities and this may not fit with yours, but I thought I would ask 😃—Marshelec (talk) 22:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC) Marshelec (talk) 22:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Kia ora Marshalec. I was already about a year into Wiki when Foulden Maar came up - but it was my very first DYK, which might be what Schwede is remembering. I had a lovely time improving a stub that had been created, and tracking all the public interest in it. Since then the Save Foulden Maar group was created, and as I'm on the board of that I feel like it's a conflict of interest for me to edit the page, which is why I haven't touched it in a long time. (Is the group mentioned on the page? There is probably a list of board members in the acknowledgements of the book, of whom some are notable and probably ought to be mentioned, like Alan Mark). But yes there is huge scope to improve the page now that beautiful book is out! I will be cheering you on from the sidelines. DrThneed (talk) 00:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I understand. However, you can always make suggestions on the article Talk page, or contact me directly 😃 Marshelec (talk) 00:37, 29 October 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) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wangapeka Track
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wangapeka Track you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 18:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I appreciate the time and effort that reviews can take, and look forward to your feedback. I expect to be available over most of the next 7 days, so will aim to respond promptly to points raised. Marshelec (talk) 18:49, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Perry County, Tennessee for GA
Good afternoon! Thanks for the heads up prior to starting the review for Perry County, Tennessee. I should have time over the next few days to respond, looking forward to seeing your comments! I've stared at the page so much now I'm blind to what is missing or can be fixed... nf utvol (talk) 15:55, 8 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I believe I have managed to get most of your suggestions for Perry County, Tennessee incorporated. Please take a look and let me know! Thanks! nf utvol (talk) 18:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on an excellent article. It was an interesting process for me to undertake the GA review, and I have learned a lot about the area. I think that if you could find out a bit more about the land usage, and the make-up of forested areas, and get some more photos, you could possibly consider taking this to Featured Article review. Here is one example of an article about a North American city that was made a Featured Article in 2017 Arlington, Washington. I think you will see that the Perry County article is not far from reaching that standard. I will attempt to get more photos from Flickr users, to expand the range of images in related categories in Wikimedia Commons. The selection is rather limited at present. My greetings to you for the holiday season from New Zealand, where it is summertime :)Marshelec (talk) 21:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for all of your assistance, especially with tracking down those images. After reviewing other FA articles on similarly sized locations, I think you're right in that it isn't far from it. Enjoy your upside down seasons! ;) nf utvol (talk) 03:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wangapeka Track
The article Wangapeka Track you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Wangapeka Track and Talk:Wangapeka Track/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 11:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wangapeka Track
The article Wangapeka Track you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wangapeka Track for comments about the article, and Talk:Wangapeka Track/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 11:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Citing a court case
Thanks for your email. There is a cite court template, but I don't think I've ever used it. It might be suitable for the article you mentioned. cite web is always a good option for any citation which has a url.- gadfium 08:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wellington Water logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Wellington Water logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Help with photo please
Hi. I uploaded a photo to Commons but I got an error message and I'm not sure why. I'm pretty sure the photo shows the sad remains of Athfield library nikaus and if I can prove that then I might like to use it in the WCL article. Do you have time to take a look at what's wrong with the image? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Souvenir_shop_Wellington_Airport.jpg&diff=next&oldid=727064211 Thanks. Wainuiomartian (talk) 19:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you saved the image from Flick to your hard disk and then uploaded it, it may have been recompressed so it won't match a digital comparison with Flickr. If you edited it in any way, e.g. to crop it, it certainly won't match. I copy images from Flickr to Commons by pasting the Flick url into the upload wizard using the "Share images from Flickr" button.- gadfium 22:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you did download and save the file first, before uploading it, then it may be best to start again. I suggest asking for this image to be deleted, and once that is done, upload with the "Share images from Flickr" button, as Gadfium has explained. To delete the file, you just insert a delete template in the description, to get the process underway. See: c:Help:Nominate_for_deletion. Marshelec (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, the Flickr upload option is not available to all users. You've got to reach a certain level of permission first.  Schwede 66  09:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Evans Bay Patent Slip
BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Feedback wanted for Te Rapa cogeneration article
Hi Marshelec,

Schwede66 forwarded me to you for help. Here was my original request:

I'm working on the Te Rapa cogeneration article and was wondering if you could help me find additional sources for the lead. So far, I've only found one report and couldn't find anything else useful on Google. Most of the search results are about the plant's planned closure. I would also appreciate general feedback about the article.

Thanks in advance for your help! CoderThomasB (talk) 23:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, I posted a reply but possibly on the wrong talk page :) I am heavily committed over the next few days, but will try to get to this next week. Cheers, Marshelec (talk) 07:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for offering to help. It's not urgent, but as a new editor, I would appreciate any feedback you could provide! CoderThomasB (talk) 07:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * . Can I ask the background to the 44/45 MW power rating ? The sources I have found so far all say 44 MW. Marshelec (talk) 03:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I originally switched it to 44MW from this report, but this ProQuest articles says 45MW, so I don't really know. Maybe saying 44-45MW might be better. CoderThomasB (talk) 04:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I recommend you stick with 44 MW (note the gap !). The MBIE source is authoritative and also far more recent. The newspaper source is old. I also note that journalists often struggle with scientific details like parameters in SI units, especially the difference between energy and power. :) Marshelec (talk) 04:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I've changed it back to 44 MW. CoderThomasB (talk) 05:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Citing sources from ProQuest
Hi, I thought this might interest you. I have come across a template for citing sources from ProQuest. It looks handy, so I will plan on using this in future cases. Here is an example: Marshelec (talk) 02:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks.Wainuiomartian (talk) 02:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't make that work unless i change 'newspaper' to 'work', and somebody told me I should be putting in the URL access in the citation. But it is tidier... Wainuiomartian (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I have just copied the example above into my sandbox, and it seems to work fine ? With regards to the url-access - yes that is perhaps an omission from this template. However, given that you can login to ProQuest using the Wikipedia library, access is not much of an issue for those with a Wiki account. I guess we can choose to use the template or not - there is no absolutely right way of doing things :) Marshelec (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Tragic we can't use Papers Past after 1950. You can put the url-access in the ProQuest bit, i.e. use . For example:
 * Jon (talk) 04:40, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Papers Past has The Press up to 1979.- gadfium 04:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Gadfium excellent, that makes me happy, also that someone is still scanning and cataloging stuff for it. I got the impression at some point that its funding was cut — Jon (talk) 07:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Gadfium excellent, that makes me happy, also that someone is still scanning and cataloging stuff for it. I got the impression at some point that its funding was cut — Jon (talk) 07:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing Music of The Lord of the Rings film series
Hi there, as my official GA review mentor(!) could you at some point spare a moment for a quick gander at Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings film series/GA1 and just make sure it looks reasonable to you? I haven't done a final thing against the 6 criteria yet, but some initial points and a bit of discussion. Cheers! — Jon (talk) 03:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * . As discussed, there is a useful tool for checking for copy violations. See: https://copyvios.toolforge.org/ There are some things to note: some websites mirror Wikipedia, and the bot cannot tell this (unless the mirror sites have already been flagged to be ignored). So sometimes, the report shows apparent violations that are actually just mirror sites. Marshelec (talk) 00:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As a further comment, it has been suggested to me that it is desirable to get the % similarity rating produced by this tool down below 20% for any one source. This is not always possible, because the article may need to use an exact combination of words repeatedly, and the bot may then classify these with a similarity rating above 20%, even though there is clearly no copy violation.

GA review process
. Undertaking a GA review can be a long process, involving a lot of work. You might be interested to see the review process for a nomination I have just passed. In this case, the review comments have almost as many words as the original article. However, the article is now passed. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Huntingdale_railway_station/GA1 Marshelec (talk) 22:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * And then there's this.  Schwede 66  23:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Also pinging I've run into one issue with my first GA review: Talk:Music of The Lord of the Rings film series/GA1 around the FUR on non-free images used in the article. Criterion 6a says "valid non-free use rationales are provided" and I'm assuming that valid means that an admin or image patroller has added   to the image FUR template, as is required to avoid it being disputed/deleted later. Do either of you have an opinion here? Alternatively, could either of you apply your magic adminy powers to the images in question and make the problem go away (I actually think the FURs are valid, but it doesn't seem like it's up to me or the article author)? Cheers — Jon (talk) 21:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I have not come across this particular issue before, and don't have admin rights, so this is above my pay-grade :) Sorry. Marshelec (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no admin action needed. What Chiswick Chap said at 9:40am is correct. All that's needed is for the uploader to provide a rationale, and for the reviewer to check that the rationale looks reasonable.  Schwede 66  21:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks chaps! — Jon (talk) 22:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi; where should I start with Talk:Contrabass trombone/GA1, just start editing? Not sure I agree with some points, for instance other music articles refer to composers by their usual surname moniker e.g. Wagner, Verdi, etc. — Jon (talk) 23:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It is great that the GA review is underway. You can look forward to success, although some work remains. :) This same editor was also the GA reviewer for Wangapeka Track, and did a thorough job. See: Talk:Wangapeka Track/GA1. This editor has completed 198 GA reviews, and has 59 GAs. The feedback seems thorough and well-considered, and shows the close attention that this reviewer has given to the article. I suggest getting stuck in and resolving all the points raised, other than where you have a significant disagreement. For those issues, I suggest you compose a reply setting out your view and supporting rationale, but bear in mind the extensive experience of this editor.Marshelec (talk) Marshelec (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As an interesting benchmark for a GA graded article about musical instruments, have a look at Violin acoustics. This article was nominated for GA by Amitchell125 and was passed.Marshelec (talk) 23:57, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Great work on responding to the GA review of Contrabass trombone. :) It looks to be going well. Cheers. Marshelec (talk) 22:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's absolutely fine to have a discussion with the reviewer when there are point you disagree with, . You could put a forceful argument up, or tease out where the reviewer is coming from, or anything in between. GA reviews are almost always very civil affairs. If you've got a good reviewer, which evidently you have, you will undoubtedly end up with a better article.  Schwede 66  05:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Schwede66 cheers chaps, it's indeed going swimmingly and I'm learning a lot. I am stuck on the use of the DMA thesis as a source though, which given the tiny field and how recent it is (2020) it seems a bit unfair to expect it to be widely cited? Anyway, might raise it on Sunday and canvas ideas. Jon (talk) 10:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I noticed in the Infobox of Contrabass trombone that when I clicked on the image showing the playing range of the instrument, there was a pop-up option to download a midi file. I was keen to hear the sound of the instrument, but it was a piano. !  I guess this is OK for the playing range, but is there any chance of getting a sound file of the instrument into the article ?? Because it is an unusual instrument, many readers will wonder what it sounds like.  On a related note (if you will pardon the pun), I have just listened to this thrilling piece. Although I think it features bass trombones, but not contrabass, I am sure you will still enjoy  :) : .Marshelec (talk) 06:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah yes... the state of the Score extension is a little lamentable; I've contributed a patch to make it do SVG, which if we're lucky might be deployed some time before I'm eligible for the pension, given its ticket T49578 was opened in 2013. One of the things I'd like to do is record something and put it up on commons. What (public domain) music would you like to hear on it? — Jon (talk) 07:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It's got to be an excerpt from Mars: the bringer of war !! ..Marshelec (talk) 07:27, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Haha... excellent, but sadly that was written for the British bass trombone in G, not quite a contrabass. The main reason I haven't done it yet is because I haven't quite got my chops around the Wagner "spear" excerpt in the article; it's a massive blow! Meanwhile, here's someone who really knows what they're doing, Csaba from Staatskapelle absolutely nailing it to your face, as it were. — Jon (talk) 07:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * , ok another suggestion - this majestic Pilgrim's Chorus theme from Wagner's Tannhauser overture: with the main theme played (slowly) an octave lower on the contrabass trombone !! Marshelec (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Review of GA nomination for Walter Nash
. Kia ora. I found your GA nomination of the article Walter Nash. I am interested in this article, and it looks to be in good shape. I would be willing to be the GA reviewer. However, I am busy for the next week, and would not be able to get started until the first few days of April. Provided that no-one else has commenced the GA review by early April, I will initiate the process. Once I get started, it would be best if you have sufficient time available to respond to any points, so that together we can make progress without things dragging on. Are you reasonably available in the first couple of weeks of April ? Marshelec (talk) 07:16, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

. Kia ora. I am currently working on a GA review of Walter Nash and would appreciate a second opinion on a point I am uncertain about. This concerns mention of Stuart Nash as a great-grandson, in the section Walter Nash. My inclination is to suggest that content about his great-grandson is off-topic and best omitted. This content doesn't fit well with the heading "Personal life" of Walter Nash. However, perhaps I am overly swayed by the current controversy surrounding Stuart Nash. At present, I think it is more relevant to mention the relationship in the article about Stuart Nash, but not in the article about Walter Nash. Any thoughts ?? Marshelec (talk) 21:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I thought he was Stuart Nash's grandfather and not the great-grandfather? Maybe my memory serves me wrong. Anyway, grandfather is a stronger tie than great-grandfather. As they also share the same surname, it's an obvious relationship. I would be inclined to include it, especially so if there are reliable sources for it. Another aspect is that their life spans have overlapped.  Schwede 66  23:12, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I am well through the GA review, but it is currently in my sandbox here: User:Marshelec/sandbox. As you will see, it has taken a bit of work ! I will probably post all this into the article GA review page in next day or two.  If you have time to scan through my draft comments, I would be grateful for any feedback.  By the way, it seems that Stuart Nash is indeed a great grandson of Walter Nash, at least according to this Labour Party source:  Marshelec (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That guy would probably know... I'll try to have a look at your sandbox tonight.  Schwede 66  03:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments on your draft review
I shall comment here as I read the article and your draft review. This will come is many separate edits:  Schwede 66  08:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC) I hope that's helpful. Good work. It'll be a nice article once all this feedback has been worked in.  Schwede 66  10:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Kidderminster seems too much of a detail for the lead. Maybe Worcestershire or even West Midlands might be more appropriate.
 * What you've written about the lead seems appropriate. In addition, there's this article: List of longest-serving members of the New Zealand Parliament – Nash is very near the top of that list.
 * I've read your review of subsequent sections and can't fault any of it.
 * I wonder whether MOS:JOBTITLE should be looked at and some caps be dropped.
 * I don't like the overall structure, with everything as level 1 headings. Maybe there should be a level 1 heading "Political career" with existing headings becoming level 2 headings.
 * I wonder whether the section "Early political career" should finish prior to him getting elected to parliament. If so, then the parlbox could move to the next section. This would avoid the sandwiching of some text between the parlbox and the photo on screens set to the default view.
 * The citation from the 1965 Birthday Honours should be worked into the text.
 * The section "Honorific eponyms" is insufficiently referenced.
 * I feel that there's too much detail about Stuart Nash. It could simply say that he was an MP from 2008 to 2011 and again from 2014 to 2023.
 * Some images are too large, e.g. the state funeral one. Upright images should use the parameter "upright".

GA review in progress
If you can find some time, please have a look at Walter Nash and the GA review that is in progress: Talk:Walter Nash/GA1 During this review, I have adopted some of the presentation approaches used by the GA reviewer of Contrabass trombone, including adding a collapse template when all review comments on a section are actioned. You are welcome to directly edit the article, or contribute to review comments if you wish :) Marshelec (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I would add that the images on commons don't have captions or structured data ("depicts" tags), but not sure if that's GA or FA? Jon (talk) 10:05, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Becoming an AFC reviewer
Kia ora, I have just added myself to the talk page here, offering to become an AFC reviewer: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants. Hopefully my offer will be accepted. I will probably want to do "cleanup" tasks on articles that I accept. What tools do you recommend ?. As an example of an AFC that needs a bit of cleanup, see: Draft:Tianyi_Lu. Some of the citations are not fully formatted. I could fix these manually, but perhaps there is a tool that can help with some of this ? Any suggestions for cleanup tools would be most welcome. Thanks..Marshelec (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I take it you've had a look at WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions? The helper script referred to on that page does quite a bit of the cleanup. "Expand citations" is a link for me in the toolbar on the right but I wouldn't know whether that's there by default or because I've enabled it through my preferences. Either way, it does tidy up citations to some extent. The two tools that I use most frequently are both user scripts that get installed in your personal javascript area:
 * User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates – this is super-useful but you need to check each and every edit before you save it as it's not 100% accurate
 * User:Ohconfucius/dashes – this fixes dashes and is not something that you need to review before hitting the save button, but it does miss a few edge case (it never turns a dash into something that it shouldn't, though)
 * I hope that helps.  Schwede 66  04:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Planned new article
Kia ora, I seek your views about the naming of a new article I plan to write about Pariwhero/Red Rocks on Wellington's south coast. I am aware that Pariwhero/Red Rocks is an official dual name, and. The dual name is included in List of dual place names in New Zealand. My inclination is to name the article with the dual name, but I am conscious of the debates that have usually surrounded using dual names like this in articles. There are some sources that use Pariwhero/Red Rocks, some put the dual name the other way around, and there are lots of sources that just say Red Rocks. An interim position might be to name the article Red Rocks, Wellington and then have Pariwhero/Red Rocks in the first line. Given your extensive involvement in these dual name issues, I would appreciate your thoughts... 20:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC) Marshelec (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Cheers for the heads up, totally appreciate your concerns on this one - I'm genuinely amazed that it still doesn't have an article! I think your inclination is probably the best course to go with still, given the need to have disambiguation otherwise. Though the one thing I'd say is that we've got convention to use a spaced slash instead, so it'd be Pariwhero / Red Rocks - as I understand it, the NZGB are in the process of standardising dual names to this orthography too. Turnagra (talk) 21:20, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware that NZGB was moving to the convention with a spaced slash, so that is really helpful. I have started drafting some content, and will put it into an article in draft namespace when it is a bit more advanced, using the dual name with spaced slash. I will then get one of my buddies who has a background in geology to review what I write about the rock formations before I publish into main space. Geology is somewhat outside my area of expertise ! Thanks for your help. Ngā mihi nui...Marshelec (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * All good, happy to be of assistance! I'd be also happy to take a gander over it when you've written something, assuming I've finished my article on Blue Smoke by then! Turnagra (talk) 22:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * . This is still in progress, but please have a look. Draft:Pariwhero / Red Rocks. Thanks..Marshelec (talk) 07:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I added a bit more to the draft today, and then decided it was at a stage where I could publish it to main space. See: Pariwhero / Red Rocks. I have ordered some additional reference materials and if they prove useful, I may still expand the article further. I could probably also improve the linkage to other aspects of the south coast, in particular the nearby seal colony at Sinclair Head. Please have a look and let me know what you think.. Marshelec (talk) 09:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I'd had a bit of a busy week and hadn't had a chance to look before now. I've just made a few copy edits to the first couple sections / expansions to the infobox, I think expanding on the link to the surrounding area is a good shout. It's probably also worthwhile flagging the recreation aspect, given how popular the rocks are as a day trip for Wellingtonians. Turnagra (talk) 10:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

AFCR protocol query
Kia ora, I have a query that will help me as a AFCR newbie. I have found this AFC article: Draft:Hermit crab behaviors. There is interesting content here, and citations, but my current view is that all this content should be placed / merged into Hermit crab. Doing so would improve the Hermit crab article, and would not make it excessively long. What is the right next step ? Do I:
 * 1) just write a review comment to that effect and wait to see if there is any feedback or action
 * 2) write a review comment to that effect and decline the submission immediately
 * 3) do the merge myself and decline the submission

..Marshelec (talk) 22:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I would discuss the proposed merge with the author.  Schwede 66  22:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have provided comments and offered assistance with the proposed merge. See: Draft:Hermit crab behaviors...Marshelec (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks great!  Schwede 66  02:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I now have a follow-up question. The user has now merged the content from their original Draft:Hermit crab behaviors with the existing article Hermit crab. I have done some copy edits and re-arranging of content in this article after the merge. My question now is how to proceed with the draft, because it is no longer required ? Is there a way that the user can request that it is deleted ? Marshelec (talk) 22:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * On further investigation, it appears there is a suitable process at WP:G7. Should I now ask the user to put the relevant template into the draft article ? Marshelec (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, G7 will do the trick.  Schwede 66  19:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Upper Hutt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stuff.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Marshelec (talk) 22:50, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

? Wellesley College ?- disruptive editing
Hi, the recent instances of disruptive editing from Special:Contributions/203.173.161.240 may be too minor to escalate. However, I am interested to know if you ever contact schools to let them know ? The talk page says the address is associated with Wellesley College. This is a private school with a reasonably good reputation - I presume they would be concerned that their IP address was being used in disruptive editing of Wikipedia pages ? Marshelec (talk) 03:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I looked at the IP's edits a few minutes ago (including edits which were disallowed by edit filters) and came very close to blocking them.
 * I haven't tried contacting a school directly. The address is used by Wellesley College Library Hub . They might have records on who was using the computers there at that time. You are welcome to try contacting them. I suspect it will be time consuming to explain to them what is happening and we'll never know the result of any investigation they pursue.- gadfium 03:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)