User talk:MichaelMaggs/Archive/2023

A cup of tea for you!

 * Thank you! MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2813 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Gerda Arendt Woah, that was a surprise. Thank you so much! MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Dyson sphere
Dyson sphere has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. TompaDompa (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Excellent, thank you. MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Quick question...
You recently reverted an edit that I made to the "Takarabune" page indicating: "Needs a reliable source to support the contention that this is a famous stone named Takarabune. And even then its connection with the subject of this article needs to be explained."

The edit I had made was the posting of a picture that I took myself in a recent trip to Japan of a suiseki stone with its information plaque. In the caption to the picture I posted the English verbatim translation of the Japanese text on the stone's plaque (where the name of the stone is indicated as Takarabune). I didn't take the picture from a book, I did take the picture myself of the actual displayed stone.

Since I am not a Wikipedia expert, my questions is: in cases like this, where the added content is not from a "source," how can this, if at all, be added to Wikipedia?

Thank you for your help! Escuadro (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi @Escuadro, thanks for the question. The issue I had with the edit was that you'd added details of the stone as a caption to the image, but didn't say where that information had come from. It looked as if it might have been from your own personal knowledge (not allowed) rather than being taken from the label (allowed). What I'd suggest is that you edit the image page on Commons to state exactly what the label says (was there an English label, or do you read Japanese?) If you could then indicate where the stone is - eg in which museum - that should be enough to count as a WP:RS. Then, I think you should be OK to re-add the image to the article, either with that full caption, or perhaps slightly shortened as the name of the river isn't particularly relevant to this article. Happy to help in any way if you need it. MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much, I am still learning some small nuances of editing Wikipedia. I will comply with your advise and give it another try. Thank you again! Escuadro (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @MichaelMaggs, I have another question for you, if I may,...is it possible to post a photograph in Wikipedia if I have permission from the owner of the copyright, or is this too slippery a slope?
 * Thank you! Escuadro (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Escuadro, Yes that may be possible, but there are a few hoops to jump through as the copyright owner has to formally confirm release of the image under a free licence that's suitable for Wikipedia. You'd need to upload to Wikimedia Commons and get the copyright owner - usually the photographer - to follow the steps set out at Volunteer Response Team. If the subject within the photo is in itself a copyright-protected work of art (painting, sculpture, some buildings), the artist will also have an independent copyright, and an artist's-release will be needed as well. Since that's rarely available, such pictures generally can't be used. There are a few exceptions, but the whole area is quite complicated. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed too complicated. Thank you so much @MichaelMaggs Escuadro (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Reversal of addition to Busman's Honeymoon
Hi Michael,

You recently reverted an addition I made to Busman's Honeymoon because it “lacked a reliable source”. The reliable source was the Wikipedia article about the series. I have copied the entry below so you can follow the link.

In 7 years editing Wikipedia, this is the first time I have seen anyone suggest that it was necessary to add a formal citation of a WP page in addition to the internal links to Wikipedia articles. If that is true, a vast number of paragraphs need to be revised, including the one to which I appended this information, which relies on the link to Edward Petherbridge's WP article.

“(Petherbridge starred as Lord Peter in A Dorothy L. Sayers Mystery, a 1987 televised adaptation of all the Harriet Vane novels except Busman's Honeymoon. The BBC could not obtain the rights. )” Merry medievalist (talk) 02:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I am also curious to know why you reverted the text instead of employing a “citation needed” note. I would never do that unless the text concerned was problematic in some other way. Merry medievalist (talk) 07:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @Merry medievalist You're right, and I've reverted myself. I think I saw the unsourced statement "The BBC could not obtain the rights" without noticing that A Dorothy L. Sayers Mystery was in blue and was a thus a link to a separate page where the information could be found. Apologies. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Merry medievalist (talk) 19:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Testimonies (novel)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Testimonies (novel) 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 Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 22:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Testimonies (novel)
The article Testimonies (novel) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Testimonies (novel) for comments about the article, and Talk:Testimonies (novel)/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 Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 20:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:CONSENSUS
Please don't do this again until the article reaches a consensus on the talk page, which I know you're aware of. Steiger already had a consensus at the WP:FAC not to include an infobox. A group of editors, not liking that consensus, are seeking to change it. Please show some respect. 2A02:C7C:A400:EF00:7D9B:6AB6:102D:5D7E (talk) 20:58, 27 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Your edit has already been reverted by another editor per WP:STATUSQUO. Suggest you raise the issue at the RFC discussion. MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I who wrote and promoted the article actually added the box as I think it's inevitable what the outcome will be. Better me add it than somebody adding one with a list of his five wives and enforcing one. At least there are links in it to awards and filmography! ♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Librivox?
Was thinking of getting into that. What audio hardware do you use? Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 01:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I use an Aston Origin mic feeding into a Macbook pro via an Audient iD14 (though that's overkill as it has two channels, only only of which is needed). Software is Audacity. Haven't done much recording for a while, as all my kit has been in store for several months during an unexpectedly-extended house move. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

GA reviewing
I just passed the GA; the bot will be along in a few minutes with the official notice. Congratulations! And can I interest you in doing some GA reviewing? You're a good writer and a very experienced editor, and we always need more reviewers. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:48, 27 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Possibly, but I see that there is recent agreement to improve the systems and documentation in quite a few areas. Rather than jumping in now - and bearing in mind that many GA requests come from editers who are already hugely experienced with the process – I might wait until the new guidance is a little more settled. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not sure what guidance you're referring to? WP:GAN/I and WP:GACR are the important pages for reviewing and I don't think there are any proposals to modify those at the moment, unless I'm missing something.  There's a discussion about changing the format of WP:GAN, the main list of nominations, but that would only affect the presentation of that page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 21:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was looking at Good Article proposal drive 2023/Feedback where there seems to be quite a lot going on, but maybe most of that's not fundamental. MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * A couple of questions come to mind as I read through this. According to the page mentioned above, "Proposal 2: Make spot checking a requirement" was approved. Could you give some guidance, please, as I can't see how that's (yet?) been reflected in the instructions. Should it be done for all reviews, even for highly experienced nominators with 100 or more GAs? Also, would you or someone be prepared to check over my first attempts? I see there is a mentor page, but according to the discussion it's out of date. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You're right that there's no explicit mention of spotchecks in the instructions; I'll ask at the GA talk page why not.  The point of them is to verify criterion 2 of WP:GACR, and yes, they should be done regardless of the experience of the nominator. We recently had a case where an editor with over 200 promoted GAs was found to have copyvio or too-close paraphrasing in almost all his articles, and they have now been mass-delisted.  I used to not bother with spotchecks for experienced editors, but the discussion you mention concluded that it's necessary to check at least a small number of citations for every nomination.  What I do is what you saw in my review of your nomination -- I randomly pick at least three sentences (more for a longer article) and post a list of them in the review, along with the number of the footnote or footnotes that support them.  Then I look up the references and if the sentence is fully supported by those footnotes, I mark it as verified.  If I don't have access to the source I ask the nominator to quote the text from their copy.  Anything more than a very minor discrepancy and I'll do more spotchecks.  Yes, I'd be glad to help out or answer any questions.  One other thing: when you start a review, a template will be placed on the review page by default that you can use to check off the criteria, one by one.  See Talk:Charles Edward, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha/GA1 for an example; the reviewer there is using it as a summary tool, with icons indicating where the article currently passes, fails, or has not yet been assessed against each criterion, and a more detailed list of comments below.  I don't use the templates and they're not required but many people find them handy. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:51, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Mike Christie Ok, thanks. When I get back after Easter I'll have a go at a first GA review. MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Request for Article Review
Hello! I have recently edited the Wikipedia article for Provoke Magazine. Seeing as you are interested in subjects in photography, I was wondering if you could provide some feedback on the new edits. Thank you. Andrew34jack (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, don't really feel qualified to comment on that subject matter. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:38, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries MichaelMaggs. Andrew34jack (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Sachan
sir there is not enough documentation regarding the Sachan community because they were the secret service group in the Maratha Army. My close friend belongs to this community and what I had written is the belief of all the people of Kanpur region where Sachan community resides. So it's a request to alter the change and make it what I have edited. RajputSarkar01 (talk) 20:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid that Wikipedia works entirely on documented reliable sources. No matter how certain you may be that the information you have is accurate, unless it can be supported by a reliable published source it can't be added. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * sir I think you need to understand that Sachan is a caste in India and during the British colonial period, Sachans were among the rebellious communities that's why British demolished their documents and ancestors records. So if a community was oppressed by some power in history, then is this not the right of that community to show it's proud history to the world? RajputSarkar01 (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I sympathise with the difficulties of proving such things, but I'm afraid that without published sources it will not be possible to add the information. You might like to ask for advice at the Teahouse. MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Testimonies (novel)
BorgQueen (talk) 12:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:The Dancing Floor, Buchan, 1926 first edition cover.png
Thanks for uploading File:The Dancing Floor, Buchan, 1926 first edition cover.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 23:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * That's fine. I didn't see the other version of that cover image. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I uploaded that cover to Commons afterwards. -- Whpq (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

david raye
you said that you need a source he will join spurs i am family freinds with him 213.8.151.122 (talk) 18:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi I'm afraid that in order to add information of that type to Wikipedia you need to be able to show that it's been published in a reliable third-party source - see WP:RS and WP:BLP. Unless the information can be confirmed by a reliable third-party published source, I'm afraid it can't be used here, even though you might know personally that the information is accurate. No doubt in due course it will be reported somewhere, such as a reliable newspaper, and at that point it will become useable. MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

And Then There Were None
Hopefully this fixes the problem (the subsequent revert had nothing to do with actual content, so please restore it if you don't see any problem). The search in question happened after only two deaths, not three, so I was fixing the sequence of events, but then there was the issue of where to mention the rhyme and figurines. 125.164.43.151 (talk) 00:25, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * An editor has reverted your edit for 'ban evasion'. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It's this guy: Long-term abuse/Belteshazzar. His abuse of Wikipedia is prolific enough that his edits are generally best reverted without anybody even bothering to look at their content. Obviously, if you do want to look into it, and you think that anything he has changed actually was beneficial, then there is nothing to stop you from reinstating it but you are under no obligation to expend any time on this and, either way, I recommend not to engage with him in any discussion. DanielRigal (talk) 11:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the background. MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The current article refers four times to Isaac Morris as the owner of the island. Reading the beginning and ending of the book, that doesn't appear to be the case; it was understood that he made arrangements for someone else. If you don't have the book handy, you can check on this at the Youtube channel I linked to earlier. 110.136.217.243 (talk) 04:02, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Boson article
hi, you removed the section of the boson article which mentions his ethnicity. You can check the wikipedia page fo him, he was an ethnic bengali who was born, raised, and died in bengal and from a bengali family. CorrectionalFacility101 (talk) 16:20, 14 October 2023 (UTC)


 * No - it doesn't say any such thing. The Satyendra Nath Bose article notes that he was "an Indian mathematician and physicist specializing in theoretical physics". If you assert that that information is incorrect, or that his ethnicity (as opposed to his nationality) is of importance to his professional work, you need to find and cite a reliable source that confirms that information. This is not the place for nationalism. As your edit has been reverted, you now need to go to the talk page to make your case, if you still wish to discuss it. Please do not revert again without getting talk page consensus first. Regards, MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Ten Green Bottles
You made a mistake, no references regarding the recently added information. Ten Fat Sausages does share the same tune as Ten Green Bottles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mannyisdaman (talk • contribs) 21:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi. No I didn't make a mistake. New information such as the sentence you added needs to be supported by a reliable published source even if you personally know that it is true. You can find more by clicking the links in the message I left on your talk page. Regards, MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Montacute
You made a mistake Kindly refrain from editing something you know little about. Firstly by reverting the change about the hill you're simply perpetuating nonsense claiming that Mons Acutus / St Michaels hill was the Durotriges hill fort. It wasn't, Ham Hill was. As for you yet again deleting the comments about village legend, there aren't any documents: oral history is exactly that. FWIW much of the page is based on oral history, undocumented. Most of the articles historic content in it's current form was written by me and RodW I've been associated with the village for 65 years, so I think I know what I'm talking about Olddemdike (talk) 23:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Olddemdike Hi. No I didn't make a mistake. Significant new information such as the text you have added needs to be supported by reliable published sources even if you personally know that it is true. I don't have much time at the moment to look at Montacute, but I'll come back to it. I'm from Yeovil myself, and I'm pretty sure that some of the 'oral history' you want to add can be found in local publications such as those of Jack Sweet. Do you have access to local history books, or can you get to the library to find published sources? Rodw, who I know personally and who is a very experienced editor, may also be able to help with sourcing. MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)