User talk:Prhartcom/Archive 2

Beatles RfC
Hello Prhartcom; this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band " THE BEATLES " mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc  (talk 23:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Tintin article
I do realize the Tintin article has been promoted to FA, quite a long time ago. I promise you, if it were put up today, it would not pass (I'm not saying that to be unfriendly—I'm saying that after the intense scrutiny my own recent FACs have undergone).


 * 1) having "comics" link to Franco-Belgian comics is just wrong—it's totally not what a reader is going to suspect, and linking "comics" at all in most cases goes against WP:OVERLINK. Franco-Belgian comics should be linked in a context that's obvious to the reader—a line, say, like "Tintin has become the best-recognized work in Franco-Belgian comics" or whatever.
 * 2) I have no problem with comic album being linked somewhere, but having the format at all in the first paragraph I think should be avoided; it's minutia that the average reader likely doesn't want to know about, and is most appropriate in the "Publication history" (or whatever) section.
 * 3) Hergé was a cartoonist—he wrote and drew cartoons. I'll never understand the aversion to this word.  Scores of actual cartoonists wear the title as a badge to be proud of, and it is far more often that fans (particularly American fans) object to it than actual cartoonists.  Linking this very common word (I've been told in my previous FACs) falls under OVERLINK.
 * 4) "proven" is weaselly, and doesn't belong on a NPOV encyclopedia. Similarly "engaging".  You could say "Kim Thompson said it was engaging", but seriously, that only comes across as advocacy, which is not the purpose of an NPOV Wikipedia article.  One would hope a work of fiction is "engaging".  What is "engaging", anyways?  How does writing that help a curious reader?
 * 5) sorry about the fr vs lang-fr mixup.
 * 6) I could've sworn the bit about Volume 10 was on a line by itself. Apologies again.
 * 7) The list of albums is already linked to in the table of contents; it is just clutter in the infobox, especially since it gets hidden anyways (either way, the reader has to click somewhere). Such a long list is totally inappropriate in an infobox.  I haven't re-removed it, but it definitely should be.

To be honest, the article does need a lot of reworking. Having all the supporting characters' names displayed in French in the lead is overkill and disruptive trivia that does a new reader no favours. The lead is supposed to summarize what's in the body, but there is information (particularly in the last paragraph) that is nowhere in the body (and is cluttered up with inline cites that are unnecessary clutter in the lead—unnecessary, because they should all be in the body already. See MOS:LEAD). Excessive information, like the names of Hergé's assistants, are mere clutter in the infobox (and leads to some people wanting to abolish infoboxes altogether).

The article is certainly a well-researched & put-together article, but it could definitely be greatly improved in many ways, and is definitely not at the standard that FA demands these days. I only tackled the things that most stuck out at me, taking a peep at the article after putting down L'Étoile Mystérieuse. I can assure you that what I did (though I made mistakes, sorry!) was in the interest of improving an article on a subject I enjoy. Curly Turkey (gobble) 17:31, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm totally willing to help out with the Tintin articles, though I don't consider Tintin one of my specialties (though I've read them all the English volumes and a couple of the French). You've probably noticed I've been making my way somewhat slowly through all the Tintin articles, updating infoboxes and tightening up the leads.  I've been reworking the leads in the interest of keeping them to the point.  Many of them could be longer—"longer" meaning "more information", though: "written and illustrated by Belgian artist Hergé" is a lot of wasted words when "by Belgian cartoonist Hergé" gets all the same information across.
 * I sympathize with "bold writing over bland writing"; ideally the articles will have an interesting style, but will avoid loaded words. When lacking that ideal, bland, unfortunately, ends up prevailing over bold.  If you take the article to the Guild of Copy Editors, they have people who are often good at striking that balance (it's best to take an article to a set of third-party eyes one way or the other—one can grow attached to one's own words, which isn't necessarily best for the article.  I know it hurts to see your own carefully-crafted words taken apart).  Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi ! I'm Hridith. Thanks for your support and advice. I will preview my edit now on... and as you guessed I'm a great fan of Oz books and really adore them.. I'll redo my edit in a proper way this time! Thank you Prhartcom! Hridith Sudev Nambiar (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Tintin articles
Hey there Prhartcom! I hope my attitude over at the Soviets page didn't come across as rude or dismissive; that was not my intention, although I can see that it may well have come across as such. I have done some work over at the Hergé page in recent months, and hope to see that raised to FA at some point. I would also love to raise the other Tintin articles up to GA status too, and would be happy to work alongside you in that! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries
Oh don't worry about that. You'd be surprised how often it happens though. There's definitely a dual sense of androcentrism and American-centrism here on Wikipedia, so I wonder if anything could be done about that. Perhaps someone will do a sociological study of it one day, after all, I suspect that "Wikipedia studies" will emerge as an academic field before too long. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Tintin
Noticed you were doing some work on the article. I would suggest citing everything that has a [citation needed] tag, and trimming the "legacy" section, as it's rapidly turning into a trivia list of everyone who's ever namedropped Tintin. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 07:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
TransporterMan ( TALK ) 13:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

FA review of Tintin in the Land of the Soviets
Hey there Prhartcom! I was thinking of trying to get Tintin in the Land of the Soviets – which is currently a Good Article – pushed up to Featured Article status. Considering your interest in this issue and the work which you put in to pulling it into shape, I wondered if you would be interested in being its co-nominator along with me ? Best, Midnightblueowl  (TALK ) 18:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, my dear MBO! As you know, I am junior to you; I have never done that before.  What must I do?  On another subject: I'm very glad you are at our Adventures talk page, lending a steady hand. What do you think about the To Do list; do you think anyone will help me do those things?  —Prhartcom   (talk)  21:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Admittedly, I have only ever got one FA review through successfully; it can be a little difficult, but I think that Tintin in the Land of the Soviets is good enough now. Plus with two of us at the helm, I think we can deal with any problems that might arise during the review. I'll go ahead and initiate the FA candidacy, and add your name to it; I'll then post it here. Regarding the To Do list, I think it's a very good plan, although I'd also like to see more information included in the article itself; I'll be best at helping with the latter, although will happily lend a hand elsewhere if needed. Best, Midnightblueowl  (TALK ) 21:40, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Here: Featured article candidates/Tintin in the Land of the Soviets/archive4. Fourth time lucky! We'll probably have to deal with some constructive criticism, but I hope that this time it shall pass. Midnightblueowl  (TALK ) 21:48, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

That FA of ours seems to be taking a while, but then again, these things always do. I've pushed Tintin in the Congo through a GA review, so hopefully that should gain GA status soon. I've also been doing a lot of work over at Tintin in America this week, if you want to have a peruse, and see if there's anything you would like to change (I think some work is still needed in the synopsis section for sure, and I have a few images from the strip that I haven't uploaded yet). After that I think it would be good to put that one forward for GA review too. It's good to see The Adventures of Tintin page is coming along, so thanks for the work you're doing over there. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks like Midnightblueowl has figured out why there were no takers. Curly Turkey (gobble) 04:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your improvements over at America and Congo, and an extra big thank you for responding to all of those points over at Soviets; I've posted a few comments in response over at the FAR page. I've taken a look at The Adventures of Tintin page; I think a big part of the problem there is the lack of sufficient referencing in certain sections; for instance, that on Captain Haddock doesn't have a single reference. I have access to a wide variety of books on Tintinology, so I will endeavour to make additions over the coming months. My current plan is to work on each and every one of the Adventures in chronological order, pulling them up to GA (I'm currently on Cigars of the Pharaoh), also working in tandem on Herge and The Adventures of Tintin main page. If you ever need me to look up a reference, just let me know. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome, my pleasure. I noticed you were working elsewhere and perhaps unable to respond, so I stepped up to address the reviewer's helpful suggestions.
 * Regarding The Adventures of Tintin article, of course you must know that I certainly already know that "lack of sufficient referencing in certain sections" has generally been the problem, as you can clearly observe by my edits and my To do list that I have been attacking that very problem for weeks by adding what feels like about a hundred new references to the article into nearly every section. I did run out of steam before attacking the problem in the Characters section, but I believe got it everywhere else.  It is not enlightening, after all that, for you to tell me the very thing that I know more than anything else.  I was hoping you could bring enlightenment to someone who has probably been to close to the article by making specific, useful suggestions or, better, making specific, useful edits, as I have done for the articles you have been working on.  —Prhartcom   (talk)  16:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been keeping an eye on the Soviets FAR, but also have been busy on a few other pages, like V. Gordon Childe, Muammar Gaddafi, and Nelson Mandela, which have distracted me a little from the Tintin articles. I must reiterate that the work you are doing over at Adventures of Tintin is excellent; I really think that the page requires major addition of text sources from the primary works of Tintinology. Offering bits of advice on various sentences and such would be – in my opinion – a little premature for this reason. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Good, yes, I mentioned I had noticed each of your works on other articles, good show there, you are probably doing a wonderful job with meaningful articles. When you reach a hiatus, can you jump in over here? I believe we would work well together.  I did just recently acquire a handful of primary works of Tintinology and it certainly has been of use recently.  Thanks in advance for your valuable assistance.
 * By the way, we all have really got to do better about trying to write in active voice. We can't just write in passive voice sentence after sentence.  It really hurts our articles, especially in the Synopsis sections.  It took a lot of work to get rid of it in Soviets, but I believe we have success there at least.  —Prhartcom   (talk)
 * I admit that I'm a bit of a dabbler when it comes to Wikipedia; I'll dabble in an article, work on it for a few months, then get distracted by something else, and only return to the original several months or a year later. It's a bad habit, I know, but at least it keeps Wikipedia work interesting for me. So that might explain why I don't seem consistently active on a particular page. I've just added a little bit more referenced information to The Adventures of Tintin page. Regarding the "active voice" thing, you have a good point; feel free to highlight where and when I am doing it (I often do it without noticing), and I shall endeavour to correct it! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Your dabbling is wonderful, keep it up if it keeps things interesting for you; I believe I do the same thing. Regarding the active vs. passive voice, of course I've always known about it like you have, but it was really only this weekend that I woke up completely to an awareness of it, and realized we all have got to actively work every day to avoid writing in passive voice.  You, my dear, do it continuously, one sentence after the other, over and over—if Soviets, Congo, and America is typical of your writing.  So do I.  We're both quite bad about it.  I'm afraid this is our wake up call.  The America Synopsis is awful, it is about one-quarter passive voice, more than the other two combined. Soviets Synopsis is almost completely fixed; see the Synopsis "before" and "after" here .  —Prhartcom   (talk)  17:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you ! I must admit I never noticed it until you pointed it out to me. Is there an actual Wiki policy regarding the matter; if so it would be worth looking at that. Regarding Degrelle, you have an interesting point; I know very little about the man, and only know what I do know from second-hand sources. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Just got your recent message (and Khazar's response); it is really something that I had never thought about before, but will definitely try to be more observant in future (I may have used the passive voice throughout other articles too?!?!?!). If I do include it multiple times in a sentence, don't be afraid to call me out for it. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Seriously not trying to cause any kind of offense.
I think we've run into this before. I'm seriously not trying to cause any kind of offense with my comments—I think you're reading, much, much more into them than is really there.

Anyways, an image check and a check on the references (formatting, etc) is a requirement of the FAC review. Even with ten supports, the delegates won't promote the article until they're done—and the lack of a source for the image is a cut-and-dried violation. I pointed it out so it could be fixed, not to denigrate the article or yourself in any way. After all, I did support, didn't I? Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for helping out. I've long since given up trying to understand all their arcane rules re copyright. Now it's illegal to post a photo of a building taken from the street!!! Anyhow, thanks for getting it restored. --Peripatetic (talk) 07:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Saw your profile - I used to live in Denton, TX a few years ago before moving to the UK. Used to drop into Dallas all the time! Miss the old place sometimes.

Declined PRODs
Hi! I just wanted to let you know that you can't use PRODs on redirects. I don't know that these would qualify for a speedy delete as a redirect, so the best place to go would be WP:RfD as far as deletion goes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Tintin invitation
Hi Prhartcom,

Thank you for the invitation to work on Tintin-related articles. I am currently very busy working in other areas of Wikipedia, but I would be glad to be a FA reviewer the next time there's a Tintin-related FAC. Great job with Tintin in the Land of the Soviets.

Neelix (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Tintin articles
Hi, I definitely would like to look over the various Tintin articles, and I think you know I'd love to see more Tintin FAs (or GAs). I'm a bit busier lately in real life than I'd like to be, so I may not be too quick to get to them, though. If there's an article in particular that you're planning on bringing to FAC soon, let me know, and I'll try to give it some priority.

Also, I hope you don't think I've been mad at you over anything. I often have a (much) more impersonal style of interaction on WP than you do, and I think you may have been reading emotion into my comments that I didn't actually put there. I can assure you, if ever I were mad, you'd know it quick. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I know you're going to be disappointed, but anyways ... There's a fundamental difference between the two disputes you brought up:
 * The FAC one was procedural—if I hadn't brought it up, a different image review would have, and failure to rectify it would have meant one of the delegates would have failed the article. That's a red line.
 * The one over dates was different: this was an issue of WP:CONSENSUS.  There was no "right" or "wrong", or "winning" and "losing" but a disagreement over editing styles & philosophies.  I still firmly believe I was "right" (from my point of view), and I'm sure you and MBO believe the two of you were.  What happened there is that we reached a consensus—through discussion, we presented out rationales to each other, and offered refutations for each other's rationales.  In the end, I didn't agree I was "wrong"—both formatting styles were factually correct.  I agreed that the date formatting was an acceptable compromise.  I still don't like it, but have agreed to bend on the Tintin articles, because it's just not important enough.  I see it a sub-optimal (from the point of view of my editing philosophy), rather than actually problematic.  Further, if it were the only issue I had witht he lead, I wouldn't have kept the dispute alive.  In the end, after discussing many issues, it was the only issue left "alive", so I let it die.
 * The important thing about the second issue there is that one of the most fundamental principles of Wikipedia is consensus building. It's important that editors consider each other's positions before blindly making decisions.  I'm not going to stop presenting my positions simply to be congenial.
 * A side issue: I've noticed you've been expanding instances of Tintin to The Adventures of Tintin.  Could you please stop?  The shortened form is perfectly acceptable, just as Tom Jones is not only a perfectly acceptable short form for The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling, it is in fact the preferred form when mentioning it in passing.  The long form only degrades the quality of the prose by being unnecessarily verbose.  You might want to take a look at Accuracy and precision: in short, being less precise is not th esame as being less accurate.


 * ——— Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:28, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look over at Cigars; I made a fee minor changes, but pretty happy with your improvements. I need to add some more images, then hopefully it can be sent off to GA. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:27, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello there Prhartcom; I was wondering if you'd be interested in co-sponsoring an attempt to get Tintin in the Congo to FA status in the ensuing few weeks ? Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jeff Wayne's Musical Version of The War of the Worlds – The New Generation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dulcimer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

The Adventures of Tintin
Hey Prhartcom! I completely understand why you would desire to see The Adventures of Tintin be brought up to scratch first. Logically, it makes a lot of sense; after all, it is the main article on the subject and gains the most views (or so I would assume). However, I believe that pragmatically, improving the lesser articles first (i.e. those on the individual comic books, and on individual characters) and then moving on to the bigger articles like The Adventures of Tintin and Hergé actually ensures better quality for the latter, and is altogether less time consuming.

As you will see from the approach that I have adopted, I have collected together all of the Tintinological books which I could acquire, and am reading them (or re-reading them in many cases) in tandem. I am therefore filling out the Wikipedia articles on the subject as I go along. So far, my focus has therefore been on adding information on Hergé's early life and work to the encyclopaedia (and you can see this through my inclusions over at The Adventures of Tintin, Hergé, Soviets, Congo, America, Cigars, and Quick and Flupke). In the coming months (and no doubt years) I will proceed to add much information to The Blue Lotus, Broken Ear and so on and so forth, right on to Alph-Art. While I fill out these articles in greater detail, I can summarise exactly that same information using the same references for inclusion in The Adventures of Tintin and Hergé pages.

The alternative would be to read through all those Tintinological books first, to flesh out The Adventures and Hergé, and then re-read them all over again in order to add information to the smaller articles; which increases the workload exponentially ! For me personally, the first process works far better, and I wish to continue doing my edits in this manner, although I by no means wish to impose that paradigm on others. I hope that clears things up from my perspective a little bit, and explains why my focus is on the less significant articles right now. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Good call on the Congo change. I've sent it to FAR, with both of our names on it, so we'll share credit if it passes. Not that the credit's a particularly big deal, but I would like to see it reach FA so I can then feel more comfortable about focusing on other titles. Plus I've noticed that having those accomplishments under your belt lends further legitimacy and gains respect when dealing with other editors (officially it shouldn't, because everyone should be equal, but it de facto does). Argh; that dreaded passive voice! If you have already made the Word document, I suggest that you go ahead and make the necessary changes to Congo; rather than send it back and forth between us, which will just increase the length of time and probably won't really be very beneficial. You have my blessing to go ahead and make any active/passive voice changes that you see fit. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:24, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope it doesn't just look like I'm saying "no I don't want to do that; you do it!" I can see now that it can look a a bit like that. I admit I'm not terribly comfortable with this passive/active voice thing, I'm far more comfortable researching stuff and just collecting together information. But I will have a look over at America and see if I can change it to active voice where possible. Best Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:58, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Looking over at the new material added at America by the anonymous IP, it's littered with problems and things that don't fit Wikipedia policy. It's also a bit too long. I've just going to revert it back to how it passed GA. I hope that that's okay with you. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I don't have Microsoft Word. Tried using OpenOffice but it doesn't seem to have the same abilities as you describe (or maybe I just can't find it). I've had a go over aat Tintin in America nevertheless; I've left a few passive sentences which I actually think work better, but I've removed many others. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:29, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Precious
  Tintin

Thank you for quality articles on Tintin's adventures, such as Tintin in the Land of the Soviets, for a nice disinfobox, and for sharing useful tips and links such as Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Rastapopoulos
Hello there Prhartcom; yes, I know I'm in the wrong on this one! I made my edits and changes to that page late at night, and never made the necessary clean-up. I promise that I'll endeavor to do it soon! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah! I was typing my reply to you when I received your message; yes, I'll go along with the revert for now, but hope that we can discuss the issue further after that, maybe on the Talk:Rastapopoulos page ? Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Prhartcom. Michael Farr states that Rastapopoulos' first name is "Roberto" in his Tintin & Co. (2007, p. 121). It's probably worth pointing out that the first page to be created was "Roberto Rastapopoulos" (back on 16 September 2003), with "Rastapopoulos" only being created on 26 July 2004 as a redirect. Hence, my recent edits revert the page to how it once was. I should stress that this is not an issue I'm passionate about; I think "Roberto Rastapopoulos" is the obvious choice, but I'm not that fussed about the issue. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:16, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:23, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries; to be fair I'd completely forgotten that the book even existed or that I had a copy. I must have bought it when it first came out, and then stuck it with the rest of my comic books. I think Farr also published the book as a seven-volume set, if my memory serves me correctly, with each volume devoted to a different character. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Congo
Hey there! I left a message on Midnightblueowl's page that you should probably read. Curly Turkey (gobble) 04:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey. The entence "with Mondondo calling it "racist and xenophobic"" has one of those WP:PLUSINGs in it.  The "with NOUN VERBing" seems to be the most common construction violating the PLUSING "rule" (and the easiest one to spot once you get used to spotting them).  Like I said, I can't quite wrap my head around why, but Tony1 knows his stuff—he's one of the main contributors to the Manual of Style.
 * As for personal websites, you might want to double-check them before exterminiating the sources. On the Whaam! FAC, one of the editors pointed out that an article used as a source was a "blog" from Paul Gravett's personal site.  Gravett happens to be a pro who has published books, and it turns out the "blog" wasn't a blog at all, but one of the articles he had written.  Another that was pointed out as a "blog" turned out to be a blog that aggregates peer-reviewed articles for an academic journal co-published by a PhD at the University of London.
 * Unfortunately, if it turns out these personal websites really are just personal websites, I don't think anything will save them from the FAC reviewers. Sometimes information just has to go.  If a particular piece of info is really important to you, you might want to track down a user access to European sources (say Fram?)  Any info available in English on Tintin I'm sure has appears fifteen times in French. Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

GA Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks for your editorial contributions to Tintin in America, which has recently become a WP:GA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for your offer Prhartcom; I'm not sure if you can have co-nominators for a GAR, only a FAC. I'm taking a little break from the work on the Tintin related stuff at the moment (other than GARs and FACs), but I'll be back on it with The Broken Ear or something in a month or so. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Tintin
I noticed that you were working on bringing The Adventures of Tintin to FA. Can I help? I'm a Tintin fan myself and would love to see it hit FA and more importantly, be part of getting it to FA. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:22, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed, I would be honored to work with you to bring this article to FA. I will respond on your talk page. —Prhartcom (talk) 14:43, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't have that much access to material as I imagined I would have. I have a limitecd access to Highbeam and JSTOR thru my University; I could make use of this. Otherwise, I'm quite adept at finding insanely hard to find stuff on Google Search. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Which Tintin article are you working on right now? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
<span style="border:1px solid black; background-color: #FF513D; background-image: -ms-radial-gradient(center top, circle farthest-corner, #FFAA3B 0%, #FF0000 100%); background-image: -moz-radial-gradient(center top, circle farthest-corner, #FFAA3B 0%, #FF0000 100%); background-image: -o-radial-gradient(center top, circle farthest-corner, #FFAA3B 0%, #FF0000 100%); background-image: -webkit-gradient(radial, center top, 0, center top, 556, color-stop(0, #FFAA3B), color-stop(1, #FF0000)); background-image: -webkit-radial-gradient(center top, circle farthest-corner, #FFAA3B 0%, #FF0000 100%); background-image: radial-gradient(circle farthest-corner at center top, #FFAA3B 0%, #FF0000 100%);padding:4px;"> Blurred   Lines  21:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Just saying hi
Hello, I just came to tell you I'm grateful for your appreciation. By the way, how come you have displayed yourself as an apprentice? You have been here for so many years and have 3000+ edits, that clearly means you are eligible for experienced rank and above, or is it on purpose? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Ugog Nizdast, thanks for stopping by and for your kind observation! I had a vague idea that I may have reached a higher service award but hadn't bothered to check (I don't take much stock in this method of measuring Wikipedia editing success), and I also think you are right; I was probably leaving myself at a lower rank on purpose. I know fellow editors who work so much harder than me. But I just checked myself and I checked you too; apparently we are both ready to award ourselves one of the higher levels! The funny thing is, the badges themselves seem to get less attractive the higher you go! Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 12:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually I'm approaching Journeyman in a month (6 months exp). I didn't think you would be a Yeoman after all this time; I guess that's the problem with the edit count thing. It's only an approximate way to measure experience. (my edit count is a large but only 20% of it must be editing articles, the rest is undoing vandalism/unconstructive/misc edits.) I like putting this since it looks a bit cool and it keeps reminding how long I've been here. Also I've never seen a Half-Barnstar before, haha. Anyway, see you around, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Musée Hergé.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Musée Hergé.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Multichill (talk) 14:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Pocket PC (From CharlieTheCabbie)
Hello, Prhartcom, and thank you for your offer of help. This is the problem: what I'm using is considered quite old in the PocketPC world. This is an HTC Hermes 200, which at best will take WM6 Professional, which is what is on here.

I assume this means that the IE version on it is going to be rather old and therefore, not very compatible with WP.

I'm also using a custom ROM, Schaps 1.6 ROM for Cellphone Network Engineers. Is there anywhere I can actually download Wikipedia's certificate and store it manually, perhaps?

Thanks again for your help! CharlieTheCabbie (talk) 23:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Sondonesians are not based on East Timorese fighters
Hello. I am new to editing Wikipedia pages, so I'm still learning etiquette and coding (?). I see an error in the Indonesia section of the Settings in The Adventures of Tintin page. These lines about the Sondonesian rebels are partly incorrect: ''Said to be undergoing a civil war or a war for independence and now rebels for hire, they appear to be thinly disguised Khmer Rouge or East Timor fighters for independence. Hergé's insistence that the Sondonesians' home is in a state of civil war reflects the state of conflict in Cambodia during that period.'' Flight 714 was published in 1968. East Timor did not have independence fighters at that time. East Timor had been a Portuguese colony for over 250 years and the last major rebellion against the Portuguese was brutally crushed in 1912. Indonesia did not invade East Timor until late 1975, thus sparking the rebellion (war for independence) against Indonesia. My point is that in 1965-68, when Flight 714 was being produced, there was no East Timor rebel movement. Also, East Timorese rebels would not be conversing in the Indonesian language (as the Sondonesians do). Instead, I strongly believe the Sondonesians are based on the rebels of the Republic of South Maluku as this rebellion was taking place in the 1950s and 60s. Maluku also fits in with the likely location of Bompa. So, would you mind if I edited that section of the Settings in The Adventures of Tintin page to remove the references to East Timor and Cambodia? Thanks and apologies if I'm not adhering to 'talk' etiquette (such as putting this in the incorrect part of your talk page), SiberianCat (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your prompt reply and advice. I have made the changes and followed your advice of citing a published article that states the Sondonesians are likely based on Maluku separatists (and not East Timorese independence fighters). I deleted the Khmer Rouge reference because the Khmer Rouge was not formed until 1968, the year that Flight 714 was published. The assertion that the Sondonesians "appear to be thinly disguised Khmer Rouge fighters for independence" seems unlikely, as the Khmer Rouge tried to isolate their country from foreign influence and massacred suspected capitalists. SiberianCat (talk) 07:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I followed your suggestion of adding a publication date and retrieval date to the cited article on the Settings in Tintin page. The Flight 714 page seems fine as it does not claim the Sondonesians are based on East Timorese or Khmer Rouge fighters. I have cleaned up some messy grammar that was in the trivia section, regarding the komodo dragon and proboscis monkey. SiberianCat (talk) 22:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
&mdash;Darkwind (talk) 22:28, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you very much for your kind words Prhartcom! You might be interested to learn that I intend to get to work on The Black Island fairly soon, although am a little preoccupied with expanding John Whiteside Parsons and cutting down Fidel Castro at the moment! And that's not including all the stuff I have to do in real life! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, and please know that you will always have my assistance in the Tintin articles if you call upon me for it. Prhartcom (talk) 15:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

House of Cards (US Version
Hi. I saw your message. I don't see a talk page on there. Are you saying that I have to create an account to do that and make edits? I don't want an account, and furthermore, it says at your rules that you don't need a user account to make changes. That seems really unfair. It also seems that those authors of that Wikipedia article are very unaccepting of anything other than his original article and were very rude about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.182.149 (talk) 11:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * List of The Smurfs video games (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Spirou


 * Spike and Suzy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tintin


 * The Black Smurfs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Spirou


 * Willy Vandersteen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tintin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

 * Thank-you, User:Fortdj33! Have a great Christmas yourself! Prhartcom (talk) 07:58, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

A Holiday Turkey!


What's a holiday without a funny-tasting chicken? Most flavourful they are soonest after glaring directly into the twinkle of your eye.

Gobble gobble! Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:59, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Dialogue balloons
Hey, there. I realize your source says it (honestly, comics "scholarship" is not particularly scholarly; you should take pretty much anything these people have to say with a grain of salt), but dialogue balloons were not "a new American idea"—they were new, perhaps, to comic strips in Europe, but they had appeared in art for centuries, and in European editorial cartoons at least as far back as the early 19th century. Probably want to find a way to reword that in the Tintin article. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Curly Turkey, I believe I had twisted the source wording and in doing so apparently made it less accurate, so I will try to reword it now. And actually, this article needs a comics expert to go through it with a fine tooth comb, so if you see any more please feel free to fix it immediately or let me know. Thanks again.
 * P.S. I laughed at your holiday card; it exhibits the same unusual humour I prefer. Prhartcom (talk) 17:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Tintin article
Hey, I think I'll put off looking at the Tintin article until you and MBO have sorted out the content issues. Also, I'd strongly, strongly recommend taking it through the GA process before nominating it again. Gimme a ping when you think it's ready for a copyedit. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Curly Turkey. Prhartcom (talk) 01:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Snowy
Hey, sure, working on Snowy (character) sounds fun. Ringbang (talk) 16:42, 6 January 2014 (UTC)