User talk:AntientNestor

This is AntientNestor's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury

Hi, AntientNestor, and thanks for your messages. As I said at the article's talk page, the copyedit is finished now but the article still needs work to comply with WP:V in particular. If you think I might be able to help in any way, please let me know. I'll keep it on the watchlist. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the work—it certainly needed attention. There is a downside: I'm a little reluctant to venture to do any work on the article now, as being unable to match your meticulous standards! AntientNestor (talk) 05:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best thing to do is follow WP:BOLD. I'm sure you're a good editor. Best, PearlyGigs (talk) 10:59, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Periods

MOS:LQ says nothing about double periods, one inside a quote and an extra one outside immediately after for a very good reason. It is't grammatical. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the Chicago Manual of Style Online: "Don't ever put two periods in a row." Or San Jose State University Writing Center: Anna asked, "Why is school so long?" Clarityfiend (talk) 08:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is completely grammatical, but my edit summary would have been better as WP:ENGVAR for this British-English article. I was going with Pam Peters and The Cambridge Guide to English Usage (page 455): while allowing that there are variations in usage, there it's regarded as a case of MOS:ENGVAR between US and British practice whether "one or two stops are needed […] either side of the final quote mark.". Changing it against the original variety of English for personal preference is not acceptable, hence my revert.--AntientNestor (talk) 09:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit revision

Hello, I noticed that you deleted the comma. There are at least three entries being listed, so why would there not be a comma before the "and"? (Example: The prominent article mentions Person #1, Person #2, and Person #3.) I was always taught that if at least three things are being listed, commas should follow all listed before the "and". Has this rule changed? Thank you for your time. Lime green k (talk) 08:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edit preferences are set to stop my saving without an edit summary, but there was a glitch on the WM servers; the error message said that the whole of my edit had failed, but just the summary got lost. I wrote: "Oxford comma not used in this article. Please see WP:RETAIN.".--AntientNestor (talk) 08:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Kelvite sounding machine

On 24 July 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kelvite sounding machine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Kelvite sounding machine used a chemical reaction to determine the depth of water in which a ship was sailing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kelvite sounding machine. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kelvite sounding machine), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

^Complex/_Rational 00:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forbidden trains

@AntientNestor (talk) The sources cited are, to my knowledge, the only ones on the subject. Or maybe you deny that such communication functioned in Germany in the past? You deny the only sources, but you know better ones? Best regards, MZM (talk) 22:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't, and I did look. As you say, it seems to be the only source. Pity—it would make an interesting article.--AntientNestor (talk) 06:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Delage (soldier)

Hi @AntientNestor: Why did you publish this when its not got page numbers of the book references, making it virtually useless for the reader. scope_creep^Talk 17:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Want to take another look? I didn't publish it, just tagged the existing article {{Page numbers needed}}. AntientNestor (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI about Draft:Anthropomorphized food

I notice you accept this article for AfC. I draftify it as of now as it is in terrible shape and barely even pass the notability guideline. This is just an head up so... Cheers! Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 11:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Responding on article talk page. AntientNestor (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford in literature and popular media

Hey @AntientNestor you removed my addition of "Babel" from the list of works the University of Oxford is portrayed in, as "The novel is about an "alternative-reality Oxford", not the same as the subject of the article". This seems inconsistend with the introductory paragraph to the list stating: "Famous literature based on Oxford ranges from Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh, which in 1981 was adapted as a television serial, to the trilogy His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman, which features an alternative-reality version of the university [...]. Other notable examples include:". Hugogro (talk) 15:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a point, but the WP:OTHER policy doesn't encourage such comparisons. The University of Oxford article is about the real, concrete institution.

My other concern—although I didn't actually include it in the edit summary—was "why should this particular novel be in?" It's not on a level with Waugh. There must be hundreds of novels about the university, and this section in the article is, rightly, very short. Many articles have a separate "XXX in fiction" article linked to them, but I couldn't find one for University of Oxford.

Finally, how does including the title advance the reader's knowledge of the institution itself?--AntientNestor (talk) 17:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clearing that up.

I couldn't (and still can't) acertain any clear criteria for which titles are added to the list. Babel as a financially and critically successfull novel by an alumna, containing quite detailed descriptions of the City and University of Oxford seemed to fit. Hugogro (talk) 19:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There could be an opportunity here! You could start a new article University of Oxford in popular culture. I couldn't think of many examples of an article dealing with institutions, but Columbia University in popular culture is one. Very many historical personages have them: e.g. Oliver Cromwell in popular culture and Cultural depictions of Anne Boleyn. Good luck.--AntientNestor (talk) 21:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]