User talk:Crisco 1492/Archive 53

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

→

Archive 60

POTD 2014-09-05

Hey, that image (or the previous version of it) was already POTD before. See Wikipedia:Picture of the day/June 14, 2006. Are you sure you want to repeat it? (This was also true for the Great Wave Off Kanagawa the other day, BTW.) —howcheng {chat} 06:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Howcheng. Yeah, I was aware of the Wave, but as it was a different reproduction (and fairly different), I figured there was no problem running it. As for the Suburbs... no, I didn't realize that these had already been on the main page. Did you see that we ended up featuring two versions of the same image? Anyways, I'll be removing that image (pinging Armbrust as he should know) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I saw that in the delist nomination. I don't know what happened to the POTD template on the original. I'll put it back on. —howcheng {chat} 15:24, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Minor White

Crisco, can you please take a look at this and see whether the reviewer is on the right track here? The requirements mentioned seem unusual to me... Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• Patently ridiculous. If we held any process to that standard (even FA), it would grind to a stop or result in people only using online, English references. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

• You explained it much better than I could have. Thanks for taking it on. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

• Glad to help. :) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:39, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

• Arbitration report: Media viewer case is suspended

• Featured content: 1882 × 5 in gold, and thruppence more

• Op-ed: Automated copy-and-paste detection under trial

• Traffic report: Holding Pattern

• WikiProject report: Gray's Anatomy (v. 2)

• Recent research: A Wikipedia-based Pantheon; new Wikipedia analysis tool suite; how AfC hamstrings newbies

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

The Cup

Whether I win or loose, I'm certainly not doing this again. It does take some of the fun out of working on FP... A small number of sore losers take care of the rest...--Godot13 (talk) 05:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

• One of the reasons I've never bothered. ;) It's enough to create content and know that we are advancing humanity's knowledge base. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:00, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
  • That's the main motivation...-Godot13 (talk) 23:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

September FLCs failed log

Hi. Hope you're well. Would it possible for you to go back and sign these three lists you added to failed log, just so it's clear and I can close them? [[1]], [[2]] and [[3]]. Thanks. Cowlibob (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

• D'oh! Signed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

All closed now! I was wondering if I could ask you a favour, do you have time to try to restore this image? It's not really in good shape but I'm hoping to use it in a future FLC. [[4]] Cowlibob (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

• What are you thinking of? Sharpening? Short of retaking the image (impossible, obviously) there's not really much that can be done to get rid of that blur. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I wanted to reduce the blurriness. Oh ok. Cowlibob (talk) 15:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

!!

Is everybody

Allegory of the Creation of the Cosmos

Bonus picture

inserting new edit notices just to scare me? They jump and pop up everywhere ... a bit of a surprize. Well, gues this is the punishment I was away for too long. Yngvadottir got a dog. Well, it is nice - when one gets used to it. Petty girl. Hafspajen (talk) 17:07, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

• Dhalia? Yes, she was quite beautiful. Her character in Lewat Djam Malam was a plucky one too. I should really go through my scans of old magazines and expand some of the articles on her. I mean, the start-class article I wrote doesn't even mention her (failed) venture at becoming a film producer. Thanks for the paintings; they are quite nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

She has this wonderful clean, peaceful face the orientals have, that no European girl can come close in a hundred days. Hafspajen (talk) 05:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed. I love this shot of her. I just wish I knew where the negatives are (or if they're even extant) to scan them... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

lucu sekali

i smell the blood of the script of meaning of life - not the liberation front for the revolution in southern woopwoop, but in fact the southern woopwoop knitting circle in support of the revolution on the y fronts of the liberation squads, or something as momentous. satusuro 02:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• I ... am not quite sure what you mean by that, Sats. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:17, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • cultural references probably obscure. no problems. satusuro 07:41, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

TFAR

Hello, Crisco 1492. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:18, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Replied there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:37, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lilium bulbiferum

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lilium bulbiferum var. bulbiferum 01.JPG, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Here to make you cry (or somebody cry)

Woof?

Somebody is going to cry or I'm not going to feel like it was worth the effort. I want to get this image [5] onto Wikipedia (or Commons; I don't care which; I just want to get it). Can you or Hafspajen (no, you don't escape Haf just because I'm asking here) get it or tell me how to do it in one simple step (if it is more than that it will be me that is crying and that wasn't in my plan at all). Big kiss to anybody that uploads it (I'm told my wiki-kisses cause unconsciousness and delirium, so it's up to you whether you want to put in a claim). Belle (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• I believe Dcoetzee (on Commons) has a bot that can do that. Quite frankly, I'm surprised this one isn't on Commons yet. Perhaps Dcoetzee hasn't had time to go through the most recent Google Art Images. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:23, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  Thank you. I'll go and make Dcoetzee cry tomorrow then. Belle (talk) 02:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  If he doesn't want to run the bot for one image, there's also this — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  But it's not working for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Well, Belle, this is at 1200px tall. Can't figure out how to get the original size. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Belle, it may not be as nice as a mojito on the beach, but I've got something for you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey, great picture. Was looking for this everywhere... was actually thinking about nominating it ... so, people start fighting - will see who will get to it first...

• If you want to nominate, go right ahead. I'm just happy to have worked out a way to get high quality scans... even from the MET or Rijksmuseum. :D — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:55, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  Thank you. You can have a certificate to redeem this "Mwah" whenever you next want to collapse and hallucinate (for some context on all this twittering about my poisoned kiss). Hafspajen, I'm going to write an article for it, so you might wish to hold off from the nomination (also, if you cross me, you are going to get pinched to death; not by me though, I have an army of trained crabs; those ones with one big claw because they are the worse kind). Belle (talk) 07:47, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  Beat you to it anyway (so I suppose that's a relief for you that you aren't going to be pinched to death by crabs) Belle (talk) 12:59, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Sight, saw that. Can't say I liked it. Hafspajen (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• I recall the poisoned kiss. I'll have to make sure to buy a clear plastic thingy to wear first. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll wear the hamburger bra. Irresistible. Belle (talk) 12:59, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Art Collection of Prince _{Władysław Vasa} Crisco - bonus pic

OK, what do you think about this, Crisco? It is a sculpture... Boxer of Quirinal Hafspajen (talk) 08:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Ouch. Marie does some very good work, but she mustn't have brought her tripod or something, because the attempt to erase the noise has left the image very posterized. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Wow Haffy, that's a lot of art! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, it looks good, no? And have you tried to click on it on commons? Sombody put a lot of work into this - very nicely made, one can click on the objects and it cames up a new extra pic and it explains what that object is. These are all existing art objects that was once upon a time in this collection... Wish it was big enough... but that is for you to tell. Hafspajen (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC) .

• I missed that. Wow! That's very useful. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

An Award

	A Numismatic Support Award
	A "personalized" thank you for all of your support.--Godot13 (talk) 21:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! (BTW, if the Smithsonian accepts donations, I could probably hunt down some more recent issues of Rupiah) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	This barnstar is awarded to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. Hafspajen (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Kain bentenan, a Minahasa textile from Sulawesi.

• Thanks, Haffy. Eh, you like textiles, right? Check this out. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Fantastic. Hafspajen (talk) 15:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

You know, I always imagined your bedroom something like this -> File:Hotel Transvaal Indiase kamer.jpg

. This picture is absolutely gorgious. Can anyone nominate it here when it already a FP on the Spanish? File:María Cristina de Borbón-Dos Sicilias, reina de España.jpgHafspajen (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed! María Cristina can be nominated if you want. The English WP and Spanish one have different processes. They don't affect each other. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah... good. Hafspajen (talk) 09:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification

This is to inform you that Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 30 September 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 19:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/ColecoVision 2

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:ColecoVision-wController-L.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

De nuttige van Ned.-Indie

Siang, Pak Chris. Bisa tdk, anda trjmahkan garis besar dri dua halaman De nuttige Karel Heyne. Sy membutuhkannya sebagai bahan untuk menulis kenaf dlm bhs Indonesia, yg dikenal dgn nama yute jawa. Mohon bantuannya, Pak. :) --Akbar ini dari Kalbar 04:36, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Aduh, saya juga tidak bisa bahasa Belanda (kalau saya membaca teks bahasa Belanda, saya mesti pakai Google Translate). Mungkin ini bisa digunakan. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:48, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK opinions requested

Crisco, I was hoping I could get your opinion on a couple of nominations:

• Template:Did you know nominations/Trijata: this is the oldest outstanding nomination, and Viriditas thought that the readability of the section titled "Trijata and Sita", specifically the first half was enough to hold it back from being passed. Drmies thinks it's okay—he's done a lot of editing on it; I had some trouble wading through that bit, but I'd like your opinion... and if you think it's ready to go, then by all means give it a tick. (Or, if it's not good enough and you don't think it's likely to get there, maybe it ought to be closed.)
• Template:Did you know nominations/Development of Deus Ex: this is the second-oldest nomination; Viriditas had trouble with the hook. This needs a second opinion on whether the hook is confusing or not; again, if a tick is appropriate, go ahead, but if you feel the hook does need work (or a complete replacement), by all means say so.

Thanks for anything you can do with these. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Done both. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

EV...

Argh... I get it. The image was tough to place to begin with.--Godot13 (talk) 06:54, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• I can get at least a stub up and going, then we can use it. Do you think there's enough for one paragraph on the Dutch Guiana? Add a summary of the New France article, and that's enough for a new article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:58, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I can email one or two of the world currency experts for more info, but I don't know if a "personal communication" citation will cut it on WP. I have one possible source I haven't checked...--Godot13 (talk) 07:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
    • No, "personal communication" or "interview" won't cut it. I'll try and help out best I can. Card money is live, but still expanding. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I thought as much. You work fast!--Godot13 (talk) 07:39, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks. I enjoy focusing on an article at a time (like this) so that I can work quickly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:41, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Though less prolific than you, I like working that way too (but I'm spread a bit thin right now...)--Godot13 (talk) 08:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
            • No worries. I found a couple acceptable (not spectacular, but acceptable) sources for the Suriname card money. National Bank of Belgium and Central Bank of Suriname. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
              • Ironically, I found a numismatic article by the guy I would have emailed...-Godot13 (talk) 08:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
                • Excellent. I'll work it in. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:33, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Basuki Resobowo

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Bonus monkeys

Did you know we have a Commons category "Monkeys in art" ?Hafspajen (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• 
• 
  The black sheep
• 
• 
• 
  and not this of course
• 
• 
  well, not this one .no
• 
  Happy monkeys?~~~~

...? -Godot13 (talk) 21:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

The best monkey so far, has style. Hafspajen (talk) 22:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Very nice. :D — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

What is the point Shewing her? File:Etty-Candaules King of Lydia Shews his Wife to Gyges.JPG Hafspajen (talk) 20:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Shewing... showing? Why though? Looks like it's based on a legend or something. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Silly thing. I would not show mine if I had any. Hafspajen (talk) 09:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

• Re: images: shame most of those are already featured on the English Wikipedia. Only one that isn't is the surfing one, and it's not even used yet. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, got them from some place it I thought were not, - the surfer is too good not to be used, thoug. Hafspajen (talk) 09:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

This looks good theoretically, 65 x 54 - (2,440 × 3,168 px) and a nice find - not by me (and I don't want to pinch it) ... - but it doesn't seems to get any bigger, when clicking on it . File:Robert Antoine Pinchon, 1905, La Seine à Rouen au crépuscule, oil on paperboard, 65 x 54 cm.jpg Hafspajen (talk) 16:26, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

New note

400 livres, much better, brighter, cleaner...--Godot13 (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• That's lovely... want to nominate today, or wait? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I could, but if you would like to nominate, be my guest...-Godot13 (talk) 03:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I'd tent my fingers, but being evil doesn't suit me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:14, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Retrograde motion (disambiguation)

It was noted that this disambig page was used in the documentation as an example of an unnecessary page. The help page now has a dead link. Please restore this page.~Technophant (talk) 07:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Or, you know, change the link on the help page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Yayan Ruhian - actor and martial arts practitioner - notable?

Hello Crisco, I tried to review Draft:Yayan Ruhian as an Articles for Creation submission, but found my background knowledge insufficient. Certainly the sources provided in the draft fail to meet Wikipedia:GNG. And nothing in the biography section proves notability if it were reliably and independently referenced. And of course, it needs some copyediting. On the other hand, if some of the roles listed in films are major ones, then he would be notable on that basis, according to Wikipedia:NACTOR. What do you think? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Mad Dog! I knew I recognized that name. I know some websites have made him into a memetic badass (if you watch The Raid you'll know why), but that doesn't necessarily translate to notability. However, there are a couple mainstream refs that can be used: The Jakarta Post article about him working with Hollywood (very short), and Kompas has information about his memetic status, Tempo has some about him going to Hollywood, MetroTV (a TV station in Indonesia) article about him having a film with... vampires and Yakuza?.... (Bloody Disgusting has the same bit, and I think it's an RS for film articles). His filmography could probably be supported by filmindonesia.or.id (run by JB Kristanto, who published a catalogue of Indonesian films until 2007), but for some reason the site's not letting me access it. In short, Arthur, I think that there are enough sources to support an article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Lengthy profile here (MetroTV again; Indonesian though). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, after trying to approve it, I looked deeper and I have had to template it for CSD as a blatant copyvio of the exact same webpage it got deleted for a year ago. Maybe you could create it as a stub after it gets deleted? You've gone to the trouble of finding the required sources :) Arthur goes shopping (talk) 01:25, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Filmography. Yeah, I could easily get a DYK-able article out of the refs here. Later tonight, though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Yayan Ruhian is up and going. Reasonable enough, ten refs, including two detailed articles on him. Yahoo! News has information about his life before Merantau, but since I'm not sure of the source (Cek Ricek) I've decided against using it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:26, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Thaddeus Stevens

Other than the changes in the infobox, everything else in my 2nd edit came from https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/articleinfo/index.php?article=Thaddeus_Stevens&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia#maintenance, and there was more than just the 2 you mentioned. You could have just changed those two. And do you realize that you also reverted the previous change? That was a correction of the previous one by an IP. Surely you can't think that that was okay. --Musdan77 (talk) 05:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Wait, so you made those changes based on what a bot was suggesting? That's not how one writes "brilliant" or "professional" prose. Edit summaries only offer 255 characters (fewer if special characters are used), meaning I could not expand on everything in the edit summary (hence the "etc."). My apologies for reverting your reversion of the IP edits; I have reinserted that. Now, as to the individual points:

• The extra spaces in the infobox do not affect the template at all, nor do they have a visual effect on the article. If we take the other three removals as correct, this would be in
• some of the territories vs. some territories - some of indicates a particular quantity or subset of a greater number of items, whereas "some territories" is less specific
• in order to - as I said before, unnecessary verbosity
• "A scholarly biography" -> "A biography" - The qualifier "scholarly" is important as it gives a quick identification of the degree of investigation needed, as well as the reliableness of said work. A "biography" without a qualifier could just as easily be like those biographies of famous people sold to grade five students: unnuanced, not providing references, and possibly placing POV over accuracy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:41, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

So, what's the point of having that "bot" if it's almost all wrong (at least according to you)? Of course, I understand that it's not always correct, but... Anyway, thanks for your explanations -- even though I may not agree with all of it. --Musdan77 (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Bot, script whatever. I didn't write it, and had consensus been sought I would have argued against creating such a tool. All such a tool does is identify certain strings which are considered problematic by whomever is doing the coding. What it fails to take into consideration are personal style, subtly different meanings (or quite different, depending on the situation; if the string is "some of the" --> "some", then "some of the 99 names of Allah", for instance, would become "some 99 names of Allah": nowhere close to the same meaning) different wordings have, and standard practice at the featured article candidates process (where "in order to" is exterminated with extreme prejudice).

Camilla?

File:Camilla Pissarro Pontoise 1874.JPG He is called Camille, not Camilla, that's a girl's name. Camille Pissaro. Hafspajen (talk) 20:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Move requested. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

PR for the Wigan Nightingale

Evening squire,

After the son came the father is all very much in the cart-before-the-horse territory, but the little clean up of the Formby Snr article got a little out of hand and turned into an overhaul. For better or worse, the Wigan Nightingale is now at PR for comments, criticism and complaints. If you have the time or the will I'd be delighted to hear your views, but I appreciate that your Wiki time may be limited. Pip pip – SchroCat (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Excellent! I'll be over there tonight. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

"Dubious"

If someone slaps a "dubious" on a statement made here that has five inline citations from four sources, can I remove it?--Godot13 (talk) 09:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• It's possible that the sentence there may be considered an oversimplification (not familiar enough with the subject to say if it is or not). If you can give a footnote regarding different views of the matter, that would certainly be enough for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:00, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Could do that. Alternately, since the user is making reference to UK heraldry (which is very different from this), I could simply add "A state coat of arms..." to begin the sentence, making it more specific and rendering his comparison moot (and then remove the dubious?)--Godot13 (talk) 10:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • That could work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
      • FYI- amicably taken care of.-Godot13 (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Excellent. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:18, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Two things

• Hey Crisco, wanted to ask you where do I apply for being awarded with the half-million award for bringing Megadeth to FA status? I believe the readership is about 750,000 views a year, which qualifies me for the half million cube.
• Second thing, can you participate in the peer review on Thirteen? The link is Wikipedia:Peer review/Thirteen (Megadeth album)/archive2. A friend of mine is vying for WP:FOUR, so please give it your best shot.--Retrohead (talk) 07:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
• You can either award it yourself, or as at Wikipedia talk:Million Award. As for the second... I may take some time, but I'll try and get to it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

sheesh

the guy had a sene of humour satusuro 10:56, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

your sure the stuff is not already up? I was sure at Borobudur we have some dupes (accidental of course) - but long time since i was trying to put some of that stuff in appropriate boxes... satusuro 11:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK – increase to 3 sets

Hey Crisco! BlueMoonset, Cwmhiraeth and I have commented on WT:DYK how it's probably a good time to increase to 3 sets a day, since the backlog is over 300 noms now (336 to be exact). Could I trouble you to help implement this (provided that consensus has been reached in your opinion)? Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I think this might be the page. —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Barlas Page

@Crisco 1492

Recently you protected the Barlas page due to edit warring between user nawabmalhi and lysozym. I thanked you for this and wanted to bring to your attention that I had a long interaction with nawabmalhi and he refuses to accept anything but his own preconceived notion. I brought this to dispute resolution and there was an exchange of over 7500 words in which nawabmalhi presented all his sources, I provided evidence to the contrary, supporting the existing wording of the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_97#Barlas

and at the end of this the conclusion arrived at is pasted below:

Proposed solution[edit] I think the best solution I can prose, with the evidence presented here, is that the existing wording of the article remains. Unless I see any decisive evidence (as opposed toWP:SYNTH and sources failing WP:RS, I will close this shortly. --Mdann52talk to me! 06:03, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

@Mdann52 NawabMalhi says "Overall we are in agreement" at the end of his last comment and so I suggest this matter be closed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jebenoyon(talk • contribs) 01:51, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Then three weeks later nawabmalhi went back and changed the next few sentences, essentially again making the same assertions about the Barlas being "Persianized". All this is on the page history. I then asked for Administrator assistance because he had gone back on what was agreed to and kept on reverting back to his version. This request can be found at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive852 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive852#Persisting_disruptive_editing_despite_dispute_resolution. I'm sorry I don't know how to link it another way. One administrator initially made a comment because I had pasted the whole discussion there and when I clarified matters I never heard back from him. So this request is still sitting there in the archives where I asked for help in stopping nawabmalhi.

The I asked another editor on the page, lysozym, to provide his views and he agreed with my position also. I posted his response on nawabmalhis page thinking maybe nawabmalhi would recognize that both a closing editor and another neutral editor were agreeing with me, and with what is the truth. Then nawabmalhi contacted lysozym and as usual had the last word but lysozym rejected his assertions also. However, as the founder of nawabmalhis controversial religion made a highly contentious claim that he was Barlas and he was "persiniazed" so as I said on day one in my request for mediation, a link to which can be found in the archives I have linked to above, nawabmalhi refuses to believe anything because of his religious sentiments. I am no expert on Wikipedia but I have contributed to this page for long and am a true Barlas myself. This nawabmalhi will not stop until he gets his way and has already tried to get around what he agreed to in mediation. Now he is edit warring with another editor. I would ask if you would be kind enough to look into this and decide because I would trust and respect your finding. or maybe it can be sent to arbitration, as we have already gone through dispute resolution, and getting a third party opinion, and nothing seems to work with nawabmalhi who keeps repeating the same refrain no matter what is said. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. Jebenoyon (talk) 04:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• You two should attempt to discuss the issue on the talk page, and see if you can reach a consensus there. I am not familiar with the subject matter, and thus would have relatively little to contribute. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492 As we have discussed this matter for over 7500 hundred words in the first dispute resolution that nawabmalhi agreed to, and even more than that since then when a third editor concurred with the wording as is, which represents my position and the conventional position, I do not have high hopes that further discussion with nawabmalhi will solve anything. Subsequently nawabmalhi has also engaged with another editor in the same type of refusal to accept anything other than his position that he did with me. Is there another remedy because he does not listen to another opinion with an open mind? Jebenoyon (talk) 15:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• If you have exhausted all other avenues of discussion, you may consider starting an RFC. However, I notice that neither you nor Nawabmalhi have attempted to discuss the issue this time on the talk page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492The edit discussed on the dispute resolution page and the edit I did recently are not the same at all and the recent edit was actually the compromise I was willing to do with Jebenoyon on the dispute resolution page when I said: Overall we are in agreement. The thing I agreed to was that I would not write that Barlas as a whole were Persianized, since the references that I provided on the dispute resolution were based off of the Timurids and Mughals (who are branches of the Barlas) and did not say the Barlas specifically.(even though all the references used in the Barlas article currently are related to the Timurids or Mughals). I this is what I told user Jebenoyon:

1.the source which you gave does mention the Timurids but the mention of a Barlas ancestor does not mean the ancestor gave the clan prominence but instead to soley trace the roots of the timurids.
2. Read the sources I gave you which shows that Even Timur was a ideal Perso-Islamic ruler
3. The timurids specifically along most of the Barlas were definetley persianized I gave you 8 valid sources
4. But I understand your point that maybe some segments may not have personally this is my first time hearing this
5. Till I find a source that specifically mentions Barlas in general I will not write persianized;however I do think it is important to mention that Timurids and Mughals were persianized and will reference this with the sources I gave you
6. And PLEASE understand that persianization in NOT ethnic but cultural Read persianization and Turko-Persian tradition

7. Again I did not threaten anyone to be honest you threatened report me I told you not to Edit War and asked Mdann52 if their was forum were a more specialized editor(in this area) could look at the issue

Dispute resolution Noticeboard:
1.The reason why Mdann said at first the sources were out of context were because they used Timurids and Mughals(a subset of Barlas) but later I explained to him that Timurids are part of the Barlas and his position changed
2.Then Jeneboyon argued that not all Barlas as a whole were persianized because only the Timurids were not the only Barlas
3. Then Mdann said that might be WP:SYNTH and I said I will not write Barlas are Persianized as a whole but it is important the only two Notable Subsets of the Barlas were Persianized which is undeniable historical fact and afterwards Mdann made a new proposed resolution where he said stop whining don't know why he purposesly uses the old one even though he got corrected by the admin.
My Edit:
1. Here is part of my edit with which Jeneboyon has contention with (different from dispute resolution):

The Barlas clan is now spread out in Central Asia, South Asia, Middle East,Turkey, and the Caucasus region. Like many other Turko-Mongol Tribes settled in Persia and Central Asia, many subsets of the Barlas such as the Mughals and Timurids were persianized and made created elaborate Persianate Court Cultures.

2.Now I have not done WP:SYNTH since the sources I use directly use the Timurid and Mughals and meet required burden of proof.
3.My references are valid written by credible historians and I provide the page numbers and use Google books links a reliable way to search through millions of books so that people can look at the references.
4. I sticked to my promise to not write Barlas in general are persianized but instead I am very specific and willing to provide even more reliable Sources if needed.
5. Jebenoyon or Any other editor cannot just remove historical facts that are referenced clearly and then blame the other user for disruptive edits
Why is it Important to mention the Timurids and Mughals persianization?
Now the disagreement between me and Lysozym is whether this verifiable material should be on the page or not due to its relevence to the page. I believe it should be because although the Barlas were an ethnically Turco-Mongol trible the two great clans of the Barlas(all references on Barlas article based off Timurids and Mughals) were ethnically Turco-Mongol but were persianized and an important part of the Persian Cultural fabric and were not just culturally Turco-Mongol which would be a generalization and Selective quoting because we would ignore almost every book on them were they are mentioned, explicitly, as persianized, persianate, part of persian cultural fabric, and/or patrons of Persian culture. This is relevant as long as you include the Timurids and Mughals on the page as removing it would make the page look 2D instead of the 3D with cultural identification.--Nawabmalhi (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Crisco 1492 Thank you for your advice. I hope you can see from the above post by nawabmalhi what I meant. Its like he is so concerned at trying to drown out any opposition and having the last word that he did not see what you wrote about not being the right person to deal with this. He has repeated things, such as cutting and pasting one of his several responses in the dispute resolution dialogue, that have already been refuted and dismissed. A review of the archives would clearly show that while the closing editor did get fed up with the going back and forth between nawabmalhi and myself, and in the end admonished both of us, this did not change the resolution that the wording would not be changed. This was agreed to by nawabmalhi by his own admission. He simply chose to qualify it 3 weeks later by essentially saying, "Well, I actually meant this not that." He is doing the same thing here by now inserting a new version of what happened with the closing editor over a month later. Its this kind of behavior which can be inflammatory, as is trying to change someone's ethnicity for the sake of your own religious beliefs. In any case, you have advised me of my options and we will let matters take their course. I wish you all the best. Jebenoyon (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Tennis article discussion

Because you and others were instrumental in forming our current tennis guidelines on seasonal articles for special players, I though you might be interested in the re-visit being discussed at talk:projectTennis. Currently, because of input from that 2011 discussion, any singles player skilled enough to win a grand slam tournament is allowed continuous seasonal articles. No grand slam tournament win, no season article. A grand slam tournament win in 2012 allows seasonal articles in 2013 and 2014 whether or not more grand slam tournaments were won. I was against these articles, but even I have to admit it has worked reasonably well and there really haven't been all that many articles made. A recent deletion of the 2013 Maria Sharapova tennis season has brought this to the forefront once again and we at Tennis Project are trying to decide if we leave things as they are or narrow the parameters in several different ways. We could use more input (whether your views have changed or not). I gave the old discussion link so you can see your original thoughts, but all those who gave their view before are being invited to discuss. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Minor White

Crisco, I get the feeling that the nominator won't be coming back to this one. If you have the same sense, since you're the last reviewer, can you please finish up the nomination? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

• Op-ed: Media Viewer software is not ready

• Traffic report: Refuge in celebrity

• Featured content: The louse and the fish's tongue

• WikiProject report: Checking that everything's all right

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK question

Hi. Hope you're well. I had a question about a DYK nom. Is it ok for the hook to not include the article name but for it to redirect to it. For example, if the hook is about an actor/actress but their name redirects to their filmography and not to the BLP one named after them. Cowlibob (talk) 22:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Like ... that Christian Bale has appeared in three Batman films? I wouldn't have an issue with it (and have used similar wording for other lists, I believe). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Card money

You're making me take a good look at several scans I made and wonder if some of these qualify as card money... They are siege notes - one French one German (but in French) both from 1793...-Godot13 (talk) 10:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Similar to these...

• Hmm... I'm not too sure. Siege currency seems to be a different field. I was debating including that billet de confiance as it's not clearly a playing card (None of these are). I've found this one, but it doesn't say "billet de confiance]. Neither does this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:46, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • this one's reasonable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • The nine of diamonds seems like a no-brainer for playing card money (and it's a better image than the king).-Godot13 (talk) 11:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Perhaps. I pulled this together though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Very nice! Here's an extra if needed...-Godot13 (talk) 11:42, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Great! What year? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
            • c. 1735, fairly early.--Godot13 (talk) 11:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
              • Re: your edit summary. I asked because the date field is not filled in properly (says 2014 ****). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
                • The effects of 30 hours without sleep is beginning to show...-Godot13 (talk) 12:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
                  • Cripes! I hope it's not Wikipedia related... nothing here's worth doing that to yourself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:13, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
                    • LOL! It's not wikisomnia-Godot13 (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
                    • Not this then? Good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
                    • Not quite, but I can occasionally identify with it...--Godot13 (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
• We may need to differentiate (within New France) between Canada and French Louisiana... Apparently there was both card money (two different issues, none are known to exist) and playing card money (private issue, payable in bread) in Louisiana. Sorting out the details and ref(s).--Godot13 (talk) 02:16, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Additional refs: 1, 2, and 3. I’ll summarize #4 (hardcover reference book, no electronic version) and #5 is a pdf en route...--Godot13 (talk) 03:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Sounds like something I might end up finishing tomorrow or Monday, but I will get to it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
      • And I had time today. Oddly Godot, none of the links you sent (bar one) actually had information on the Louisiana currency. Well, Neufeld had a paragraph, but it was just "Oh yeah, these guys did it too". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:18, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Sorry about that. I was trying to bolster the refs for the Canadian card money, the Louisiana stuff is scarce (but I'll check to see if I didn't forget something). I'm sorting out the info and will try and summarize the issues (four card and two playing card) within the next day. I may tweak a little in the Louisiana section in the process, but change whatever doesn't work for you.--Godot13 (talk) 03:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Hmm, if we're going to do full lists of issues (now that's work right there!) it might be better as a subarticle... especially for the Suriname issues. 94!!!! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
            • (gulp) Yeah, there's a small project. Getting images of these is going to be very tough (but here's a king for you). We can spin it off when we get the info. Does the one seemingly comprehensive source come in English?--Godot13 (talk) 04:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
              • Hmm... a very frightening project indeed. Well, I've added some info on Louisiana from Clark's economic history of the area. I'm on my way out now, so I'll check the rest later. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:50, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Godot, I've added more on Louisiana but I'm not too sure of how well I understood what he was saying (my apologies, I'm a lit major). If you have time, could you double check? As for the van Elmpt book... this says it's in English (you'd be looking for volume 1, naturally). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:16, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Added a first paragraph on Louisiana. Given what I found, probably 2-3 more paragraphs to come (this first one was on "Company" card money, one for government-sponsored card money, one for private issue playing cards to be worked into what already exists...)--Godot13 (talk) 19:57, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Very interesting! Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I should have the van Elmpt book by the end of the month...-Godot13 (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Federal Reserve Note set at FP

It is interesting how Nergaal, who has made two contributions to FP in the past 9 months, and is openly vocal against FP scoring in the Wikicup, suddenly decides to jump in on this nomination...--Godot13 (talk) 09:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed. But you're doing nothing wrong, be it legally or policy wise, so WP:DENY applies. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I particularly like beans...-Godot13 (talk) 09:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
    • And the links there, eh? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
      • First laugh of the day...--Godot13 (talk) 23:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
• At what point does his behavior get classified as disruptive?--Godot13 (talk) 01:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Since Ed's weighed in there, Nergaal's considerations alone are not enough to derail the nom. If this is stressing you out, no need to keep replying to him. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm going to stop replying because he's not in this for the reply...--Godot13 (talk) 02:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree. That was my last reply. On a much happier note, I should hopefully have a mint (or near mint) 100k note soon, so I can finish the set. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Very cool...--Godot13 (talk) 02:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

FA/GA

Nothing in the pipeline, the aftermath of moving has kept me too busy changing light fittings, putting up shelves, curtains etc. I've also been neglecting reviewing, so I'll take your message as a wake-up call and try to get something done. Cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

The Who

Hi. I don't suppose you could have a quick look at The Who and its related peer review Wikipedia:Peer review/The Who/archive2 and make any relevant comments, particularly about the choice and licencing of images? It would be most appreciated. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Dick Burns

Crisco, I'm sorry to bother you again so soon. I'm happy with the ALT8 hook that's been proposed here, but don't feel I can approve the nomination without another opinion on the James proposed nickname for Burns in the final Cincinnati section paragraph, which Bagumba strongly objected to. It seems rather out of place to me, and the juxtaposition with the final sentence (Newark Domestics) is jarring. Still, if you think the retrobermanism sentence is fine, I'll go ahead and approve the nom; if not, would you suggest I delete the section myself, or ask the author to? BlueMoonset (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Replied there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK preps need promoting

Crisco, I have no idea whether you're around or whether someone else will get to it first, but we're two hours late (and counting) to promote a prep to a queue for the main page. Hope someone sees it soon... Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. Something odd happened, though: while the bot was in the middle of updating, and had indeed already copied the queue to the main page but hadn't yet cleared the queue, Fram pulled the Mahikeng Airport hook from the queue page. It didn't affect the promotion, however. The issue seems to have been that Hawkeye7 chose the original hook, which hadn't been passed, instead of the ALT1 hook, which had, though EEng subsequently changed the hook in prep (and that's the version that made it to the main page). Thought I should mention it, and the hook is currently being discussed on WT:DYK, though no one seems to realize that it's on the main page now. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• I think TRM or Fram picked that up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Bandung Bugs

• 
  Fly
• 
  Fly
• 
  Fly
• 
  Spider
• 
  Spider
• 
  Grasshopper ‎
• 
  Grasshopper ‎
• 
  Beetle
• 
  Beetle
• 
  Leaves of unidentified plant

And that's the last of my pictures from Bandung. Any help with IDs would be appreciated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Hurricane_mk1_r4118_fairford_arp.jpg

Have a look at this. Isn't it good? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• At thumbnail, very nice... but at full size it looks a little oversharpened. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Maybe slightly, but not by very much, from my view. I want this user at featured pictures. Aircraft are damn hard to photograph well, and he does. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I'd like that user to be at FPC too, but I can guarantee that the reception that image will get is not going to be a good incentive. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

You may be right. Perhaps one of his other contributions? Still though, I think you underestimate the difficulty of aircraft photography. They tend to move very fast. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:53, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed they do, and average conditions in the UK are certainly not supportive of fast shots (I doubt even 1/1000 would be enough to get rid of all the blur, even excluding the propeller). But I'd rather see it a little blurry than oversharpened like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• On a different subject, could you save November 30th at POTD? The Battle of Franklin has a 150 year anniversary that day, and I just did a Battle of Franklin image. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Sure, Nov 30 is free. Once the image passes, feel free to schedule it (I'll do the blurb) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Jacobus Anthonie Meessen

The DYK project (nominate) 14:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

McKinsey & Company

So it's a very large article on a business consultancy, which is not a topic that attracts a lot of interest around here. There's been a good half-dozen editors involved in the page at one point or another, but each tends to maintain interest only for a single section. Sphilbrick just reviewed the Publishing section, but said he was all peetered out on it after that for the time being.

I've made some cleanup requests here regarding some poorly-sourced or redundant information. It looks like an intimidating request, but since it's just deleting it's actually fairly easy. I was wondering if you had the time/interest to take a look. All that's left after that is the Notable Works section and we should be able to completely disperse the "Issues" section (formerly Criticisms) and get to a point of polishing and GAN prepping after having been poking at this article for over a year now. CorporateM (Talk) 14:41, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• Not for the next two weeks, most likely. My family is in town for the first time in two years, so I am going to be busy until they return to Canada. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Aww, Canada, the country every American loves to idolize. I've been hammering away at this article/client for about two years now; I think I can wait two weeks ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 13:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Great. Ping me if I seem to have forgotten. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

!Ping! ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 18:36, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey Crisco. I wanted to see if you were still going to do something (delete, merge, etc.) with the "Awards and industry rankings" section before I move on to the next item. Also, user:My2011 has re-inserted (see here) some of the material that I do not believe is supported by the sources, important, etc. I pinged them on their Talk page a couple weeks ago to try to start a discussion to no avail. CorporateM (Talk) 20:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oops. Done, I think. As for the readded paragraph: you may need to get more discussion, if possible, so that it doesn't end up readded and readded. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess I will keep waiting to see if My2011 responds. He/she hasn't been active, so I think they are just busy. If you don't mind my continuing to bother you, there is also the matter of the Lead on the Yelp page (see discussion here). I can ask someone else to take a look, but since you have already poked at it, I thought I would see if you wanted to merge it or if we should get more input, etc. I want to go pester the GA reviewer once it's done ;-)

• I wouldn't mind, but I'd like the formatting to already be taken care of before I do that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Since it's the Lead, there are no references to format. CorporateM (Talk) 12:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Bold, links, etc. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done Oh ok, got it. CorporateM (Talk) 12:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi there -- I'm the Wiki editor CorporateM is talking about above :-D. He's right, I don't check that often anymore, but will work with him directly on the compensation section of the article -- I figure since I added it back I should be the one to see it through. Please ping me on my talk page if you need anything, I'll try to check a bit more often. My[2011] (talk) | 02:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I also just noticed this edit removing sourced material. It seems like the issue could be resolved with some minor copyediting like: "A 2011 Harvard study by Michael Luca found that there was no significant statistical correlation between being a Yelp advertiser and having more favorable reviews." to clarify that it is the findings of the study and not necessarily a statement of fact. CorporateM (Talk) 03:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• I think the objection is that there was no academic paper resulting from said study, rather than the wording. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I have started a discussion on Talk with more information, context and links. The available secondary sources are bountiful, so I really can't imagine why it would be a good thing to remove sourced content, but I think I figured out what the IP was thinking. CorporateM (Talk) 12:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Ping

Hi Crisco. Sorry for bugging you so much. user:Coretheapple re-implemented the Harvard study on the Yelp page and I'm talking with user:My2011 on their Talk page about the McKinsey & Company page. He/she seems to be busy IRL, so that may take a while. What I wanted to bother you about again was the Lead on the Yelp page, which now has wiki-code for bolding and wiki-links. The GA reviewer user:Erachima put the GA review on hold and I think this is the only thing left to address his first wave of feedback. Naturally the Request Edit won't be answered within the same type of timeline of a GA review. It's way beyond what is appropriate for me to edit myself. CorporateM (Talk) 14:00, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

• Done. I checked it quickly the other day, but I must have missed that you'd used a no-wiki tag and thus there were no blue links showing up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I pinged you again on the Yelp page and wanted to check-in on the in-progress Request Edit on the McKinsey page. I promise to leave you alone after - it's just a lot of stuff that we got started that I'm trying to close-out. CorporateM (Talk) 19:02, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• I don't see what's missing in the #Some cleanup section of M&C. We already discussed the Vault.com ref, and the other one seems to have been implemented. I didn't receive the Yelp ping, but I've implemented most things now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't realize the Awards section was removed and the other issues I need to wait for My2011 for. I'll move on to the next section, but I'll see if I can find someone else since I've been bothering you so much ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 01:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

• No, it's okay if you want to ping me (just make sure to sign so Echo picks it up!) Actually, I thought of your history of public relations article yesterday... September Morn, which I'm expanding, was magnificently manipulated by one of the early PR people. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I really enjoyed writing that article. I got to do it in virtual isolation and quiet, without all the COI stuff or drama and the available source material was far more vast and superior in quality than anything obtainable for most companies, spanning multiple books written by credible historians. I minored in PR in college and I also learned that the story is a bit more complex than they teach in school.

Anyways, I posted more stuff on the McKinsey Talk page, if you're up for it, but if you're busy or whatnot I can ask someone else. The Notable Works section I put together will need more work eventually, but it's a start. CorporateM (Talk) 02:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Early photography

[6] Is this really a photo? The really early photography can look so very drawingish... Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 06:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

• Looks to be a photograph to me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Will add it to my list, then. Trying to beref up Confederaste Generals, as they're so poorly covered. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 08:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Is this image free?

I need an image of him for his article. He said I may use this - per e-mail, but I have my doubts. HereHafspajen (talk) 15:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• According to this, the university claims copyright over everything on the site unless noted otherwise. If they claim copyright over the image, they may have to be the ones who need to release the image. Could you copy the exact text of his statement to me, so that (if possible) I can provide better feedback? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:37, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, ... Hafspajen (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• Just copy it from the email and use the "email this user" link. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:53, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Do you have any second thoughts asking him yourself? He said he will be glad to help with any information. But these picture things - well, I am not the one to figure those out. If the pic is not free he has to provide maybe a new one - and how, don't know. Someone has to tell him how to load up or provide one with some copyright to it... I might have overwhelmed him a bit by now. He is a great guy and clearly notable. But I mixed up Descartes and Pascal, so he probably thinks by now I am not quite to trust. Or crazy .... Hafspajen (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

• I guess I could drop him a line tomorrow. Tonight I want to get you two Camille Pissarros. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Great!!! And probably you are the one who say - picture is OK, that will have the pondus required - I might be good on certain other things but pic licence is not my area... Hafspajen (talk) 15:06, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Camille Pissarro gallery for Haffy

• 
  Le grand noyer à l'Hermitage, 1875
• 
  Le jardin de Maubuisson, Pontoise, la mère Bellette, 1882
• 
  Falaises aux Petites-Dalles, 1883
• 
  Enfant tenant une pomme, undated
• 
  View of Rouen, 1884
• 
  Two Young Peasant Women, 1881–82
• 
  Jalais Hill, Pontoise, 1867
• 
  Study of a Washerwoman, 1880
• 
  Hay Harvest at Éragny, 1901
• 
  The Public Garden at Pontoise, 1874
• 
  A Cowherd at Valhermeil, Auvers-sur-Oise, 1874
• 
  Still Life with Apples and Pitcher, 1872
• 
  Pissarro A Washerwoman at Éragny, 1893
• 
  Barges at Pontoise, 1876
• 
  Côte des Grouettes, near Pontoise, c. 1878

• Still under construction, of course. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Done for the night. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Looks great. Take the middle one, - Le jardin de Maubuisson. Hafspajen (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

(benevolent and peaceful talk page watcher): Hafs and Crisco, Camille Pissarro is my absolute favorite. I also like the garden scene from 1882. This makes me want to seek solace in my museum of art, since I am on retreat from Wikipedia tomorrow. Thing is, my museum is not only dark on Mondays but Tuesdays as well. The bane of state government funding. Thanks both. ツ Fylbecatulous talk 21:41, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Wish this one was a Crisco-file too...

• I agree with both of you; the garden is absolutely beautiful, and the resolution's pretty nice too. Haffy, if you put it in the article (I haven't a clue what you're all doing there) we can nom it later. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, there's a whole bunch more etchings out there. Might even be some paintings on other sites... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• For instance. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Done for now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Very good, Crisco! well done, great scans. Hafspajen (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• You're in luck (see new image). Off to bed now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• WOOOOOW! GREEAAT! Hope my luck will continue... Hay Harvest at Éragny - it's a pretty crapy article. (Wish it was a real Crisco-article...) Managed to move in almost all paintings - but I had to rewamp the article a bit...

Hafspajen (talk) 18:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Don't think I'll be able to go that far yet. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hope 15's enough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bharata Natyam Performance

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Bharata Natyam Performance DS.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 20:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Formby Snr

Hi Crisco, Just a quick update to let you know George Formby Snr is now at FAC, if I can persuade you to pop over for a review–image or otherwise? Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll be over later today! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-09-17/Featured content

Could you possibly help with the featured picture section? I'm not feeling that well, but it needs done tonight. Ed said he'd do FA and FL. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 23:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

• We ended up edit conflicting. Blast. If you want, Adam, I can do the rest. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • If you don't mind, it would be a great help. Tell Ed when you're done - I think there's some Scottish referendum thing he wants to get out before the vote. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    • K. I've got about an hour before work. That should be enough — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:18, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

• In the media: Turkish Twitter outrage, medical translation, audience metrics

• WikiProject report: A trip up north to Scotland

• News and notes: Wikipedia's traffic statistics are off by nearly one-third

• Traffic report: Tolstoy leads a varied pack

• Featured content: Which is not like the others?

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to September Morn may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 'September Morn'' to Armenian art collector and philanthropist [[Calouste Gulbenkian]] for $30,000;{{efn|The MET gives 1931 {{harv|MET, September Morn}} while a 1935 ''Montreal Gazette'' article

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Joseph and Potiphar's Wife (etching)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Rembrandt - Joseph and Potiphar's wife.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 16:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Rupiah set

Great set. I did a little tweak on the image layout. Please revert the change if it is not okay.--Godot13 (talk) 18:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Excellent, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your great work on improving the September Morn article. Chillum Need help? Type {{ping|Chillum}} 16:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks Chillum! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Model

I don't know if it will help, but Suzanne Delve is quoted in the Salt Lake article as stating she also modelled for Dagnan-Bouveret (his name is mis-spelt). This would seem to confirm it was the "popular actress"? That is becoming a very interesting article! SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:21, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for the link. She looks quite different with her hair down, I must say! I don't think we need to go into further detail on her (in fact, I think there's too much, since there's at least one more person who claimed to have been the model), but that's certainly circumstantial evidence for that actress being the model here (and thus either lying her ass off, owing to age considerations, or the French Wikipedia being wrong). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Aah, female actresses are allowed to fib about their age though. I do think it might cast sufficient doubt to justify removing the line about "she would have been 13 when she first posed"? SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'm sorely tempted, but to avoid an edit war with you-know-who I'd want to have more concrete evidence. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

My own inclination is to remove it as I feel it adds undue emphasis to suggest the model's age, which isn't specified in that newspaper article. I'll leave it be meantime though ... SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Trust me, I want to do that too. I just think fleshing out the rest of the article is of a bit higher priority. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what's the big deal. In Scandinavia everybody, whole families go to sauna together naked, and nobody is freaking out over it. Same thing for bathing. The human body is a natural thing. Unless you have a dirty fantasy. Hafspajen (talk) 13:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Are you referring to the current crusade or the 1913 one? Different reasons there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
• I think Coat is just pushing his narrow POV a bit hard, and it seems clear that most of us are not so easily shocked or offended. I suppose there is the genuine question of whether we should make decisions that avoid offending minorities over satisfying the majority though. But then there is the counter-argument that you're actually offending the majority when you allow minorities to dictate things... I'm not sure that it really matters whether one is part of a minority or not though, in most cases, I think they should just 'get over it'. :-) It is interesting how acceptance of nudity varies so much though. I was one in an urban park in Munich and saw a man with three teenage girls (I would guess aged 12, 14 and 16) swimming and playing in the river naked. Nobody batted an eyelid. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 13:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed. When I've gone to Taman Sari, for instance, there are 8 or 9 year old boys playing together in the water, completely nude. Nobody but the foreign tourists bats an eye. I'm curious if it's a predominantly Anglosphere phenomenon, going this far to avoid anything being considered "child pornography". I mean, the Aussies banned photos of breasts smaller than a B-cup to avoid the possibility, and we've had our own issues with the British Virgin Killer case. In this particular case, I don't see a single source supporting a claim that this is indecent. Even the Brauer abstract seems to be leaning towards this being an acceptable depiction of a minor. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• The restrictions on controversial media in Australia appalls me. We don't even have a legal X-rated classification. It's R-rated (soft porn, essentially - no genitals allowed) or it's illegal. I found that out first hand when as as teenagers, my brother and I decided to play a prank on our parents and convinced our cable-tv provider that we were the account holders in order to get 'the porn channel' unscrambled. ;-) We were sorely disappointed by the Mills & Boon style 'romantic seduction' style content and by that age had already seen worse on the internet. Anyway, I digress. ;-) I'm not arguing strongly in favour of porn per-se, but most Western countries at least tolerate it. We're very illiberal when it comes to these things. It's frustrating though, because like the US, many of us are pretty open minded but the voice that screams loudest (Christian lobby groups, conservatives, etc) tends to get its way. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 15:45, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Not even an X-rated classification? Wow. At least, with this painting, we won't have to worry about a subpar article attached to it... people will, hopefully, be able to judge it as it is, and not for illustrating a stub. I tire of opposition to POTDs because the articles are short, though fortunately that's not as common now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC))

  

  Bonus picture

I personally think it is not genuine. Why isn't this File:Canaletto (Giovanni Antonio Canal) - The Bucintoro at the Molo on Ascension Day - Google Art Project ( AGPvVoUXqRRYw).jpg categorized ? Hafspajen (talk) 15:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• The painting's not genuine, or...? The bot on Commons must have made a mistake. I've fixed that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, very nice isn't it? Canal was a good painter. Etto. Hafspajen (talk) 16:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed. Almost photorealistic at thumbnail.` — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Yayan Ruhian

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Paul Innella

Hi, can you restore whatever article was deleted to my user space? I'll see if I can do anything. I have reason to believe it was once an article. Actually if you can find anything deleted in the database can you check to see the date it was created. If not pre Feb 2002 don't worry, the article history would have to restored anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I expanded Double-hulled tanker, early April 2001, not bad!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Good find! I don't see any deleted articles at Paul Innella; are you sure of the spelling? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I think so, but it might have been a red link and not created.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• Always a possibility. Oh well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/William I of the Netherlands

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:William I of the Netherlands.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: September Morn

OK, the Toledo Blade photo is copyright not renewed. No renewals for back issues at copyright.gov, but the Milwaukee Journal story is from 1971 and not renewed wouldn't apply here. The photo has to be from before his death in 1937, but I see no credit to whoever took it in the news story.

So I've started going through hits at Newspapers.com to see if there's another copy of the photo that was printed earlier and would be able to go for copyright not renewed. While looking, I've seen a lot of interesting information about the painter and this painting. He was an invalid for the last few years of his life and died in a room where the only painting on the wall was a reproduction of September Morn he himself had painted. The painting made its way to Russia and was at one time thought to have been destroyed. Chabas asked the press in 1933 to help him find the original painting as it had been lost for some time. During and after WWI, there were scads of good quality copies all over the globe, with many being passed off as originals. Chabas was offered "the original" during a visit to Argentina. It was a good quality copy with a copy of the original letter Chabas had written re: the painting. He also said that the painting which was making the rounds in the US and causing the commotion was not his original work as it had never been to the US at the time. Found an old news story that said a man came home with a copy of the painting; his wife objected to the tune where she called the police and he was run in. :) There's quite a bit of good news material here about many different aspects. We hope (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Let me start clipping & tacking the news stories on the September Morn talk page. ;) We hope (talk) 00:17, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

It looks good to me! :) I wish we could have found out who took the photo of Chabas beside the painting. It probably stems from his exhibition of it in 1912, because the painting was out of his hands for most of the remainder of his life, really. While trying to source it, I checked both LOC and BnF but there was nothing at either. Sort of love it, though, that the promotions for the repros and replicas were really aimed toward men--and then coming home with one could get you charged with disorderly conduct if your wife was upset with it. :) We hope (talk) 00:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I liked the Milwaukee Journal photo printed in 1971, but nothing turned up as to who took it originally. If you want to use anything from the 1937 Salt Lake Tribune, I just checked renewals for periodicals for years 1964 and 1965; the paper didn't renew, so anything there would be PD. We hope (talk) 01:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

There were also some actresses getting publicity by claiming to be the September Morn model :) We hope (talk) 01:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• Excellent, added. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I clipped the story. They've managed to really misspell Chabas' name; it gives you some quotes from the trial you might want and that Jackson was happy enough with his acquittal, he offered to give a copy of a litho of the painting to all jury members. We hope (talk) 13:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I think the "S" is also a misprint and they do mean Oliver Dennett Grover. We hope (talk) 13:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Left you a couple more stories on the talk page last night. Am just thinking--most to all of the cherubs pictured in famous religious art aren't wearing clothes and AFAIK, nobody's ever (publicly anyway) said they should be covered. We hope (talk) 13:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Am going to investigate the copyright on this, though I believe it's before 1923; she died in 1936. It's interesting because even artists perceived as "respectable" such as Grace Drayton, were cashing in on the wave. Will upload this after I do some checking. We hope (talk) 13:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, File:Grace Drayton September Morn 1912.jpg Drayton did more than this re: September Morn. This is a painted bisque figurine; I archived the auction and the front, signature and bottom mark photos (click the pic to see them). I went through original artwork registrations from 1912-1918; she did not register the figure. The figure was done by the German porcelain company Schafer and Vater, as the seller indicates. They were noted for their comic treatment of subjects and their jasperware. This would have to been produced before 1917, as anti-German sentiment came in after WWI began in the US. The factory was out of business by the end of WWII. I have one of their pieces--many times they didn't mark them. Have an old time "chia pet" type figure where you plant grass seed in it and water the figure's tongue. The grass grows to produce "hair" for it. There are a lot of repros of their work now and you have to examine the item carefully to be sure it's original. The repros generally can't seem to exactly duplicate the original comic text found on some and the coloration on the repros tends to be too vivid. We hope (talk) 16:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:POTD/2015-03-29

Recently another 2013 Dar es Salaam building collapse-related picture was promoted to FP status, File:Suleiman Kova and media, 2013 DSM Building Collapse.jpg. Maybe they should ran together on the same day. What do you think? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:11, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'd rather not, for two reasons: 1, we don't want to diminish the impact/value of the individual images, and 2) they have EV for fairly different reasons, and thus can support two blurbs. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

United States Sesquicentennial coinage

Got another coin, United States Sesquicentennial coinage. If you would like to do the DYK, I would suggest noting the Coolidge is the only US president to appear on an American coin in his lifetime. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• Great User:Wehwalt! I think we'd need to duplicate the reference for DYK, though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:21, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Congrats!

Crisco, you've attained a new plane of excellence — to be annointed as both "puerile" and "infantile" takes some doing, even on WP:FPC. My hat is off to you! Sca (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• It's been... an interesting nomination, I'll admit. But not half as interesting as this painting's history. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Michelangelo, lunetta, Uzziah - Jotham - Ahaz 03.jpg Another "purveyor of smut" at the Sistine Chapel. :) We hope (talk) 15:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed. Sigh. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• The Daily Mail art critic. Op-ed by the yard, seasoned with a blow-by-blow account of my wonderful personal life. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• To be quite honest, the nomination is part entertaining and part irritating to me. We all have to eventually put up with stuff like this whenever we're on here. Though I feel like it may come from the same source in this case. GamerPro64 21:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• I've already started filtering out comments from certain people. On a somewhat related note, apparently removing a 72-word quote from a single play that's inserted into the running text is considered censorship. And the only reason to remove a cut-and-paste quote which is an entire abstract would be censorship. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Categorization

[Moved from WT:FL] I have noticed that many FL are listed as list in the WikiProject. Is it possible for a bot to spit out a list of articles in this state? -- NickGibson3900 ^Talk 11:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't know; the User:WP 1.0 bot does something along those lines, but it won't be able to recognize if an article has the FL star but is categorized as "List-class" on the talk page. At Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists#Assessment you can find a list of all 14,088 list-class articles (just click on the number), but that would be really tedious to go through. Sorry I can't be more helpful.

I would suggest, however, pinging one or more of the FL delegates on their talk page; they probably would have a better idea if something like that exists or not. As you can see, no one really pay that much attention to this particular talk page anymore, even the FL delegates themselves. AmericanLemming (talk) 20:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok moved here because of suggestion. [7], [8] and [9] are just a few examples of FL's rated list. Could a bot go through Category:List-Class articles and spit-out a list of pages that have FL as the current status in Template:Article history? -- NickGibson3900 ^Talk 23:04, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• NickGibson3900, I'm not very skilled at technical aspects, but wouldn't someone or some-bot be able to go WikiProject by WikiProject to see which ones are in both Category:Wikipedia featured lists and (for instance) Category:List-Class Somerset articles? Using a tool like Wikipedia:CatScan? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

So, what is wrong with this picture?

Moennitarri warrior in the costume of the dog danse

Hafspajen (talk) 17:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Very artsy, but not very useful in describing the breed. Dang. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Bonus pic

There is WORSE

• That poodle one is rather cute. Worthless for the article, but well shot. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Huh, look's like Hamlet's dad to me .. How about this one...

Ivan Aivazovsky displayed at The State Russian Museum

The painting exhibited

• The painting has a chance, but not this photograph of it. Too noisy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:25, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Poodle is back in article ... got reverted. If you belive is worthless for the article, will you remove it? Even if it is well shot - looks weird and it is back. Hafspajen (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Just to note, the Moennitarri warrior image is featured already (in a restoration by me and Crisco). On the subject of mail coaches: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/highsm.24953/ or http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/pga.03502/ might be a good choice. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Rather like that mural. Shame it doesn't seem to have been adjusted for lens distortion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

FLC question

Hi Crisco- How many more reviews for this should I be looking for? My hope was to finish this before putting the image set up, but I can move ahead with the FP nom anyway. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 04:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The first spider above is cool...-Godot13 (talk) 04:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• I think we'd expect another support (I count two). If you want to go ahead with the FPC nom, that wouldn't affect this one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

• FPC nom is up. All images have been cleaned, state names cleaned. Title page took me (no joke) 15+ hours just to clean the lettering.--Godot13 (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Doesn't surprise me, somehow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• FYI- got a third support on the FLC. Unrelated, the Suriname paper currency book arrived today.-Godot13 (talk) 05:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Great. Will drop by FLC today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Sleeping Dogs FAC

German Joe reccomended that I contacted you to see if you were available to do a media check at the Sleeping Dogs FAC.[10] URDNEXT (talk) 21:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Seriously? You changed the timestamp to make sure Crisco notices your thread? Come on. GamerPro64 21:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I had several cases where I messaged people and they only responded days later because they didn't get notified. URDNEXT (talk) 21:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if it got to you, @GamerPro64. I didn't mean to annoy anyone. URDNEXT (talk) 21:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• It's rather hard to miss the yellow banners... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry Crisco. Can we just forget the timestamp? URDNEXT (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

We're able to get the yellow banners back? Because I kinda don't mind bringing it back. GamerPro64 23:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• GamerPro64, there's a script/gadget available. See User:Ignatzmice/Orange Bar documentation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

This should be helpful too]. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but why do I get the feeling Gamer is trolling me? URDNEXT (talk) 23:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Regarding what, the date stamp or the yellow bar? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Yellow bar. URDNEXT (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• You haven't been here long enough to understand how useful it was, and how much some people (myself included) hated to see it go. The scripts/gadgets I linked to help, particularly the second one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oh, now I get it. And sorry for saying that Gamer. By the way Crisco, can you do the media check at the FAC, please? URDNEXT (talk) 00:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Already done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Sleeping Dogs? URDNEXT (talk) 00:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Yeah. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I saw it just now. Thanks for that! Hopefully we'll be able to adress all of your concerns in a couple of minutes. URDNEXT (talk) 00:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'm going to ignore the fact that you accused me of doing something that could result in having six years on this site go to waste. At Crisco, thanks for letting me know about the gadget. Turned it on as soon as I knew where it was. GamerPro64 00:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Glad to be of service. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for stepping in, Crisco. I didn't really feel well yesterday and URDNEXT needed a quick review - your help is appreciated as always. GermanJoe (talk) 06:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Bonus pic

« Qu'est-ce qui vous émoustille
Et qui donne aux jolies filles
Plus d'éclat, plus de piquant,
C'est le cancan, c'est le cancan
Qui fait que le bal Mabille
Est connu des joyeux drilles
De Pékin jusqu'à Fécamp
C'est bien le cancan. »

• Jean Béraud's Paris scenes
• 
  La Lettre (774 × 1,000 pixels... or 774 × 1,000 pixels all of them)
• 
  Personnages
• 
  Au Bistro
• 
  La Partie De Billard
• 
  Sortant De La Madeleine, Paris
• 
  Home, Driver

Sorry to interrupt, but these are some of the most beatiful paintings I've ever seen! URDNEXT (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Agree, Haffy, these are some great paintings. But is the yellow tint original, or is it from the camera settings being too warm? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict):You don't intrerupt anything. Veird that the guy, Jean Béraud is so little known, actually. Weird that his article was so bad too, before I revamped a little... Hope Crisco will be able to upload some better files so we (you?) can nominate some of them ...(ansvered URDNEXT) Hafspajen (talk) 23:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Crisco, I don't know. Could be, found the guy for two hours ago. Hafspajen (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll see what I can do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

The article looked like this like three hours ago -> not much. Hafspajen (talk) 23:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

• Haffy, do you want any of these?
  • Parisienne un jour de pluie, place de la Concorde 1890s (my favourite)
  • Portrait of the Artist's Nephew (undated; this would have to be uploaded without heeding the URAA)
  • The Elevation of the Host (undated, but probably 1890s)
  • Christ (1900–06) — Crisco 1492 (talk)

Want the girl. And the host, maybe, just because is time-typical (not a good picture, but it can be added to some religin related articles... Hafspajen (talk) 11:46, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar for you

		The Indonesian Films Barnstar
		For your work on Indonesian films, and because that's such a perfect barnstar logo, I award you this custom barnstar. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks Adam! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Surjendraneil

Does these types of pages OK? :) Jee 15:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Nope, per Wikipedia:FAKEARTICLE we can MFD it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Please. We've a difficulty to delete those pictures because they are in use. Jee 16:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Where is it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates&diff=626538671&oldid=626533798

• Looks to be in the correct place now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Betty Go-Belmonte

Crisco, any thoughts on the image licensing (the date the photo was originally taken is clearly wrong), and on the article's COI tag? Is the latter a topic for WT:DYK? I haven't run into either circumstance before. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

According to a post just made on Talk:Betty Go-Belmonte, the photo has just been nominated for deletion from Commons because of the date discrepancy. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Orange tag is a big enough issue for DYK to worry about. I've commented there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Pah Wongso Tersangka

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Sleeping Dogs

Did you see the picture I got for the article? URDNEXT (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, I did. Give me a second; I've just woken up. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• I forgot it's morning in Indonesia. Here in the California it's 5 pm. URDNEXT (talk) 00:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

McKinsey & Company

You're killing me ;-)

I'll try to put something together tonight, but it's already 2 a.m. so if you don't hear from me, it's because I'm sleeping!

One thing I should mention is that McKinsey has a policy of not discussing their client situations. Supporters say it gives them "mystique" while detractors say they are "secretive" - to them it's just an issue of confidentiality much like you'd expect from lawyers or doctors. So it is even more awkward than usual to contribute content on the subject of their clients on their behalf, but that is the nature of the beast. CorporateM (Talk) 06:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• My thought is that, rather than do the work twice (you're aiming for GAC, aren't you?) we might as well get it done with in one go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

How's this? I found that AT&T and Swissair both belong. I'm not sure the Fortune list was actually all that great. I didn't find much sourcing on most of those and AT&T was a negative example, not a positive one (they did previously do a re-structuring that was considered successful, which may be what it was referring to). The book has a chapter called "Are they worth it or not" with a section for "yes" with good examples and a section for "no" with negative examples, but I'm not sure if they were actually the most significant projects, or were just used as examples. Most of the early works seem to be beamingly positive, than it transitions to more balanced in the 70s/80s and more critical in the '90s. I didn't find anything significant from the 2000s, even in the book that was just recently published. The draft probably has too much of a negative lean now, but as the book says, McKinsey does not share their successes, so only the controversial ones become public knowledge through lawsuits/investigations. So fair or not, it seems representative of the literature. I would suggest a title like "Consulting projects" might be more descriptive than "Work" CorporateM (Talk) 20:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Looks fairly reasonable. Done — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

We should be able to do away with the "Criticism of management advice" section, its contents being redundant with the new Consulting Projects section and the section title being obviously POV. I am culling through the article now top-down fixing URLs, formatting citation dates, copyediting, and checking for completeness against a 20 page profile on them as GAN prep. Getting closer! It's also on my list afterwards to write a Lead. CorporateM (Talk) 17:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll try and do this tomorrow. Off to bed now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Cool, regarding the series of bankruptcies (Kmart, Enron, Swissiar and Global Crossing), page 20 of the book I am using to check the article for comprehensiveness is very very similar to what I put together and names the same clients, so I think we hit that right-on. CorporateM (Talk) 20:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done with the vetting/polishing of the History and Structure sections. If you do have time to take a look at my comments there on Talk, just a yes/no would be fine for the non-controversial stuff and I'll make the edits, as it would become very tedious for me to explain exactly where to put each item. If you stick it out over the next week, we could have it almost GAN-ready within a week, probably with a couple dangling items. CorporateM (Talk) 22:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

You've been busy! Already this has scrolled way up on your Talk page. I just thought I would see if you wanted to keep hammering out the GAN-ready polishing or if you were all pooped out on it for now. We could circle back next week if you want a break or I can see if someone else is willing if you've had enough. Just checking in. CorporateM (Talk) 00:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Still keen, just got RL work to do (a paper for a conference next month). I should be able to go to the talk page later today, or tomorrow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture promotion

So my mollusc is now a featured picture! (Yay!). Can I also get him in the queue for POTD?? Let me know if so. Thank you! KDS4444^Talk 00:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Sure. When were you thinking? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, any old time is good. Sometime in early October maybe? The third? Fourth? Fifth?KDS4444^Talk 00:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• How's the 14th? (My first open day). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:30, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I love it. Sign me up! KDS4444^Talk 00:31, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Grand. If you want to write the blurb in a (slightly) more technical manner than the nomination blurb, feel free. Template:POTD/2014-10-14. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Underwater photography

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:US Navy 120209-N-XD935-302 Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Shane Tuck, assigned to the Expeditionary Combat Camera Underwater Photo Team, c.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: Clips

Just as soon as I finish making replacements for the Lauren Bacall list. ;) We hope (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

If you can get a larger version of this cover together, it wasn't renewed. Checked years 1974 & 1975-no renewals for the title in periodicals at UPenn-if would help, since we can use that to replace the publicity photo with no "background". ;) We hope (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Your link is forbidden, according to the server. I just found 2 others-one color and one B&W: File:Lauren Bacall Gary Cooper Bright Leaf.jpg and File:Lauren Bacall 1945.jpg. It's too bad Lantern doesn't have the magazine in question online. I think it will be, given enough time, as these scans come from US copyright. They're the originals submitted for copyright. Maybe one of these will work out. We hope (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Will get your clippings and then need to clear out the "trailer park" at Commons. :) We hope (talk) 16:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

We hope (talk) 17:05, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Crisco 1492. You have new messages at Template talk:POTD/2014-10-12.
Message added 20:17, 23 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:17, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/cph.3g12774/

Here, the little Odina for you -Bonus art

Bonus woman, she is all yours, nominate her if you like her
Shame its halftoned (scanned from an art book)

Do you see the really weird thing about this image? If you don't, look at the top a bit more.

What's going on here? Should I fix that? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 12:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• I'll download it and have a look. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) It looks to me as if the title has been added by a different and unskilled hand (perhaps a restrike or reprint from the original plate)- the title should have been engraved in reverse on the plate. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:13, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• The original may be by Johann Andreas Bergmüller- the engraving looks pretty crude compared with the lettering at the base, so maybe it's been re-cut by the person who added the title. The lower left corner's got a bit awry. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• The question is: Do I fix it? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Still download. Slowly. Ever so slowly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• (as far as I can see) it's a part of the original print. I've only had a brief look at one Bergmuller print, at low resolution- it didn't look as crude in its engraving as this one, so I wouldn't fix it. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:07, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• I checked "Collection des Prospects" and there seem to be two different Bergmüllers associated with it, J. Georg (1688-1762) and J. Baptist (1724-1785). Ohhh… A view of the British naval assualt on Saint Eustatius that took place February, 1781 during the American War of Independence. The title is engraved backwards because the works were intended to be shown on a wall or screen using a "magic lantern", an optical device that projected the image by means of candles and mirrors. A type of print are also known as a "Vue d'Optique.…f***- it's here. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 15:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. I should probably offer a mirror-image version as well, then. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 19:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I've come across this sort of thing before- just forgot about it. I think it's a re-use of a pre-existing print, therefore a mirror-image version would be topographically incorrect. It isn't a "magic lantern' that's used though, but a type of Opaque projector- again can't remember the name, but it's a large lens on a swivelling wooden frame. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: It's a Zograscope- by a good coincidence I came across one for sale just now and was able to find the name. Not a projection, but the image is reversed.Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 13:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I might need an ALT for a pic I am nominating - because of the frame... Will you help, me please? I think Simonetta Vespucci needs some careful cropping... Hafspajen (talk) 18:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Sure. Just send me a link. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

This is the one with FRAME ->File:Piero di Cosimo - Portrait de femme dit de Simonetta Vespucci - Google Art Project.jpg Hafspajen (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

How about the above? Hafspajen (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

• Looks like that one'll pass without a crop. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Othello

Hello, Crisco 1492. You have new messages at Talk:Bernese Mountain Dog.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

HM; the File:Othello.jpg - on commons is a dog, quite nice pic too... Hafspajen (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Moved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

AH, Othello... thanks, I think we make that into lead pic. Hafspajen (talk) 15:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Not one dog pic you feel you could put a C on? Hafspajen (talk) 19:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

• Have been busy, sorry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Not A Kitten

	The Put Your Critics in a Small Box and Throw the Box Away Barn Star
	Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Jan van Noordt Porträt eines jungen Mädchens als Ceres, bonus girl

• Didn't work too well for these guys... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Damn! Ended up editing it. Review section looks a bit paltry, compared with Bram Dijkstra's. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:11, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• And that, Xanthomelanousprog (Xan?), is why we have Template:Over-quotation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Trims some, adds one, runs away laughing. (Well, it's probably just as valid a review as the rest) Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Aha! One and the same… Hafs had the same "coincidence"- I didn't notice it till Hafs pointed it out, and it really bothered Hafs (and me). Spoofing? I can't see how it could be done, but the previous example was weird. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• It is possible, and has been done before (Jimbo's talk page had a thread started by an IP from... North Korea). No comment as to whether or not this is happening now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:31, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)*You can type faster than I can, Xanty! ;-) I was just about to make a similar point. Why edit as an IP when no location etc is revealed if an account is used? SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• A dummy account might be safest, I guess. But anywho, I'll just let it be for now. Probably should work on my paper for the seminar next month (maybe not a keynote, but my name's in the brochure so...) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:35, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hafs has deleted the bit, but I think it's okay to say that the IP logged in from Warrington. If it was Coat (and it seems now that's possible), that was harrassment- and in the thread Coat was replying to the IP as if it was another person. And again in this case. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 10:42, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
• Not deleted, archived. Hafspajen (talk) 12:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• Alright. If questionable things keep happening, we can take it to a more proper venue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

• And the IP's essentially admitted to being Coat, by the looks of it. So the talk page discussion is just more of his/her POV pushing. And yes, its harassment. Drmies, I really would appreciate your neutral eyes on this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:00, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Not heard back from the Met yet- I asked someone to go look for the painting, so they're either so entranced by its beauty that they haven't come back yet, or got lost in the basement, or can't be arsed :) I did ask very nicely, and I hope someone from the Met appreciates how much you've added to the articles. (the coat hidden in the bushes he mentioned in another post? - that would certainly add to the questioning ambiance noted by another editor here)- hmmmm… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 07:01, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• I've just started ignoring most of that snark. Less stressful that way. If we can get even email verification that yes, the painting has been significantly yellowed with age, that would be useful to cite in the article. And they should be happy we've got a good article on the subject; a TFA would probably increase their ticket sales. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:04, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Just posted something to the FP page. I'm inclined to think the yellowing is a white balance issue, and not varnish or nicotine/tar. Did Coat really look for a "coat" hidden in the bushes? Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:28, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• No idea, but I see what you did there (finally). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• If you still need someone to see the painting in person (if publicly available) I could go to the museum tomorrow...--Godot13 (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, that'ld be good (if it's not too much of a time soak for you). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 12:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
• If possible, that would be grand. Poor MET's probably wondering why this painting's become so popular all of a sudden. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• The MET online database says it is NOT on view...--Godot13 (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Right then. No worries. If they don't reply to Xanthomelanoussprog (seriously, what can I abbreviate that as?), I'll email someone. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:17, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• I can still try to find a way in (perhaps via Smithsonian?) but it wouldn't happen quickly... (How about "Xprog"?) -- Godot13 (talk) 14:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• If you are sure about that... but I think we should try the email route first. Prof. Brauer replied favourably... maybe the MET will too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Unfortunately I'm located in the UK. I expect you've seen this one? I've got an inkling this is the original model. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• That's quite possible. He did say that she modeled for him until she was 28, so it's not unthinkable that she's in more than one of his paintings. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

• Just in case you're wondering- the link's safe (you have to search the phrase) I only looked at one page (honest, guv, some Czech sculptor) but someone appears to be cataloguing the whole industry of which Chabas may have been a small part. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 16:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• The Witchard book, or...? I was looking into it, but she cites Dijkstra for all of the Chabas discussion, so I need to find that book to get the context in which his quote is set. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Ask

The Little Nemo comic strip - don't you think that it should be placed among illustrations instead of paintings? Hafspajen (talk) 19:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• It's in Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others, which is where the other comics FP is. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK Queue 4

Just noticed that in the DYK Queue #4, there are two things that claim to be pictured, namely actress Le Bon and the flag of Gabon (they rhyme!). Personally I prefer the Gabon image as more elucidating. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Looks like the one claim has been removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Assignat

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:FRA-A73-République Française-400 livres (1792) 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Armbrust, I think Godot didn't receive a creator (scanner) notification. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Now this one, I would be delighted to see as the POTD. Here's hoping! Awien (talk) 13:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• I agree, it's a beautiful note, and Godot13 kindly scanned it for us from the National Numismatic Collection at the Smithsonian. Can't say I know much about French currency, but when I came across this while working on card money it was... well, we zinged. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• That's because he didn't nominate the image. If you check his talk page, than you can notice that every notification for banknotes uses the {{PromotedFPC}} template. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• I don't think that's quite right, Armbrust. When I scanned the notes in my current nomination, each one was at least an hour's work (more, generally). Godot not only had greater transport issues, but he also had to negotiate with the Smithsonian for permission to access their collection. The scanning process itself was probably more difficult too (you don't handle 200 year old banknotes with bare hands...). I think that's more than enough for an FPCCreate template. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Armbrust-I inquired (by email after the nomination was made) as to whether it would qualify for WikiCup points given the nominating scenario. I was told by one of the judges that since I did all the work on the image it would qualify regardless of the nominator. I use this only as a comparative example. While I don't need a creator notification, it certainly would help keep the numbers straight...--Godot13 (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• Well, given that there seems to be some lack of clarity on this I will not be claiming points.--Godot13 (talk) 04:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Damn! Sorry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Honestly, no worries! I'm glad you got to put it up and get it through...--Godot13 (talk) 04:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Alright. Hope it doesn't / hasn't caused trouble though... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oh no, no trouble. I had posed the question via email to one of the judges who had no issue with it. But if there is no acknowledgement on my talk page (per above) I don't want to potentially create more of a stir than what already exists regarding FP points and the WikiCup. That's all.--Godot13 (talk) 06:00, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Also (tangential) since Adam never identified the images he thinks needs more work or those which he may work on (coats of arms), I've started doing a second cleaning of any with a moderate or greater amount of the white threads he pointed out...--Godot13 (talk) 06:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oh boy. Sounds like fun. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• For periodic relief I may pull out a fingernail or two...--Godot13 (talk) 06:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• I don't know, Jersey Shores may be more distracting. No comment on the pain. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:16, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

• Godot13, go ahead and claim it for the Cup. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• The ed17 ...and the voice from on high has spoken...--Godot13 (talk) 20:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Use this or this

Joshua Reynolds, self-portrait (detail) aged around 24, National Portrait Gallery, London

Use this or this at Joshua Reynolds Hafspajen (talk) 22:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)?

• File:Self-portrait c.1747-9 by Joshua Reynolds (2).jpg looks a bit better IMHO, but it needs a link to the source. Probably to the NPG. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/State Arms of the Union (set)

Thank you for your support of this FP nominated set. Based on some feedback received from a reviewer, yesterday I started another round of light cleaning of the images to remove thread-like white fibers that could be found in the brown and black ink areas of the images. I do not expect to edit each image but have already completed 33 of 46. If for any reason the touch ups are not completed by the end of the nomination (approximately 24 hours), I will suspend the nomination. Thanks again for your support. --Godot13 (talk) 03:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Form-letter notice... ;-)

• *shock* That's some considerable work right there. My S stands. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

POTD-related querry

{{POTD/2014-11-29}} and {{POTD/2014-11-30}} seems to similar, and are now scheduled on two consecutive days. What do you think? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Didn't get that far yet, but thanks for the heads up. I had scheduled the -29 a while back (in March, actually), but since the -30 has a round anniversary, I think it should get priority. I'll move the 29 forward to ... what's unscheduled next? The 19th? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:41, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• The 19th is currently unscheduled. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Alright, something like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:50, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Request for undeletion (or information)

Edit

Hello Crisco, i have a question about a deleted image. Can admins undelete images aswell or is this only possible for articles? I am looking for source (and maybe history) information on File:Otto I the Great.jpg, which was uploaded to Commons and deleted on en-Wiki. I want to keep using the image in Otto I. However, some source information was probably lost - atleast it is missing in the Commons version File:Otto the Great.jpg - the uploader is inactive. The current "source" (NNDB) is only an aggregation website under copyright. If possible, it would be great if you could provide the "original" source information of the old en-Wiki image (or restore the image temporarily?). GermanJoe (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• The entirety of that page is simply "The Magdeburger Reiter: a tinted sandstone equestrian monument, c. 1240, traditionally intended as a portrait of Otto I (detail), Magdeburg. From [11]" and a clearly incorrect PD-100 tag. The image itself may be from the early 20th century, but short of a better source there's not much we can do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Time to look for a replacement image, i guess - although i like this one. I surfed the Internet back to 2005, but couldn't find a proper source for this one. Thank you for checking this, Crisco. GermanJoe (talk) 13:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Or, we can see if a German/European Wikipedian would have a chance to take an image. Jastrow comes to mind (she's done a lot of statue photography) but she's based out of France. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Alter Markt (Magdeburg-Altstadt).Magdeburger Reiter.ajb.jpg is of the same statue, and is already on Commons. Could use an edit, but that's simple. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately i live in another part of Germany, or i'd take one myself :). The angle with the pillar looks odd (atleast for a biography article). I'll keep looking into this and similar ones, thanks. The statue is semi-popular in Germany, so should have a few photos available. GermanJoe (talk) 13:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Flickr, definitely. I don't speak the language or I'd search there. I've added the edit I made if you want to use it as a temporary measure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Just for fun (i doubt this leads anywhere): it's possible, that the B/W photo was taken by de:Sigurd Curman, a Swedish art historian and restaurator, who travelled in Germany (and throughout Europe) in the early 20th century. GermanJoe (talk) 14:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Well, he did take at least one image of the statue in 1902. Flickr — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Gambar

Pak, apakah ini bisa masuk Wikipedia? Malam. --Akbar ini dari Kalbar 15:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Yang melukis siapa? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/September Morn

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Paul Chabas September Morn The Metropolitan Museum of Art.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• Final word count: 10,656. That's longer than the article on Barack Obama, though still 2k short of George W. Bush's article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Especially on the article. In a basement in a large museum somewhere in a great city, two porters are struggling with a canvas shrouded in a white sheet. "Why are we taking this to the city dump?" one of them asks… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• Considering how none of us appear to have gotten a reply, you might be correct about that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

• God bless our preservation of art. GamerPro64 04:59, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• God bless preservation of our sanity. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• GamerPro64, this idea of “Art” redeeming pornography is a holdover of a centuries-old hypocrisy. It was all right for the wealthy upper classes to have their pornography, their Venuses, their writhing tortured saints, their muscle-bound hunks wrestling, because it was Art. It wasn’t all right for the lower orders to be corrupted by dirty pictures that didn’t have "artistic merit". Today’s consensus is that on the whole people can have whatever porn they like, except that we draw the line when it involves underage children, Art or not. Awien (talk) 16:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Ugh, I never like it when people address me by my full username. Makes it sound like I'm in trouble. But I will reply to you, @Awien:, that while we're talking about children, your post-nomination for the picture was in of itself childish. If you think that it was a bad decision for the image to become a Featured Picture, why not take it up for Review? If I had the same opinion as yours in this case, I would do so. But since I didn't even Support or Oppose in the candidacy, I will instead continue to do what you seemed to have missed in my comment: making snark. I wasn't focusing on the painting being art, which it is but explaining why it is is a discussion for another time. Nor was I talking about its content. I was mocking the fact that the painting itself must have terrible preservations. I don't care if this painting was of an underage child. Frankly being on the internet and seeing inappropriate fan art of underage characters from my childhood disillusioned me. I will again point out that we're not calling out stuff like Child Bride in terms of image use. Why the heck are we still making a stink about a century old drawing? GamerPro64 20:10, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Blimey... I saw this thread and started to wade through the FPC to see what all the fuss was about. I lost the will to live after a few minutes — all that fuss over a painting? And not a pornographic one at that? A photo may have some justification for the furore, but daubs of oil on canvas? Good grief! Great pic, and kudos to Crisco for having the stamina for seeing it through to the end! - SchroCat (talk) 17:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I found it fascinating that individuals with some purported levels of intelligence describe this work of art as "repugnant". I think videos of people being decapitated as repugnant, or images of children burnt to death as repugnant. This is not similar. Some people really need some perspective. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• This discussion has highlighted my concern is that we (as in, English-speaking humanity) have become so concerned with paedophilia, and fear promoting it so much, that at times we (again, no specific names, just a general we) act as if all forms of nudity of children are perverse. Cases like parents being charged with child pornography for taking images of their bathing and breastfeeding children, or a whole country's government saying "any naked pictures of children can get you arrested" give me concern, because it is very close to what individuals like Anthony Comstock argued back in the early 20th century: nudity is equal to obscenity, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Under such rulings, our article on breastfeeding is child pornography, something I doubt most people would agree with. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

• Featured content: Oil paintings galore

• In the media: Indian political editing, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Congressional chelonii

• Recent research: 99.25% of Wikipedia birthdates accurate; focused Wikipedians live longer; merging WordNet, Wikipedia and Wiktionary

• Traffic report: Wikipedia watches the referendum in Scotland

• WikiProject report: GAN reviewers take note: competition time

• Arbitration report: Banning Policy, Gender Gap, and Waldorf education

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:50, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Quick check...

Hi Crisco-

I was going to bring this live. It's short and I'll keep working on it but I wondered if you saw any glaring flaws. Is it long enough for a DYK? (based on nb 3 and nb 4). Thanks--Godot13 (talk) 04:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• 3k of text? Certainly long enough. You've got some redirects and dab pages. All I can see is John Q. Adams, William Harrison, James Polk, Ulysses Grant, Rutherford Hayes, James Garfield, and Chester Arthur. The two dabs (the first two) must be fixed, the others are optional. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Many thanks, will fix later and get it live sometime today.--Godot13 (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
    • @Godot13: On a minor formatting note, why U.S.? They're rather redundant, and no other nation or country (not named Canada) uses them; even Chicago has deprecated them. Just my two cents. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
      • @The ed17: I certainly appreciate any input, but I'm not quite sure what you're referring to...--Godot13 (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
        • Sorry, late night here. U.S. vs US -- one has periods, the other does not. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:39, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
          • Got it... Will fix tomorrow. Thanks for the tweaking you did by the way.--Godot13 (talk) 07:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Should the Four Award include post-GA DYK?

I have closed this discussion. --Pine^✉ 07:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK queue problems

Crisco, in WT:DYK#Florence Pernel hook, the nominator has discovered a problem with the lead hook, and it needs to be pulled from Queue 2 (and a new one substituted, probably from a convenient prep).

There's also a problem with Queue 3: Victuallers promoted it from Prep 1 but also left the set there. As a result, the second and third words, "the soprano", were deleted from the Prep 1 version but not the Queue 3 version. Can you please edit it there?

In the meantime, I'm going to clear Prep 1 and advance the next prep, so that we don't have two queues with the same hooks in them. Thanks as always for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:06, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

OOPs sorry, thanks for your calm correction. Victuallers (talk) 09:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• No worries, Vic. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Him?

kickin

Him?

Found Him

Her

File:Gilbert Stuart Williamstown Portrait of George Washington.jpg? Hafspajen (talk) 09:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hmm... I don't think we have much of a chance with that, not without a greater resolution. Also, that's not his incomplete one; that's been filled in by Rembrandt Peale. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• O "inept" editor- I feel like kicking something… Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• That's why I've been applying WP:DENY for the past week or so. I have no problem with people indicating issues with prose / w.e. (and I do thank Awien for her comments), but once someone like that yellowjacket decides to imply I'm a pedo or what have you, they shut my ears to their buzzing forever. I'd rather be out writing articles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

But Crisco, I know you like grown upp women - it is just so obvious. There are some editors that I prefer not to name though that have some tendecies - but -no, no - not you. That is just so - untrue. Hafspajen (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• That Lincoln image is a nice one. BTW, Hafs, did I show you Beauty Revealed yet? Very ... unique... self-portrait (NSFW or spouses/children). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey, THAT WAS NICE. Truly lovely. Hafspajen (talk) 12:45, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

now what have I done with that guy with the lightning... Hafspajen (talk) 12:48, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• I love that print. Shame I can't find anything of higher resolution. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:59, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Ben... didn't go so well. We'd need an article on the painting first. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Cccc. Well, it is an allegory - of course. You don't really think it is this what really happened. I think it is interestig because it combines the old style allegoric paintings with a portrait. It is rather charming. Hafspajen (talk) 13:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Indeed, and the propagandic value of such a painting is second to none... but, oh well. I think the painting's probably notable enough for its own article, and if that happens then there is little question of its EV. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:17, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is NOT a crystal bowl - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw9Hzv17OPs bonus wisdom

]

Museum of Bad Art? don't think so. On the contrary. Hafspajen (talk) 13:20, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• My thoughts too. But we've seen the power amateur art critics hold. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

? File:Medienhafen Neuer Zollhof B.jpg? m? Hafspajen (talk) 13:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Hmmm. Looks a little posterized, or something. K, gotta go. Supper. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

File:Beethoven.jpg. Hafspajen (talk) 15:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, I guess it is sleeping time in Indonesia. Hafspajen (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/jan-beerstraaten-the-castle-of-muiden-in-winter This is NICE. Hafspajen (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

(stalker) Franklin's kite experiment always loosely reminds me of the currency vignette...--Godot13 (talk) 21:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Nice vignette. That Beerstraaten looks really nice. Will have to look further into it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

It was this thing about her breasts. Hafspajen (talk) 12:19, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Award

	The 147th Wikipedia:Featured picture Award
	Congratulation on your 147th Wikipedia:Featured picture, and all the great work you put into the project! Hafspajen (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks Haffy — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:45, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Current issue of the rupiah

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:1000 rupiah bill, 2000 series (2013 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:2000 rupiah bill, 2009 series (2014 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:5000 rupiah bill, 2001 series (2009 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:10000 rupiah bill, 2010 revision (2014 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:20000 rupiah bill, 2011 revision (2013 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:50000 rupiah bill, 2011 revision (2013 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:100000 rupiah bill, 2011 revision (2013 date), processed, obverse+reverse.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:34, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Sweet!--Godot13 (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Notification: RfC on Game of Thrones and chapter-to-episode statements

The RfC: Is Westeros.org a suitable source for this content? was closed with the result that Westeros.org is reliable but that whether the disputed text was valuable enough to include should be addressed separately. The closing editor recommended that all participants in the RfC and related RSN discussion be informed that such a discussion was under way:

RfC: Should the article state which chapters appear in the episode?

If any of you wish to make a statement on this matter, you are welcome to do so and your contribution would be greatly appreciated. If any of you would prefer to stay away from this dispute, I think we can all get that too. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

?

Bonus pic

Bonus pic

File:Korovin moonlit night.JPG, you don't happen to have a better scan on this+ looks ... foggy somehow. Hafspajen (talk) 16:25, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Strangely, the Museum doesn't include that painting in their collection. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Admin question

À la peanut butter—and banana and bacon?—sandwiches!

Is it true that admins have the magical power to restore deleted pages? If it is, do you think you could restore Shizuoka? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 22:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure? It's just a disambiguation page. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, there were two reasons: a) we wanted to see if it was, indeed, a disambiguation page, or a redirect; b) the page has been moved back and forth a number of times, and I wanted to have that history restored as evidence in future disputes. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, it's restored! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:28, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• I guess we do have magic powers ;) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo! Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oh, could we get the talk page restored, too? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Alakazam! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Captain MarvelShazam! Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• • Did someone say Alakazam? GamerPro64 01:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• • That may have been what I was going for. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

this?

A young Billy looking rather handsome in cuttlefish...(Comment by PaleCloude White)

Him?

• Hmm... that Billy cody image looks like it was taken from an Archive.org source (compare with the image of Chabas I took; similar texture). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes. File:Zavedeni slovanske liturgie na velke morave.jpg ... Hafspajen (talk) 14:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

7 wild wheel whirl wonders, bonus pic

Frederick Bancroft,

Since when are you in the category violence against women? Catfight Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence and User talk:Crisco 1492? Hafspajen (talk) 15:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Erm... oops? (Fixed) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for United States Sesquicentennial coinage

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)