User talk:George Ponderevo/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

GAC needs ce

Hello George Ponderevo,

I've noticed you've done some "ce" at Torture during the 2011–2012 Bahraini uprising article which appeared on DYK yesterday, thanks for that. Seeing all those thanks and Copyeditor's Barnstars made me take this request directly to you rather than to WP:GOCE. The article name is Bloody Thursday (2011), it was reviewed yesterday and I was advised to pull its GA nomination due to needing a lot of copyediting. So here you have it, thanks in advance. Mohamed CJ ^(talk) 08:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm about done here for today, but I'll try and take a look tomorrow. If I forget, feel free to remind me. George Ponderevo (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Spaces in section headings

I noticed you were removing spaces between the equals signs and the heading text. That's seems odd to me, since when one uses the tool bar above the edit window, the example heading is added with the spaces, e.g., === Heading text ===. I also haven't noticed that the presence or absence of the spaces makes any difference in the display of the heading. Are you certain this is necessary? If so, I think you should suggest that the tool button should be changed. --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm neither adding nor removing spaces, simply making the spacing consistent. It may not make a difference now, but who can tell if it might in a future release? George Ponderevo (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

FA status in Piano music of Gabriel Fauré

Please see this comment. Best wishes, Gidip (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	For your excellent work in copyediting. Keep up the good work! SupernovaExplosion Talk 15:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

That's very kind of you, thanks. George Ponderevo (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Pandemonium Architecture

Thanks for your edits Jimmierock (talk) 14:36, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a very nice article, and I enjoyed reading it. Reminded me somewhat of the Blackboard pattern used in some kinds of diagnostic systems. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	I've noticed you gnoming about on my DYKs and other articles I've worked on - your help has been much appreciated. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:08, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I got access to AWB yesterday, so I've playing with it like a kid with a new toy. I'm hoping that I'll maybe get one of those Highbeam accounts that are on offer, so that I can start doing something more substantial though. Who knows, I may even try writing a completely new article. ;-) George Ponderevo (talk) 14:23, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I noticed you tidied up a lot of articles I contributed to and watchlist so I thought I'd say thanks. :-) J3Mrs (talk) 10:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm relieved to learn that I didn't make a mess of them, as I'm still learning with AWB. One in particular caught my eye, Bickershaw Festival, the North West's own Woodstock. Is that something you plan to do any more work on? I might be tempted to have a go at it myself if you aren't. I wasn't there, but it reminded me so much of similar events down south, better known. And the Jeremy Beadle connection is irresistible. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm more interested in Bickershaw Colliery! I just tidied the festival article. Improve away.I don't use any of these tools, just one finger typing and inevitable typos. Technology and I are somewhat incompatible. Happy editing. J3Mrs (talk) 14:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Being of a naturally lazy disposition I'm a great fan of automation. If I ever get around to working on the festival (did I mention that I was lazy?) I may ask you to cast an eye over it when I'm done. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

question

Are you familiar with King John's Palace by any chance? I ran across the article when looking through things that need a copy-edit, and the subject caught my interest. I don't have any reference material, but there does appear to be some available online. As this is a very extensive article, any suggestions on how to proceed in improvements would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. 2eschew surplusage (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know anything at all about King John's Palace, but I do know a little bit about writing, and that looks like a very nice project to get your teeth into. I'd start by doing two things: pruning away the bumph – the Historical background section is almost exclusively about King's Clipstone for instance, nothing to do with the palace – and get rid of the overly informal tone, such as in " It is not known how or when the building became associated with King John as he only spent a total of nine days here!", or "Our knowledge of the palace complex is greatly increased during the years 1348-9 ....". In short, I think this is a clear case where less would be a great deal more by focusing on the structure, which is after all what the article is nominally about.

So, get those copyediting shears sharpened and chop away all the extraneous material. My gut feeling is that the article is about twice as long as it really ought to be, so prune hard! George Ponderevo (talk) 16:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you greatly for your time. I want to finish up on some copyvio concerns at Patsy Cline, but will do my best to improve the King John's Palace article in the very near future. Good advice, and I think I'll give it a go. 2eschew surplusage (talk) 03:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you could take a look at this?

Hi, George. You once made a big favor to me by improving a FA I wrote. I wonder if you could take a look at another: Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil. It's small and I don't believe it'll take much of your time. I would be very grateful if you could do it. --Lecen (talk) 00:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything you're particularly concerned about with the article Lecen? I've made a few tweaks to the lead for instance, but is that the kind of thing you're looking for? If it isn't, then of course feel free to revert. George Ponderevo (talk) 01:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I wanted you to take a look to see if the article is still good enough to FA standards. I made a small addition to the text today [1], could you improve it or correct it if necessary? Lastly, could you also take a look at this piece of text here? Thus one: "the middle of February, the Viscount of Inhaúma also returned, but his health was so compromised that he died a few weeks later. Upon learning of his death, Caxias said: 'and the same would have had happened to me, had I not resolved to get out of that hell.'" --Lecen (talk) 17:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I had a go at it, so see what you think. The article still seems fine for FA to me, but I'm no expert. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

That's ok. All I wanted was a second opinion. I'm really grateful for your aid, George. Thank you very much! --Lecen (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Respelling things in other languages

Noticed your tinkering on the Danish American page, specifically the respelling of "Rebild" into "Rebuild." It is a Danish place name and was correctly spelled the first time. Please do not try to respell things in the Danish language unless you have specific subject matter expertise. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.215.45 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 30 April 2012

I made quite a few changes, of which that was only one, but obviously I didn't notice that mis-correction, so I apologise for that and I'm sorry that my "tinkering" has upset you. In general though the article is written in appallingly bad English; is that something you plan to rectify? George Ponderevo (talk) 16:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

George, the critique only applied to the respelling of Danish words, otherwise the article reflects the linguist character of many contributors without a desire to bring together a linguistic fasces. Perhaps more important is that the article is a starting point for both layman and student alike, cutting the chase to resources over the tone of a singular voice.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.215.45 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 7 May 2012

Another Barnstar for your collection!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Hallo George, as native Italian speaker I cannot thank you enough (yet another Italianism :-) ) for rinsing in Thames water my articles! Grazie mille e continua cosí! Alex2006 (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	How many of these things can you get? Is there a limit on Wikipedia? Maybe a topic for things not to write about on Wikipedia (I left my mark with #1559). Anyways, thanks for the clean up on Columbian Park Zoo. Morning277 (talk) 17:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Krasta copyedits

George Ponderevo, thank you for the copyedits in the article of Krasta. I just have one unclear point concerning the definite articles "the" used before the open form compound words. Here [2] you added "the" before Krasta mine and Bulqizë mine. I mean, both of them are almost same as saying "the mine of Krasta" or "the mine of Bulqizë" (the compounds are already in the definite form), so do we have to use another article "the" before (the the Krasta mine)? Maybe I'm wrong but would like to read your explanation. Thank you in advance and thanks again for the other edits! Empathictrust (talk) 12:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, what's the official name of Krasta mine? Presumably it isn't just called "Krasta", as the lower-case "mine" would suggest? George Ponderevo (talk) 13:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, well, the official name is simply "Krasta mine" (here [3] page 30 & 48, from a published edition of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Energy of Albania). You could have been clearer. Anyway is there any relation between the lower case of "mine" and the common or proper form of the noun (mine's name). i.e. in Tanco Mine or San José Mine, upper-case is used but the definite article "the" is still used before. Or simply it should be used and full stop? :) Empathictrust (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

On page 28 and 29 of that pdf it says "Krasta Mine", not "Krasta mine". What difference does it make? Well, consider the example of bridges; if I was writing about a specific bridge and using its "proper" name, say London Bridge for example, I would write "I drove across London Bridge today", as opposed to "I drove across the London Bridge today". In other words you wouldn't use a definite article in front of a proper noun (think about "I asked the George a question"). But in the case of "I drove across London bridge today" "London bridge" isn't a proper noun, and therefore I'd write "I drove across the London bridge today", which could be referring to any one of a number of bridges, potentially none of them called London Bridge but all of them having some kind of connection with London. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Pretty clear now, thanks for your explanation! I actually didn't know the rule of capitalizing the following noun that the first proper noun defines (when it is really "proper"). One last thing: since you saw yourself Krasta Mine is the official name and since it's a proper one with upper case, how if we move "Krasta mine" to "Krasta Mine" as per the source's fact? Empathictrust (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea to me. George Ponderevo (talk) 21:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

On reflection I'm not certain my example of bridges is as good an example as I initially thought it was, as I might certainly write "I drove across the Severn Bridge today". Perhaps a better rule of thumb is that proper nouns may or may not be preceded by a definite article depending on context and idiom, but that improper nouns are always preceded by one. Ho hum! George Ponderevo (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Advisor

Good to see someone use Advisor. You're the first one who I've seen it since 2009. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I came across it because I saw someone else using it and decided to investigate. User:Ealdgyth I think it was. One thing it's particularly useful for I've found is picking up on incorrect ISBNs. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

True, I mostly use it for Whitespaces though. It has caused problems witht he mdash and nbsp-dash in the past. But very handy. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

There's a minor bug when replacing hyphens with dashes as per MoS, in that the script inserts a spaced mdash instead of an ndash, but the biggest problem I've found is that it doesn't distinguish between hyphens in image names and hyphens in the article text, so you need to check every single one of the changes carefully. I wonder if the author still maintains the script? George Ponderevo (talk) 12:39, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Dashes stuff

First of all: thank you for fixing my many mistakes, and for making the texts more MOS-like. I should explain: I don't avoid the standard dashes because of some ideological stance, but because they're not featured on my Romanian layout and are virtually useless to me outside wikipedia; to click them in the character box is just too much of a nuisance, with so many footnotes. It's also that I do not consider these aspects essential, as long as one article is consistent one way or the other.

Concerning this: if you're going to take the trouble of changing them, could you also somehow make sure that you change all? We now have "242–43", but "238-39", and even "142-44, 150–51". Regards, Dahn (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

That's because you have, for instance, "p.17-8" in the article. Where you're specifying a page range you should use "pp" rather than "p", which is what the script looks for. But I've fixed that for you as well. BTW, there's no dashes on an English keyboard either. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Well yeah, but one could modify your keyboard to feature it, or shortcut-key it (I guess), if that will serve any real purpose; in my case, it does not. Also, while I for one also prefer "p.[and no space]" to "pp. ", in this case I followed the style already used by the author. Dahn (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

And of course: Thank you. Dahn (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Whether or not there's a space after the "p." or pp." is a matter of taste so long as the article is consistent. But using "p.", whether spaced or not, for a page range is simply incorrect. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

[Drive-by comment:] I agree re:pp. But I note that "17-8" is given as an example--in my business (which follows MLA) the convention is to write that as "17-18": "In a range of numbers, give the second number in full for numbers through ninety-nine"--"2-3, 10-12, 21-48, 89-99". I don't know if our MOS has something to say about that. Drmies (talk) 13:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

So far as I can tell the MoS is silent on that issue, but I like the MLA convention; "17–8" just looks odd to me, as if you're reading the book backwards. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

George, strange things are afoot, or ahoof (given the Swedish message I received on my talk page): 17-8 is my date of birth. That cannot be an accident. Now, I want you to name a random, four-digit number: if it's my birth year, then Wikipedia is possessed by the devil and I will cease to work here. Drmies (talk) 14:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll decline if you don't mind. I'm afraid of meddling with strange dark forces I don't understand. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:17, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		Thank you for your diligence in looking after the details in new articles featured at "Did you know?". Your countless improvements help each of the topics look better during their moment in the limelight. Cumulatively, your work builds Wikipedia's reputation as the best online encyclopedia. Congratulations! Binksternet (talk) 03:35, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Possible FLC

Would you be interested and willing to have a look at this list to offer any advice, and improve the text. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

That looks like a terrific piece of work, not sure that it really needs my help. Most of the copyediting I've done here so far has been on main-page DYKs, but I'd like to move on from there, so I'll be glad to take a look. George Ponderevo (talk) 16:35, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I have a question straight away though. The lead begins "Cheshire is a county in North West England. This list contains all the Grade I listed churches and chapels in the ceremonial county of Cheshire." So as this article is about the Grade I churches within the ceremonial county, is that first sentence really necessary? Why not just "This list contains all the Grade I listed churches and chapels in the ceremonial county of Cheshire in North West England"? In general. if I have further questions, where would you prefer me to post them? On the article's talk page? George Ponderevo (talk) 16:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I struggled a bit with how to start, and changed it only today, not very satisfactorily. But that's the sort of input for which I was hoping. I'll deal with it, probably tomorrow. Anyway, if there's anything else, yes the talk page would be fine. I'm not an owl so off to bed now! Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyediting. It's been nominated. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:41, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

William the Conqueror

I've seen you work on the TFAs and some work at DYK, etc, so could I ask/beg/politely entreat you to perhaps cast your eye over this article prior to me taking it to FAC? I know you don't know me from adam but on an article this big, every bit helps... Ealdgyth - Talk 13:28, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

That's a big subject -- literally according to the events of his burial! I'm trying my hand at writing a new article right now, and it's a Bank Holiday weekend here, so I'm not sure how much time I'll have before Tuesday, but I'll be happy to help do what I can. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

That has to be the first time I have been upbraided for incivility after I intentionally refraining from being incivil. It wasn't even you I was going to be incivil about, but the process. That being said, don't judge everyone else there by a comment I made in frustration. I would never be taking this (or any other) article to FA status to begin with as I think the whole process is flawed, but that's just me and is not meant as a reflection on you as an individual. Agricolae (talk) 04:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Yet another barnstar!

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For many improvements to many articles, most particularly your recent skillful edits to Barony and Castle of Kilbirnie. Orlady (talk) 14:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I have to admit though that I don't at all understand the purpose of the tiny section called Micro history. What's that about? George Ponderevo (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I dunno about that. It's not my article, merely my DYK nomination. (From time to time I skim the list of "Good" New Articles for possible candidates for DYK nominations). My best guess is that it's something akin to a trivia section -- a collection of historical details that ought to fit into the history somewhere, but that the creator couldn't find a good spot for. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The right spots seem fairly obvious to me, so I've moved all that stuff out and deleted the section. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant! --Orlady (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I gave you a "DYKmake" credit for that article, based on your improvements to it. That credit should not count toward the 5 DYK credits that cause you to need to do a QPQ review when you contribute a self-nomination at DYK. --Orlady (talk) 15:42, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

That sounds good, but I'm afraid the rules of DYK are a bit of an arcane mystery to me. I only stumbled across your article because I was trying my hand at writing a DYK myself, Ursula Eason, and on checking the nomination I noticed what looked like another interesting article in the same queue. Any idea when they're likely to be appearing on the main page? George Ponderevo (talk) 15:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I noticed your article contribution -- nice work! The schedule for DYK updates is on the page Template:Did you know/Queue. The DYK that includes those two hooks is scheduled to go up at 17:00 London time on 7 June. As for the rules of DYK, when users who have accumulated 5 or more DYK article-creation credits submit new nominations for their own work, they are supposed to pitch in and help at DYK by reviewing another nomination. (This is called a "quid pro quo" review, or "QPQ review".) I contend that the credit I am giving you for the castle article shouldn't count toward your five. --Orlady (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's clearer now, thanks. George Ponderevo (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Barony and Castle of Kilbirnie

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Ursula Eason

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Happy birthday

Hello George, I see that it's your first Wikibirthday today. Happy birthday! The quality of your contributions would suggest that you are much older, so you have matured rather quickly. Schwede66 18:36, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's true that I haven't been one year old for an awful long time now. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Boddingtons

Salford and Manchester are both located on the River Irwell, as was the Strangeways Brewery, where the advertisement was filmed. It seems appropriate to link to the song. Salford is part of the Greater Manchester area anyway.Farrtj (talk) 17:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm very well aware of where Salford is, and it's most certainly not in Manchester. In addition, you added the Easter Egg link to a quotation from a Boddington's spokesman, with no evidence whatsoever that he was referring to Salford rather than Manchester. George Ponderevo (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

into what

A rather ugly turn of phrase, wouldn't you agree? Regards, Ericoides (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't. In fact I think that your allternative of "She also transformed a rather pedestrian series of five-minute children's programmes the BBC had acquired from France into The Magic Roundabout, which became a cult classic" is rather linear and dull. George Ponderevo (talk) 17:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough; it's a game of opinions... Regards, Ericoides (talk) 18:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm very sorry. I was rude to you yesterday, and there's no excuse for that. Ericoides (talk) 08:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Forget about it, I already have. There seems to be something in the environment here that makes it inherently difficult to disagree like rational adults; things seem to escalate all too readily into battles over stuff that really doesn't matter in the scheme of things. I'm sure our next encounter will be much more fruitful. George Ponderevo (talk) 08:58, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, George; appreciated. You're so right. Every so often on here I seem to behave like a total idiot, and then remorse belatedly sets in. I wonder what it is in the environment. I guess you didn't like the word "ugly", I didn't care for "linear and dull", and then off we went (well, off I went, at least). And funny how it all started with my good-natured attempt to "improve" your article, which followed my clicking on your user page for the first time to see who this other DYK-tweaker editor was (even my edit summary on the Eason page – "minor ce" – was meant as a glancing tribute to your own summaries). But, of course, you weren't to know any of this. Ericoides (talk) 09:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

It's water under the bridge now; we just had a stylistic difference of opinion that got slightly out of hand. But talking of DYK-tweaking, have you seen this, currently on the main page? I'm rather astonished to learn that DYK doesn't have a requirement that an article meets even a basic standard of literacy. George Ponderevo (talk) 09:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

No, as a matter of fact I hadn't. From time to time some real horrors slip through. I've noticed that quite a few people who pass the articles have limited linguistic skills, so perhaps it's not surprising. I'd fix this one myself, but the subject is really of no interest to me. Ericoides (talk) 10:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Another request

George. I see you're busy, but there's no rush with this. I've written an article on Thomas Harrison (architect) and should like to get it to GA. When you have time, I should be grateful on your opinion on its worthiness; and if worthy, could you please give advice and improve its prose. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

It's been promoted to GA, and quickly too, by a more-than-reasonable reviewer. Many thanks for your input; a great help. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Great news, congratulations. I might try a GA myself one day. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:15, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for CE

Hi, Thanks for copy editing this article. *Annas* (talk) 10:40, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to have done more, but frankly there are bits of it I simply don't understand. George Ponderevo (talk) 10:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Which section? *Annas* (talk) 11:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Here's one example: "Not satisfied to persecution, the players are crazy trample him, which makes he had to be rushed to hospital with bruised." George Ponderevo (talk) 11:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

After they punched and kicked the referee, they don't satisfied, they also trample him, they do like a crazy man. *Annas* (talk) 11:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

So he had to be rushed to hospital with bruised what? George Ponderevo (talk) 12:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I dont know, the source did not mention specifically *Annas* (talk) 12:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Then the sentence makes no sense; "bruised" is an adjective, therefore it must qualify a noun. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Nonsense. "Rooney was left badly bruised following a robust tackle from Terry" is a perfectly acceptable sentence. In this case the ref is the object, not any particular body part. 94.197.105.51 (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Nonsense indeed. In your example "bruised" is clearly an adjective qualifying Rooney. But are you seriously arguing that "... which makes he had to be rushed to hospital with bruised" makes any sense at all? Or are you just here to argue? George Ponderevo (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Who is it?. George, It seem you are very good in grammar. would you like to help me more? My another DYK is in the queue now, maybe you have time to CE, Thanks. *Annas* (talk) 05:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look. But before I do you ought to have a read through 2008–09 Liga Indonesia Premier Division and make sure you're happy with what I've done there. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Of course I'm happy with what you have done there. I see that you have a good knowledge about football. The first paragraph is copied from WP:Football league season template, but you also CE that. A few days ago, someone has CE my article, but I think the article have no improvement. Maybe she doesnt understand about football. *Annas* (talk) 08:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I've been a Manchester United fan for more years than I care to remember, and I still visit Old Trafford for a home game from time to time, so I'm quite comfortable with football articles. I'd like to see lots more, better, football articles, and articles like yours are particularly interesting. I was a little puzzled initially as to why the Liga would be organised as groups leading to a knockout stage, until I remembered the sheer scale of Indonesia. George Ponderevo (talk) 10:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Indonesia is very large, From west to east indonesia is same with distance from London to Moscow. Top tier league is in one group. Well, there is a million of Manchester United fans in Indonesia, and also million of another world popular club fans in Indonesia. If you interested about football in one specific country, maybe it's Indonesia. Football is very popular in Indonesia, but mismanagement resulting in bad achievement. Indonesian football fans just watching another team play in the world cup, but they never stop to dream that some day they will go to the world cup. Because of internal conflict, Currently there is two faction in the Football Association of Indonesia, one recognized by fifa and the other no. Both of them create their own complete competition from top tier to the third level. Have you ever find any country with two FA and two competition?. This conflict also led to Indonesia heavy lost over Bahrain. Have you ever find that all best player banned from playing for their national team?. *Annas* (talk) 05:38, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a pretty bad situation. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look through your other football article and made a few changes. There seems to be some kind of copyright problem with Miangas though, so best I don't touch that until it's resolved. George Ponderevo (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Its look better. If you want more challenge, you can look at Indonesian football clubs article or Indonesian players article. Most of them have language problem, due to lack of skill literacy from the editor. See this for example. Have fun :-) *Annas* (talk) 13:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Seems like too big a job for one person, I was just trying to help you out. There are other things I want to find the time to work on myself anyway. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I just wondering if you can understand such an strange article. Thanks *Annas* (talk) 06:12, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Commons cat placement

Thanks for your recent cleanups to Wall poems in Leiden. However, this edit placed the {{commons category}} template in a section by itself, violating the explicit request not to do that in the template's documentation. I have moved it to an earlier section. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:17, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I'll watch that in the future. George Ponderevo (talk) 23:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

YOMYOMF

Thanks for chipping in at YOMYOMF! Just curious, why did you remove some of the ref tags? I'm presuming because the facts in question are uncontroversial or "common knowledge" if you will. Just wondering. CaseyPenk (talk) 10:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Because they were repeated; the convention is that a citation sources everything that precedes it. Unnecessarily citing each sentence simply adds clutter for no benefit. George Ponderevo (talk) 10:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Euros

Yes, they should and they are. My netbook does not have quick access to the codes. Thank you for adding them. Drmies (talk) 21:58, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Charles Swain

Thanks for your edits to Charles Swain (poet). Can you clarify your edit summary relating to Template:ODNBweb? I use it a lot and have never had problems raised previously, even in GAs and FAs. Also, you expanded the accessdate parameters and these too have never been an issue previously, although I am aware that there has been a discussion concerning them recently (didn't really follow it - MOS discussions tend to take forever, cause a lot of bad temper and often achieve not a lot!). Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 13:31, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

If you look at the formatting of this version, just before I changed it, you'll see that the italicisation is all over the shop; I've never before seen the accessdate in italics for instance. In addition, there are lots of details missing that really should be provided for a full citation, such as author, year, and publisher. So I'm surprised to see that you've never had problems with {{ODNBweb}} at FAC, as that's the kind of thing that Nikimaria seems to home in on pretty rapidly from what I've seen. As for accessdates, there does seem to be a lot of sound and fury surrounding theiir formating, as you say, so if you feel strongly and want to switch back to the yyyy-mm-dd format I certainly won't be standing in your way, even though I don't see the point of it. The only reason for using that format, IMO, is to make dates easily sortable, which clearly isn't necessary for accessdates. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:15, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I am reverting nothing and had no intention of doing so. I was just curious and I appreciate the clarification. - Sitush (talk) 14:56, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Ursula Eason

Take a look at this. The lady with the little horse figurine half-way down the page is Ursula right? The reason I ask is that I want to be sure so I can upload it for the Eason article. INeverCry 18:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. The caption to the image below it identifies her clearly. I've added the image to her article. INeverCry 19:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The image below the one of the lady with the horse figurine is definitely Ursula Eason, as I've seen that photograph elsewhere, but I'm not sure about the figurine one. Do they look like the same woman to you? Where have you seen any captions? George Ponderevo (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The nose especially looks the same, as do the lips. Also, the article is mostly about Ursula, so a picture of anyone else placed in the middle of text that refers only to Ursula would be very strange. INeverCry 19:31, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

CVUA

Hello, George Ponderevo/Archive 2! The instructors at the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy have seen your hard work reverting vandalism, and we would like to thank you. But do you want to go to the next level? Would you like to know how reverts, warnings, reports, blocks, and bans all come together to keep this Encyclopedia free from disruption? Then consider enrolling today! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Electriccatfish2 (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it may be little late for me, but good luck with that. George Ponderevo (talk) 18:27, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

NeverSeconds, a problem with 9 year old schoolgirl

I saw your previous edits on the article NeverSeconds and I thank you for your great contribution. But I think the removal of 9 year old is not much necessary. I agree that she won't be 9 year old for ever. But, still the article says that she is a schoolgirl (in the same sentence which contained the former). She wouldn't be a schoolgirl forever! But I think that the article must contain the age of her because it is one of the specialties of her blog. And today, when this article is on our Main page, it must contain this specialty. We can update this when she become 10 years old, and it will be simple as she has the spotlight on her. It is nice to hear that Wpedia, too contributes to the no. of hits of her blog (as it came on mainpage). Do you think that her age should be also mentioned in the article? Vanischenu m^Talk 14:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I just moved the mention of her age to the description section, as what will never change is that she made her first posting to her blog when she was nine years old. So it's still there. But if you don't like anything I've done then just revert it. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:41, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate you for placing it at the best place it can have. I just felt that the emphasis on her age is lost, but it would not be encyclopedic to focus on it.Vanischenu m^Talk 15:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

The Coral Island

• You should know better than to edit war. Surely you know of WP:3RR. I'm going to count and check the time stamps. You had best, too. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 10:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  This is all rather pathetic, don't you think? George Ponderevo (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  Actually, George, no, it's not. This is wrong, too. ';' is for definition list, which the reflist is not. I don't think you know who you're dealing with. You might see the "7 years, 7 months and 21 days" at the bottom of my user page. You might see the implementation of the user page, too; you'll not be teaching me anything that I don't already know about wiki-syntax. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  All I see is that now you've seen that harassment doesn't work you're switching to intimidation, which I can promise you will be no more successful. The Wiki markup documentation says quite clearly and explicitly that the function of a leading semicolon is to bold an entire line, which is precisely what's required in this case. It says absolutely nothing about restricting its use to definition lists. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  BTW, which user page are you talking about? I don't see any mention of "7 years, 7 months and 21 days" on your user page. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  George, you need to not be so belligerent. The help page was wrong; you've made it wrong, again. The ';' produces an html "dt" tag; a definition term. They happen to be bolded. See Wikipedia:LIST#Description (definition, association) lists. I know such markup inside and out. The seven years is how long I've been editing Wikipedia (it's right under the image and it's right here on your talk page). Br'er Rabbit (talk) 15:42, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  You have a curious notion of what "wrong" means, as the documentation described the effect of a leading semicolon very accurately. That it's rendered as a "dt" tag is supremely irrelevant. But how can someone who only registered a little more than a month ago have been here for over seven years? George Ponderevo (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  It's not about the rendered "effect", it's about semantic markup. You'll note that another editor has reverted you on the help page and has explained it on the talk much as I've been saying to you. They're also taking things further in the appropriate direction. Proper markup matters, George. Please listen.

  It's true that I only registered this account last month. It's not my first account. I've a lot of wiki-experience. Don't think you're dealing with a n00b.  Br'erRabbit  16:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  I've responded to RexxS on the article's talk page. He raised a valid point about the effect of the markup on those using screen readers, which I found persuasive. Therefore I've made the change he suggested myself. You still need to fix the documentation though, as it's still recommending the use of a leading semicolon to produce non-TOC headings.

  That another editor is or isn't a newbie never factors into my consideration, and certainly doesn't affect my attitude towards them. Had you raised the accessibility issue instead of focusing on a bit of emitted HTML that doesn't matter a damn I would have been equally persuaded by your position. George Ponderevo (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  The accessibility issue is real, and solid reasoning. The emitted HTML matters, too; that's what things like Google bot are reading. Proper markup matters. I'm sorry it doesn't' matter to you. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi George, I just wanted to say thanks for listening to me about the problems definition lists might cause for folks using non-visual agents. Our project is only slowly realising the need to consider accessibility in so many areas. We have made good progress with tables and horizontal lists and yet it will take a long while before we get thousands of articles to give up their definition lists. Still, even a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step, so I hope you don't feel we have wasted our time. If you're interested, WP:WikiProject Accessibility could always do with help from somebody who can understand the problems. I hope you won't have hard feelings about Br'er – he's been involved for a long time in improving the accessibility and usability of our articles (instrumental in creating HLIST for example) and I promise you he only has the best interests of the project at heart. Regards, --RexxS (talk) 16:54, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

No hard feelings at all. I have to admit that the accessibility issue is one that hadn't even crossed my mind, but you're right, it's something we should pay more attention to. Thanks for raising the issue as you did, as I very much doubt that Br'er and I would ever have agreed otherwise about that leading semicolon. I'll likely become an evangelist myself now against using it to produce non-TOC headings. :-) George Ponderevo (talk) 17:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

coral redux

• Start a thread somewhere in neutral territory. Notify WT:FAC. Over and out. :-) – Ling.Nut (talk) 13:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  What's it got to do with WT:FAC? And I'm not the one complaining about the {{HighBeam}} template, so why should I be required to do anything at all? George Ponderevo (talk) 13:24, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Quoting HTML attributes

Hi George, I noticed you were asking what was the argument for quotation marks in named references. There are several, but for Wikipedia the most important one is this:

1. Experienced editor A writes a named reference, but uses name=Beatles because he knows that most browsers will supply the quotation marks.
2. New editor B looks at A's work and thinks "Those named references look useful; I think I'll use them."

   (So far so good)

3. Editor B writes his first named reference as name=Rolling Stones - unfortunately it doesn't work and doesn't give an error message that he can make sense of.
4. Editor B is discouraged from learning more as this is a frustrating experience.

   (Not so good now)

Now replay that scenario with experienced editor A taking the time to quote the HTML attribute (as the spec suggests): name="Beatles" - even though he knows he could get away with not quoting. A much better result, even if A never sees the benefit! HTH --RexxS (talk) 14:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Is the <ref> tag part of HTML? I thought it was a Wikimedia extension, so why not fix the extension to avoid that potential issue? George Ponderevo (talk) 22:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

It is indeed a Wikimedia extension to HTML, but it has to output HTML and it needs to use the name you give to the reference as both a target of an <a href=...> tag and also as a named anchor (<a name=...> tag). That means for example that you can't have spaces in a name - because a space is a delimiter within an HTML tag - unless you explicitly quote the name, enclosing it in "". Requiring Wikimedia tag extensions to follow the same rules as the usual HTML tags makes sense - all HTML attributes are of type string and the conventional way of delimiting strings is of course to use quotation marks.

I expect that we could ask the developers to look at ways of parsing the characters following 'ref name=' to perhaps substitute underscores for spaces, but if I were a developer, I wouldn't see much priority for doing that, when simply adhering to normal practice for HTML tag attributes (enclosing in "") removes the problem entirely. Wouldn't you agree? --RexxS (talk) 02:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't, because the <ref> tag isn't an HTML extension it's a Mediawiki extenson, and therefore could work in any way the developers choose. I would never use spaces in a ref name any more than I would in a variable name, which is also a string but is never enclosed in quotes because it never contains spaces. So in your example if Editor B copied my style of naming refs they would be using upper camel case anyway. Now, how about we get back to something a little more important, like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? George Ponderevo (talk) 12:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

That's ok, George. I admire your faith in the developers, but sadly I'm not able to share it. I spend time these days looking at the ways we can help people learn to edit Wikipedia, and referencing is the single toughest area for most to get to grips with. I'm afraid that experience tells me that editor B copying your quoteless camel case is just as likely to create a name with spaces in it anyway. Never mind, if it's that unimportant to you, I won't bother you again. --RexxS (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

You misunderstand me, or I have expressed myself poorly. I have no particular faith in the developers, who are of course ultimately responsible for the Byzantine citation system we have to work with today. I simply don't see that enclosing the name parameter in unecessary quotation marks goes any way at all to making it easier to use; on the contrary in fact. Any half-decent programmer could fix the quotation issue in a matter of minutes. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

you are not welcome on my talk page

Please refrain from posting there. Your argument is invalid; we're talking about attribute values. The name of the attribute is "name". Br'er Rabbit (talk) 00:01, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

You very clearly have no idea at all what you're talking about Mr Rabbit, so I very much hope that I never have the misfortiune to encounter you again. George Ponderevo (talk) 00:08, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

For those who might otherwise be persuaded by Br'er Rabbit's obsessive pontification I'll repeat here the observations I made that he has deleted from his talk page:

What the w3c says about attribute names is that "Document authors are encouraged ... to avoid symbolic or white space characters in names". The quotation marks are therefore an unnecessary adornment, and should be deprecated in favour of some form of camel case.[4] In other words, his "well-formed" argument is itself not well-formed. Contrary to his stated position, in reality the quotation marks are only necessary to deal with attribute names that were once considered to be well-formed, i.e. those that contain spaces.

CE please

Would you like do copy editing on my article, if you have leisure time. Thanks. *Annas* (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I haven't quite finished yet, I'll pick it up again later if you're happy with what I've done, so have a look and let me know if this is the sort of thing you were looking for? George Ponderevo (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I think I've done what I can now, and if there's anything you don't like then just revert it. I haven't done anything with the Bono location section because IMO you ought to dump it. Also, you need to clarify what "... considered by locals to be the incarnation of the seven evil spirit" means. Should that be "seven evil spirits"? And if so, what are these evil spirits? George Ponderevo (talk) 00:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes. it's spirits. The sources did not mention the name of spirit, maybe spirit1, spirit2, until spirit7, hehehe :). Thanks, your works is appreciated. *Annas* (talk) 05:52, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you like to CE this, Thanks.*Annas* (talk) 05:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

There you go, see what you think. George Ponderevo (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

BMW R2 Article

Just to say thank you for the major edit banner you placed on the BMW R2 page which I was creating. It was very useful and I didn't previously know about it. Many thanks. DAFMM (talk) 20:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. I saw you put a notice on the talk page, but nobody would have seen it there. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:30, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

FL

You may have noticed that Grade I listed churches in Cheshire has gained FL status. Thanks for your help in achieving this. I think it's time now for Grade I listed churches in Greater Manchester to get the star; what do you think? If so, would you please improve the text. I was pleasantly surprised to find how interesting (and different from Cheshire) these churches are. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm pleased to hear that, well done. I'll be happy to look over the GM churches later, but it's curry day at my local Weatherspoons, so I may be gone some time. :-) George Ponderevo (talk) 12:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

In our medical school pantomime (which we produced ourselves) there was a song that rhymed "curry" with "intestinal hurry". Hope that does not keep you away too long. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I had a very nice chicken jalfresi and err, let's just say a pint or two. I only have one comment on your excellent list article, which is that in the entries for St Augustine, Pendlebury, and St Edmund, Rochdale, it appears that the cost of the designs was £33,000 and £28,000 respectively, but presumably that was the cost of contruction? George Ponderevo (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Louise Cochrane

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Collaton St Mary Church

George Would be very grateful if you could improve the following page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaton_St_Mary_Church

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collaton blagdonhistory (talk • contribs) 16:12, 9 July 2012

I'm afraid the only way to improve it is to completely rewrite it; you can't just copy-and-paste from the church's own web site. I've made a start for you, and with a bit more work it should be deletion proof. If you have the geographical coordinates of the church that would be a help, as might a little article on the village of Collaton St Mary. Anyway, I'll try and help you get the article firmly established, and hopefully by the time it is you'll understand what Wikipedia demands and be confident in carrying on yourself. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The first thing we have to do is to establish some notability for the church. Is it a listed building? Is it a parish church? George Ponderevo (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Chrysophyllum oliviforme

Yngvadottir (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyedit?

Hi George, I was wondering if you'd be willing to copyedit an article for me? I've seen that you do a lot of good work in that area. I'm working on the article in a sandbox right now, so it probably won't be really for a week or two (maybe more). It should be an interesting read though, about an unusual religious group from California. No problem if you're busy, you do enough around here. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I have the (perhaps unfair) impression that there are a great many "unusual religious groups" in California, and indeed in the US generally. Let me know when you're ready and I'll be happy to take a look through. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, for some reason they do seem to generate a lot of new religions, not sure why. I'll let you know when I move it to mainspace, just need one more book to finish my research. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 16:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello George, I would like to suggest a copyedit of Later life of José de San Martín. I've just reviewed this article for DYK and it's almost ready to go, but it needs someone with your skills, as the nominator's English is a bit shaky in places. Schwede66 19:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi again George, hope your wikibreak went well. I've finished my expansion of Ruth Norman, the article I was thinking of above, and will probably submit it at DYK and GAN soon. I'd definitely appreciate it if you took a look at it sometime. Also, be sure to do an image search for her. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

That's seriously wierd, but I see you've already got Ruth to GA. Looks pretty good. George Ponderevo (talk) 16:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they are very weird, but at least they haven't tricked anyone into committing suicide or terrorist attacks. Alright, well, thanks for helping me out on this one. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

FLs

Thanks to your efforts Grade I listed churches in Greater Manchester is now a FL. If you can bear it, could you please improve the text of Grade I listed churches in Merseyside. It's mercifully short, quite interesting (to me), and the next in the series of Grade I listed churches I am creating. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, i've finished that now. Good luck at FLC. George Ponderevo (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I gave you more to do than I had intended/expected. And I've never really understood this "Postcript" business, although I guess it's simple when you know how. And why should you use <br/> when <br> seems to work perfectly well? I think I'm getting a bit old to grasp all this stuff. And how do the newbies cope with getting it all "right"? Cheers, and thanks again. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

The <br/> thing is to do with making the HTML well formed – for every opening tag there should be a corresponding closing tag. You may have noticed that the default behaviour of the {{citation}} and {{cite}} templates is slightly different, in that the the latter adds a closing full stop whereas the former doesn't, so using the postscript parameter allows the formats to be aligned. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

It was spotted at FLC that the refs did not point to the bibliography any more. So I've changed the cite book template back to the citation template, and added the postscript field. Seems to work OK now. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:12, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

That's because to make the links with {{cite book}} you need to include the "ref=harv" parameter, which I've now done. To make {{citation}} visually compatible with {{cite book}} you need to use the "separator=." parameter as well as "postscript=". George Ponderevo (talk) 14:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Phew! Thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Things would be much easier if we had a single, standardised citation system, but I don't see that happening any time soon. That {{NHLE}} template really ought to have a "|ps=" parameter added to suppress output of the trailing full stop though, just as {{sfn}} does. George Ponderevo (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Agree. Anything to make life simpler for simple people (like me). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I hate to leave a job unfinished, so I've updated the {{NHLE}} template to make it compatible with the {{citation}} template by adding those "|separator=" and "|ps=" parameters. If you look at the previous version of Grade I listed churches in Cheshire for instance, before I implemented the template changes, you'll see that ref #1 ends "retrieved 6 June 2012", whereas ref #97 ends "Retrieved 15 May 2012." Interestingly that's the sort of discrepancy that gets hoovered up very quickly at FAC from what I've seen, but FLC seems not to notice. Anyway, compatibility can now be achieved by appending "|separator=,|ps=}} to each {{NHLE}} invocation, as in {{NHLE |num= 1330112|desc= Church of St Mary the Virgin, Acton|accessdate= 15 May 2012|separator= ,|ps=}} George Ponderevo (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I like it! But why can't the people who are clever enough to create templates, not clever enough to make them mutually compatible (the same goes for infoboxes, too)? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Too much effort I suppose, especially if they don't themselves need the missing functionality or compatibility. Not that it was much of a job though, just a few minutes work to test it. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I've been messing about with another list, List of works by Sharpe and Paley, and seem to have achieved some sort of consistency, but this time with full stops at the end of each reference. In some ways it seems simpler to me (always an advantage for me). Do you think this approach is OK as an alternative, or it it "better" to have no full stops? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

What you've done looks fine. I don't think it really matters whether you have full stops at the end of citations or not, so long as you always do or you always don't. My preference is for no full stops, on the basis that a citation isn't a sentence, added to which full stops seem to clash somewhat with the lack of them in the preceding See also section. But each to his own. George Ponderevo (talk) 23:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Bulleted list item

hi

First time user on this, I simply would like to enter information on a company so that it can found on wiki. Is this possible? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhocpr200 (talk • contribs) 12:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Quite possible, as long as you have access to reliable sources that indicate the notability of the company. I'd suggest that you start something in your sandbox (See my sandbox at the top of the screen) and I'll take a look at it if you like. George Ponderevo (talk) 12:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I've just seen from your talk page that you're talking about Express Cafes, which has just been deleted. The problem with that was that you can't just copy and paste from the company's web site, you have to write something yourself. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

regarding ssp support service provider and deaf interpreter.

thanks for the info.

please dont delete pages. I am new to wiki and learning how to post and edit.

i will redo the pages.

thanks so much

p

You are not allowed to breach copyright by copy and pasting from another web site, which is why your page was deleted. George Ponderevo (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Svetlana Kirdina

Hello George Ponderevo, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Svetlana Kirdina, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: enough content hs been added since you tagged the page to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 11:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I am quite familiar with the the criteria thank you, so no need for that rather condescending link. George Ponderevo (talk) 11:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Svetlana Kirdina

Dear George, I am sure that Svetlana Kirdina is a very important person for russian science, economical and sociological studies in modern Russia. You can see this Internet page in English http://www.kirdina.ru/eng/index.php to make sure that I tell you the truth. Please do not delite this page. I just need to have more time to give full information about this scientist. thanks for understanding, Andrew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatgemacht (talk • contribs) 10:18, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I have no power to delete the page, but you're perfectly entitled to contest the speedy deletion nomination by pressing on that large button in the middle of the nomination. All that's needed is a sentence or two explaining who Svetlana is and why she's notable. George Ponderevo (talk) 10:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

And now?

And now what? George Ponderevo (talk) 12:12, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Another FL

The Merseyside churches made it to FL with very little trouble; thanks for all your help in that. Next for Grade I listed churches in Lancashire. Would you be willing to make the text (and formatting if it needs it) fit for FL? Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Of course. Probably not until tomorrow though. George Ponderevo (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no rush. Any time to suit you (it takes them a month to pass it anyway). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

There you go, I even came in on the weekend for once. :-) I'd wish you luck at FLC, but with your well-oiled machine you don't seem to need it. George Ponderevo (talk) 12:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

And the weather's so good, too. Many thanks, again. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Norman

Thanks for your help on Ruth Norman, it is now a featured article! Mark Arsten (talk) 21:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

That was quick, well done. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

It will be TFA soonish, hopefully. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter

Hey George Ponderevo. I'm dropping you a note because you've been using the Page Curation suite recently - this is just to let you know that we've deployed the final version :). There's some help documentation Wikipedia:Page Curation/Introductionhere that shows off all the features, just in case there are things you're not familiar with. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

I really want to thank you for taking time to copy edit the Yadira Silva article. All your edits seems like magic to me! Thanks again, Osplace 01:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Concealed shoes

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: William the Conqueror

This is a note to let the main editors of William the Conqueror know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 25, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 25, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

William the Conqueror (c. 1028 – 1087) was the first Norman King of England. He had been Duke of Normandy since 1035, although his illegitimate status and youth caused him difficulties and he did not secure his hold over the Duchy until about 1060. In the 1050s and early 1060s William became a contender for the English throne, then held by his childless relative Edward the Confessor. Other potential claimants included the powerful English earl Harold Godwinson, who Edward named as the next king on his deathbed in January 1066. William argued that Edward had previously promised him the throne, and that Harold had sworn to support William's claim. William invaded England in September 1066, defeating Harold at the Battle of Hastings, and was crowned on Christmas Day 1066. Several unsuccessful rebellions followed, but by 1075 William's hold on England was mostly secure. William's final years were marked by difficulties in his continental domains, troubles with his eldest son, and threatened invasions of England by the Danes. In 1086 he ordered the compilation of the Domesday Book, listing all the landholders in England and their holdings. He died in September 1087 on campaign in northern France, and was buried in Caen. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help with Grade I listed churches in Lancashire which eventually made it to FL. Cumbria next! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Seasons greetings...

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Ealdgyth. Troll-free sounds good. George Ponderevo (talk) 06:16, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Season's greetings

	Best wishes at Christmas time!
	Happy holidays! -- Dianna (talk) 06:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Little Moreton Hall

Just to let you know that I've picked this for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 12, 2013. Hope this is OK. If you want to tweak the blurb before it appears on the main page, please do. Congratulations on a lovely article! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 11:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice to see a bit of a dream come true ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

What a pleasant surprise! George Ponderevo (talk) 16:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Two TFAs in a few weeks, extra precious! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

fr, it, tempted to do a German stub --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I have a little problem to change the coordinates to the format the German infobox wants, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

What format does it want? George Ponderevo (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

example Kathedrale von Florenz, description tells me nothing (no music), takes to two others, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I see. If you click on the coordinates you'll get them in different formats. The one you want (I think) is |BREITENGRAD=53/7/38/N, |LÄNGENGRAD=2/15/6/W. George Ponderevo (talk) 22:50, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

That looks good, but I get a message of a missing parameter, probably "REGION-ISO=", - any idea? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the article? I worked for Siemens for many years, so I had to be able to read a little German. The ISO code for the UK is GBR. George Ponderevo (talk) 23:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Link? you go to it and then "deutsch" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

"swallowed" - something seems wrong with that ISO but not wrong enough to prevent the coords from showing - as before ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:27, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

All seems fine now. Anything else you'd like me to help with on the German Wikipedia? George Ponderevo (talk) 23:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

even found the ISO: GB-CHW, and a few more cats ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Little Moreton Hall de

New day: thanks for the formatting! I changed it to cite web, otherwise you should say "abgerufen" for "retrieved", the template does the translation for you ;) - The template does not change the date format, so when going to de, you have to add the dots and change names of months. Going to de: you are welcome! Others did it before, see? If you know of an article you would like to see in German, have it imported to your userspace, do what you can there (translation,selection of sections), ping me by leaving a note on your de-user, I will do what I can in translation. When you are happy I move to article space. If you wrote the English article yourself, you can skip the import. I see plenty of red links in the List of Grade I buildings ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Another FLC

Happy New Year! I feel it's time to try to get Grade I listed churches in Cumbria to FL status, and wonder if you would cast your eye over it, improve the text, and advise on anything else that might be necessary. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you as well. Copyedit done. The only outstanding problem I can see is that the format of refs #6 and #7 are slightly different from the rest: "Hyde & Pevsner 2010" vs. "Hyde & Pevsner (2010)", caused by using the {{Harvnb}} template for those two as opposed to the {{sfnp}} template used for all the other citations. The best way I've seen of handling what I think it is you want to do, attribute a section of a book, is to treat McMillan, say, just like any other author, with a full {{citation}} entry in the Bibliography describing the name of the section he wrote in the |contribution parameter and the page range of that section in the |pages parameter. I've done that for ref #6 to show you what I mean. George Ponderevo (talk) 21:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for your ultra-fast attention. I'd no idea how to fix the references — and it works (of course). All done now, so I'll nominate it and see if it attracts any interest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and a ping

Thank you for your work cleaning up United States v. Jackalow. I did notice that the references to the New York Times are now in a mixed format, several in smallcaps and others in the citenews template. I passed the article for references, both forms can be viewed as correct and everything else looks like it was fixed. However, it is a bit inconsistent and probably should be cleaned up before I give the article an overall pass. So, will you still be cleaning up the remaining NYT cites so they are all consistent with one another? Just checking... Also, I dove in and reworded one particularly awkward section of the article, I do not think I altered the meaning of anything, but as I am the GA reviewer, I would be more comfortable if you checked my edits and fixed anything I may have done improperly. I see some need to fix a few other small errors in the article, (some comma problems and run0on sentences, mostly) but didn't want to get too involved with it directly. Montanabw^(talk) 20:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was still working on that, but I will finish the job, promise. I haven't really looked at the article overall yet, but I'll do that when I've finished with the citations. I do understand your reluctance to dive into the article too deeply, so I'll do what I can. Like you, I think it's too good to fail. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

And the lead editor has apparently bailed from WP, hasn't edited since November. Thanks for stepping up. Montanabw^(talk) 23:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I came across the article completely by chance, by clicking on the Random article option as is my habit, and then on investigating the GA review I saw your question on the GA talk page and decided to try and help out. It's my impression that many, if not most, of Wikipedia's 3000 or so active editors are only interested in creating articles, not in improving existing articles, as there's no glory in that, just hard graft. Which I think is a shame, but not anything I can change except by example. George Ponderevo (talk) 23:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I've been stalking Montana's edits ;P ! Hi George; I'm hoping, at some point, to get all the British Mountain and Moorland native pony breeds articles up to at least GA standard, ideally (longer-term) FA standard, with the aim of getting a featured topic kinda thing going. (the New Forest pony article was a TFA the other day; that's the first one I've got to FA level.) If you could pass an eye over any / all of them to tighten up the prose, improve, etc. then I'd be incredibly grateful, as Real Life issues have me a bit short of time and energy for article improvement just at the minute. Pesky (talk) 11:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

The list is here. Perhaps a place to start is Shetland pony, for obvious reasons (high traffic article that currently is pretty marginal). However, the less-known breeds get less traffic and are perhaps easier, as there are relatively few sources (they can easily get to GA, but probably will always lack comprehensiveness of material for FA). Other than Pesky, User:Dana boomer has sort of been singlehandedly taking stuff to GA, most recently Kerry Bog Pony, and I'm sure she would love some more hands on deck. Dana, Pesky and I are willing to take point on the equestrian details if someone else wants to dive in and write! Let us know, we can shoot you some decent WP:RS links via Google Books, etc... Montanabw^(talk) 20:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I won't be doing more than a bit of copyediting to help out Montanabw; horses aren't really my thing. George Ponderevo (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

... having said that, I've done some work on Exmoor pony this evening, more to come tomorrow. I think that with a bit more tidying up that would make a very plausible GA candidate. How are you on early British childrens' TV programmes? I could do with some help with Four Feather Falls for instance, which is set in Kansas, so that ought to be bread and butter for you. ;-) George Ponderevo (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Will peek at the TV show, I made one tweak on the Exmoor article, you may want to redo the ref links (I kind of suck at that). But I think all the sources were intended as footnotes, as I think there was a whine about the accuracy at one point and a need to dogpile the data occurred, but ask Pesky. Montanabw^(talk) 01:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC) Follow up Peeked at FFF and tweaked. Hope it helped. Montanabw^(talk) 18:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

That looks great, thanks. George Ponderevo (talk) 18:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

... and I also took a look at Dana's Kerry Bog Pony you mentioned. What a GA nomination that was, quite extraordinary. Does that kind of thing often happen at GAN? George Ponderevo (talk) 02:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

When it involves me arguing with a soon-to-be-blocked troll about a horse article, yes (check out the GA for horse, just as an example). I sincerely believe that Murphy's Law governs the known universe. Or at least WikiProject Equine. Montanabw^(talk) 01:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)