User talk:Gryffindor/Archive15

Nomination of List of rulers of Ife for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of rulers of Ife is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rulers of Ife until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. LukeSurl^{t c} 16:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Tea Room Copyedit

Hello, Gryffindor. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Golden Tea Room at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Mehmuffin (talk) 17:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Golden Tea Room

On 16 August 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Golden Tea Room, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Toyotomi Hideyoshi, the Japanese regent from 1537 to 1598, ordered the construction of the Golden Tea Room (pictured), a chashitsu that was completely covered in gold? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Golden Tea Room. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Golden Tea Room), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (talk) 01:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, Gryffindor! I've got a question I can't solve and I'd love some advice from you. You see, there is this file; Kolja21 and I are having disagreements over what countries should be included. Since our discussions seem to get stuck, I'd love to get some third opinions to help us solve the problem. How do you think this problem should be solved? Should we (provided Kolja agrees) contact WP:EU or is there a special place for a discussion? Thank you!--R8R (talk) 18:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much!--R8R (talk) 11:01, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editor requests

Gryffindor, you're currently up to four requests at WP:GOCE/REQ, but the limit is two active requests at any one time. Please remove two of your requests. You can always resubmit them, one at a time, as each of the remaining two requests is completed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Star of Venus

Do you think the history of Star of Venus should be merged? Agathoclea (talk) 10:12, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Dragon

Thank you for your work on Blue Dragon. I hope you do not mind to repair a few templats, that are now linking to a disambiguation page: Template:Toonami-anime, Template:Blue Dragon series, Template:Mistwalker and Template:Akira Toriyama. Thank you in advance. The Banner talk 11:15, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

House of

Do not move articles that start "House of" without using an WP:RM as such move are often controversial see a previous discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves/Archive 29#House of -- PBS (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also do not edit the resultant redirect, like for some of the recent moves that you made because to do so stops an editor easily reverting you moves and so such edits are disruptive. -- PBS (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not "House of" is correct or incorrect is not something to be decided by a rule. It is something to be decided by consensus on the talk page, and if a move is to be made then use WP:RM. It is much more complicated for continental European families as everyone and his dog held sovereign rights over their territory at one time or another before the founding of the modern national states. -- PBS (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not proposing anything. I am not claiming right of wrong. I am suggesting that instead of moving hundreds of articles because you "know" that that are incorrectly named that you get consensus for the moves. How do yo know that the rule you are enforcing is correct in all cases? -- PBS (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lets look at an example. Here is a link a source of one of the pages you moved House of Arenberg. Why did you move it? -- PBS (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He ors she, claims that he wants to change everything like the English model of nobility, in my vieuw, not correct.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolus (talk • contribs) 14:54, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your first comment so there was no need to reiterate with "Again, if these are families that were not ruling...", what is the source that you draw this conclusion and let's look at the practical example I have given with House of Arenberg and the use of the term by the Arenberg Foundation. What is you source that says this usage is incorrect? -- PBS (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand what that argument has to do with the Belgian nobility?--Carolus (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not cool

I see you moved House of Croÿ again. Fine, we disagree, although it would have been nice if you had not ignored me when I pinged you before for a reason (User_talk:Gryffindor/Archive14#House_of_Cro.C3.BF_move)... and have once again failed to give a reason for your move here... this edit is some severe gaming of the system. There's no reason to remove that redirect template; it should be there. The only reason you did this is to slow down and annoy people who would revert such an undiscussed move, as would be proper. Next time, use WP:RM, and don't do technical bullshit to try and "enforce" your view. I will be filing an RM now to restore the old name, which is what is used in the sources. SnowFire (talk) 20:46, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

If you realy gonna change

I do not see why or the urge to change all structures, but your game, have fun! --Carolus (talk) 14:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Federal Ministry of Science and Technology (Nigeria)

A tag has been placed on Federal Ministry of Science and Technology (Nigeria) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Allow renaming of Nigerian Ministry of Science & Technology

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shamash-sun-symbol

Your request has been completed. If satisfied please place a resolve tag on your request entry here, so we may close it. - FOX 52 (talk) 18:26, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Agano Kawara ware

The article Agano Kawara ware has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I couldn't find any evidence that this is in any way notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 09:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Japanese bamboo weaving

Hello! Your submission of Japanese bamboo weaving at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 23:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dwarika's Hotel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dwarika's Hotel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwarika's Hotel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CelenaSkaggs (talk) 19:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Japanese bamboo weaving

On 19 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Japanese bamboo weaving, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that learning Japanese bamboo weaving (pictured) involves a lengthy apprenticeship and the skills require at least a decade to fully master? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese bamboo weaving. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Japanese bamboo weaving), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 00:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock Throne copy-edit

Hello, Gryffindor. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Peacock Throne at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Dhtwiki (talk) 00:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ikebana

Hello, Gryffindor. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ikebana at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne (talk) 03:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gryffindor – If I have time tomorrow, I'll read through the article once more, but I think I've been pretty thorough. – Corinne (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Ikebana

Gryffindor, when you created this DYK nomination back on October 3, you neglected to take the final step in the process: to transclude it onto the DYK nominations page at T:TDYK. So it was effectively orphaned.

I've just discovered that this happened, and I was going to offer to have it restored for you. However, the nomination will have a very difficult road to get approved if I did restore it.

First, DYK requires a 5x expansion to existing articles starting seven days prior to nomination. According to our DYKcheck program, which measures the number of prose characters, the article had 8293 prose characters prior to expansion, and currently has 23852 prose characters. That's just under a 3x expansion; you'd need to expand the article to 41465 prose characters, or add another 17613 characters; that's more than you added in your recent expansion.

There is also a requirement that every paragraph have an inline source citation. This is not true for the article, which also has not one but two refimprove templates: one at the top of the article and one just before the reference listing at the bottom. These templates would also need to be addressed before the DYK nomination could be improved.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed from here. It seems unlikely that you'd be able to make such a large expansion and find sourcing for all those paragraphs without citations, but if you think it's feasible, by all means let me know. You can always simply delete the nomination template, if you'd wish,by tagging the nomination page with {{db-g7}}. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response on my talk page; I've put up the nomination template for speedy deletion. Should you ever get Ikebana up to Good Article status—the sourcing issues would need to be taken care of prior to any nomination—you can nominate it again for DYK within seven days of it passing. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Birds of Iraq has been nominated for discussion

Category:Birds of Iraq, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor^(talk) 20:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Gryffindor. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dojo

I have reverted the move of this article and its corresponding dab page, mainly because you introduced over 500 broken links. I don't think the move to Dōjō is as controversial, but that article would still be the primary topic for the macron-less term. —Xezbeth (talk) 11:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move warring

(diff) 22:36, 5 November 2017 . . Gryffindor (talk | contribs | block) (19 bytes)
(diff) 22:36, 5 November 2017 . . Gryffindor (talk | contribs | block) (36 bytes) (Gryffindor moved page House of Croÿ to Croÿ over redirect: no other article with this name, no need to disambiguate)
(diff) 13:07, 12 October 2016 . . Gryffindor (talk | contribs | block) (35 bytes) (Gryffindor moved page House of Croÿ to Croÿ over redirect)

See Wikipedia:Requested moves#Undiscussed moves (WP:RMUM); and discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility/Archive 8#House of which has reached no consensus or conclusion and of which like me you are a participant.

Moving the article in October 2016 was within the bounds of WP:RMUM, but after that was reverted in January 2017 to move it again in November 2017 is clearly a breach of WP:RMUM "Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures...".

Altering the resultant redirect, as you did less than a minute after the move on 5 November 2017, is an effective method of preventing a revert of a move by another editor, and has in the past had editors blocked for disruption (if there is no good reason for making such an edit). I do not think that administrators ought to make such edits as it could be used as a playground defence "but (s)he does it" by a disruptive editor. -- PBS (talk) 19:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On this note. Since you moved the Commons category to just Croÿ as well, would you mind moving that back? (Well, and also the Wikipedia category as well ideally... but that happened a longer time ago.) SnowFire (talk) 03:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again?? at [1] and at [2]. Moved all the categories and many other pages too, which is extremely disruptive (WP:RM is that way) Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:40, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13 years of editing, today

Hey, Gryffindor. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 19:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Federation of Austrian Industry (logo).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Federation of Austrian Industry (logo).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:49, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Villa Albergoni

Hello, Gryffindor. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Villa Albergoni at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:47, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Moving "House of Foo" to "Foo family"

Hi Gryffindor, can you please help me understand why you're moving "House of" articles to "... family" articles? The German Wikipedia style is to call all noble families "Foo (Adelgeschlecht)", the English equivalent which is usually "House of Foo". "Foo family", on the other hand, is used for notable, not noble families e.g. the Fugger family who were influential merchants but not nobility. A "house" refers to noble family of any kind from count to duke - see dynasty. Cheers. --Bermicourt (talk) 09:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving "House of" articles without a discussion and consensus!

Hi, I see you're ignoring my comments and continuing to move these articles, despite there being no consensus on this subject here or here. Please stop. That is not how Wikipedia operates. --Bermicourt (talk) 11:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth I totally agree with the moves. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, but now that they have been objected to, it is clear that they are not uncontroversial requests, so they should go through the Wikipedia:Requested moves process (perhaps as a single multimove request). I am particularly concerned that there appears to be an attempt to block reversions to many of these changes by performing a subsequent edit to remove the "R from move" template. This is creating a lot of work for everyone. I have no opinion on these moves, but it is a lot of work to go through deleting pages in order to get things back where they started. Dekimasuよ! 18:00, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. With apologies, I have significant concerns about the pattern of page moves I see here and believe that it is worth discussing with the community in order to persuade you to discontinue this sort of activity. That said, I hope we can continue to work together productively in the future. Best, Dekimasuよ! 08:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I really advise getting over to the ANI thread ASAP and telling everyone your side of the story, otherwise it looks like there might be a campaign to remove your admin rights. If you give a reasonable explanation now, you can stop that; if you don't, it might well carry on to that as nobody has been given a convincing argument why they shouldn't. Or you could go to WP:BN and just resign your tools "under a cloud", then apply for the page mover right some time later - at least that's one way of stopping all this. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:57, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to wait a couple of minutes and bounce off the comment I am in the middle of leaving. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:13, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your service

Hi, Thanks for your service here and thanks for handing your bit in,
Unfortunately I think you knew it was heading towards a desysop one way or another but doing it in a peaceful way is always the best way to go and without a doubt it certainly goes in your favour,
Anyway thanks again for your service here and happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 14:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry to see that. Happy editing and maybe see you around here, or at least I hope so. cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 16:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of page move ban

Hi Gryffindor

This is to notify you that following the community discussion, there was consensus for an indefinite page move ban to be placed on you, as detailed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Topic_ban_from_moves. The terms of the ban, and how you may appeal it are also detailed there. — Amakuru (talk) 08:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]