Jump to content

User talk:Martinevans123/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Happy New Year, Martinevans123!

[edit]
Happy New Year!

Martinevans123,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 00:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Precious five years!

[edit]
Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well done my precious. But the road is a bit long and goes on and on and on... Robevans123 (talk) 13:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just leave my ring out of it, if you don't mind. Funny, but it seems more like 11 long years.... Fret ye not, I'm not gonna let them catch me.... Midnightevans123 (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Take the ring from the Main page, the first English Brünnhilde, the 100th women's biography after joining women in red. Remembering the Welsh, of course, who helped me pleading at a time, but the time for pleading is over, I decided to dance and to let go, and now to rejoice and serve ;) - Sing a new song, - I thought that was Psalm 149, others say Psalm 98, - guess what? We are all right, alright? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding me that Catherine is there. But so many rings!! What's this place coming to?? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
circles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ever decreasing? Robevans123 (talk) 15:45, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
a comedy? you can't be serious ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, fair point. We think of you, Gerda, as that simple peasant girl, who always tries rescue something. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a quote from the singer who never had training as an actress: "I worked for almost 15 years in a hospital and had many experiences with young and old people, with children, rich and poor, happy and sad people. This is the experience I bring to the stage." - She was quite impressive. In the final monologue, she looks at her mobile, letting images of past happy times pass ;) - Siegfried was Lance Ryan, the one who made Andreas Schager's career by not arriving in time. Now Schager sang the premiere, but I saw Ryan who was very funny at times, especially talking to the three attractive girls at the bar Zum Rheingold bar (pictured). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Today: ... that the English tenor Mark Milhofer appeared as Mozart's Ferrando in Beijing and Moscow, and as Poppea's nurse in Berlin, dressed as a parody of Riff Raff? Remembering a sad day, parody feels good. Going to write moar "out of the deep" though, - Rutter composed it for first cello solo, then alto same melody, deep deep deep. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:46, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating me, Gerda! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:05, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weichet nur, betrübte Schatten, BWV 202, - remember, heard that in Tallinn? ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
.... Danielle de Niese lets it rip. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP t-Shirts

[edit]

? Uhm... If you would like to nominate me here : [2]. I would have no objections (here's hoping) to one of these WP glad-rags . P.S. My cat would like one too. Her size is SSS (very small), chest size 11 inches. Aspro (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But, of course, my pleasure. You coyly forget your own size. I can't guarantee the cat - in this panto season, suggest she sticks to posh footwear? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:05, 3 January 2018 (UTC) "Whaddya say, fellas? Nice setta good articles? Now Mary, how's about shakin' it around a little..."[reply]

Land of Hope and Glory

[edit]

Or, in other words, Wikipedia. Lol'ed at your comment. The reason I linked that song, aside from the reference to the hope and glory of Wikipedia itself, was that it was linked in the Christmas Truce page but, interestingly, the song being used during the Christmas Truce is not discussed on the "Land of Hope and Glory" page. I'll add it later if you or someone else doesn't add it before that. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:59, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That has always struck me as a very strange choice by the Allied troops. One imagines that a Christmas carol would have been a lot safer. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. if "Queens Gambit" is good enough for William Hartston it's good enough for me. But I think I'll stay out of that one for now.[reply]
Because of your addition I was further pondering the Christmas truce and, as an adequate-to-semi-good Wikipedia, I want and added a Category:Christmas truce! Thanks for the inspiration. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:15, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disputing Fact

[edit]

I am well known to the SG team and the edits are true. Please source your changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RushDiggity (talk • contribs) 21:35, 6 January 2018 UTC (UTC)

You need to source your changes as you adding new, unsourced, information to Saint-Gobain. I'm just reverting you, to the version of the article agreed by consensus. I don't need to source anything. You were recently making the same unsourced edits as an anonymous IP, so I warned you on your Talk page: User talk:31.52.29.124. If you are, as you claim "well known to the SG team", you need to stop editing altogether and read WP:COI. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:40, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've got nothing against hermits, thanks. Especially pale ones. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC) the ones geolocating to Peterborough, I'm not so sure... [3][reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
im sorry daddy 
Catchmemartinevans (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You will be when you're indefinitely blocked. Kind regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I couldn't find a "space slice" but my sister Dolly does have a rather lovely cake slice, you might like to use. Martinevans123

"Even if misguided,

[edit]

willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. For example, edit warring over how exactly to present encyclopedic content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, edits that are detrimental but well-intentioned, and edits that are vandalism. Mislabeling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful."

Especially by sockpuppets? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I could tempt you with one of my sister Cissy's rather lovely Upside-down cakes?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Finology

[edit]

You say roonstone, I say rynestone – let's call the whole thing off. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 14:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth, you're such a wiki cowboy. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC) ... but all done in the best possible taste....[reply]

Farewell Ray

[edit]

Raymond Thomas: 29 December 1941 – 4 January 2018

There are times when I think I've found the truth
There are times when I know that I'm wrong
And the days when I try to hide my fears
Bless the days when I'm feeling strong

... don't tell me

.... But time will tell of stars that fell, A million years ago. Memories can never take you back, Home, sweet, home

Oops

[edit]

Per guidelines I should have collapsed instead of removing since you had commented. I hope you can forgive me even if the rest of the community can't. ―Mandruss ☎ 20:59, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I may just bring myself. But I don't think Paul will. And I was on the brink of 13 down too, damn you!! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(The guy has been indeffed per NOTHERE btw) ―Mandruss ☎ 21:17, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. (Strong Llanelli accent): "I'll 'ave you! You ruddy lazy beggar!!". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC) ...more of Newport's finest[reply]

Ray Thomas' Death

[edit]

I'll just throw this out there without making any edits. Hopefully, you strive for accuracy as much as your readers want accurate information. Ray Thomas' wife Lee issued the following statement today on Ray's cause of death.

"I know a lot of you have been reading that Ray died from prostate cancer and I'd like to set the record straight. He did NOT die from the prostate cancer, he died from a massive heart attack. The prostate cancer was being treated and had been held in check for 6 years."

https://www.facebook.com/FleecityFirkin

Hooter13 (talk) 04:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Hooter. I'll answer your question over at Talk:Ray Thomas. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Kay

[edit]

Hello!

I only skimmed the source in fairness, after watching a video of what happened. It seems incredibly obvious the pap was in the wrong, but regardless the source actually uses allegedly for both men's behavior. Probably best the article does the same? 80.3.154.91 (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks, you are quite right. I've added in that second "alleged", although it now looks a bit clumsy. Crafty of the Standard to bury that second one further down the piece. Is that video in the public domain? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Thomas

[edit]

I was ready to post this one for RD, but then I realize it's 10 days ago... It would be too difficult to stretch this one, so sorry. Alex Shih (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I was ready to add all the sources so it would be fit to post. Well 4 Jan was 9 days ago, but that's a shame. So much for changing the nomination date, eh? I guess the rules for a nomination going stale are all clearly written down somewhere. I looked at Wikipedia:In the news/Death criteria, but I couldn't see them. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. when did it actually go stale?[reply]
It is a shame (it's already January 14 here in Japan). Yeah, I am not sure why it's not written in death criteria, but it is written in Template:In the news (commented out). (Remove any older than 7 days). I don't check ITN all the time, feel free to ping me when something worthy needs to be posted. Alex Shih (talk) 17:49, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Well, Ray certainly died in Surrey, not Japan. But thanks for the link. That rule doesn't really stack up with the way the nomination was moved to take account of the families wishes in delaying the announcement? I had assumed if a nomination was still live on the nomination page, it was still viable. Looks like it was already stale last night when I finally managed to do the major update. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:01, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. commented out text, on a template page, saying "There should be a maximum of 4 recent deaths. Remove any older than 7 days" isn't exactly in the most visible place, is it? But either it should have been removed on 11 Jan, or it should stay live until tomorrow? Closing it as stale now just makes me feel like all my effort was wasted.
p.p.s. you folks in Japan must have a lot of fun closing stuff at a time that looks to us lazy Brits like it's 7 hours too early. I thought we all worked by UTC? I wonder how many admins wake up even earlier? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:30, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, okay. If Masem says so, I think it'll be fine to stretch this then. Alex Shih (talk) 19:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Alex. One day is much better than none. I must learn to keep a better eye on the calendar. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Ray Thomas

[edit]

On 13 January 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ray Thomas, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Alex Shih (talk) 19:54, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you!

[edit]
Happy Thai Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you!

May all your endeavours have a fruitful beginning and prosperous ending!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 12:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sanchi

[edit]

Martin, I was just completing an overhaul of MV Sanchi when you made your changes. I'm afraid I went ahead and made mine, so I may have scotched some of yours. Can you take another look at the article and fix anything you think needs fixing? Thanks. Sca (talk) 13:51, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, did not realise. Was only tweaking things as it's been bumped at ITN/C. I'll try and take a look. Thanks for telling me. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Snowflake

[edit]
Ed Davey demonstrates his politically inclusive position

Please do not comment on trivialities and please contribute on the discussion. Sport and politics (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So terribly sorry. But I started the discussion thread at Ed Davey and then you kindly barged in before me? And what do you mean by "snowflake" exactly? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Focusing on minutiae does not address the issues with the article, and complaining about layout and who got what done first, is nothing of substance. Please focus on the content of the article, that way the article can be improved. Sport and politics (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any "issues with the article". It looks pretty well-written. What issues do you see? And please don't lecture me. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. "snowflake"??[reply]
Several options. Tap, tap, tappin' at your windowpane to tell you she's in town? Asking for Peruvian Snowflake? Or just a generic disdain for young people. Other possibilities include a focus on fractal minutiae. Hard to tell. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ooooo, what a charming cartoon. Yes, it is hard to tell, but ouch!! I now feel suitably crushed. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. I'd usually rather tap on this window pane. ... but I'll see ya and raise ya!![reply]

"...an alabaster gnome..."

[edit]
"I'll have a fourpenny up the Dilly, if you don't mind, my good man."

RIP. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. "He was a man of Nature who forgot his birds and bees"? What an incredibly groovy track. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC) .... Gloucester Bus Station was a very slippery place back in 1975, I'll have you know, with all those bars of soap lying around....[reply]
Sadly, not all voiceovers have that je ne sais quoi. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even know Fiona was doing this kind of stuff any more! But yes, she does sound a little disjointed. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC) [reply]

DYK for Angel Recording Studios

[edit]
Blimey! It can get a bit hot up in Islington it seems!!

On 21 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Angel Recording Studios, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a former chapel built in 1888 was one of eleven studios involved in the recording of Adele's bestselling album 21? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Angel Recording Studios. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Angel Recording Studios), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 14:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Gatoclass. Yes, I'm afraid the rumours are true. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-nominal Sir

[edit]

I've reverted at Ian McKellen and Ringo Starr. The same thing had happened at Ridley Scott and Charlie Chaplin. There's obviously a need for clear instructions somewhere central. --RexxS (talk) 15:03, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks. I agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Manual of Style seems to imply that the "Sir" should be part of the name in the intro and the infobox, but the documentation for the person infobox seems at odds with this. It's not unusual for infoboxes to be at odds with the MoS...
I must admit that I don't like anything above the main title of an infobox, but it does provide a useful link to the honour (but it would be better to re-direct to Knight Bachelor). Robevans123 (talk) 15:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS Watched the Two Towers last night - love it when he re-appears as Radox the Green Gandalf the White... Robevans123 (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I was quite confused about this conflict when I was discussing with User:Phinn about Barry Gibb last month. I was very glad of the clear advice from RexxS-press. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The Manual of Style doesn't seem to imply that the "Sir" should be part of the name: "The honorific titles Sir, Dame, Lord and Lady are included in the initial reference and infobox heading for the subject of a biographical article" (my emphasis on heading). Honorific titles/prefixes, such as "Sir", are included in the infobox header. The infobox heading is the contents of the header of the infobox (inside <th>...</th> in the html). The heading includes three elements on separate lines against a common coloured background. The three elements are supplied by three parameters: |pre-nominals=, |name=, and |post-nominals=. No matter what anyone's aesthetic sensibilities are, "Sir" is not part of anybody's name that I know of. If you don't like multiple lines in the infobox heading, then you could suggest an alternative at Template talk:Infobox person or a similar venue. --RexxS (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that all seems pretty clear. Although there seem to be special cases? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a sentence to the MoS in the hope that it makes clearer what an "infobox heading" is. let's see if that helps. That's not a special case; the word you're looking for is "error". --RexxS (talk) 16:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But what's your suggestion for correcting the "error"? I wish you luck over there. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:52, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think I'm suggesting correcting the error? There are about 2,710 of them - search for hastemplate:infobox insource:"name = Sir " insource:/name ?= ?Sir /, which incidentally shows that Logic (musician) claims to have "Sir" as part of his given name. If you wanted to clean that lot up, you could request a bot run. --RexxS (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your unstoppable search for consistency of course. But I'll let you know about the bot run. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2018 (UTC) .... arise Sir Rag'n'Bone?? .... [reply]

Infobox

[edit]

In reply to your Mike Westbrook question: I suppose because the reader doesn't know that it's Template:Infobox musical artist; we do, as editors, but readers don't. I agree that "musician" looks redundant, but it's recommended on the Template page and it might look odd if just "composer" appeared. Your version also has redundancy: "jazz pianist" is obvious, from the "Avant-garde jazz" and "Piano" entries in the infobox. On the other bit: it's obvious that Mike Westbrook would be associated with the Mike Westbrook Brass Band, so that shouldn't really be there. "Musician" appears at Bix Beiderbecke, Jimi Hendrix, George Harrison and other featured articles, but not all. So: stylistic preference perhaps. That's why I didn't revert, although in my periodic run-through of jazz pianist articles I might change it again, having forgotten this conversation; apologies if I do and if you still prefer the version you reverted to. EddieHugh (talk) 22:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Maybe the Brass Band is "obvious" to you and me, but it's still quite a different vehicle to his other work and as such seems informative. And I just see "jazz pianist" as being much more useful to the reader than "Musician", quite regardless of what is in the article or what's in the rest of the infobox. If there really are project-agreed "infobox norms" for Template:Infobox musical artist, I'd be happy to go with them. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi - You recently switched out the interlanguage links in the 'Enigma of Kaspar Hauser' article, in favor of direct links to de.wikipedia . I probably put those interlanguage links there. The good thing about the interlanguage links is that, if someone creates an English language article with the required title, the link automatically switches to an ordinary wikilink. The interlanguage link also makes it clear that you're leaving the English-speaking universe if you use it in its original state. I'll leave it to you if you'd like to revert your own edit, but there was a logic to the original scheme. Cheers, Easchiff (talk) 23:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Yes, if someone creates, which seems to me very unlikely, but we should always be hopeful, I guess. And yes, it's more obvious, although I had assumed the colour difference with direct links would also be seen by those readers who are not using a monochrome display. I'll revert, although I'll retain the extra ones I added. But before I do, I wonder could you explain that one for Alfred Edel? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"ill" links are much better, because they kind of warn readers that they are about to leave English territory, + say what the next language(s) will be (which could be Japanese or Hebrew). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't write {{Interlanguage link multi|Alfred Edel (actor)|de|3=Alfred Edel|lt=Alfred Edel}}, but {{ill|Alfred Edel (actor)|de|Alfred Edel|lt=Alfred Edel}}. It means that English has an Alfred Edel, who is not this actor, so English has to disambiguate, but without showing the disambiguation. (I believe "lt" is short for linktext.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Having looked: that Alfred Edel is only a (bad) redirect, which could be overwritten by the actual Alfred Edel when writing his bio. I had the same for Catherine Foster, who was a redirect to Katherine Foster. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:33, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Gerda - you do a great job explaining this. Cheers, Easchiff (talk) 00:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, many thanks, Gerda. So when, if ever, are direct links preferable? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Never ;) - readers should see easily that they are supposed to work, meaning change red to blue. I reduce that pompous "multi" to simple "ill" when it's not multi, such as linking to de, it and fr (which you can do for one article, but I claim that once you are in one other language you can easily see what else is available). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Um, so why do we even have them? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In former times, we had them to actually connect, but now we do it per Wikidata. Took me a while to find how to edit them now: look for "Wikidata item" left. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But they still do actually connect, in these present times? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They do. I used such links a lot for German singers of Bach cantatas in my early days, until Graham told me better not. Imagine you are blind and end up in Hebrew ;) - I remember my first time of adding something in the Hebrew Wikipedia, and had (and needed) help from a friend born in Israel. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But just linking is not adding anything? I have always assumed that someone reading an article about a German person would be grateful for an embedded direct link to another German person or subject. But Graham is very welcome to expand here, is he wants to. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:31, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, it's better to use interwwiki link templates in articles. Interwiki links using colons can be useful in discussions, however, for example to link to my Hebrew Wikipedia contributions; too much editing in the Hebrew and Arabic Wikipedia makes me almost want to listen to One Direction. Graham87 15:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oi vay! Martinevans123 (talk) 15:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Dahmer additions.

[edit]

Hi, Martin.

Just wanted your secondary opinion here. Do you agree with me this addition to the Dahmer article, despite the blustering justification it isn't trivia addition, should be reverted? Not only do some of the reference insertions reek of puerile impertinence (murdermostqueer, Blacktino etc.), but even the author's text description for some radiates trivia and incidental depictions (dark comedy etc.). I was itching to revert, but, in this instance, thought I'd get a second opinion first. It's a stepping stone to that South Park depiction being added with "justification" in my Mancunian opinion. Thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kieron. I'm not sure. I'll try and take a closer look. I must get round to adding that South Park episode one of these days. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've now removed two of those as they seem to have no suitable sources. The third I've tagged, as it needs a better source. But the fact the remaining two items both have Wikipedia articles suggests they are notable entries. I do not have visibility of the first source, but have accepted in good faith. Hope this helps. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Martinevans123. I agree with your observation, and did think the "dark comedy" called "Betty's Summer Vacation" certainly were irrelevant. If insertions like that were allowed to remain, incidental mentions in episodes of crime dramas would soon seep in. Always reassuring to know you can assist a needy serial/cereal killer from time to time.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual deaths

[edit]

Hi there! Bless for reverting away the python death since that source didn't make any comment as to whether it was unusual or not. :) I did some digging and pulled up another couple of sources and have posted on the unusual deaths talkpage about them, and I'd love your input - the short version is that neither says explicitly unusual, but do refer to it as a one-in-a-million event, and I'm wondering if consensus is that's close enough. Cheers! NekoKatsun (talk) 16:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NeoKatsin. Thanks for the message. I've made a comment over at the Talk page. But I get a bit nervous when people mention Pythons. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MES

[edit]

We need to get the word Manchester into the lead! Ceoil (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yes, we probably do. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bishop!

[edit]

Haha Martin thanks! ... which then triggered me to go off and have to re-look-up the Church Police sketch (which seems to be a little better developed and funnier on the LP Matching Tie and Handkerchief than on the TV --> YouTube one I saw??) ... and so on. Cheers (not really here) 82.34.71.202 (talk) 10:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not really here? Ah yes, the value of a good disguise. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Quite. :) 82.34.71.202 (talk) 11:22, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belated Christmas greeting

[edit]
Slings and arrows will not harm you
He's makin' a list

And checking it twice
Gonna find out if your naughty or nice
Santa says no pings
Are allowed. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ooh yes, the sling backs and arrows of outrageous fortune, dearie! If I were you, I'd resign. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean, belated? I have two Christmas songs on the Main page ;) (the second one has an image that Hillbilly on holiday) would also like. - Mary's cleansing (40 days after giving birth) will be tomorrow. Please watch the TFA then (was supposed to appear last year, but I was too slow). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In peace and joy I depart, - I wonder if that some day will fit me. I wonder about Krzysztof. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Widdecombe

[edit]

Do you think the media section is becoming overloaded with trivia? It reads more like a blog than a BLP. Best wishes for your attempts to keep this article neutral and free from spiteful vandalism, Xxanthippe (talk) 00:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Well, it's hard to tell what's trivia and what isn't, but yes it is getting a bit big, I think. I think we're not quite ready yet for a separate article on Media work, appearances and stage acting career of Ann Widdecombe, so maybe it could be trimmed down a bit. Maybe you'd you like to open a discussion thread at Talk:Ann Widdecombe? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:27, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Remove it all and replace with a link to serious commentary by Victoria Wood.
Hahaha. Not seen that before. Very good. "W.I. and Double D"!!
"The Media section is too big!"... "Oh, no it isn't!" Martinevans123 (talk) 10:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I have warned you in the past about linking to copyright violating sites, so it seems rather coincidental that you would knowingly add such a link to a discussion about a copyvio action I took. I removed it, please don't ever do this again. Fram (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not sure what you're implying about any "coincidental" addition on my part. Would you explain that please? My addition was made in perfectly good faith. Or perhaps you've already provided User:7&6=thirteen with a copy? That copyvio has been there for over two years? Did you do the automatic Google translate to check? How would I "knowingly add" something if I have no original to compare it with? Now only you and other Admins have access to that? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you didn't just remove what might have been an offending link in my post. You removed my entire post. Then you rushed here to scold me. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I obviously didn't rush fast enough, as you readded it and didn't see fit to remove it despite my post here. Don't add this kind of thing again or you will be blocked. ues your time instead to remove all youtube copyvio links from your userpage once again, as many of the links seem of very dubious copyright status again. Fram (talk) 14:32, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now you've deleted my entire post again. So I assume you did a check and the copyvio has been there for 2 years? I'm not sure how I was supposed to know that, unless I had kept my own personal copy of the deleted article or had an eidetic memory. And now more threats. You seem to be assuming totally bad faith on my part. That's really unpleasant. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:34, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The copyvio was there from the start of the article, otherwise only part of the history would have been deleted. You readded it after it was removed, and didn't bother to remove it after reading my posts here either. On the other hand, you have been readding youtube copyvio links to your user page despite being warned about this by me in the past, when you gave the impression to comply with this for a short while. Fram (talk) 14:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You added your message here while I was restoring my comment at WP:AN/I, believing, in good faith, that your deletion was a mistake. And what's a "short while" exactly? If you think my linking to YouTube videos on my own user page is so serious, then I guess you will just have to block me. You've convinced me that my contributions here are not wanted. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:58, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want to edit here if you are not allowed to put links to copyright violating youtube videos on your user page, then that is your choice. If you readd them, I will indeed block you, but I would much prefer if you left them of your user page and simply continued editing. Fram (talk) 15:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, despite the "Copyvio links" heading here, this thread is not about a few links to Youtube videos which may or may not be "copyvio" (although they have obviously been watched, over decades, by million of viewers, across the world, without any apparent legal consequences), it's about my post here which was my good faith attempt to contribute to that ongoing discussion, where I was trying to make a point about notability, whuch had been raised by User:GoldenRing here. It apparently contained a copyvio link (in another language). So my post was deleted wholesale. I was also accused of deliberately re-adding it despite a warning here (which I had not had time to see). I don't really appreciate threats of blocking and then having material dumped off my User page without a request to remove it myself (which I would gladly have done). I've just had enough of this overbearing battleground mentality, thanks. So I've carefully trimmed down this page, in case there are any copyvios lurking, and trimmed the YouTube links yet again, just for Fram, who seems to see my contributions at WP:AN/I and my willful and malicious posting of links to YouTube video, as all part of the same unbearably disruptive activity. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, linking to the defense from one side in a dispute which is at court now is not really evidence, and in any case, the question is not whether it is legal or not. The question is whether it is allowed on enwiki, and the answer to that question is "no". Fram (talk) 10:41, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Indeed; we have stricter copyright rules than most places, and WP:COPYVIOCITE is quite clear on not linking to copyright-breaking material. Primefac (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for clarifying, @Fram: and @Primefac:. Just to be totally clear (as that linked page does not mention translations), this applies to all translations into foreign languages, such as the one I linked in Esperanto, even though an editor may have no knowledge of that language to be able to determine if it is a close translation of not? Won't it depend on how good the automatic translation is? Your advice would be much appreciated. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you're asking. Primefac (talk) 20:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Primefac. That's the best answer I've yet had. But yes, one sentence was a little ambitious there, wasn't it, I'm sorry. I was trying to ask this:
1. Can a translation of a passage into a foreign language always be assumed to be a copy-vio? I mean, other languages use totally different words don't they, and express things in a different way, with different grammar?
2. If one doesn't know a language (like I don't know Esperanto, for example) how does one judge if it's copyvio? Is a machine translation (like GoogleTranslate) good enough to determine this?
3. (another question I've just thought of, as you're here) Can links to what may be copyvio material never be used at Wikipedia, off article main space, for the purposes of discussion or illustration?
Thanks for your time. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) I probably shouldn't rush in where angles fear to tread. But to answer those questions briefly: 1. no, only an unauthorised translation of a copyright work is a copyvio; an authorised translation acquires a second copyright, that of the translator. 2. you can't, and no (but it can give you an idea). 3. no; if you have to give the link (to report a copyvio, say), drop the http:// (e.g., www.linkvio.us). Now I'll eff off. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Justlettersandnumbers. That's very useful. If only Fram could have just given me some friendly advice like that. Not seen him for a while. We'll have to wait and see if Primefac agrees with you, I guess. We wouldn't want to steal his thunder, would we? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC) ... loving the eggs[reply]
Although, if ever I have a copyright question I always tend go to User:Diannaa, who seems to be a complete expert in this area, and who is always straightforward, polite and helpful. I wonder if she would see fit help me out in my "hour of need." Martinevans123 (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2018 (UTC) [4][reply]
Oh no, now I'm worried that I've leap-frogged on poor old Primefac. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So, JLAN, one can just remove "http://"? That seems somehow very easy. Is that actually website policy? Surely one is encouraging the reader to reconstruct the link and to click through just the same? Or is this some kind of "due diligence"? Perhaps Primefac could actually advise us. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


oh dearie me, seems someone's been at the sauce judging by all these empty tin-pots... Poor vous. .micro.dot.cotton (talk) 20:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, then, to both of you. That (and the page history) sure looked like ongoing (and unfriendly) harassment. I stand corrected. General Ization Talk 21:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ella and Louis are always more than welcome at my Talk page, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2018 (UTC) ... as are any other sundry icons of popular music, of course.[reply]

I need the angel

[edit]

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialogue, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

O Heavens, O forgot the attribution. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

moar impact

[edit]
Impact
Thank you for your impact
in aspiring to amuse,
facing recent deaths
with serenity

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I restore this, - too lazy to write the diff in the prize record. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eat ur heart out, Ron and Sonia

I hope that you watch my talk and know already that we had a lovely Main page today, on which Nazi was mentioned which should guarantee a few extra clicks, - sad, really. Tomorrow will be Der gelbe Klang, sounds rich. There's a video, but nononono link. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you know Gerda, as a subtle tribute to Donald Trump's wig, I try and steer clear of the ever-diminishing Main page. But I think you are very brave with the Übermensch-Untermensch theme. 23:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC) shame about the nonononono bangin' tuuuuuuuuuune!!!
My theme was Ihr habt nun Traurigkeit (You now have sadness), but the reviewer brought in the four-letter word. I sang "Ich will euch trösten" (I want to console you) on the stage of the Mainz opera house, because our choir was asked to add flavour to the opera chorus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, you are always so thoughtful and sweet. I do appreciate your musical lightness. One of the better four letter words, there. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC) [5][reply]
I should put that in my "blushing" cabinet. 18 February, - did you know that it's the day I gave Precious to the one who gave me the good advice "ignore ignore ignore", 6 years ago? And the birthday of another friend who died too young? Phoenix Arising was written by his son as a tribute to him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have to admit that I did not notice, Gerda!! That's very interesting about Phoenix Arising. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, - I just started the next, on piano pieces. The composer was my first DYK, I had filled a red link. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We start today. I just was reminded of that, mind the date. I was too proud to appeal for two years, and may have been wrong. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Six Nations Championship

[edit]

Somewhat gutted by that. Often the TMO has to make a tough decision based on no direct view.... but when it's in perfectly clear view watched by millions?? Mr Glenn Newman not terribly popular in Wales at the moment, I fear. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Side image

[edit]

Hello! Since you've done good work on the Walk on the Wild Side (Lou Reed song) article, I'd be interested in your opinion about my proposed image addition at the end of the talk page there. Best wishes. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. I'll try and take a look. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 14th

[edit]
(1860-1880) Museum of London

 Happy Valentine's Day!
It wasn't easy to come up with an innocuous Valentine's Day greeting to share with collaborators on Wikipedia, so I went with "evolutionary".

Nobody will ever win the battle of the sexes. There’s too much fraternizing with the enemy. ~Henry Kissinger


Atsme📞📧 13:20, 14 February 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Oooh, thank you so much Atsme. What an unexpected delight! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Savage, KG tbr

[edit]

Hi Martin

Thank you so much for your help getting the Booth's Gin article better informed, and so swiftly! May I ask for your assistance in renaming (or at least how to rename) the article currently entitled John Savage, KG? As should be obvious this is a misnoma, because anyone who has been knighted can be styled Sir, and in his instance he has been known as Sir John Savage, KG for time immemorial (especially since the post-noms KG differentiate him uniquely from others by the name of Sir John Savage, who weren't KGs).

Much obliged for your guidance & thanking you in advance for your assistance as it is good to have Wikipedia reflecting correct info.

217.169.51.41 (talk) 18:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 217. Just tidying up a bit over there. Still looking a bit stubby. As for Sir John, yes that does look like a misnomer. Looking through all the others at Category:Knights of the Garter (and there are quite a few) I don't see any with that title format. It seems we already have a few others listed at the DAB page for John Savage, so we'll need to agree on a good distinctive name. Any thoughts? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Martin, and would John Savage (1444–1492) fit the bill? Again thanks for tidying the Booth's Gin article; you're clearly vastly more experienced in such matters, so perhaps let others have a say & then revisit with more info (when we've thought of some!) in a few days' time? Cheers! 217.169.51.41 (talk) 19:07, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As you will see at John Savage, dates are not usually used for the titles of articles on people. The best place to look for advice is WP:TITLE, or more especially Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Noted, so what's wrong with Sir John Savage, KG since that is how he is known to most people (who've ever heard of him ofc!)? Will advise if can think of anything more appropriate. Thanks again. 217.169.51.41 (talk) 19:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS. and since the post-noms "KG" don't fit the style, then surely just "Sir John Savage" would do... Any other Sir John Savages (none so far) who make the grade to have their own Wiki entry could then be distinguished by years? He was, after all, by far the most famous Sir John Savage ever to have lived. Anyway, thanks your consideration of this matter (because John Savage, KG apart from being wrong looks clumsy too). Best, 217.169.51.41 (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is some advice for titles at Wikipedia:TITLESINTITLES. But, looking again at the Category, I see that a few do use just year of death e.g. Thomas Felton (died 1381) and Anthony Browne (died 1548). So I'd initially suggest John Savage (died 1492). I see that the article has been edited quite recently, including by User:Rodw, who I know is a very experienced and friendly editor. Although the name move will probably not be contentious, it's always a good idea to open a thread to discuss it first at the Talk page. Any editors who have that page on their watchlist will be able to see that a change is being proposed. So I'll open one there, where discussion can continue. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is a very good suggestion - thank you. 217.169.51.41 (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so I've started a thread at Talk:John Savage, KG. See you over there. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My word, 217, something tells me you're not a newcomer, haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You seem quite clued up - I hope my edits to trance music just now add value to Wiki's article. I hadn't realized that Rod hasn't much interest in the articles he edits, but anyway hope my small input is well received! Thanks again. 217.169.51.41 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, he does have a lot of interest, I think. It's easy to get thrown by a bit of random trance, isn't it. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mesmerised, no doubt?!
PS. anyway, you are right - easy to get blown off course. Thanks for your help so far. 21:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
That last was just an excuse to lead me to Jules. If you see Fram, tell him I had a word with Jules and he said it was totally official. Just go ahead and do your thing. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think the Martin Garrix link you posted is an official one? I can find no evidence that "Fu music" has the rights to this recordings, but perhaps I miss something. I presume you have checked this and can easily show me that this is not a copyvio link? Fram (talk) 07:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Fram. What a coincidence that you should just appear like that. Yes, a good point, well spotted. I hadn’t noticed that. "Fu music" may not be an official channel it seems. So I’ve removed it. It’s not a performance by Martin Garrix of course, but by the Istanbul University State Conservatory. I can’t find that video on their website. I was probably distracted by the fact it’s been there for two years and has had 2,135,202 views. But as you’re here, perhaps you could now explain what you meant about "coincidental" addition on my part, with regard to the automatic Esperanto translation?

As you seem to be keen on avoiding copyvio, I’d still be very pleased to get your advice on these questions from the thread you opened on "Copyvio links" above. As you may have seen, I already asked User:Primefac above for his view, as well as on his Talk page, but he has so far neglected to answer:

  • 1. Can a translation of a passage into a foreign language always be assumed to be a copy-vio? I mean, other languages use totally different words don't they, and express things in a different way, with different grammar?
  • 2. If one doesn't know a language (like I don't know Esperanto, for example) how does one judge if it's copyvio? Is a machine translation (like GoogleTranslate) good enough to determine this?
  • 3. Can links to what may be copyvio material never be used at Wikipedia, off article main space, for the purposes of discussion or illustration.

Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:15, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

[edit]

As you obviously can't be bothered to stop adding links to copyright violations, despite multiple and recent warnings, you have been blocked. Fram (talk) 13:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? I've just removed the link that you seem to think was such a huge breach of policy? My linking was a mistake, which I fully admitted. I've done what you asked to me to and removed it immediately. And the result is you've now blocked me??? That just seems crazy. Vindictive almost. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


No, I repeatedly asked you not to add links to youtube if you were not sure that they were by the copyright holders (e.g. links from the official BBC channel). Yet this is what you did yet again. While mistakes are acceptable, mistakes which happen again and again and where you have been explicitly warned not to make them again are not. I wanted to make sure that you really did add another link to a problematic youtube channel, and not to some official channel where I missed the indication that it was some rights holder for the performers or composers: but as you made clear that there was no such justification, there is no longer an excuse to let you continue editing like this. An editor where every edit (or every talk page edit at least) needs to be checked for copyvio links is not someone who should be allowed to continue editing. Fram (talk) 14:16, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are exaggerating both the size of the problem and my response to your advice. You previously seemed to be assuming I was editing in wholly bad faith. And you've also not answered my questions. So, for how long have you blocked me? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I note that you made the same kind of "mistake" at User talk:Ceoil yesterday, linking to copyrighted youtube videos there as well. Your "response" to advice seems to be "I'll remove them when you find them, but otherwise I won't change a thing", which is the reason you are now blocked. Indefinitely, which is until there is a clear indication that you'll stop adding such links anywhere on enwiki. Fram (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realise you were following me around watching for incriminating evidence in the form of links to copyrighted Youtube videos. It's not always clear what's copyright and what isn't. I'm not the only editor who is unclear. You seem to wanting to a make an example of me. I'm really not sure how I can make such a "clear indication" that you will accept. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"It's not always clear what's copyright and what isn't. " If you don't have a good reason to believe that something is not copyrighted, then you should not link to it (or otherwise use it). That should have been very clear by now. Your position seems to be "if I don't know if it is a copyvio link, I'll link to it anyway and hope no one notices it". That's not a case of wanting to make an example of you, that's a case of an editor where I am aware of problematic behaviour who continues with the same behaviour after multiple warnings over a prolonged period. Fram (talk) 14:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I'll find it difficult to remove any offending links, which I may have inadvertently left, on other user's Talk pages, or to pass on your policy message, while I'm indefinitely blocked. But perhaps you have compiled a long list of such violations, that you're prepared to work through yourself? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At least now you're unable to add any further such links, which is what the block is trying to prevent. If I had blocked you while you were indeed actively removing such old links on your own, then it would indeed be a crazy block. But all you remove are the ones I find after a cursory search and post here, and afterwards you simply add other similar problematic links ("inadvertently" of course, as a "mistake", but a mistake that happens again and again and again). Fram (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unable to edit the encyclopedia at all. You must see the potential risk of "contributory copyright infringement" that I will expose the project to as far outweighing the benefit of improvements I might make. What percentage of my edits have breached policy in this regard so far? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:07, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware that we have some policy which says that you are allowed to make problematic edits as long as you make enough productive ones. Perhaps you can make such a proposal if and when you get unblocked. Unless you show any indication that you realise the problem with these edits and are willing to change your approach, I'm done here. Fram (talk) 15:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fully aware of the "problem" with these edits. My difficulty seems to be in identifying what's a breach of copyright and what isn't. I think your indefinite block is overly harsh and punitive. That's just my personal view. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fram, I don't offer any opinion on the block myself, but I think you should put it on ANI for community review, since Martinevans123 is an experienced and constructive contributor. Bishonen | talk 17:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC).[reply]
    • They can put up an unblock request, and/or they can give some indication that they take any actual note of the problem and won't repeat the issues. Being experienced and constructive is not a "get-out-of-jail" card. Their whole attitude in this sorry episode is the opposite of constructive anyway. Fram (talk) 17:32, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Martinevans123, can you just agree not to link to any Youtube videos unless they have an appropriate license in the "Show More" section? --NeilN talk to me 17:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hi Neil. That sounds easy. But I'm not too sure what "an appropriate license" means. The one here says "Standard YouTube Licence", so does that mean this is ok to post? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • Technically, yes. In your case, no. I'll explain. "Standard YouTube License" can be used by any uploader, for any video, including copyright violations. However in this case the uploader is BBC News, the copyright holder, verified by checking if the channel is mentioned on their website (and the "verified" checkmark beside their name). If you aren't willing to do these checks then you have to look for videos with these or other free-to-use licenses. --NeilN talk to me 19:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm quite willing to make checks. It seems a very good idea. But I'm still a bit confused here.... It's not just a case of looking for "an appropriate license", but also one of finding a website and the "verified" checkmark in the "SHOW MORE" section? (I can see an example of the "Creative Commons Attribution licence (reuse allowed)" licence in the video here). Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would have been better to take this to AN/I first for consensus. Fram, please unblock, then if you want you can open an AN discussion about editors posting links on user talk. SarahSV (talk) 18:46, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe it's my lack of understanding on the whole copyvio thing but I honestly see no issue with what Martin does ..... Anyway I would recommend unblocking and starting a community discussion over at ANI (or unblocking and then starting an RFC on this whole YouTube linking thing). Either way blocking indef was not appropriate IMHO. –Davey2010Talk 19:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010, while there's certainly an argument that blocking was an overreaction, policy as currently written is absolutely clear that Fram acted correctly. (WP:ELNEVER, WP:LINKVIO and WP:CV#Addressing contributors, if you need chapter and verse.) Since WP:ELNEVER in particular is explicitly to be applied by admins without exception, if any admin other than Fram were unilaterally to overturn this particular block it would be a suicide mission since arbcom would have no alternative but to desysop that admin. (All it needs is an "I won't do it again" from Martin and it will be liftable.) ‑ Iridescent 19:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for cheering things up for us all, Iri. I'm still busy learning about YouTube licences from Neil. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) And in this case it boils down to the fact that Martin has been warned in the past about posting copious links to probably copyvio YouTube videos to no tangible benefit to the encyclopedia. In this situation, the only thing I could recommend Martin do is to apologise, recognise that posting any links to external videos is now verboten as he admits to not understanding how to determine whether or not they infringe copyright, and request an unblock. Until then, I see this as being one permanent goodbye. Which, despite all of our run-ins, even yesterday, would be a shame as when Martin works on content, it's beneficial to all of us. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ramblo. Your comments seem very fair. Thing is though, although you say "he admits to not understanding", I'd rather learn. And to see clear guidelines for all on a policy page. Or perhaps you'd prefer "one permanent goodbye?" I could take a vote on that one. A "run in"?? I thought that was just playtime for you? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC) I noticed you bilingualistic skills, there.[reply]
I'm cool with most things. You've hit upon an interesting topic, but I think you need to realise that linking to videos etc on talkpages is a waste of time, and a little like using Wikipedia as Facebook. If you're adding videos to articles then that'd be ok as long as they comply with the usual media requirements. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Buy there we have it... Not just a waste of time unfortunately. They say it is a capital offence. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know all this piping is your natural defence, but you'd do better to just accept the issue and do what I suggested. That way you're back in the game. If not, you'll be forced to create another sock. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not another one, surely? I've lost count. But ah yes, I love cricket. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:07, 19 February 2018 (UTC) ...but whatever you say sugar daddy....[reply]
I'll leave you to it. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Eek. I just saw the struck and italicised username and thought 'what the hell', and was to comment that this was a bad block, but fair enough. @Iridescent: so no room for a ANI discussion to discuss the block and let another admin overturn? Of course there needs to be assurances that this linking will not happen again. !dave 19:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to my talk page crowded cell, !Dave. I've always secretly suspected that your name was Dave. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The mystery can only be revealed if you are an OTRS agent... !dave 20:01, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I might have guessed there'd be some kind of subterfuge involved. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC) [reply]
My name is not dave, the formula is indefinite, pending satisfactory assurances that infringement will not continue - e.g. unless and until either it's proven that the block was in error, or Martin agrees to stop posting copyvios, an ANI discussion won't make any difference. WP:CV is a legal policy so any change to it would need to go via the WMF; a discussion at ANI (or anywhere) won't have authority to amend it. ‑ Iridescent 20:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Iridescent, that's an extreme interpretation of policy. Similarly, we could block editors who add too many block quotes to articles, in case they've inadvertently quoted the most important part of a book or too much of it. Anyway, Martin, the best thing is to agree not to do it again. SarahSV (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
SlimVirgin, that's not an "interpretation", that's a verbatim quote from the policy. ‑ Iridescent 20:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As far as Fram is concerned, it's not just million-view YouTube videos, it's a "bigger picture" involving, for example, automatic Esperanto translations. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SlimVirgin: I do block editors who add too many block quotes. They get one warning and then they're indefinitely blocked if the behavior continues. They're asked to explain in their own words why they were blocked and how they will avoid violating policy in the future. Their responses often reveal they're not proficient enough in English to write content using their own words and a limited time block would do nothing to solve this. Martin - question for you. Why are you treating video different from text? If you came across an unpaywalled copy of the NY Times on www.free4all.com I assume you wouldn't link to it or use it as a reference? --NeilN talk to me 20:35, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm very glad that you can see there's a difference in my behaviour. I probably wouldn't be adding NY Times text of any kind in a casual jokey manner on a fellow editor's Talk page. And I wouldn't typically be linking YouTube videos in article main space either. I think I'd be more likely to be deleting them as being WP:PRIMARY. I've deleted a few on that basis. I must admit I have assumed in the past that User Talk pages were somehow less important as far as copyright violation was concerned. That seems to be a view shared by very many editors. But User:Diannaa tells me that's not the case, which still seems odd to me. I'd still like to know what a "verified checkmark" looks like in a YouTube "SHOW MORE" section. I mostly just see websites, such as the ones shown here. I've assumed that's "official" because it links to the orchestra website. Can you tell me if that is a correct assumption? I'm now guessing that anyone can add a website to a video. I'd like to be able to tell easily what is legitimate and what is not, as it seems my assessments have occasionally been a bit hasty. Thanks for engaging in discussion here, which I'm hoping will be useful for other editors who might find themselves in the same position. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The verified checkmark is beside the account name (example), not in the "Show more" section. And in your orchestra example, you've got the scenario backwards. You need to check if the website links to the YouTube account. --NeilN talk to me 22:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. Many thanks, That is pretty clear. Those two checks prescribe all legitimate YouTube videos for use at Wikipedia ? Is that written down as a policy anywhere? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The policy is "don't link to copyright violations". I'm telling you how to figure out what is a copyright violation. If some anonymous person dumped the entire text of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone somewhere on the web, I don't think you need specific policy instructions telling you that that's a copyright violation and therefore not to link to it. --NeilN talk to me 22:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That also seems pretty clear. I think most people would spot that onYT music video that's been watched millions of times? Or even a small machine translation in Esperanto of a recently deleted Wikipedia article? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter what the play count is - some companies are lax about enforcing their copyrights. It should take no more than a couple minutes to figure out the copyright status. If you are unsure, email someone with the link. The machine translation example is more complicated but bottom line again, email someone. I'm trying to get you unblocked but right now, the onus is on you to state how you're going to change your linking practices. --NeilN talk to me 23:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful advice. Yes, I'm sure it would change my linking practices. Please don't feel you have to rush. I'm looking at all the vandalism on my watch list and realising that I no longer feel obliged to issue a level 1 warning, and then issue a level 2 warning and then you know, eventually raise a post at WP:AIV. All that stuff. It can be quite a chore, can't it. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:41, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There might be some confusion here. We (or at least I) are waiting for you to post an unblock request that includes how you're going to change your linking practices. I see that Fram didn't post unblock request instructions. Here: Please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=''Your reason here''}} --NeilN talk to me 23:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
NeilN, when you block editors for block quotes, they're probably extreme cases: pasting large amounts of text with quotation marks. This is someone posting links on user talk. But Martin, really, the easiest thing now is for you to agree that you won't do it again. SarahSV (talk) 22:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly won't deliberately do it again. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Guess best thing since YouTube is not a reliable reference anyway I think (what do I know as I am just a MONGO) so maybe just pledge to never link to that dreaded site again since it's naughty stuff.--MONGO 21:38, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your note, MONGO. I'm sorry I can't do that, as it would be contrary to policy (as I understand it) and because I genuinely believe that YouTube videos can provide a resource that can enhance understanding of a subject, particularly a musical one. I'm also still considering taking Ramblo's "one permanent goodbye" option in protest over the harshness of Fram's indefinite block. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There still seems to be some discussion over whether it's fair, or if anyone else can fairly overturn it, or whether there should have been an AN/I case, or if there should a still be an AN/I case. I'm sure Fram thinks he's "just doing his job." Martinevans123 (talk) 22:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not really an "option", it's an inevitability. What you'll find (and I know this) is that after one or two days of being blocked, you're quickly forgotten. Three or four days and it's "hmm, who?". So if you really want to get back into the game, I'd follow my advice. If you don't, oh well, it happens. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You said above you were going to "leave me to it". You're now saying my goodbye is "an inevitability"? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I guess so. I thought, for a moment, you were going to do the sensible thing, but I can see from all the joking around that you still really don't get it. Bye Martin, I'd like to say it's been fun, but it hasn't. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. I fear you have shown your true colours. Thanks for all the support there. When did my deadline expire exactly? Perhaps you can tell me if Fram is actually "done" here or not. Which bit of "joking around" didn't you like? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Martin, forgive me for jumping in here, you're far more eminent than me, and I hope you don't think in the slightest I'm being patronizing here, but the sentences "I think you should put it on ANI for community review" & "They can put up an unblock request, and/or they can give some indication that they take any actual note of the problem and won't repeat the issues." I'd hate to see Wiki. lose you. All the best--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
+1 GMGtalk 02:44, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is the Michael Jackson - Thriller (Official Video) on michaeljacksonVEVO which is OK as it is official. There is also the Michael Jackson's "Thriller" Tribute in LEGO which has seven million views and is great fun to watch, but it is an unofficial fan tribute and is probably a copyright violation somewhere along the way. WP:YOUTUBE makes clear that there are many videos like this. If Martin agreed not to post any links to YouTube videos at all, it wouldn't be a great loss. They are rarely suitable as citations anyway.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only a loss to the lawyers, I guess. And anyway, I thought Michael loved Lego. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:35, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Martin, I realize that you don't seem to be in any hurry to be unblocked (you do want unblocked, right?) but all that is really required is that you file an unblock request and give assurances that you won't be posting any video links until you have a proper understanding of what you can post. You don't have to have that understanding at the present to do this. If you feel that the policies and guidelines aren't clear then you can post for clarification on the respective talk pages to start a discussion. It isn't all that hard. :) It would be easier on those folks who are trying to help you if you would just file the damn request promise to refrain from posting any videos.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good! Pardon my perpetual slowness. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yngvadottir. I certainly don't mind. Thank you so much for such kind words. Yes, I saw the formula and it was good of NeilN to give it. Pardon my sloth. Hope to be back soon. Even after many more than a few hours. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Martin, I am delighted to see you back here. With best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:12, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think linking to YouTube videos is to copyright infringement what talking about narcotics is to trafficking heroin. Plus a block here does nothing to address the actual problem on YouTube any more than sticking somebody in the slammer for a bag of grass helps curb the activities of Columbian drug barons. Welcome back, Martin. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

come back Martin

[edit]

Hi dude, you're unblocked, hope to see you soon. Govindaharihari (talk) 07:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. There are few people I can argue with over Nike Drake with such mischievousness and passion. Ceoil (talk) 03:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He's observing. Believe me. All the best regardless though, Martin. You largely maintained my drive in the area of skill you noted I have, and you helped hone, and which I continue to focus on.--Kieronoldham (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when he is finished his "observing", he might get back to article work, given Drmies fair and reasoned unblock. The Rambling Man paints a bleak picture of where martyrdom will get you, I concur having kown more than a few that contributed migthely, gave up in disgust without drama or exit speaches, and after a week or so....whoosh, as far the admin core could give a damn. The internet is a cold and lonely universe. Ceoil (talk) 04:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ceoil Regardless of what I stated, I agree with your sentiment. "Gafas" (certainly latterly) aside we're a community. Keep up your good work too. Limey.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries Kieron. Yes we are a community. Ceoil (talk) 04:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ceoil. It's okay mate. I hope I am wrong although I suspect a guild of some form ("MUST KEEP EDITING"? ALWAYS indifferent given personal nurturing and support). Regardless, Martin has been nurturing, supportive, and humorous to so many of us. Stay focused yourself.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tell him to get is ass back in here. He is a significant net positive. End of story. Ceoil (talk) 04:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, get the guy to "haul ass" to the Pennines, Ceoil and I'll do so on a personal basis. Regardless of cheap geographical humour... I don't know the guy beyond here on Wiki. Chill with a tune. Back to focus, I hope I do hear from him. Stay chilled yourself and I'll keep you informed. Kez.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:38, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
despised and rejected
the desert is a good place for introspection
Miriam Makeba
(4 March 1932 – 9 November 2008)
  • Martin, take your time over feeling rejected, with an image for a time of Lent which I chose yesterday (Handel's birthday) to illustrate He was despised. Composed in 1741, with all those speaking rests: "He was -- despised, - despised and - rejected, - – rejected of men, ... – despi-sed – rejected"". From the cable of the outcasts, most of whom felt the same at some time more recently than that. I made the redirect in March 2012. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Blue Monday and Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme are worth listening to whilst waiting, which hopefully shouldn't be too long. L'honorable (talk) 19:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gerda, not such a harsh desert, really. I shall listen to those. It's seems to be the honourable thing to do. "Jakarta??" --- "No she she went on 'er own, on a jumbo." Martinevans123 (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Martin, I also really hope to see you back editing on Wikipedia someday – I miss your sense of humour, and crossing paths with you on music articles from the pre-internet era that desperately need improving. And Ceoil, if you need someone to argue with over Nick Drake in Martin's absence, I'm always available... Richard3120 (talk) 00:46, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Martin, do you want to correct the spelling of your name on ANI? - Missing: I miss people. Alex: did you see my name here? He also took the warning sign (to his user page) that says (in German) "He who speaks a word of consolation is a traitor" (which I had on my user page until 2015.) - More my talk, look for F minor. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sinfonia in G minor

More mellow after the black despair pictured above, here's a subtle hint at a composer from Wales (click on Waterhouse), and the first church I knew pictured. F minor is gone, G minor now. Will hear the cantata now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Gerda. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for improving the composer's article! - It was outstanding, depth and heights. The "erlösen" (redeem, but the German word has to do with loosening) was perfectly light and loose! The soloist (whose article just survived AfD) also sang as part of the youth choir, and looked like enjoying it! - Did you see the AfD for the woman from Wales pictured on the Main page, which may come up again, - closed because she was on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to avoid the front* at all costs. That looks like a very well-written and well-researched article. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC) * "All Fur Coat and No knickers"?[reply]

Kudos

[edit]
The Barnstar of Diligence
Hope we see you again, Martin, but if not (and hopefully this won't unfold as being the case), I wanted to add this to your page. I could have added an Original, Random Acts of Kindness, or Editor's Barnstar, but thought this one to be the best. Please don't rest on superlative laurels.Kieronoldham (talk) 04:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much Kieron. Yes, hopefully. As if I would. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy St. David's Day

[edit]

The leek is one of the national emblems of Wales, worn along with the daffodil (in Welsh, the daffodil is known as "Peter's leek", Cenhinen Bedr) on St. David's Day. According to one legend, King Cadwaladr of Gwynedd ordered his soldiers to identify themselves by wearing the vegetable on their helmets in an ancient battle against the Saxons that took place in a leek field.[1] Cheers!‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 15:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Vol. 5. London: J Limbard. 1825.
And to you, Gareth! What an interesting source. I guess that must have been Allium-loving Cadwallon ap Cadfan? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Great to hear back from you! Great link, thanks. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 15:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another Daily Mail RfC

[edit]

There is an RfC at Talk:Daily Mail#Request for comment: Other criticisms section. Your input would be most helpful. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guy. Tend to agree with L.R. Wormwood. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alt text

[edit]

Hi Martin. Saw your simplification on Blaenffos and wondered if you knew whether alt text can be added to the caption in the infobox? Cheers, Tony Tony Holkham (Talk) 23:07, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is OK; I found this: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Alternative_text_for_images#Captions_and_nearby_text. Tony Holkham (Talk) 23:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, that looks a useful option. Many thanks Tony. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But not sure it can be used at Template:infobox UK place? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:36, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When an old-fashioned infobox doesn't have it, you can do 2 things: demand it added (also a image_upright parameter), or code it all in the image field, example all churches that I touch, such as St. Martin (has no alt, but I guess you can imagine). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thanks Gerda. How would I demand that? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You go to the template talk and say that {{infobox person}} has these features, and template xyz should also have them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I see what you mean. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Template:infobox UK place has the option to add alt text, but the syntax is slightly different: use |static_image_alt=your alt text. Works just like the standard alt text for photos etc, but also displays the text when the cursor hovers over the image. I've added some alt text to the infobox at Blaenffos. Feel free to edit/improve. Robevans123 (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Bax

[edit]

If you actually dare search for it, I'm assuming that the YouTube upload of "Arnold Bax - November Woods (1917)" (20:36) published by Yusuf Yalçın on 25 Dec 2012 is probably quite likely to be a possible copyvio since it does not link to the BBC Philharmonic website and does not give a clear indication that the orchestra has given it's permission for that recording to be published? (Or is the estate of Arnold Bax, and/or his original publisher, involved in some way? I'm sorry if that question appears hopelessly naive). I expect there is a whole set of advice on music copyright rules somewhere at Wikipedia, isn't there Any advice welcome. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly a copyvio. To start off, Arnold Bax's work is still in copyright - he died in 1953 so his work is in copyright until 2023 (70 years from date of death), in the UK. The copyright is probably held by his estate (but if he had sold the rights of some or all of his work to others then the date of his work coming out of copyright would be unaffected - you'd just have to pay someone else to record or perform the work).
In addition, copyright also applies to sound recordings of performances (regardless of whether the recorded work is in or out of copyright), and this copyright usually lasts 70 years from date of publication, and is usually held by the record producer (in this case Chandos). Again, the holder of the copyright may possibly assign the copyright to others.
The performers of the work also have rights covering distribution and equitable remuneration etc, which is usually 70 years from when the recording was made.
In the case of the Chandos recording, a fee would have been paid to Bax's estate for permission to record and publish the work, and the performers would also be given a fee. Depending on the contracts, the fees may have be one-off payments or possibly a smaller recording fee with later payments based on number of sales.
So although the work was written in 1917, and the recording was made in 1982 and released in 1983, Bax's copyright lasts until 2023, the performers' rights last until 2052, and Chandos's copyright lasts until 2053. So, unless Yusuf has some sort of license agreement with Chandos then he is violating the rights/income of the composer, performers, and recording company. This seems unlikely as the work is released on a standard YouTube license...
Caveat Lector: much of this post is based on UK copyright law (which would certainly apply if someone based in the UK posted a recording by a UK composer/performers/record company, even if the server was elsewhere). Copyright in the US is different for sound recordings as these are often viewed as "work for hire" and attract even longer copyright periods.
The UK Intellectual Property Office posts a number of useful pages on copyright. I've used Copyright in sound recordings for this post. See also Copyright for a number of interesting pages on copyright issues. Hope this helps. Robevans123 (talk) 19:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, Rob. That's wonderfully clear and informative. And the links will be very useful! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Easy as 123. EEng 05:47, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A tickling stick for you!

[edit]
The tickling stick for humour beyond the call of duty
How tickled are we all to see humorous quick-fire japes from Martin. As Sir Ken put it, "Laughter is the greatest music in the world and audiences come to my shows to escape the cares of life. They don't want to be embarrassed or insulted. They want to laugh and so do I - which is probably why it works." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is that all you've left me, Threesie?? "I wanted to take the dog to obedience class but it wouldn't go." Hondootedlay a comic icon, and a fine singer (Decca: 45-F 11355) in his day too (53 Singles and EPs at discogs.com) ... e.g. try The Key (Ebb, Magenta, Jacques Larue [fr]) on Columbia (1962). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC) "You think you can get away, but you can't. I'll follow you home and I'll shout jokes through your letterbox."[reply]
I leave you Happy Easter with all the music we sang these days, four in a row ;) - I offered a hymn for Easter, but it wasn't fit between the April Fools, and - looking at today's Main page - I am happy about that. Will come tomorrow, - and we in Germany will still celebrate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resurrección de Cristo by Jaime Serra (–1405)
Thank you, Gerda. And a Happy Easter to you, from St Bride's, Fleet Street! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC) [6][reply]
Happy it was: I love this colourful world. Licensed. The composer was pleased ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Two more videos - composer too dead to approve - if you look here for 1 April. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Too dead to object also, I'm guessing. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stopping wars?

[edit]

if they really wanted to stop the war in Syria they target Russia. The link is to an article by Jonathan Freedland, just to illustrate that their view of themselves is challenged, and isn't the reasonable, self evident assertion you claim it to be. To say they oppose all bombs is propaganda because they are selectively vocal, selectively silent. Come on Martin, you're not this stupid.78.144.80.249 (talk) 22:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be using an article by Jonathan Freedland in The Guardian to make a political point about the Stop the War Coalition. What's that got to do with Brian Eno? The article says "... established ... to campaign against what it believes are unjust wars." So maybe we should use that description? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well that would be better than what the article said which was 'dedicated to preventing and ending wars' !!The only way it seems to dedicate itself to ending the Syrian civil war is to cheerlead for Putin/Assad and hope he massacres all the citizens who are against the regime, end it that way. Best would be to find some article where Eno himself explains what he thinks its role is. If he heads this outfit he most probably has expressed some sense of what he thinks he is doing it for. 78.144.82.58 (talk) 18:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The edit summary you left for your original deletion was this: "Its said nothing about Russian massacres in Syria , this is not a place to spout its fatuous assertions about itself." That looked to me a trifle political. I have no particular drum to bang, either for or against that organisation, but passing editors may wish to mote that this story is currently headlined on its front page. Any suggestions for article improvement are probably best placed at Talk:Brian Eno#, where I started a thread? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC) p.s. even though he's President, teh artcole for Stop the War Coalition doesn't actually mention Eno.[reply]
o.k. I note the headline is titled 'Russian hysteria , its aims...' This is itself explicitly aligning itself with the Russian regime view, invasion of Ukraine, targeting civilians and hospitals in Syria, blowing up MH17 with a BUK, poisoning dissidents with plutonium, murdering journalists? Bah, its all 'hysteria'. 78.144.82.58 (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Thanks for (mis-)reading the first four words of the article title. Perhaps this explains why you have such a balanced view of things. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please parse the title for me correctly.78.144.82.58 (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If I get beyond the fifth word, I'll let you know. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Day

[edit]

Remember my date: it was a peace day in 1945, pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes. The only prize that's really worth cherishing and celebrating. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Instead of going to the (crowded) funeral of the young man who maintained this website and suddenly died, I began about the choir. I know people from the group (with whom we often perform, so those concerts came to mind first + had sources), - they could barely rehearse Carmina burana the day he had told his wife he would go to rehearsal right after work - and didn't make it. RIP. They sang a Bach chorale first, and then turned to the other, - concert soon, such is LIFE. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Next funeral will be for Walter Fink, the one with compositions by 5 living composers for his 80th birthday, 3 of them present, that was on DYK on his birthday in 2010. Will look tomorrow if good enough for RD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that's very sad. But he had a good run. I see it's quite well-sourced with 14 references, but none in English (although that should not matter at all). Martinevans123 (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Last time I met him was for the Mozart Requiem, this one. The conductor is always good for something special, like that day a procession to music by Hildegard von Bingen, and a theatrical rendering of Remember not, Lord, our offences. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes "... a theatrical rendering of Remember not, Lord, our offences" otherwise known (at Wikipedia) as Jimbo's Little Black Block Book. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see who wrote the Purcell? Had many reasons to say so ;) - I translated it to German, and built Hear my prayer, O Lord (Purcell) (which also appeared in the same concert but without dramatic gestures) on the model. - I went over the Fink sources, none of the 2010 links worked, sigh, but I found a few others sources (and expect more tomorrow in printed media). Will nom for RD now, please watch. I tried to select 3 from the list of composers he invited, - impossible. Every single one is/was great. Ligeti and Henze didn't come in person, but the others did! Take me as an unreliable source for that ;) - I remember Dutilleax, 90+ already, and talking vividly - the day I seriously regretted that I never learned French beyond being able to read a menu. LouisAlain, do you hear me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. Gerda, most of us never have the chance to meet the people who appear at WP:ITNRD, let alone sing for them.... or even order dishes for Wikipedia from a 90-year old French menu! We are often short of reliable sources when someone notable, but not so famous, dies, aren't we. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should make a list of the people about whom I wrote while they were alive but ... - worse when I didn't notice soon enough and wrote only after they died, such as Manfred Jung. Sometimes I don't know, - some singers must be quite old if they - hopefully - still live, take Yvonne Ciannella, the first coloratura soprano for me, in a madness scene. - One ref for Fink (Hauff) had good quotes by him, but only in German. Perhaps we could have one in the article? The shortest - and my favourite - is: "Musik entspannt – es sei denn, man hört zu." ("Music is relaxing, unless you listen." - not sure about the translation) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What a great quote. How very true. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2018 (UTC) Great video tribute to Freddie, amongst others, there, of course. Although, for strange some reason, Alecia Beth Moore reminds me of the next Mayor of London.[reply]
I put the quote in the article. Psalm 84 or lovely dwelling. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:08, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw and heard this, with Nadine Secunde now as the mother-in-law, returning after years to where her international career took off. Will search for a ref, as I am not reliable ;) - The soprano looked more like her first image, not like the new one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RIP Wanda Wiłkomirska - practically no refs yet, all help welcome. The first violinist I heard on stage, playing the Wieniawsky. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That ITN (or not) was disappointing, but we'll get her to the Main page ;) - How lovely to read in other news "Polish Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, he has heard, is more inclined toward forgiveness". Haven't heard the last word here for a while. Next singing Vierne. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You and your damn ostriches...

[edit]

Adding copyrighted YouTube links here, huh? Sounds like you have done a lot worse! talk to !dave 19:57, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're not the first to rake this up after 4 years, you know. And to think they promised my a new start here on the Wiki project! And how do you think Bernie feels about it?? [7] Martinevans123 (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, right, yes, the real Bernie there! Nah, that one ain't got no chance in a presidential election. talk to !dave 20:34, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's the best coverage of a Presidential Election I've ever seen. Thank you so much. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. He votes for a third-party...weirdo! talk to !dave 21:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sheesh. I lasted one full minute on that one. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong revert

[edit]

Hello, I saw that you deleted the edits of the page "list of highest-attended concerts" by deleting Liam Payne's (110,000 people in the audience, 30 March, Dubai Global Village) statistics out of the list. Please fix it, the information was correct and cited correctly by multiple arabic sites. Syggan (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "please fix it", I'm not really sure what you have in mind. There seems to be a mini-edit war going on at that article currently, involving yourself and two Bharti Airtel IP accounts which geolocate to Madhya Pradesh in India? I wonder if you yourself have any knowledge of those? Yesterday I also opened a discussion thread at Talk:list of highest-attended concerts to which no-one else, including yourself, has yet contributed. I wonder would you care to add something there instead of edit warring? I've just had to clean up this last contribution to the article, which left in it a bit of a mess. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now, purely by conicidence, an IP editor, geolocating to "Santa Rosa, in the Philippines" also wants to have a go. How bizarre. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now, purely by conicidence, 29 minutes later, from Quebec in Canada: [8]. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:50, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nikita Khrushchev

[edit]

I don't now what your difficulty is. Images of his grave, including one by me, have been added to the article repeatedly over the years. They are removed because they are derivate works of the artwork.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:37, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My difficulties are these: (1) your edit summary suggested that the image cannot be shown as "there is no freedom of panorama in Russia" - so the image of the destroyed khrushchyovka is also not permitted? (2) if the 8 images in "Category:Grave of Nikita Khrushchev" at Commons are also artworks in copyright, shouldn't they all be deleted? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They probably need to be deleted, but I have enough on my hands without nomming them. As for freedom of panorama, it has no applicability to wrecked buildings. Although this article is almost a decade removed from FAC, I do try to keep up standards as best I can. I don't see an obvious fair use rationale either.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:50, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Maybe some kind of thread or warning notice at the Talk page might avoid future wasted effort? Or are you saying that any image of any grave marker at Wikipedia is a derivative artwork and so cannot be shown? And exactly why are "wrecked buildings" excluded? That seems very odd. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry about that. I'm open to any reasonable solution. I'm not sure how effective a talk page notice would be as those who add images don't tend to go there. No, obviously most grave markers are not barred, but K's was custom designed for his grave by an artist in the mid 1970s and has not passed into the public domain.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:03, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As fro the wrecked building, the lack of freedom of panorama can bar photos of buildings under the law in some countries. I see by our page on commons on this that there is freedom of panorama as to buildings in Russia, just artworks are not covered. My thought was a wrecked building would no longer be subject to restrictions since it is wrecked.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:07, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. I guess it would depend on if it was wrecked in an artistic way. I must admit I thought that nearly all grave markers were "custom designed" for the deceased, although that person is usually called a "monumental stone mason" and not an "artist". The best solution would seem to get all 8 mages deleted at Commons. I'll ask about that, although I somehow doubt this applies only to Nikita Khrushchev. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:58, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So I've posted a suggestion here. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This conversation above gives me the creeps - my commons items of D havent been challenged since about 2009 :( [9] horrors JarrahTree 13:57, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But then [10] shows that even finding a plot let alone an artistic rendering above it, can be somewhat problematic for some. JarrahTree 14:05, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, yes. I'm having regrets about nominating that image for deletion. In fact I'm now taking care to wear gloves whenever I leave the house. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:17, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
horrosho, pity this is goldfishbowl territory, otherwise have some marvelous funny anecdotes about nevsky prospect and d's gravesite - oh well, bck to the salt mine JarrahTree 14:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, an interesting new delivery mechanism that's for sure, comrade. But, sheesh, these Wiki Talk page discussions - I often fell like I've completely lost the plot. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
salt mines suck, this definitely needs a jump in a grave that has been surrounded by permafrost to duck for cover from endless talk pages, with no quack test JarrahTree 14:44, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wehwalt:, just to let you know, the Commons category:Grave of Nikita Khrushchev is now empty. So no possibility of further wasted effort. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's a shame, but I'm just trying to follow policy as I understand it to be.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise. And of course many of these images may be still freely available across the internet. I would imagine that no one ever asked the artist if he objected to a photograph of his work being published? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've Been To The Mountaintop

[edit]
Martin Luther King Jr., 28 August 1963

A series of programme on BBC Radio 4 today, including a unique tribute program in which global figures celebrate the legacy of King by reading the words of "I have a Dream", introduced by Professor Clayborne Carson, editor of the Martin Luther King papers. A small but fitting tribute to Dr King, who had made perhaps one of the greatest and most inspiring speeches of all time. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 4 April 2018 (UTC) [11][reply]

ITN recognition for Ray Wilkins

[edit]

On 4 April 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ray Wilkins, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Folks may wish to search a certain well-known social media video site for "Ray Wilkins Red Card: England V.S Morocco in Mexico WC1986" posted by "Hamza Erresmy" on "17 Apr 2014". I wouldn't directly dare link to that clip here, of course, in case I get "sent off". Martinevans123 (talk) 12:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC) ... or worse.[reply]

Newuck

[edit]

Thanks for your help again, as with the Welsh. Best wishes, Brian Bmcln1 (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rhymes with schmuck, no? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:33, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the time has come to get protection for the page to save M from himself. How do we go about that? Bmcln1 (talk) 13:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's possible, but very unlikely - many would see his edits as in wholly good faith. And if they are that contentious it's a much larger problem, which might even warrant a question at WP:AN. If he does have a rhotic bee in his bonnet he's going to have plenty of scope for exercising it across literally thousands of articles that use a pronunciation guide. But I think he's given up on Newark-on-Trent for now. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2018 (UTC) p.s. this might have been a better source for local dialect? (... or else joost fooken google it, mush)[reply]
Luv the slung! I didn't want to prolong the discussion even further, but what he's thinking of is the rhotitotetote in stressed syllables like CARdiff and PORlock, where North Americans and Scots can rhote to their heart's content. This is an unstressed syllable. Bmcln1 (talk) 13:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wholly agree. He does seem to be getting a bit stressed out by it all, doesn't he. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Business must be a bit slow...

[edit]

For Colin Grove recently. TBH I don't think he is all that convincing. Britney Spears is very good though.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:39, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But he does provide his own props, I hear. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:59, 14 April 2018 (UTC) ... yes, she drives me crazy[reply]

it all makes sense now

[edit]

Why I kept going around in circles trying to get off anglesey all those years ago - it is in wales. JarrahTree 00:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. Yes, it's sometimes easy to get stuck in Wales. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:51, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/Assessment/Margaret Thatcher

[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/Assessment/Margaret Thatcher. --Neve~selbert 00:53, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite. Although, as you probably know, my recent interest was only sparked by that member of the Secret 1922 Committee who has an overly keen interest in footwear. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Learn something new every day?

[edit]

Hi. I'm wondering if you can spare me a few moments? I was scanning my watchlist and your edit comment caught my eye. "This article is written in British English, which commonly treats collective nouns as plural. DO NOT change "WERE" to "WAS"." What is the definition of a collective noun, and why is it plural? (I always thought a collection of coins or stamps or whatever was a single entity, and hence singular.) With thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was just copying the existing hidden note from the article, into my edit summary, of course. Many of the articles for UK bands have that note or something very similar. And that's because band names are an exception in British English - normally, as you say, collective nouns are singular. There's a definition of "collective noun" here. Hope that helps. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very kind of you. Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. If you're really that interested, I guess you could even look it up in a encyclopedia? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury

[edit]

Per MOS:LEADPRON, we should not include pronunciations for place names whose pronunciations would be obvious to English speakers. Canter is a common word, and -bury is a common suffix in English place names.
--maczkopeti (talk) 14:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. So -bury is always pronounced the same way in all English place names, is it? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:50, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what Ed would have to say about that. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 14:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's a difference between bury as a word and as a suffix. Bury as a word is almost always /ˈbɛri/, while the suffix is usually reduced. An English speakers would know the difference, as both usages are common.
--maczkopeti (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, "usually", is it? I see. Good job we cater only for fluent English speakers, then. You don't think there would be any point at all in asking a question about usefulness at Talk:Canterbury? Your pronunciation thinning crusade continues apace. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:LEADPRON says "Do not include [pronunciations] for common English words with pronunciations that might be counterintuitive for learners (laughter, sword)." Why would bury be different?
--maczkopeti (talk) 15:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How common is "-bury" as a place name suffix? And in spoken English as a whole? By all means give a percentage of common usage. And what criterion does MOS:LEADPRON apply, exactly? Would you consider yourself a fluent English speaker very familiar with British place-names? Which variant of "Canterbury" do you see as "counter-intuitive"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

[edit]
Hi, thanks for your support in adding and reviewing the Southwest Airlines passenger to the 'List of Unusual Deaths' article. I'm only an occasional wikipedia user so I am a little bit nervous about major additions I add to articles - your support means a lot. Thank you :) ◄Sandshark23► talk♦contribs 13:27, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I admire your courage. Most editors "wouldn't be seen dead" at that article. A brownie??! Couldn't you manage something with some sassy orange?? Let's hear it for Mark Landler. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC) see "Sassy Trump Listens To Multi-Part Question From Reporter" at the "the social media website that dares not speak its name". etc. [reply]

John of the Cross

[edit]

You reverted a change I made on the page of Dali's painting John of the Cross. Previously it said "1550" (unsourced?), but I corrected that based on what I found at the Wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_the_Cross, where it says: "At some point between 1574 and 1577, while praying in the Monastery of the Incarnation in Ávila in a loft overlooking the sanctuary, John had a vision of the crucified Christ, which led him to create his famous drawing of Christ "from above". " So I have a source for 1575. What source do you have for the 1550??? GeoRic (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, GeoRic. You mean my revert here at Christ of Saint John of the Cross? I wounder could you explain to me what that source en.m.wikipedia.org is? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest Hemingway

[edit]

Martin, would you please back off? I'm experience a lot of difficulty editing these days and if I say I can't get to something that you think needs to be done right. now. then there's a good reason for it. Those articles are almost a decade old, and I'll get around to the fixes if I'm convinced they're needed. I didn't think there was any reason to reply to the other editor's talk page posts yesterday, and now it's just a big clusterfuck that I. cannot. deal. with. Please back away. Victoriaearle (tk) 22:44, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Victoria. I'm very sorry to hear you are experiencing any difficulty editing. I do hope you'll be able to resolve any issues you may have. It's often very easy to forget that other editors have real lives. If I've been in any way impolite or unfair I apologise unreservedly. Ernest Hemingway is a fine article that you should be proud to have help build. I'm sure any niggles recently identified there are no more than very minor stylistic ones that are really nothing to do with article content. I think I've said all that I can at the Talk page there and I won't contribute further if you don't think it's helping. Some editors seem to feel that discussions are a waste of time and all that matters are article edits. Kind regards. ~~
Use of the term "commit suicide" is obviously also a much wider issue than just applying to this one article. For example, there are at least four instances at Epidemiology of suicide which might have been expected to set the standard in some way? I'm really not sure why attention has recently been focused on the Hemingway article. Perhaps because, as a very well-known individual, his article gets lots of readers. Or perhaps because it's a Good Article and so can be expected to "lead the way" in terms of style. Whatever the reason, I'm sure this topic deserves scrutiny and discussion at a more centralized venue. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martin, I'm not opposed to discussion or, to put it another way, putting on the kettle and settling in for a natter. But if the baby's fussing and granny wants her tea, the discussion turns to getting rid of slugs in the garden and whether we should follow the village ordinance or the county's, how quickly those slugs can be gone, while the baby's squalls reach a crescendo and granny is thumping the floor with her cane - well, nerves get frayed and it's not the best time. That's what happened. In terms of Hemingway's suicide - in a sense that suicide was similar to Robin Williams' for a more recent generation - and Hemingway's still garners a lot of attention. There are a few more articles to look through, but the ones written more recently were fine. The biography was written in 2009, before I was aware of this issue. Apologies for screaming, btw. Victoriaearle (tk) 23:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Let's all make sure we're "at home" to mellow Marjorie Manners. But let's not even answer the door to rotten old Rosemary Rude. I do hope we can avoid all this dreadfully troubling beastliness. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC) p.s. 'ere, Vicky luv, sorry to 'ear about the wailing sprog. Maybe it's 'ungry? Or 'ave ya tried a shot of Calpol darlin'??[reply]

To Whom... from all those years ago... Cinderford's finest

[edit]
(What the ...)
(What the f*** was that?)

"You burden me with your questions
You'd have me tell no lies
You're always asking what it's all about
But don't listen to my replies
You say to me I don't talk enough
But when I do I'm a fool
These times I've spent, I've realized
I'm going to shoot through..."
And leave you.
(Your purple prose just gives you away)

.... it's not every day one gets an email that ends "... that's your problem exactly, a waste of fucking space who only pokes but never actually does anything. Fuck you small man. Truly." ...(....please send answers on a postcard).

Provoked

[edit]

Hi there, you thanked me for my edits on British Airways Flight 5390 so I assumed you're sort of on my wavelength and it's OK to talk frankly here. You've been having fun and games on there with our pal EEng whoever the F*** he is! I know it's highly unethical to get personal, but WTF is his problem!? Has he nothing better to do with his time? I would very much like your opinion on his removing huge chunks of text inc. the late great In pop.culture section that I've so lovingly worked and reworked in many an aviation disaster article of late. Can he just do that? And why the F doesn't he go delete some other stuff from some other places, what's his evil fascination with our Captain Lancaster's horrendous ordeal, hasn't he had enough to contend with without having his bloody wiki article shredded to pieces. Oh and did you see the Talk page discussion I attempted to start with our friend? Nice to see that my being a relative newcomer to Wiki editing automatically makes my opinion count for less than his. The fact that I've been a professional copy editor for over 20 years (with little time to devote to Wikipedia previously) must count for naught then! I have learnt (the hard way) that you have to have a very thick skin to survive in this environment, but this joker's really something else. I could go on but I just had to vent a bit... Thanks for listening and thanks for thanking too! Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:33, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rodney. Don't worry, we all face this kind of revolutionary zeal from EEng once he stumbles across an article that he finds "overburdened with detail" (whether we're newcomers or not). Please don't take it personally. As you will soon discover, what we do or have done in our real lives counts for very little at Wiki. Poor EEng has the misfortune to be an American, but he also has his cross to bear. He can be very witty when he's not on one of his article padding and cruft crusades. By the way, I've left a note at Talk:British Airways Flight 5390 about the DV windows. What do you think? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(Watching, and then Martin was faster:) Thank you for adding detail, - sometimes that's not wanted. Wikipedia - like it or not - has a tendency to stay with a status quo, so don't change too much at a time, and if you are reverted (some will tell you to argue on the talk page and find consensus for your change, but I tell you) go somewhere else. Thousands of articles need improvements, or to be written first. Try that, - then you can create a status quo ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ps: Martin, did you see that I put delicate and brutal as required on the Main page? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda is so right. Avoiding a confrontation is always much more useful - finding a quiet place to improve is usually very much more productive. When you come back to an embattled article, you often find that things have been restored and improved by others. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC) Well done with Milana Chernyavska, Gerda. Now I'll have to spend hours searching for her on YouTube! (that Grieg Sonata has suddenly caught my eye....)[reply]
DYK that I made a suggestion in 2013 on a talk page that caused an uproar (and sadly made a user leave), and years later it was taken, without me doing a thing? - I didn't hear the pianist (yet), she was a red link on the violinist's article whom I heard ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Oh, no Mrs Fawlty, don't mention the box!!" ... "I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it all right." [13] Martinevans123 (talk) 15:28, 28 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]
Yes I know what you mean. I've been itching to get on with some of my other more mundane articles like the Winter Olympics, Oreo cookies, Birmingham, the National Ice Centre, but sometimes a bit of a confrontation can be so much more fun! As long as it doesn't get out of hand. It's all the more rewarding when you get to meet some nice people too. Anyway, g'night, too tired for any more logical thinking right now. Rodney Baggins (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Nutt

[edit]

You do know that 67 years is way pass the current standard retirement age for most folk here in the United Kingdom, don't you?! -- 87.102.116.36 (talk) 18:29, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If Theresa May and her chums have their way, I guess we'll all be working until at least 80. But I don't think retirement age is legally enforced in every UK job or profession, is it? What about at Imperial College London? I guess they must have a policy written down somewhere? But perhaps we'd be better discussing this more centrally at Talk: David Nutt? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC) ... way pass!![reply]

re: Fontina

[edit]

Yes, Alex was right to revert me, see User_talk:Alessandro57#re:_Fontina for context. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm all for having the occasional hovercraft full of eels, but perhaps not in an encyclopedia. I applaud the inventiveness, but I was a bit confused. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hermann Rorschach

[edit]

Hello Martinevans123. This is a heads up that a group from my history of psychology class will be adding to the Hermann Rorschach article. This is part of the APS Wikipedia Initiative, and is being supervised by me and consultants from the Wiki Education Foundation. The work on Rorschach has been vetted by user:Ian (Wiki Ed) before they've been allowed to make the changes. I am aware that you have reverted this article before, and I've warned them to be very careful and leave a message about what they are doing on the Talk page. Thanks for your consideration. J.R. Council (talk) 18:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi James. Yes, I think we had some minor issues last time. But that latest change looked really very promising. I don't want to step on Ian's toes, so I'll try not to rush in to change or revert. Many thanks for letting me know. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lets hope the students don't blot their copybooks. Robevans123 (talk) 18:33, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Eek!!. And to think I was deliberately holding back there. D'oh! you, dirty dog, Rob. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Less of the animal metaphors please. I'm more into sentence compl.... Robevans123 (talk) 18:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Great to see you stepping out, Rob, in your Sunday best! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! I know that the students will appreciate it, if you do see something wrong, to help them see the error of their ways and correct it. J.R. Council (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The error of their ways?? Oh, no!.... sad face. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Testing Times for Martin's Magic Eraser. Robevans123 (talk) 22:37, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could we please stop using this Talk page to swap FSB and GRU coded messages? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

[edit]

Could the script case have a connection to the new EU budget? I mean, - after the Brexit, our (EU) balance will be negative (the hesst - Budget Difficit). We (my EU) need investors from England (against Novitshok - acceptance and an investors - visa (permanent residence permit for the EU).

Weill, usually. The EU has been and still is working with another kind of venom poison (methyl mercury) (the judiciary, the police, the social services, the citizens' initiatives, the drug dealers, etc.).

WikiVorspraecher (talk) 16:51, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the hot tip. I'll try and stock up. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:40, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zara Tindall

[edit]

Hi,

Yes, as the 18th reference says she used her married name for the first time on that occasion. I tried to add it myself, but I'm not a frequent user of the english wikipedia so I didn't know how to do it.

--Qwerty1999 (talk) 16:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll take a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so I just took a look and it's not good news. The source at Ref 18 is this one from the Daily Mail. But that newspaper is no longer used, as per WP:DAILYMAIL, so alas it will have to be removed. So we now need two sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New User

[edit]

I am most definitely a new user. If you want to see my statement on this you can read it on my user page. Please do not spread vindictive rumours about me and drag me into issues that don't involve me. I've only had an account for 11 days but I've been made to feel so unwelcome on here for daring to have an opinion that I'm tempted to delete my account and return to being a read-only user. goodforaweekend (talk) 20:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry if you found my subjective opinion unpalatable. I said that you "looked so very well-informed and skilful for an editor with such a new account?" And I said it was "Almost as if [Cassianto was] being baited there." By all means take the first bit as a compliment. And could you kindly excuse the last bit as an over-generalisation of what seems to have happened to User:Cassianto over the past year? Why did you wait for so long to tell me? It's a bit late to adjust my comment now that it has been archived. What would you like me to do? I really don't think that one comment in defence of that user counts as "spreading vindictive rumours", do you? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still remain truely amazed that the first edit that a previosuly "read-only" new editor would make, before even creating their own Userpage, is this one. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So, what would you like me to do? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) "Every editor is a human being" ;) - shamelessly canvassing: Tobias Kratzer who couldn't decide which staging of Rigoletto he preferred to present at an international competition, so took two, one as an American woman, the other as a Bulgarian man. DYK? I saw his Vasco da Gama on a space voyage - remarkable! - Welcome, goodforaweekend, nice to meet you! There are many good things to do that won't bring you in heated zones! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I myself try to stay away from heated zones. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:43, 10 May 2018 (UTC) p.s. ... that space thing will never work.[reply]
The reason I waited so long to tell you is because Wikipedia doesn't keep you logged in and since I am currently studying for finals I don't make the effort to log onto here very often. I don't want you to do anything, but all I've had since I created an account is people accusing me of being a fake account that was set up by an already established user in order to push an agenda/bait some random person. I've already explained that I created an account specifically to make that post as I found it very strange that the page did not have an infobox, had I known it would've blown up in my face like that I wouldn't have bothered. I have no idea who User:Cassianto is or what, if anything, has happened to them over the past year. As I created the account specifically for that reason, this is why it was the very first thing I did. I didn't even know what a userpage was until I'd made the post and started to explore the user side of Wikipedia a bit more. I suppose the silver lining to this whole thing is that if I do decide to keep this account, I now know which editors to avoid. goodforaweekend (talk) 00:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining. I certainly don't envy any hapless new user who suddenly finds themselves in the minefield that infobox debate has become. Again, I have no accusations to level about you or your motivations. I was merely trying to point out how your very first edit might be viewed by someone who has seemingly become trapped in this problem space and who is no stranger to baiting and provocation. Of course I hope you will stay and find an area in which to participate that is far removed from confrontation and accusation (there must be a few left somewhere amongst over 5 million articles, surely?) Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok well I think it's best now if we all just move on, I don't have any desire to reenter the infobox debate. Maybe in the future yourself (and other users as you are by no means the only one who did it) could try engaging with a user before throwing out accusations. I'm not a horrible person, I would have been happy to explain things and maybe, in turn, someone could have explained to me that it was a very contentious issue and that User:Cassianto had been having problems with other users. This whole thing could've been avoided if people had just communicated with each other instead of getting emotional. goodforaweekend (talk) 19:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very sorry that you think I just "threw out an accusation". I was trying to explain why someone who was appealing a Arbitration enforcement action might have reacted in the way they did. I've certainly never suggested that you are "a horrible person". I said your edits "looked so very well-informed and skilful" and I don't think I'll withdraw that subjective view. You had two days to explain (and make me look quite foolish), at that "Arbitration enforcement action appeal by Cassianto", where you must have seen my comment? It was wholly your choice not to do so seemed to me at the time that you had deliberately chosen not to. If you do decide to keep this account, feel free to avoid me. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I told you I don't log onto here very often. By the time I did I'm pretty sure the appeal had already closed, besides I had no idea what the appeal was about and had no desire to get involved. So no, it was not "wholly my choice". goodforaweekend (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you told me. Thanks for telling me. Thanks for telling me again. I have adjusted my comment above to fit better what you have now told me. Aagin. Is that acceptable to you, or would you like me to adjust it further? You are wise not to get involved. But now that the editor concerned has retired, it seems unlikely you'll have to be in that position again. Would you like me to post a large apology here so that everyone can see you are the wronged party and that I am very sorry to have caused you so much upset and annoyance? Or would you prefer me to come over to your talk page and post a large apology there instead?? I'm really not quite sure what else I could do to help you get over the trauma that all these "vindictive rumours" have caused you. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:01, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citing

[edit]
The joys of Visual Editor
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi Martinevans 123, Greetings to you and appreciate that you looked for source to strengthen the article as many editors would not do - an act needed to be praised! I reply your question here instead of in Kevin De Bruyne page as there is nothing for me to change or edit for the moment. I used Visual Editor to cite source for such the automated programmed format (such as date /use work instead of publisher) is a little different from manual input using Template: cite web; however, as I found it is convenient, easy and fast for I do a lot of editing in Wikipedia. See below.

Instructions: Citing source from web - Do not copy and past the URL address and paste into the body text, but click "cite" on menu page and fill in the fields as per the Template: cite web and save when it is done). Examples below:

To add an in-line text citation for an internet reference, there are 3 web citing methods as below:

1.Source edit mode : fill in the source info as below {{cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= }}

2a. Visual edit mode :Please click "cite" on the menu bar and fill in the info

2b.Visual edit mode: download Visual Editor and paste the URL and all fields will be filled automatically.

Examples

  • To add an in-line text citation for an internet reference: <ref>{{cite web|url =https://www.mmafighting.com/2018/4/5/17203890/watch-conor-mcgregor-throw-a-dolly-through-ufc-223-fighter-bus-window |title = Watch Conor McGregor throw a dolly through UFC 223 fighter bus window|accessdate = 15 April 2018|author=|last =Al-Shatti |first = Shaun |publication = mmafighting|date = 15 April 2018|archivedate =15 April 2018 }}</ref>
  • To add an in-line text citation for a paper reference: <ref name="Green">Green, William: ''Observers Aircraft'', page 228. Frederick Warne Publishing, 1991. ISBN 0 7232 3697 6</ref>

(note: remove nowiki tag when input the citation. Fill the info and change the date as needed. See on source edit view mode.)

Thank you and have a wonderful day. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 21:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great. Question: is it better to add an unformatted ref or leave a statement unsourced? Do you never use or recommend "reFill"? Thanks. Have a great wonderfully formatted day. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Martinevans1123, Thank you for the questions above. First of all you need to ping me so I would know you message me. I placed your talk page on my watch lists as I had written to you earlier, for such I know you wrote me a message. You could insert {{ping|CASSIOPEIA}} (please remove "nowiki" upon replying - you could only see this in source editing mode and not visual editing mode) to message me on your talk page and the system will notify me that I have a message from you.
To your questions here
1. add unformatted ref or leave a statement unsourced - Here is some background first - Content added/edited in Wikipedia needs needs "inline citation" from independent "third party" reliable source (in any language) for verification to gauge the nobility criteria is met. The articles's inline citation is the WP:BURDEN which it is on the person adding the information. Please note official website, records of sport events or individual player records are consider primary source and not independent source, and social network source such as facebook, twitter, instagram, imbd and etc are considered NOT reliable source and can not be used for citing. Independent reliable source are sources are those obtain from major newspaper, such as The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald, CNN news and etc. or source obtain from major publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press). (Note: Wikipedia can NOT be the source - see WP:CIRCULAR).
So it is better to add unformatted ref over no sourced; however, it you download Visual editor, citing is so much faster and easier with just one click away.
2. Refill - I do use refill and it is recommended if there are many parts of the content share the same source/ref.
2a. You open the refill tool here [14] and copy and page the page name and click "fix page" and it will assign the "name ref" for you.
2b. You could click "page" on the manu bar and choose "tools" then click "expand bare references" and it will bring you to refill page and all you have to do is submit the page.
2c. You could do it manually - after you have cited the inline citation. Go back and added the name (you assigned the name of the ref instead refill do it automatically for you (usually by number such as 0, 1, 2.... ect). I am using the exam above - see below
<ref name="Mcgregor dolly throwing">{{cite web|url =https://www.mmafighting.com/2018/4/5/17203890/watch-conor-mcgregor-throw-a-dolly-through-ufc-223-fighter-bus-window |title = Watch Conor McGregor throw a dolly through UFC 223 fighter bus window|accessdate = 15 April 2018|author=|last =Al-Shatti |first = Shaun |publication = mmafighting|date = 15 April 2018|archivedate =15 April 2018 }}</ref>


I have insert the ref name here and on other content which also use the same ref then we dont need to recite the same reference but to insert <ref name="Mcgregor dolly throwing" />. (add the extra / after the assigned name). After you have save the page, you could go back and check the Reference section and you would see "a b + ref". (a and b means 2 part of the content using the same ref). It is useful to asign the name yourself if you want to trace the ref in the content.
Hope it helps. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 22:20, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks ever so much for telling me about ReFill. I must try and get round to using that tool. I don't use Visual Editor. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boulez GA review

[edit]

Hi Martin Thanks for your edits on the Boulez page. I don't want to just undo your change re photo credits without explanation - but it was a condition of the Cleveland Orchestra giving permission to use the photo that we credit the photographer. I think we'll either have to reinstate or lose the photo, which would be a shame... Best David

Hi David. My understanding (through painful experience) is that permission to use images may not be given dependent on acknowledgement in article space, but rather only (as normal) at the image upload page. If you can direct me to any policy which shows something different, I'd be very grateful. That said, I have no real problem with with those credits, so feel free to restore them. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:46, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The licenses explicitly call out (don't make me find it, please) that acknowledgement via a link is sufficient. Those donating images can't expect an in-caption credit any more than those contributing text can expect to see themselves credited directly in articles. EEng 13:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, what a surprise. So how's Japan? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:47, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Immaculate. EEng 06:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please give my regards to Jim Morrison. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just nominated him for DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well done, Gerda. You must mean the real Pierre, not our friend "Lunchtime O'Boulez". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the real one whom I had the honour to meet, however briefly (concert is mentioned here). Sorry for the emotions I caused when I tried to improve his article. Made me loose all interest in repeating. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Cavell

[edit]

Hi Martinevans. On Stanley Cavell's page, you asked whether to include the philosopher's birthname. In one of his two autobiographical works (A Pitch of Philosophy and Little Did I Know, I don't remember which) he relates that the name "Goldstein" was assigned to his father at Ellis Island by a callous bureaucrat. I don't know if there's any standing criterion, but I would err on the side of omission: it was not his father's birthname. Also, you can ask him. He sometimes responds to emails. :P Anarchic Fox (talk) 20:09, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May thanks for reminding me and for the clarification. I would certainly not want trouble him. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Um, so is it alright if I remove the birthname? :P Anarchic Fox (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd strongly advise you to ask at the article Talk page. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:26, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, will do. I thought you were the one who added it, thus my presence here. Anarchic Fox (talk) 15:38, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course, with this edit. Most BIO articles have the same thing in the infobox as in the text. Indeed, the infobox is meant to summarise main facts from the article and have nothing unique, I think. That's why I added it. If you feel there is a good case for casting doubt on that name as a birth name, I think this should be made clear in the text. You seem to know far more about Cavell than do I. I have no very strong view either way about including any name. But I think a discussion at the Talk page is probably the best way ahead. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The box is exactly where that information belongs, not in the body. At least until the biography rises above "C" class. I've seen enough behind the scenes to know that minor rules about inclusion are rarely followed on neglected pages. Anarchic Fox (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You think it's ok to have unique info in the box? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yeah. I'm hard pressed to come up with an argument otherwise, except for the highest-class biographies. The boxes tend to be filled out most reliably. With such a uniqueness rule, you would be forced to generate boilerplate pages for start-class ones. Then the evil wikignomes (hat tip to a once friend) would appear some day when noone is looking and delete the page for notability, as evidenced by the boilerplate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anarchic Fox (talk • contribs) 19:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was just assuming it was a matter of consistency. Most bio articles have birthnam (with an added explanation if necessary, perhaps in a footnote) elsewhere in the article. That's all. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:14, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Best wishes on your editing. :) Anarchic Fox (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Anarchic Fox. It's great to see you improving Stanley Cavell so rapidly. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NFCC8

[edit]

Martinevans123, do you agree with another editor's observation that this image - after 5 years of usage/display upon the Wikipedia Dennis Nilsen article, now fails NFCC8?--Kieronoldham (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit I was a bit surprised when I saw that. Shame it's rather low quality. Don't criteria change after the subject's death? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:57, 13 May 2018 (UTC) .. no need to ping... I do read my Talk page, honest. [reply]
Thanks, Martin. I haven't checked whether criteria change after the subject's death, but it certainly makes finding an alternative free usage image more difficult to find. I agree that (actually like the newspaper in question generally), the image is of a lower quality than the original, but that was done to increase the fair usage rationale. This alongside the text relating to the image, which 'broke' the story to the British public for the 1st time. The image was actually flagged as failing NFCC8 a few days before Nilsen's death by a certain user.--Kieronoldham (talk) 21:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A "certain user." That sounds a bit suspicious. I'd say it was a key image for that article. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean it in that regards, not much, it's just someone who removed it but with just a blunt message for doing so. I know they're more than a century old and in the Commons, but I don't see the newspaper etc. images removed from the Jack the Ripper article. I'll reinsert it if you like, but please can you and EEng keep an eye on the article and that image. Thanks.--Kieronoldham (talk) 21:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'll certainly try to, yes. I'm sure we'd all agree that Nilsen was a lot more "real" than Jack. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Someone may probably try and steamroll the press over the next few days..--Kieronoldham (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

[edit]
Hello, Martinevans123. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.NickMcGowan (talk) 10:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick. I have read your email and will respond in due course. I hadn't realized that changing a title to italic font might attract so much attention! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have replied in kind. Please feel free to let me know how you get on. It must be interesting to be just a spectator here? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying, Nick. Looking forward to all the scoops. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:22, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Owl

[edit]

You do to copy right any thing you find on a website! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge of fact (talk • contribs) 22:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I understand you, sorry. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
this owl? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, thanks for that, Gerda. I had no idea. R.O. de Vries How lovely. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:33, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It looks as though everything they added at Talk:Owl (and also at Talk:Polar Bear) is copy/pasted from websites. The pattern of adding it under a edit protect request seems to have been used in the past by KrisT2007, and also by an IP address... Robevans123 (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Ooo, see you Jimmy!" .... see you over at WP:CopyVio Police. But yes, I was beginning to think I had been drawn into some kind of Ancient Welsh epic. -- Mabinogio 123 (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A strange hinterland of potterish animal magic. Now, where did I leave my zoo keeper's hat? Robevans123 (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More music on my talk, today mostly the solemn mass. Funny that another Rutter received thousands of views just because it was sung for the Royal wedding ;) - I wrote the article in memory of a friend who seemed to disappear, - but looks in every now and then. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could link to the mass in Llandaff Cathedral ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Which one? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
still the same, "it was brought to a playable stage by Easter 2010 with its inaugural performance (the Gloria of Louis Vierne's Messe solennelle) at the Easter Vigil service on 3 April 2010." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
new: the sp'rit of truth --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work Gerda. And there's me thinking it was Ardbeg. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When we sang it, I explained that it was something energizing. We received instructions from the Director of Church Music at Salisbury Cathedral, whose first comment (after praise) was the question: What is the most important word in the first line? Yes, Love, so sing towards it, - don't rest on "If". He also encouraged a more moving tempo. Singing in that place was among my unforgettable moments. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well I do hope you took a pack of wetwipes with you. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
talking 2006 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ps: we sang it again - on my request - on one of my birthdays, in a service which also featured the premiere of a piece nicknamed "Gerda's Halleluja" ;) - the official name is "Halleluja St. Martin". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... and again today, with a round of friends, love-ly. I decorated my talk for the occasion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another RD: Dieter Schnebel, - yes, I remember that I wanted to avoid the place. - Good singer on the Main page, seen in the role, which made me write the article. Saw Maria Bengtsson (soprano) yesterday, as Arabella, phenomenally sweet, clear and vulnerable at the same time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:48, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw him there, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will that never end? Barry McDaniel, on RD, help welcome. I spent the day throughing out lovely details for which I couldn't find a source, - awful job. - Good news: I nominated the lead DYK (Pierre Boulez, another - like Arvo Pärt - whose hand I had the honour to shake), and wrote the German lead SG (Schon gewusst?), de:Messe solennelle (Vierne) which we sang for Pentecost. Two pics the same day is a first in my career ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. See my talk for a bird's eye's view for where used to live for a short time, inspired a march song. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May thanks, Gerda. Barry McDaniel looks in pretty good shape. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC) p.s. I think you meant throwing.[reply]
Yes, forgive my spelling ;) - We sang the piece mentioned in the hook, for celebrating mere 54 years, not 1000 of a church (yes the one with your name), it was fitting, but the minister said "bombastisch" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I know what he means. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
.... "Stone the crows"!!! A German national hero!! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Toni, please, yes, he won favours ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:27, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Bishop Michael

[edit]

What jaw-dropping Royal Weddings should be all about, I feel. What's next, the Michael and Justin Show ?? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All too easy to imagine the later scenes at Frogmore House, with Charles vigorously Dad-dancing to "Get Down" by Gilbert O'Sullivan and "Macarena" by Los del Río, and Camilla belting out her famous karaoke version of "Dancing Queen" by ABBA. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conversation from LouisAlain's talk page

[edit]

ii I'm bringing this here rather than polluting his talk page as the subject does not concern him really but new pages patrolling. I wish you would avoid taking words out of context and putting a spin on them that I had no intention of giving and did not suggest in my comments. I don't know if you really didn't understand what I was saying or whether you were being disingenuous for some reason or another but I'd rather clear things up. New pages patrolling is not an easy task because you have to sort through the crud of undisclosed paid editing, fan pages, hoaxes, newcomer's efforts, lazy editors work and so on.

When you come across an article such as Véronique Bracco for which there is one source [15] that doesn't even mention the subject normally you tag it and move on. As this is a French pianist/composer that also has a page on FRWP and I am a French speaker I had a quick look at it. The page has been tagged as not having the necessary sources since November 2017. Both versions (English and French) contain unsourced claims that I took the time to tag for clean up. This is the kind of work that should not be left on wikipedia in its present state. IMHO an editor that has nearly 100k edits should not be creating pages like this. This article was translated almost word for word with almost no changes and no search for sources at all. His reply the very fact that this pianist is refered to through the Authority control model means that she enjoys some notability is not enough I am afraid. I don't know if you had a look at the authority control Worldcat but her sheet music is held only in the BNF whose role is as "the national repository of all that is published in France" (my bolding).

Also if you understand French have a look at the subject's own comments on the French version's talk page here, in this extract she says "En tout cas, merci svp de ne surtout pas supprimer cette page wikipedia sur moi. Elle est très importante pour mon travail, pour mes concerts, mes projets musicaux et ma présence en ligne." a quick translation reads "Anyway please whatever you do, do not delete this Wikipedia page about me. It is very important for my work, my concerts, my musical projects and my online presence". The links she provides are a mixture of social media, passing mentions and links to recordings that were self-published, by a publishing house that only publishes works by one artist and those accompagning her and is run by a member of this artist's family apparantly.

Anyway it is not up to the new pages reviewers to clean up after editors that one could be forgiven in thinking seem to prefer quantity to quality. As a pending changes reviewer would you accept unsourced information in a BLP? I doubt it and at new pages patrol we have instructions to tag this kind of thing or nominate for deletion. I hope this clears up some of your concerns. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) So you would rather go about "polluting this talk page", would you?! ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 17:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you bother reading the page I was talking about and the request from another editor to carry this on elsewhere or are you just being flippant? Dom from Paris (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Ouch! ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 17:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I could think up some equally derogatory alternative options if you wanted, Gareth. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:23, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dom from Paris, I have not questioned the value of "your work as a new pages reviewer". What I was questioning was the way you have "dealt with" LouisAlain, who in my experience is a very highly-valued, collaborative and productive editor. Perhaps he's made a mistake. We all make mistakes, don't we? I don't really see that as good reason for you to invite him to leave the project. I'm not the only editor who feels this way. Apparently, so you tell us, "this kind of reaction ... comes with the territory", but I think you are valuing your little piece of "territory" more highly than an experienced fellow editor. That seems a little short-sighted to me. You seem quite unfriendly. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) p.s. who exactly invited you to "carry this on elsewhere"? p.p.s. and I'm guessing you didn't mean the Botswana National Front there?
I took this as a suggestion but I may have read more into it. [16]. I'm amazed that you guessed I am shortsighted, well done but I am also now a little longsighted too but we all go through that one day or another (hey it's actually quite fun to pretend to not understand the meaning of someone's words!) but if you met me IRL you would undoubtedly find me extremely friendly indeed unless of course you try to twist my words. Come or go with the territory is a pretty well-known phrase that indicates that when one accepts to do something then one has to accept the more difficult aspects of the task and this has nothing to do with a territory in the way you are suggesting. And to deal with can have several meanings you have chosen to attribute a sense that is close to punishment and I presume you knew that was not what I meant otherwise you wouldn't have put inverted commas around the word. You seem to like looking for hidden meanings but really there are none here just common or garden English expressions. He probably did make a mistake but he did not make a constructive reply when I templated him which with hindsight was lazy of me as it chucks out a sort of welcome message that is of no use to an editor with that many articles to his name but seeing as he reacted in a way that one expects much newer editors to do I didn't bother checking his history. mea culpa. Anyway I've said what I wanted to get my POV over I hope that you understand. Happy editing Dom from Paris (talk) 18:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dom and Out from Paris, you'll never be able to trust me. Even IRL. I may try and twist your words. Happy forgiving. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC) p.s. many thanks for your detailed and sincere explanation. p.p.s. useful Chemistry link. [reply]
Humm not sure how much "sel" I should add to the above but I think I'll take it at face value! Happily I am not editing in visual so I got all the piped jokes without clicking! And I will auto-trout myself for the avoidable template reaction! Cheers Dom from Paris (talk) 19:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Llenarte las botas!"..... as they (probably don't) say in Sigüenza. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't heard that expression since I left the UK and the army. I thought it was only army slang, thanks for the link. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do hope you're not still on the run. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thank you!

[edit]

Hello, Martinevans123, and thank you for your thank you. I briefly posted and then removed a few remarks about the former Meghan Markle's mixed-race heritage, and then I thought to myself "Y.I., don't stir up trouble. Take that down." So I did. I apologize if the removed material was the very thing you had thanked me for. (I'm still learning, and can't tell or do a lot of things.) Newbie gaffes! Thanks again! Have a great rest of the day. Yseult-Ivain (talk) 20:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thanked you for something else. But I agree with a lot of what you have said. You are very wise to try ad step lightly! Dear fun-loving Big Chief Sir Jimmy Wikki stepping in didn't really help matters did it? ...more tea, Bishop Curry?? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Martin. On the same talk page, can you please correct this? i wasn't the one who opened a RFC. Thanks. --NeilN talk to me 20:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and apologies (à la Jane Austen)

[edit]

Hello Martinevans and thanks for your warm support on my TP as pertains the minor spat that took place there. And please accept my apologies for the little tantrum I went into. My banishment from the fr. wiki started with 2 wikipedians who eventually led me to blow a fuse and then my fate was sealed. I didn't want to repeat the incident here, that's why I temporarily withdrew.

Thanks again and fare well. Yours, LouisAlain (talk) 21:05, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, LouisAlan. Sometimes things get Lost in Translation (YouTube clip available). Just as long as you don't get lost to us here at en.wiki... enjoy!! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC) p.s. ... did you know that He (many YouTube clips available!) is now 94 and is still still touring!![reply]
I did hear that Van Morrison is recording an album of Beefheart covers. It's going to be titled "Ice Cream For Van". Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"cringe" ... ooh, Xantho, you're such a beast.... for that one you deserve a massive trout. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC) "moonjeans and bluebeams", anyone??[reply]

What happened?

[edit]

I just saw where Ritchie retired - WTH??? Atsme📞📧 12:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OMFG. But not exactly retired, it seems. I will try emailing him. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:21, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mamoudou Gassama article

[edit]

Hello, I see that you've edited the article on Mamoudou Gassama. I would like to ask you to give your thought on the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mamoudou_Gassama With regards, --Kurt Leyman (talk) 16:24, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. Although I feel I may be swimming against the tide over there. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Careful out there splashing around. Wakes are cool, wakes not so much. RivertorchFIREWATER 21:27, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You betcha. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who knew spiders could surf? Ah reckon it's why they call him "the amazing". RivertorchFIREWATER 21:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you know, it ain't easy. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC) ... almost as painful as your tortuous puns[reply]
Voted for "weak keep and move" there. Realistically however it will join the ranks of 1Ers like murder-suicide pilot Andreas Lubitz, Alexandra Wallace the UCLA racist and a teenage cybercriminal that carries out online attacks due to a plane crash whose name I can't recall. 79.189.206.17 (talk) 15:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gore (film) for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gore (film) 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/Gore (film) 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. KTC (talk) 08:35, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Josiffe / Peter Cook

[edit]

The Goon Show, and who indeed? Here's Milligan's script, but the YouTube recording is blocked, no doubt for copyright reasons....... "The Spy, or, Who is Pink Oboe?" Thomas Peardew (talk) 15:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Intriguing. I much prefer the sound of: Octaroon Monkey, the Purple Mosquitoe, the Vermillion Sock, the Vermillion Ponk, the Chocolate Speedway and the White Bint. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:55, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure it wasn't a coincidence, though -

SEAGOON:
Look, I... I think I'd better write this down.
COMMANDER NARK:
No please don't, you'll go colour blind...

Thomas Peardew (talk) 16:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New RFC on a Talk Page you edited

[edit]

Hi Martin! I see that you left an interesting remark on the Carles Puidgemont talk page a week or so ago; interestingly, Jimmy Wales used the same analogy a few days ago! I say this because there is now an RFC which you may be interested in which affects all Catalan biogs. Many thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Llywelyn2000. Well I've said my bit and I'm not sure another !vote will make much difference either way. For me it's another case of all options a bit right, all options a bit wrong, depending o context. But of course, Wikipedia loves to get a definitive answer on such questions, even if it takes weeks of debate. Personally I think Carles would great in a Tam o' shanter. 13:10, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Treatment? Robots? Lol

[edit]

Re this [17] may I confess I haven’t the foggiest of how to unpack your meaning? Lol. Are you saying their username is fine or not? (I have no issues if you think it is, i’m just confused... in fact that whole discussion with them has given me a headache) ...   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  20:27, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe better left fully packed?? Short version: your username is very plain, but your sig is quite fancy. Their sig is totally plain, but their username is something you might expect to exterminate!! at any moment? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too many pop culture references... maybe I am a robot lol ...   CJ [a Kiwi] in  Oz  20:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, my great weakness. But thanks to Lord Jimbo, there's still hope. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, it seems we now have a casualty. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sanity check

[edit]

Hi Martin, As we seem to be on the same wavelength, I wonder if I could ask you a favour? I'm having a minor disagreement with someone about something that is basically a question of language and logic, and I'm getting very frustrated because I'm convinced I'm right, but the other party is equally convinced that they're right and we've reached a bit of a stalemate.

The article in question is Turkish Airlines Flight 981 and the section is Turkish Airlines Flight 981#Similar accidents. The discussion isTalk:Turkish Airlines Flight 981#Error in section "Similar Accidents".

The discussion concerns the difference between an inward-opening "plug door" and an outward-opening cargo door on a DC-10. The original text read:

"An outward-opening cargo hatch is inherently less resistant to blowing open than an inward-opening one, also called a plug door. In flight, the air pressure inside the aircraft is greater than that outside, and pushes outward on the hatch. In the case of a plug door, this actually seals the door more tightly. An outward-opening hatch, however, relies entirely upon its latch to prevent it from opening in flight. This makes it particularly important that the locking mechanisms be secure."

Now as far as I'm concerned, that was correct! But at 00:15 on 29 May, Lew Sheen came along and changed it to read:

"An inward-opening cargo hatch is inherently less resistant to blowing open than an outward-opening one, also called a plug door...."

So for some reason he thought the original was wrong and he decided to correct things by swapping "outward-opening" and "inward-opening" in the first sentence, which screwed things up, and so it began...

Please can you take a look and see if you can provide another opinion on the matter. Maybe a fresh set of eyes could make all the difference. If you wouldn't mind making a comment at the end of discussion, as it would be so useful to have another editor involved to break the deadlock.

Many thanks. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:36, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rodney. Your opening statement above will serve well I'm sure, in years to come, as Wikipedia's epitaph.
From what you have written you are 100% right and Lew is 100% wrong.
I'll try and take a look... if I can shrug off this bone-crushing sense of weltschmerz, ennui and general déjà vu. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Eternal thanks Martin! I really did think I was going mad. Lew's edits were unnecessary and wrong and the whole thing was a big waste of time. Mind you, I think the overall wording has been improved in the process so maybe it wasn't actually for nothing. I owe you a favour mate! Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Park Theatre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for much, DPL bot. You are one of my most dependable friends here. Especially now since Jimmy's gone, of course. If ever you get buried in Scarborough, I hope you also get a coffin angled at 45 degrees. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Georgie Fame and the Blue Flames Do The Dog excerpt.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Georgie Fame and the Blue Flames Do The Dog excerpt.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awaiting guidance at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:13, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit help at Antwon Rose

[edit]

Hi Martinevans123, I'm looking for copyediting help at Shooting of Antwon Rose Jr. if you have time! Thanks. -Darouet (talk) 14:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Darouet. I'll try and have a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:52, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! -Darouet (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I added for template for Black Lives Matter, assuming it was relevant. But it's not actually mentioned in the article, so perhaps it's not justified? Martinevans123 (talk) 06:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You might consider my superficial copy edits merely a light snack. But once the big guns arrive, I'm sure you'll be sitting down to the full monty. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:17, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Believe In Life.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Believe In Life.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Farewell 30-second "Believe In Life" clip. Although he's issued at least 25 albums, he's always shunned commercial exposure and it's difficult to find any of his music discussed in the press. Furthemore and Do You Wonder are both wonderfully inventive and skilful albums. I'd urge anyone to seek them out. Glad to see that at least Shawn does have his own YT channel: [18]. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Birds of Fire.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Birds of Fire.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have now added "discussion" of the title track, by starting a "Reception" section at Birds of Fire with a sourced quote. So have re-added the audio sample. For anyone who is interested, the entire album is available at YouTube, in at least two different places. An upload of the whole title track has also been there now for nine years. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:44, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Breakthrough.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Breakthrough.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Farewell 30-second "Breakthrough" clip. Although he's issued at least 25 albums, he's always shunned commercial exposure and it's difficult to find any of his music discussed in the press. Furthermore and Do You Wonder are both wonderfully inventive and skilful albums. I'd urge anyone to seek them out. Glad to see that at least Shawn does have his own YT channel: [19]. And he's posted MP3s of some classic track samples at his website: [20], like Do You Wonder. The discography at his websitre is very good [21], but I think both albums have long since been deleted fromm the A&M catalogue. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:52, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Davis Tutu.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Davis Tutu.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have added material which explicitly mentions the title track, so have re-added the audio clip. It is the title track, after all. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:55, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Fairport Convention - Sloth.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fairport Convention - Sloth.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have now added a couple of items about the song "Sloth" so have re-added the audio clip to the Dave Swarbrick article. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Full Nelson.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Full Nelson.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tutu (album) already has one clip restored. Maybe that's enough for now. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hoo Dioo Blues.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hoo Dioo Blues.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was the original 1957 single on Excello. My clip was from the wonderfully swampy 1971 re-arranged version on High and Low Down, where it was re-named "Voodoo Blues". Just a great, great blues song. A few examples available on YT. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:38, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:I Can't Trust Myself Alone.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:I Can't Trust Myself Alone.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems a perfectly good sample to illustrate both the music on that album and Earl Hines' unmistakably distinctive musical phrasing. And it's his own composition (the only one on that record). But, since "the song is not discussed" in that article, it seems it has to go. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:48, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now it's gone. Forever. Oh well. (... well, still two full versions on YouTube, if anyone needs them!!) Martinevans123 (talk) 22:07, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Just a Memory.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Just a Memory.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to believe that there is not a single example of his playing at Johnny Hodges, which is why I added this one. But the rules seem to be that the song has to be "discussed" to warrant fair use. Unlikely there's much commentary about this version of the tune could be found, or an article created for the EP from which this is taken. Perhaps a different clip could be added at Side by Side (Duke Ellington and Johnny Hodges album), if some discussion of the version on that album could be found. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:On Reflection.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:On Reflection.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The song is mentioned in the "Reception" section in a sourced quote. I have opened a thread at the talk page of Ojorojo, who removed the audio clip, to clarify the situation. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now resolved - clip re-added. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:48, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Scott-Heron Johannesburg.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Scott-Heron Johannesburg.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-added the clip, as the song is discussed in that article. How much more "discussion" there is required? Can easily be expanded, if required. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Hopkin bullying

[edit]

When an IP editor appears here and moans about an "internet troll hiding their IP address and hiding under a fake name", that sounds to me like the height of hypocrisy. Wikipedia works on "consensus" - if you see that as "bullying", then I'd respectfully suggest that Wikipedia is not the place for you. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Our Lives"

[edit]

Hi Martin, still into this masterpiece ? I recently discovered an auto-generated audio video on YouTube (with an excellent audio quality) and it instantly reminded me of the 12" version you sent me back in 2014 (!) along with some other remixes. Synthwave.94 (talk) 23:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes still sounds great to me. Not sure what has happened to that YT clip which is now "not available" after only 10 days and 10 views. Maybe it's a geographical thing. "Robert Brookins Our Lives (Extended Club Mix)". posted by Malik Silas Jefferson Published, on 28 Dec 2015, seems to still work fine, although I can't post a link here, of course, unless I want another indef block. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:36, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The video posted by Malik Silas Jefferson also works for me, but I didn't find any clip for this song. Maybe this has something to do with copyright issues (which seem to affect more and more YT videos these days...) Synthwave.94 (talk) 00:53, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure there is any trend at YT. Maybe it depends on one's musical tastes. A few years ago about 5% of the videos I had favourited would suddenly appear as "This video is not available", presumably for copyright reasons.These days I have more favourites, but they almost never disappear. I suspect YT has somehow "sorted out" the copyright problem, perhaps with greater use of geographic filters. I'm just surprised there's not some high level contact between YT and WP that would resolve copyright issues in a more satisfactory and transparent way. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:36, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Musical memories

[edit]

(I'm afraid I didn't want to continue where we left.) I managed to write the bio of the last of five influential people who shaped the festival that has made most of my summers from 1987, Claus Wisser. The others on my talk (today) and in my memories + more music. Came to sit next to an artist's mother last Wednesday, whose article I improved (+ image), and wrote his wife's whom I heard playing here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keats

[edit]

Thanks for your keen eyes on John Keats. It would be wonderful to work it up into a GA. I did submit it (at one point) but the reviewer said it needed a separate 'themes' section. I think there is a lot of themes work woven into the article itself. Biography is more my thing. I had all the biographies out at the time of writing the article. I don't think it's that far off, still, thanks to the various stewards and their eagle eyes. I've been out of the WP loop for some years now, my eyesight being not very good. Just thought I would mention it to you, as a senior poetry power (SPP) in the WP world. You have given so much to the project over the years. My great thanks for your dedication. Anna (talk) 11:37, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Northward he turneth through a little door,
And scarce three steps, ere Anna's golden tongue
Flatter'd to tears this aged man and poor;"
But thank you so much, Anna, for those very kind words. Getting the Keats article to GA would be a very worthy aim. Agnesevans123 (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind keeping half an eye on Anna, if you're about? She might get hit by some rather pointy hammers sometime soon. Ta. Anna (talk) 17:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will try. A totally new topic for me. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. It's just the usual person with a sledge hammer we're looking out for. It hasn't materialised, thankfully. Anna (talk) 22:27, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Found a Job.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Found a Job.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, B-Bot, you'e doing much better lately keeping up with User:Ojorojo, who certainly seems to have "Found a Job". It's nice to be automatically told these things. Or not. Happy to see "The Big Country" has survived there. Shouldn't be too difficult to find a discussion of the other track. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Have now re-added with a review quote. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hinger-luuuu-uuund!!!!

[edit]

"The Cuervo Gold, the fine Colombians, make tonight a wonderful thing." (?) --Georg "Nobby" Hegel 123 (talk) 09:51, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Clifton Chenier Bon Ton Roulet excerpt.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Clifton Chenier Bon Ton Roulet excerpt.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clifton Chenier has nine albums listed (although discogs lists 23), so some discussion shouldn't be too hard to find. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:23, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But maybe this clip would be better placed at Bon Ton Roula? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:47, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Good Old Days.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Good Old Days.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will have to try especially hard to find a suitable discussion for Jaroslav Jakubovič. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:05, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now re-added with a review from DownBeat magazine. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:22, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:New York Collapse.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New York Collapse.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to find any discussion about this track. But I'm sure Sassafras (rock band) deserves a clip of some kind. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[edit]

Thank you for tidying up the article List of In Our Time programmes by removing the duplicated entry on Montesquieu. Many thanks, Vorbee (talk) 07:57, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Don't often get any duplications there. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

s-s-s-s-s-sampling

[edit]

I don't believe dropping audio down to mono with a low bit and sample rate is a specific requirement for a fair-use rationale on an audio file; I just do it anyway because it makes the "respect for commercial reuse" bit stick. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:59, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

omg.... what a complete wikiwuss. But thanks, anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:02, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to upload my "rock band" arrangement of Boléro (in the style of ELP with a side order of King Crimson) as a free work, but the music is still in copyright until 2025 in the US. Bugger. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:04, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah-ha, well let's all hope, when it arrives, it's in glorious mono. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC):[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Barnstar of Good Humor
This is one of the few things that has made me legitimatly laugh on this website, congratulations. 💵Money💵emoji💵💸 23:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question 58

[edit]

I've only just spotted this. Maybe we could jam in my garage one day, if I can stick it out (I'm talking about keeping the band together). nagualdesign 05:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. I was originally programmed for conversational English, but after several years humouring the guests at Wikipedia, I now tend to just let rip, I'm afraid. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC) .... "His mama was screamin', His Dad was mad"....[reply]
You know what, Martin, it's been really heartening to have received a lot of support and encouragement to continue editing Wikipedia, and most of the bullshit that drove me to distraction is beginning to wash off (although the stench remains quite pungent from where I'm standing), but the biggest boon to my mental health came from reading your user page and seeing those Zappa quotes, then spending much of the evening listening to Joe's Garage. When I found myself singing and dancing as I was preparing my tea for the evening I felt like an enormous weight had lifted. This is why I absolutely love Zappa and have about 60 of his albums.
Joe says Lucille has messed his mind up, but was it the girl or was it the music? As you can see, girls, music, disease, heartbreak.. they all go together. Joe found out the hard way, but his troubles were just beginning... his mind was so messed up... he could hardly do nothin'. He was in a quandary being devoured by the swirling cesspool of his own steaming desires. Meh.. the guy was a wreck. So, what does he do? For once, he does something smart. He goes out and pays a lot of money to L. Ron Hoover at the First Church of Appliantology.
Enjoy! nagualdesign 13:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes…. As you can see, girls, music, disease, heartbreak, Wikipedia…. they all go together -- L. Ron Wales (First Church of Wikipediology) 13:33, 11 July 2018 (UTC) ... "an enormous weight"? you ought to try something a little lighter for your tea!![reply]
Are you telling meee I should come out of the closet now, Mister Ron? nagualdesign 13:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's probably safer if you stay put for now, mate. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
These executives have plooked the fuck out of me. And there's still a long time to go before I've paid my debt to society. And all I ever really wanted to do was play the guitar and bend the string like Reent-toont-teent-toont-teent-toont-teenooneenoonee...
I've got it; I'll be sullen and withdrawn. I'll dwindle off into the twilight realm of my own secret thoughts. I'll lay on my back here 'til dawn in a semi-catatonic state, and dream of guitar notes that would irritate an executive kinda guy...
I can't wait to see what it's like on the outside now. nagualdesign 14:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Time to make myself something to eat and listen to the greatest album of all time I think. nagualdesign 14:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? Delete if not free ;) to fly with the balloon --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. What a very close examination that is. I had no idea that Ligeti had ever included "grab the pussy, grab the pussy" in his original libretto, but there you go. Great to see The Donald losing a few pounds like that and metamophosing to cleverly into an very animated Lady Liberty? Hats off to Sara. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DYK? - Had the great pleasure to hear her last Saturday, even took a pic with her permission but not quite good enough. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Greenslade - Feathered Friends.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Greenslade - Feathered Friends.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have now added come sourced commentary and have re-added the audio sample. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:05, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hunters and Collectors.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hunters and Collectors.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will have to try and find some discussion of this this classic. Even though it'll need re-creating. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sweetest Smile.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sweetest Smile.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have now added come sourced commentary and have re-added the audio sample. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:36, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Voices on the Wind.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Voices on the Wind.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like we'll have to give a new clip of "Hate to Lose Your Lovin'" a go, instead.Martinevans123 (talk) 20:51, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious!

[edit]

You invited me to message you on your talk page. I wonder how long before you delete this post. Look at your messages and then look at your reporting to "John" because you weren't getting your own way. Then I suggest looking up the word bully and understanding the definition. 183.182.104.62 (talk) 11:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Mary Hopkin article, or indeed Wikipedia as a whole, exists just for your personal amusement. Do you have anything useful to contribute? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:07, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saman Kunan.jpg

[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That tricky 5%, eh. It needs cropping at well. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Frankenstein sample.ogg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Frankenstein sample.ogg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For once I'm very pleased, as the article now has an official YT link to the whole thing. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh!!! What's occurrin'??? Nudge?? Hold?? Tilt??

[edit]
Nudge?? Hold?? Tilt??

My Watchlist seems to have suddenly transformed itself into something from Pinball Wizard!! Thank goodness that "The jackpot is in the handle on a normal fruit machine"!! Are we all now permanently on the slots??? ...... you tell 'em Puddles!! Martinevans123 (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That video was brilliant! I've never heard of PPP before. Yeah, the new watchlist is pretty horrific. On my laptop it kept popping up and down as it loaded, so as I was clicking on one thing, something else jumped under where my pointer was, then I have to click Back and repeat the whole thing again! I switched it off completely. (Preferences → Watchlist → tick Hide the improved version of the Watchlist.) nagualdesign 21:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is wonderful. One of his best, I think. I like a lot of his stuff. Talented guy. You may also like one of his first. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 16 July 2018 (UTC) (and good to see he's now crediting the song writers on the Cash/Who mash-up)[reply]
Very good. Subscribed. nagualdesign 21:58, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Christopher Chope

[edit]

Thanks for your most recent edit; just wanted to tie up loose ends. I wasn't aware of WP:DAILY MAIL; thank you for highlighting it. Happy to exclude the source then/probably search for something else later. As far as "weird referencing" was concerned, I didn't mean that the Public Whip reference is weird - on the contrary, very reliable source - but whoever formatted the reference (I think I saw two edits) had it so that it came up as only an external link, without the URL even given in the reference section, which was odd. I won't revert your recent edit, in light of WP:DAILY MAIL; happy with the consensus. Thank you once again! MB190417 (talk) 13:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling out the Public Whip source as a cite web ref. My only concern with that source is that one has to go searching for the material that supports the claim, not see it written in easy-to-swallow Daily-Mail-style prose. Perhaps that original edit summary by DM-hunter-in-chief was a bit misleading. Chope really is an MP "in a league of his own", isn't he. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, you can say that again! I'll give a search later on in the week to see if I can find anything non-tabloidy that can support the claim. In any case it's good to keep the Public Whip source there, even if we can find a suitable replacement. MB190417 (talk) 14:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"… we forgot Billy Preston!"

[edit]

Hi Martin. Thought I'd drop by and thank you for all the thank-yous you've been sending my way of late! Go well, JG66 (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome, JG66. Some great improvements. If you have any ideas of a suitable music sample that could be added to Billy Preston, do let me know. I think it would need to be used to illustrate a "discussion" of one of his songs. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine the easiest song to justify in terms of fair use would be a sample of his solo on the Beatles' "Get Back", because there's no end of commentary on his playing and what his presence on the track signified at the time. Other candidates might be his own hits "Outa-Space" and "That's the Way God Planned It"; maybe "Billy's Bag" from The Most Exciting Organ Ever; and the Hammond solo on the Stones' "I Got the Blues". As Rick Wakeman says in this excellent Radio 4 piece on Preston, there's no book or documentary film about Billy, and his solo career tends to be viewed as secondary to his work for the Beatles, Stones, etc. I imagine the same issue might limit our ability to justify including song samples anywhere other than in the Preston song articles, but less so for his contributions to a Beatles or Stones track, because of the coverage those acts continue to receive.
I'm getting ahead of myself a bit, but it would be great to have a section at Billy Preston dedicated to discussing his musicianship. There are some great quotes from Wakeman and others in the Radio 4 piece. For instance, the text could say how he brought an authentic gospel element to the Stones' work ("I Got the Blues", "Shine a Light"), same with funk through his introduction of clavinet to the Stones' sound ("Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo (Heartbreaker)"). I'm not sure if commentators see things that way, though – it could just be the gospel according to me … JG66 (talk) 06:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks JG66. As ever, some very intelligent ideas. I'd certainly support a section at Billy Preston dedicated to discussing his musicianship. And we have got 19 separate studio albums to consider as well. He wrote some great songs. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Too kind, thanks. Yeah, he's an artist that interests me plenty – extraordinary musician. (And I can't believe there's no mention of him at Hammond organ. In my opinion – not being a big prog rock fan, admittedly – Preston owned the Hammond. Ian MacLagan wasn't too shabby either.) JG66 (talk) 13:22, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Saman Kunan

[edit]

As a contributor to Talk:Tham Luang cave rescue#Saman Kunan article you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saman Kunan. Regards, WWGB (talk) 02:08, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. I fear he may not survive. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:23, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To Hull and back

[edit]

Here yesterday the Hull Daily Mail is trying to kill off the Queen as well.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:45, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, not Brenda too! Yes, but what all of these lists of "What will happen when Royal X dies?" are missing is the nationally important Step 6: "Their Wikipedia article gets {{pp-blp}} slapped on it pretty sharpish." Martinevans123 (talk) 08:22, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why Kim Jong-un appears in public so much is because if he didn't, people would assume that he was dead or had been toppled in a military coup. When one is an all-powerful communist leader, one has to keep up appearances.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:52, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and even when you've had enough. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:17, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The London Daily Mail is doing it now.[22]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:30, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Recently, the Queen was said to be furious after rumors started doing the rounds on social media that her husband had passed away. Buckingham Palace was said to be flooded with calls after Prince Philip's 'death' started trending on Twitter on Friday, July 20." He seems to be alive, in all those DM pictures. But one never knows, he could just be a giant lizard. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Cat distinction

[edit]
Catalonia (but really Spanish)

.... that old musical conundrum ....

.... where is Schleswig-Holstein?? ....

Cat-not-alonia (may be Dutch)

Andrei Chikatilo

[edit]

Hi, Martin.

Would you agree with my opinion that the lede of the above article should read that the individual was a Soviet serial killer, given that he was born in the Yabluchnye Oblast of the Ukraine in 1936 and obviously the individual committed his crimes across much of the Soviet Union in places as diverse as Tashkent, Leningrad and Ilovaisk between 1978 and 1990. Over the prv. two days, someone has repeatedly made adjustments claiming he was a Russian serial killer, with a smarmy reply in his/her last edit. Regards, --Kieronoldham (talk) 22:18, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kieron. Yes, I would agree. Although the layout here means that your addition has suddenly made my exiled Spanish cats look quite sinister. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I knew it anyhow, Martinevans123. Just needed a (more eminent?) Wikipedia opinion to back me up. I have probably worked more extensively on that article more than any other. I knew I was either just the target of either vandalism or blatant immaturity. As for the placement of this text, well, that was unintentional, but the cat on the left of the screen looks like it's contemplating getting it's claws out anyhow. Regards,--Kieronoldham (talk) 22:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, yes it is. Don't be put off by random IP incursions (nationalist agenda based??) - you've obviously put a lot of effort into that article. But, if you're ever in Salisbury, just watch out for the local perfume. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. gee, thanks dude, I don't often get compared to more real stars. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, as the saying goes. Carry on.-Kieronoldham (talk) 03:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lance Percival

[edit]

Unlike yourelf, I have no idea about any of the protocols associated with wikipeadia and not being a professional like yourself, I have had to do a quick crash course on using it so apologies for any mistakes.

I'm not sure how you came to be amending the page in question. Perhaps you could tell me. It is interesting that you hadn't bothered correcting the glaring error of the omission of any mention of the accident (see the youtube video for original wiki entry). It was after all, a life changing event, not just for the dead and injured, but for Percival himself. I have a feeling he didn't work in TV or films again, something I must do some research on as it might be a salient point to include in the Bio. What do you think? The implication that the newspaper images are in some way fraudulent and that the youtube clip should be taken down because of this is insulting. As for giving credit to Rossini, he does get a mention in the comments so that if that is not sufficient I can amend that .

I think putting the amount of compensation into what it is worth today is slightly overspinning as if anyone is truly interested they can look it up as indeed you had to. If you want to continue with that mindset we might as well say " A crime which if comitted today would result in a custodial sentence" Do you think that would be a good thing to put in? At least you had the good sense to remove the word 'substantial' for the compensation from a previous incarnation if indeed that were you. As for wondering who I am, I am sure Percival made many enemies in his life.I was not one of them. Clivemasters (talk) 12:01, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the trouble to drop me a note here, Clive. And thank you so much for crediting me with "good sense". Also very pleased to hear that you and Lance were not enemies. Re how you came to be amending the page in question, Lance Percival is quite well known and Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", so why not? He's on my Watchlist, just as, I imagine, he is on yours, for whatever reason. Re: glaring omission, we are none of us perfect editors who are expert on the subject of every article we might edit; anyone is free to add what they think is missing. Re: newspaper images are in some way fraudulent I think the newspaper material is all 100% genuine, I suggested that it was useful source material. My qualms were based on the possible motivations behind making such a video, and on the fact that it almost certainly counts as WP:SPS and WP:OR. Re: didn't work in TV or films again, yes certainly a salient point worth researching. Re: amount of compensation into what it is worth today, this is just standard practice used across very many articles to explain comparative value; it has nothing to with "spin" or changes in criminal law and sentencing. Re: for wondering who I am, I was actually wondering who the YouTube film maker was. He seems to be a bit of an expert on this matter, doesn't he? (or she, of course) Martinevans123 (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Evening all.. this from L.P.s obituary in the Telegraph [23] "In late 1970, however, Percival was involved in a bad car accident in which he nearly lost his sight in one eye. Despite this, he appeared in several more films, including the Up Pompeii! series and similar British comedies of the period, among them Our Miss Fred (1972) with Danny La Rue, and Confessions from a Holiday Camp (1977)...He made a variety of television appearances both as an actor and personality, including in the series Up the Workers (1974-76); The Kenneth Williams Show (1976); and Noel’s House Party in the 1990s. On Radio 4 he was a regular panellist on Ian Messiter’s Many a Slip in the 1960s, and on Just a Minute in the 1980s." So it doesn't look like he stopped working. Irondome (talk) 12:31, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Irondome. That's very useful and rapid research! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problomo Martin. I liked talking to Lance P. He had a wealth of stories..that was in one of my previous incarnation as a recruitment consultant in the 90's. It was hard placing him with a suitable P.A for his writings, but I had and have a soft spot for him. Irondome (talk) 12:44, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added Ian Messiter’s Many a Slip, which I was unaware of. That obit in The Daily Telegraph is also very useful. How impressive that you got to talk to him, Simon!! Fame indeed. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:56, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The conversations would last an age. Stage one would be a barely-veiled attack on my profesional competence, based on his perception that the candidates I was sending him were rubbish "Now you know how busy I am Simon, I need a young lady (sic) who can think.." "You know my requirements, how many times have we been over this..?" all delivered in that distinctive, nasal voice. Then chit chat would ensue..He would always talk about The V.I.P.s and the other cast. When speaking of Orson Welles his tone would become reverential. Initially a little crusty but once you gained his trust, a gentleman. A lovely man and a relic of a lost age. Irondome (talk) 13:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Am now wel-jel, innit. I'd recommend "Original Takes for Orson Welles Wine Commercial" which is available on a certain well-known video sharing website Martinevans123 (talk) 13:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(winks) righto guv! Irondome (talk) 13:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Cor blimey, me ol' china plate. I'll keep me mincies peeled for the owd Bill, while you snatches the sparklers!!" etc. etc. Jack-"the-Pratt"-McVitties 123 (talk) 13:34, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to protest in the strongest possible terms to the crediting of this so-called "Martin Evans" with good sense. Tsk. Best wishes to all, — Preceding unsigned comment added by DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk • contribs) 16:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for that heart-felt vote of confidence. I'm always happy to dole out a bit of common sense: --Marty Dread 123 (talk) 18:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC) ...yes, folks, a real reggae band without any "jam coons" or "weed niggers"[reply]
Who said nigar? On my to-do list. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's so gratifying, Gerda, to see you taking an interest, at long last, in Pakistani cinema. Who knows what's next.... maybe even cricket! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disappoint you: Debussy's spelling. I thought of a DYK for a singer of love and jealousy, we could say that Sybille Specht appeared as La Belle, and Sybille Philippin recorded Bach. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget that the oratorio Sankt-Bach-Passion by Mauricio Kagel, premiered for the tricentenary of Bach's birth in 1985, "changed the game by making Bach himself the suffering protagonist"?
Die Fliege
I copied Die Fliege by mistake, take it for the last times you were gone. Miss Hillbilly, no holiday without him. Five years ago, he made me blush. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cripes!! Who let that darned pesky thing in here??! [1]
I rather liked steaming fucktard™ - do you think the College of Arms would permit me to adopt it as my motto? DBaK (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC) Look Mummy I signed this one.[reply]
But, of course. Don't forget it's the Great steaming fucktard. "Twat rampant gules, on a field of corn or, two bends argent". --Tarquin Sprightly Boyes-Rentum 123 (talk) 08:49, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Martin

[edit]

Just saying hello. EEng 19:30, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, hello. "...when I call, you never seem to be home". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC) (.... only 2,371,077K views)[reply]

Flowers for Die Fliege

[edit]
flowers, music, balloon

Here's a hiding place for that pesky ... It's my parents' wedding anniversary, and the bridal flowers were gladiolas from her parents' garden. I share them in loving memory, with a touch of art. The link is shameless canvassing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see Purcell's Dildo and Aeneas given the front page mention it deserves. Malapropevans123 (talk) 12:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's also a linguist with a Welsh name. See ERRORS, for image, soprano's hook interest and name of Russian opera, sigh ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. That's only PRETEND ERRORS. I hear these days we have a special cave where the front page is constantly wrong, nearly all of the time. Allegedly. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The last word on pretend was that the image has to be removed from the Main page, you better speak there if you think it's a good image for an exceptional situation. teh rulez, teh rulez. (I know the cave.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The world of Trump is indeed a strange one. Some of us are still trying to comprehend the election result. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How fitting that the article was created by User:Pigsonthewing ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I knew there was a connection somehere. Maybe I'm internally conflicted. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:41, 30 July 2018 (UTC) p.s. I've also given up on Talk:Ezra Pound for the foreseeable future (as it seems you may also wisely have).[reply]
I unwatched E.P. on request. Said today already that AE is the worst place WP has to offer. I got no ping so ignore ignore ignore it, happily. I don't believe that blocks and (topic) bans create a collabotative atmosphere, seriously. I also said before that I don't fear to be blocked for making a factual list, passing a beautiful image, and then make it a bit smaller when disappointed. Will expand the article. On one of his birthdays, my father and we company made a pilgrimage to that bridge that he loved, as many others. He made a trip to the UK once to explore a historic bridge, possibly this one but not quite sure. - Building bridges is something I like ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Newport has quite a famous one. Quite impressive to walk across it. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Enters Sara Hershkowitz (the image I said wasn't good enough). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, Gerda! A jaw-dropping performance (Sara's, that is, not yours!) Martinevans123 (talk) 07:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You should hear her also singing "... und auf uns sinkt des Glückes stummes Schweigen", from Morgen! - as I did. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Politics is the Science of Lying

[edit]

It looks like maybe a little "family entertainment" is in continuation & outside of the Teahouse here? There is no jackknife in anyone's hand but, despite much of the lyrical content of the song to be linked here (esp. much of the chorus - which rings volumes) many of the lyrics may actually ring true, tweaked, can be interpreted as a form of truth for us both? Best regards. :)--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take any of this too deeply btw., mate. Politicians et al are perfectly capable of bursting their own bubbles.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Blimey. And I thought some of my posts were a bit "abstruse"! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:06, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Damn it. It went down like a lead balloon.--Kieronoldham (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Tomasz Stańko

[edit]

On 31 July 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tomasz Stańko, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ad Orientem (talk) 18:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Tomasz Stanko Quartet - JazzBaltica, Salzau, Germany, 2005-07-03" Published on 18 Nov 2014 121,253 views - highly recommended. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:06, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats M. The DVD listed here Tomasz Stańko#Video albums is a Christmas Eve tradition in my home. A nice mix of traditional and jazz songs. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 19:17, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, here are a few snippets c/o EuroArtsChannel: [24] It was recorded live at the Cistercian monastery Schulpforte in Saxony-Anhalt ( - I think Gerda would strongly approve!) If you want to hear Tomasz in action with Angelika Kirchschlager, you'll need to search for "8. "Es ist ein Ros entsprungen". Quite magical, I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding these links for your talk page watchers M. It also includes some views in around the town as well. A beautiful watch and listen - I have even pulled it off the shelf and put it in the DVD player in months other than December :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 20:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have that (yet) haha. The tribute video that ECM have posted on YT shows clearly what a genius he was. I had mixed feelings about his first ECM album, Balladyna, as he fitted so easily into the ECM groove. I think some of his best work was after that. His later ECM albums are all classics in my book. Fortunately here is no shortage of Stańko on YT - even entire albums, such as the wonderful Almost Green (1979) on Leo Records (not that we can link to most of them, of course). Martinevans123 (talk) 20:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
More thanks to you for the mentions of his works. RIP TS and thanks for the music that you created. MarnetteD|Talk 21:33, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thank you for updating Tomasz Stańko's page. I was also working on it. I'm TOTALLY new in editing Wikipedia so sorry for all the mistakes I've probably made. I would love to get in touch. I'm in contact with Mr. Stańko family. They really want this page to be great. Kajetan Prochyra (talk) 08:39, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Kajetan, that's very kind of you. You seem to have a done a pretty good job, there. A big improvement. I will try and check over it later. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Still alive"

[edit]

Indeed I am.[25] I've been less than enamoured with the administration of this site, so have found myself spending time at pastures new - I think they call it 'internet dating', though that latter term can only be loosely applied. lol. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, good for you!! I actually died a long, long time ago and donated what was left of my frazzled brain to the WikiMedia Charity Drop-in Center™ Martinevans123 (talk) 21:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've heard about that drop-in centre - someone had a birthday party there. ("The place was crowded out with people - people I don't even know"). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:10, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed. Sorry to hear that "Slack Alice went mad" and said that the Birthday cake was a "bread-pudding whitewashed". Ooo-ooo Martinevans123 (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taxes and death

[edit]

Hi Martin.

With regard to this edit, and your question about tax, I believe your death would be tax deductible - Hotblack Desiato set a legal precedent for just that. (I would have posted in the AN/I section, but it's been closed.) Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How very thoughtful of you, Chaheel. I will consider adding a codicil, in your favour, to that document I carry everywhere with me in a leather case. But fret ye not. As you may have seen, I was already tipped off by another fellow eternal hitchhiker. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kay Burley

[edit]

Hi, the link to the petition is https://www.

change.org/p/sky-news-kay-burley-must-apologise-to-simon-weston-over-comparing-him-to-women-who-wear-burqas

but it won't let me post it directly. As a novice user I don't understand why - can you help out? Thank You.

92.4.0.52 (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know, that source also has a global ban! We'd need to find a secondary source that mentions the total figure - often problematic if the petition is very recent and keeps growing. We'll have to keep looking. Thanks for your patience. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see that 60,666 have now signed. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe Kay would like to be forced wear a burqua for a day and see how she likes it?? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions

[edit]
Not everyone who walks here is dancing.

Thanks for unbiased and often humorous contributions. Just Saying ..... :) .... In times of universal deceit, seeing humour in all things becomes a revolutionary act.-- BOD -- 12:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Poor old Jezza. I thought that was only a professional hazard at Wikipedia. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies about the several editing conflicts just then :) back late and rushing-- BOD -- 21:09, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very grateful to User:Khamba Tendal for providing that BBC link. Quite a useful resource. Easy to see how things can get confused and misconstrued. I would have thought that general graveside etiquette at an event such as that would mean Corbyn may have had very little say as to where he was expected to stand and what he was expected to do. It's all quite ridiculous. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly (my editing tonight was all over the place, wanted to get on to more social things). Love your lopsided index, I had to double take :)-- BOD -- 21:35, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I fear this saga may have all been Grave Mistake. ~ BOD ~ TALK 13:33, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, poor old Jezza, his political days are numbered, I fear. "A pathetic Daily Mail article??.... I can't believe it!" Martinevans123 (talk) 13:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Darn dem pesky facebook reading sleuths. ~ BOD ~ TALK 13:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, people, "hoo noo"!!?. lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...but can't really comment, as I spend all my time drooling over pics of Jeremy in Magaluf, in his budgie-smugglers, on this site.

Corbyn - Wreath laying in Tunis

[edit]

My edit was explained in the first edit of a group of edits, the same as Bodney did. However unlike Bodney's multiple edits (which apparently did not require explanation), my group were one edit only separated so as not to revert intermediate unrelated changes from JLo-Watson. Clivel 0 (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit trail wasn't clear. Your edit summary here was "Removing non BLP material, political grandstanding, and WP:COATRACK material, all in barely intelligible English". I think the English was wholly intelligible. What was this coatrack? I think a separate edit summary is expected for each edit? Essentially you seem to have just reverted the whole preceding set of changes? What was the reason or reasons? It might be better to discuss at Talk:Jeremy Corbyn? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually my reasoning was only three lines down, nevertheless I should have applied it to each edit.
And it was not just a reversion, I did included some, albeit very little, of Bodney's material relating to Mohamed Sheikh, Baron Sheikh also having attended the conference. Unfortunately by reverting it, the article now appears to have devolved into what appears in some cases to be not much more than a propaganda piece e.g
" ...who Israel believe were involved in the Black September Organization which was responsible for the Munich massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics (though none of those actively involved in the killings at Munich were buried in Tunisia) ..."
to say that Israel believe[s] when there is no doubt is putting a spin on it, so is the unnecessary rider: (though none of those actively involved in the killings at Munich were buried in Tunisia). Prior to the changes by Bodney, that sentence read:
...for members of the Black September Organization who were linked to the Munich massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich
which was accurate, neutral and succinct.
Bodney also censored the quote from the widows, the real victims here, who have requested that Corbyn issue an apology, buy removing much of the quote. Despite the discussion on the talk page regarding the widows Bodney did not avail himself/herself of the opportunity to partake in this discussion, and Snowded who had taken part was only concerned with the source, not the quote itself when he wrote: Nothing should be inclued until there are reliable third party sources as to its narue and its significance and later wrote: It's a selected source designed to make a point. We could insert lots of quotes here, including accusations of hypocrisy against the Israili Prime Minister and so on. neither of which are arguments for not including it as there are plenty of sources. Clivel 0 (talk) 23:02, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that this is on your talk page Martinevans123, I do admit my editing was at times messy tonight, should not edit while multitasking & toothache, I made too many silly minor English mistakes.-- BOD -- 23:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your explanation, Clivel 0. I think this discussion belonged at Talk:Jeremy Corbyn, but there's little point in moving it now. Things have already moved on there. I have no objection to the article's current version. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:47, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On elementary grammar

[edit]

In 2012, Corbyn married his Mexican-born partner Laura Álvarez in Mexico, who runs a fair-trade coffee import business.

That it a devastatingly sloppy piece of prose because after a comma, one is given a clarification and in ',+who constructions' the word proceeding the comma is what the 'who' refers to. I.e. put thus, 'Mexico' becomes a person 'who runs a fair trade coffee import business'.

This of course is not what was intended. My 'improvement' simply clarifies this slipshod use of the comma+who construction.

In 2012, Corbyn married in Mexico his Mexican-born partner Laura Álvarez, who runs a fair-trade coffee import business.

A stylist would write:

In 2012, Corbyn went to Mexico and married Laura Álvarez. She is Mexican-born and runs a fair-trade coffee import business.

which I didn't do because I had my left cheek just under the eye punctured by a queen bumble bee two hours ago while harvesting nashi near her hive, and the nagging pain doesn't make for patience.Nishidani (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems Jezza has been well and truly stung also? I make a point of never editing after being stung by queen bumble bees. I think I've seen worrying behaviour at wikipedia. But make sure you watch out for those King Bees Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC) p.s. I have my own private stylist, thanks.[reply]
I don't think he has been stung. The silly fellow should lay his cards on the table, fearlessly, and state what everyone knows, instead of crumbling like a gutless wonder towards death by a thousand promo-blows for bullshit. What everyone knows is that this is a disgraceful assault on one of the core values of modern democracy - the idea that there is such a thing, in law, ethics and modern institutions, as universal rights, whatever ministers in the present Israeli government think. Thanks for the trip down memory lane with the link to the song.Nishidani (talk) 14:33, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dog food

[edit]

We will perhaps never know when the little nigar served. Should I take it out? per the article talk page? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I generally love trivia like that, but that really is quite inconsequential (unless one is desperately searching for a DYK hook, of course). Not sure it helps the reader really understand the subject better. I would guess that the advertising agency probably didn't even know who wrote it. And, besides, it's not even decent dog food!! Martinevans123 (talk) 18:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to please, see user talk:Drmies/Archive 115#The Little Nigar. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha. I had not peeped, honest!! Xanthy obviously has the right idea. But User:Drmies ought to know better than to promote racist dog food. tut tut Martinevans123 (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a much less studious rendition than the one, linked in the article, by Ichiro Kaneko (which is wonderful). It's by Marina Scalafiotti and it's certainly Con brio! Not exactly hi-fi (with a $5 mic), but Wholly in the spirit of ragtime, I think, and really enjoyable: [26]. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1904 - 1912 - 1901 - 1903

[edit]

In 2015 with this edit you produced a bit of calendrical whiplash in Salvador_Dalí#Early life.

First the birth year of 1904 is mentioned. Then the summer of 1912 is mentioned. And then the year 1903 is mentioned in relation to the birth year of 1904.

That out-of-place middle sentence was inserted by altering a ref with edit summary "(bring out of ref)". Only that put it between two sentences that shouldn't have been separated. Shenme (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How very kind of you to remind me. Well, the clamour to correct that disaster has hardly been unbearable for the last three years. But thanks for spotting it. How would you propose we correct things? We still have that rather ugly, yet seductive, in-line link to Google Street view. Alas, whiplash is my middle name. Let's hope you get the compensation you deserve. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Richie

[edit]

If the comment was aimed at me, I'm too stupid/tired to understand it. If it was aimed at Richie, I'm too stupid/tired to have realised it, and apologies for bothering you! --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 12:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Like most of my inane comments, it was aimed at no-one in particular. (Note: "More tea vicar?" is a common expression, used in polite conversation, in many British front parlours, when the local village parson is kind enough to call). Martinevans123 (talk) 12:40, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also

[edit]

New User

[edit]

Hi, why immediately delete my addition to various artists who have recorded versions of Morning Has Broken? Just curious as this is all very new to me. Thanks, April AprilShowersMayFlowers (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi April, thanks for asking. You added a version in the "Other versions" of Morning Has Broken, saying "Added content" and I reverted it saying "Lenny who?". Sorry if my edit summary was a bit cryptic. Your addition has two problems: 1. The artist Lenny Marcus Trio does not seem to be notable, as it has no article; 2. You provided no source to support your claim that those artists did indeed record a version of "Morning Has Broken". Unless you can establish (1) somehow, there's not much point looking for (2). Is that reasonably clear, or can I expand on anything for you? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:27, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaahkay...so since the band doesn’t have page yet, I should either create one or cite the album somehow? I don’t know why they don’t have a page but I’m not that committed. Their albums are on Apple Music, going back several years. I’m not a fan of theirs, per se, but I love this song & happened to hear their version today, searched for more info & was surprised to find that they weren’t mentioned on the Wikipedia article. No big deal. It’s extremely rare that I know something that hasn’t made its way onto Wikipedia yet & thought it would be fun to contribute something...but I doubt I’ll go to any more trouble at this point. Thanks for your prompt attention. AprilShowersMayFlowers (talk) 21:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks to you for alerting me to that trio. Here they are on YouTube with Moonlight Sonata. Reminds me a lot of Jacques Loussier. Here's the track you added. Very talented. Perhaps someone will create an article for them. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Worry not: this is not overlinking; due largely to the siting of the festival away from the town it is named after this is the first mention of Glastonbury as a town name, rather than a festival name, in the article. Britmax (talk) 11:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts also. I was just wary as the town is accessible via the existing link to Glastonbury Festival (1914–25). Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Better Headings

[edit]

What about Jeremy Corbyn and the Cemetery of Smear starring Daniel Radcliffe, except Rowlings not a fan of Corbyn. ~ BOD ~ TALK 23:14, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic Wreaths and Where to Lay Them, Jerry Potter and the PLO Stone or even Jerry Plodder and the Prisoner of Tunis? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:52, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Over my head...

[edit]

...huh? Atsme📞📧 14:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I was merely suggesting that Michael Hardy might possibly not quite scrape through an WP:RFA, if he stood these days. As for the Ancestral health F-plan diet, I tend to live a basic hunter-gatherer existence, subsisting on goji berries, wild lentils and sorrel, and felling the occasional bit of scrag end when the fancy takes me. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhhh...yes, I agree that things are different, but probably not for the same reasons as you. I just hope more editors will begin to realize that the trial period/term limit/mandatory recall proposal I put forward has merit. I have seen more dissension among admins this year than I have in the past 7 years, not to mention the detrimental effects of complacency, pre-conceived notions, time constraints on one's ability to conduct proper research, and the occasional poor judgment call that results in a bad block or t-ban. It's a relief to know that we still have a substantial number of trustworthy admins in the pool so my confidence level remains high. I also have a level of renewed faith as a result of the caliber of some of our newly elected admins. Unfortunately, we've lost quite a few quality content creators, reviewers, and copy editors, not to mention a noticeable lack of incentive in those who have chosen to remain. Worse yet, the WMF is promoting itself as an "advocacy", which opens the door to all kinds of special interest groups and advocacies who are on a mission to RIGHTGREATWRONGS...and like the old gray mare, NPOV ain't what it used to be. It made me think a little harder about the discussion on JW's TP regarding information warfare - it is not as far-fetched as I first thought. Atsme📞📧 22:22, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree with you, Atsme. You make some very useful points here. Jimboevans123 (talk) 09:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary

[edit]

Do you approve?[27] ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 16:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very much so Gareth, thanks. Perhaps we can find a third there? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Days of Future Passed

[edit]

Found an old vinyl copy of this in my collection last week - I don't think I'd played it for about 25 years. I think I was too much of an "angry rock kid" at the time to appreciate it. The article definitely needed a bit of a spruce-up. I'm curious to who the "Redwave" is on the original "Redwave - Knight" credits; that seems to have come from absolutely nowhere. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit, I totally missed that. No idea. What exactly is meant by "Days of Future Passed (Media notes). Deram. 1967. SML 707"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's the sleeve notes from my copy of the LP (probably), which contains the basic credits, and a very "of its time" blurb about combining poetry, "beat combos" and symphony orchestras so the group "becomes one with the classics". Obviously they hadn't experienced the extreme Mellotron onslaught of In the Court of the Crimson King at that point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:43, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe a piped link to (Media notes) would be clearer? I have never owned a vinyl copy of this (although I do have a prized copy of The Magnificent Moodies!) If there's no mention of "Redwave" I guess it should go. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's the {{cite AV media notes}} citation template. The "Redwave" - "Knight" credit is on the label. I just don't have any further information about it other than what's there. I'm sure somebody's put a scan of it online somewhere (but of course if you linked to what's technically a copyright violation, the fire of Hades would rain down on you). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Django"

[edit]

Could you transcribe the relevant parts from around this Google Books page for me, so I can read them with my screen reader? It seems like remarkably high praise from Miles Davis here. Thanks! Graham87 05:35, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go:
In Miles’s mind, he and Brubeck were not operating on the same terrain. While the pianist was a jazz star, especially on college campuses, his aesthetic was not the blues-drenched affair that the Miles Davis Quintet offered. Brubeck’s music was pale enough in its watering down of the blues aesthetic to be “sickening” – or, as Miles slyly signifies through Hawes’s comment, of a different cultural back ground altogether. On the other hand, Miles admitted John Lewis/s music very much, even though, as a leader of the third stream movement, Lewis was as genuinely interested in Western art music as was Brubeck. Davis described Lewis’s "Django" as one of the best compositions ever. A tribute to the innovative guitarist Django Reinhardt. It is almost like a poem in its economy and poignancy. With remarkable restraint and almost no concessions to the extroverted tendencies of jazz, the slow and dirgelike “Django” sustains an intensity and pathos made all the more beautiful through restraint.
Although Miles rarely played in contexts as staid as the MJQ, his feeling for their aesthetic cone be inferred from some of his collaborations with Gil Evans...
Hope that helps. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, yes, it does, and I'll add it into the article. I read about Davis's praise for the piece in this blog post, and it surprised me, because I'm sure I read somewhere (can't remember where now) that he wasn't much of a fan of the Modern Jazz Quartet. Graham87 09:10, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very glad to help. Quite a nice quote there from the authors of the book too. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC) p.s. my extensive musicological research habitual trawling of YouTube has also revealed this one by Aaron Diehl. I must say that YT is awash with versions from all sorts and all decades. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh why not? That link is really cool – I'm listening to it now– though the piano-playing gets rather terrifying around 2:30 or so. I've liked something in every version of this song I've heard (eve the crazy one from Jazz Abstractions) except the Blood, Sweat & Tears one ... what were they thinking?! Graham87 10:27, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wow I've not seen that one yet! A treat in store, by the sound of it, haha. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, being a complete brass dope, I rather like that one! Not exactly commercial gold, but quite gentle and relaxing. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah fair enough. Have you tried the Wynton Marsalis version? The best way I'd describe it is bittersweet ... and the trumpet and orchestra just add to that effect. I'm not so much a fan of brass instruments because I have absolute pitch and am generally very sensitive to intonation issues, which seem to be more common on those instruments (understandably) ... but they can create some amazing music. Graham87 11:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, just the best jazz album ever made, bar none, in my book. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:13, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One more excerpt if you don't mind ... from the Google snippet I can read, it seems to have led tothis film soundtrack? Graham87 11:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here uou go:
"Django – above all Lewis’s good luck charm, the piece that made him and the MJQ world famous, the piece that led directly to the commission for his first film score; the piece most associated with the heightened level of jazz composition in the ’50s  – was played at the “last concert” in a decisive version. "Django" is a memorial homage, a cortege for the great Gypsy guitarist Django Reinhardt who Lewis first heard during the war on a weekend pass.
I was tremendously impressed. Then I heard some record he made with members of the Teddy Hill band, Including a duet with Bill Coleman that was unbelievable. I definitely got to know his music when he came to this country in 1947 To play with Duke Ellington. He came down to a club where we were working on Fifty-second Street and we played overtime to make a good impression. It was wonderful to watch the change that took place in his playing, from things that were made in 1937 to things he was doing at the time he died. He kept changing. And I was so sorry when he died. I would have liked to spend more time with him.
The MJQ received the Prix du Disque for its 1954 recording of “Django” at the American Embassy in Paris. In 1992 Heath observed, "The original version with Kenny is of sentimental value but the one in the last concert is my favourite." Here are all the elements of Lewis's skill and MJQ’s interpretive power are as one: the evocative Gypsy feeling in the main theme, recalling the Adagio of Mendelssohn’s Octet the eloquently stout bass motif; the congruence of delicacy and force, discipline and spontaneity, tragedy and joy.”
Hope my dictation app was up to the task here .Martinevans123 (talk) 12:59, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks ... some very interesting quotes and tidbits indeed there! I'll add this info tonight and/or or tomorrow my time, depending on how busy my watchlist is. I've taken the liberty of making a couple of corrections for my own reference, done by Google-searching snippets of the text that I now have. I take it that the first quote is by John Lewis? Graham87 13:17, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it must be Lewis. It's just indented on the page with no attribution (which is page 399, by the way). Just listening to WM's version again now, which is on my original 1984 vinyl copy of Hot House Flowers. Stunning arrangement, stunning orchestration, stunning playing. He sure can hit some pretty perfect pitches. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:29, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes! On vinyl I imagine it'd be pretty nice. Graham87 13:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Emerson

[edit]

Hello Martine, thank you for your message about my edit in Keith Emerson. I have now added the autobiography as a reference. HOWEVER... The original text said: 'His parents were amateur musicians' which is not correct as only his father was an amateur musician. That's why I corrected it and added the page of his autobiography where he talks about his 'unmusical mother', to prove that 'his parents were amateur musicians' was incorrect. Although the text is NOW factually correct, the reference I have added (p 21) does not make any sense with the new text, because on p 21 he doesn't say that his father was an amateur musician, he says that his mother was not a musician. So although factually correct, the referencing is to amend a previous version of the text which no longer appears... Anyway... I probably over-complicate things... But do you understand what I mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarianneVerity (talk • contribs) 19:50, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Marianne, for leaving a note here. And thank you also for adding that source as a reference as I suggested. I've added a url link to the autobiography and I've tweaked the text a bit. Hopefully we, and other interested editors, can progress from there. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bells

[edit]

Is the video YT 3AzcU-FuF-I&vl=en free? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda. Is it that time again, already! I'm not the YT expert remember, I'm the YT dunce. I'm sure there are certain admins around who would know much better than me about these things. If I had to guess, I'd say that the video had been deliberately published in the public domain by YT account "Wiesbadener Knabenchor" which acts as the "official publisher" of that own material. However, as can be clearly seen from the video description, it is attributed as "A Film by Fritz Philipp Photography, Neu-Anspach (www.fritzphilipp.de)" and I can't see a clear statement by that company that the video has been released under a free licence. So I think Wikipedia policy forces us to assume permission has not been given. But I'd strongly recommend you ask a copyright expert like User:Diannaa, who is always very polite and helpful in these matters. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a license on that video, which means it is under a standard YouTube license, which is not compatible with our license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Diannaa. Would there be any way that Gerda could get permission directly from Fritz Philipp Photography? I would imagine the process, via Wikipedia or Commons, would be tortuous. Or is it impossible since it's already published under a standard YouTube license? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
People can change the licensing if they so desire. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Music for you, in the church with your name ;) + we are pictured in the ref, 2013 pic but better than nothing! The girl is in school now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How very uplifting and inspiring. I found a rather nice version of the Stanford Jubilate, by the Durham Cathedral Choir, from 2015, here. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Question as above: 4CjpKfpkVns? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, as you can see from my own User page, I guessed that the same applies. But I see that MusicArt61 has gone to he bother of copying "Licensed to YouTube by The Orchard Music (on behalf of Challenge Classics)" eight separate times. So I'd be very happy to get a second opinion from Diannaa again. I see it's been there five years already. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am not seeing any indication that this video is released under a compatible license. "Licensed to YouTube" would indicate a standard YouTube license, which is not a compatible license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Same music, other people: hUFRmfjU39k? - love the comment! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Um, "Spoecksl1", whoever they are, looks even less likely as an authorised copyright owner. And again no "indication that this video is released under a compatible license." The description says "Live recording of Köthener Herbst 2011. www.immo-schroeder-tenor.de" So I'd guess that's who owns the copyright here (although not necessarily). Maybe you want to contact Immo Schröder and ask him directly: [28]? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He is the tenor, in the costume, has it also on his website which I can't properly see, and on Bach cantatas. So he will not get an article ;) - The countertenor has one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And what a lovely wig, too. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abduct a user

[edit]

{{Adopt me|20180915151906}} Simon Adler (talk) 15:19, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


No pigs needed yet, thanks
Haha. I see Solway Products do just the right bit of kit. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've ordered the intermediate. Next I want a pig ark. Simon Adler (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. I assume you meant "adopt", although "adapt" sounds more fun. But don't think your dragging me up Mount Ararat, even if you do want to bask in reflected glory. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah-ha! Suddenly it all makes sense. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:38, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You ain't seen me, right?. Simon Adler (talk) 15:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It’s Zeptember!

[edit]

Hi Martin, I see that we had an edit clash the other day over at Jimmy Page – well, it is 'Zeptember' (according to Planet Rock anyhow)! And now I’ve just seen you again over at Rudyard Kipling. Maybe he’ll be one of the historical characters abducted by Bill & Ted in their upcoming adventure – which would be good, as at least he could settle the matter of his bl**dy nationality for us! All the best. JezGrove (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. I sometimes think that editing a Wikipedia article is just like reading a book.... "Cycling Up A Hill" by Rudyard Peddling. *chortle*, *chortle". Or then again, maybe it's just like making love to a beautiful woman....?? --Swiss Marti 123 (talk) 22:44, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it’s hard when you're in love with a beautiful woman. Shockingly, until yesterday I had no idea that Shel Silverstein had written "A Boy Named Sue" and most of the lyrics and music for the Dr Hook songs. JezGrove (talk) 23:28, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A shocking admission (I didn't know either). I see that "Zeptember" is used in the Masurian dialect. So I guess Rob and the lads must be big in Eastern Poland. Of course, me and Bobby go way back. Great to see he hasn't aged a bit. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC) ... wow, Silverstein wrote some real gems.[reply]

"Pass me that packet of Veras"

[edit]

You're welcome. Anytime. If you need me just reply on my talk page. Cheers! I wonder when I deserve a barnstar? Have a good day! GloriousGalaxyGal (talk) 10:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you are known as the "Wiki Forces sweetheart". Martinevans123 (talk) 11:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"My God"

[edit]

I can't believe we didn't have an article on "The Witch's Promise". Well now we do, and by pure serendipity it is, 123 bytes long. Would you care to make it a bit longer? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you know me, a bit superstitious, so I tend to steer clear of the Scottish play. But I could probably manage to stretch it to 124 or even 125. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Turns out we had an article but somebody deleted it - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Witch's Promise. "Not notable" - yeah, apart from being a top 5 hit and an often-repeated Top of the Pops appearance. WP:SQUIRREL!!!!! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Phew! There, now done my bit. Quite a slog and so intense I think I've gone cross-eyed. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC) I might even do more later![reply]
Just don't be dim-witted and add unsourced content, now.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:38, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Anomiebot never forgets. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's big enough to consider a DYK now. Any ideas for a hook? Only Tull single with a Mellotron on it, perhaps? I think "Cross Eyed Mary" on Aqualung has got some on the intro, and I think that's about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm tricky. Not sure where you'd find a source for that. I guess you ought to know, as they do call you Mr. Methane Mr Mellotron? Might take a while to check all 101. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The best source I know of is Planet Mellotron. It's just a question of convincing everyone else that "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". Seriously, what Andy "Planet Mellotron" Thompson doesn't know about the 'Tron isn't worth knowing about and he has been name-checked as an expert in a couple of books. And you can "verify" the claim by going through the group's back catalogue and checking which singles have 'Tron on them and which don't, the PM source just makes it much much simpler. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's very convincing. I certainly can't think of a better one. We would have to add it to the article, of course! Martinevans123 (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now for some blatant name dropping .... some time around 2001 I was setting up for a gig backing a local singer / songwriter, when Ian Anderson phoned him up and asked him to support him on a solo gig. Apparently, Ian wanted to use local musicians as support for every gig. I don't know how you'd verify that as it was in the pre YouTube era. And then there was the Cropredy gig a couple of friends of mine went to where everyone was asked to play the main riff of "Locomotive Breath" on kazoo. Strange times.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ooooh, **swoon**. Cropredy is always a great time. Have been quite a few times. A shame we don't have a copyright-compliant clip of the TOTP appearance. I see the one at YT has had 1.9M views since it was posted 8 years ago. What terrible miming - although the excellent sound quality suggests it's been re-dubbed. No sign of any keyboards (or much drums for that matter). But great to see the psychedelic effects for the Mellotron in the middle 8. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC) p.s. I guess a link to the lyrics would be useful addition.[reply]
I've got a feeling the miming was bad on purpose. When groups mime, the drummer usually plays a special kit that's basically all fake where all the cymbals are weighted to not move and all the toms are filled with padding so nothing makes any noise. This is why most of them look completely nonplussed and disinterested while they're "playing". Apart from Keith Moon who just took the piss, as per usual. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's Anderson's antics that really stand out. I guess the grimacing and gurning suggest he's not taking the whole thing very seriously. Paul Hegarty and Martin Halliwell describe them here calls them "pantomimic facial gestures". I must say that the little bit you do see of Clive Bunker looks rather tame but completely in time. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wish

[edit]

Hello. Assist content for Maureen Wroblewitz Thank you. 42.115.39.209 (talk) 11:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a Ibanez Soundtank DL5 delay pedal sitting on my desk here that's older than her. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Backing Britain?

[edit]

Hi Martin, just saw a comment of yours over at the I'm Backing Britain talk page. Not sure if you heard today's BBC Radio 4 drama based on the I'm Backing Britain campaign, but worth a listen. It managed to skewer both Jacob Rees-Mogg's father (and by implication the Moggster himself) for his/their obsession over Europe and the dangers of a far-left infiltration of union branch meetings (and by implication the Labour Party). And all whilst channelling the sexism, atmosphere, and background film music of the period. Best wishes! JezGrove (talk) 19:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How surreal. But I bet Harold doesn't get to visit a cemetery in Tunis. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Civility Barnstar
You are appreciated. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:18, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WSAN-AM

[edit]

Hi, Martinevans123. Saw your comment on the WSAN article. Agree with the sentiment. The billboard contest attracted national attention. One of the most amazing news stories the Lehigh Valley has ever seen. I covered the story for Service Electric's TV2 News and it made our news day almost every day for a half year or so. I was also a fan of WSAN in the 70s when they sponsored a concert series at the Roxy Theatre in Northampton. T. Rex, Blood Sweat & Tears, Peter Frampton, Billy Joel, James Gang, Roxy Music, Kiss... All of whom warmed up for their national tours in this 500-seat venue. Tickets were typically $1-2, never higher than $4.50. I have a pdf of the concert guide so at least I can add this almost immediately. I'll dig up the billboard story as well, plenty of sources on that. Not so much on the rest of the 1970-80 era, but thanks for calling attention. Allreet (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How amazing! Maybe you can add that to an article somewhere and use the concert guide as an image? Looking forward to your additions re the billboard story. I believe it also made national US newspapers too. Many thanks for the note. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Otis Rush

[edit]

Many thanks for bolstering his article so admirably. Damn pity it takes someone's death to occur before their Wiki article actually pay's anyone justice. Seems to happen to almost everyone - the bigging up of their article I mean, not the death itself (which definitely seems to happen...)

I would have sent you a kitten, or some fruit cake, or biscuits; but I couldn't be arsed. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Derek. Kitten cake and fruit biscuits can be very overrated when one suffers from "wiki seebs". I would have completely missed it had it not been for our friend Grymturtle. So we can both thank him. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:23, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Charles Aznavour

[edit]

On 2 October 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Charles Aznavour, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 00:41, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Au revoir, Charles. [29]. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:48, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for what you did for him, Martin. Servus, Ignaz. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:03, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least he had the last laugh on Terry Wogan. Adieu, Charles. Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard 10:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Adios Monserrat, - just found this beauty by Fiammetta Rocco: When the ample Catalan sings: Callas is no more; Kiri Te Kanawa is making television commercials, but Montserrat Caballe, the 61-year-old soprano with the old-fashioned style, is still the people's diva of choice - can you perhaps make it a source for Last Diva? I saw her as Salome (but she had a double for the dance ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a truly out of body experience. Have added a quote. A very good article. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just added this sumptuous yet delicate performance from 1971. Just beautiful. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google books

[edit]

Is there any benefit to linking to google books if there's no access to the content of a publication? You linked to Art Tatum: A Guide to His Recorded Music, but there's only bibliographic information available there. I've read that linking to google books is definitely fine if it's to a specific page, possibly fine if there's something there, but I haven't read anything about linking when there's no access to the material. Is there a discussion of it somewhere? Or, more briefly, why do you choose to link in such instances? Thanks for the other links: they'll help some readers. EddieHugh (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eddie. Thanks for taking the time to drop by with your polite note. Access to book content via Google Books seems to vary between countries. My only motivation is that "more links are better". If you feel any of the links I have added to Google Books, or to publishers, including Universities for PhD theses, have no added value, please feel free to delete them. Furthermore, if you would prefer to just be given time to work thorough the Art Tatum article, with your excellent checking and copy editing, without the distraction of my very mundane and pedestrian edits, please let me know. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I seemed blunt: I tend just to ask. Good point on access varying by country; it's one reason I don't bother adding links, but I've no objection to others adding them. And no: keep going with the edits, as I'll try to do from the Lester biography. EddieHugh (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Kewel beenz". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Double Shot!.jpg

[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. We cant spare a whole 31 KB for this already pitifully degraded image. Oh well, thanks for the link. Please reduce away at your leisure. I can recommend the opening track, "Dirty Rat", by the way (which is available on YouTube). This is a fine album which has a wonderfully home-made feel about it. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:45, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aznavour

[edit]

Hi. before starting an editwar explain your revert at talk please. Seda Aznavour clearly says no Charlie exists [30]. 46.172.9.61 (talk) 12:19, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Best discussed at Talk:Charles Aznavour, I'd suggest. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted again and added a new reference (the given reference didn't mention any children anymore, as far as I could see) but I'm unsure to skeptical about Charles jr. I started a thread at Talk:Charles_Aznavour#Son_Charles. Thank you, both. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:32, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm not sure a Facebook page can really be used for anything. But especially not if it's just WP:OR. I see that fr:Charles Aznavour says this:
"Marié trois fois, Charles Aznavour a eu six enfants : Seda (1947) et Charles (1952)[1] de son union le 16 mars 1946 avec Micheline Rugel Fromentin... " which tramslates as:
"Married three times, Charles Aznavour had six children: Seda (1947) and Charles (1952) of his union on March 16, 1946 with Micheline Rugel Fromentin.. "
Martinevans123 (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ magazine Biographie No. 3., décembre 2012, "… il a le bonheur d'être à nouveau père d'un petit garçon, prénommé Charles", article de Lucie Benhamou.

Khashoggi

[edit]

Soon to be a major motion picture opening near you? (Perhaps as a sequel to one about the Danish submarine guy.) Sca (talk) 16:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be at all surprised. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:14, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Goulishly enough, I just watched a German documentary about a dismembered body found at a dam near Goslar. A description (Google trans.) begins, "In February 2007, a hiker at the Oker Dam (Harz) ... discovered something that did not belong there. It looked like part of a mannequin, but without the arms, legs and head. It was a human torso." Turned out a local butcher had done the deed, with help from his son. Gag. Sprichts du deutsch? Sca (talk) 16:25, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. Just the thing to watch when I'm chilling in the cellar. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh. I was hoping you were talking about the Kapuzinergruft in Vienna. Very artistic, if a bit musty. Sca (talk) 16:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Forgive me if I've asked you this before, but have you ever considered archiving the first 8 million words of your talk page? Sca (talk) 16:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How very dare you!! I have the shining example of my icon to think of. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I learned our government must be strong;
It's always right and never wrong!
Our leaders are the finest men
And so we elect them again and again,
And that's what I learned in school today,
That's what I learned in school.
– Tom Paxton, 1964. — Sca (talk) 17:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NOTBROKEN

[edit]

This edit goes against WP:NOTBROKEN. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Love you too, Walter! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A rousing and inspiring musical link for all those who are feeling particularly not broken: I Bind Unto Myself Today (St. Patrick's Breastplate) at YouTube - "Hi-Fi Hymn Book provides FREE downloads of pipe organ recordings of Christian hymns and service music."

Wish

[edit]

Hello. Helps improvements for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you.125.214.48.163 (talk) 10:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I wish too. But it might be like the blind leading the deaf? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Martin, that wish comes up on multiple talk pages, - I started rollback the third time. - See my talk today, for Chopin and Brahms, and yes I'm pictured ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, only my second so far. Forget about Chopin and Brahms, dearie, here are some nice make-up tips for you. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  no bra no make-up
This user supports breast cancer awareness.
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good for you, Gerda. Well done! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Small Image

[edit]

Hi Martin, you mentioned the image in the article for Jamal Khashoggi was small. There are larger images of each individual, including the photograph of Maher Mutreb which is not pictured there, on the Daily Sabah article LissanX (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lissan. The image itself is not that small, but the 16 component images are. I'm not sure how those individual images could be added or linked. This might add weight to the argument for a separate article for the disappearance of Khashoggi, where all 16 images could be shown individually in a gallery? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:35, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems you did not realize they might all be in breach of copyright. I see that they've now all bee deleted. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Civility Barnstar
For keeping your cool and maintaining a completely civil attitude, demeanor, and conduct in this discussion on Talk:Princess Eugenie - even as an IP user made numerous uncivil, heated, and troll-like comments toward you. Your continued civility and your calm response to the user after they made this comment towards you is to be commended. Most users would have stooped to this user's level and responded with equally uncivil responses and personal attacks, and I'm happy to see that you didn't.

This level of civility is a shine of brightness in what's sadly become acceptable and "normal" in terms of uncivil conduct between editors. Your ability to remain civil and not allow messages like this get to your emotions or drive you to respond back in the same manner is absolutely wonderful and a rare quality to see in other editors. Please don't let that quality about you change; It separates experienced and wise editors from the average and the new, it makes leaders out of followers, and paints maturity and wisdom among those who have been an editor on Wikipedia for a long time and that many others look up to.

Keep up the excellent work, and know that keeping your emotions and civility in-check at all times like this will help you go far on this project. I hope you don't let that quality change about you - it means far more to others than you think or could imagine :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:02, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness me, Oshwah. I'm weeping softly into my crumpled hanky here. But thanks very much! Let's hope that IP editor found his CAPS LOCK key eventually. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite welcome; you deserved recognition for that. I hope so too... but fear not... we gave the user plenty of time to locate it as well as read WP:CIV while they're blocked. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 11:08, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. I’ve always thought that ”You Genie” was quite an odd name for a Princess. But I can get you a free pass into Ivy Cotttage for a few Tequila slammers any time you fancy!! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC) [reply]

File:A Cut Above.jpg

[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow yes a whole grizzly hyper-realistic 64KB there. Almost as bad as printing banknotes and hanging them out to dry on Wikipedia money trees. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:25, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You haven’t been blocked in a while, so

[edit]
Stackable WTF blocks
 You are the recipient of a WTF Block
Remember how much fun you had playing with blocks as a kid? Now that you're a mature adult?, you can collect blocks with adult letters. They're not only stackable, they're collectable.

Where have you been? I’m missing your humor!! Atsme✍🏻📧 17:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC) Disclaimer: Intended as humor. Pure pun-ishment. [31][reply]

As you may have seen over at BDSM Weekly, I am just happy to quietly indulge my coulrophobia while enjoying a nice cup of Herbaria'™' calming tea. But thanks for the WTF blocks.... they will remind me of some of my favorite rogue admins. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:36, 25 October 2018 (UTC) ..... p.s. have actually been taking time out to perfect my revolutionary new pudding supplement....Ken and Brian 123 (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2018 (UTC) [reply]
Have not seen the Weekly but get the message. I was swimming with amazement by the Herbaria spot - very well done!! And finally, I do my best to stay away from rogue admins. My favorite admins are awesome people, but I am well aware there are other types. I was missing you over at EEng’s page, especially in light of his latest gig. 😂 Atsme✍🏻📧 18:16, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can see Dolly Parton and Carol Burnett as ideal Admins..... but not too sure about Andy Warhol and Jack Nicholson. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2018 (UTC) .... these new fangled "gigs" will never catch on, you know... [reply]

DYK for The Witch's Promise

[edit]

On 27 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Witch's Promise, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "The Witch's Promise" is the only Jethro Tull single to feature a Mellotron? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Witch's Promise. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Witch's Promise), 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) 00:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Saturday Zoo

[edit]

On 28 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Saturday Zoo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jonathan Ross in Saturday Zoo (1993) was described as "humour-resistant Teflon"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Saturday Zoo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Saturday Zoo), 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, 28 October 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Have a rose for being the opposite of humour-resistent, - happy day today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! My favourite! A Teflon rose. At least it's not recycled. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

just clumsy

[edit]

Hi Martin, in the last few weeks, I have come to know you as a proud British man, so let me torment you a bit ;-) and trigger off your sense of justice : Who is the Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman? - BBC Newsnight → at 3:30 → "Fuck London, the Queen is our slave. And their police are ours dogs." Please, keep in mind my English is lousy, I don't want to come across as aggressive or carelessly offended someone. Sometimes I'm a bit clumsy. Your dear anonymous IP, --87.170.201.92 (talk) 12:51, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tut tut. I think we may need to direct MBS to this thread. Just a little harmless banter, I'm sure. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:59, 29 October 2018 (UTC) ... you must have meant a proud Welsh man, surely?? [reply]

Karl Parsons

[edit]

I see it - was just about to adjust. Many thanks80.229.34.113 (talk) 18:50, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. Many thanks for your patience. I'm not wholly convinced by that one rather uncertain source. We don't even know if he lived at that address for a full year? Thanks for your note here anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:56, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The 1901 and 1911 Census should give an indication - on Ancestry.com80.229.34.113 (talk) 13:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think so. United Kingdom census, 1901 was nine years too soon and United Kingdom census, 1911 was one year too late? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If 1911 has the same address as the cite, then its probable Parson's was living there.80.229.34.113 (talk) 10:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah OK. Well that does help. Looks like he was there from some time in 1910 until at least 2 April 1911. The issue now is that census records are viewed as primary sources, so should not be used directly. But at least that one secondary source is supported. Even thought it's WP:OR, it might be useful if you noted your find at Talk:Karl Parsons? Do you have any kind of web link that shows that record? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:08, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Census records would seem to be independent in that they are an overview by the government. I can only suggest citing Ancestry.com with a reference to the specific census record without a link (this is not uncommon if citing a book for example). In theory Ancestry.com are the secondary source publishing the original material on line? Not possible to link into Ancestry.com. Regards80.229.34.113 (talk) 15:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the difference to a book source being, of course, that Ancestry.com don't publish real books which you can buy or get from your local library. Also you have to pay to view material at Ancestry.com I think? I must admit, I have seen citations to Ancestry.com elsewhere, and even sometimes to raw census records. It might be worth checking at WP:RSN. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When Ancestry distributes images of primary records it doesn't make them any less primary. See [32]. EEng 16:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. So we currently have no sources that can be used to support his residence at that address for that period. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If so University of Glasgow History of Art and HATII should incorporate the census into its research and re-publish the web page(s) in relation to Parsons to firm up its present findings. I've not seen the Parson census record, but in good faith he probably did live at 38 Gainsborough Road. Knowing the census record gives us more confidence in the one secondary source we have. Could we safely add a note to the cite perhaps?80.229.34.113 (talk) 12:35, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By all means encourage them to do so. Meanwhile, an unsourced note is still unsourced? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:39, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Irish presidential election, 2018

[edit]

On 29 October 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Irish presidential election, 2018, which you supported in a manner that pretty much single-handedly saved a seemingly doomed nomination. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Tlhslobus (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Martin. Tlhslobus (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Tlhslobus, you are very welcome. Glad to see it there. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:37, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Huntingdon

[edit]

A little late, but if you haven't heard this [33], you may want to. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:39, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks. More Wikipedia articles should have the option for "sung version"! But I think we can agree there is nothing very heroic about John Cleese's singing ability. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:22, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think he agrees with you on that, but I like the falsetto at the end. And I see we have a very detailed article on it. Pythonism forever!. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:30, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes. One can't beat a good dramatic adaptation, can one. Miss Ritafairbanks123 (talk) 09:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Peer review/Veerapandiya Kattabomman (film)/archive2

[edit]

Hello Martin, been a while. Sut wyt ti? BTW, Kailash29792 and I have listed this article about a 1959 cult classic film in Tamil cinema for peer reviewing with the intention of preparing it for FAC and subsequently taking it to FA. Your constructive comments would be deeply appreciated. Thank you.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 05:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SSven2. I'll try and take a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

[edit]

Replied to your message on my talk page. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christ_of_Saint_John_of_the_Cross

[edit]

Dear Martin, In April you undi my edit of the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_of_Saint_John_of_the_Cross, so you set the date of this drawing back at 1550. This is unfortunate, because the maker was only 8 years old then. You say I did this unreferenced, but the date was already unreferenced. If you go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_the_Cross, you'll find the following: "At some point between 1574 and 1577, while praying in the Monastery of the Incarnation in Ávila in a loft overlooking the sanctuary, John had a vision of the crucified Christ, which led him to create his famous drawing of Christ "from above". In 1641, this drawing was placed in a small monstrance and kept in Ávila. This drawing inspired the artist Salvador Dalí's 1951 work Christ of Saint John of the Cross." So my edit was factbased, your correction incorrect. Please allow me to remake my edit. How would I include the proper reference? (GeoRic (talk) 06:54, 5 November 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Georic. Thanks for your note. Your edit in April was your only second ever edit. I have to admit that, without any indication that the year you added was correct, I was more trusting of the existing year, which had been in that caption for some time. There was also the fact that the date was not exact - "c. 1550" (to me that suggested "roughly in the middle of that century"). Yes, I see that passage at John of the Cross. The problem is that that passage has no source either. Based on what you have said, I will not revert you if you want to change the date, as it makes sense. But I suggest you add an edit summary to explain your reasoning and that you also start a discussion thread at Talk:Christ of Saint John of the Cross to explain and discuss possible sources further. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:56, 5 November 2018 (UTC) p.s. some artistic prodigies can produce remarkable sketches at the age of 8![reply]

MOS:LWQ

[edit]

Hi, Martin, I've thanked you for this edit, mainly for wikilinking TheWire to The Atlantic (thus enabling me to remove some long overdue red ink from the related citation). But I thought you just might want to know that your moving of the 'small black hole' wikilink is questionable per MOS:LWQ, due to the 'soon after' wording there. I've no plans to change it since I think it's probably best where you've put it, but I suspect some other editor probably eventually will. (Incidentally, my own addition of 'sic' to the next paragraph is even more dodgy, but I'm not too bothered if it gets amended or reverted or whatever).Tlhslobus (talk) 14:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I have to admit that I had second thoughts myself about that link. Not least because, I thought, how do I know that Mary really knew what she was talking about there. I mean, since when did U.S. Department of Transportation Inspector Generals become experts on cosmology?? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:22, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, but on the plus side, having the link where you put it allows the reader to see at a glance that her sentence up to that point isn't meaningless rubbish, as the reader might reasonably assume based on the rest of her sentence. Incidentally I have my own problems with your above-chosen cosmology expert's TV accounts of the finer points of human evolution, tho I won't bore you with the details. Tlhslobus (talk) 11:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What! How very Darwin dare you!! one of Lancashire's finest minds?? (well, apart from Philomena Cunk, of course... ) Martinevans123 (talk) 12:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, Cunk were never a Lancashire lass, as they took Bolton and the rest of Greater Manchester out of Lancashire the year before she arrived. Or at least so it says in Wikipedia, though admittedly only an idiot would believe anything you read in that publication, considering the kind of idiots who write it. Tlhslobus (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, Wikipedia relies on good sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin and Ken citation

[edit]

Hello martinevans123, I found a citation for: "The final line is a reference to his recently deceased colleague Ken Oosterbroek.[citation needed]", but I have no training to do it correctly yet.

The Life and Death of Kevin Carter, By SCOTT MACLEOD/JOHANNESBURG Sunday, June 24, 2001 http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,165071,00.html

You find it at the of the article. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 07:38, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rudeness

[edit]

Do not accuse me of doing anything "unexplained". You clearly don't bother to read edit summaries. Start doing so. 146.198.193.18 (talk) 12:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What was your edit summary here and here? You are now edit warring against two other editors. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Are you illiterate, or are you trolling? It's one or the other. "this whole paragraph, in fact, is irrelevant. if no Australians fought at Suvla Bay, then a song about an Australian at Suvla Bay would be inaccurate. Some Australians fought there, so a portrayal of an Australian there is entirely accurate". 146.198.193.18 (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And please don't accuse me, in your edit summary, of "trolling" as you did here. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it might be more useful for you to open a discussion thread about this at Talk:And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda about this, instead of edit warring and throwing insults around? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But I see you've now been blocked for 24 hours. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Somme

[edit]

Hmmm, it was quite rainy there too, wasn't it. But those guys actually had to turn up, didn't they, Donald? Not sure they even had umbrellas. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Irrelevant edit" of the article Finland

[edit]

Hey! You undid my edit in the article "Finland". Could you please explain how my edit was not relevant to be presented in the article? The bilinguality of Finland is explained later in the article, but to my mind it's confusing to name two languages without mentioning that both of them are national languages of the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alluk. (talk • contribs) 20:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Alluk.. Where did "Irrelevant edit" come from? Your edit was this. My reverting edit summary was this: "this may be a true statement in isolation, but this does not make sense inserted here, sorry". I'm not sure what else to say. Yes, one can easily guess that the two official languages are Finnish and Swedish, but I don't think the statement you added can properly be used to introduce the sentence part "next come the Finland-Swedes". I'm not opposing the addition of your statement, just how it fits with the existing text. I hope that makes sense. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube

[edit]

Thanks. I'll keep "SHOW MORE" in mind. Sca (talk) 21:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Stan... It Ain't Cool to assume that YT is always off limits. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You think it's cool to make me wait with baited breath for what you say
You think it's cool to be the overlord of all that you survey
You think it's clever being clever, that you wear your fortune well
You think it's cool to be the foxy one, but time alone will tell that -
But I think you already know that. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN for Richard Baker (broadcaster)

[edit]

On 17 November 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Richard Baker (broadcaster), which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Dumelow (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Famousbirthdays.com as a source

[edit]

Hi Martinevans123. I noticed that you recently used famousbirthdays.com as a source for information in a biography article, Mark Williams (actor). Please note that there is general consensus that famousbirthdays.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. (See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_153#Is_famousbirthdays.com_a_reliable_source_for_personal_information). If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 00:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for telling me, Ronz. His birthday seems to be still unsourced. I assume IMDB is also acceptable? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Elton John

[edit]

My Christmas is already ruined. How could Elton John have played in E-flat major with the white keys on the piano? Actually it is not impossible. Irving Berlin had a lever action piano which could transpose the notes.[34]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:58, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a real thing apparently! (.... the piano, I mean, not Elton) "Is it cos I is only usin' black notes?" Martinevans123 (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2018 (UTC) ..."sad ads sell so much"?? [reply]
I presume he used a capo? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:40, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just trying to get my head round what a piano capo would look like..... Martinevans123 (talk) 23:48, 20 November 2018 (UTC)... and meanwhile here's a lovely Hannibal Lecter potter's wheel to enjoy..... [reply]
I would have assumed from the above you'd seen Elton John... Britmax (talk) 14:50, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just from Ian's first five words?? Oooo, Britty mate, that's well harsh, innit. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC) p.s. Dusty Springfield – backing vocals![reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Martinevans123. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, yes, thanks a packet Cyberpower67 Bot father.... "Yippee"!! Already busy making paper chains and hanging up bunting. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have heard that the delectable Dr Hannah Fry is "well up" on Markov chains and has used them to get really good at Monopoly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, hot-diggity-dog, delectable indeedy doody.... she can let me love her lace any time she wants.... (they don't call me "Thomas Oléron Evans" for nothing, you know....) Martinevans123 (talk) 23:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC) "... not 'arf pop-pickers".....[reply]
They don't call you Thomas Oléron Evans at all, m'lord. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe they don't. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:50, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, until 23.59 on Sunday 3rd December. So that'll be in 2023, then. No rush really. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... and this stuff cloggs talks and is never removed, while a simple link to where the info can be found by those who really don't know would do. I made my link a little memorial this year. DYK that he practically saved my wiki life? I consider to make it part of my edit notice: "have a laugh". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's very sweet of you, Gerda. No, I did not know that. Of course they will have to run the election all over again now, but this time with messages bearing the correct date! Ah, you couldn't make it up, could you. Can't wait. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

London Evening Standard vs Evening Standard

[edit]

I did some research and found both are still used, many of the most modern seller stands as recent as 2017 show the word London as do some editions. I went with the title on the publication used in the citation. My Favourite Account  😊 18:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well hearty congratulations. And I have no objections if you just want to use the style used in the citation. I guess there is no need for any strict rule on this, just consistency within an article, so that the reader doesn't start to wonder if there are two separate newspapers? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have been racking my brains trying to figure out why I posted this to you... and I just can't. My Favourite Account  😊 02:10, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise. But I guess the rack is a better option than the comfy chair. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:53, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Undoubtedly.My Favourite Account  😊 17:30, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Evening Standard is something of a special case, as it's been through so many mergers and demergers with other papers in whatever stable currently owns it, and usually with a name-change and a drastic change of editorial stance and journalistic style each time. I struggle to think of any legitimate reason Wikipedia would ever be citing the ludicrous Lebedev/Osborne propaganda sheet that is its current incarnation, which is notorious for writing fawning puff-pieces about their big-money advertisers and makes the The Sun look like Nature in terms of reliability, except perhaps for such things as theatre reviews. (If I were cynical, I'd say that part of the reason for the large circulation is that, being (a) free and (b) printed on relatively soft paper using water-based ink that doesn't smear, it's become something of a routine for students and low-paid workers to grab an armful on the way home as a cheaper alternative to toilet paper and kitchen towels; if I were extremely cynical I'd say that the management is well aware of this, which is why they use water-based rather than cheaper soy-based inks.)
@My Favourite Account, the reason many of the most modern seller stands as recent as 2017 show the word London is because that was a year before they dropped the "London Evening Standard" name as part of Osborne's plan to eventually take on Metro in the rest of the country. ‑ Iridescent 17:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but as I said, I went with the title on the publication used in the citation. As regards Lebedev and Osborne, I believe, like so many politicians throughout the world, their only concern is money and the power that brings. Part of a social elite, in control of our interests and the presentation of information. I am extremely cynical and don't see anything changing for the better until we take back control. How? I have no idea. At least the students can benefit. My Favourite Account  😊 18:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Soy-based inks, my arse". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My arse, my arse My Favourite Account  😊 19:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't have put it better myself. But, just to show I know the difference.... here's a great tune from 2008. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Talking of tunes, from 1996, therefore bunny rabbits ARE way cuter than chipmunks.My Favourite Account  😊 20:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes boyo, rockin'. What a complete belter. Blackwood's finest! Martinevans123 (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC) .....washed down with a Special Brew[reply]

New News

[edit]

Jake Bugg has signed with RCA records according to latest news and his twitter account has confirmed. You should check yourself and add it to wikipedia. Regards 157.43.83.254 (talk) 14:21, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. By all means copy your sources here or, better still, go ahead and add the update with those sources to the article yourself. It could then go in the infobox, although I assume he has not yet released anything on that label? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah he has not released any song from the label because it happened only a day ago though i thought that infobox should have all the latest info regardless of for how long it remains or anything. I just told you that because you are quite wonderful editor here and also it would increase your total no. of edits by 1 so you may love it. Actually i don't edit wikipedia anymore it was just because of bugg's infamous character that i edited. I have had enough from wikipedia and some of its administrators. Anyways, Best of luck for your career further as a wikipedian and wish you all the good. 👍
Yours Friend 157.43.83.254 (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is so very nice of you to say so, IP157. I hope you will return some day. (Don't worry, my terrible spilling will ensure I'll continue to steadily increase my total edit tally!) Martinevans123 (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As you and many others hoped that someday i will be back, i decided to give it a another try but it clearly seems that most peoples here are just bricks in the wall.

Read my recent story now: I have made an account on wikipedia Bobby Southside. You can find this page on Bbb23 and seeing his contributions at the bottom. I was busy making a funny and unique user page on that after which i had decided to edit some pages and categorise some pages. I had planned everything. But it was only 3 hours since i joined, when he deleted my user page and blocked me indefinitely even without a warning, when asked about the reason he said that im not here to make an encyclopedia. I know that its a block evasion but you have to understand the fact that im falsely blocked since i was not given much time to do constructive edits and also prove that 1) I was not only interested in making my user page and 2) I have knowledge about editing wikipedia and its policy [which are the only conditions that apply on me]. Also there was no personal attack or disruptive editing in my user page edit. I only added a userbox containing a hypothetical person named Bobby southside and some fun facts about him that made my userbox interesting and unique. But they say that you can't. Every wikipedian has rights to construct his user page the way he wants unless it hurts someone. But that wasn't subject to any disruption. What a reception i got in just 3 hours of my wikipedian career after having done nearly thousands of edits through IP. This is the reason i never wanted to come here as registered user, i knew this would be the fate as it has been for nearly thousands of new and honest editors who were victims of the egotism of these kind of veteran editors. Yours useless friend 2409:4063:2194:697:B5CF:DED1:6607:F355 (talk) 12:13, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry to hear that. Did you mean somewhere on User talk:Bbb23? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nah! When you open his contribution section, you would find at the very bottom an edit about Bobby Southside named user(which refers to me). If not at the bottom then you can click older 50s and it would be up there. No way i am liable for harming any of the wikipedia policy, i have read it all. Oh gosh! Never mind. Whenever you need me, just call me here. Always up for you.2409:4063:2194:697:B5CF:DED1:6607:F355 (talk) 12:29, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My advice, if you were to start another account, would be to leave your User page blank, or at least with very basic information, and to make good and useful edits to articles for a few weeks. Fellow editors will judge you mainly by your Main space article contributions, not by the amusement value of your User page (and I should know, lol!) Martinevans123 (talk) 12:36, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Seems I may be caught in a mini crossfire here. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:30, 1 December 2018 (UTC) [reply]
Martinevans123 Re-notifying you that Jake bugg's contract with Virgin EMI has come to close and now he is working with Sony's RCA records which has already been approved (check Jake bugg's news section on google). Hence, its a sincere request that please add this information ASAP. RegardsHardSunBadMoon (talk) 13:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're evading your block by posting from an IP. I've blocked it. Bishonen | talk 13:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC). Also the IPv6 range you post from above, 2409:4063:2194:697::/64. Bishonen | talk 14:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Jamal Khashoggi

[edit]

Figured out how to reply. :-) I'm sorry if you feel I completely changed the intro. If you are monitoring this wiki article, I defer to your opinion.11 Arlington (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's not just me monitoring! It has quite a large editor following. With your permission, I will revert to the version immediately BEFORE your edit. And you can try again, if you want to? Is that acceptable? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bass players

[edit]
"dont get me started. only fancy the two archaeologists."

It pisses me off that the camera so totally ignores the bass player here, when its the whole point of the song. I blame Brexit and other such bollocks. Ceoil (talk) 11:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, perhaps not totally? At least, as someone has commented, "the tamborinist is Killin it". An interesting band. But folks would need to look hard before finding a more inventive bassist than our very own Big Norm. Yes I still blame Brexit too, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:51, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not everybody has such a nuanced view as you Martin, alas. When I clicked the Big Nor link, half expected to see Big Vern had been shot dead trying to escape from that one last bank robbery he pulled this morning. Bloody Brexit, but least the cops didn't get him, and he made it out dead, no way could he do more porridge. Ceoil (talk) 12:03, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"No bastard copper's gonna take me alive!" Martinevans123 (talk) 12:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
dont get me started. only fancy the two archaeologists. Ceoil (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can dig that. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I vaguely remember a magazine running a readers poll of "greatest singers of all time" which led to a viral campaign to put Stephen Malkmus at #1 ... or did I just imagine that? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think even Malkmus' mum, Ritchie, would dare vote for him as one of the "greatest singers of all time"; interesting a voice and vocalist as he is he's no damn singer. Martin, the re the aging and hairy archaeologists porn to the right; hmmm :) but not need to say this to anybody right? Ceoil (talk) 22:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Although it's a close call with Margarita Pracatan, I'm pretty sure Wing will always gets my vote. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:53, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hocus Pocus

[edit]

It seems that until 15 minutes ago, we didn't have an article for "House of the King" (which for Focus is a pretty straightforward and enjoyable tune that even non-fans like). Care to join me in some expansion, and think of a suitable DYK hook? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh yes, an iconic 70s track. Am immediately back sitting cross-legged on a purple floor cushion with the josticks! So I added this, which seems to be fully licensed to YouTube for copyright purposes. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's undoubtedly the greatest Tull song that wasn't; have you got a reliable source for Bob Holness doing the clapping on the track? I'm sure he was in the studio waiting for a session to happen. Incidentally I saw Focus live a few years back and briefly said hello to Thijs van Leer (oooh, namedropping), he's a slightly eccentric but thoroughly nice chap, and he thanked his wife for giving him the motivation to go out and play live as Focus again after a long time off. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:54, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I clearly remember, as a teenager, travelling with my best prog rock pal, on the train from Newport, to the Students' Union of Cardiff University, to see them. They cancelled at the last minute. Gutted. Never got the chance to see them again. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in 1999 somebody offered me tickets to see The Who in Shepherd's Bush. Now, bear in mind this was after all the "Who On Ice" and Quadrophenia tours, and I assumed it would be a 15 piece soft rock band, so I said "thanks, but no thanks". It turns out they had decided to strip back down to basics, with critics saying the gigs were right up there with the classic lineup (or at least towards the end with Moon) and I voluntarily passed. Talk about being in the loo when opportunity knocked..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As long as you didn't flush Moony's pills down the toilet, you'd probably be safe. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Donald's frappacino

[edit]

Could you please explain this apparent non sequitur? IP 93.139.59.187 wrote about some positive feedback loops in climate forcing related to the melting of ground ice, and you responded with a <small>ed remark equating them with Donald Trump, whose public views on climate change would appear to be contrary to those of the IP. Political jokes like that aren't particularly beneficial to discussions on the ref desks, but more importantly the joke doesn't make any sense given the context. Did you misread the IP's contribution or am I missing something? Cheers! -- ToE 14:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Political jokes which don't amuse aren't particularly beneficial anywhere, so I've removed it. My comment was directed at the OP 212.237.124.15. I'm sure the Donald is a great believer in climate change. Sorry if you were confused. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC) p.s. I have no reason to believe that Donald Trump secretly uses an IP address in Kurdistan to post questions to Wikipedia Ref desks. I'm sure he has someone to do that for him.[reply]
Oh, you were responding to the OP IP (212.237.124.15), and not the responding IP (93.139.59.187). Your mis-indentation confused me. Still, your removal is probably best, as there isn't any reason at this point not to take the question at its face value. Cheers! -- ToE 15:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I do apologize if my comment seemed to imply that Donald Trump was a complete imbecile with little grasp of scientific reality. The price we all have to pay for making America great again, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:03, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
??? No, not at all. Your mis-indented joke seemed to imply quite the opposite, that Mr. Trump could be compared favorably with someone (the responding IP 93.139.59.187) who is able to cogently summarize some of the mechanisms and risks of climate change -- hence my confusion and original query. With proper indentation, I'd have understood that you were ridiculing the OP, and while I'd have still preferred that the question simply be taken at face value, I'd have not bothered writing here. My purpose was entirely to understand your apparent non sequitur. Done. Cheers! -- ToE 18:25, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh the perils of this misplaced colon when one has smalled. Done. Cheers! -- Martinevans123 (talk) 18:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC) But yes, IP 93.139.59.187 is to be roundly applauded. One of my most favourite cogent IPs from the City of Zagreb in almost 2 days.[reply]

Baxter Dury

[edit]

Yep, The Guardian article you added does say he was six when he posed on the cover of New Boots and Panties!!... but if Baxter was born in December 1971 and the album came out in September 1977, that would make him five years old at the time, no? Hard to believe The Grauniad would have made a basic typo or error given their unimpeachable reputation for subediting, but still... Richard3120 (talk) 02:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh!. I'm just a wikipedia editor, you can't expect me to do simple maths. And besides, he was six when I bought my copy! -- Clevor trever123 (talk) 08:53, 28 November 2018 (UTC) please Sir, can we start using the Daily Mail again, please?[reply]
The Daily Mail? Woah, hang on... I never suggested The Guardian was *that* unreliable... Richard3120 (talk) 10:40, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we don't know exactly what he actually said to David Pescheck in that interview, do we. Perhaps he meant that he "... made his first public appearance at six in the morning"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC) "I often come awake, In a wiki morning mood, And have a proper edit, Before a page gets screwed."[reply]

Placid Bees my ass

[edit]

Took me until just this moment to figure that out. Softlavender (talk) 04:00, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit I'm still trying to figure it out myself. But please keep your apiary-related medical issues to yourself. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:29, 29 November 2018 (UTC) p.s. I would give John Malkovich his kaftan back, but I need it for my weekend horseback jaunts with Donald.[reply]

Forgive me.

[edit]

Nothing really I can say except to apologize. Dealing with some stuff in the real world that got me on edge and you just caught me at a bad moment. No excuses, just wanted to say I'm truly sorry for the childish way I responded. Hope you are well. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:34, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ho worries.No worries. You seem to be very busy all the time! I very much appreciate your message. Thank you. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Martin what are these Ho worries of which you write? Is there something you would like to share with the group? Curious minds need to know ... DBaK (talk) 10:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, lol. Well spotted. Now corrected! Fo shizzle dude. Just gonna skank up ma mean hoes in da hood, an' all. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC) [35][reply]
Ah yes. Thank you for the lovely link with the young people performing their song. It's very very nice. DBaK (talk) 10:35, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Like a washing machine, I can wash the clothes" - it seems the young lady is gainfully employed in domestic service. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:40, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Dear Martinevans123 and EEng, I recently sent this request for help [36] about attempting to link to biographies, Marguerite Brazier and Etta Palm d'Aelders. The connection is made at Nicholas Bonneville, but I believe reliably sourced information might be found somewhere in a tomb on French revolutionary history. I've written to a few others, but if either of you are interested in the conundrum, your help is most appreciated. -Darouet (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tomb or tome? EEng 00:23, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Where historical mysteries are unearthed.
I was thinking about something like this. Also sorry, I'm reading a book by Robert Tombs right now, and it's gotten into my head. Right now just word choices are being scrambled, soon I'll be campaigning for brexit. -Darouet (talk) 20:27, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah right. I was thinking of Tombs the Butler who was played, in the BBC's adaptations Jane and Jane in the Desert, by the wonderful Max Wall: [37]. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Air Embryo SD733.jpg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Air Embryo SD733.jpg. 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. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rulez is rulez folks. Whether that image is about 100% relevant or not. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant to what. It should be used (and isn't), that's all, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's pretty relevant to the band. But the rules on image fair use mean that it can be used only on an article about the album, which we don't have. I'm really not sure how this aspect of the fair use rule helps or protects anyone. I have commented at User talk:Aspects. But he does not seem to see any problem. Oh well. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend needs help this time

[edit]

Yeah yeah you would be thinking how i decided to come back. Well its a long story, don't think about it. I just want to tell you about vandalism done by two users-115.133.122.243 and TheRedundancy. These two guys have violated three revert rule as many times as infinite. I guess you can't block users but maybe you can request their block. HardSunBadMoon (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I knew who you were or what you were talking about. Well, perhaps. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey brother, im the anonymous guy who met you after adding the name of new label records in jake bugg's infobox. But no need to worry my problem is cured.HardSunBadMoon (talk) 13:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How do I know that? You could be anyone. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
nice point. But if i am anyone then how can i know that how you and the anonym met on wiki. I mean there is no talk left on your page which proves that. Also i did message you nearly 4 days ago in a very depressed mood and all. Is that enough? HardSunBadMoon (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel you are in dispute with another editor and that they have breached an aspect of WP policy you should seek redress with an admin. It's not generally seen as a good idea just to canvass other editor "your friends" to support your side of the dispute. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it seems that you haven't still came to believe me or you are upset with me something.(i think i haven't done anything wrong but if i have then sorry) I can understand. You may not like what im going to say but i really don't have faith in admins as most of them are indulged in some kind of politics and are mostly corrupt so i bring my consents to those on whom i have faith or those whom i know to be honest. Remove this talk if you have now believed it.HardSunBadMoon (talk) 14:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dear HardSunBadMoon, you have done nothing to upset me. Unfortunately, if you have no faith in any admins at all (to a greater or lesser degree, of course), Wikipedia may not be the place for you. There are formal mechanisms for you to express your dissatisfaction with any admin. This is just the way it "works". I tend not to remove things unless they are downright trolling. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For some admins actually. I can't do almost anything about them though. Eventually, some day you will get to know about many of the admins here on wikipedia(how they are misusing their power). But it doesn't matters to me anymore. Last question- Have you recognised me now? Please tag me in your reply.HardSunBadMoon (talk) 15:08, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Blunt admission: some of my best "wiki friends" are admins. HardSunBadMoon. I am prepared to accept that you are who you say you are (or were, as the case may be). Martinevans123 (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... Alright man. Its time to say goodbye to you. Take care and have fun editing wikipedia(im not leaving, its just kind of way of ending the discussion). I always prefer you as one of the best person here and thats what actually matters to me. Your old friend with new nameHardSunBadMoon (talk) 15:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, goodbye. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... caught in a trap? Time for this. Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard 15:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. There's no turning back. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly attractive. Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard 16:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At least he has an article: Gui Boratto. It's from Take My Breath Away (2009), vocals by Luciana Villanova. Does have a certain satisfying groove to it. Probably helps if one has taken one or two mind-altering substances. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've already been there. Mark Knopfler is much more to my liking. Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard 17:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Gareth Griffith-Jones: Actually i too am a big fan of mark and dire straits. I was finding a dire strait fan from a long time. Its pretty hard to find them in my country.HardSunBadMoon (talk) 08:12, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jack Brooksbank

[edit]

On 8 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jack Brooksbank, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jack Brooksbank, husband of Princess Eugenie of York, was not given a peerage following his marriage, as there is no general precedent in Britain for a commoner to be given one on marrying a princess? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Brooksbank. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jack Brooksbank), 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.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I never even got an invite to the evening do, down Andy's. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are invited to listen today to Pauken and Trompeten, DYK? Tönet, ihr Pauken!, which they shall do ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, Gerda. Wonderful stuff. Here's a version by Collegium 1704, with Hana Blažíková, conducted by Václav Luks in 2011, at the Abbatiale Saint-Robert, France, during the 45th Festival de musique de La Chaise-Dieu: [38]. Just sparkling. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
... two links for LouisAlain ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Like to remember the Blažíková DYK which appeared on IWD ;) - Can't listen to music right now, still full of ours! Moar tomorrow (IV-Vi that is). The one who will conduct tomorrow was full of praise (he watched from up at the organ pictured in his article). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And of course soon time for "Herrscher des Himmels". Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's what we did, and what is on my mind, see playlist, and now officially added here. The rest tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. A good guess there. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
pictured --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! Wiki fame!! Looks almost medieval.... haha Martinevans123 (talk) 13:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Look at it with more light: Rubens School. My favourite is Mary with her servant carrying her belongings on his head, and the formal gardens as the one who paid for the paintings would have liked it, and the parrot, as you can see here, among places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, I'd have to agree. You can't beat a good old Dutch master, can you? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
pictured the first day --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds amazing. It is so wonderful to read that it is ecumenical. And a "long-necked lute theorbo", no less. Yes, that does indeed sound quite Baroque. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The theorbo is better seen on the other pic. I nominated the ecumenical project for Christmas, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff!! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla

[edit]

Hi. I can't join because IPs are banned from editing Tesla article or talk pages. I'd just like to say that Fkp, the person because of who you changed your opinion is a POV pusher. Read [39] this topic which directly led to this RfC and you'll see that Fkp is just making any claim he can make to prevent this source entering the article. It doesn't seem to me that someone who has real concerns would jump so much from one reason to another reason. He's just trying to find some excuse. Furthermore, Bilseric has a good point. Unrelated to this RfC, someone has edited the article against the standing consensus puting Serbian orthodox cuhurch in the article. Fkp has no objections to that although it's factually wrong and against another RfC. But he surely does have many objections to this RfC. The other's are not much different as well. I'm sure none of them would mind Serbian orthodox curch in the 19th century and the standing consensus, but the'll find any reason against this source which is perfectly valid. 141.136.229.217 (talk) 23:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Had you considered creating an account? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have an account, but I'm not using it when discussing with this group of editors ,because they always resort to personal attacks. Nothing will ever be good enough for them. They sayd that source is not mentioning Tesla, and now when they got source saying the same exact thing from a Tesla biography, the will not be satisfied. Either they will find other excure or ignore. You'll see. 141.136.229.217 (talk) 16:34, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is that not sock puppetry? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No. You are perfectly legit to logoff and edit as an IP, as long as you don't edit the same articles or pretend you are 2 different persons. 141.136.229.217 (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So I guess all your opponents will know it's you canvassing here. If you have concerns that they are personally attacking you, or that User:Fkp is "a POV pusher", you need to go to WP:AN/I, not here. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:58, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You seemed objective so I posted on your talk page since I can't participate in the discussion, since I was the original editor who found the source. If you don't want me here, that's ok, but you'll see that the things I said are correct. The other POV pushers will ignore or try to discredit the very source they seeked it is nencessary. 141.136.229.217 (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now beginning to regret that I ever went to that page and expressed an opinion. Kind regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kind regards to you as well. Bye. Sorry, but Tesla topics always turn to a mess like this. 141.136.229.217 (talk) 18:30, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your info, you agree with a POV pusher that has been lying on Balkan articles for years [40].89.164.199.211 (talk) 13:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Russell Bishop (sex offender)

[edit]

Sorry, but I removed the unsourced content with this edit [41] and you added it back with this one [42] much safer to remove unsourced content completely per BLP. Theroadislong (talk) 22:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was not my intention to "add back" anything and was obviously an edit conflict. As per my explanatory null edit, my original edit summary was this: "move down +tag, but suspect this will need to be deleted". I have no problem with you removing it. I was hoping to elicit a source which might lead to a place of birth (still unsourced). Sorry if that is so contrary to BLP that it deserves a scolding. I do hope that Mr Bishop wasn't too offended. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I must admit that the phrase "a bit of a ladies' man" looked just about as neutral as a description of Jimmy Savile as "a real gentleman". Martinevans123 (talk) 14:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Dove Christmas

[edit]

Error: No text given for quotation (or equals sign used in the actual argument to an unnamed parameter)

Here it comes!!

[edit]
Happy Holidays!
Wishing you much joy & happiness now and every year!!
Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️

  • When does New Year’s Day come before Christmas Day?
Every year!
  • What do you call a bankrupt Santa?
Saint Nickel-less.

🔔🎁⛄️🎅🏻Atsme✍🏻📧 21:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Atsme!! Thank you very much..... "you know I ain't no fool.... I'm just upside down"! [43]. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:51, 13 December 2018 (UTC).....[reply]

I'm just grateful I'm not back-to-front, I guess!!

DYK for House of the King

[edit]

On 16 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article House of the King, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "House of the King" by Focus has been a theme tune on British television twice? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/House of the King. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, House of the King), 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, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Not 'alf, pop-pickers!! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Merry

[edit]
Happy Christmas!
Hello Martinevans123,
Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that

Nobody could have had a noisier Christmas Eve. And when the firemen turned off the hose and were standing in the wet, smoky room, Jim's Aunt, Miss. Prothero, came downstairs and peered in at them. Jim and I waited, very quietly, to hear what she would say to them. She said the right thing, always. She looked at the three tall firemen in their shining helmets, standing among the smoke and cinders and dissolving snowballs, and she said, "Would you like anything to read?"

My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk 02:18, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, MarnetteD. What a thoughtful greeting. Maybe there'll be something for me from Cerys under the tree this year: "... hilarious depiction of life in the early 1960s – one young woman confesses to not knowing what the word “lesbian” means, thinking it is a kind of omelette".... Martinevans123 (talk) 10:26, 19 December 2018 (UTC) [44][reply]
Thanks for the link M. Such an interesting take on things. I am always fascinated how one work of art can inspire creativity in others. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 16:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A mitten for you!

[edit]
A mitten for you, Martinevans123!
Hi Martinevans123, Softlavender has given you a mitten!

Mittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better.

Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a mitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.


Softlavender (talk) 10:37, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

   


Douglas Firs can be so rude at this time of year, I find. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think you may be reading something into that, Martin. Mittens do not have middle fingers, nor indeed any fingers. Softlavender (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Let's just face it, none of of us know exactly what's going on in that mitten, do we. But many thanks, anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:44, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Hi Martinevans123, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year,
Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia,

   –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 18:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas !!!

[edit]
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas!

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Greetings

[edit]
Viggo Johansen: Happy Chrstmas (1891)


Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.

- Sca (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Super Christmas!! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


John Fahey – Sca (talk)

Yo

[edit]
None-more Gothic Seasons Greetings
Wishing you all the best for x-mass, hope it is a time of, some but not too much, cheer. Ceoil (talk) 22:19, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. This is by far the most artistic greeting I am likely to get this year! oooh, almost as Gothic as .... Game of Thrones. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:59, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit upset nobody is getting my Spinal Tap ref. I had though you were king of references, man. What happened to you? ps, yes Content Provider is amazing. Ceoil (talk) 23:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

where the dogs are dry and dusty

[edit]

from oz the dusty deserts that keep us dry, have a snowy one for us - gday and appy christmas from downunder - may your sense of humour drive you well through 2019 JarrahTree 23:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Things were so much nicer back in 1961. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
:) JarrahTree 00:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Xmas

[edit]
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

[edit]

Unless you are David Slater. A while back I came across this Christmas card and thought straight away that it was Naruto from the Monkey selfie copyright dispute. Slater probably didn't get a penny for this. As previously discussed, my Christmas was ruined when Elton John played in E-flat major with the white notes. The problem is now fixed, here is what he actually plays. Finally, the Christmas lights which are even more complicated this year (click "Download" to watch the videos).--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Post Brexit, those lights are just going to get worse, I fear. But many thanks anyway. By the way... I'm not your monkey man. (Peter Kirtley (guitar), Steve Lamb (bass), Dave Sheen (drums) live at the Alabama, Munich, Germany, 1984) Martinevans123 (talk) 11:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Martin, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:51, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Cheers, Rodders. Iechyd da. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Martinevans123, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 05:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Many thanks, Walky. Christmas bangles to you. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:36, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas Martin

[edit]
Season's greeting to Mr.Martinevans123 and well wishes for the upcoming year

Credit:Clarityfiend HardSunBadMoon (talk) 06:41, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, HardSunBadMoon. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

La Cheminée du Roi René

[edit]

Hi Martinevans123,

Regarding a recent exchange, let me present to you - as a sign of Internet friendship - this piece by D. Milhaud that perhaps you may not be aware of, which I doubt anyway. Yours, LouisAlain (talk) 21:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear LoisAlain, I can assure you I was wholly unaware of Darius Milhaud until now. Thank you so much. It is totally charming. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Sister Wendy

[edit]

On 27 December 2018, In the news listed the article Sister Wendy, which you updated, so many thanks for your contributions. For details of the discussion, please see the candidates page. Andrew D. (talk) 10:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Affectionately known, in our house, as Sister Bendy Weckett. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:34, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few others on Flickr, with all rights reserved, including this one from 2012 with Phil Tufnell. I wonder could the Barber Institute be persuaded to release it into the public domain but adjusting the Flickr tag. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:41, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Today, I searched for refs for Amos Oz, someone beat me to nominating, and I don't find a ref for an early school, sigh (one that doesn't look like a mirror). It's a shame we don't mentioned him hours ago, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Halleluja, a ref is there now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only hours? Count yourself blessed! As you may know, I find DYK RD quite dysfunctional. I've even thought of suggesting that in order to make any !vote, an editor ought to have to make at least one edit to improve the article. The tacit assumption, that the nominator(s) are responsible for improving the article and then presenting it for RD nomination, seems to have long disappeared. And even when "fully improved", articles often languish for many hours, or even days before they are posted. It's no wonder folks don't bother. Sorry to be such a grinch. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, - at least I feel less alone in the grinch corner. I was at Paulskirche when he received the prize, and still remember. He died yesterday, and here we had a chance to follow promptly, - sigh. My last suggestion was archived without a single comment, - I have him nominated for DYK now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:39, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well done for your persistence, Gerda! I'm sure he deserves a mention on Main page somewhere. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bernstein, yes ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Amos Oz appeared. His name means courage. Talk to discouraged LouisAlain please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A bit late, of course, he had five-digit page views for 2 days already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Talking about recognition, for nominator and updaters? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I was, yes! Martinevans123 (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work on her article M. She was such an intriguing teacher. She was the first person to make me aware that The Church at Auvers did not show its doors. Did you ever see the parody Sister Randy? Here is one of her treats. I think of her as an affectionate tribute but I can understand how others might be offended. My apologies if that is the case. MarnetteD|Talk 21:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. Sister Windy had legs?! Wow, who knew. I think you knew, MarnetteD, that I'm not so easily offended. I have never seen that series before and it's very witty. They kindly forgot the teeth and the cute R mispronunciations! I found Sister Wendy a breath of fresh air because she had never been been to University to get a degree in art history. I'm not sure that's just tobacco that Randy is smoking.... "From dust bunnies you came and to dust bunnies you shall return" --Martinevans123 (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are right about Sister Wendy and I'm glad you enjoyed Randy. You so often provide links to fun and/or informative items that it is nice that I have been able to return the favor. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 00:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hah you did it again with the new link to the tobacco and art article which I had never seen before! Now I wish there was a way to get SR into that article. Frivolous of me I know :-) MarnetteD|Talk 03:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Frivolous!? That's the sort of trivia quest that I'd take a week to nail down. I reminded myself of Breaking Bad S3 E12 with my earlier mention of that 1967 classic. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arise, Sir John Elton

[edit]

What caught my eye was that when he was receiving the honour in February 1998, he was announced by the Lord Chamberlain as "Sir John Elton".[45] We now name the guilty person, it was Thomas Stonor, 7th Baron Camoys who did this because he was Lord Chamberlain in 1998. I wonder if afterwards he said sorry, which seems to be the hardest word.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:49, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's hope he didn't burst into Wind in the Candle. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My favourite quote from Sir John Elton is here: "Elton John has always taken a principled view of his relationship with the press. 'They can say I'm a fat, old sod,' he once said. 'They can say I'm an untalented bastard. They can call me a poof. But they mustn't lie about me." And who would ever do a thing like that?--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:18, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's time the lead section of his Wikipedia article described him as "a fat, old, untalented, bastard poof." After all, That's What Encyclopedias Are For. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:22, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, as C. P. Snow so wisely observed, "Comment is free. Facts are sacred." So when The Sun said that one of Elton John and David Furnish's dogs caused serious injury to a girl, they took legal action for libel and won.[46] Anyone might think that The Sun had a thing about Elton John and David Furnish.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:36, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who knew a spaniel could be quite so nasty. "Bite your lip (get up and sue!)". Martinevans123 (talk) 13:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Having seen the photo here, I would hope that Freddy Krueger could have managed a lot better than this. "I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too!" (sorry, wrong film). It's also worth pointing out that the spaniel incident occurred in February 2016 [47] so it was exactly two years before The Sun on Sunday found out and made the obligatory hoo-ha over it. Still, better late than never.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Although spaniels are not as vicious as those horrible little westies (allegedly). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion pending for File:Nathan Wyburn with Joanna Lumley.jpg

[edit]

Hello, Martinevans123. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:Nathan Wyburn with Joanna Lumley.jpg — was tagged with {{OTRS received}}, indicating that a statement of permission had been received by permissions-en@wikimedia.org, but that this email was insufficient in some way

This could be due to any of several issues:

  1. The OTRS agent might have asked for further information to validate the ticket, but no follow-up reply was received (this is the most common reason).
  2. The license submitted might not have provided an acceptable free content license. (Statements of permission that allow only usage on Wikipedia or only non-commercial usage are NOT sufficient.)
  3. The person who submitted the statement of permission might not be the copyright holder or might not have been able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the OTRS agent that they own the copyright.

Due to privacy reasons, we cannot comment on Wikipedia with the exact reason that the ticket could not be processed.

  • If YOU submitted the ticket to the permissions address, please search your email for a reply with the ticket ID - a reply was sent some time ago requesting more information or further actions needed to confirm permission. Please reply to that message.
  • If the copyright holder (not you) submitted the ticket, then that person received a response (which may have been some time ago). Please ask them to follow up.

If another message is sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

  • If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org that resolves the problem, please let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. B (talk) 12:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's all too difficult. I give up. Quite frankly, I think that's probably the best image you are likely to be offered for that article. If you can't even tell me what's wrong with it, then I guess the reader will just have to do without anything at all. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Martinevans123/Archive_12&oldid=1186927825"