Jump to content

User talk:Miniapolis/Archives/2014/July

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


UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Miniapolis

I've activated your UTRS account. Thank you for volunteering.--v/r - TP 23:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! All the best, Miniapolis 23:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

MUFCLatest

Sure, go ahead. I had been communicating with them in email but I have been rather busy the last few days. Daniel Case (talk) 02:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Help in adding number of words (new and rollover) in July Blitz

Hi Miniapolis. I've just completed copy-editing SPAN Infotech (which is the most highly-challenging work I did so far here at Wikipedia) and I would greatly appreciate if you can help me put the correct number of words in my list. I was able to put the "Page size" tool but I'm still at a loss on what to do. I also have some queries about "Roll over" words, and I'd like to know if my previous output (June Blitz) is usable or not for the current drive (July). I would greatly appreciate any help you'll extend. Thanks and best regards. r4k3t.14unch3r 12:03, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! When you click on "Page size" in the left sidebar under "Tools", the article should highlight yellow and at the top you'll see "Document statistics". What you want is the "readable prose size" in words. In future, it's best to get the word count before the copyedit, since copyediting almost always removes words (to get the word count of a section, you have to preview it first in the edit window). You'll be able to use your rollover words from the June blitz in the August blitz; the rollover words from this drive are from the May drive. Don't worry; it seems more complicated than it is :-). All the best, Miniapolis 13:34, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the response, they're very helpful. I've just finished copy-editing another article (Ardmore Airport (New Zealand)), hopefully I can have more free time from work to add to my total. Best regards. r4k3t.14unch3r 19:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Great. No need to rush, since the drive is all month :-). Have fun and all the best, Miniapolis 21:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anthrax (American band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Soundwave. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, just to say thank you for all your help on Anthrax. We've got two of the big four bands at FA status, one is currently nominated for FA, and Anthrax would be last one to work on. By the way, that is one killer cat up there.--Retrohead (talk) 10:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Glad to help. Yeah, I love cats and when I saw that picture it cracked me up :-). Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 14:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

The Rules of the Game

Thank you very much for agreeing to Copy Edit The Rules of the Game. Just as a heads up, User:Beyond My Ken has for whatever reason chosen to be consistently disruptive on this page and will undoubtedly continue. I had already reported a previous incident, which was unfortunately ignored. I'm just letting you know since this user appears to consider themselves to be almighty and invincible and I'd rather things got settled up front instead of creating a history of edit warring on the page.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 06:18, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

@Miniapolis: Deoliveirafan's take on this is quite wrong. I am a veteran editor (9 years, 145,000 edits) dedicated to improving Wikipedia, I have never (and would never) intentionally cause disruption or harm any article for any reason at any time. D. has twice accused me of trying to "own" The Rules of the Game, which has never been the case. I will admit to feeling stewardship towards the article, however, and will continue to revert edits which I do not believe are helpful, and make changes where I believe they are necessary.

In the case of your copy-editing, I thought it was a mixed bag, but that enough of what I saw was not an improvement that I felt I was justified in reverting the edit -- the alternative would have been to leave the edit and laboriously go through and change what I thought needed to be reverted or altered.

Well, perhaps I should have done that, since D's latest attempt to chase me away from editing the article encouraged me to do the even more laborious copy editing of the entire article, a task I've been putting off since D. started added material to it. I have finished doing so now, so if you want to examine my edits (which I did section by section), and make what changes you think are justified, that's fine. All I ask if that you do it in small pieces and not as a whole, so that any disagreements we -- or any other editor -- may have can be discussed.

I hope that we can work together to improve the article. I think that D. has added a lot of interesting stuff to it --almost to the point of adding too much -- and that the article is better than it was, not that it was a poor article to begin with. Myself, I have no interest in collecting baubles, I don't care whether an article is a Good Article or a Featured Article, I only care that it's a good article that serves our readers by providing them with accurate information which is well-presented. Best, BMK (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

I copyedit; I don't edit war. Therefore, I'm done with this article—tant pis, because it has potential. Trying to copyedit an unstable article is a waste of my time. Miniapolis 13:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't recall asking you to edit war -- in fact, I specifically asked for your input. Ah, well, I wouldn't want you to "waste your time". BMK (talk) 15:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
My "input" was copyediting the lead (which you reverted) at Deoliverafan's request. Miniapolis 19:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on ANI, I reverted your copyedit because it was not well done. I've just looked it over again, and I'll stand by that assessment, it's quite poor, actually. I hope that's not a reflection on the work the Guild does in general. BMK (talk) 02:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken, you really can't see that Miniapolis's copy edits significantly improved the readability, grammar, and consistency of the article's lead? Before the copy edits, the lead used "Renoir" to start multiple sentences in a row; it contained other verbal redunancy; it lacked commas that were clearly needed; it used the serial comma inconsistently; it italicized inconsistently; a caption was uncapitalized; and the text was overlinked. Those problems were fixed in a single copy edit. And that was just the lead.
I hope that you will be patient with the next GOCE copy editor, if the article can stabilize enough for us to return. It is unfortunate for the article that the edit is unlikely to be performed by Miniapolis, one of our most experienced and competent copy editors. Thank you for explaining your recent series of edits on the article's Talk page. It is clear that you want to improve the article. I think your statement that "perhaps I should have" built on the edits instead of reverting them is, for each of us, worth meditating on for a while. Thanks for being willing to engage in good faith. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:58, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: What M. did to the section was not essentially "copy-editing", it was re-writing. Any professional copy-editor who did the equivalent to the work of a professional writer would be on the street so fast their head would swim. BMK (talk) 15:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Jonesey. This isn't the first time I've been accused of incompetence (and I'm sure it won't be the last :-)); although I know it's not true, I'd be lying if I said it didn't rankle. Although WP is a collaborative project, unfortunately not all editors work well with others. I'm a volunteer who contributes in my area of expertise as best I can. Miniapolis 14:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyediting Gemini

Hi, are you free to copyedit the article Gemini (2002 Tamil film), which is currently a FAC? In fact, seemingly all the comments on it have been resolved, except that it's prose needs to look more upto international standards (I prefer to say more British in tone) in order to pass the FAC. If you have the time and interest to edit, it would be very kind of you. If not, kindly pass the opportunity on to any other GOCE member (except Bafflegab, who already edited it formally long ago). Kailash29792 (talk) 14:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no. Baffle's copyedit was only a little over a month ago, and was completed the day before the article's nomination. If the article has become unstable since then, put the nomination on hold and the article on the GOCE requests page. Good luck and all the best, Miniapolis 17:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited KHJ (AM), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WOLD. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

Megadeth

I realize it probably makes me look like a prick, but I've been undoing a lot of your copyedits to Megadeth. Too many of them have reduced the readability of the prose, while others have introduced ambiguities or otherwise changed the meaning of the prose. In a couple of spots I've noticed that you've moved citations around, breaking text-source integrity. That last one I hope you'll try to be especially careful with. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

While I appreciate your concerns, Retrohead requested a copyedit for the FAC and I was doing my best. The only citation-moving I've done has been to close a gap after re-casting a sentence. Since it's an FAC, I've put a lot of effort into the copyedit; however, since you seem to want to take it over I'm done with this article and will advise Retrohead. Miniapolis 00:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't doubt you were doing your best, and put a lot of effort into it; nor do I want to discourage you from copyediting. This is the rock-and-a-hard-place thing—I can't in good conscience just let it go, but how do I revert without hurting feelings? Obviously I've failed at that, but my first responsibility has to be to the article. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, since the FA nomination was archived a while ago (which I just discovered, although it wouldn't have affected the amount of effort I put into the article) it's pretty much moot. Looks like Retrohead requested another copyedit from the GOCE because of valid concerns raised by Eric Corbett. I don't mind if my edits are reverted after I've finished a copyedit; what I don't care for is being followed through one. Miniapolis 02:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
It's not moot; the article's been copyedited more than once since then, and is now back at FAC again (and if you look at the archived FAC, you'll see there were far more concerns with the article than just Eric's). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyedit

I was looking through your copyedit on the Demi Lovato article and was pretty impressed with your work. Months ago, I attempted nominating Josh Hutcherson for FAC, however it failed due to a lack of comments. The peer review I had for it went untouched as well. The article is a GA, but I do feel it could benefit from a strong copy edit before I potentially bring it back for another FAC nomination. Do you think you'd have time to take this one on? If not, it's okay! But it would be very much appreciated. Gloss • talk 18:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I hope to help eventually, but it wouldn't be fair to take on your article ahead of those who have been waiting on the Guild of Copy Editors request page. I suggest listing Josh Hutcherson on the requests page; there's usually a five- or six-week wait, unfortunately (we're chronically shorthanded :-)), but while you're waiting you can continue working on the article if you want. Hope this helps. All the best, Miniapolis 18:41, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Eh, didn't know you were following a list. Not that important. Thanks anyways. Gloss • talk 20:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Minor advice

Hello. By seeing the copyediting on Megadeth and Anthrax, I've noticed a small mistake of your. The metal genres are written without the dash between them. "Thrash metal" instead of "thrash-metal", for example. By the way, thanks for all the help. Hope we can successfully collaborate on something else. Cheers.--Retrohead (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I only hyphenate when it's a compound modifier: "thrash metal", versus "thrash-metal band". Looks like Curly Turkey will be able to do your copyediting :-). All the best, Miniapolis 20:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

A while back you said I deleted something without giving a reason. I addition, you later accused me of employing meat puppets. You never responded to my response to your undeserved warning on my web page, so that is why I am posting to your user page.

Since my very few edits have gotten rather intense attention of sock puppets I can see how you could have gotten upset. But I assure you that when I made the deletion to the article, I actually made no contact with anyone else. In fact, the reason why that one person came to my aid is because you posted a warning on my page. And he or she wasn't necessarily friendly to me before that which is why I think he might have been following my page. This of course made it seem like she came out of nowhere for you I guess. Don't get me wrong. I am happy and consider myself very privileged when it occurs and I definitely don't take it for granted when someone helps me. But, I did not seek aid in this. In fact, it turned out you sought aid for me when you posted the warning to my web page.

I have not been editing for long and my first couple of weeks were pretty rocky. So I can't go back in time to fix things that occurred years ago. So yes, this was there for quite some time. However, it should have never been there - especially because of the rules concerning biographies of living persons. I think the low level of interest in the article led to it not being corrected earlier.

I wish you well and hope there is no animosity between us.Hilltrot (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Um, you may have me confused with someone else. I finally found what you're talking about (diffs would have helped), and I made no accusation of meatpuppetry. You removed an entire (reliably-sourced) section with the edit summary "This is clearly absurd and incorrect Russian Propoganda stupidity as well as being libel", which is not supported by any WP policy or guideline. I stand by my comment on your talk page. I'm just a copyeditor who was working on the article because it was tagged as needing copyediting (which it did) and is about a topic I consider encyclopedic, but I have very little patience with edit wars. Please calm down; WP is not a battleground. All the best, Miniapolis 21:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
You made your accusation of meatpuppetry [here].
Of particular note "I don't like edit-warring, and I like tag-teaming even less." The first sentence for tag-teaming is "Tag teaming (sometimes also called a "Travelling Circus" or "Factionalism") is a controversial[1] form of meatpuppetry . . ." The article later says "Unsubstantiated accusations of tag teaming are uncivil."
Libel is in fact part of Wikipedia policies. Propoganda is as well, but can be a vague in my opinion. WP:BLP1E is far more specific about this as well as many, many others. But as you have said to numerous people and me, you don't like discussing such matters, so I won't bother you with further details.
I am glad you've withdrawn your accusation of tag-teaming.Hilltrot (talk) 05:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Please don't include footnotes in copy-pasted talk-page posts; it messes up the formatting. Miniapolis 14:19, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  1. ^ Controversial as there is no consensus regarding the merits of this essay in namespace. Editors have voiced a concern that the "characteristics" of tag teams can easily be applied to editors who share a common practice of editing in accordance with policy, and that the essay can be used as a weapon against editors who are acting in accordance with Wikipedia's editing policies to cast aspersions on their good work. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Tag team
BTW, that essay was kept. Miniapolis 14:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

Double-check on archived copyedits

Hello Miniapolis. Can you check once again whether the copyediting done by MrWooHoo on Metallica, Lex Luthor, and Sleeping Dogs is really what the nominators demanded? I've already asked Metallica to be returned to the list because I don't consider this edit to suffice. Furthermore, another editor seems dissatisfied with how the task was handled, so I think we have a problem here.--Retrohead (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I see that you haven't mentioned this to MrWooHoo yet; you should take up any issues with them first. Miniapolis 21:17, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
I did discussed the topic with him at Metallica's talk page.--Retrohead (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
I take articles I've finished copyediting off my watchlist, and they may too. The place to discuss this is on their talk page, not here. Seems like there's no "happy medium" when it comes to copyediting; I caught hell for being too thorough with Megadeth, and now this. Why not ask Curly Turkey to check the copyedit? Miniapolis 23:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Nothing serious, seems the issue is resolved. Sorry for taking this to your talk page. Everything the best.--Retrohead (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Jesus motherfucking Christ! I've ignored your sniveling and throwing my name in Retrohead's face ever since I un-botched your copyedit, but now you're even pinging me to make sure I don't miss that you're slaging me. What in the flying fuck are you trying to provoke?! Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Didn't mean to ping you; I just linked your username as a courtesy to Retrohead. I have my notifications set differently from yours, and didn't give it a thought. Miniapolis 01:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC).

Full armor of god broadcast

Despite 3 AfDs - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Full Armor of God Broadcast which doesn't mention the 2 before: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full Armor of God Broadcast (2nd nomination) this has been recreated - getting around the salting with lower case. To be fair the creator told me about it on my talk page, see User talk:DougWeller#Full armor of god broadcast. This is on the basis that Tim Lambesis mentioned it. What do you think? Dougweller (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I haven't changed my opinion since the most recent AfD. Although the creator is apparently a good sport about the deletions, the lowercase re-creation after three deletions and salting is, IMO, disruptive. The "notoriety" they cite consists of a passing mention in the Daily Mail, a self-published promo from the program host and a repeat of the DM mention. Notability is not inherited from Tim Lambesis, and it still doesn't meet the GNG. All the best, Miniapolis 17:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Adoption?

Hi. Because you're listed as available on the GCE page...

I've been having a discussion with BrownHairedGirl at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#CIR problem (just ignore the RfA stuff ) regarding a problematic new editor. Would you be interested in mentoring/editing for them? If not, can you suggest the next step? There's no way I could keep up with them and do anything else. Besides, I now know more about cricket than I ever wanted to.

--... ...-- -.. . .- .-.. .- -. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Alan, and thanks for your concern about the editor in question. I read the thread and frankly, agree with BHG; while it's possible to mentor many things, I don't think one can "mentor" proficiency in English sufficient to edit en:WP. The problem sounds more like a basic language-competency thing than mere grammar and spelling editors (too bad, because I like cricket and as a Yank, I have a lot to learn about it :-)). Unfortunately, there's a lot of this on the English WP; it's the biggest, and people want to edit here who could do a lot more good on their native-language 'pedia.
As BHG said, try not to let the RFA get to you. I squeaked through mine about a year and a half ago (never quite hit 80 percent, but I haven't broken anything yet) and it was a miserable experience. While I'd thought about submitting a future RFA, someone I thought was an admin made me an offer I couldn't refuse before I understood what the process entails. Mere competence and experience aren't enough, and I think half the habitual opposers are just venting sour grapes. You're holding your own, though, so just grit your teeth and get through it. BTW, are you a ham?
--... ...-- -.. . .- -. -. . Miniapolis 00:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Re the CIR problem, so do I bring it to ANI then? There's not much more I can say to him/her.

Re the RfA, I'm afraid it's getting to be too much. In one of my responses, they earned one of the few exclamation marks I've ever written. The idea that it all comes down to working in one particular area, in which I don't want to work, seems ridiculous, but people seem to smell blood and pile on. I don't know why anyone would knowingly put themselves through it as it stands. I certainly won't do it again if it fails. Unfortunately, the result in that case will be that I will do less admin-type work because it's a pain to have to file AIV, UAA, ANI, when I should just be able to pull the trigger. It seems unfair to ask that I waste that time (and the time of others).

I've been a ham for a little over 34 years now. If I have a radio anywhere, it's got lots of dust on it, though :) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I blocked them for 48 hours to (hopefully) get their attention. It's possible that they don't check their talk page, but not using edit summaries plus the egregious MOS violations (which must be cleaned up by others, and we're short on volunteers as it is) was a bit too much to overlook. CIR, indeed. I've been active in amateur radio since the mid-1980s (my first username was my callsign, which I changed for privacy reasons :-)), almost exclusively on CW—ironic, since I couldn't learn it when I was a kid. All the best, Miniapolis 16:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I was rather intrigued with code, and got pretty good – I copied the 20 wpm Extra test almost verbatim, to the examiner's surprise, and got up to ~30 wpm I think in contests with my ears and a Heathkit paddle. I have a WAS QRP CW cert somewhere. I'm surprised I still know it. Something to be said for learning it early in life, I guess – it's kind of instinctive now. Memories... —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:05, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I flew in the face of the conventional belief that kids pick up Morse like a sponge; although I got interested in radio at age 11 (after discovering that I could hear faraway stations at night on my six-transistor radio), I had a mental block about code and it took 20 years to get from zero to five wpm for the novice ticket. We lived in a big city, though, and with no room for antennas the only way I was going to get out was on CW; it's now by far my favorite mode, and I handle traffic on 80 meters almost daily. It's still a fun hobby. All the best, Miniapolis 14:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Request for peer review

Hii Miniapolis. I am a new editor on Wikipedia and i request you to review the Lucknow article. Please note that i am not the admin or creator of the article but i have restructured the article according to the wikipedia guidelines. So keeping it short and simple, i am looking for your suggestions on making it a high quality (GA or FA worthy) article. link for PR:-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Lucknow/archive4 Thanks, Wikiboy2364 (talk) 17:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll get to it as soon as I can. Miniapolis 17:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 ... and it's  Done. All the best, Miniapolis 20:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miniapolis/Archives/2014/July&oldid=1209381126"