Jump to content

User talk:Philg88/Archive 43

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45→Archive 50

Tarohly

Any suggestion of the best course of action regarding Tarohly? Someone has just recreated a hopeless stub, while the prior version of the article was prodded. - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

@Sitush: Looks like it's gone. Do you want me to salt to prevent resurrection? Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 12:21, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks - someone tagged it as G3 (!!) after I posted above. I've no idea whether the creator of the original is the same person who recreated it. I think it might be worth leaving open for now but if a similarly poor recreation appears then salting might be necessary. Certainly, I've never been able to source it. - Sitush (talk) 13:15, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@Sitush: OK, no problem. If you have a mo please cast your expert eye over this stub that I cleaned up this morning. I think I got the geography correct.  Philg88 ♦talk 14:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Rose is not RS and these surname articles usually end up being deleted because the names themselves are not much discussed in sources (an obvious exception is Sharma). It would be better turned into a list of notable people bearing the Narwal name, if indeed we have any. That is, a dablist.
I'd do it myself but I'm only popping in and out here at the moment - for the first time in ages I have got quite a lot of work on. - Sitush (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@Sitush: Hmm ... I only found one individual surnamed Narwal so no point in a DAB. I also found Narwa, which seems to be about the same claim and it's also solely referenced by Rose. Maybe I should PROD both?  Philg88 ♦talk 15:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
They look like PROD candidates to me. Btw, although it is far from complete you might find User:Sitush/CasteSources generally useful - and feel free to add to it, even if only in note form. - Sitush (talk) 22:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@Sitush: Thanks,  Philg88 ♦talk 09:51, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
No probs. I see you picked up the other one. I'm doing a very good impression of a fly at the moment! - Sitush (talk) 11:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

@Sitush: Curiosity piqued. However, each to their own .... Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 15:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Oval (cricket ground)

In view of the fact that a proper discussion and consensus process has never taken place and given the ridiculous number of changes to the title of this article, can you please revert it back to its original title of The Oval and then formally invite the discussion to proceed so that a consensus can be established re the future title. As things stand, the process has been reduced to a complete shambles by people who are intent to doing their own thing without any regard to the cricket project which has hundreds of links to the original title. Thanks. Jack | talk page 06:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jack and thanks for the message. I agree it was a complete shambles. I moved the article AGF following an uncontroversial request and didn't know the background. Fortunately, Jenks24 has restored the status quo. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 06:35, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Phil, and we should all thank Jenks for his prompt action. Jack | talk page 06:38, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Phil, no worries – this happens to me as well at RM/TR sometimes, the histories can be pretty convoluted and difficult to ascertain which is the real status quo. By the way, you might have seen I move protected the article. That's not a knock on you in any way, it was more just preventative to make sure no one moves it while under discussion for the next little while. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 06:43, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the message Jenks24 and your prompt action. As you say, sometimes it's hard to determine the status quo. I have no problem with the move protection, an eminently sensible precaution. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 06:51, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate closure

This is a closure I would never expect from your part. It must be a snowball closure but remember snow closure doesn't come under speed keep's criteria, read WP:SK#NOT. You must not mention "speedy keep" as a closing rationale when it doesn't meet any of the criteria mentioned here. Best, Jim Carter 05:02, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jim Carter: Far from inappropriate. That nomination was so erroneous it beggars belief. Please feel free to take it to deletion review if you're unhappy.  Philg88 ♦talk 05:19, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I've no idea what on earth made you thought it was a erroneous nomination. Make sure you understand WP:SK. It is evident from my nomination rationale and my response to Cutest Penguin that I've read the article and the sources, hence the nomination is absolutely not erroneous. My nomination standed on valid grounds. Jim Carter 05:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
It is blindingly obvious to even the most inexperienced editor that Subhash Chandra is notable based on my closing comments at the AfD. That makes the nomination "erroneous". As I said above, if you're unhappy with the close you are free to take it to deletion review. Now let's get back to building an Encyclopedia.  Philg88 ♦talk 05:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Yesterday

Hi Phil. Thanks for yesterday. What do you mean "Lugnuts may be a pain in the ass on occasion but overall, IMHO he's a net benefit to the project"?! Only on occasion?! Maybe 428,000 edits and closing in on 24,000 new articles is perhaps some net benefit to the project. I'm lead to believe once I reach 1 million edits and 50,000 new articles I'm allowed to go on a 24hr power trip. Let me know how I redeem my golden ticket for that one. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 07:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. I did reword my comment as the version quoted was a bit over the top, for which I apologise. As for the golden ticket, looks like that's about ten years away when Wikipedia will no doubt be a very different place. I wouldn't like to speculate on redemption this early! Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 10:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Re

I have seen your message, but I really don't think I did not follow the policy (see details in my reply there). In fact, I was pretty surprised to see the wording in your message there. Please help me for solving the issue, thanks! --Cartakes (talk) 12:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cartakes: The issue to "solve" is your cut and paste moves, which have removed the attribution history and are in breach of Wikipedia policy. It is not fair for me or anyone else for that matter to have to go through your contributions and work out exactly what you cut and pasted from where to where. The responsibility for that clean up rests squarely on your shoulders. I don't want to see any more of these type of moves and I also want you to discuss what you are doing with other editors like ch who have an interest in the same area. Wikipedia works on consensus, not unilateral action. Thanks.  Philg88 ♦talk 14:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Before seeing your message I just left a message at User talk:CWH#Re: new articles to explain the issue (there must be some misunderstanding). As for the move, I must say what I was doing was cut/pasted part of the article(s) that were too excessive or detailed for the original article(s) and reworded/restructured them in the new articles, and at the same time left an edit summary saying "Moved to Korea under Yuan rule" etc. So definitely I did not try to intentionally violate the policy. I do want to solve the issue as fine as possible. --Cartakes (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
@Cartakes: I've replied at ch's talk. Please keep conversations in one place. It makes me dizzy jumping back and forth. Thanks.  Philg88 ♦talk 16:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Sure, let's discuss there instead. --Cartakes (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Your reversion

No worries, and thanks for the explanation! Happy editing :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 05:29, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Thanks for the message. I put the error down to not having finished my first cup of coffee of the day! Mind you, we don't normally get IP's removing six year old comments from talk pages. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 05:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Your recent move

Hello Philg88, I really don't want edit war with you but can you give me a reason why you moved Native ethnic groups of Africa to Ethnic groups of Africa?, I left a summary prior to moving the page explaining that the topic covers mainly the ethnic groups that are native to the African continent and should have a more specific and explanatory title. That is the reason why the page was moved to Native ethnic groups of Africa? I checked WP:RM and couldn't find any request for your recent move of the page. Stanleytux (talk) 21:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Stanleytux, thanks for the message. I don't just move articles randomly, it was requested as uncontroversial here. If you have a problem with the move then it's probably best to take it up with the requester. I may be only the messenger, but I do wear a Kevlar vest.  Philg88 ♦talk 21:49, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I left the user a message at their talk page and hoping that they reply so this can be sorted out. Stanleytux (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Nizamabad,_Telangana#Area

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Nizamabad,_Telangana#Area. Thanks. Vin09 (talk) 06:18, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done  Philg88 ♦talk 20:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Flag of India

Phil, I was wondering if you could help with some sources. I have a couple of scholarly sources at Flag of India which explicitly state that a blue banner was what was used officially during the raj (the sources were also checked during the FARC process), but crw I think has been saying that the red banner was used (my sources say that the red flag was mainly used at the League of Nations). Wondering if you could find some other source through BNA or other British sources, as this seems to be a constant sticky point on the article. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey SS and thanks for the message. I know Wikipedia isn't a reliable source but according to Star of India (flag) the red banner was used at international events while the blue banner was used by the Indian navy. The way the British Empire worked, the Union Jack would have been the official flag because of the monarch's status as Emperor/Empress of India. The evidence for that is available in multiple sources if you want me to dig some up.  Philg88 ♦talk 06:16, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, that's where my problem is, the Red star of India bit found its way here from crw and has been propagated across mirrors etc and it's now all over the interwebs (I had to remove a remirrored, mirrored source from the article once!) But Arundhati Virmani who has perhaps done the most comprehensive research on Indian flags has indicated that the blue one was the official one. Srirupa Roy who has also done research into the flag has made some passing comments about the blue banner. Virmani has also alluded to why the specific flag was used instead of the Union Jack as was standard -- to get a buy-in from the locals after the 1857 revolt. It'd be great if you can find some British sources for this (whatever is correct, not what the Virmani source says!) as I haven't been able to get any (probably because I haven't been looking in the right places). cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 06:29, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm drawing a blank on sources, largely I suspect because everyone knew that the Union Jack was the pre-independence flag and so assumed that there was no need to write it down. I found a passing mention here but nothing much else. I can't find anything about official usage of the red/blue field in British sources but I'll keep looking. I'm waiting for my BNA subscription to be renewed, which may help us. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 07:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. This is one of the Virmani articles where she makes the claim about the Viceroy being assigned the blue banner to represent the Indian territory (By QV in 1863). It's an OUP publication of a Past & Present journal. That might help in searching for further sources when you get your BNA access. Let me know if you'd like the article. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 08:47, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
@SpacemanSpiff: I've combed Google using multiple search queries for any mention of the 1863 event and there is none. I'd appreciate a copy of the article though for info. I used to have Jstor access but now they want $36.00 for a copy! Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 10:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
That is indeed part of the problem here, Google hasn't been very friendly to me on this front -- almost everything I find on it are adaptations of the crw work which is a hobbyist effort. You should have the article now, I've applied for the jstor access through WP:JSTOR but I have no idea how long it'll take for them to recoup unused accounts and recirculate them. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: I interpret Virmani to mean that the blue banner was a personal award to the Viceroy, rather like a coat of arms. It was not a national flag. The timing fits with the upgrade of Governor-General to Viceroy and Governor-General under the Government of India Act 1858 and with the plethora of blue banners used by the Empire (see here). This is a nice bit of context. Now for the good bit; there is an excellent explanation for the red flag here. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 15:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm, that's a bit different to what at least a couple of people thought on the basis of that source, but I guess we might have to change it now. I'm a bit tied up over the next couple of days so I'll get to it after that. I'll also try to see what that book says, my gbooks preview isn't the same as yours so I can't see what you were pointing to. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, no probs.  Philg88 ♦talk 05:40, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Phil, there's something funky going on with that source. Compare with this one year old version of our article. Part of the wording in that page is mine. Also, one problem here is that our article had the Bikhaji Cama flag wrong (the commons version is incorrect, there's a discussion on this in the archives) and this book has repeated that error in addition to being a copy of our article from a certain point in time. This is one of the perennial issues I've had with this particular article as a lot of errors from hit have made their way to mirrors etc. I'm not sure how OUP would do this though. —SpacemanSpiff 07:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
In fact that book has also changed scholarly consensus on the designer of the flag based on a WP:FRINGE claim that was unreverted in our article during my inactivity! —SpacemanSpiff 07:07, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I've noticed the mirroring problem as Wikipedia has got bigger. We of course have no chance to correct third party works that have used our (incorrect) info. I think that what we need to do is go back to the original (albeit primary) sources that document the flag's history, i.e. the British government and the associated acts of parliament.  Philg88 ♦talk 07:19, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree, I'll try to check up on those, also please let me know if this is getting too boring for you -- it's obviously not a topic of interest for many historians, so I shouldn't assume it would be for you! Also, the GG/Viceroy's flag was File:Flag of the Governor-General of India (1885–1947).svg. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 15:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Not boring at all. I love all the old Raj stuff, which is why I just created this. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 15:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
No, that was a confusion caused by my not being able to see either preview on the day Phil posted (apparently Google gives different previews on different days as I can see them today!). This -- the second link is the mirror. crw flags is a flag store that also hosts a hobbyist website which is often correct and was an accepted source for most of our heraldry articles earlier on. —SpacemanSpiff 08:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Got it, thanks. I've not seen that mirror used before and it looks to be an obscure publisher. - Sitush (talk) 08:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Personal biasness shown by Cyphoidbomb

I had a talk page disscussion over article balouchistan Pakistan where my position was oposite from User Cyphoidbomb. All ended with a concensus. After that for another article Baluchistan I am here on DRN against User Cyphoidbomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Balochistan.23Recent_changes, but with out being relevant to another article's (Khyber Paktunkhwa) dispute (between me and User Jasimkhanum 10 on maintaning pre dispute version of article), Cyphoidbomb started persanol revenge game. 1. He misrepresented me on ANI read https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FEdit_warring&type=revision&diff=675320060&oldid=675310006 2. He deleted pre dispute version of Khyber Pakhtunkha and took Jasimkhanum 10 side and voilated WP principle that in case of dispute a pre dispute version will be maintaned. Zmaghndstakun (talk) 03:37, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Zmaghndstakun: That page is on my watchlist, I was watching all edit war. I will give you simple suggestion, just provide citations for that language section and do edit protected request, any admin will do that change later. Or wait for 2 days and do your desired change with proper source. I think language section is necessary in any region related topic, but it do needs sources. Regarding "revenge" thing I will suggest you that don't go further in this matter otherwise it will just waste your time and it will be just distressing thing for you. --Human3015Send WikiLove  02:58, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
@Zmaghndstakun: Wikipedia discourages admin shopping and quite what you expect me to do isn't clear. It looks to me as if Cyphoidbomb has the situation under control for now. What I will tell you is that when the edit protection on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa expires, if you resume edit warring I will block you without warning. Hopefully, that makes things clear but you may also want to take Human3015's advice and ensure that you provide proper citations for anything you add to articles. Thanks,  Philg88 ♦talk 05:40, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Even if you will edit war you will get blocked because on WP rules are same for every one. Thanks for repeating policy Zmaghndstakun (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

GOCE August 2015 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors August 2015 Newsletter

July drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 24 people who signed up, 17 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

August blitz: The one-week April blitz, targeting biographical articles that have been tagged for copy editing for over a year, will run from August 16–22. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the article list on the blitz page. Sign up here!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis, and Pax85.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
sent by Jonesey95 via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_most_populous_cities_in_India#Requested_move_16_August_2015

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_most_populous_cities_in_India#Requested_move_16_August_2015. Thanks. Vin09 (talk) 08:52, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done  Philg88 ♦talk 09:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Is using emblems a copyright issue? Like at this page edit, I think it was removed.--Vin09 (talk) 12:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Vin09: Not in this case as the image is, or was properly licensed. On the other hand, adding an administrator icon to one's user page as that editor did is a very bad idea, so I've removed it. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 14:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok fine. Admin icon to my page or his?--Vin09 (talk) 14:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
His. I know you have more sense than to do that .  Philg88 ♦talk 14:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
--Vin09 (talk) 14:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Does it require a disambiguation page for Nandigama and Nandigama, Guntur district.--Vin09 (talk) 14:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

See WP:TWODABS. I suggest you check with the Census of India as to whether there are other identically named places (probably) and if there are create a DAB page. Otherwise use a hatnote to point either way. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 14:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Shop Direct

Hi Philg88, thanks a lot for the quick move of the Shop Direct page. I was wondering if I could ask a quick bit of advice. I'm a Shop Direct employee, though I'm a long way down the pecking order, no where near PR or anything like that. The Shop Direct articles are in a sorry state, and I see they've been edited a bit recently by what I can only assume is staff members, ignoring the problematic issues and focussing on "announcing" brands that are shutting down.

Anyway, my question is; I'm not here to fluff the Shop Direct articles, but I would like to see them better written. Is the declaration I put on my user page sufficient to meet the recent conflict of interest requirements? Thanks again for all your help Flying Buttress (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi there Flying Buttress and thanks for the message. This is a tricky one. Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy is designed to prevent employees, PR people and God knows who else from twisting content for their own purposes. However, the overriding aim of everyone here is to improve the Encyclopedia so if you intend to make such improvements - i.e by adding information that conforms to our policies on sourcing and neutrality, then go ahead and make the edits. If you want to remove content then I suggest that you post the requested change on the article's talk page rather than doing it yourself. Tread carefully though, as people will be watching and I'd hate to see you blocked.  Philg88 ♦talk 14:47, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
It is tough... it's a big company, and I'm a little guy. I've no one in the higher ups telling me to edit the articles, in fact they don't know that I am. I've been reading Wikipedia for a long time, I tried editing before (but got disillusioned by a certain admin). I reckon I get the policies and can fit within them. Either way, I'll start slow. I can't see how what I'm planning to do could be seen as worse than the status quo though. Anyway, thanks for the advice. Is there anywhere else you'd suggest for more if I get stuck? Flying Buttress (talk) 15:01, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
You can always ask/ping me. I'm quite nice to people who are trying to play by the rules ...  Philg88 ♦talk 15:08, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Check

Could you check User_talk:Vin09#Mind_It.--Vin09 (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Vin09: I've left our friend a strongly worded message. Hopefully that will do the trick.  Philg88 ♦talk 17:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Seal

The edit here says as Do not place a non-free image here in previous version. Is the seal pic acceptable or any copyright issue?--Vin09 (talk) 17:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I suggest also posting th question and answer to Talk:Chennai where it can be archived, making it easier for future reference. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:34, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
No non-free images should be used in the sister city context. A "fair use" claim allows for use of such an image only when used to illustrate an article about the topic. Chennai is not that topic so it needs to go - I'll leave one of you to take care of that.  Philg88 ♦talk 17:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Merge

I've removed merge tag from the page which Talk:Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority. Is it fine?

I have no problem with it. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 10:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Same edits

Promoting chennai as a Megacity here. Spoilt the page table.--Vin09 (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Articles

Earlier I've created pages named List of cities in India by area and List of cities in Andhra Pradesh by area. I'm moving the content of AP cities areas by adding extra column on List of cities in Andhra Pradesh by population. So, what about List of cities in India by area? Also, if merged area and population can the name be List of cities in Andhra Pradesh by population or it can be renamed as List of cities in Andhra Pradesh. Your views?--Vin09 (talk) 10:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

@Vin09: On the content front I'm kind of busy with Sikkim stuff right now so I'll leave it up to you to sort out AP. Please ensure that you get consensus before doing anything potentially contentious. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 10:33, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
I think List of cities in Andhra Pradesh with population and area is a good idea. I don't see any reason to oppose it as long as content it covers existing content from the other two pages. utcursch | talk 14:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
@Utcursch:. Fine.You mean the article title must be List of cities in Andhra Pradesh with population and area?

No, he means just List of cities in Andhra Pradesh. The population and area form part of the article.  Philg88 ♦talk 11:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

@Philg88: Unable to move it to List of cities in AP, does it required requested move, or could you do it?--Vin09 (talk) 07:59, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

@Vin09: Please state exactly what you want moved to what and I'll go ahead and do it. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 08:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
@Philg88: List of cities in Andhra Pradesh by population to List of cities in Andhra Pradesh as how User:Utcursch stated.--Vin09 (talk) 08:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
@Vin09: Done. 08:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for your suggestion. I see what you mean. --Cartakes (talk) 14:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

No problem.  Philg88 ♦talk 14:13, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Confused -- Please help me understand my error

I have edited pages for pierogi and momo to remove the reference to gyoza, a Chinese dish that is referred to by that name in Japan, and have just been notified that those changes were reversed. I do not understand the reasoning for this. Would you be so kind as to explain so that I can avoid making similar mistakes in the future? 賢進学 「Kenshin Manabu」 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:04, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

@賢進学: Hi there and thanks for the message. You may know what this is referred to as in Japan but the vast majority of our readers don't. As a general principle, except in cases of obvious vandalism or unsustainable claims, you should try to avoid removing information from the Encyclopedia. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 05:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Frescobot - Tony de Peltrie

Hello Philg88 - I received a message from the frescobot about Tony de Peltrie. I don't see what the problem is. Is the english to poetic for the Bot? And "better sources needed" - at this point are 3 sources for the text. Maybe I have to put the wp-source at the end to no. 3 in this line. Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:05, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

PS on the talk page I read that some user not more real happy with this Bot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Basilicofresco .--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Maxim Pouska. The bot is right. You can't use Wikipedia as a source as it's not considered reliable. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 14:18, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok I'm going to remember this for the future - but what about [clarification needed What does this mean?] at Plot?--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
That indicates that the meaning is not clear. I have no idea what you are trying to say and my English is pretty good. Perhaps you could try retranslating or ask a friendly talk page stalker to help?  Philg88 ♦talk 14:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
OK - I did some clarification. I hop it is now OK.Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Not quite, but I think I nailed it now. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 15:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you - to write simpler is better to read. I try it for my next article.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 15:34, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
You rang, Sir. Hi Maxim Pouska! Sorry for being late, I can only be at the computer for short moments right now. Is this to be a translation of the German article? Have you nailed this for now, or do you want me to take a look and see if I can help with the translation of that particular part? w.carter-Talk 15:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Pip, pip Jeeves, but I'm afraid you're a tad late. Problem solved methinks but thanks anyway.  Philg88 ♦talk 15:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry about that, won't happen again. All the same, I took a peak at the German and made my own translation of it. I'll just leave it here in case one of you want to use some of it:
  • "The film portrays the last part of Tony's career, as seen from his own perspective. Now alone and nostalgic, he recollects his past in a dreamlike state before it all fades away. The emotions of the story range in a melancholy way from joyful memories to the sad ending."
Cheers, w.carter-Talk 15:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

That flows well, why don't you swap it for the existing less eloquent translation?  Philg88 ♦talk 16:04, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Ok, if you say so. w.carter-Talk 16:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
I like it too. Thanks.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 17:21, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Thalys attack

While I agree with the results of your keep of the Thalys terrorist attack article, I disagree with the speedy close. A good quarter of people voted to delete.

Early closure risks railroading. It should be done with utmost caution, like a hypothetical proposal to delete the United States article. It is too easy to abuse early closure of any kind of discussion or vote. Why not cancel the U.S. Democratic Party nomination and have Hillary Clinton as the nominee as "speedy keep"?

Please reconsider. We will win the keep but to have done it fair and square. Do not ask me to apply for a re-opening because that is simply red tape forced on me. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Sandra, Wikipedia works on consensus and that's clearly what we had here. Thousands of people from all over the world will have turned to Wikipedia for information on this incident. We do all of them a disservice by exposing a prolonged internal squabble to the wider, and no doubt grieving, public.  Philg88 ♦talk 20:31, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I am concerned that your early closure is personal bias, not supported by Wikipedia rules, and a bad habit.
It is a habit. See another complaint about you doing it before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Philg88#Inappropriate_closure This is on your user talk page.
It is not supported by Wikipedia rules. See my original note to you. Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Speedy_keep Your actions do not abide by any of the six reasons. (note: this link was kindly provided in the other speedy keep complaint to you by someone else).
I am concerned that you are using your own rules and whim when you write "We do all of them a disservice by exposing a prolonged internal squabble to the wider, and no doubt grieving, public". Coverup is bad. Many politicians cover up bad things but that turns out to be the wrong path many times.
I am for the article, which is why I am not making a big stink. However, I am very concerned that you are not acting in the correct way. Perhaps, you could promise to abide by the rules more closely in the future? I hope you don't become aggressive and demand that you are right and then go all out to punish me. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 21:11, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
The speedy close (although technically it should've been snow rather than speedy) looks fine to me. As the story develops, the event looks to be even more notable than when the news broke, which is why the bottom half of the votes are all keeps. I also went to the page to vote keep, but it was already closed. Leaving the discussion open for too long would be time-wasting and hamper the event's ITN nomination process. -Zanhe (talk) 22:18, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Zanhe. It was a snow close (as mentioned in the closing comments). Closing before the usual seven days allocated to an AfD makes it a speedy close since there is no such thing as a "snow" AfD outcome. @Sandra opposed to terrorism: Making unfounded accusations of bias and bad habits when you have been on Wikipedia for one day is not a good start. These are considered personal attacks and against policy - if you intend to stay around here they are best avoided.  Philg88 ♦talk 05:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
No personal attack was intended but thanks for letting me know of the customs here. Also please, no personal attacks on me. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 16:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Besides, it's even in my name. Personal attacks can be terrorism. I am opposed to terrorism. ha ha, really, not joke, I am opposed to it. Sandra opposed to terrorism (talk) 16:35, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Blatantly wrong maps need immediate fixing

Blank Asia map

Examine these two maps

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:East-Hem_900ad.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asia_1025ad.jpg

Now examine these articles.

Kara-Khanid Khanate

Kingdom of Khotan

Kingdom of Qocho.

The first map is wrong, in that it portrays the Kingdom of Khotan as part of the Kara-Khanid state.

The second map is wrong, in that it portrays the Kara-khanids and the Uyghur Kingdo of Qocho as part of a single state.

So the first map needs to have the Kingdom of Khotan edited into it.

the second map, needs to have the Kingdom of Qocho edited into it. Basically transferring the "Xinjian (Uyghurs)" from the first map onto the second map, and labelling it as "Kingdom of Qocho (Ughurs)".

Also do you know where I can find a standard blank map of east eurasia (at least including Mongolia and central asia), without topography, that can be used for editing and uploading to wikimedia?Rajmaan (talk) 03:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey there Rajmaan and thanks for the message. Unfortunately, these maps are jpgs, a format that all mapmakers hate because it's very difficult to edit. In these two cases the contour details overlaid with text make it nigh on impossible to change without the whole thing looking like a dog's breakfast. For a blank map you could use the example shown but you will need to remove the modern day boundaries. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 04:48, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_cities_in_India_by_population#Census_reference

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_cities_in_India_by_population#Census_reference. Thanks.--Vin09 (talk) 12:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done  Philg88 ♦talk 12:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Help me to create "Portal:Kollam"

Hi Phil,

I request your help to create an exclusive Wiki Portal for Kollam(Quilon). I had a look on some of the Portals from India, but the structure and it's creation is unknown for me. Help me to build one. Expecting your reply.

-- Arunvrparavur (talk) 14:18 IST (06:30 UTC), 25 August 2015

Hi Arunvrparavur and thanks for the message. I'm afraid I don't have any experience in building portals - you might be better of asking at the India noticeboard. Good luck! Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 09:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

-- Arunvrparavur (talk) 15:18 IST, 25 August 2015

Flag of India Part 2

@SpacemanSpiff: Now that my BNA subscription has been renewed, I did some digging and added a paragraph to the history section of Flag of India. This effectively invalidates some of the unreferenced claims in the preceding paragraphs so I'm not sure it gets us any further forward. Thoughts? Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 12:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks for that addition. I haven't been able to get a copy, but Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India appears to have some information specific to the blue v red banner. As for the British India flag idea, I've seen it typically credited to one William M. Coldstream, and subsequently Lord Curzon issued a statement saying that the Viceroy's flag was sufficient for the empire and there was no need to replicate what was there in other places (this is apparently in the form of a letter to the Secretary of State) and might be accessible via some empire archives I guess. Which unreferenced claim do you see that needs removal? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:54, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It's the bit starting "The partition of Bengal (1905) resulted in the introduction of a new Indian flag ...", which appears to be a flag for the Independence movement rather than anything official, as Lord Ampthill's letter came four years later. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 13:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Ah, I see that. That's more of a writing error than an unreferenced claim -- it was to mean the independence movement, but it isn't obvious. I'll fix that today, thanks for catching that. —SpacemanSpiff 13:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome. Is there anything else needed on the topic? Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 16:40, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
The only matter is the red vs blue, because my understanding is that Curzon specifically didn't want the Red one that other territories of the empire had because it would add to the confusion. There's the letter that Curzon sent to the SoState reg this matter and that would be really helpful, if you can get that through any of your source channels -- I've been unable to do that. I've clarified the flag statement now, I think that should be ok. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:11, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Hmm ... nothing immediate found on the Curzon red/blue issue but I'll keep an eye out. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 19:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

An old friend at it again

Phil, you'd blocked Prashant 015 earlier for some Jat POV stuff, he's now back again with this very odd edit. I'm refraining from taking any action here as I'm a regular editor of Delhi and had cleaned up after him on some population data. However, I've warned him of GS/Caste sanctions and Thomas.W has warned him of ARBIPA sanctions. Alerting you so that you can do what you think is best. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

@SpacemanSpiff: I've reverted his edits on Jat people and also his unsourced, and totally ridiculous, claim on Jutes, a Germanic people in Northern Europe, that they're ancestors of the Jats. Thomas.W talk 09:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Thomas.W Saw that, but if you go searching on Commons you'll find the map that traces the route that the Jats took from Jutland to northern India and their conquests en route! I remember deleting or redirecting an article on that a few years ago, but the map should still be on Commons. —SpacemanSpiff 10:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@SpacemanSpiff: The Jutes were a Scandinavian tribe, like the Geats, the Swedes and others, and both where Scandinavian peoples migrated when the climate in Scandinavia started to become colder during the bronze age (a climate change that meant that Scandinavia could no longer feed the large population there), and when they did it, is well known. Scandinavians migrated to all parts of Europe (Scandinavia is the Urheimat of all Germanic peoples) and eventually even to North Africa (see Vandals), but they never migrated to any part of Asia (a move from Scandinavia to India would have left archeological traces along the way, and why would they move all the way to India when there was plenty of fertile land to grab in Europe?). So all claims that Jats descend from Jutes or any other Scandinavian tribe are very fringe. Thomas.W talk 10:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Thomas.W Oh I know, I was just being sarcastic, I've had to delete so much of this really out there stuff.—SpacemanSpiff 10:54, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Blimey gentlemen that is a spurious claim if ever I heard one. The "lost" Roman tribe in China I can sort of buy, but this ... nah. I'll keep an eye on our friend. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 11:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm tired of fringe-pushers, having dealt with all kinds of them for years now, mostly on articles relating to Europe, though. Including a very persistent, and very prolific, fringe-pusher claiming among other things that the Vikings weren't a Germanic people but Finns, a totally unrelated people speaking a totally unrelated, originally Uralic/Asian, language. So it seems like everyone wants to claim a connection to Scandinavia, probably because of all the blondes there. Thomas.W talk 11:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Well, there is some evidence that our traveling ancestors were way out east, but they just grabbed what they could and returned home afterwards. Little did they know that they would create fringe ripples here. I guess they ignored the Prime Directive. ;) w.carter-Talk 11:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

ping W.carter Are you claiming Buddha was Swedish? We have enough trouble over his birthplace already.  Philg88 ♦talk 12:01, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh no! Perish the thought that I would claim something like that. But the figurine was, (ahem) acquired, by some of my ancestors and brought back to Sweden along with a new fashion for trousers, dinars and other shiny things. :) w.carter-Talk 12:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

literacy

Could you check User_talk:Vin09#2011_census.--Vin09 (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Vin09. The Times of India is considered a reliable source from what I can see at the related notice board. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 05:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Philg88 But the official website don't support it.--Vin09 (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not with you. Doesn't support what?  Philg88 ♦talk 05:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Explanation: REFERENCE page-43,

AP population - 49386799; Literates - 29772532; children (0-6 age) - 5222384;

So, literacy rate (%) = 29772532/(49386799-5222384)*100 = 67.41

If The Times of India has more current data than the latest government info, its use is acceptable because it is a reliable source.  Philg88 ♦talk 06:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
The AP official website and the times of india reference both came at the same time. A minor logic, if the literacy is 90% then the literates should be 90% of the population, but here it is not. Both TG and AP websites were formed after 2014 only. If unclear I'll provide more ref.--Vin09 (talk) 06:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Phil, this is very likely a typo from the ToI which they never ever correct, a 91% literacy rate for any large state other than Kerala is near impossible currently. That said, Vin09 has to start explaining things properly or even taking some of these issues to the relevant notice boards rather than talking in abstracts as it gets very difficult to understand. Also, I think he should start following up on actions and not just dropping the ball into the laps of other editors. —SpacemanSpiff 06:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
@SpacemanSpiff:, I respect your statement, as Philg88 is an admin I mostly ask him in some tricky situations, that's it. Sometimes users make edit war, so I ask advice from users like you if those edits are correct or not. Anyways, I try to follow what you said. Thanks.--Vin09 (talk) 06:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
It's perfectly fine asking for help and there's no reason for me to ever say otherwise, but then in the other thread both Phil and I had suggested you file the SPI, but you did not -- I have done so today after remembering, but now one of the accounts is likely stale. Unless you follow up on these things, you shouldn't be bringing it for help to others, this wastes more of everyone's time, in addition to handling the original disruption. Likewise, over here, you should have explained everything in the beginning, it's very difficult for someone to go through from one link to another, without context and again causes an unnecessary amount of time to be spent on this. You had all the information in the beginning, so you should have included that in the first question. I looked at this and I couldn't figure head or tail of what was being asked of Phil. The only reason I came to a different conclusion than Phil is because of the 91% figure, which unless someone has contextual knowledge, isn't possible. —SpacemanSpiff 06:25, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up SS. @Vin09: SpacemanSpiff is an admin too but that's not the point here. This is far from a "tricky situation" and, as he says, we're not here to do your grunt work. In this case, the reliable sources noticeboard may be the best place to raise the issue.  Philg88 ♦talk 06:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

SS. @Philg88: I'm always here to learn and follow other editors. Definitely I follow both of your words. Thanks for taking your valuable time in explaining. Cheers.--Vin09 (talk) 06:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Automated message from this user

 Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Namibia with this edit, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 21:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Namibia with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 21:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

This edit was not done by me, although the IP is the same, I have a dynamic IP address with my ISP so it changes from time to time. Message has been sent to the wrong person. 217.44.95.158 (talk) 21:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@217.44.95.158: Don't worry about it. You're using a dynamic IP so this can happen from time to time. The message is also four years old.  Philg88 ♦talk 06:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Move

Dear User:Philg88, I hope this message finds you doing well! I just wanted to bring your attention to the fact that although you successfully moved that article, the talk page still needs to be moved. I hope you can also move the talk page too. Have a great day! With regards, AnupamTalk 19:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Got it. Jenks24 (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you my friend. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 20:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

GBooks NGrams

Wow, just wow. I didn't realise such a thing existed. - Sitush (talk) 09:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

A most useful resource  Philg88 ♦talk 09:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Reg move

Phil, reg this move, I don't profess to know what the right title is, but the ngrams would be misleading because Valmiki is very well covered in scholarly literature, and is unrelated to this topic. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hm. And this returns nothing. That might be a technical thing (using search phrases rather than words) but there is also the issue that mentions of castes often do not take the form "name caste". Eg: we get books that say things such as "castes in the area include the name1 and name2". - Sitush (talk) 09:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I did a fair bit of digging to find the ref about Ambedkar and all that appeared was Valmiki as the caste name. It also seems logical that if the caste took its name from Valmiki then they would maintain the same spelling. Having said all that, I have no problem if you want to revert the move as you are much more expert in the matter than I am. Cheers,  Philg88 ♦talk 09:58, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't have an opinion either way, really. Like you say, it seems to be common sense. Whether common sense and COMMONNAME always align is a different issue. - Sitush (talk) 10:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Indeed it is. Let's leave the article where it is for now and see if any issues are raised by other editors. Best,  Philg88 ♦talk 10:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Philg88/Archive_43&oldid=1076642668"