User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 99

Archive 95

←

Archive 97

Archive 98

Archive 99

Archive 100

Archive 101

→

Archive 105

Reboot

Not that it matters, I'm sure, but I'm now all about the love for people who really care about the project. You're one of those. So let's reboot. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Sure, although I must confess complete confusion over what a "bollocks face" is. Say, M25 motorway needs a GA review, and I think Gerda wanted a DYK hook about ten threads above. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:50, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

A bollocks face? Well you could start with this one and add that one too. I'll think about the M25 GA, I spend long enough on it. EZL? I'm not even allowed to discuss that, as you know. Is that some kind of trap? So soon? The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 17:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I missed that. When did that happen? I had a quick look on the dramaboards and the only thing I can find is a proposal being tossed out. In my view, it is poor form for an administrator to log something at WP:EDR and not put a link to the discussion that led to the consensus. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

You know me, I have so much drama swirling around (like a novice Fram), I couldn't point you to anything. I'm sure someone somewhere will be able to point to the bit where I was banned forever from engaging in that whose name can't be spake ever, although I was given the dispensation that I could do whatever I liked at WP:TRM which, obviously, is complete bollocks, but that's how we roll here. I think I'd be okay with making reviews of articles in isolation of any known main page "process of whose name I cannot speak", and I can draw attention to the myriad issues from said "unspoken other place" at WP:TRM, but I can't actively engage with the community, even when it's utter horseshit and full of problems and embarrassing and on the main page for hours and hours. Because that all makes sense. Can't risk it because there are certain admins who, in the past, have shown a determination to simply block, block, block, and move on, mechanically, almost like a robot. So I'm treading cautious these days. Happy to help with the normal sub-par stuff that gets onto "certain" parts of the main page, but I'm permanently "under a cloud". The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 18:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Basically TRM kept getting dragged to AE, so Sandstein went to ARCA and this motion was passed.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, that. I see there I wrote "As I said on the other thread, if you gain TRM's respect and have a quiet off-wiki word, he is reasonable. If you charge in on horseback with Arbcom pro-forma templates, you'll get blown a raspberry", though I seem to remember most of my participation in that discussion was to try and diplomatically get BU Rob13 to take off the spiderman outfit and climb down from the Reichstag. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

It was my good friends at Arbcom who instigated the topic ban. As odd as it is. But I have renewed respect for some of them after their response to the board, so I'm letting it slide for now. I think I can trust at least a handful of the remaining committee to do the right thing. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 18:35, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I have remained largely silent on the Fram issue aside from stating my views on it once (which drew a few comments of "that's far too sensible to post here") and kept a wide berth of the more hysterical side of discussions. I have said the WMF was, if not incompetent or malicious, extremely naive and unfair about banning a longstanding contributor without any explanation or any right of appeal, but I just don't think Fram has got the right temperament and communication skills to be an administrator and I would have supported a desysop, though probably not a site ban.

As for "that project", I will see if I can raise the issue at WP:ARCA and get some common sense injected into the debate. I am absolutely certain that Gerda Arendt would have no issue whatsoever in you reviewing her proposed text for Georg Katzer. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Well sure. If I was a betting man/dog/amoeba, then I'd place 1000/1 on that Arbcom tell you to do one, evens that the ban is extended further (as normal when my appeals are lodged) and a million to one against anything favourable occurring. So sure, go for it, common sense is in short supply of late, but I think it's always trumped by the rejoicing hawks who await my demise. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 20:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The ban was the result of last autumn's round of drama, when the mysterious "TRM groupies" were brought into the equation and I think you offered someone a Christmas Ale, Ritchie. But probably as long as there are people at DYK who "complain when you're around, and rejoice when you leave" it's going to be difficult for TRM to find a home there...  — Amakuru (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Late to the party, back from another delightful concert, pianist playing his own piano concerto, first time in Germany (on my talk). No time for Wikipedia. The hook is not about Georg Katzer (I expanded the article but not 5 times), but his opera, and I tried to oblige saying East Germany (which I believe never was a country, - a region yes, a political system yes, but not a country)), and need a check if that would work. The opera with the useful quote about trying in vain to pound at the doors of the mighty. (Insert the mighty you think have too much power.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Paycor page deletion

Hello Ritchie

You recently deleted a page I created titled "Paycor," but I don't understand why it was deleted. The reason was marked as a G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion. However, I believe I only had factual information on the page regarding the subject, and I referenced several outside sources including Inc Magazine and The Cincinnati Enquirer. I also fail to see how it is really different than other company pages I see on Wikipedia, like "LaRosa's Pizzeria" or "Paylocity" for instance, so I'm not sure why it warranted deletion. Can you give me an explanation? Thanks

Seanschaeffer24 (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Seanschaeffer24: Company articles are a hard sell on Wikipedia; the basic problem is the world at large doesn't talk about them and mainstream news outlets and books don't write about them. If this sounds unfair, then unfortunately it's just a reflection of what the world thinks about payroll software compared to somewhere to have lunch. LaRosa's Pizzeria is included because it has coverage in multiple national news sources, such as this piece in USA Today which explains its longevity and regional importance, while Paylocity is included in the Deloitte Technology Fast 500. If you want the text restored to your userspace so it isn't lost, I can do that for you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I get what you're saying, so let me ask you this: If I included more widespread, national outlets/sources (like Forbes for example), would that make it so the page would be eligible to stay published? And thanks, but I still have a copy of the text I can use. Seanschaeffer24 (talk) 19:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The best way to proceed is to use the article wizard at Wikipedia:Article wizard. This will take you through a series of steps, explaining basic dos and don'ts, and then create the new page in draft space, where it won't be deleted. If you need help, there is a good Q&A page called The Teahouse which welcomes new users' questions and can give further advice. Once you think the page is ready to go "live", it will be flagged for review and an independent and experienced editor will look at it. I hope that all makes sense. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Burghley Park Cricket Club (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Stamford

Still in Love with You (Thin Lizzy song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Brian Downey

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bretonbanquet: Do you think we should set up a move request for Brian Downey? Brian C. Downey is naturally disambiguated, and while Brian Downey (actor) has done a bit, he's nowhere near as notable as the guy from Dublin; a straight Google search brings up the drummer in at least the first three pages. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, why not? I somehow thought there were more Brian Downeys than that. The Lizzy man seems to be the primary topic? Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Declined speedy Martin Concepcion

Hi Ritchie, I see you declined the speedy for the recreation of this article. I had raised the AfD at the time and have just done so again - this is (as far as I can see) an identical copy of the article back then. Nothing has changed. The only thing worth noting is that the original author of this article has been blocked and the new article is most likely a sock. There has been previous sock activity with this user and a new case has been raised. Very "ducky" behaviour. This may be worth considering in the light of a marginal AfD previously. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 17:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The article has been sent to deletion review and I have left a comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 July 17#Martin Concepcion. I don't really have any views on who created it; I was more interested in seeing the most appropriate consensus play out. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

You

will find far better summaries that qualify as snarky, from me. That was an objective description of him. Have you ever heard of him or read his works? ~ Winged Blades^Godric 19:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, the mentioned trio are orders more competent. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 20:00, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I am well aware of Peter Wright and Spycatcher, which were major and re-occurring items on British news just over 30 years ago. I don't understand why calling him a fuckwit in an edit summary is conductive towards writing or improving an encyclopedia, and to then complain about other editors leaving milder edit summaries is, well, hypocritical. Update: Ah no, this is some other Peter Wright (and not obviously the Mail on Sunday journalist either); however that doesn't really invalidate my point. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

All I see is that you are well-aware of how a person can write books from his grave .... What leads to you believe that Peter Wright is a coyrighted name?

And, that does invalidate your point because you had nil clue about what you were talking 'bout. This is the person, in, question. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 20:23, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Godric, has it occurred to you that over the past 24 hours or so, you have acted like a massive cockwomble? I mean, honestly, I'm trying to do the review of Elisa's block as fairly as I can, and you're make a frightening spectacle of yourself. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

You have absolutely done a fair and commendable job and given the way it's running, she will get site-banned. There's no doubt on that. And, has it ever occurred to you that you are increasingly getting into a habit of maneuvering into completely alien territories despite however clueless you are? ~ Winged Blades^Godric 19:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

• Well, I must say that T&S's recent initiative to bring Wikipedia closer to the ideal of a collegial safe space imbued by peace and harmony is having an almost magical effect. EEng 22:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

thank you

for the housecleaning services in my user space! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Now I see

Pick out a dye

Aaah, now I see, you're one of those crazy deadheads on Wikipedia who drinks real ale (the kind). I'll take half a cup of Rock and Rye to go with that, with the ale in a bocksbeutel, listening to the river sing sweet songs, to rock my soul. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's strange how I like all that music (largely because it's improvised and you can dig out endless variations on a familiar piece of work, keeping it fresh in your mind) but I'm not particularly interested in the tie-died hippy culture that goes with it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Yep, the music is where it's at (I like your "endless variations" description). The scene used to be chill in the mid 80s, almost utopian in some ways: peaceful, functional, fun. After Touch Of Grey, the scene got bigger, but it didn't entirely break the scene. The gangsta hippies in the early to mid 90s ultimately ruined the scene. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:28, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

All we need is music.....

• Grateful Dead - China Cat Sunflower → I know You Rider 6/16/1990 – Electric bluegrass, Jazz, MIDI, etc. All kinds of music there. (Who are the Grateful Dead, and why do they keep following me?) (Fair use). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:35, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

“ The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible. ” — Arthur C. Clarke

References

This gig has my favourite version of "Dancing in the Street", just taking it to a completely different level. Still, that last tour with Brent Mydland is also a peak of the Dead's career too; amazing to think they were still musically on top of their game after 25 years. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Old skool. Friends of mine don't always understand my strong regard for the Dead, so I try to hook them up with the best, 5-star shows, to offset the various weak shows that are out there. Re Dancin', take your pick: Frost 85 or Greek 85. I'm lucky enough to have caught the boys at both venues back in the day (but neither of these shows). I think I like the Frost version slightly better. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:20, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

• @Northamerica1000: and @Ritchie333: Don't mean to share my opinion, but I believe the king of jazz rock is the one and only 25 or 6 to 4. I am a huge fan of the Dead as well. My personal favorite is Friend of the Devil. Takes me back to the drives to Massachusetts and New York country side. AmericanAir88^(talk) 02:43, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Request

Stay off my talk page
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am going to leave one final request that you leave me alone, meaning, please refrain from editing my talk page unless policy requires you to do so and I ask that you refrain from editing my userpage, ever. There should be no need for you to intervene as an administrator as anything involving me would be easily considered WP:INVOLVED. I have done my best to stay away from your editing and I have refrained from commenting about much of anything you're involved in and I'd appreciate the same respect in return. Praxidicae (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC) While you are free to tell people to stay off your talk page and stop bugging you, I notice that since then you have left a rather snarky message on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The School of Artisan Food after I showed you a source that (in my view) shows at least the article could be redirected to Nottingham Trent University (per policy). If you want me to leave you alone, surely it's only fair to leave me alone and not leave messages like this that are at best irrelevant and at worst inflammatory? Your problem is you appear to go around looking for trouble, defacing articles and nominating them for deletion, and when you are challenged on it, you get angry and upset and start insulting the other parties. You need to assume more good faith. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC) you are very misguided and misrepresenting facts. If you truly believe my intent is nefarious and that I am a vandal, you know the appropriate venue to go to and I suggest you bring your concerns up there becuase the actual evidence contradicts yours statement and you’re just WP:HOUNDING me as this point and creating needless personal attacks. I stand by what I said when I asked you refrain from interacting with me. And need I remind you, ‘’you’’ edited theee things after me. Not the other way around. Praxidicae (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2019 (UTC) Praxidicae asked you to leave her alone and you present evidence that you're doing exactly the opposite. It seems to me as though you routinely check their contributions and involve yourself in them, which after being asked not to, is hounding. You went so far as to blank their userpage, which although the content was not necessarily nice, should not have been done by you as you are heavily involved. It's evident you have caused this editor distress and that you do not see a problem with it. The best course of action now, and what I ask of you to do, is to ensure your editing does not converge with Praxidicae's. You're both constructive editors and nothing good will come of this. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 14:33, 20 July 2019 (UTC) How about asking Praxidicae to leave ME alone? Praxidicae, do not ever post on my talk page ever again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:58, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of M25 motorway

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article M25 motorway you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of M25 motorway

The article M25 motorway you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:M25 motorway for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Too many hawks

It comes as no surprise now to see users with grudges demanding "further sanction". If it wasn't so funny, it'd be tragic. I still want a picture of the four-level stack. Perhaps next time I go to Reading I'll go hands free and photo it as I pass underneath.... The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 16:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

There are plenty on Geograph, such as this one, and they've all got a Creative Commons licence - is that what you were thinking of? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:50, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The article already has quite a nice aerial view of the M4/M25 junction. I've never seen it from that angle before. I may have some M23/M25 excitement somewhere in my photo archives. A typical thing that became totally overengineered once the London Ringways were cancelled.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I'd prefer one from below looking up. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 09:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Request to restore draft

Hello! I think I'm doing this right.

The article I was working on for the Purple Rose Theatre Company was deleted due to G12 & G6 - I think I've got a grasp on what those mean. I don't understand the G8 reasoning for the page though. I'm still learning up on all of this.

I'm requesting that the draft be restored in hopes that I can remedy the problems. I'm new and I think I just need more help/need to delete items that aren't from reliable sources. Am I understanding that correctly? I'm hoping that since the notability check was good (as referenced below) I should be able to amend the problems and move forward.

22:10, 19 July 2019 Ritchie333 talk contribs moved page Draft:The Purple Rose Theatre Company to Purple Rose Theatre Company (Draft passes notability check, should be good to accept) (revert) (thank)

Thank you for your time, and everything that you & other admins do. Seriously. It's thankless work. Thomas.Macias (talk) 02:31, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thankless? You just thanked him! Make up your mind! EEng 01:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thomas.Macias: The problem with your draft isn't anything to do with sourcing; as I recall that was accurate and at least one independent editor concluded the theatre was notable. Rather, it's because the prose appeared to be copied and pasted from other websites. The G6 was logged after Bkissin reviewed your draft and passed it, as it required an administrator to overwrite the existing page, which was a redirect to Jeff Daniels. I looked at the article and the prose looked suspiciously well-formed and comprehensive for something so new, so I used one of our copyright checker tools. I found the first paragraph in the body was an identical copy of a website, the second paragraph copied another, and several other paragraphs were copied from the theatre's official website. Unfortunately, the terms and conditions you see when you edit a page say "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted". User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to copyvios has more information - Wikipedia's definition of "copyright" is very specific; any text must be licenced to be shared with anyone, and even resold, and most websites don't offer this. The G8 in the logs is simply clearing up the related talk / draft talk pages that don't point anywhere once the main article is deleted. I hope that explains things. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:50, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Got it. That explains a lot. So then, if I understand correctly, even if something is directly quoted and the source is sourced, it still won't necessarily be protected from copyright. There was a lot on the page that was my own work, and I don't doubt that others were not my own words. Is there any way I could get the draft back anyhow and correct the mistakes? Or is it a line in the sand "no turning back" sort of thing? If it is, I get it, but I know you know that a lot of hours went into getting the formatting and sourcing correct. I'd be... not quite devastated, but upset if I couldn't at least get the work back and fix what I did wrong.

Looking ahead to any future work on Wikipedia, is there a way you can share your copyright checker tool process with me? Or point me in a direction to learn more? That would help me double check anything I put on this site moving forward.

Thank you again for your time! Thomas.Macias (talk) 18:43, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

@Thomas.Macias: Unfortunately, all Wikipedia pages have to be distributed with an appropriate free documentation licence, and text copied from other websites has to be deleted for legal reasons, regardless of what state it's in. We release this involves work submitted in good faith to be lost, and that is a shame.

To install the copyvio check tool yourself, edit Special:MyPage/common.js and add the following line : importScript("User:The Earwig/copyvios.js"); You'll then get an extra option in "Tools" called "Copyvio check". Click on it and it will give you a report on how likely the page is to be copied from another website. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Circular review system

Thank you for your update. I used text regarding Iron Vision system from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava#Iron_Vision_helmet-mounted_display_system . Can I delete also this text from Merkava article in Wiki?--Swadim (talk) 04:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

I ran a copyright check on Merkava and it came back with about 75% violation likely, with several paragraphs directly copying a news site. Money emoji, I don't suppose you could take a quick look at this? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:55, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Ritchie333, Did a check using earwig. the 75% match is a false positive, that website copied from us; I figured this out by scanning what Merkava looked like the day the news article was published; They looked the same and no one added in a bunch of content at the time, so it had to have been a backwards copy. They also didn't remove the citation when copying it over to the news site; As it says "Mark II chassis provides a low-cost way to upgrade support units' capabilities to perform medical, logistical, and rescue missions.[19] " If you see citations like this pop up during scans, the potential of the website copying from us is much higher. I have to do an irl thing now but I'll look at the other results on earwig later. 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 12:31, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm removed all the copyvios found by earwig from the article. The section Swadim is talking about seems to be clean. 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 15:19, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Cheers m'dears. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:17, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I need help, Ritchie333

Hello Ritchie333,

I don't know Wikipedia procedures well, yet, but you have been helpful in the past, so I hope I can ask you about something.

This is my husband's page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr. He is remarkable in that 1. He was in charge of flight test engineering at the Skunkworks, Air Force Ones... 2. He, with me, co-founded the Ware Lab at Virginia Tech, and 3. Though he was a conservative icon, and his sphere were also conservative, he married me, a transsexual, SRS in 1981. He got with me in 1989, lived together since 1993, married me in 1995...married me 17 times, each year on our anniversary until his death in 2012.

People in our sphere have always tried to hide this, even caused pain to us trying to drive me away.

I just learned today that someone removed the 2nd paragraph in the Retirement section of his page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr. which stated that I am transsexual.

This is true, and it is very important that a man of his conservative nature, a Christian Elder, in the 1990s would marry me, a transsexual, and the person who removed the paragraph said it was almost slanderous to say—as if I am someone of a nature who a man like Joe should not marry. I wouldn't be surprised if the remover was someone in his sphere who is still trying to shut it up.

But I've learned in life there is nothing wrong with me and that it's wrong of people to assume there is or should be. I've been trying for years, now, to own myself and our love. I've shared it to all friends, organizations I'm in, in my book, at Virginia Tech (where his lab is), all over, because it is BEAUTIFUL. He loved me. A man like that; he loved me, married me, stayed with me until the end in spite of prejudice that tried to hide the fact.

SIR: I am not sure how to handle this, but saying Joe married a transsexual is not any slander—it's true and is a beautiful testament to his loving nature, non-judgmental, non-prejudiced, nature.

QUESTION: What can I do to prevent that paragraph being removed again?

Thank you

Jenna Ware, Hathalm Mrs. Joseph F. Ware, Jr. Co-founder of the Ware Lab at Virginia Tech Transsexual

Hathalm (talk) 19:38, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Hathalm: Firstly, my apologies for not replying sooner, I am not in a position to be on-wiki much at the moment and have been distracted by other things in life. Anyway, it sounds like you had a good marriage that gave you lots of happiness, and that's nice to hear. For what it's worth, one of my best friends is transgender and which she has suffered problems from people, I have tried to be as supportive as I possibly can towards her because to me she sounds like a sensible and intelligent woman.

Anyway, it seems that since you wrote, another editor has restored the content as being appropriate to the article, so I don't propose to take any further action. If it gets removed again, let me know (or put a post on the Noticeboard for Biographies of Living People, and I will look into it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Email from ArbCom

Hi Ritchie, I've just sent an email to you via email this user - can you please respond to it as soon as you're able? Thank you in advance. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Why does this kind of post sound kinda ... ominous to me? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Standard Arbcom arrangements. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 07:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Ritchie, will you come in please. I wish to talk to you. EEng 07:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Email from TRM

Hi Ritchie, I've just sent you an email relating to off-wiki communications. Take your time responding, we need to get this right. Cheers! The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 07:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Isabel Pell

Hi Ritchie, I'm confused about what happened at Isabel Pell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Elisa.rolle created this in August 2017. On 17 July this year, you tagged it as a copyvio, copied from http://andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/biop1/pell01.html, although that page says "Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". Jimfbleak then deleted it.

On 19 July, I pointed out that the webpage had copied from Wikipedia. I understand that these things can be overlooked easily. It's what happened next that's unusual. Instead of asking Jim to undelete it (or doing it yourself), it seems you copied the deleted version, copy-edited it, then re-created it as your own. You then undeleted the previous edits. This has added Isabel Pell to the list of articles you created, but not marked as recreated. It has also left a confusing history, where with one edit it's tagged, and the next is a copyedit that has added 12,577 bytes.

Did you do the same thing at Green Tomato Cars? Your list of creations shows that you created it, but in fact someone else did. The logs also show a deletion and undeletion by you on the day the log says you created it. SarahSV ^(talk) 17:20, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@SlimVirgin: This seems to be an artifact of the MediaWiki software. I used the same procedure for restoring Isabel Pell as I did for other articles started by Elisa and deleted per G12. You can see the same issue in the history for Allanah Harper, where I appear to add 2K of prose, despite the overall size of the article going down.

As far as I recall, somebody moved Green Tomato Cars without a redirect while I was copyediting it; resulting in me re-creating the article without realising it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie, thanks for the explanation. What should have happened at Isabel Pell is that, once you'd realized the mistake, someone should have asked Jimfbleak or another admin to undelete. The admin who undeleted would also have removed the copyvio tag, so the history would show tag added, tag removed. Then, with the article restored, you could have made your copy edit.

Instead, you recreated the article as your copy-edited version, then undeleted its history, which meant (1) you acted as admin and editor on the same article; (2) the article was added to your list of creations, even though you didn't create it; and (3) the article history looks odd (one minute tagged as copyvio, the next an addition of 12,577 bytes described as a copy edit). The way to avoid this in future is to make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article, except perhaps for issues such as BLP violations. You can ask any admin to undelete (or whatever admin action is needed), and that leaves you free to edit. SarahSV ^(talk) 16:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Passing comment, I imagine that rev deleting a cv is appropriate, but slightly agree with caution in recreation. Despite the awareness of copyright amongst active contributors here, which is largely ignored elsewhere. adding something missing is a worthy task and deserving of attribution and guidance. But could be I am missing the point. cygnis insignis 10:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

"make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article" While this is generally good advice, in this specific case I assumed I had general consensus to restore the article after it was pointed out I had made an error and there was no obvious disagreement. "In straightforward cases, the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion." If a third party had complained that the article should not have been restored and should have remain deleted per G12 then yes, that would be involved. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Simple undeletion wouldn't have been an issue. It's that you copied the deleted text, changed it, created the article as your own, then undeleted the history. That created an entry in your creation log showing you as the article's creator. I've never seen an admin do that before. I thought it worth mentioning so that it can be avoided in future. SarahSV ^(talk) 02:15, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Userbox

User:Ritchie333/Userbox Boris - feel free to decorate your user page with it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nom?

Hello. Would you be willing to nominate this article for DYK? The Debut (Jackie Evancho album). I like to do research and write articles, but the technical DYK nomination process is arcane to me. The hook could be:

• "...that The Debut was Jackie Evancho's eighth consecutive release on the Billboard Classical Albums chart to debut at No. 1?"

Please let me know either way. Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ssilvers: Sure - Template:Did you know nominations/The Debut (Jackie Evancho album) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Let me know if I can help you out with any proofreading/copy editing, which is my forte. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

question of procedure

Hi Ritchie, I notice you are active and have a query on contesting an unblock of a user, although I recommend not getting involved and responding hypothetically. The advice to let it go is an option, of course, but assuming I don't, what is the next step after discussing it with an admin? cygnis insignis 10:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I assume we're talking about King of Hearts unblocking Wnt. Since the blocking admin endorses the unblock, unless you have further information that Wnt is being disruptive and should be blocked now, there is no need for any further action. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

The blocking admin did not recognise a consensus to unblock, but did not register an objection; not quite the same thing. I don't, of course, have any new information (as they were blocked), just my personal conviction they should not be contributing any time soon. I did request a hypothetical response, not forthcoming so I will leave you to it. Have a good one. 11:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Ref HELP, again, FYI. Paragraph Deleted Again

Hello Ritchie. Thank you for taking an interest.

Now a day later, another author deleted the same paragraph as before, the one in Retirement section that says Joe Ware married a transsexual—which is true. I am his wife/widow, and I am transsexual, have been with SRS in 1981. We got together in 1989, married in 1995.

Joe was a significant conservative icon. His family worships him. He was flight test engineer in charge at Skunk Works, Lockheed, over the 1st 2 Air Force Ones, the U-2, the SR-71, the C-130 Hercules...and he was a Christian, a Presbyterian Elder...

There have always been people in his sphere who took exception to our marriage. It felt,rather, like it was the 1950s and he was a white icon who married a black person. People tried to run me off from the start. Yes, he was 40 years older, but neither of us had a concept of that, either. He was a MARVELOUS man, and we loved each other, truly. We married each other ever year on our anniversary, for a total of 17 times, I'm fond of saying.

But people have been abusive of me during our time together and even after his death in 2012. As well, people in his sphere have tried to hide the fact that a man like that would marry someone like me.

The paragraph in question is the 2nd in the Retirement Section of Joseph_F._Ware_Jr. It is a very positive paragraph.

No reason was given for the revert, and I did note that on my undo just now, but I believe the offending part of the paragraph is where it says he married me, clarified as transsexual.

I believe it is very important to state the truth of our marriage, as it shows what a good man he was, and to feel I shouldn't state that truth is to slam me for being what I am, that it's not okay he married someone who is transsexual, which can't be true.

Anything you can do or advise me will be most helpful.

Thank you

Jenna Ware Hathalm Hathalm (talk) 12:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

And Someone Deleted the transsexual parts of that paragraph again

Hello Ritchie,

Clearly, this is over my head. I need help, guidance.

Someone else rapidly changed the page in a matter of minutes to delete, among other things, that his wife is transsexual. They also cited otehr things, some of which are wrong: Joe is not a living person. My book self-book autobiography of 2016 is there to show my statement of the truth. That I am transsexual in our marriage is unusual, and that's why it's newsworthy.

People are making choices that are removing this fact of my transsexuality from our marriage. If you have any advice, please share.

Thank you

Janna Ware Hathalm (talk) 13:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand the Talk edits about Joe's page

Hello Ritchie,

Two things are happening to Joe's page, I think.

1. People keep reverting the page to an edit that has a sentence fragment in it. I keep fixing that, but they keep changing it back to the sentence fragment: Retirement section, Para 2, Sentence 2, begins "Though..."

2. The sentence on the Co-founding of the Ware Lab only lists Joe, but it was 3 of us: Note What Virginia Tech says here: https://eng.vt.edu/warelab/about-the-ware-lab/friends-of-the-ware-lab.html I've been copying that, but someone keeps removing Dr. Griffin and me and leaving only Joe.

3. I removed my citation to my book, as it was SPS, by request. I believe it's relevant, as it's the only source of this covered-up information, that I'm transsexual. But if it's not allowed, okay. But I think it is very noteworthy that I, his 3rd wife, am/was transsexual. NOTE: Such things on the wed page I supplied such as Joe being in the Coast Guard Auxiliary, helping them with Counter Terrorist activities...were all supplied by me as his wife, earlier, and they're okay without third party discussion, but I can't add that I'm transsexual because it refers to me? That results in the avoidance or suppression of what is so important, proof that Joe was non-judgmental, non-prejudiced, in an era that has been very anti-trans. We took a lot of hell fort this. How can it not be stated?

And now, even though I left off my book citation, I'm being warned about doing an edit war because I keep going in and re-inserting correct Ware Lab data, me as transsexual, fixing the sentence fragment. I'm not trying to war.

Jenna Ware Hathalm (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I have added my thoughts to the discussion page Talk:Joseph F. Ware Jr. - let's keep conversation focused there so it's all in one place and people can easily find it. I've been watching your video from the Virginia Tech College of Engineering YouTube channel, where you talk about how fun it is to get up in a plane and see the world from above. That sounds more exciting that what I'm doing this evening (which'll probably be doing some washing and cleaning). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I may have been banned?

Hi Ritchie. Yup, we all ge to do the washing and cleaning at times. :) I don't look forward to it, either.

I may have been banned at Joe's Talk page. I saw someone else counter your statement, then I tried to add the following, TWICE, but it doesn't show. I find NO where saying that I've been banned, but it's not taking the reply. Nonetheless, here it is, below, including me publishing this twice in the VT campus newspaper, in 2018, though I paid for those 2 full page adds.

Making Progress

Thank you Ritchie333 for your helpful comments. Yes, I am supportive of the issue of my transsexuality on Joe Ware's Article. I believe it is noteworthy that in a climate of transphobia, of hate, where I had been threatened, assaulted, our home intruded...that he would stand up and openly declare his love for me, marry me, and that we stayed together until his death in 2012. Joe Ware, a conservative man, defense department engineer, married me, a transsexual.

As to publication, Virginia Tech did include that video of me. I don't think I look that good on the video, but I approved of it.

I also published this exact matter TWICE in the Virginia Tech campus newspaper, about Joe's wonderful family, the Ware Lab, my transsexuality, Virginia Tech's Commission on Equal Opportunity and Diversity stating unanimously that transsexualism exists, and my hope for further campus integration in time—all published on August 28, 2018 and again on September 11, 2018—but I don't know if it matters here as, yet again, those two full-page ads were advertorials, as they called them. I paid for them.

I must be doing something wrong, here, though, because the fact that this great man stood up in a climate of hate and openly married me, transsexual, is not something that can find a way onto his Article. My book was self-published https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Life-Aerospace-Love-Secrets-ebook/dp/B01MQX0THD/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=Jenna+Ware&qid=1564068631&s=gateway&sr=8-2 , the two times it was in the Collegiate Times I paid for, I'm not allowed to include information about myself in his Article, and another person can't speak authoritatively about my transsexualism...

On the POSITIVE SIDE, Yes, VT did do that video of me, in my airplane hangar at Camarillo, CA, and I've well established that I am truly transsexual and that we were married.

RESOLUTION ?? 1. Would it be acceptable if someone else, other than me, included a line in Joe's Article something to the effect that his third wife was/is transsexual? Because this is not only true, it's the kind of thing that is important for our society.

2. I see the sentence fragment got fixed, but

3. I still need to fix the incorrect statement in Retirement that says Joe founded the Ware Lab. There were 3 of us who co-founded the Lab: Joe, me, and Hayden Griffin, Ph.D., a then engineering professor at Virginia Tech. This is all described in detail in my book, but that citation isn't liked because it was self-published. But Virginia Tech has stated this as well: https://eng.vt.edu/warelab/about-the-ware-lab/friends-of-the-ware-lab.html

4. No third party sources that talk about Joe marrying a transsexual? In the 1st paragraph of Retirement, note that he served in the Coast Guard Auxiliary, helped them with counter-terrorism, owned a Beachcraft and a T-28...all without citations, but they're there. I'm the one who supplied that information. It says citation needed, but it's still there.

All this ruckus is over this word: "Transsexual." Why is that? Why is that one thing, that he married someone like me, the thing that's so disallowed, that has no way in? I'm asking that this great mean, demonstrated by his open marriage to me, be allowed.

Self-published work is disliked because it can contain falsities. I understand. But mine is conservative in that area, and I believe the information in it is important to describe this great man who showed remarkable courage and strength of character in openly marrying me.

I hope we find a way to include.

Jenna Ware Hathalm (talk) 16:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Hathalm: you probably got caught in an edit conflict, don't worry it happens all the time. Just while I'm here, could I ask that you don't start a new section ever time you reply? Just reply beneath the other editor using a progressive series of colons; see WP:INDENT for examples. Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 16:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

As Godric has said, he can't find any sources in newspapers.com that talk about you and transsexuality. If he had found any, he would have put them in the article and that would have ended the dispute. I have asked Megalibrarygirl for assistance as she is a professional librarian and has full access to many offline journals and periodicals, including a lot of local news sources, that aren't widely available on the end of a Google search.

From my personal point of view, if you look like a woman and act like one, I'll treat you as one. There's more stuff about transsexuality I can talk about but it involves real-life friends of mine that I'm not at all comfortable mentioning on-wiki; suffice to say I don't have a problem with it at all. And it is important to get the issues to discussed out there. (I note above that I confused transsexuality with transgender - the two are different, but I do have a friend in each of those "categories") In the meantime, you could stick User:Ritchie333/Userbox Trump on your userpage, it might not be able to get the article fixed quicker, but it will at least make you feel better. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:00, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie! I looked at several databases and tried searching under both "Jenna" and "Jennifer." However, I see no reason not to include the information about Joseph Ware's personal life. It's written about here and I'd consider it to be a reliable source and it's not written by Jenna. Clearly, his open mind and his marriage of 22 years would have an effect on his life and should be part of the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

The applicable policies are verifiability and biographies of living persons. Hathalm, you need to be aware that Wikipedia does not deal in personal knowledge, since without independent verification, that would go against the policy on original research. But the place to discuss article content is its talk page, which is Talk:Joseph F. Ware Jr. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Ritchie, for your helpful comments and insight. :)

Jenna Ware Hathalm (talk) 15:54, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Two articles that could do with a little support

I sought a second opinion on : Talk:Steve Bray (activist) and have tried a little education on a reverter on Bob Marshall-Andrews can you put your admin hat on please. --ClemRutter (talk) 18:57, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: I have semi-protected Steve Bray for a few days. Bob Marshall-Andrews doesn't appear to have been edited for a fortnight, so I don't think any action is necessary there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Debut (Jackie Evancho album)

Hello! Your submission of The Debut (Jackie Evancho album) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ssilvers:, you probably want to check this. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:47, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, don't worry, I am watching it and will follow up. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of German Air Force (disambiguation)

The article German Air Force (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All the German air forces (there are 3) are linked to in the hatnote at German Air Force and have been for a long time. This page is redundant and unneeded.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Srnec (talk) 03:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

What has this got to do with me? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

You moved it into mainspace, so were the logged page creator. ——SerialNumber54129 12:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I imagine that they notified you because you were the first registered editor to edit it. StudiesWorld (talk) 11:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Ritchie333. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Arbitration motion

A motion has been proposed in a request for clarification or amendment which you began. GoldenRing (talk) 14:20, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Sandeep Guleria

Hi, I am reaching out to you regarding this draft - Draft:Sandeep Guleria. I couldn't make it live as only an administrator can make it live and the records after searching "Sandeep Guleria" showed you to be the right person. Sandeep Guleria was conferred the Padma Shri this year and I found his name in this list - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Padma_Shri_award_recipients_(2010–2019). Could you please look at my draft and make it live / remove the protection against his name to make it live? Thank you. Csgir (talk) 12:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Elizabeth Williams Berry

valereee (talk) 00:02, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Vanamonde (Talk) 15:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Ritchie333 and Praxidicae

After discussion with both parties, the Committee resolves that Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) be indefinitely banned from interacting with, or commenting on Praxidicae (talk · contribs) anywhere on the English Wikipedia. Praxidicae has agreed to abide by a mutual interaction ban for the same duration. This is subject to the usual exceptions.

Support

AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, KrakatoaKatie, Mkdw, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, SilkTork, Worm That Turned

Recused

Inactive

Callanecc

For the Arbitration Committee, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:15, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration motion regarding Ritchie333 and Praxidicae

Whaaat?

This cannot be![1] And the Victoria Line series has barely been begun... I don't know what prompted this but hope all's well with you mate, and that you'll be back with us soon.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Take a break and do come back

Hi Ritchie333, You have done a great deal valuable work in Wikipedia and many of us appreciate you time spent and contribute to Wikipedia project. Take a break and come back as all things settle in time. Take care. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 07:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Seconded. Best wishes, El_C 07:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

In triplicate Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:26, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

?

Despite all our conflicts, you were one of the good guys, who cared for the 'pedia. Don't know the cause but I hope you come back, someday in future. ∯WBG^converse 07:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

shocked --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

love's labour's lost

Thank you for pink cat, written with Fylbecatulous in mind. (Why is the article not in it's navbox? ... and the image not in the category?) I'll write Britten's Purcell Realizations with you in mind. I went over my images from "it is enough" to "life is too short" but think a cat may fit best. Wishing you well, and hoping that you'll be with us again some day, - a selfish wish because the place is much sadder without you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

ps: then I found that today is Fylbecatulous day, and have to fight tears reading her "bestow pink kittens for moment of silence...", pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

remember open arms? 28bytes just removed the black bar. We hope! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

+1. What did happen? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

This happened; a secret Arbcom case with no (publicly visible) case request, request for evidence, or finding of fact. While I've explained at length recently why this kind of Nacht und Nebel action is sometimes unavoidable, I find it even less likely that Ritchie333 can be classified under the violent criminals and genuine lunatics which that star chamber clause was intended to address than I do Fram. ‑ Iridescent 09:05, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah. That's quite disconcerting. Not to say worrying. Does this mean Threesie now has some kind of "gagging order" over this? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm subject to an in camera IBAN handed to me by Arbcom, but that was for very different circumstances. There's no reason at all that this was conducted in a similar manner. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 09:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

As I'm sure Gerda will remind us all, there is no need for any of us to be told the reasons. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Franz Kafka: Das Schloss
... about alienation, unresponsive bureaucracy, the frustration of trying to conduct business with non-transparent, seemingly arbitrary controlling systems ...

if you need to see it again, - we really have too much of this frustration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to hear of the grief, no wonder things have been a bit quiet around here lately. Best wishes. Nortonius (talk) 09:56, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Very sorry indeed to see this. I hope you'll feel able to come back after in the future. You will be missed!, Best Johnbod (talk) 13:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• I can only imagine this is aggravating, but your presence is really valued here Ritchie, and I hope to see you back. I emailed you yesterday ignorant of this mess, and while you obviously have bigger things on your mind now, if you've seen it you know at least one of us values your judgement very highly. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 13:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• Sorry to see this , You're a great editor and you're a fucking great admin too!, I hope you'll come back in the near future, In the meantime I wish you all the very best, Thank you for everything you've ever done here!, Take care, Regards, Dave 14:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)