User talk:SchroCat/Archive 35

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Your GA nomination of Littlehampton libels

The article Littlehampton libels you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Littlehampton libels for comments about the article, and Talk:Littlehampton libels/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject Crime banner BLP issue

Following this comment I added sk= as an alias parameter for the task force call in the banner, if in any case you feel it is inappropriate to add that in the wikitext. Also works for the importance parameter as sk-imp. Hopefully this helps your concern? PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks PARAKANYAA. I think that would suit in the cases where there is a BLP element to the matter. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Haydn Talk Page Infobox Discussion

Talk:Joseph Haydn

There appears to be an infobox discussion for Joseph Haydn even though an RfC was never initiated. It appears to have been going on intermittently for several months but only a few users have contributed. However, someone has added an infobox even though there appears to be no clear consensus (last I counted there were five in favor of the infobox and four against, including myself). Is there anything that can be done? It seems to be a very unofficial way of trying to push for an infobox. Barbarbarty (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

It appears especially egregious as if this was an RfC it would have been long closed by now as before yesterday the last post was made over four months ago. However, a single user appears to have dropped in and that was used to add the infobox. Barbarbarty (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Claiming a consensus that doesn't exist? Colour me unsurprised.... - SchroCat (talk) 05:03, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Grammar check

Hi Schro, hope you are keeping well. I was wondering if you could do a quick grammar check at 2001: A Space Odyssey. The sentence mixes the singular and plural senses of "tribe"—not great but not grammatically incorrect either. But there is a disagreement about the final clause. I contend that the final clause can read "returns to drive its rivals away with it" (singular) or "return to drive their rivals away with it" (plural), but not "returns to drive their rivals away with it". I really don't care which sense the sentence uses, but the latter simply does not sit well with me. Basically it just needs to be grammatically correct, that's all that matters. Betty Logan (talk) 09:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Betty Logan, how are things? I hope you're keeping well. The problem is that "the tribe" can be either plural or singular, and it's being used as both in such a short area here. Getting rid of "the tribe" for "they" solves much of the problem. How does this look:

In a prehistoric veld, a tribe of hominins is driven away from a water hole by a rival group. The next day, they find an alien monolith has appeared in their midst. They then learn how to use a bone as a weapon and, after their first hunt, return to drive their rivals away.

Sound okay? - SchroCat (talk) 10:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

That reads great, although it actually looks like the dispute has been resolved. Thanks as always. Betty Logan (talk) 11:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Socompa

Greetings, since I remember (perhaps I am imagining things) that you were interested in whichever my next FAC effort would be, it's Socompa (since Cerro Panizos) has now passed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jo-Jo: I did say I'd look in at the article, and I completely forgot about it! I'll try and pop in for a look today. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

FAC Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

New message from Jo-Jo Eumerus

Hello, SchroCat. You have new messages at Jo-Jo Eumerus's talk page.
Message added 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

my H. Nelson link

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Please say, was wrong with my Nelson edit, that needed your attention? Broichmore (talk) 13:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

As you can see from the changes I made, the newspaper should be italicised, 'comma date' is better than 'of date' and linking to a category of paintings on Commons isn't great. - SchroCat (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for italicised, comment, I will follow it in future. Even though its not a hard and fast rule, especially within the bounds of a page.

The 'comma date' is better than 'of date' is your opinion.

Why is linking to a sister project, that is a major conrtibutor and an integral part of the community not great? Broichmore (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Because MOS:INTERWIKI explicitly states that "To avoid reader confusion, inline interlanguage, or interwiki, linking within an article's body text is generally discouraged." If you believe that Horatio Nelson is notable enough for an article, a redlink would be preferable over an inter-project link. Creating an article about him first, and then linking, would be even better.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• "'comma date' is better than 'of date' is your opinion". Correct, but it's also widely considered a superior manner of phrasing too, including—importantly in this context—by the MOS, which lists 'comma date' 'of year' at MOS:DATESNO as an "unacceptable date format".
  And yes, italicising publications is a hard and fast rule: see MOS:NAMESANDTITLES. - SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC) (Amended SchroCat (talk) 17:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC))

  This particular case, the use of the comma, is not mentioned. There is nothing wrong, with my use of it. Please pick out the particular phrase in this mad woman's knitting that proves your point.

  I gave way to you, I can see the sense about italicising publications, however, there is nothing there, in your link, about italicising them being a hard and fast rule. Again, tell me the particular phrase.

  The meaning of generally discouraged, doesn’t mean it’s totally forbidden. If used sparingly, and as, in this particular case, there is no possibility of confusion. This person is not notable enough for inclusion on this project as an article, and never will be. The content on commons, in terms of displaying an artist’s body of work (such as the one mentioned) is quite enough, and every bit as valid as the noted exceptions of Wiktionary and Wikisource. The two mentioned are only examples, as such. Broichmore (talk) 16:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not going to bother coming back to this: you are being unnecessarily abrasive and confrontational in your stance for one thing, and ignoring both the MOS and common practice. The links to the guidelines are there for all to see and back up what I've said, which is all that counts. Given the edit was made to an FA, there is a requirement to follow the MOS, which the article does. The image you added is still there, but the supporting text is now MOS-compliant, which is all that is needed, without this extended and unnecessarily aggressive stance. - SchroCat (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promotion of Littlehampton libels

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Littlehampton libels, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Littlehampton libels

On 28 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Littlehampton libels, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the Littlehampton libels, Edith Swan fooled three juries and two judges, had another woman sent to prison twice, and was declared not guilty before finally being convicted? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Littlehampton libels. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Littlehampton libels), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 18,102 views (754.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 01:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Why Let’s get a long way into 2025 first

why Let’s get a long way into 2025 first GAMERBOY102 (talk) 06:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Because there is no need to have it there. We only added 2025 onto the page a week ago, so adding 2026 is premature. Plus it’s only half the job, there are other steps to take to do it properly. As you’re very new, it would be best to focus on improving articles, rather than trying to change the fabric of the place. - SchroCat (talk) 06:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

ps. GAMERBOY102, Please don't do things like this again. Aside from the fact we have a process for getting on the front page, the articles that go in the TFA slot must be featured articles, Gateway Mall (Quezon City) is a very long way away from that. - SchroCat (talk) 06:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

ok GAMERBOY102 (talk) 06:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Street numbers on Baker Street

Concerning Baker Street robbery: Thanks for your recent edit to this article to clean up the street numbers of the premises involved. However, the illustration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_Street_robbery#/media/File:Baker_Street_burglary_tunnel.svg) in the article still shows incorrect street numbers, both for the bank (shows 187 but should be 185) and for Chicken Inn (shows 188 but should be 187). I understand that the illustration was requested by you (and executed by Goran tek-en). If you agree with this, would you be willing to ask Goran tek-en to alter the illustration? Thanks! Felix116 (talk) 14:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:GAMERBOY102 is trying to game Today's Featured Article Process. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Beholder (horse)

Beholder (horse) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 14:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)