User talk:Wehwalt/Archive 20
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Wehwalt. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
Hi Wehwalt, Thanks again for the information you provided for Operation Bernhard. I've got this going through the A class review, prior to a hopeful attempt at FAC. If you have the chance, would you be able t have a look through at some point? (Nompressure, and if you're snowed under elsewhere, or would prefer to keep your powder dry until FAC, that is entirely understandable.) All the best, The Bounder (talk) 07:20, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
- With pleasure. Expect me there in the next couple of days.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Re: Founding
Thanks for the invitation. I'd be glad to do so. I'm not quite familiar with the nomination procedure for FA on English Wikipedia, however. Please tell me what I should do in the nomination (Is there something more than writing response on the nomination page?). Thanks again.--如沐西风(RúMùXīFēng) (talk) 13:19, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- I will open the nomination, a co-nomination statement would be very helpful. I would appreciate it if you would stay aware of what's going on at the nomination. I may ping you if a concern seems your area, such as requiring knowledge of Chinese.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- It can be found here.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
No Legacy section for Scalia
May I put in a good word for the useful edit from User:Bbb in the article. Are you sure about a no Legacy section at Scalia? Wikipedia has one for other public figures such as Clinton, Bush, and Obama, and the topic is already mentioned there in the Scalia article from a school noting his name. I mention this because the new play, constructive to Scalia, has received a good review from The New York Times, and has been broadcast nationwide in the United States on Public Television. Usually, that's notable. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 18:17, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- It's not the question of a legacy section, it's the play, which no matter how you slice it is not part of Scalia's legacy. I think because once you are getting into plays, you're getting into "In Cultural Appearances", thus trivia. I would not consider mere appearance in a work of fiction good enough. I think it should not be mentioned unless it changes how the public views a person. How do we distinguish between something that gets a good review, and a hit piece made notable by two borderline RS? If someone wants to make an article out of The Originalist, I don't mind if it's added as a see also. But his article should not have to contain information on an obscure play not written in his lifetime..--Wehwalt (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- By way of my good word for User:Bbb. The most important point is that this play was originally from 2015 and performed in Washington DC with Scalia himself personally meeting with members of the cast and the production while he was still alive and well. That makes a difference. Since that time, the play has received a positive review from The New York Times, a significant reliable source, and it has played in several theater houses from coast-to-coast in the United States (from Washington DC to California). My own comment is that the play is notable for its portrayal of Scalia as a useful figure of political stature to both conservatives and liberals. The fact that the play has also received nation-wide broadcast on Public Television earlier this month gives further weight to my good word for the edit of User:Bbb. The Wikipedia article for Scalia looks stronger when it recognizes that even the Arts in general are endorsing Scalia as a notable political figure for both conservatives and liberals. That seems notable for inclusion. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Well ... I don't think it should be a paragraph, but a sentence or so. Possibly a good idea to start an article on the play, so as to minimize the exposition needed in this one.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- By way of my good word for User:Bbb. The most important point is that this play was originally from 2015 and performed in Washington DC with Scalia himself personally meeting with members of the cast and the production while he was still alive and well. That makes a difference. Since that time, the play has received a positive review from The New York Times, a significant reliable source, and it has played in several theater houses from coast-to-coast in the United States (from Washington DC to California). My own comment is that the play is notable for its portrayal of Scalia as a useful figure of political stature to both conservatives and liberals. The fact that the play has also received nation-wide broadcast on Public Television earlier this month gives further weight to my good word for the edit of User:Bbb. The Wikipedia article for Scalia looks stronger when it recognizes that even the Arts in general are endorsing Scalia as a notable political figure for both conservatives and liberals. That seems notable for inclusion. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the source review
I usually do that on the FAC page but I went back to do it and it's been promoted. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:11, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
- You're welcome, and congratulations!--Wehwalt (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Congrats!
Maine Centennial half dollar. Well done! Thanks for your hard work on this article and so many others. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. And I appreciate all you've done with those stubs and the work you do when I expand one of the commem articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Like My contributions are minimal, but I'm happy to help where I can and appreciate your kind words. I look forward to seeing more numismatics articles expanded and promoted! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- You help more than you think. Eventually we'll get through all these early pieces. And there's still regular issues to be done.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Many, many moons ago...
You had a look at Van Diemen's Land v Port Phillip, 1851 and asked to be pinged when the heavy lifting had been done. I've been picking at it for ages and I think it's getting somewhere close to finished, so we'd be grateful if you could take a look and see if there is anything obviously missing. Parts of it might still be a little rough and ready as I'd like to give it another polish, but the ultimate aim is FAC I think. Any thoughts appreciated. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- OK, I'll look it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Me and Juliet scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Me and Juliet article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 15 April 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 15, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:46, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 21
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
- #1lib1ref 2017
- Wikipedia Library User Group
- Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
- Spotlight: Library Card Platform
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Your opinion
Hi Wehwalt. Would you mind taking a look at this article? I was planning on nominating it for FA, but I keep thinking that it's missing something. I don't need a full peer review, I just was hoping you might give it a quick look and mention any glaring flaws I may have missed. Thanks! --Coemgenus (talk) 12:26, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Jan to Mar 17 Milhist article reviewing
|
Military history reviewers' award | |
| On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of two Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period January to March 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. AustralianRupert (talk) 14:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Connecticut Tercentenary half dollar, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Charles II and William McFarlane. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK Kalākaua coinage
DYK Kalākaua coinage — Maile (talk) 18:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Squib. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
New RfC at Plummer v. State
There is a new RfC at Plummer v. State RfC, dealing with the Internet meme section. Please visit and comment on the proposed language for the section. This is revised from the first proposal, and you are receiving this notice due to your participation in the first RfC. GregJackP Boomer! 20:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Dear Wehwalt, I hope that you are keeping well. In the event of your wanting a diversion from money or Maoist art, Monnow Bridge is up for FAC here, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Monnow Bridge/archive1. It's a quaint, old, bridge in a quaint, little, corner of Wales, which I once called home. Any and all comments would be very gratefully received. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 14:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Very much appreciate your input to, and support for, the article. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks you too.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Andrews. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi, my article Margaret (singer) recently achieved GA status, however I keep working on it and get in touch with other editors to make sure everything is good. Could you have a look at it and maybe review it when you find some free time, it would be much appreciated. ArturSik (talk) 01:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, but it may be a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks a lot. ArturSik (talk) 13:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for the review. I was just thinking how to tackle the lead, because when writing it I've looked at other GAs and it is always written chronologically, so I'm not too sure where in the first paragraph I could mention about the highlights of her career. It is all written but in the second paragraph and the first one focuses on all the things she did before her breakthrough in 2013. ArturSik (talk) 00:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC) update: I've actually came up with something, do you think that will be enough? ArturSik (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- I might say "has gained" rather than "gained". Just remember that Google viewers see such a tiny part of the article. No problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks very much, appreciate it. If you've got a minute could you just briefly check the recent changes I've made since then cause from your notes in the talk page I guess you've missed them? ArturSik (talk) 05:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- No, I haven't had time to review them yet as my online time is limited right now. I will get to it in the next day or so.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you again, I really do appreciate it. p.s. There's no article for Melody Smurf and Smurf redirects to the show's article so I don't see a point linking it really. and about the market value I wouldn't say 'as a performer' as it includes her endorsement deals etc. also I'm not too sure how I could convert the currency. ArturSik (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks very much, appreciate it. If you've got a minute could you just briefly check the recent changes I've made since then cause from your notes in the talk page I guess you've missed them? ArturSik (talk) 05:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- I might say "has gained" rather than "gained". Just remember that Google viewers see such a tiny part of the article. No problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for the review. I was just thinking how to tackle the lead, because when writing it I've looked at other GAs and it is always written chronologically, so I'm not too sure where in the first paragraph I could mention about the highlights of her career. It is all written but in the second paragraph and the first one focuses on all the things she did before her breakthrough in 2013. ArturSik (talk) 00:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC) update: I've actually came up with something, do you think that will be enough? ArturSik (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks a lot. ArturSik (talk) 13:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Jamal Adams
LSU fan here. After having the pleasure of watching Jamal Adams for three years I can just about guarantee you the Jets struck gold. He can turn that secondary around immediately. Think Troy Polamalu, but with less hair and less Samoan. Incredibly smart and instinctive. Lizard (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- One hopes. But then again, he may be the second coming of Blair Thomas, if I may shamelessly mix positions. It is a big gamble certainly, especially with the quarterback position so unsettled. Jets fans have been living on thin rations of hope for a long time. Thanks for the good word though:) --Wehwalt (talk) 02:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Ben Affleck peer review
Hi, I noticed you left helpful feedback in the peer review of Bradley Cooper's article and wondered if you might look over Ben Affleck's article too? Thanks, Popeye191 (talk) 07:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Of course. It may be a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Kalākaua coinage
On 3 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kalākaua coinage, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in order to put the silver Kalākaua coinage into circulation, Claus Spreckels formed the Spreckels & Company Bank in Hawaii? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kalākaua coinage. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kalākaua coinage), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 05:48, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
FAC reviewing barnstar
|
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
| FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the four FAC image/source reviews you did during April. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC) |
How do I effectively research a topic?
I am attempting to overhaul Buffalo, New York into something akin to Hamilton, Ontario or Minneapolis, but it's a daunting and overwhelming task because I don't know where to start (specifically in regards to the history section). Somehow I was able to completely reconstruct Utica, New York, which became a good article, but I can't find a way to replicate that success here. Buffaboy talk 01:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- The obvious place to start is with other histories of Buffalo, both in book form and otherwise, as we are a tertiary source that should predominately be based on secondary sources. To get published, they had to do some level of professional research and have it checked, hopefully. Don't ignore sources because they are old, as older histories/bios are often more detailed. In general though, newer sources have had the benefit of the older ones, and also you can figure out where to put your emphasis. Start with a short one, so you know the territory a bit better, then examine the books, mining them for information rather than necessarily reading straight through. A look at a book on the War of 1812, and also at one on the Erie Canal, might be useful. If I'm not hitting the point you want, feel free to follow up. It sounds like a very worthy project.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for the advice and if I have further questions I'll get back in contact. Buffaboy talk 17:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Vermont Sesquicentennial half dollar
Congrats! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Much obliged. Another one done.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Amazing work! Which one's next? :p ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Probably Illinois, but first there's Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co..--Wehwalt (talk) 17:41, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Glad to hear! I was just reading Illinois, but haven't seen Palsgraf yet. Connecticut, Fort Vancouver and Missouri all look promising, too. You're a machine (in a good way)! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:44, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, but the problem with Missouri is that we don't have an image of a 2 (star) 4. Images are starting to be a problem.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- I doubt a missing image would prevent the article from being promoted, but I sure understand the desire to make an article feel complete. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:18, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Carousel
I ran the reference for this new addition to the article through Google translate, and it does not support the assertions about the length of the run (or the opening and closing dates). It also does not mention Stefan Mayer, Richard Wherlock, Bryony Dwyer, or Christian Miedl. It supports the name of the theatre, the director and the actress who played Nettie. I then did a Google search and could not find support for the length of the run. It got bad opening night reviews here and here, with the director and music both coming in for some sharp criticism. Please advise if you think this production ought to be in the article, and if not, I suggest going ahead to delete it. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Operabase contains the specific performance dates. Note that the final scheduled performance of May 5, 2017 was cancelled so that the performance of April 29, 2017 became the final one. I will undo the deletion and will insert the Operabase link as proof. In addition, the production team is listed in the Theater Basel link I provided. Just visit the tab titled "Künstlerische Leitung" and the information you claim is nonexistent is visible there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luluplatz (talk • contribs) 14:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, but this shows that there were only 17 performances in total. Only one of the players is a notable person. I believe that this was not a noteworthy production. Note that this musical is played regularly in regional and foreign professional theatres all over the world. Please read WP:BRD, which asks editors to bring disagreements to the article's Talk page, if challenged, rather than simply to revert to their preferred version. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Wait a second here. Are you the arbiter of what is noteworthy or not? If, as a contributor with the free will to do so, I decide to include something relevant to the article, it should be allowed to stand. I think you are playing games with me and imposing arbitrary double standards. For example, you claim that the Basel production is not worth listing because it received "only 17 performances" and that only one of the players is a notable person. What number of performances do you consider acceptable? How many players should be "notable" enough? Moreover, why is the London Savoy Theater production of December 2008 allowed to remain in the article but not the Basel one? The London one received mixed reviews as did the Basel one. Most productions do anyway for one reason or another or a number of them. Not only that but the London revival closed a month earlier. Basel only lost one (1) performance of the 18 originally scheduled. So what gives? Luluplatz (talk) 18:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Because there is such a thing as editorial judgment. Productions in London and New York are under a spotlight, get much attention, and are important for that reason, they also often have major stars as the leads. The Basel production was no doubt worthy, but is it widely covered in English language sources? Will it be a benchmark for a future Carousel?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, so now we are limited to productions taking place in London or New York and covered by the English speaking press? Who knew? Do you not see why I raise the problem of double standards and arbitrariness? That Basel wasn't covered in the English speaking press means nothing. Music is music anywhere. As for it being a benchmark or not, who decides? Again, much arbitrariness at play here. This is not really (or shouldn't be anyway) about winning arguments. But I am requesting that the Basel paragraph be included. If not, I will have to bring it up to higher ups at Wikipedia (although things should never, ever be allowed to get to that point because people such as myself are busy and have little time and energy for nonsense and for fighting unnecessary, capricious battles).Luluplatz (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well? Luluplatz (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- Well what? I'm not here continuously. I think you'll find the same questions elsewhere: what distinguishes a European production from the hundreds of other regional productions of Carousel. In this case, it could not justify its originally-planned run. New York and London are the centers of the English-speaking theatre world.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:51, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- You keep harping on London and NY being the center of the English-speaking theater world. Funny how you choose to conveniently make these stern divisions. By your logic, we should not be discussing let alone writing about opera productions sung in foreign languages in English-speaking Wikipedia, as opera is a Continental Europe art form first and foremost. And this by definition excludes NY and London. What do you recommend we do? I will let it go because I am frankly tired of dealing with people with control issues such as yourself. As I stated before, you act as an arbitrary and capricious arbiter around here. Go ahead, enjoy your little kingdom. And please never, ever remove any edits I may make elsewhere on Wikipedia or you will be reported for harassment and abuse.Luluplatz (talk) 02:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you feel that way, and I assure you I keep to my own knitting. As for opera, that is a different ball game and how we treat opera geographically is not the same. To compare the two is like discussing how one should pitch to Pele on an 0-2 count.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Flying Eagle cent scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Flying Eagle cent article has been scheduled as today's featured article for May 25, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 25, 2017, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
- Congrats on the Main page appearance! ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I updated it to the new Red Book but it's a dull process to do it for all the articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Archive photo, Speer's Zeppelintribune.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Archive photo, Speer's Zeppelintribune.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Online disaster
I hope you are enjoying your travel, and will be able to read this. Two days ago, in a freak accident, my laptop was destroyed, with the complete loss of all my contact information. I am temporarily using a borrowed laptop while the technical guys try to salvage what they can. But I need urgently to get in touch with Tim over the various meetups planned for next week and I've no way of reaching him - I don't think he regularly checks his old WP talkpage. If you could email him for me, and pass on the message below, I'd be most grateful – I'd email him through Wikipedia, but that link is missing from the toolbar on this machine and I don't know how to install it. The message is that, basically, due to health issues I've been forbidden to travel to London on 5 June as anticipated, but will be allowed on the following Saturday with an escort (my daughter). I'm sorry this will mean missing you & also for all the inconvenience I seem to be causing. Would you mind leaving a note on my WP talk confirming that you've received this? Tim can also communicate with me via that page. Brianboulton (talk) 14:02, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for forwarding this to me. I'll email Brian and copy you in. Meanwhile, if you are still available on Monday as planned, I should love to meet up at the Wehwalt Arms. Pray let me know. Tim riley talk 14:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
- Most providentially, I have been able to change my airline reservation to 12 June, so I will be in London to watch the Monster Raving Looney Party take office and also to meet with all and sundry on the 10th.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:24, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the FA on Kalākaua coinage
Thank you for taking the initiative to get this done. — Maile (talk) 00:21, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- No trouble, I'm always up for this sort of thing. I may look at the other Hawaiian monetary articles as time permits. Great working with you!--Wehwalt (talk) 02:52, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Precious five years!
 | |
| Five years! |
|---|
You talked about Carousel back then, - is that now ready for TFA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
- I suppose. I haven't come up with a lot of new sources on themes.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
- Today, we had a new FA within minutes ;) - congrats! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate your help on the painting.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:31, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
- Today, we had a new FA within minutes ;) - congrats! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for today's Cincinnati Musical Center half dollar, - I am proud to have a great singer on the same page who's 90th birthday we missed by a few days. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
- A great singer and a scandalous coin! But thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
- Today: you and Juliet ;) - Thank you for the musical that "was an utter flop, though reading it, it probably deserved better"! I have scandalous music on the Main page (DYK), and read that people don't even know the composer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Today, I heard Andreas Schager sing Wehwalt, alongside Evelyn Herlitzius as Brünnhilde, - I remember that I promised years ago to write his article (Tristan then), and hope I will manage now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC) - I managed, and found another story about him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'm glad you got to go. It's been a long time since I went to see Wagner.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for today's Flying Eagle cent, "the first U.S. small cent"! Thank you also for your FAC review! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- Time to nominate Grace ;) - will you or should I? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. - I just found more - looking for something else - on the recent Siegmund, his first Tristan, a detailed review [1] of reviews, p. 52, story beginning p. 49, all worth reading, about "intensity and authenticity" and Isolde's real tear. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for a most interesting link. Regrettably, I've rarely seen Tristan live, and probably not in ten years. I'm sorry you felt you had to archive your FAC nomination.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:32, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- It wasn't my article anymore as Brianboulton correctly summarized, wouldn't be surprised if Francis nominated it for FAC after the prescribed waiting time. - Did you see the RS concerns at the bottom of its talk, discussed at the RS noticeboard where I feel lonely defending a history that was there before I even joined Wikipedia, and which is questioned now (as you probably saw in the FAC). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:41, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- I saw that the nomination page had gotten quite long, I did not read the details. It's too bad when things like that happen.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Iridescent put it best, and summarized his FA involvement, - you will like it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- At the FAC? I didn't see his name.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Not at the FAC - which I am sure would have turned out differently - but his talk, look for my name, first thread if not archived, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I see it now. I don't keep WT:RS/N on my watchlist, but I suspect there is a certain reluctance to get between you and Francis, given that you both know a great deal about Bach and we don't.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:30, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- It has nothing to do with Bach. He suspects that the liner notes that the site reproduces sample are copyright violations, and that is his argument for eliminating all links to the site from the article, and requesting that all other (several hundred) articles should do the same. I assume in good faith that the liner notes - of many labels! - are reproduced with consent by the labels. I am also sure the site is the most detailed resource on the subject we have (and in three random samples a link was present in the first version of articles, added by different users), and taking it away from our readers is a big mistake. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I see it now. I don't keep WT:RS/N on my watchlist, but I suspect there is a certain reluctance to get between you and Francis, given that you both know a great deal about Bach and we don't.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:30, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Not at the FAC - which I am sure would have turned out differently - but his talk, look for my name, first thread if not archived, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- At the FAC? I didn't see his name.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Iridescent put it best, and summarized his FA involvement, - you will like it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- I saw that the nomination page had gotten quite long, I did not read the details. It's too bad when things like that happen.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- It wasn't my article anymore as Brianboulton correctly summarized, wouldn't be surprised if Francis nominated it for FAC after the prescribed waiting time. - Did you see the RS concerns at the bottom of its talk, discussed at the RS noticeboard where I feel lonely defending a history that was there before I even joined Wikipedia, and which is questioned now (as you probably saw in the FAC). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:41, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for a most interesting link. Regrettably, I've rarely seen Tristan live, and probably not in ten years. I'm sorry you felt you had to archive your FAC nomination.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:32, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
- Do you want to nominate Benjamin Tillman for TFA on 11 August? - Schager will be on DYK tomorrow, if an admin manages to move prep to queue, no image, which is sad given that for once it would have matched the hook ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- No, I'm hesitant to nom that one due to the subject matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Do you mean ever? - How about James B. Longacre, same day? - Just found another review for the tenor who sang Siegmund and both Siegfried in one cycle (three cycles so far), - translation (at least I tried) in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- No, I'm hesitant to nom that one due to the subject matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Do you want to nominate Benjamin Tillman for TFA on 11 August? - Schager will be on DYK tomorrow, if an admin manages to move prep to queue, no image, which is sad given that for once it would have matched the hook ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
I think I saw Gary Lakes sing both roles in the same cycle once at the Met ... no, not ever. But pick the time for when it won't get attacked. If Tillman's in the news, if they rename one of the buildings named for him, that might be a good time. I don't have an issue with Longacre.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Roosevelt dime has been scheduled for the above date as Today's Featured Article. I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time to make sure it's up-to-date. You can edit the text that will appear on the Main Page if you like; I'll be trimming it to around 1100 characters. Thanks! - Dank (push to talk) 00:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Lincoln Cent
I noticed that you protected the Lincoln Cent page.
I'd like to run a change by you. At several points, the coin is called a "penny". Legally, it's a "cent", and I think that most of the references to the coin should be changed to reflect it's correct name (leaving in place things like "Leave a penny, take a penny"). Thanks. Almostfm (talk) 06:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
- I agree. When it made FA, all of it said "cent". If pennies have slipped in, they should be removed (with the obvious exceptions you cited).--Wehwalt (talk) 06:42, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 22
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017
- New and expanded research accounts
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
- Bytes in brief
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
PR
Hello, since you have provided helpful comments at Taylor Swift, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence's FACs, would you be kind enough to do the same at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lady Gaga/archive5? I would really appreciate the help. – FrB.TG (talk) 18:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:37, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I saw that you removed (the start of) a list of honorary degrees from John Diefenbaker on the grounds that it was "not significant nor particularly encyclopedic". However, the articles about most of the Canadian prime ministers who have followed Diefenbaker have similar sections. See Lester B. Pearson#Honorary degrees, Pierre Trudeau#Honorary degrees, Joe Clark#Honorary degrees, John Turner#Honorary degrees, Brian Mulroney#Honorary degrees, Kim Campbell#Honorary degrees, Jean Chrétien#Honorary degrees, Paul Martin#Honorary degrees, and Stephen Harper#Honorary degrees. In light of this pattern, it would seem to be appropriate for Diefenbaker as well. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- They're not FAs. It's still not encyclopedic. Dief enjoyed getting honorary degrees and the list is likely to be long. How do his honorary degrees add to the reader's understanding of Diefenbaker?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
The King and I
How do you want to deal with this? Part of it is unreferenced. Please let me know what you think. I imagine you were already aware of the Said book, but that you found it too general? It is not clear whether Said actually referred to The King and I, or whether the editor's reference to it is OR? -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm aware of Said's book generally, but not that he mentions The King and I which he may well do. I wasn't aware of the other book. Let me look it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- Any progress? Happy Memorial Day! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm currently traveling, when I'm home in ten days I'll go to the library. Same to you, of course.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- Any progress? Happy Memorial Day! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
- I hope you enjoyed the Wiki meeting in London. Let me know if you get a chance to look into the above. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks. I was only home for a few days and I didn't get to the library so it looks like it will be the middle of next week, regrettably. Thanks for reminding me. Hope you're doing well.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
- I hope you enjoyed the Wiki meeting in London. Let me know if you get a chance to look into the above. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
- Doing well, thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I reverted the change for now. Note that what the person suggested might fit into this article, if it were cleaned up, and depending on what the Said book actually says. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Spiro Agnew
I've opened a sandbox, here, in which I've listed all the sources I have to hand in relation to Agnew. The books are a somewhat random collection, made up of what's on my shelves. They all have some significant Agnew content, but much will be repetitive and the list can surely been slimmed down. At some stage I'll do a brief content analysis on the books, to see what's worth using. There are undoubtedly titles which I don't have and you will wish to add.
I've only skimmed the articles and websites thus far. Again, you will probably have access to more articles that have not found themselves online, and such sources as his ANB entry - which perhaps you could email me? May I suggest that you use the sandbox to add suggestions of your own. Not all material is available in the UK - I can't find a copy of Agnew's own account Go Quietly or Else, though the novel, The Canfield Decision can be got for a few pence.
No timetable yet for a beginning, but autumn (Sept/Oct) looks most likely. Brianboulton (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I'll start getting stuff together. I'll email you his ANB entry.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Just a heads up
If I need to pursue an RfC on the whole commission date vs oath date matter, it will be held at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States courts and judges. But not before tomorrow. :) Getting late and turning in for the night. Safiel (talk) 07:17, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
- At your convenience. Could you just ping me?--Wehwalt (talk) 07:19, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
- Will do. Safiel (talk) 07:21, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Check
Per talkpage discussion, I added a bit of content to Homer Davenport. Can you review and tweak it if it seems necessary? Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 06:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi User:Wehwalt, can you help with List of facial hairstyles, mainly the name of the styles, I know there should be more sources but I'm wondering if the names of the styles are the generally used terms. Most images are ok, but the Zappa is half in the dark.--Theo Mandela (talk) 03:12, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Well ... I'll look at it anyway but I do not pretend to be an expert on facial hair.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:47, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Great, it's mainly if you get reliable sources, thanks.--Theo Mandela (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- So on the Zappa one, it would help to have more (reliable) sources, correct?--Wehwalt (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- I more meant sources for styles and descriptions that don't already have sources, but yeah the more the better. George Christie (former Hells Angels leader) had/has a Zappa. I thought you'd be able to add/rephrase some sentences properly or maybe find some better images. Would appreciate any help, however little or big, thanks 👍--Theo Mandela (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- So on the Zappa one, it would help to have more (reliable) sources, correct?--Wehwalt (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Great, it's mainly if you get reliable sources, thanks.--Theo Mandela (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you 😊.
Thank you for creating Waterloo Medal (Pistrucci), it is a good read. 🤓--58.187.171.100 (talk) 02:40, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- I was stunned that with detailed articles on microbes, we lacked this. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Back, and with a new PR
Hi Wehwalt , Good to see you again recently, and I hope all is well with you. After something of a break, I have recently been working on the militant suffragette Emily Davison—she of the 1913 Epsom Derby fame; the article is now at PR. Should you have the time and inclination, I would be absolutely delighted to hear any thoughts and comments you may have about its suitability for a push to FAC. Obviously there is no problem if you are otherwise engaged or don't find the subject of interest. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 06:49, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
- I recall what she did, rather than the name. I'll give it a look.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
RfA
|
Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC) |
- Good luck. It may come in handy. :) Congratulations.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:39, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Request
Hi Wehwalt. How are you? If you have time and interest, I wonder whether you might possibly be able to give feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Watching the River Flow/archive1. Thank you for considering. :-) Moisejp (talk) 05:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Certainly.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you for what you did for the Witch of Pungo, whose good name Grace Sherwood was restored after 300 years OTD. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- No thanks are necessary for doing what clearly needed to be done, but you're welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- I sing your praises (have a soprano in both sets today (Maria Friesenhausen and Dara Hobbs with Isolde), - it's a great day for teh cabal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Much more credit due to Pumpkin Sky, who as we recall was very badly treated.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- I mean PumpkinSky--Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Credit was given, before yours (I go by the order in the FAC, every day). Credit here also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- I mean PumpkinSky--Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Much more credit due to Pumpkin Sky, who as we recall was very badly treated.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- I sing your praises (have a soprano in both sets today (Maria Friesenhausen and Dara Hobbs with Isolde), - it's a great day for teh cabal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Today: "... a small, commonplace coin (in the US anyway) that has been struck for seventy years with little drama or variation", the Roosevelt dime, thank you! - I archived little drama. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Bush (not George W.)
Just wondering if you've finished with your comments here? I think I've responded to all your points thus far – is there more to come? Brianboulton (talk) 22:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Question about British currency
Hello, Wehwalt. I saw your name on the list of participants at the British Currency Task Force. Might I trouble you with a brief question?
While doing background research for an article, I came across a mid-19th century reference book for London booksellers (The London Catalogue of Books Published in Great Britain). That reference provided various bits of information about each itemized book, including its price. But the headings on each page stated that "All prices are expressed in boards". The price were given in the three-column fashion that I usually associate with pounds/shillings/pence, but those words weren't actually used (nor any symbols) -- just the statement at the top of the page referring to "boards". I assume that "boards" is synonymous with "pounds", but I haven't been able to corroborate this with on-line searching. Have you seen this term before and, if so, does it really mean the same thing as "pounds"?
Any help that you can provide will be greatly appreciated. NewYorkActuary (talk) 00:13, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Not familiar with it but will do some research. My guess is that they did not want to be expressing an opinion, possibly they stole the whole list from another source. Do you have a link?--Wehwalt (talk) 01:22, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds to me like the prices were for bound copies, not unbound or paper covers, both sometimes sold. Johnbod (talk) 03:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Pretty sure Johnbod's hit on the answer here. Likely this is not referring to the currency, but to the binding status of the copies. I have a few older books in my collection that were originally sold without covers wher the buyer would then have them bound to match the other volumes in their library. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks to all for following up on this. In preparing my response to Wehwalt, I went back to the on-line sources so I could provide the following link here. And that's when I saw something I missed the first time around -- although the statement (near the top of the page) is in italics, the two-word phrase "in boards" is not italicized. So that set me off on a new round of on-line searching, which produced this, a description of 19th century book binding techniques. And indeed, "in board" binding is what they were calling the most common method.
My apologies to Wehwalt if you've spent too much time searching for an answer to my misguided question. And thanks again to all for responding. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:40, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks to all for following up on this. In preparing my response to Wehwalt, I went back to the on-line sources so I could provide the following link here. And that's when I saw something I missed the first time around -- although the statement (near the top of the page) is in italics, the two-word phrase "in boards" is not italicized. So that set me off on a new round of on-line searching, which produced this, a description of 19th century book binding techniques. And indeed, "in board" binding is what they were calling the most common method.
- Pretty sure Johnbod's hit on the answer here. Likely this is not referring to the currency, but to the binding status of the copies. I have a few older books in my collection that were originally sold without covers wher the buyer would then have them bound to match the other volumes in their library. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds to me like the prices were for bound copies, not unbound or paper covers, both sometimes sold. Johnbod (talk) 03:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Not familiar with it but will do some research. My guess is that they did not want to be expressing an opinion, possibly they stole the whole list from another source. Do you have a link?--Wehwalt (talk) 01:22, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Commenting on RfCs
Please don't make edits like these. It's a bot-built summary page; your edits will be overwritten when Legobot (talk · contribs) next runs, most likely at 23:01 (UTC). Instead, follow the link at the top of the entry to reach the actual RfC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:43, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Image review
If you have the time to spare, I'd be very grateful if you could give an image review to this FAC which is very long and has been open since the dawn of time, but just needs the images checking now. If not, no problem. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- OK. I'll have it done sometime this weekend.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:17, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Emily Davison
Hi Wehwalt, Thanks for your thoughts at the recent PR for Emily Davison. The lady is now at FAC, should you wish to comment further. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 17:17, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sure.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:19, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 23
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017
- Library card
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
- Bytes in brief
Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 24 August 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 24, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Another good one about justice and irony, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. If having a decent article on the subject will make life easier for law students, I've done my bit.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:24, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
FAC reviewing barnstar
|
|
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
| FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the seven FAC reviews, three image reviews, and two source reviews you did during August. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:09, 3 September 2017 (UTC) |
- Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:06, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
California Diamond Jubilee half dollar scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the California Diamond Jubilee half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 9, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. In particular, please see if the sale price needs updating in the lead and the text.
If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 9, 2017, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! I was out yesterday, sorry for late thanks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I hope it was enjoyable. And thank you for all you do.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:58, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Will you nominate the Chinese monster painting for 1 October? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- I held back because of the WDW railroad article, and I see Mike has expressed concerns about that. My thought is that there would probably not be time before he schedules (if it's him doing it) to be worth a nomination. If he schedules it wonderful, if not, it can wait a year. In either case, the coordinators know it is there.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- You are so considerate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, I wouldn't say that. I'm still hoping to get an image of the version of the painting we don't have (1972).--Wehwalt (talk) 20:59, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- You are so considerate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- I held back because of the WDW railroad article, and I see Mike has expressed concerns about that. My thought is that there would probably not be time before he schedules (if it's him doing it) to be worth a nomination. If he schedules it wonderful, if not, it can wait a year. In either case, the coordinators know it is there.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- Will you nominate the Chinese monster painting for 1 October? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Query...
What did you mean by this diff, given that I'm the nominator at FA? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
- What it says. You are reluctant to have them run, and I'm reminding Dank of that.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
The Founding Ceremony of the Nation scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the The Founding Ceremony of the Nation article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 1 October 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 1, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:42, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi User:Wehwalt, do you know if there's a name for this facial hairstyle, or if it's mentioned anywhere please? Like a walrus moustache with a beard, sported by Calvin Harris (here [2]), thanks.--Theo Mandela (talk) 07:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'd call what Harris has in that photo "long stubble", and if you go into a barber's and ask for "long stubble" that's what they'll give you. If he lets it grow out more, but not to full-beard lengths, it will be a Bandholz beard. ‑ Iridescent 07:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Iridescent. Theo, I never could figure out how to get password-protected online resources to you without emailing them. Is there something you need copyedited?--Wehwalt (talk) 08:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Iridescent, as well the styles you mentioned, "long stubble" and Bandholz aren't on the article, that's why it needs more recent images, descriptions and sources. It's just hard (for me) to know which are reliable. Maybe an entry could be added for long stubble with picture of Calvin Harris, the article's incomplete mostly and it reminded me of it when I was in Tony & Guy the other day, where they described a ton of facial hairstyles to me by name that aren't on Wikipedia's list. Yeah Wehwalt, if your not too busy, could you add some of the information from your source to the article please? I'd appreciate it loads. Thank you both.--Theo Mandela (talk) 14:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Bandholz is a relatively recent phenomenon and probably hasn't percolated through to other articles yet—I'd be inclined not to include him in more general articles on hairstyling (although he can be sourced easily enough just by googling his name), as he'll likely fade from public view and people will go back to calling it "neat long stubble" or "short full beard". The recent rise of slacker style (in the US) and Shoreditch Twattery (in the UK) has led to a plethora of neologisms for various hairstyles, and Wikipedia probably shouldn't be trying to second-guess which names will stick. ‑ Iridescent 15:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Iridescent, as well the styles you mentioned, "long stubble" and Bandholz aren't on the article, that's why it needs more recent images, descriptions and sources. It's just hard (for me) to know which are reliable. Maybe an entry could be added for long stubble with picture of Calvin Harris, the article's incomplete mostly and it reminded me of it when I was in Tony & Guy the other day, where they described a ton of facial hairstyles to me by name that aren't on Wikipedia's list. Yeah Wehwalt, if your not too busy, could you add some of the information from your source to the article please? I'd appreciate it loads. Thank you both.--Theo Mandela (talk) 14:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Iridescent. Theo, I never could figure out how to get password-protected online resources to you without emailing them. Is there something you need copyedited?--Wehwalt (talk) 08:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Invitation to Admin confidence survey
Hello,
Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.
The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.
To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.
We really appreciate your input!
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Balfour
Hi Wehwalt,
A big thank you for your insightful and constructive comments at the Balfour Declaration FAC.
I am disappointed that the review was archived, but I have never been through this process before so knew to expect the unexpected. I am trying to figure out if I should go through the pain again of trying to hit the 2 Nov centennial deadline, or just give up the ghost.
Either way, your comments to date have been incredibly helpful, so if you have the time to continue your review on the talk page (or at a new peer review?) I would gladly work with you to incorporate the changes.
Regards, Onceinawhile (talk) 12:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- I was actually stalling with my review in the hope it would keep it open and you'd get more feedback ... I'll continue either on talk or at the peer review, which I would suggest you open. I would discuss with Brianboulton what he would like to see. I think he's your sticking point. I think there's barely enough time. You might want to consult with the TFA coordinator who is scheduling November, I suspect Dank. I can see how much work has been put into it. If you feel competent to do FA reviews, that is often helpful in attracting them.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:42, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your reviewing was incredibly helpful – i didn't realize you were stalling but thank you for trying to help in that way as well. I will do as you suggest; I have opened a peer review, and I will speak to Brian. I actually raised the timing point with Dank a few days ago (before it was archived and when I was feeling more confident about the timeframe) he said there's nothing he can do until it achieves FA status. He commented on the previous peer review, so I think he is interested. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Getting enough reviewers is an obvious issue. The article is lo-ong.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yes that's very fair. I admit feeling very envious when I saw Si Ronda – perhaps the shortest FA ever – on the main page yesterday... Unfortunately I simply couldn't achieve criteria 1b and 1c without an article of this size – the amount of ink which has been spilled on the topic of the article is immense. I keep telling myself, though, that if Jesus can have a featured article, there's nothing stopping any other controversial article from getting there too.
- By the way, on reviewing other FAs, I have been thinking about it but I have been too uncertain to dive in and risk messing up someone else's nomination. For example, a few days ago I read another FA candidate's article and decided against leaving comments at the FA for exactly this reason. Instead I left a content related question at the talk page, which was answered but without clarifying amendments to the article (Talk:Rotating_locomotion_in_living_systems#.22Power_transmission_to_driven_wheels.22_section).
- We all have our strengths and weaknesses in life, and if I was to map mine onto the featured article criteria, I would say my strengths are 1b, 1c, 1d, and perhaps 4, but others are much stronger than me at 1a, 2 and 3. Perhaps there's a part for my skill set, but I see most FA comments focusing on 1a and 2 rather than my areas of relative strength. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Try out your skills at peer review, a little less of a live-fire exercise. It's important to have good coverage of things like Indonesian film, and it's important to have good quality in articles like yours that get an awful lot of clicks. You've taken on a major project and so far as I can tell, done it well and stuck with it a long way. I'm sure it will pass sooner or later.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for your advice and insight. It is greatly appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Try out your skills at peer review, a little less of a live-fire exercise. It's important to have good coverage of things like Indonesian film, and it's important to have good quality in articles like yours that get an awful lot of clicks. You've taken on a major project and so far as I can tell, done it well and stuck with it a long way. I'm sure it will pass sooner or later.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Getting enough reviewers is an obvious issue. The article is lo-ong.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your reviewing was incredibly helpful – i didn't realize you were stalling but thank you for trying to help in that way as well. I will do as you suggest; I have opened a peer review, and I will speak to Brian. I actually raised the timing point with Dank a few days ago (before it was archived and when I was feeling more confident about the timeframe) he said there's nothing he can do until it achieves FA status. He commented on the previous peer review, so I think he is interested. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Intersectional conflict
What exactly do you mean by intersectional conflict in the lead of Franklin Pierce? The meaning of this phrase is unclear in this context, and I have been unable to locate any source to clarify it. General Ization Talk 22:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- North-south conflict. You changed "sectional" to "sectarian", which really means religious war. How do you think it should be phrased?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- I reverted myself, as I do see this phrase in use in scholarly publications concerning the Civil War and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, e.g. [3], [4]. Still, I believe it is not a term readily understood (and is probably misunderstood) by most readers, and I'm sure there's some other way to express this notion that is. General Ization Talk 22:59, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Fair enough, also my spellcheck didn't object :) I've changed it to be more explicit (Wehwalt).--23:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- I reverted myself, as I do see this phrase in use in scholarly publications concerning the Civil War and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, e.g. [3], [4]. Still, I believe it is not a term readily understood (and is probably misunderstood) by most readers, and I'm sure there's some other way to express this notion that is. General Ization Talk 22:59, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks!
Hi Wehwalt, thank you for your comments at my RfA. I hope that I'll be able to answer your concerns with my actions rather than my words. Cheers, ansh666 23:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Good luck.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, not sure why he did that. I am as certain as I can be Charles II didn't renew the grant in 1688, as he died in 1685, and I really struggle to see how he awarded it in 1649; given that he was exiled in Holland and the country was under the Interregnum. I've posted a note of the main editor's Talkpage and perhaps he can check the sources. Hope you're keeping well. I shall get along to Sprio's PR before too long. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 10:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- I never studied the Civil War/Commonwealth era in depth, but I recall Charles II made a lot of promises to keep going in exile, many of which he paid off on after the Restoration. It could be that. But I don't know.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- Didn't read the whole thing. Doing well, hope you are too, thanks in advance for Spiro.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:29, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Aberfan
Hi Wehwalt, I hope all is well with you. I have recently been working on the rather shocking Aberfan disaster; the article is now at PR. Should you have the time and inclination, I would be absolutely delighted to hear any thoughts and comments you may have about its suitability for a push to FAC. Obviously there is no problem if you are otherwise engaged or don't find the subject of interest. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- I read the articles in the British papers on the 50th anniversary last year. I will be happy to do it.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- SchroCat So very sad. All those kids...and then the government's & the coal company's abdication of responsibility. Amazing that no one was ever brought to trial for the deaths of those 144 people. I'll read through it & post any issues I might find on the PR page. If you'd like to submit the article for a GA Review, I'd be willing to review it. Shearonink (talk) 04:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- I spent several days in South Wales in the spring. To judge by the memorials and also what I learned at the Rhondda Heritage Museum, life was cheap in the days of coal. But these were just kids, just terrible. And this was 1966 ... Wilson government and everything ...--Wehwalt (talk) 05:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yep - we're used to seeing how shabbily people were treated in the 18th and 19th centuries (see the Senghenydd colliery disaster), but this was 1966 - the height of the Swinging Sixties, the year England won the World Cup and a forward-looking radical Labour government. Miners are used to being badly treated, but the complete abrogation of all responsibility in the face of dead children makes it all so much worse. - SchroCat (talk) 07:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- I spent several days in South Wales in the spring. To judge by the memorials and also what I learned at the Rhondda Heritage Museum, life was cheap in the days of coal. But these were just kids, just terrible. And this was 1966 ... Wilson government and everything ...--Wehwalt (talk) 05:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- SchroCat So very sad. All those kids...and then the government's & the coal company's abdication of responsibility. Amazing that no one was ever brought to trial for the deaths of those 144 people. I'll read through it & post any issues I might find on the PR page. If you'd like to submit the article for a GA Review, I'd be willing to review it. Shearonink (talk) 04:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
There's been a recent spate of edits to this List, adding statements such as:
- First President to be the subject of a Presidential biography published by his son
and
- First President to write a Presidential biography about his father.
I dunno...this List attracts such factoid statements from time to time. I'm not very fond of them but I noticed you have edited the List in the past and was wondering what your thoughts on these recent additions might be. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'd double check John Quincy Adams for one thing. He wrote a lot about his family. The only one I saw that was obviously wrong was the first president on a US coin, which is a common error, it's come up at trivia. I'll take a closer look at the list when I'm less tired and also add a source for what I added ... I didn't see anything obviously terrible, but I need to take a closer look.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:25, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- Shearonink, I can't find anything that says JQA wrote a bio about his father, so I guess it's right. It just strikes me as a bit trivial even for a list which is basically trivia.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you - that's kind of the way I was leaning too. This List every so often degenerates into such a heap of utter cruftiness... It's like having an entry for "the sky is blue' in the article about "The sky". Thanks for your input. Shearonink (talk) 00:21, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
12 years of editing
|
Hey, Wehwalt. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 23:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC) |
|
- So it is ... much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- And it is so that today we enjoy The Founding Ceremony of the Nation, a very well known painting (in certain parts of the world) with a fascinating history. Few paintings have been buffeted so often or so dramatically by the winds of political change while in the final analysis, remaining more or less the same. - Thank you! - I have a DYK on the same page about a song I love (and two more items there that I reviewed), - quality article work! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Much obliged, thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
FAC reviewing barnstar
|
|
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
| FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the nine FAC reviews and two image reviews you did during September. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC) |
Withdrawing a FAC (2)
Hi! I recently nominated Fawad Khan for FAC but now I want to have it peer reviewed. Can you please tell me how to withdraw a FAC.Amirk94391 (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
- I would simply inform one of the coordinators you wish it withdrawn.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:41, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much.Amirk94391 (talk) 11:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 24
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Star Coordinator Award - last quarter's star coordinator: User:Csisc
- Wikimania Birds of a Feather session roundup
- Spotlight: Wiki Loves Archives
- Bytes in brief
Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Balfour
Hi Wehwalt,
Many thanks for your continued support – and guidance – on this one. There are events taking place round the world already this week to commemorate the upcoming centenary (in both positive and negative lights, of course). The article has four supports now, and with 8 days until the centenary I am still optimistic that we can get it on to TFA in time (although I understand last minute changes are not always possible for TFA coordinators).
I am posting here because you asked me to let you know when it’s ready for your review. I think after Mightnightblueowl’s excellent comments, I am now done tweaking the article. If you do have time to take another look, particularly as you were the first commentator at the first FAC, it would be a great way to end a long journey!
Onceinawhile (talk) 05:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Wehwalt, thank you for another great review.
- I am honestly amazed every time – I keep thinking it’s perfect and then find out that it wasn’t just yet. Well, I have learned a great deal from the last few months; it’s been a fascinating experience.
- If you’re happy with how I dealt with the changes, and you are supportive of the nomination, would you mind confirming at the FAC?
- Today marks one week to go until the centenary. I am still hopeful that it has a (perhaps small) chance of getting through TFA on time!
- Onceinawhile (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Each of us is too much in love with our own writing. I've been stunned when people pointed out quirks that I had never noticed in my own. I'll be over there shortly. Nice work.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Glad to hear I’m not the only one! Thanks again for all your advice, help and support. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Least I can do.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Glad to hear I’m not the only one! Thanks again for all your advice, help and support. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Each of us is too much in love with our own writing. I've been stunned when people pointed out quirks that I had never noticed in my own. I'll be over there shortly. Nice work.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Halloween cheer!
Hello Wehwalt:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:15, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Elizabeth David
Hi Wehwalt, Tim and I have been working on Elizabeth David recently, and have now opened a peer review for comments, in advance of a possible run at FAC. Should you have time and inclination, your thoughts and comments would be most welcome. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 11:30, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- Anyone who seeks to improve British cooking gets my vote. I'll review it but it may be a few days.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:00, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Peer review request
Hi Wehwalt. I hope you're well. If you have time and sufficient interest, I was wondering whether you could possibly leave feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/The Breeders Tour 2014/archive1. It's a quite short article and (I hope) wouldn't take you long to get through. Thank you for considering. Moisejp (talk) 04:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, certainly. Due to travel, it may be a day or two.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:00, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
TFL
I'm sorry but I oppose TFL appearance of Aitraaz. As its sole contributor, I have my own plans for it. Please remove it. Thanks!Krish | Talk 12:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I will as soon as I consult with other coordinators as to the proper procedure.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:14, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Nixon article -- discussion
Wehwalt -- long time no talk! Hope all is well with you! I see you're still editing away at the Richard Nixon article. I just started a new discussion on 1968 on the talk page that I'd be interested in your views on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Nixon#1968_peace_talks_--_redux. Best, Happyme22 (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of List of United Kingdom Parliament constituencies represented by sitting Prime Ministers
The article List of United Kingdom Parliament constituencies represented by sitting Prime Ministers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
This page is redundant; the entirety of the information in this article exists on List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom. Furthermore the subject is not noteworthy enough to justify existing as a separate 'summary' page, pageviews analysis indicates it gets only 12 daily pageviews on average, compared with 3,828 the List of PM's of the UK is getting.
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. ToastButterToast (talk) 15:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Wehwalt! Its been a while. How are thing with you? I have nominated the accolades list for the Brad Pitt starrer, Moneyball. I would appreciate your comments here. This is my first attempt at a Hollywood film accolades list BTW. 
— Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 17:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- I would appreciate your comments here too.
— Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 07:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC) - I"ll take a look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
ANI Experiences survey
Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Der 100. Psalm
Thank you for valuable comments to improve Der 100. Psalm, now promoted to FA on the day it was mentioned on the Main page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
I am importuning close colleagues to look in, if they are inclined, at the peer review for Arthur Sullivan. Ssilvers and I are planning to take the article to FAC, and if you are inclined to look in at the peer review and give us your comments, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley talk 22:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
- A most worthy subject. I will look it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
FAC reviewing barnstar
|
|
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
| FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the seven reviews you did during November. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC) |
Disambiguation link notification for December 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James K. Polk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Shore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Sullivan again
As no good deed goes unpunished, we are alerting everyone who was kind enough to contribute to the peer review on Sullivan that Ssilvers and I now have the article up for FAC. If you have the time and inclination to look in, we shall be most grateful. Tim riley talk 11:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 25
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017
- OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
- Bytes in brief
Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Illinois Centennial half dollar scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Illinois Centennial half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 16, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 16, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:09, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Nice! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Happy Saturnalia!
|
Happy Saturnalia | |
| Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free and you not often get distracted by dice-playing. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:05, 17 December 2017 (UTC) |
Thank you and the same. I'm hoping for a quiet Winterset, personally.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Rhode Island Tercentenary half dollar
Congrats! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you indeed!--Wehwalt (talk) 22:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Bittersweet seasonal greetings
|
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | |
| Seasonal greetings for 2017, and best wishes for 2018. Heartfelt thanks to you for your contributions, which have done much to enhance the encyclopedia and make me feel it's worthwhile to keep contributing. So here's to another year's productive editing, with old feuds put aside and peace, goodwill and friendship for all! Brianboulton (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2017 (UTC) |
I realise the notice may be something of a headscratcher to most of our American friends, but you're pretty well up with our sporting fortunes and misfortunes. Brianboulton (talk) 20:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you. It's the first time I've ever seen the piece from which the Ashes came from. Thank you for your contributions, even in the face of adversity. Merry Christmas.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:43, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Possibility of providing your input on a Peer Review for Regine Velasquez's entry
Hi Wehwalt,
I'm writing to ask whether you would consider having a look at the article. I'm aware that you've been involved with a few PRs before. I've given it a major rewrite and complete overhaul. I began working on the article late October when it looked like this and somehow ended up rewriting the whole thing and aiming for potentially FA. This isn't a process I've been through before, but I have been reading the reviews here in preparation, and am familiar with FAC demands. I would very much appreciate a fresh set of eyes and happily address any concerns you may have.
Thanks! Pseud 14 (talk) 05:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at it as soon as I can.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Pseud 14, I'm sorry I've been delayed. I'm traveling until Wed, and hope to get to it soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Wehwalt, no worries, look forward to when you can have a look once you're back! Pseud 14 (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Merry Christmas to all!
|
We wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2018! |
| Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas, and a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless! — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 10:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Disambiguation link notification for December 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James K. Polk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Black (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
.jpg)
|
Wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2018! |
| A very Happy, Glorious, Prosperous Christmas and New Year! God bless! — Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
James K. Polk Article
Thanks for making fixes to this article and including lots of new information (this comment was not made for a discussion I’m fairly new to this application and really don’t know how to send personal messages)
-Jurassicjae Jurassicjae (talk) 01:57, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Still much work to be done.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018! |
|
Hello Wehwalt, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Thanks
Thanks to all leaving holiday greetings.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- Congratulations on a drama-free first month of scheduling TFAs! - Dank (push to talk) 02:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Still not over yet ... but thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- You did well, in that capacity also! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Beginner's luck. But thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- You did well, in that capacity also! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Still not over yet ... but thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James K. Polk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Overseer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Aberfan
Hi Gary, and a very warm happy new year to you. A few months ago you were kind enough to comment on the PR for the Aberfan disaster. After a slight delay to allow some of the images to become PD, the article is now at FAC. Any further comments would be most welcome. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:19, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Happy Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you!
_Raw_sugar_jaggery_gud_Punjab_India.jpg)
May all your endeavours have a fruitful beginning and prosperous ending! — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 09:58, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged, and ditto.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:09, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
FAC
Hey, would you be interested in reviewing my FAC Margaret (singer)? Best. ArturSik (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- I probably will, but it will be a few days, most likely.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Wehwalt, Thanks for your extremely helpful input during the peer review. I have listed it up for FAC and was wondering if you would have time to provide your feedback. Thanks in advance Pseud 14 (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Wehwalt. I have nominated my first solo FAC. You have peer reviewed this article in May-June 2016. Do let me know if you wish to leave comments at the FAC by pinging me. Thanks. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 12:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- I'll get to it when I can, Ssven2, but I've been behind on reviews recently.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- No problem, Wehwalt. Do let me know when you do so. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 12:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- No problem, Wehwalt. Do let me know when you do so.
The article has been promoted to FA. My first solo FA. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:42, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Congrats. It's a good feeling :) ...--Wehwalt (talk) 16:09, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Hogwarts Express FAC
Hi Wehwalt,
I nominated Hogwarts Express (Universal Orlando Resort) just over two years ago and you had left some comments. I haven't been on Wikipedia since (I only signed back in last week!) but I made some adjustments to the article and I think it could become a FA. I would greatly appreciate it if you could review it again! Thanks!--Dom497 (talk) 18:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Happy to. I got a trivia question correct because of your article :)--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Eliza Acton
Hi Wehwalt, I hope all is well. If you get a chance over the next couple of weeks, could you pop in to a peer review for Eliza Acton? Not a huge amount is known about her, so it's not the longest article we have and another pair of eyes would be hugely beneficial. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
p.s. Please let me know if you're at, or will shortly be at, PR at any point, and I'll make sure I pay a visit. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Certainly I'll look in. I don't have anything at that stage right now. Been lazy. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you ...
 | |
| Precious six years |
|---|
... for improving article quality in January 2018! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 26
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018
- #1Lib1Ref
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
- Bytes in brief
Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
My friend and fellow editor, Numerounovedant, has nominated the article for FAC. Do let him know if you are willing to post comments at the second FAC. Thank you. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- I will try to get to this but I'm not sure if or when.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:56, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
FAC
I saw your offer to another editor, so here goes:) I've been thinking about Jean Baptiste Point DuSable in light of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jean Baptiste Point du Sable/archive1, and other things.
I recently had the Guild of Copy Editors do a review. I have edited the article over the years but the editor who did the lion share of Good Article work and also nominated for FA, User:JeremyA, retired awhile ago. I am appreciative of his work, have interest and sources on the topic, and would perhaps like to complete his desire for FAC (crediting him) but I was wondering if you can take a look at the article for improvements and any FAC issues. Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- I will look at it. I need to wrap up a couple of others, but I will look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks much. Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello again, I think I have now addressed all the cmts you made on the talk page, please let me know if there is more I can do? Again, much appreciated. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you, and TopGun and Inlandmamba and the "ton of other people who helped" for Muhammad Ali Jinnah, "Were it not for Jinnah, the map of Asia would look different, for without him there would be no Pakistan." To collaboration! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Much obliged. Thank you for all you do.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:57, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you today for William Borah, "a senator whose tenure might be dismissed as more eccentric than effective, were it not for the gripping hand he had on U.S. foreign policy for most of the crucial interwar period. He may still have influence today, a commenter on a comments page elsewhere mentioned his foreign policy as what he would like to see."! - Will post HNY on my and project talk tomorrow, thinking also of you, with thanks for article work but even more for lasting friendship. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- I appreciate both very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you today for William Borah, "a senator whose tenure might be dismissed as more eccentric than effective, were it not for the gripping hand he had on U.S. foreign policy for most of the crucial interwar period. He may still have influence today, a commenter on a comments page elsewhere mentioned his foreign policy as what he would like to see."! - Will post HNY on my and project talk tomorrow, thinking also of you, with thanks for article work but even more for lasting friendship. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Today, "the only classic commemorative to show Abraham Lincoln, ... the handsome portrait of Lincoln without the beard", Illinois Centennial half dollar! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Today: Indian Head gold pieces, "the only ones the US has ever done which have the design lowered below the surface of the coin. The eighth in my nine-article series on the Great Redesign of US coins from 1907 to 1921. It contains the usual snafus behind the scenes at the Mint, an increasingly irritated Theodore Roosevelt, and perhaps the most plaintive comment ever by an artist who has had his design "improved" by the Mint." - I have the honour to have a singer on the same page, whose hook was "improved" by piping the unique Staatsoper Unter den Linden to an unspecific State Opera, something almost every little state in Germany boasts. No comment may be the most plaintive ;) - The singer was dismissed when Germany was united, see Spiegel clipping. His comment was not plaintive: "Die Staatsoper ist kein Imbißstand, den man so einfach verscherbelt." That would have been a more unique hook, but I try to stay positive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- Gerda Arendt Not sure why I was pinged here, but Staatsoper Unter den Linden actually redirects to the English-language article Berlin State Opera so all I did was "unpipe" it, not "pipe" it to "an unspecific State Opera" at all. Really, this is most peculiar and a little hosile. If you have an issue with what I've done, please present it directly to me, not obfuscated via another editor's talk page. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- OK, it was too early for me to tell unpipe from pipe, sorry about that. - Would you call La Scala the Milan State Opera, or La Monnaie the Brussels State Opera? Poor German one is just not (yet) famous enough. - I would not have addressed you at all about something this minor, but thought you'd love the irony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- No, common name applies, and this is English-language Wikipedia after all. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- TRM is correct here; we go with what English-language sources typically call something. That this leads to inconsistencies is unavoidable, since sometimes the native name enters standard English use and sometimes it doesn't (hence Berlin Hauptbahnhof not "Berlin Main Station" but Berlin Schönefeld Airport not "Flughafen Berlin-Schönefeld"). This goes both ways; e.g. German Wikipedia has de:Hallé-Orchester but de:London Symphony Orchestra. ‑ Iridescent 09:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- Of course TRM is correct (or I would have gone to errors). I would not have hesitated to call it Berlin State Opera if left without a link, but for something with a link, I thought we could entertain the luxury of some foreign flavour. Staatsoper = State Opera in German really doesn't carry too much weight because we have so many states, and some states have several Staatstheater, - it says not much more than most of the funding comes from the state rather than from a community. Unter den Linden is one of the better-known addresses in the world, I'd think, - and now finally, after years of restoration, the house is open again at that address. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- TRM is correct here; we go with what English-language sources typically call something. That this leads to inconsistencies is unavoidable, since sometimes the native name enters standard English use and sometimes it doesn't (hence Berlin Hauptbahnhof not "Berlin Main Station" but Berlin Schönefeld Airport not "Flughafen Berlin-Schönefeld"). This goes both ways; e.g. German Wikipedia has de:Hallé-Orchester but de:London Symphony Orchestra. ‑ Iridescent 09:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- No, common name applies, and this is English-language Wikipedia after all. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- OK, it was too early for me to tell unpipe from pipe, sorry about that. - Would you call La Scala the Milan State Opera, or La Monnaie the Brussels State Opera? Poor German one is just not (yet) famous enough. - I would not have addressed you at all about something this minor, but thought you'd love the irony ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Precious six years!
| |
| Six years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you very much.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
FA review for this article
Hi Wehwalt, trust you're good. Was discussing with Versace1608 (who created the article) about possibility of promoting this article to FA. He was a bit reluctant and refused because he felt there were not enough references from books and scholarly journal sources which carries more weight than Newspapers. After doing a search myself, I discovered it was not that he refused to use them, there simply weren't available. Since I saw your name on people willing to help, I decided to just come ask for your opinion. Regards, 17:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- I will look at it, but I am very backed up and trying to keep up with my own writing plans so I can't tell you when it will be. I won't question their word on sources, though I may do a couple of searches myself.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:18, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) I can tell you on the quickest of skims that the sandwiching here needs to go; it makes the article virtually unreadable on phone or tablet screens, which account for roughly 50% of Wikipedia overall article views and the figure is almost certainly higher on African topics; the black-on-green text also needs to go as it makes the text unreadable when printed out. ‑ Iridescent 19:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- Can't argue with that, thank you Iridescent.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding, hopefully you'd be free enough to take a look this year! @Iridescent I don't think Versace1608 would have a problem with those minor changes. @Iridescent I once read an article you wote about a extraordinary glutton (can't remember his name now) and it was really amazing, thanks!
- I will look at it, but I am very backed up and trying to keep up with my own writing plans so I can't tell you when it will be. I won't question their word on sources, though I may do a couple of searches myself.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:18, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- Regards,
- Mahveotm (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- That would have been Tarrare—certainly one of Wikipedia's odder biographies. ‑ Iridescent 16:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Mahveotm, I've left comments on the article. Sorry to be so slow, but my wiki time has been limited.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Wehwalt, as always I would be delighted if you get the time to take a look at this, which has now been taken to PR. Ceoil (talk) 10:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
- Certainly. I think I was there once as a child.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
TFA
Hi, I've recently nominated Knuckles' Chaotix for TFA; see here. However, there's already an article planned to be run on the day I originally wanted it for. The next ideal date is on June 23, and it has been brought to my attention that you are responsible for scheduling June. Would you mind helping? JOEBRO64 22:11, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- Without totally committing myself, I almost always run articles requested by someone. I would suggest adding it to the template at WT:TFA/R so I don't forget. Mind you, if someone else also wants the day, we'd have to see.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
No good deed goes unpunished. I'm importuning kind colleagues who contributed to Sir Osbert's peer review to look in at his FAC page if so inclined. Perfectly understand if not, naturally. Tim riley talk 09:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
spelling fix
A note: I fixed what I assume to be a typo in a recent ANI close; it was a "content dispute", not a "consent dispute". power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Even Omar nodded. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Wehwalt, I wanted to check if you would have time to provide feedback for an FLC. Whenever you have the time though. It has undergone a copy-edit for the lead, and comments for format and structure from a reviewer. I would appreciate feedback from you as well. Cheers! --Pseud 14 (talk) 13:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Carolwood Pacific Railroad FAC
When you have a moment, I would like to see your input on the FAC page for the Carolwood Pacific Railroad here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Carolwood Pacific Railroad/archive1. Per Sarastro, he wants someone to confirm whether the article is well-written, comprehensive, well-researched, and neutral. Once that's done, it will be ready for promotion. Jackdude101 talk cont 22:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm traveling at present and would prefer not to undertake too many reviews at the same time. Could you get someone else on this one? Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Wehwalt. I have nominated my fifth FAC and second collaboration with Kailash29792. You peer reviewed this article back in March last year. Do let me know if you wish to leave comments at the FAC by pinging me. Thanks. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 09:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you ...
 |
... for improving article quality in Febuary 2018! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
... and for today's Indian Head cent, "a coin that was was in Americans' pockets for most of a century, counting the time that it circulated after they stopped making them. Widely disregarded at the time as too common, it is today both admired and widely collected." - precious ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for those.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
William Branham
Hello! I have been working on an article lately I was considering nominating for FA: William Branham. I have not wrote an FA quality article in a few years and wanted to get your opinion before I nominate it. I am afraid I might be a bit rusty. :) If you are too busy to look, that is ok. Thanks! —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 20:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, welcome back. I'll likely get to it, I'm just not accepting anything with deadlines.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:16, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- No deadline, and no hurry. :) I still am trying to round up some more pictures for it at this point. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 21:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Point du Sable
When you have a chance, would you look in on again on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jean Baptiste Point du Sable/archive2. No rush. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:44, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
If you are here because you've asked me for a review ...
Please consider reviewing this peer review, open for three weeks and yet to attract a comment. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
FAC reviewing barnstar
|
|
The Reviewer Barnstar | |
| FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the five FAC reviews and one source review you did during February. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:04, 4 March 2018 (UTC) |
Harry Truman TFA/nomination
I hope I satisfy your request for a draft combining the two FA-class articles in an upcoming TFA. Here is a blurb about The Two Trumans. FunksBrother (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, but I'm just not convinced it's worth one of the rare opportunities we have to run a president, especially with 75th anniversaries of his presidency coming up. Still, I'll leave it up to the coordinator in charge of running April.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Importuning
Taking the cap round for contributions, I have André Messager up for peer review. He's rather a neglected figure now, but was the last great composer of opéra-comique and opérette, and rather close to my heart in a quiet sort of way. If you are moved to look in and give me your comments it will be esteemed a favour. Tim riley talk 17:40, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
- I have heard the name but I'm not terribly familiar with the figure. I shall not long neglect him though.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Billy Martin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oakland Oaks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Carousel (musical) scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the [[Carousel (musical)]] article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 13, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 13, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. I couldn't get checklinks to work today, but I assume you'll check the article over anyway. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Migration
Fair point regarding migration and the West Indies, you're correct. Ohgoshhi (talk) 03:09, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Choice of words is a bit subjective, but really, they were just moving from one British-administered area to another. Thank you for caring enough about the article to edit it, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Louisiana Purchase Exposition dollar scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Louisiana Purchase Exposition dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 30, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 30, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 26
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Simon Hatley, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Coleridge and Pinnace (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
FAC
Bonjour de Paris (wishful thinking: it's de Islington, truth to tell, and where are you located today?). M. André Messager is now at FAC, and if you are minded to look in and comment it will be esteemed a favour. Tim riley talk 15:22, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- Adrift off the coast of Africa. I shall look in on M. Messager.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- Calm Sea and Preposterous Voyage, I hope. I look forward to some traveller's tales from you next time we meet. Meanwhile, thank you very much for your support at FAC and your earlier judicious touches on the the tiller. Bon voyage! Tim riley talk 18:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- Well, as to the preposterous side, if it were played upon the stage, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. But thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes - Issue 27
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018
- #1Lib1Ref
- New collections
- Alexander Street (expansion)
- Cambridge University Press (expansion)
- User Group
- Global branches update
- Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
- Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
- Bytes in brief
Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Carousel
Do you think the Drama League Awards belong there? I would limit the B'way awards to Drama Desk and Tony, as IBDB does. Your call. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:03, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- I would defer to you on this one.—Wehwalt (talk) 12:35, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- Removed. I imagine that the person who added it will challenge. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Ford Piquette Avenue Plant FAC
I created an FAC nomination for the Ford Piquette Avenue Plant article here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ford Piquette Avenue Plant/archive1. Basically, it's not just some random car factory; it's the oldest one open to the public, first to make over 100 cars in one day, possibly the first where cars were made using moving assembly line concepts, and the one where the Ford Model T was created and first made. Any comments you would be willing to provide on the review page will be much appreciated. The subject of car factories is kind of rare as far as seeking FA status is concerned, so by participating in this review you would be part of Wikipedia history, pending its promotion. Jackdude101 talk cont 23:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- I'll get to it.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:53, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Standing Liberty quarter scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that Standing Liberty quarter has been scheduled as today's featured article for 1 May 2018. Please check that the article needs no polishing or corrections. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 1, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:39, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello! If you are interested in delving back further into the origins of American musical theatre, you may wish to look over a substantial recent edit from an IP to The Black Crook that I reverted because it seems suspicious to me. Some of the material is referenced to general books about musical theatre, but much of it seems to be copied out of something, and overall, I doubt its balance and credibility. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- Curious, I took a look, and support that the changes look unbalanced and lack refs. - "from Goethe's Faust", - if you say so, it should link to a play (not to the character), which might be Faust I (more likely) or Faust II. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- I will look it over, but real life is keeping me a bit busy right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
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.Jphotosynthesis (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Jphotosynthesis (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Jphotosynthesis
Hello, Wehwalt. I have nominated my sixth FAC and my first one for a Hindi film. Do let me know if you wish to leave comments at the FAC by pinging me. Thanks. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 07:46, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- I will, hopefully, but as I have to do the TFAs for June this week and I'm behind on article work, it may be a little time.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:00, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- No problem. Just make it before the third week of June as I'm planning to list the FAC as a part of the ongoing WikiCup challenge. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:41, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- No problem. Just make it before the third week of June as I'm planning to list the FAC as a part of the ongoing WikiCup challenge.
Cruttwell FAC
I've done my best to update and improve this article, but would appreciate it if you or someone would give it a read-through, before confirming it as a TFA next month. Brianboulton (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- PS – are you requiring a blurb from me?
- I will give it a read over myself. No. We will supply the blurb although I’d appreciate it if you could look it over before it runs. Hope you’re doing well.—-Wehwalt (talk) 13:33, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 13
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Billy Martin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Keister (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 20
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Billy Martin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fran Healy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Billy Martin
Definitely did not mean to revert your edits there. Misclick on my watchlist. Carry on. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- I didn't notice. Thanks for letting me know.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
FAC
Would you have time to look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56/archive1? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
- I will look it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Withdrawing a FAC
Hi! I recently nominated Fawad Khan for FAC but now I want to have it peer reviewed. Can you please tell me how to withdraw a FAC.
- Consider leaving a note on WT:FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:34, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Hudson Sesquicentennial half dollar
Wow, congrats! I love your numismatics articles. I wonder if California Pacific International Exposition half dollar or Missouri Centennial half dollar is next up? :p Keep up the fantastic work. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, I expect they'll be run before too long. Most likely one of them next after Martin. I need to get some more done.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:02, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Carousel edit
What do you think of this? -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
- I agree with what you did.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
2017–18 Bergen County eruv controversy scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the 2017–18 Bergen County eruv controversy article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 24, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 22, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks!
Could you also check the first three images? Although the thumbs are OK, click-through gives pics with incorrect orientations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Jimfbleak, not sure what you mean. They look OK and there's been no changes since the image check at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:18, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- That's weird, they all look fine to me today too, but yesterday two were showing rotated 90, and one was upside down. Must have been a temporary glitch somewhere, sorry for the false alarm Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 28
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018
- #1Bib1Ref
- New partners
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
- Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
- Bytes in brief
Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
I see you have been working hard on this article, so kudos for that. However, you appear to be relying very heavily on several unpublished sources and, even though you are a long time editor here, you may not be aware they are not considered reliable for wiki article purposes. That prose may have to be deleted or provided with published sources instead, please see WP:SOURCE. You may also not be are aware of two templates that can be added to the article header while working on it so you don't have to make so many small saves, al the time wondering if another editor might save an edit while you are active and make you start over: {{in use}} and {{under construction}}. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 09:30, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- What I mean by unpublished is that is how they were termed by the Congressional committee. It doesn't mean it's not a public document, and it is available online. Probably it was released to the press quickly. An official transcript of a congressional hearing is an appropriate source, I've used similar on my coin articles. Possibly I should reconsider how I phrase that. As for the templates, this is a low-traffic article and so far few edit conflicts. Thank you for your very sound advice--Wehwalt (talk) 10:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- I looked at WP:PUBLISHED and I think we're good. The standard seems to be accessiblity and these documents are available to anyone who cares to subscribe to Congressional ProQuest or who has it through their university or library. "Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?"--Wehwalt (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sounds fine though as you say maybe the term unpublished will throw others too. I don't have access so can't comment further. Indeed the traffic is not high. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Ww2censor, if you send me an email, I can send you a copy of them as attachment. It's all part of one PDF file.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think that is necessary but thanks for the offer. ww2censor (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Ww2censor, if you send me an email, I can send you a copy of them as attachment. It's all part of one PDF file.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sounds fine though as you say maybe the term unpublished will throw others too. I don't have access so can't comment further. Indeed the traffic is not high. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Spiro TFA
I know it's early, but seeing how far ahead TFA gets scheduled I thought I'd mention this now. Can you select a suitable date, early November, for Spiro's front page appearance? Possible double-header with Tricky Dick? Mid-term date might be good – the sight of their unwelcoming faces might just swing the result. Brianboulton (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Well, November is the 50th anniversary of their election. The 5th it was. Certainly a double header.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Can I leave it with you then? Brianboulton (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Certainly.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:26, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Can I leave it with you then? Brianboulton (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Well, November is the 50th anniversary of their election. The 5th it was. Certainly a double header.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Warren G. Harding - your (partial) reversion makes sense
I reverted some changes with an edit summary of "apparent vandal", you (sort of lol) changed my reversion (and your change makes complete sense), but I wanted to mention....my main concern was that the editor changed the content twice, 1st time was reverted by another editor and then by me, and in both cases this unknown editor without explanation was deleting the sourced cause of death from the infobox. That's all... Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
- Shearonink, I wonder if the IP thinks that we don't actually know for sure the cause of death? It was cerebral hemmorage at the time, it's the later doctors that have said it must have been a heart attack.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Monroe Doctrine Centennial half dollar scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Monroe Doctrine Centennial half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 2, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 2, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for that article with a back story: "he title of the article sounds like a dull historical event, but the Monroe Doctrine Centennial half dollar is anything but. It was part of a scheme by Hollywood in the early 1920s, when there were such scandals as the accusations against Fatty Arbuckle, to get good publicity by having a historical fair and issuing a coin for it. The expo was not noticeably successful, but as one source points out, if it was in anyway responsible for Hollywood's later success, then it and the coin were very successful indeed."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for those nice words.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:28, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Please do not edit others comments
You deleted my comment on Trump's advice to sue the EU. Please desist from editing any comment from other editors as per WP:TPO. Personal attacks there mean against other editors. Dmcq (talk) 18:20, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think we should be insulting anyone.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Flower Drum Song
Is this change OK? If not, please revert: -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:56, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Alexandria
Reasonable query on your part; voluntarily reverted. Cheers. Bigturtle (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Blurbs
Ealdgyth would like to run James B. Longacre and Huguenot-Walloon half dollar in August ... if you'd like to do the blurbs, that would be great. - Dank (push to talk) 21:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, fine, what are we at? 1000 characters?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm guessing they have suitable images, so anything from 975 to 1050 is ideal. - Dank (push to talk) 22:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
James B. Longacre for TFA...
This is to let you know that I've scheduled James B. Longacre to appear on the main page as today's featured article on August 11, 2018. If you need to make tweaks to the blurb, it is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 11, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Sovereign Coin
@Wehwalt: Hi, I updated the citation to refer back to an original publication as the blog post did not include any references (not sure why I left the ref tag broken mustn't have been wearing my glasses). Hope the formatting is OK this time happy for you to change or if you find it problematic just delete the content it refers to, Cheers. Eothan (talk) 05:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
- Eothan, I don't see any way to access the text. If the lay reader can't access the text without joining the library, then I'd rather have the old source.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
@Wehwalt: sure no problem Eothan (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Eothan can you send me it as an email attachment? I'm curious to see what they say. I saw useful information in another 19th century Australian publication. If so, please let me know and I will send you an email, and you can reply with the attachment.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:42, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Huguenot-Walloon half dollar as TFA
This is to let you know that I've scheduled Huguenot-Walloon half dollar to appear on the main page as today's featured article on August 5, 2018. If you need to make tweaks to the blurb, it is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 5, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:04, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- Congratulations on the H-W article. Bigturtle (talk) 16:47, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
What do you think of the new changes? It seems a bit much to me.... -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 29
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018
- New partners
- Economic & Political Weekly–10 accounts
- Wikimania
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
- Global branches update
- Bytes in brief
Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Can you add Murders of Margaret and Seana Tapp to your 'to-do' list? It needs both an infobox and pictures of Margaret and Seana. Please? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 23:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I will add an infobox to it. I will look for images, but my Australian sources are not that great, and I suspect a photograph of that era may well be copywriter.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
TFA queue
I posted at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests#Newly-promoted article asking if it was possible to change the queue for TFA (ie swap a new FA into an already-filled future slot, with the support of the person who championed the FA being usurped). I pinged you but I may have stuffed that up so you may not have seen it. I would appreciate knowing if my request is even permitted; if it is permitted, is it in the right place and following suitable procedures; and if possible some rough time-frame for how long consideration of my request might take.-gadfium 22:48, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Apollo 15, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Webb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Statue of Liberty
Giving a “building” to another country; an amazing event. I’d like to know more about how it developed, and I suspect it’s in books, but not on Wiki.
Why did so many Frenchmen think it was a good idea? And, without diminishing their generosity... what was in it for them? Why would they think it (giving a giant costly statue to another country) would inspire or rally the French?
What was the effect in France? Especially in the 1880-1914 period?
Was (recreation of) the Olympic Games, part of the thinking (zeitgeist). A defence against German unification?
I’m still pondering. I couldn’t decide what to ask for on the Talk page, so I’ve decided to clutter up yours instead. Any comments? MBG02 (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Those are all excellent questions, to which I wish I had better answers. The Statue was not really a French government project but was pushed by a relatively small number of people. It's been eight or nine years since I wrote the article, and I'm a little fuzzy on what the sources said, so you might do well to ask on talk. I had never thought about the Olympics question. I'll see if I can dig up some of my sources.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:27, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Leon Czolgosz Birthplace
I noticed that you reverted my recent edits to the Assassination of William McKinley article regarding the birthplace of assassin Leon Czolgosz. According to the Wikipedia article on him, he was born in Alpena, Michigan, and based upon your revert of my edits, I'm wondering if there are conflicting sources regarding his birthplace, but I will not restore my edits to the Assassination of William McKinley without a reliable source which explicitly states his correct birthplace.--TommyBoy (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- If a RS says it I am happy to look into it further but I would not have said Detroit unless the cited source said so.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Nicknames
This revert by you with an edit summary saying, "rv we do not use nicknames", caught my eye. I have not unreverted, but please take a look at MOS:NICKNAME. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:04, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but in that case we should not. TR despised the nickname "Teddy", so it was far from universally used, and we should be formal there.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:18, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Wehwalt, are we sure about this? Twice? --MarchOrDie (talk) 13:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- You changed the meaning at least twice, and some nuance was lost. I am happy to discuss, but can it wait for after TFA day?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Where do you say I changed the meaning? And how many reverts have you made in the past 24 hours? --MarchOrDie (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- There is an exception to 3RR for the principal editors of the TFA while on the main page. I suggest we consolidate this discussion at the article talk page.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Where do you say I changed the meaning? And how many reverts have you made in the past 24 hours? --MarchOrDie (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- You changed the meaning at least twice, and some nuance was lost. I am happy to discuss, but can it wait for after TFA day?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Life insurance
"insurance covers", were motivated by the fact the astronauts could not have life insurance.
What is left unsaid here is how dangerous life was for Apollo astronauts. Seven astronauts (the Mercury Seven) were selected in 1959. One (Gus Grissom) died in the Apollo fire in 1967. Nine more astronauts (the Next Nine) were selected in 1962; Ed White died in the Apollo fire in 1967 and Elliott See was killed in a plane crash in 1966. Fourteen more were selected in 1963; Roger Chaffee was killed in the fire and Theodore Freeman, Charles Bassett and Clifton Williams in plane crashes. Of thirty astronauts, there were seven deaths - 23 per cent - in less than ten years. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:55, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- That is true. I will say something. I recently added that quote box with the transcription. Do you think I handle it appropriately?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, that is fine. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've been wanting to get this to FAC for weeks but that coin has been slow to move. Hopefully it will get a source review soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:49, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, that is fine. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Missouri Centennial half dollar
Congrats on the FA -- you are amazing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:57, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged. Still more work to do on commemoratives. Thanks for your help and support throughout.--Wehwalt (talk)`
- My contributions are minimal, but I certainly enjoy following along. I suspect California Pacific International Exposition half dollar may be your next pet project? :p Keep up the fantastic work. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:00, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm going to let that one cool for a bit given how slow this one went. I have the materials for the 1922 Grant issue and even some images, but need to find time to do it.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
National Front FAC
Hello Wehwalt and hoping that you are well. As you seemed to take an interest in the Referendum Party article when I was pushing it though FAC this time last year (and then the John Tyndall (politician) article last November), I was wondering if you might be interested in taking a look at another UK politics-themed FAC I currently have open, that for the National Front (UK). The FAC itself (here) isn't getting much attention, and if you did have the time and/or inclination to take a look then it would be appreciated, although there is of course no pressure on you to do so. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- If I can find the time and inclination, I will do it. I enjoy your articles and they are of importance, so please do not take it as a slight if I cannot get there.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, Wehwalt. If you do manage to find the time, it would be appreciated. And of course, if you ever need me to return the favour, do not hesitate to ask. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- If I can find the time and inclination, I will do it. I enjoy your articles and they are of importance, so please do not take it as a slight if I cannot get there.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
History of the British penny (1714–1901) scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the History of the British penny (1714–1901) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 11, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 11, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Just as a courtesy notification that I've made a slight amendment to this. IMO it's not reasonable to claim "known to modern Britons". Britain isn't like the US where old currency remains legal tender; aside from the shilling and florin, which were the same size as their decimal equivalents and consequently hung on a bit longer, all of the Old Money was taken out of circulation in the early 1970s. Aside from a few Faragistas I doubt many Brits under the age of 40 are even aware that it even existed, let alone could be described as familiar with the design of the 1d coin—it would be akin to claiming that the people of present-day Dubai are familiar with the design of the Gulf rupee. ‑ Iridescent 18:29, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Something about Apollo 15 postage stamp incident
- I looked at this article again, and I have large concerns about the quality of the prose. This may hinder the article's chances for FA status. My stance right now is a Very Weak Oppose. Send in to WP:GOCE, somebody will copy edit it. I would myself, but I have a long article on my hands. All else looks great, neat work! Clikity (talk) 18:01, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for that. I have listed it there. Of course, your comments are always welcome at any state of the proceedings.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Apollo 15 postage stamp incident
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Apollo 15 postage stamp incident 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 Balon Greyjoy -- Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Hey
- Nice work with you so far on the postal cover incident. Do you have a long term project that I can help you with? Clikity (talk) 12:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
- The various commemorative coins is my long term project. Eventually, I hope to get all the pre-1954 US commemoratives to FA and make it a featured topic. California Pacific International Exposition half dollar will probably be next to FAC. Grateful for any help, but I'm hoping for comments on the rest of the Apollo 15 covers incident. Despite all the hoorah, no one has commented on anything beyond the lede, and that's where I'm really hoping for comments, due to all the divergent tales told by NASA, the astronauts and the media. There are also BLP issues I worry about; two of the Apollo 15 astronauts are still with us, and at least in Colonel Worden's case, he's very active and has an online presence. So I'm trying to be very careful. I'm grateful for your help to date, especially since you got pitched into a tiff not of your making.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:51, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
FAC comments addressed
You've probably forgotten that you commented, but I've finally had time to respond at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Petropavlovsk-class battleship/archive1. I'd also appreciate it if you could cast your eye over another reviewers comments on the grammar used in the article and offer your thoughts.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Olympic coins
As 'the coin guy', do you think Summer Olympic Coins (2000–present) is worth (a) saving, or (b) deleting? In its present not-updated-for-a-decade-other-than-by-bots state it's actually less useful than a blank page, since someone with an interest Googling the topic will end up wasting their time here rather than finding a different site that doesn't talk about the forthcoming 2008 Games—however, looking at the pageview count it appears that I'm the first person to read it for a year who isn't a search engine bot, so I doubt there's the interest to justify spending time trying to rescue it. There is a potentially interesting topic here—the 2012 games are still distorting the British coin collecting market years after the event, and I assume the same is true elsewhere—but this article certainly isn't it. ‑ Iridescent 22:49, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
- I realize someone put time and effort into it, but I just think this is never likely to be the go to reference on this because we have no images. So I don't really think it's worth the keeping. Maybe some of the text could be saved in a merger, but I'm not sure where.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Apollo 15 postage stamp incident
The article Apollo 15 postage stamp incident you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Apollo 15 postage stamp incident for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Balon Greyjoy -- Balon Greyjoy (talk) 11:02, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello Wehwalt, been a while. How are things going on with your good self? BTW, Kailash29792 has listed this article about a 1965 cult classic film in Tamil cinema for peer reviewing with the intention of preparing it for FAC and subsequently taking it to FA. As always, your constructive comments would be deeply appreciated. Also do have a look at his other FAC. Thank you. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:17, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Time permitting.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
John Adams FAC
Hello. As you may remember, you were involved in the FA review process for John Adams back in July before it ultimately failed after 5 days. You managed to get a little bit of reviewing in before this happened but not very much. After significant work on the article (which mainly involved copyediting and shortening), I renominated it late last month. If you wish, you're welcome to take another look at it and see if there are any comments you'd like to make. If not, no problem. Thanks, Display name 99 (talk) 02:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
- OK, I will look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Brazen soliciting
Greetings, dear Sir! If you have time and inclination I'd be exceedingly glad of your thoughts on Hector Berlioz's article, which I now have up for peer review with FAC in mind. Perfectly understand if you are not available, of course, but I do hope you will be able to look in, Tim riley talk 21:45, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, certainly.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Apollo 15 postage stamp incident
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Apollo 15 postage stamp incident has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged for your help.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Apollo 15 postal covers incident
The article Apollo 15 postal covers incident 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:Apollo 15 postal covers incident for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Balon Greyjoy -- Balon Greyjoy (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes, Issue 30
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018
- Library Card translation
- Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
- Global branches update
- Bytes in brief
French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
TFA...
Spiro Agnew, TFA for 5 November 2018. You know the drill... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- I've done a read-through, but some of the text is a bit beyond me at present so I'd be obliged if you'd take another look. Brianboulton (talk) 10:57, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
- I shall.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Because you write too much...
Rhode Island Tercentenary half dollar TFA on 18 November 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- "Because we are too menny".--Wehwalt (talk) 20:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
GAN Article on hold
Hey, just wanted to post that I have put the review for Apollo 15 postal covers incident on hold for any additional edits. Please let me know if you have any questions or feedback. On a side note, how were the autobiographies by Irwin, Scott, and Worden? I'm currently on a shuttle-era astronaut biography kick, but would you especially recommend any of those books? Balon Greyjoy (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Balon Greyjoy Sorry, I didn't notice this comment. I didn't think much of Irwin's, because you can see the light of his new faith popping over the horizon all the time. Worden's seemed good, but I felt he was protesting a bit too much on the stamp issue. As for Scott's co-bio with Leonov, I would have preferred more Scott and less Leonov. Thanks again for all your help.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
- Good to know. Not surprised about Irwin's, as that is how Amazon described it. It's too bad about Scott's bio; I think Leonov is a very interesting guy and I'm curious why they didn't just release two independent books (or Leonov could've made a book with Stafford). I think I may postpone reading those, my next few Apollo-era books are Rocket Men and Apollo 8. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Soliciting II—The Sequel
Hector Berlioz is now at FAC, and I beg leave to ping you as adumbrated at PR. Tim riley talk 14:08, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Agnew TFA
Thanks for your monitoring of the article on its main page day - no great harm done by assorted vandals and others, I think. 90,000 viewings is a pretty fair haul for the day. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- That is good. Yes, it was quieter than I feared. Hope you're doing well.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Pod
Hi Wehwalt, I hope you're doing really well. All's well here. I was wondering whether you might possibly have time to contribute to the PR of the article I've been working on: Wikipedia:Peer review/Pod (The Breeders album)/archive1. If you don't have time—or interest—no worries! Take care, Moisejp (talk) 07:17, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
- I will get there when I can, I'm traveling at present.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
FAC review
Hi Wehwalt , Did you mean to do this? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- No idea how that happened. Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks - I guessed it was in error! I hope all is well with you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 17:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
W.H. Harrison Campaign article
Hey Wehwalt. I'd like to thank you for the work you did on the William Henry Harrison campaign article. I was the one who originally created it, taking some of the information from other articles to start it off. There were a couple of other articles that I made as well, like the Jackson campaign in 1828. I haven't looked at the page in quite some time, but I got an alert about the peer-review you requested from last year. I don't sign in much on this account these days and so I just saw the article again for the first time. Anyway, it seems like you did quite a bit of research, and I commend you for the work you put in there. Themane2 (talk) 06:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. And thank you for a fine foundation on which I built.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:46, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Some handy little guides
- "GPO Style Manual" (PDF). - See pp 37-38
I've bookmarked these for my own use. I actually once had to find a US military manual of style, because there was a whole edit war going on about titles, dates, ranks, etc. Sometimes the US Government manuals come in handy. God bless the bureaucracy. — Maile (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
How about...
|
Ahh... a sit in GW's bathtub at the hot springs in Berkeley Springs, WV |
| to rest up from all your travels. (And thanks for all your reviewing work, muchly appreciated.) Shearonink (talk) 01:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC) |
- Thanks. Been to Berkeley Springs, I used to fill up water jugs if I was passing nearby ...--Wehwalt (talk) 01:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
TFA (Tillman)
I know it's from 2015 but why? And after the past two years you don't think it's at least inappropriate, if not outright dangerous? Heather's death wasn't enough? What if it instigates something akin to Kristallnacht? The article so prominent on the front page wouldn't do it under normal circumstances, but a so-called president is urging murder, so now do you feel like an accomplice? I know you seemed to think it's all for the encyclopedia, but is that worth lives? You personally won't be directly responsible, but having such a prominent site feature one of 'their' heroes, what do you think would go through a supremacist's mind? You don't think this is historic because the subject's dead, right? So what if upon seeing it a cult member decides to gratify the fascist tendency and go on a killing spree? Is one star (how ironic considering the symbols Nazis used...) at the top of your page worth what, one, five or ten lives?
You may be writing about politics generally, but considering there are probably many others that aren't featured yet why focus on such? And why let the process grind on after you know the outcome of 2016 (well, the campaign was on in 15, you didn't write it in response?) - all it took for one person with a gun to kill eleven people is the "there might be middle easterns" (in south america, somehow) after which he concluded that it must be Jews and that is that. Now that was one of thousands of lies, this article may be factual but for them it is like a shrine they need to worship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.158.69.142 (talk) 15:11, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting point. I thought I presented Tillman fairly negatively, especially the ending. As far as I know, Tillman himself is not the subject of supremecist adulation. It is certainly something to keep in mind. Thank you for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- They adore most of the segregationist, Confederate historical figures. They kill people alive today over statues of people from centuries ago, and this one is a century old, there might be people alive who were children back then. And it's not whether it's positive, neutral, or negative... it's how prominent it is, like on a pedestal, that I'm sure they've already noticed by now making them feel vindicated in their beliefs. 51.158.69.142 (talk) 15:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Several members of the Nazi party, slaveholders, criminals and others of unsavory background have run TFA. I see you have posted at WT:TFA, perhaps that is a better place to continue this discussion. Some guidance about what you would have us do would be helpful.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:47, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Well, in my, and what seemed to be Karl Popper's opinion, giving more oxygen to extremism in general isn't productive to a rational society. This is an encyclopedia, but it can still impact the outside world, and being located in the biggest country where extremism currently flourishes can only bode negatively, I think. Not that it's the worst offender when social media let lies spread like wildfire and only in exceptional circumstances do they suspend extremist accounts (in its most iconic response it wouldn't suspend a president's account even if they threaten nuclear war, despite its policy against violence applying to everyone else, and of course nuclear annihilation wouldn't exactly leave them a world to extract ad revenue from).
- So, it's the paradox of tolerance... sure, Wikipedia wouldn't censor a TFA about some childish insult that somehow someone wrote extensively about, but in its tolerance of absolutely anything doesn't it risk aggravating societal factors that enable what could be, ultimately, detrimental to the survival of the site itself? If e.g. there was a hypothetical civil war which some on the fringes already try to incite, unless the servers are flexible with its relocation, not to mention staff etc. This is besides lower-level harm potentially done to society outside of the site, and in the end to its editors too. Many sites do much worse, only to be suspended from prominent hosting after a massacre or such, but this site is much more prominent than most of them, so wouldn't it be rational, for its own sake too, to have some sort of regulation on the front page especially? 51.158.69.142 (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- I do understand your point, very well. It will be interesting to see what the community thinks of the matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
It's the only way to stop the political vandalism. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 03:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Seasonal greetings
|
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | |
| Seasonal greetings for 2018, and best wishes for 2019 to all who continue to fight for good practice and higher standards in building this great encyclopedia. Brianboulton (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
- Thank you, and a wonderful 2019 to you too, along with the greetings of the season.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Seasons
|
Gothic Seasons Greetings | 
|
| Wishing you all the best for x-mass. Thanks for all the help this year. Ceoil (talk) 19:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas!
| A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! | .jpg)
|
|
|
TFA
Thank you for Casey Stengel, "one of the great managers in baseball history, and one of its great characters"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- You are welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 |
- Thank you for improving article quality in March! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, and to you. Article quality always needs improvement.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:08, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- Good job on the March TFAs. Very little squawking at WP:ERRORS. - Dank (push to talk) 23:44, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, somewhat gratified and relieved.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in April, changed the image ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:14, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in June (May below), - new image, accepting that sometimes there are thistles, but also beautiful! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:20, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in July, - take a mountain lake for the thistles --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in August --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in September! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
- ... and in September! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, somewhat gratified and relieved.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- Good job on the March TFAs. Very little squawking at WP:ERRORS. - Dank (push to talk) 23:44, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, and all who helped, for Carousel, which "may be the most beautiful musical ever written; we will not disagree with Time magazine, naming it the best of the century. We're talking about a musical which had such songs in it as "If I Loved You", "June is Bustin' Out All Over", and the R&H song which has perhaps had the greatest single impact, "You'll Never Walk Alone". Enjoy. Curtain up."! - Were you one of more than 17k who looked yesterday at my hook about a peace day? On the same page as Imogen Holst. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Today, thank you for Louisiana Purchase Exposition dollar, "the first US gold commemorative coins, allowing us to meet one of the more interesting characters in the history of numismatics, coin collector, dealer, and ruthless promoter Farran Zerbe. Today, he's mostly remembered for good, with a major numismatics award named for him, but he was a very controversial figure in his time."!
- You are welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Next day: Standing Liberty quarter, in "a article series on the Great Redesign of US coinage from 1907 to 1921. As usual, this features the usual officials and artists butting heads, one less than untimely death, and the usual insanities behind the scenes at the United States Mint." For me, you stand for liberty ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged, thank you. Odd that it is a back to back.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for more article work in May! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- ... crowned by a new FA ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. Always glad when it passes.--02:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged, thank you. Odd that it is a back to back.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for today's Neville Chamberlain, "a scrupulously fair look at a man whose reputation, in the public view, lies in rubble"! - For today's music, see my talk, trumpets and all ;) - a fair look at a person with damaged reputation deserves it! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the Waterloo Medal (Pistrucci), "the famous Waterloo medal, that cost the British Government thousands of pounds, and at the end of the day, could not be struck in its original form. And if it had, it would have been useless, since most of the recipients were dead and it would have been politically imprudent to bring up Waterloo while wooing the French ..."! - Thank goodness the Rheingau Musik Festival gave its prize to Enoch zu Guttenberg in 2017. Never magaged to hear one of his concerts, - Verdi's Requiem was scheduled in a few days. - That's the fourth "recent death" in a few weeks, sadly. Thank you for your review of the FAC that failed, - one of the minor problems. I may ping you in a while to a PR. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Shame about that. Thank you. I guess "Don't mention the war" was true even in 1849!--Wehwalt (talk) 08:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for 2017–18 Bergen County eruv controversy, more shame. - I had a good DYK yesterday, but couldn't interest as many as hoped in Hilmar Hoffmann and the Museumsufer, including what we had to describe precisely as the "first independent Jewish museum in postwar Germany". He proclaimed "culture for all", saying it's a work in progress, - would be a good motto for WP, - "anybody can edit" is just so untrue. - Can you please keep an eye on BWV 134a, supposed to be my next FAC, but with a little edit war. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, didnt notice that. Thank you. I'll take a look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nothing happened in 2 weeks, after that shock on a Sunday. - Well, much else: Thank you for todays Huguenot-Walloon half dollar, "a somewhat controversial commemorative coin, in its time. Though it would probably be so today, I suppose. Also notable for the appearance of one of Congress's most spectacularly named members, Wells Goodykoontz. He should have kept at it, imagine Senator Goodykoontz, Governor Goodykoontz, dare I say President Goodykoontz? But I digress."! - As a token of thanks for what you did about politicians and remembering them, take a look at a memorable performance remotely related. I even placed it in an article I didn't know existed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:38, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- How interesting. Thank you, and for the kind words. As it happens, I avoid involvement in articles on 21st century politics. Too much edit warring going on as it is, and by surprising people.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for today's coin, the Vermont Sesquicentennial half dollar, "a half dollar with a rather complicated history, both in Congress and in the preparation. There were repeated battles in Congress over this coin, not so much because of its subject, but over the idea of issuing commemorative coins at all, and things then got hairy in the Commission of Fine Arts ... well, it's a nice coin, even if the catamount on the back's a little hard to explain"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Much obliged. Thank you again.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for today's coin, the Vermont Sesquicentennial half dollar, "a half dollar with a rather complicated history, both in Congress and in the preparation. There were repeated battles in Congress over this coin, not so much because of its subject, but over the idea of issuing commemorative coins at all, and things then got hairy in the Commission of Fine Arts ... well, it's a nice coin, even if the catamount on the back's a little hard to explain"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, didnt notice that. Thank you. I'll take a look at it.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Good to see William McKinley once more! Today, we both have a serious-looking 19th-century man pictured, DYK Das goldene Kreuz? I didn't until it came up in a singer's bio. Sad story. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not familiar with the opera. I guess not all successes last forever. Thank you for the kind words.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- I wonder what would have happened if the Nazis had not banned it. Some other works from the period are still played, some not. This one was ranked with Carmen back then, but wasn't rediscovered after WWII, while Wehwalt is on stage often ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes. I have a cigarette card showing what happens to Wehwalt in the end. Or, as illustrated, in the midsection. It's a useful reminder.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- I wonder what would have happened if the Nazis had not banned it. Some other works from the period are still played, some not. This one was ranked with Carmen back then, but wasn't rediscovered after WWII, while Wehwalt is on stage often ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
- Planning to see the Ring next year, in Minden [5] where I heard Tristan und Isolde in 2012, and mentioned it first on this page, before writing about tenor and soprano and theatre. - Today, thank you for History of the British penny (1714–1901), "the crucial time when it evolved from a small silver coin rarely seen to a fairly large bronze coin which it stayed until decimalisation. So it either fell through holes in pockets, or caused them." - I have BWV 134a a FAC open, kept it short, and please tell me if too short: should more detail about his time in Köthen (then Cöthen) be added, for example? Should the strange new BWV numbering system, which caused me to use a different infobox, be explained instead of just appear? - I don't know how to react to this revert. - Again, thank you for the penny history, written in collaboration! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
- Would you have time to look at the FAC? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- I will, but I'm not sure when I can get to it.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- Would you have time to look at the FAC? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
... and in October! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for Spiro Agnew: "largely forgotten today, this is the tale of the corrupt former vice president Spiro T. Agnew, who served from 1969 to 1973. His rise was meteoric, from almost nowhere to VP in just two years, and he was an early standard-bearer for what became known as the New Right – the "John the Baptist" of the movement, some said. His rhetoric of the "forgotten Americans", his avid cultivation of the politics of resentment, and his attacks on the elitist liberal establishment, have a strong contemporary feel. A controversial and divisive figure, with Nixon in deep Watergate stews, only Agnew's venality stopped him from becoming the 38th president. What might have been" ...! - It's a pleasure to have Psalm 133, a little piece about br'erly love, on the same Main page. I miss him. - Thank you for your thoughtful FAC comments and support! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the Rhode Island Tercentenary half dollar, "with quite a bit of chicanery going on, though it doesn't get the bad press as much as others"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- You are welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thank for scheduling December. I just nominated a Baroque cantata for TFA on 1 January, please consider to avoid a similar FA in December unless there's a strong date connection. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- You did well, regarding pieces, but do we really have to have Ravel a few days after another composer, on his day of death, when in 2019 or better 2020 we could celebrate his March birthday? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- We could, but I'm not sure it's significant enough. And if you try for an anniversary all the time than the TFA/R requests, often for anniversaries, stand out less.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- I just wondered about 3 classical music in about a week, two of them composers of more or less the same period. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- Do you think it might cause a problem for your Bach article for January 1?--Wehwalt (talk) 02:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- Well, probblems would be saying to much, just that we don't have as many classical music articles (as mushrooms and hurricanes), so may want to spread them a little more, and even without Bach's work, two men from the same period in less than a week seems not perfect, - unless they had both an important anniversary, as we had in August with Debussy and Vaughan Willams. + my dislike for prominence of death. I am still in shock about the death of the one who made the best comment when br'er left, and received the first Precious in style (and for a while the only one, - I made that general only the next years). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, that is sad. As for your comments, I suppose so. I'll pull Ravel then and select something else.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:24, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- Well, probblems would be saying to much, just that we don't have as many classical music articles (as mushrooms and hurricanes), so may want to spread them a little more, and even without Bach's work, two men from the same period in less than a week seems not perfect, - unless they had both an important anniversary, as we had in August with Debussy and Vaughan Willams. + my dislike for prominence of death. I am still in shock about the death of the one who made the best comment when br'er left, and received the first Precious in style (and for a while the only one, - I made that general only the next years). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- We could, but I'm not sure it's significant enough. And if you try for an anniversary all the time than the TFA/R requests, often for anniversaries, stand out less.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- You are welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:30, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
... and in November! - in memory - 7 March would be a good day for Ravel. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Remember to remind me.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'll try to remember. I'd just put it on pending but it's by Tim whom I drove off Wikipedia, allegedly, - I just don't know how. I made a list of reverted infoboxes, back in 2013 and updated when I discovered more, - that's all I feel "guilty" of, - guess what, I don't feel guilty. I just have a bad memory, and will only remember the ones that don't hurt (hurt such as Pierre Boulez, whom I met and would like to honor), without such a list. Well, yes, I also clicked a thank you at times to a newcomers who was reverted. I will never feel guilty for thanking, but stopped it anyway as it was misunderstood. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for today's Kalākaua coinage, about "four of five of Hawaii's official coins, so liked for their beauty they were incorporated into spoons, cuff links and the like, but which caused a monetary crisis when issued to refill Hawaii's treasury"! - I have another great singer on the same page, who impressed me several times, most recently as the Arabic doctor in the Russian opera. Would like to see him as Marke. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for today's Benjamin Tillman, "a racist, bigot and killer, who was also a senator and governor of his state, and a non-trivial figure in American history. It's necessary that this article be done, it is a story that deserved to be told better, even if not a story we care much for." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- You are welcome, though it does not seem everyone welcomed it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
In what way...
...was the Talk:Eduard Dietl discussion "centralized". It was never advertised as such. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- It certainly has attracted a number of editors.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Many talk page discussions do, but that doesn;t mean that the consensus determined there is applicable to other, similar pages. It takes advertising to attract community-wide participation to make a discussion "centralized" and applicable elsewhere. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Advertise.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- It certainly has attracted a number of editors.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Happy Saturnalia
.jpg)
|
Happy Saturnalia | |
| Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:11, 18 December 2018 (UTC) |
Commons photo lab
Hi Wehwalt
I 'pinged' you there concerning the Apollo image request which has unfortunately languished there since August. I wasn't sure whether you were busy, away, didn't see the notification, or whether the issue was now unimportant since it had become 'stale', so I thought I'd drop a note here, just in case you did miss the 'ping', as suggested on your Commons user page. Cheers. -- Begoon 04:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, must have missed the ping. What you said looks fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. What I was mainly looking for there was some feedback. I'm sorry you had to wait this long for anyone to address this, and if you just want me/us to use our best judgement then that's perfectly fine, but as the requester I hoped you might guide us a little towards what you were hoping for as a result. Again, if all this is too late to be of much use (or relevance) to you now then that's completely understandable. I'd been trying to clear up some of the old requests that had been 'overlooked' for a long time, and some of the requesters did still find a use for the work, even after several months. -- Begoon 09:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, Begoon. Since I am fairly amateurish at images, I obtained the one I submitted by cropping a screenshot of the film. I hoped someone could do it more directly from the video, thus hopefully there would be better resolution and a better look.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:11, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you. What I was mainly looking for there was some feedback. I'm sorry you had to wait this long for anyone to address this, and if you just want me/us to use our best judgement then that's perfectly fine, but as the requester I hoped you might guide us a little towards what you were hoping for as a result. Again, if all this is too late to be of much use (or relevance) to you now then that's completely understandable. I'd been trying to clear up some of the old requests that had been 'overlooked' for a long time, and some of the requesters did still find a use for the work, even after several months. -- Begoon 09:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes, Issue 31
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018
- OAWiki
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
- Global branches update
- Bytes in brief
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I've just expanded the article's 'Artistry' section and wanted to ask for your help. I think in general it's okay but because it's a FA I want to make sure it's written to the highest standars. I'm a bit worried the style is a bit too informal. Especially the part when I write about 'Just the Two of Us' review since most of it is a translation of what was written in the review. Would you be able to look at it and copy edit it if there's such need? Best wishes. ArturSik (talk) 19:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'll take a look.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa,
Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia,
here's to
hoping your holiday time is wonderful
and that the New Year will be an improvement upon the old.
CHEERS!
Shearonink (talk) 19:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Xmas
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year
|
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! |
|
Hello Wehwalt, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
How are you?
Hello Wehwalt! How are you doing? Its been a long time. I hope everything is going well! I just had a small request, could you kindly grant me the Edit filter helper user right because I regularly find sock puppets and file reports at SPI, so this user right will be helpful to me in various ways when I'm working in these areas. Thanks! TheGeneralUser (talk) 02:15, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, TGU, long time no see, hope you are doing well too. I'm looking at the procedure and as I read it, an admin can only grant it through the noticeboard (except for when there is a self-request to remove edit filter manager). I'm not terribly familiar with these things. What do you think? Just trying to avoid someone causing you trouble and showing up on my page in lecturing mode. Which has happened before.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:11, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- I do understand your concern Wehwalt, but I'm not asking for the edit filter manager user right (which is used to edit filters) because I don't need that right now. I'm actually asking for the edit filter helper user right which allows non-admins to view the edit filters marked as private, but not to edit any filters. Also, as per the policy, Wikipedia:Edit_filter_helper#Granting_the_right, in the 3rd point it is mentioned there that any admin can grant this user-right to trusted users (as it says, By any administrator following a self-request from an editor in good standing to reduce the editor's access from edit-filter manager). So, your granting of this user-right will clearly be in accordance with the policy. Thanks. TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm reading that as saying that if someone gives up the edit filter manager userright, an admin can make him an edit filter helper. I have no problem doing it, I just want to make sure I'm doing the policy right. Is there a user with experience in these things we can ask?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, I can understand that. As for whom to ask, any other edit filter helper/manager or admin will do. TheGeneralUser (talk) 19:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- See my inquiry at User talk:Xaosflux. If you ask at the noticeboard, I will happily endorse you.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:14, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, no problem. I'll request it some other time. TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
2018 Year in Review
|
The Biography Barnstar | |
| For you work on Simon Hatley you are hereby awarded The Biography Barnstar. Congrats! TomStar81 (Talk) 19:23, 4 January 2019 (UTC) |
- Thank you, that was a fun one to do.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:32, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Congratulations from the Military History Project
|
Military history reviewers' award | |
| On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Milhist reviewing award (2 stripes) for October to December 2018 reviews. MilHistBot (talk) 01:06, 8 January 2019 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
I was a little baffled where to put it, so I've put it in the "Culture and society" section on the FA page. If you think there's a better place, feel free to move it there. Sarastro (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
- I'll look it over. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
FACR
I take your point, and won't revert, but I think it would be OK to leave it since it's a writing guide, not an FA guide. Unless Tony loses interest in that aspect of Wikipedia, which seems unlikely, there's no reason for him to remove it or make it less useful. If he should change the content in a way that makes it unsuitable as a link, we could remove the link then. But it's not a big deal -- I think most people who read it are directed there from a link in conversation, not because it's on that page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:45, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- We could copy it from userspace to somewhere else, or link to a past edition from before all this unpleasantness? I agree the skies will not fall either way, but either removes it from his control should he decide to delete it in a huff. Which, you must admit, is entirely possible, since he is encouraging people not to be a part of the FA process.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
- And there's an extent to which we don't want a person openly stating they are trying to sabotage our project yet we keep endorsing their writing guide. The two things, admittedly, should be separate but I'm not convinced they are.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:53, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Hawaii Sesquicentennial half dollar as TFA...
You know the drill - Dank'll have the blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 13, 2019. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Question About Cuba
Hello,
I saw your response to my question about Cuba on the Humanities Reference Desk and I was hoping to ask you another question about this same topic:
Do you think that there was ever a realistic chance of the U.S. acquiring and annexing Cuba--either in 1898 (in the absence of the Teller Amendment) or sometime earlier?
I'm curious about this because Cuba strikes me as a great location for additional living space for the U.S. I mean, Florida has done an excellent job serving as living space for Americans, but it would have been even better if the U.S. would have also had Cuba as living space. Plus, the Cubans themselves would have strongly benefited from this by having a much higher standard of living (in regards to their economic prosperity). Futurist110 (talk) 21:51, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Best regards,
Futurist110 (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- I think it unlikely after the Civil War. No one wanted a large island crammed with brown and black Catholics, who might eventually have to be given citizenship/statehood. Plus Cuban sugar would pose a threat to domestic producers. I think the argument over recognizing the revolutionary government was cover for a desire to dominate economically and politically. After all, you have to treat with a recognized government. You can't as easily run roughshod economically, grab off Gitmo, etc. Before the Civil War, maybe at some point when there was good feelings, but once intersectional tensions grew, the South lacked enough strength to get a treaty through the Senate. Florida was mostly empty before air conditioning, not true of Cuba.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- The US did acquire Puerto Rico and gave all of its inhabitants US citizenship in 1917 in spite of the fact that Puerto Rico had a lot of non-Whites, though. BTW, good point about Florida being more empty than Cuba was.
- Also, out of curiosity--do you think that the US would have still went to war with Spain in 1898 if it wasn't for the USS Maine sinking (as in, if this sinking would have never occurred)?
- In addition to this, had McKinley lived, what do you think that his last 3.5 years in office would have looked like?
- Finally, do you think that the US would have still proposed the Open Door Policy for China and been as involved in Chinese affairs (for instance, participating in the crushing of the Boxer Rebellion in 1900) if it wasn't for the US victory in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent US acquisition of the Philippines? Futurist110 (talk) 04:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Nixon -- legacy section
Hey, Wehwalt -- just a heads up that I plan to propose a significant expansion of the 'Legacy' section of the Richard Nixon article. Nixon's legacy remains so overarching and so vast today, the section could use a bit more juice. The content may even manifest itself into an entirely new article, depending on how much information I can pull together. Hope to work collaboratively with you in the process. Best, Happyme22 (talk) 06:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- I'll at least copyedit what you've written.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:03, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Patrick Henry's marred historical image
Hello. I saw that you undid my deletion of the clause which stated that Patrick Henry's image was marred by his opposition to the then proposed constitution. The clause seems to me a pure statement of opinion, since the definition in the dictionary is: to render less perfect, to blot. I was hopping to read more of your view in the matter, in order for us to reach a resolution on this issue. Tigre200 (talk) 22:47, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Can you start a discussion at Talk:Patrick Henry? Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:53, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Sure. If you want to delete this go ahead. Tigre200 (talk) 11:27, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
Rossini
Greetings! Smerus and I have Gioachino Rossini up for peer review, and if you are minded to look in it will be esteemed a favour. As ever, reciprocal PR-ing is at your service upon receipt of a prod in the ribs at any time. Tim riley talk 15:40, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Lockdown 08 and Turning Point 08 TFA
Thanks, but how did this even happen? I just discovered this and another I wrote were nominated and ended up on the main page. Any information on when this started?WillC 00:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I see notes were left on your talk page and you weren't active at the time. Did you not want them to be used?--Wehwalt (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've been working on education. Only so much interest in writing more than I have to. I'm not really signed in most of the time anyway. No it was fine. Just wasn't aware. I'm surprised by it. I didn't figure any wrestling ppvs would be used on the main page, let alone two by me from over 10 years ago from a smaller promotion. Just surprised overall and interested in how this came about since I was out of the loop.--WillC 05:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong with wrestling. And if an article is in good shape and not about a ship, bird or coin, and it hasn't run, it's probably going to be eyed by a TFA coordinator with thirty or so slots to fill every month ...--Wehwalt (talk) 06:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've been working on education. Only so much interest in writing more than I have to. I'm not really signed in most of the time anyway. No it was fine. Just wasn't aware. I'm surprised by it. I didn't figure any wrestling ppvs would be used on the main page, let alone two by me from over 10 years ago from a smaller promotion. Just surprised overall and interested in how this came about since I was out of the loop.--WillC 05:48, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Princess Alice
Hi Wehwalt, Many thanks for your comments on the Princess Alice PR: the matter has now moved on to FAC for further consideration. If you have time or inclination, I would be grateful to hear any further comments you may have. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 17:56, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Good Germans
Hello, glad to see you are still active, as both of the other admins who were involved have ceased editing. Way back on 25 December 2008 you were the admin who deleted the original version of the article Good Germans, prior to it being transwikied to Wiktionary. As you can see, there is a new, recently-created article, and I would like to incorporate content from the original article. I was hoping to find it at Wiktionary, but it was never posted there -- never made it past Transwiki:Good Germans. It just disappeared without a trace -- except for some links at Deletion review. From one of the comments, it looks like the best version of that article was probably this one. I'd be most appreciative if you would post that on my User page so I can put it to use in the new article. Thanks in advance! Anomalous+0 (talk) 05:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- PS - I'm a big fan of Jerry Voorhis. He deserved better. :) Anomalous+0 (talk) 06:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- I've done that, or rather the last revision before deletion on the grounds of transfer, as well as the last revision before it was made into a definition. It would have been nice if someone had notified me of the deletion review. My, that was a long time ago. I think well of Voorhis too.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your quick response. Hopefully the new article will stick around longer than the last one! Anomalous+0 (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- I've done that, or rather the last revision before deletion on the grounds of transfer, as well as the last revision before it was made into a definition. It would have been nice if someone had notified me of the deletion review. My, that was a long time ago. I think well of Voorhis too.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Scott edits
Do you have any issues with my edits like this? I try to spice up that section with any additional information I can, but if you dislike it I will refrain on the Scott article. Kees08 (Talk) 19:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Not at all. Glad for the help.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes, Issue 32
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019
- #1Lib1Ref
- New and expanded partners
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
- Global branches update
- Bytes in brief
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Walking Liberty half dollar scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Walking Liberty half dollar article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 9, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 9, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks!