User:Dr. Blofeld/October 2015

Lakes of Nova Scotia

I'm sorry to see that you are easing off on your phenomenal contributions to Wikipedia. However, I do have reservations about some of your earlier work such as Big Mushamush Lake and most of the similar artilces linked from List of lakes of Nova Scotia and plan to propose that they are deleted, or possibly redirected. They don't seem to meet WP:GEOLAND "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. This includes mountains, lakes, streams, islands, etc." and from your essay Encyclopedia problems I rather think you might now agree with my assessment. It makes me sad to trash such a huge amount of work, but few of these pages as far as I have checked, have developed beyond your initial stub. Rather, they are fodder for the occasional vandal, which then takes effort to revert, or some minor housekeeping tweek, again effort that could perhaps be better directed.

So, pending your comments, my plan is to send one of these stubs to AfD as a test case to gain consensus, with a comment that if deleted I plan to PROD all the others with similar content, unless someone can propose a simpler mechanism.

best regards, Derek Andrews (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Derek Andrews: Well, those lake stubs are not exactly a "huge amount of work" are they, little time and research went into writing them. You're right on them not being expanded though. most articles don't develop in the way we want, it's left to people like us to expand them. Wikipedia is really not a project with millions of people actively contributing, the bulk of the work is done by a small number. You're welcome to do what you want with them but, as I'm sure Aymatth2 would agree, a fair few number of lakes are going to be notable and might not be straightforward deletions. I think people would argue that Big Musha is notable. A better solution would be to try to improve the larger ones which have a fair amount of material and then delete/redirect the rest.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I certainly wasn't proposing deleting them all, just the articles that provide no more information than can be gleaned from the location data on the List page. From what I have seen so far, I think it is the larger part of them. I will check them out and if I can find no references to show any notability, I will PROD them. Derek Andrews (talk) 18:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

User:Derek Andrews, please don't prod them. Nobody is going to expand them and I'm not going to be drilled 600 prod template warnings OK? Draw up a list of the ones you want deleted and I'll db-author them. At a later date then somebody can recreate an article with proper information if they want to.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:13, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• Drive-by comment. @Derek Andrews: It would be much better (and less effort) to redirect the titles to List of lakes of Nova Scotia than to delete them.

A lot of these mid-sized lakes will have been described in some depth (no pun intended) by reliable sources. Typically a government agency will have studied the water, fish, plants and algae. Often there will be history of logging and mining. An editor with access to the printed sources may decide the lakes deserve articles. They could expand the redirects into real articles. But if they find the articles once existed but were deleted as "not notable", they may think there is a reason why they should not. It takes a lot of confidence to re-create a deleted article. Deletion is likely to hinder growth of the encyclopedia. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Agree with @Aymatth2: redirect, don't delete. If I had the time, I would work on adding a few sentences to all of those that have RS. #time --Rosiestep (talk) 14:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I could go along with that, though I personally don't have any problem reincarnating deleted articles if I have sufficient material, and rather feel that redirects are just waiting for someone to revert them to a stub without taking the effort to expand them in a meaningful way. Thanks Aymatth2 for your edit to Ellen Brown Lake, though my opinion is that data without interpretation is rather meaningless and indiscriminate. It does however make me think that in this instance a redirect to St. Mary's River (Nova Scotia), or an article about its watershed, would be more appropriate and might build into a more meaningful article? No doubt this would work for most of the others too. Derek Andrews (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Derek Andrews: The red warning notice on a deleted article is forbidding. A new editor may not realize "notable" is insider jargon. They could agree the lakes are nothing special and drop their plan for a series based on all those printed sources from their years in the Ministry. I added what little I could find online about Ellen Brown Lake. Location and water quality are highly relevant, not indiscriminate information. Area, depth, fauna and flora would also be nice. The source I added seems typical of the papers agencies and academics will have been issuing for years. I expect there is much more offline. This should be discussed on a project page. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ellen Brown Lake

The article Ellen Brown Lake has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Derek Andrews (talk) 18:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Derek Andrews Please don't start a prod campaign and drill me hundreds of generic prod messages. I don't do prods. Go through the category, find the lakes you think are not worthy of articles and create a list and take them to AFD.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Maple Lake (Pictou)

The article Maple Lake (Pictou) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability WP:GEOLAND

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Derek Andrews (talk) 18:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Frank Sinatra may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• most fascinating man in the world, but don't put your hand in the cage".{{sfn|Kelley|1986|p=71}}} Sinatra later said of his reason for the departure: "The reason I wanted to leave Tommy's band was
• Bureau of Investigation]] kept records amounting to 2,403 pages on Sinatra. With his alleged Mafia]] ties, his ardent [[New Deal]] politics and his friendship with [[John F. Kennedy]], he was a

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:23, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Fixed BracketBot. Thanks.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Nenjil Or Aalayam

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. How are you? This article about a 1962 film is my next GAN and I was wondering if you would be interested in reviewing it. Thamizhan1994 (^{Appo Pesu}) 00:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Nice to hear from you! I'll try to do it on the weekend!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Gerda

"If you want to change from infobox to no infobox, try to get consensus for that step on the talk first, please. " Should I also ask permission to expand an article to FA level and try to gain consensus for each edit I make? Should I gain permission for trying to improve the Sinatra article, sourcing it and making it more comprehensive too? After all, the text has been there ten years, so therefore it must be ideal and non editable. Same logic. You're quite absurd. This fetish of yours turns an otherwise pleasant personality into a monster.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

You confuse "permission" and "consensus", and you missed "please". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The same thing. Should I ask for consensus each time I want to remove an unsourced paragraph which has been there ten years or add a sourced paragraph? "Please" isn't a ticket for pushy, unreasonable behaviour. And neither does being nice to the likes of Tim riley excuse the level of disruption you cause whenever anybody removes an infobox. Beyond your desire for every article to have an infobox like a uniform, can you not see how ludicrous it is that you're making me feel bad for removing it, when I'm spending a lot of time trying to promote one of our most "core articles" to FA for the centenary which gets 160,000 odd hits a month. Not a word of support or thanks, but pure negativity over a silly little infobox. What matters the most here, what is more important in the grander scheme of things? And coming from one of the people who I thought was most supportive of editor retention, this sort of thing is exactly what makes a lot of us not want to bother promoting articles any longer because we have to deal with infobox zealots who distract people from content.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Blofeld, I know that WP:CALMDOWN has the opposite effect on most people, including me, but we aren't out to get you. I support having the article at FA, but it will get tremendous scrutiny and so it's going to be a challenging haul, regardless. You are doing the right thing to focus on content, and I for one have no concerns with BRD, you don't like someone's edit, just revert and if they have a problem, it can be discussed. Montanabw^(talk) 22:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

You guys might not be out to get Dr. B, but neither one of you had made a single edit to the Sinatra article until after he removed the infobox (Gerda still hasn't ([1]), and MBW's first edit there was in fact a revert that restored the infobox ([2]). So it seems a little disingenuous to act like this is all about the content there, and it's not an extension of the ongoing Infobox Wars. RO^(talk) 23:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Way too much negativity surrounding an article which needs all the positivity and encouragement it can get. Sad.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for offering the cake of compromise, delicious and positive, - any inspiration (image? colours? Halloweenish?) for a user box (t-shirt, mug) for the positive word of power "This user has been called a monster." I made another one, not only for women this month, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

It does! I picture a sweet Enid Blyton type in a country cottage and as soon as that infobox is gone the steam starts coming out the ears and you turn into a T-rex!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Didn't think of a video for an image, nice idea! - You know how to avoid the steam, and it would be better for my health also. - Fine work on Sinatra, btw. By now I made the majority of GAs on classical compositions as you predicted, just nominated one which needs a fast review for DYK, - it was a tricky expansion because it was detailed before I started but with things I just couldn't keep, such as "is a masterpiece", - we can't say that even if it's true. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

{{User monster}} --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

A crop of this might also work ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

No no, you need to add "when somebody removes an infobox" on the end. Something like DYK "that according to legend, this user becomes a monster when somebody removes an infobox of long standing from a wikipedia article"♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK ... that peaceful Monday demonstrations which led to the Fall of the Wall began in the Leipzig Nikolaikirche where a Bach cantata was performed in 1728 (or 1729) and in 2015 to celebrate the town's millenium? (To run the (different, pictured) hook on Germany's National holiday, celebrating 25 years of reunification, was one of the better ideas of DYK.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:39, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Nadia Labidi

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

An Oscar video

Just watching this and reminded me of you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg1ZFSgQdrU One of the best Oscar acceptance speeches, I think. Cheers. Katastasi and his talk page. 03:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

How gorgeous was Claire Bloom, seriously, one fine woman.. And how much of a sleazebag did Warren Beatty look as a young man LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep, Steiger would have been relieved at that point. He did face tough competition this time as compared to The Pawnbroker. Still feel that Steiger deserved it for Pawnbroker than for In the Heat of the Night (although he was brilliant in both films IMO). Bloom looked really good there in the video. She was elegant in Limelight.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

There's just something special about Bloom, you get it when you watch her films too. [3] [4] You get the feeling that she's very intelligent and personable too. Richard Burton was smitten with her.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Rightly so. Would anyone say she's 84! She looks 30-35 years younger in her profile pic on Wiki.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 09:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

She still looks great as do Honor Blackman and Julie Christie. All three are remarkable women and have that special quality about them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

By the way, I've been meaning to watch W.C. Fields and Me, is it good or is it as bad as critics made it out to be? Katastasi and his talk page. 12:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Not actually seen it yet. Too much to do at the moment!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing you might have seen this. A lovely video. I'll bet he must have been thinking, "Now Baby gets to have a cake instead of a ham sandwich." and also, "If it's cake Baby wants, it's cake Baby gets!".  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Baby would prefer wholesome food but better cake than starving, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yolanda Alzola, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vizcaya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Hawaiian lady.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hawaiian lady.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 13:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

That you Kitty? Enjoying the book ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Sonam Kapoor

The article, I believe, is comprehensive enough to be an FA, and is quite well-written. Could you have a look at the article and remove some redundant quotes (if any), as you are good at that. I would like to attempt my first FAC with this article. If you are not willing to help, you can ignore it. -- Frankie _talk 21:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I would but I'm really busy with Sinatra at the moment and want to get well into the books I have so I'm trying to keep what else I do on her at a minimum this month. I have a GA review to do this weekend. Perhaps I can find some time next week to look at it but can't promise anything too much!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Elbflorenz (TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elbflorenz (TV series) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elbflorenz (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Fuddle (talk) 01:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Congrats on getting Rod Steiger to FA! RO(talk) 16:29, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Aw thanks User:Rationalobserver, thanks for your help during the PR too! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:35, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Anytime, Dr. B! RO^(talk) 16:37, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Vrtičkarji for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vrtičkarji is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vrtičkarji until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hitro talk 19:33, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Is it my imagination or are the deletionists out of control these days? Montanabw^(talk) 00:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

They're ultra lazy aren't they!! There should be something in place to stop people abusing the AFD process.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Lime production

Category:Lime production, which you created, has been nominated for dual upmerging to Category:Limes (fruit) and Category:Citrus production. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Dookudu

This list has been promoted to FL status yesterday and is my first FL success. Thanks for reviewing/commenting/supporting the list's promotion at its FLC. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:45, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For bringing the article of Rod Steiger first to GA status in July 2015 and to FA status in less than two months. Surely a great effort, Doctor! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:52, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Congrats! That is great work. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:04, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

An Award for you!

	The WHO ARE YOU??? Award of dynamism
	For bringing Rod Steiger to FA status along with me!  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 03:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I love it haha!! I was thinking of giving you a similar award yesterday! Who are you?!! LOL!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I see! You saw the film yet?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:43, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Congrats both of you! —Vensatry _(ping) 13:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Frank Sinatra and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Frank Sinatra

Hi Dr. Blofeld, I've moved WP:Frank Sinatra to the correct namespace, Draft:Frank Sinatra. As you are the original creator of the latter page, I thought I should let you know that I have nominated the redirect at WP:Frank Sinatra for deletion, as it is now in the correct namespace. The MFD is here.

Keep up the good work on the Sinatra article, by the way. I wish you and your collaborators good luck on your featured article nomination. Epic Genius (talk) 20:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, but I'd preferred to have db authored it and moved it myself if you'd asked. I'm not drafting it there, I'm working on the main article, but I'll store a few things there.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh well, what's done is done. Again, I wish you and your collaborators the best of luck for your planned TFA. Epic Genius (talk) 15:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Spectre

I can't believe we finally get to see you, after all these years. Drmies (talk) 02:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

His Evilness is back! I'm not expecting much from this film admittedly, I wasn't at all impressed with the trailer. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I could tell you what I'm doing about the film but WP:COI and WP:NOTADVERTISING prevent me from saying so here. (suffice to say our Shirley Bassey-styled cover of Writing's on the Wall is picking up some regional airplay and BBC Radio Kent's Dominic King loves it, which is not bad for three guys and a gal in a homemade studio attempting to compete with a major record label) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

They really picked a most unsuitable singer this time around didn't they? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Honestly, they might as well have got Phil Collins to do it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

new article

I want to create this article Erwadi dargah but it is disambaguating to Erwadi? Can you please help?Nvvchar. 03:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Nvvchar Sorry for butting in, but I can help you, I think. Just click on your link, hit the link under the heading that says "(Redirected from Erwadi dargah)" and it will take you to the page you want to edit. Remove the REDIRECT instruction and you are good to go. I hope that works. That is what I have done on several redirects without any problems.

On a totally different topic, could you look at this? Renu Kushawaha It is on the Intertranswiki expansion list for this month and I am not finding many sources from Mexico. SusunW (talk) 03:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Mohamed Nagy (artist)

Gatoclass (talk) 07:17, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

La sombra del ciprés es alargada

I can find RS about the book ([5]) but am struggling with the film. Can you help? --Dweller (talk) 10:55, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 12:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. You have new messages at 78.26's talk page.
Message added 17:05, 8 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:05, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LuigiComencini.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LuigiComencini.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Frank Sinatra may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• at Heart (Frank Sinatra song)|Young at Heart]]", the title song of his 1954 film with [[Doris Day]]), with Song of the Year.{{Sfn|Sinatra|1986|p=103}} That year he was also named "Top Male Vocalist"
• Friedwald|1995|p=377}} He released ''[[I Remember Tommy]]'' as a tribute to bandleader Tommy Dorsey]], featuring re-recorded versions of songs that Sinatra had first performed or recorded with Dorsey

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:16, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Frank Sinatra may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 2015}}</ref> and spoofed by [[Joe Piscopo]] and [[Phil Hartman]] on ''[[Saturday Night Live]]''.{{{sfn|Fuchs|Prigozy|2007|p=138}} A biographical film directed by [[Martin Scorsese]] has long been

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maureen O'Hara may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ], whom she described as "my shortest leading man, an outspoken Communist and a real sweetheart"), in ''[[The Fallen Sparrow]]''.{{sfn|O'Hara|Nicoletti|2004|p=89}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Impulse

I had an impulse. I don't think it can do any harm. Might even do some good. But even as I clicked the "save" button I realised (as in "realized", Mr. Gates) I probably should have consulted you first. I offer you apologies for my discourtesy. I hope very much that you don't feel your toes have been trodden on.

Best wishes. Charles01 (talk) 07:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou! Why would I need to be consulted first? You have as much right to edit and propose things as I do! We're all equal, but some are more equal than others ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Arnold Bax

Greetings, Doctor! Following the peer review, to which, I am glad to say, you contributed, I have Bax up to FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in, your comments will be most welcome. – Tim riley talk 12:49, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Sierra de Perijá National Park

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

"Start spreading the news!"

In case Nikki or Casliber are busy, you can ask Josh Milburn to do a thorough image and source review as well.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

How about alternative text for the images first, for people using screenreaders? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Does it get any better?

Ideal editing jam :) Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your price!) 19:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

[6]!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:40, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Actua Golf.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Actua Golf.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ActuaGolf2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ActuaGolf2.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lhasa (prefecture-level city)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture

You are invited! Join us remotely! World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture

Dates: 15 to 25 October 2015 Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event Host/Facilitator: Women in Red (WiR): Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you! Sponsor: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in association with Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation, Women in Design, and Wikiproject Women Wikipedia Design Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR in parallel with a series of "physical" Guggenheim edit-a-thons. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in architecture and design to participate. The campaign aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that by its nature combines both. As the virtual edit-a-thon stretches over a week and a half, inexperienced participants will be able to draw on the assistance of more experienced editors while creating, translating or improving articles on women who are (or have been) prominent in this field. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and learn more: →here←

I've been careful not to post this too soon but I'm doing so now, mainly for the hundreds of people who come in to see what's going on every day. Hope the Corbett Clan can join in too.--Ipigott (talk) 14:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, just about now is fine in relation to the other one. It does need to be a few weeks really between each one for a break. I can't promise much as I'm really trying to reduce the scope of what I do on here and work on the real core actor articles instead. I'll try to contribute a few new articles during the drive though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:57, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ANI

I reported you. Caden ^cool 19:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

You see Caden, this is why John Carter in my opinion was wrong to give you a barnstar out of sympathy. There's a reason why nobody respects you, and it's for things like this. You opened an ANI report because I hit the thank button for helping resolve the unfortunate situation and taking down your "I love watching pornography" signs for which I truly am grateful. You seriously need to take a long, hard look at yourself and why you are here. You brought all of this on yourself by turning up at Frank Sinatra with a nasty message unprovoked. I couldn't give a baboon's left bollock what you do with your time on here, but if you cross my path in the manner that you did I'm going to show you up for the little creep that you really are.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Last warning @Dr. Blofeld:, stop with the personal attacks or I will block you to stop you. HighInBC 19:55, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh really? And what were the prior warnings to stop with personal attacks??♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:58, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

This is ridiculous! Caden, I do suggest to let the ANI discussion go before it backfires. What's the saying, WP:Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass? JAGUAR  20:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

HighinBC I see is actually User:Chillum, Eric's arch nemesis. I'd heard he'd changed his name but I hadn't yet checked to what. I like the name, it's at least a lot friendlier sounding. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes I am Chillum, HighInBC is the old name I started here with. Eric and I have managed to avoid stepping on each others toes for few weeks now, I don't consider him to be a "nemesis". I agree this name is friendlier, in the spirit of being friendly I will now move on as I see you are happy to disengage from the current situation. HighInBC 20:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Well I'm glad to see. Well, from my side of things I'd long forgotten about this last night. It's Caden who is making a mountain out of a molehill out of this by opening an ANI thread because I hit the "thank" button for him removing boxes which I genuinely think are unsavory. If he disrupts my course of editing with such silliness then I have little sympathy, sorry. Now he has kindly removed those boxes I will longer attack him for them. But he really needs to leave me well alone now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:17, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@User:Caden Try being nice instead and you might find I'll return it. If I was casually editing and saw you'd produced good content I'd happily reward you for your efforts as I do to a lot people. But you've really got to look at the way you came across me initially, I didn't go looking to pick a fight and intentionally bully you did I? It's not my style. You came to me aggressively, completely unprovoked. Edits like this just make you look absurd. I did no such thing that you claim, it was general statement on my protocol and I was actually partly defending you there, at that was June!. If you want people to respect you you're going about it totally the wrong way.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Draft:Frank Sinatra page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Kirk Douglas

BTW, this living legend's centenary is up next year. Since you're working on Sinatra likewise, why not expand this as well, eh?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Funnily enough I was thinking about him this morning. Yes him and Gregory Peck for their centenaries next year would be good. Funny how looks can sometimes skip a generation, Peck's son [7] bears little resemblance but his grandson Ethan Peck there's a strong resemblance there isn't there!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Ethan's eyebrows really look like Greg's though! Yep, there is a lot of similarity. Ethan kinda reminds me of Mr. Spock too! Well, after Sinatra, do you wish to proceed with Peck and Douglas or stick with Grant? Your choice.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Cary Grant definitely. Him and Jimmy Stewart are just essential aren't they? Those two for me stand out a mile above all the others. As Hitchcock once said, Grant was the only actor he ever loved. I'll make a start on Cary Grant shortly as I'm waiting for the Kaplan book on Sinatra and don't think I can do too much until I've read that and can see what still needs doing. Don't expect a quick expansion like Sinatra, too much like work, all in good time ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

No hurry, Doc. I am coming back to active editing by mid-November, during which Sinatra will hopefully be FA ready. You can use my article draft for a fresh expansion and then insert whatever we have added into the main article. This userpage of mine can be used as a reference storer.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you put the refs all on the same page as the draft and just use that as a rough workbase? The sourcing of the article all needs sorting out first, can you update it with the early stuff you've written to date?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:30, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Both of them.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Considering who Cary Grant is (the greatest Hollywood actor of all time) the article is appallingly underdeveloped isn't it? People really shy away from wanting to write the big personalities don't they? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:05, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, they really do, don't they? Bogey, Stewart, Gable, Douglas, Peck, Lancaster, Fonda, Brando ... they all deserve better. It'll be a lot easier than Sinatra, that's for sure. We'll model it on Red Skelton, Charlie Chaplin and Gary Cooper.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes those are the core ones. Nah, I write my own articles. I never really look at another article for what I should be doing with it, though for Sinatra I did recap on how Skelton's multiple careers were organized and compared the length with Reagan. Each personality is different. I have an idea in my mind of how each article should look. I guess the Gary Cooper one would be the nearest, Red Skelton and Chaplin it's not going to look like that. You look through the featured articles on media personalities though. It's astounding how few there actually are, I was involved in a good percentage of them too! And then there's existing ones like Judy Garland which badly need updating.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Thiruvilaiyadal

This 1965 film starring Sivaji Ganesan is at GAN. Would you be interested in reviewing it, Dr. Blofeld? :) Thamizhan1994 (^{Appo Pesu}) 13:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coal Miner's Daughter.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Coal Miner's Daughter.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thefacebehindthemasklorre.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thefacebehindthemasklorre.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 21:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Thoughts

What do you think of merging the articles on Sinatra's parents into the "Early Life of" article? It's pretty routine to merge articles on wives and children into those of husbands and parents where the only notability they have is their association with a famous person. Marty Sinatra's article is quite short and Dolly's has a lot of unneeded content. Seems that they would not meet GNG if not for being Sinatra's parents. Montanabw^(talk) 22:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I think they're sufficient in their own right, Dolly especially. His father less notable though. I'm surprised he got started before Dolly as his mother wore the trousers in his family. There's a ton of material about her and I'd say she could even be brought up to GA status. She was a very important influence in his life, even much later at the time of her death in 1977. I'd have started Dolly myself admittedly. The article just needs expansion and development. There's not much on her early life but definitely enough to prove notability during Sinatra's lifetime.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

GA Nomination

I've nominated the article for GA now :) TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 13:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Thank you again for the review! It gave me lots of ideas on how to further improve the article, even if I'm not able to access more biographies. I'll be away for the next two days, but will open a peer review on Monday. Let me know when Sinatra is up for review, I'll be happy to participate! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 21:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3

Sylvester Stallone

What do you think of this, Doctor? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:17, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. The question is whether it works or not? "I see dead people" something of a "clique" now eh ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:21, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know whether the dead can be seen, but we can hallucinate their presence and i am an example for that. I am recuperating from a personal loss which happened in mid September this year. Till date, i am unable to cope up with it. Panic attacks and hallucinations happen once in every random two days. Tears are uncontrollable. I am leading a recluse, silent life and am planning to visit some part of India in mid November 2015 after i'm done with my mandatory exams. When i placed a user grieving tag (which i removed recently), all those wished me recovery made me feel at times that i'm a drama king. Apart from my personal life, i've seen instances where cursed families saw the dead ones. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about that matey. As long as you're not a drama king on here though haha, there's enough of them!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:42, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Death is a natural phenomenon. Still i can't understand why we can't digest it. When my 18th GA was reviewed by Jaguar, we both discussed about the same (his was in March 2015) and to make hearts feel light, i recommended him to watch the film. I am glad that he loved it. Well, they say that those shraadh practices help the souls reach the destined place and leave the earth. In fact, the effect of curses on a family leading to their members' death is often an interesting subject in films. I don't have a fair idea about Hollywood, but in Indian cinema, there are a few. In Telugu (my mother tongue), this and this are my favourites. Can you recommend me a few except The Sixth Sense? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Pavanjandhyala: Heaven Can Wait (1978) is a beautiful film you can take a look at for the death and rebirth concept. If you are interested in viewing a sort of satire on death, Arsenic and Old Lace (1944) and Dr. Strangelove (1964) are for you. For serious views, The Omen (1976) is one film.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 15:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ssven2: I remember watching The Omen once, but i will revisit it. So now, apart from Manorama's films' list, i have four more in addition. I, in turn, recommend you to watch Murari, Arundhati and Oohalu Gusagusalade in your extremely free time (believably after your exams). And i recommend the Doctor to watch Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu and Arya in addition to the three other ones. I think apart from the first two, you can find the subtitled versions in YouTube itself. But don't even try to watch the Hindi dubbed versions. The whole essence, including BGM, is lost. Having said all that, these are extremely voluntary. If you watch them ever, let me know what you felt. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:20, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Pavanjandhyala: Have you seen Ikiru or Sansho the Bailiff?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Not yet. But heard a lot about the former. Will watch em both after the exams. The links i gave you are subtitled and use British English. However considering Jaguar's feedback, let me inform you in advance that in Seethamma...., none of the characters have names except for the female leads. Hope it helps. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:48, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

You have been randomly selected to take a very short survey by the Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team!

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9mNQICjn6DibxNr

This survey is intended to gauge community satisfaction with the technical support provided by the Wikimedia Foundation to Wikipedia, especially focusing on the needs of the core community. To learn more about this survey, please visit Research:Tech support satisfaction poll.

To opt-out of further notices concerning this survey, please remove your username from the subscription list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hint: don't tick the box for "free household energy survey." Martinevans123 (talk) 20:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

It only took a minute, I don't usually bother. I raised a chuckle at the question "How happy are you with wikimedia's technical development team" Mwoahahaa. I'm positively spiffing about it (obviously) ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

SRK and DDLJ

Did you notice this: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 2, 2015? How about this: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge/archive1? I did the second one without your help. This makes me a real man now, yes? BollyJeff | talk 23:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Haha, yes, congratulations User:Bollyjeff, finally ;-) Funnily enough I saw that film only a day or two ago! What are you planning on next? Don't worry I'll let you do it all!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Dwarka

Gatoclass (talk) 01:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rafael Calderón Muñoz

The article Rafael Calderón Muñoz has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I found a mention (or perhaps 2) on Books, but nothing else on any of the other engines. There were some hits, but they appear to be about other people (later in the 20th century) - a doctor and another politician.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Onel5969: A very notable Costa Rican official, the father of the President, not sure what you were thinking here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

And a vice president in his own right. [8] Onel5969 Mayhaps you need to look under his surname of Calderón rather than his matrilineal surname. He would more than likely not have been called Muñoz except possibly by the English-speaking press. SusunW (talk) 05:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, more can be gleaned from Spanish wiki too if it can be sourced.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi SusunW and Dr. Blofeld - I must have done something incorrectly (some typo) when I did the search. At the time I distinctly remember thinking that the article's author must be conflating the son with the father. I also distinctly returning zero hits on Newspapers, which, when I run the same search today, yields several good sources. Glad to see my error, however, has led to the improvement of the article. Nice job on the expansion and referencing. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Folklore Museum of Velventos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Folklore Museum of Velventos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folklore Museum of Velventos until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

LOL you're funny Boleyn. Is this in retaliation for my "expand ref" tag on one of your incorrectly formatted refs the other day? Somebody would soon fill out the ref with the tag on it, I only add tags to articles which won't be there long. I really couldn't care less but you do with the Greek museums, perhaps a page watcher can be.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, I've no idea what tag you mean and I'd have liked to have thought you know I'm not spiteful. The museum articles I have discussed with you over a period of time, including creating User:Boleyn/List of museum articles tagged for notability and am extremely slowly working through them - very slowly as many have been tagged for over 7 years and looked at by me on a number of occasions over the last 3 years. I have only taken to AfD as a last resort and used AfD rather than prod in the hope someone can find something I've totally missed, which is more likely to happen with foreign-language articles. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Wells

Thanks for the heads up but I always have problems with "People from..." as if they were the MP they may hardly have visited let alone being born there or had a major effect on the city.— Rod ^talk 17:41, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rodw: What about a MPs for Wells category or something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:45, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

If you want to do that OK but I'm not taking that one on. I'm currently working on the cleanup lists for Somerset and Bristol - if you wanted to give a hand with them that would be great.— Rod ^talk 17:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Can't be bothered with wikipedia at the moment admittedly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:53, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Shanakdakhete

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Maafushi Prison

Thanks for supporting Wikipedia and the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 13:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

The Deletion to Quality Award

		The Deletion to Quality Award
		For your contributions to bring Ipswich Road, Colchester (prior candidate for deletion at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A1232 road) to Good Article status, I hereby present you The Deletion to Quality Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! — Cirt (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Haha, that's a new one! Thanks Cirt!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Glad you like the idea! :) — Cirt (talk) 15:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of La Murga for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article La Murga is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Murga until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

FL request

Hi, I know your time here is limited at the moment. Any chance you could have a look at this one? —Vensatry _(ping) 18:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

FAC request

Dr. Blofeld, as if you didn't have enough editors nagging you for a review, I'm shamelessly piling on. If time allows, would you be able to provide feedback and suggestions at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hebron Church (Intermont, West Virginia)/archive1. As always, I appreciate and value your comments. -- West Virginian (talk) 18:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Reading now!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Jimbo's talk page

Thank you so much for your recent edits. I especially agree with the comment, "Most of the people I see speaking mostly strongly on the women harassment thing on here are transgender and I think there's a reason for it." I have noticed that as well. BTW, there is a discussion on my talk page (named "Since") re my concern that I have never actually seen much of any attacks of female editors in the editing I have done here (editing since 2006 on many female-related articles). Just noted Eric is banned. It seems we have been "captured". Gandydancer (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I have a feeling that it was all a setup to goad Eric into saying something and being blocked. Nasty stuff. Sorry Eric/Iridescent and co if you blame me for the blocking here but the fact that a notable publication published such bollocks I had to say something against it. I do think the transgender editors might have a point about discrimination, as I do think they have a hard time in society in general. They may very well see things which they find unsettling on here. But I think they wrongly assume that any transgender abuse they might get is universal to all people identifying as a woman. I know a lot of female editors on here and I emailed around a while back asking them if there was any truth it and not one of them said they ever felt like a "victim" on wikipedia because they're female. Articles like that Atlantic one infer that wikipedia is a site where male editors go about constantly hassling all of the women editors because of their gender, and it's just not true is it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I doubt it was any kind of setup—Eric's not stupid and knows where the line is, and if somebody hadn't blocked, there'd have been an equal number of people screaming "favouritism!". (I think a month was extremely harsh, but I don't dispute the principle of some kind of block here; you speed, you run the risk of a ticket.)

If you want a fairly typical example of low-level sexual harassment in action, look over this character's edits before they get revdel'd, then multiply it by a couple of thousand to get an idea of the kind of crap that gets cleaned away before editors get to see it. You can always head over here if you want a more concentrated dose. ‑ iridescent 22:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

And I've never seen a male editor get a disgusting comment like this one ([9]). RO^(talk) 22:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The article and comments imply that most of the active male editors are constantly abusing female editors because of their gender, not that the odd vandal or sockpuppet may make a nasty sexist comment to an enforcer. I asked half a dozen very active female editors I know by email if they get abuse and none of them said they do. But then all of them are regular content contributors and not legal enforcers. I think it's closely related to actions on wikipedia, if you act aggressively/police the site you get things thrown at you, and if you're a female aggressor you're more likely to receive sexual remarks. It brings out the worst in people, to the downright creepy like stalking on facebook and the doctoring of images. I agree that if you're a female aggressor and dish out punishments to people, they're going to use it as a weakness and target it. But if edit regularly without drama I can't see people doing that sort of thing. The point I was trying to make is that I don't see evidence that active female editors are constantly being harassed and bullied off the project purely because they're female. We all have to deal with a lot of crap on here, even the best of us.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Meh, when you're dealing with Johns Hopkins University alumni best to just walk away... ;-) Anybody who comes out with "You are re-victimizing victims by dismissing and trivializing their complaints" you know you're dealing with an impossibly pompous egghead who probably has a degree in the subject.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:50, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Gandydancer: New entry at the bottom of User:Dr. Blofeld/Encyclopedia problems.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I can't say I'm exhaustively experienced in this but from what I've seen articles such as The Atlantic's one are completely wrong. Unfortunately, sexual harrassment does happen on Wikipedia, which must be stopped, but the idea that it is hostile to women in general is supported by no evidence. --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 21:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

It does seem to happen, I must live in my own bubble on here as I never see it. Isolated incidents of sexual harassment, often from disgruntled ips and newbies though is still not a website which is entirely hostile to women as you say. The idea seems to be there that all males do on the site is going about repeatedly hassling women and pushing them out of the project because they're female, and it does seem that the gender gap/militant feminist types on here use it as fodder to get at Eric and male editors in general. That's why I spoke up about it on Jimbo's talk page as I believe it is an unfair perception of most of the regular male editors here and I hate the way it always becomes about Eric. If there is a real problem here which others see, then perhaps wikimedia should do a survey and get some formal statistics and find a way to improve the situation. Airing nasty articles with anti-male sentiments and starting threads on Jimbo's talk page about it is nothing but disruptive and will not solve the problem. On his page people twist whatever you say and things always bring out some of the most pompous editors, usually from the United States, who have an agenda. The person who said ""You are re-victimizing victims by dismissing and trivializing their complaints" in particular is an appalling piece of work and typical of the sort of trolling behaviour such issues attract. I actually started the WP:Women project with Rosie on here, which though generic, it is a great way to get editors to improve content and it works. I also support the idea of having more women editors and improving the site for women, but when I see nasty articles and threads with obvious anti-male sentiments generalizing all men as sexist pigs I view them with disgust. There is a way you can go about reducing harassment on here without becoming aggressively anti-male in doing so that was what I was getting at really. Report cases of harassment and go about dealing with it without all of the gender gap vitriol and feminism. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Amen to that! --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 11:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

It is indeed difficult and it is an issue that is driving good editors apart. I have repeatedly asked for evidence and am told that I don't see it because I'm not an admin or that I don't understand that what has been called "locker room behavior" concerns some women. When pressed for an example, the locker room behavior turned out to be a couple of guys mentioning watching a game on TV and drinking a beer, as I remember it. I suppose that it could have been called locker room behavior that drew me to Eric's page so long ago. It seemed that a lot of the editors were women, which I liked. Moni was still here and she was pissed about something and was swearing a blue streak, people were laughing and saying very clever things...it was fun, like the fun that I used to have in our backrooms or offices when I was working (I've been retired for a few years). If I'm going to volunteer my time here I'd like to feel free to have some fun with the people that I like. I don't want to feel that I'll be reported to management because I was abusing someone when I do it on my own talk page, which for me is my own office. All within reason, of course. If we're going to clamp down on what I consider fun, I want to see good evidence that my actions or my opinions of the actions of other is grounded in fact and not some person's imagination. I would very much like to see documentation of the sexual abuse that some editors say is going on that I am not aware of. We have been doing a lot of talk about being fair to women who say they are being abused, I want to be sure that my feelings are not being brushed aside with the explanation "well you're just wrong and we don't have to document it either."

As for the harassment of admins when doing their enforcement duties, it does not at all surprise me that they do receive sexual comebacks from time to time. I'd like to see it as policy that offenders get one warning (if that) and then be banned. Gandydancer (talk) 17:32, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I know who the usual ones are who complain most prominently about it on here and I don't think that's a coincidence. I don't know why the women who report a lot offwiki can't at least anonymously describe it on here. That I didn't have a clue what has been reported and have been here 10 years says it all. Perhaps a lot of women are genuinely embarrassed to publicly report it, but wikipedia does tend to attract a lot of the strong women types who you'd think could handle that and stick up for themselves if faced with it on site.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:47, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frank Sinatra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ABC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Türkis Theater

The article Türkis Theater has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not been improved in 2+ years, nothing specifically notable about the theatre.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. --  Kethrus |talk to me  17:57, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Charles01, Furius, can you expand it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that the de.wiki article or the info from http://www.theatertuerkis.de/theatertuerkis.htm actually establishes notability - it's a small theatre ensemble, apparently with no actual buildings, which managed a single production or less per year between 2006 and 2013. Their website shows no activity at all since 2013. Furius (talk) 13:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walter Lippmann.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Walter Lippmann.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

About garage rock article

I have been working on a big expansion on the Garage rock article, and I was thinking about having it reviewed. It would probably be best to try to have it considered first for GA, then later for FA--I want to add some more embedded content and maybe a couple more sections before I aim for FA. I know you've been around the Wiki block a few more times than me, and that you know as well as anyone how to do big projects such as this, which this is my first of such size. So, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article and perhaps give me your opinion of its prospects, before I try to have it reviewed (doing so without the right preparation might be like jumping into Largo's shark tank--I know that as your No. 2, he's under a lot of pressure to deliver!). In all humility, I don't expect to ever be able to do what you've done in a thousand lifetimes--my work schedule wouldn't allow it even if I could. So, I appreciate all your efforts here. As for me, I'd like to contribute something worthwhile in my small way about a rock musical genre that isn't well known, but worthy of more coverage. Garagepunk66 (talk) 07:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Garage, yeah Largo's pool in the Bahamas was quite something haha! Connery almost died in it in a shark incident! Just glancing at your article it looks very good indeed and should easily be GA quality. Perhaps I'd have expected to see more book sources used, but I still think there's a healthy range of sources in there. Also I spot some very short sections which should really be avoided. But it looks in good shape. I'll try to give it a read if I can tomorrow. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, SPECTRE No.1. (and I hope your furry little white cat with the diamond necklace approves too, so I don't end up in the pool of piranhas). By, the way, as a "60s-ologist" I love the 60s Connery era Bond films best (i.e. with the definitive Bond, the definitive villains, i.e. yours truly and your "associates": Dr. No, Largo, etc. and henchmen such as Odd Job, the definitive directors, esp. Terrance Young--he directed with such panache--Thunderball is my favorite--such an elegant and classy film--not a mere action movie, but pure cinema--pure Bond--so underrated). I hope that I have pleased your excellency in saying that. As, for the article, come the time when I get it ready for FA, I will expand the short sections as well as fill in some of the various holes and gaps in coverage and add more book citations. I'm guessing that it would be best to add those pieces after the GA stage, when I prepare it for FA, because I'm guessing that the FA reviewers are going want to see additions made post-GA. Thanks for taking your time to provide me feedback. Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a "60s-oligist" too!.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I am so happy to hear that--I hope that I have now been spared from "elimination" in the floor trap-door! Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Garagepunk66: Sorry I forgot, I have a few I need to look at the moment and have forgotten which!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:33, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frank Sinatra

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Frank Sinatra 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:00, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Cholmondeley Cello for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cholmondeley Cello is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cholmondeley Cello until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. A1 (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

References are few and far between, as one would expect for a cello that went at auction before the "internet"... If anyone had access to some good cello books, there might be something additional. Also, notice the new redlink in the article :) --kelapstick^(bainuu) 16:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

World records are often notable. I don't see why we couldn't have a few articles on individual notable things like cellos. Perhaps Aymatth2 has an opinion on it and could find something?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Quite in agreement, I am sure the Marie Hall can drum up some sources, and some inspiration could come from List of Stradivarius instruments. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 16:33, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Frank Sinatra

The article Frank Sinatra 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:Frank Sinatra for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 16:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

If I can possibly interest you in yet another English composer – one of the top three, in my view – I have Ralph Vaughan Williams up for peer review. Quite understand if you are otherwise engaged, naturally, but if you can look in, any comments will be gratefully received. – Tim riley talk 18:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Most impressed that you've finished another one! I shall try to look in on it in a day or two Meester.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:47, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Maureen O'Hara

RIP

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! One of my favourite actresses and one of the most gorgeous women who ever lived has died :-(. I loved her. They don't make them like that in Hollywood anymore, even for her time she was a one in a million. I was actually thinking recently about getting her up to GA. I'll definitely have to do that in the near future, though Lightshow might beat me to it with the quote farm ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Who's left now, Kirk Douglas and Olivia De Havilland?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:24, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

She was very special DB. A true loss. Best wishes in working on her article. MarnetteD|Talk 20:25, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

She had that sensual, earthy quality you rarely got in Hollywood, even in her time. She was so important for the realism in films like The Quiet Man and How Green was My Valley. She had the most lovely voice too which makes you melt. When you think of the all-time most beautiful actresses she was right up there with Hedy Lamarr, Gene Tierney, Grace Kelly, Ava Gardner and Yvonne de Carlo wasn't she?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Who is left now MD from Old Hollywood aside from Douglas and Havilland?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah depressingly few are left: if we go with stars active in the 40s, along with those two we still have Doris Day, Angela Lansbury, Margaret O'Brien, Jane Powell...maybe some others but that's who I can think of. Counting the 50s there's more, like Debbie Reynolds, Kim Novak, Sidney Poitier. but that doesn't feel quite as "Wow, what a connection to the past" as knowing they were in 40s films. It's inevitable of course but sad! --Loeba (talk) 21:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Ooh Ann Blyth is another one, I thought she had died recently but apparently not! --Loeba (talk) 21:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Sophia Loren is still alive as well.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 23:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Joan Collins too. Now Ann Blyth, Doris Day, Angela Lansbury, Margaret O'Brien, and Jane Powell are truly Old Hollywood. Many of the ones mentioned above though came in towards the end, there'll be a ton more young starlets who came in in the late 50s/early 60s still alive as they'd only be 70s/80s. The true Old Hollywooders were active in the 40s or early 50s like Douglas, De Havilland, Debbie Reynolds and Blyth. We must keep a list somewhere haha!.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

@Loeba: Do you think we could actually make a list stick in the main space? I think we could and people would find it useful.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I was just reading about her these days, like a week ago... what a coincidence. Sad to see time passes and these Hollywood legends just pass on. Hope it doesn't happen so soon to Kirk or Olivia, we've already lost legend Christopher Lee earlier this year, and recently, Joan Fontaine and Shirley Temple. Truly sad news. Katastasi and his talk page. 03:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

And Omar Sharif too.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 07:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I see you've started it! Great idea for film buffs, and I'm sure there are lots of people who'd find it useful, though whether or not it can survive as an article we'll see haha. If you're including films up to 1963 there will be a lot more names, I'm sure. I once found a list on here in someone's personal space of the oldest living actors - it included even really random people we wouldn't have thought of. Let me see if I can find it. --Loeba (talk) 10:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah List of living actors from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Well we have lists of survivors from wars and stuff, this will definitely get traffic and interest. I think newspapers often talking about "one of the last living actors of Golden Hollywood" so I think it's something veyr commonly referred to and as you say will be great to document for film buffs. Yes the 1958-1963 period actors who started out then might eventually bloat. Eventually as it grows we might have to tighten the criteria to those who appeared in at over 5 or even 10 films before 1963 or something. We'll see how it goes. I think it's one of those lists which will take a long time to develop, much like the List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

No can't seem to find the list I was looking for, maybe it had to be deleted. Damn, it was so comprehensive. We do already have List of surviving silent film actors, but yours is defined by the talkie years so that's fine. I found this, it's a bit outdated and includes TV and non-Hollywood stars as well, but it's helpful. I love knowing that Setsuko Hara is still alive somewhere out there, so bizarre! Rhonda Flemming is another notable 40s star I didn't think of. --Loeba (talk) 10:52, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

It's going to be tricky in places I think as take somebody like Sean Connery, was he really in Hollywood films before 1962? Weren't most British productions? Rhonda seems to be in half of those 50s westerns which keeping airing on Film4 and TCM LOL! Claire Bloom another, Limelight.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Tbh I think even if you were to limit it to actors who appeared in the 50s in would be a long enough list. Maybe the end of the studio system would be a good cutting point? I don't know if there's an agreed year with that, but there most be some point at which people no longer signed contracts with studios...it was definitely over by the late 50s. And yeah, for the purpose of the list there should have definitely appeared in a Hollywood film by then (whatever date is used). --Loeba (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah we might have to narrow it down to pre 1960 eventually as the low end of the list is going to get huge over time and there'll be tons of poorly known small part actors in there. We want really to keep it the better known ones/leading players, or at least the ones who had a ton of roles before 1963.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Well I admit I'd never even heard of most those people I just added (only Norman Lloyd) but it's fun learning about them! Taking a break, that list I linked to is really good if you want to carry on. --Loeba (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Of course, Zsa Zsa Gabor!! I've linked that list at the bottom so we can gradually add to it. I'll just ensure the current ones are all sourced with a few films and then come back to it another time.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Kinds of people

FYI – Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clint Eastwood bibliography.

"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

— The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Andrew D. (talk) 11:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I should ask the nominator "Do ya feel lucky, punk? ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Animation films

I happened to notice some animation films missing from your great films list (possibly you might have forgotten or you haven't seen them yet).

Disney and Pixar films

• Bambi (1942)
• Cinderella (1950) - You'll probably rate it higher than the 2015 one if you haven't seen it.
• Peter Pan (1953)
• Sleeping Beauty (1959)
• One Hundred and One Dalmatians (1961)
• Winnie the Pooh (1977) and the 2011 film as well
• Aladdin (1992)
• The Lion King (1994)
• Pocahontas (1995)
• Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996)
• A Bug's Life (1998)
• The Lion King 2: Simba's Pride (1998)
• Mulan (1998)
• Tarzan (1999) - If you haven't seen it, Phil Collins' songs are sure to give a kind of chill in your spine! :-)
• Monster's Inc (2001) and its prequel Monsters University (2013)
• Finding Nemo (2003) - If you like Ratatouille, you'll love this one. Funny and moving at the same time if you haven't seen it yet!
• The Incredibles (2004)
• The Lion King 1 and 1/2 (2004)
• Bolt (2008)
• Tangled (2010)

Dreamworks films

• Shrek films
• Madagascar films
• Kung Fu Panda films
• How To Train Your Dragon films
• Antz (1998)
• Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005)

 — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I've seen How to Train Your Dragon and Finding Nemo, and I believe bits of Bambi, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmations and Lion King but they were always those films on the TV I'd flick over and watch for a bit and turn over rather than seriously watch. Well, I'm not heavily into animated films admittedly as I feel like a kid watching them! I don't mind watching the occasional ones, they're good fun. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:28, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

What's bad about "feeling like a kid"? The animation films remind you of the innocent creature that you (in general, not you specifically) were in your childhood. It relieves the pressure I face in my life and I'm still a child at heart because of watching them (probably why I rate them highly on my list). It's just that seeing your rating for Ratatouille and Up made me want to post this message up here. BTW, I plan to watch some of Miyazaki's films along with Akira, Grave of the Fireflies during my holidays.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 12:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Nothing, but I'm not 6 years old LOL! Yes, there's been some brilliant animated ones in recent years, I do very much enjoy watching them occasionally. I've seen Bambi 1942 fully I think, I thought it was on my list?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Neither are the films I mentioned above. It's also not like you should watch cartoons till 6 years old and switch to Francis Ford Coppola, Andrei Tarkovsky, Ingmar Bergman and Martin Scorsese films all of a sudden LOL. BTW, have you seen the Rush Hour films yet?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Space Jam LOL? I loved it. Roger Ebert loved it. Everybody loved it. I can't say it's "greatest film ever" material but it's a film that deserves utmost respect! JAGUAR  13:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I saw that in the cinema at the time actually! Yes I've seen Rush Hour 1 and 2, as I say there's still a lot of films like those I've forgotten to add. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

What's your favourite parts from Space Jam and Rush Hour 1 and 2? My favourite ones are below,

• Space Jam — Ready to play, Vintage Jordan this one!, NBA stars without their talent, sad. :(, Tune Squad intro scene and Secret stuff.
• Rush Hour — G-14 Classified LOL, Black Man's Radio, Tucker's interrogation scene, Daddy, War, Blackanese and Badge.
• Rush Hour 2 — The MJ reference, The Massage Parlour ladies selection, Massage Parlour Fight scene, Chicken, The Don Cheadle special appearance, Bomb and Chirs Tucker's Casino scene.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, those are good scenes, but probably best not to link to so many copyrighted videos from wikipedia in one go as people will be complaining!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For getting Frank Sinatra to GA status! Congrats!  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 14:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Ssven, still needs a fair bit of work though and needs to be trimmed by a good 1000 words. For some reason I didn't get the automated "You've passed GA thing".♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

That's strange. The bot is always full of errors. Anyway, congratulations on the GA! Are you taking it to peer review next? If so it should be smoother at FAC but it would take a little more time. JAGUAR  14:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm still not sure to be honest if I'm going for the FA. Still needs quite a bit of work. It's just about comprehensive enough I think, but the prose IMO is a bit notey in places and lacks flow, particularly 1946 to 1960s, I'm going through the Granata book now to try to resolve some of it. I think even with a cut of 1000 words some will still complain about the length. It's not going to be easy to really cut it too much without affecting how comprehensive it but I'll do my best. I also need somebody to do an extensive source check when done. So I'm certainly in no rush to want to get it to FAC. I'll probably open a peer review for a week nearer the end of the month. If it improves by then and comments are more optimistic then I'll take it to FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Congrats to GA for Sinatra. Some reflections - if I may - on that the person bringing an article to GA or FA should be able to make editorial choices, as you said on Jean Sibelius which is none of that yet. Yes, nice idea. You know that I have a sequence of Bach cantatas for GA, because you reviewed one of them. I took Aus tiefer Not schrei ich zu dir, BWV 38, to GA, it appeared on the Main page today. I made the editorial choice to have the references in a separate section, sorted by author name. Reverted. I can't make the editorial choice to include an infobox, because I am restricted, so suggested on the talk and had to accept a compromise, - will never understand why if Bach wrote "2 violins / viola" the infobox can't say the same but some unspecific "strings". I made the editorial choice to list Bach's original title which we are lucky enough in this case to have. Reverted, twice. (See talk.) I made the editorial choice to expand the recordings section to a sortable templated detailed information. Reverted. Compare to last weeks Schmücke dich, o liebe Seele, BWV 180, or any other GA and FA on the topic. The title translates to "Out of deep anguish I call to You". The article left the Main page already, in a state which is not my quality standard on several levels. Yes, nice idea to give the person getting an article to GA some choice ;) - Some day, when you and I have less article work to do, we should amicably discuss the "do and don't" of principal editors. - Greetings from Madeira! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, well one main editor of Sibelius supports the infobox, the other said he'd rather not have one. Perhaps half an infobox would be a good compromise ;-)? I actually like the infobox in BWV 38, if you simply just had the music pictured I don't think it would look better. If there was a nice photograph and limited info though it might look nice without. Either way it's your call I think as you bothered to promote it. I'm not going to propose "No infobox" on the talk page! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I tried to list more choices than infobox, the missingoriginal title being my greatest concern. It is too long to appear in the lead or the infobox where it could be, under |original title=, but I believe it should appear somewhere. I am on 1RR though even if it hurts. - The infobox suggested on Sibelius is "half an infobox", it follows the example of Beethoven and Bach, and FA Chopin, accepted by the principal editor, as you may remember. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

What we need, to really take into the 21st century is some sort of technology where you can click a button and on the top right of the article a virtual organist appears in a video, gives you a brief introduction to the details of the song and then plays the song to you live. That would be more of an attraction! I do think eventually it'll become reality, things will increasingly go 3D on the web and how knowledge is delivered. That Qwiki thing a while back I think was a real progression, but heavily flawed of course. I mean it's 2015 now, we've even passed Back to the Future 2 day now, about time we started getting 2 inch pizzas to inflate and driving in the sky now!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I guess we don't have hoverboards in 2015 as BTTF "predicted", because someone saw the future and did something to avert it. But I really hoped that flying cars would be commercially available by this year; many guys have personal helicopters. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I dunno about that, last week I thought I saw a photo of Justin Bieber carrying one, those awful clothes he wears and that hair and dumb expression, he'd be perfect casting for a new Back to the Future film as a freaky kid of the future!.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:19, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

An award for you!

The Rajinikanth award of excellence and bravery

Generally, the on-screen persona of Rajinikanth, the cultural icon is larger-than-life, brave, honest and efficient. As a habit of awarding this award to those rare editors whose efforts are similar to his on-screen persona in terms of those qualities, i award this to you too Dr. Blofeld for your role in bringing the article of Frank Sinatra to GA status. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

If you like this concept, try to present this/similar award those "larger-than-life" and sincere efforts made by users in bringing articles to GA/A/FA/FL status. You are the fourth editor to win this award after Ssven2, Thamizhan1994 and Yashthepunisher. Cheers! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, yes that's an unusual one, now I'm sure I don't yet have that one! With him though it ought to be the "'The Rajinikanth award of badassness". The Chuck Norris of Tamil cinema.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I amen't fully aware of Rajini's "badass" avatar. Most of the films of Rajinikanth i saw showed him as either a menancing villain or a "too-good-to-believe" character. Anyways, as i said, you can give the same/similar award if you feel the recipients are worth it. BTW, did you manage to watch any one of my recommendations (optional, but i want to know by chance if any)? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Watch the one where he ripped out the drainage system and starts beating opponents with it, Chuck would be proud of that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Which film? Annamalai or Baashha? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

One of those yup, perhaps Ssven2 can remember. I think it was Baashha. Annamalai was the one with the load of cars and fuel igniting at the end.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Is it this? If that is the one, yes. It was a superb sequence. And, i understood that Rajini can defy age and character when it comes to style. Anyone else would have been simple if they play an old village chieftain, not Rajini. Watch this scene from a Telugu film of his. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

At 3:00, yeah that's it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I just remember Annamalai for this scene only. I like it, but this sequence stood out. BTW Baashha is Kailash's future possible GAN (along with a definite FAC for Mullum Malarum). Hope it passes, when you review it! Also Sirvin is working on Devadasu, a 1950s Indian bilingual and his first GAN. Ssven2 wants to make Apoorva Raagangal a GA and it is almost ready. Thamizhan started working on four old Tamil films. Now that everyone became busy, what is your next goal Doctor? Sinatra's FA or something else? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

A dip in the Ganges perhaps? Cleanse myself of the pain in the arse that is wikipedia!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. The Ganges is a polluted river and people are thinking twice to take a full fledged dip these days. Take care Doctor, if you're going to do it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Calling Rajini "The Chuck Norris of Tamil cinema" is really an understatement. He's more than just a group of Chuck Norris facts, period. Don't get me wrong, Doc, but it's pretty stereotypical and this kind of stereotype that North Indians usually follow regarding Rajini. An example is Kapil Sharma's interview with the Shamitabh team in February 2015. His question to Dhanush regarding Rajini went something like this "Rajinikanth saab kuch bhi kar sakte hain" (Rajinikanth can do anything, obviously taking a leaf out of the Chuck Norris facts on him). Dhanush took it in a positive manner and gave a smart answer which I don't really remember.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 02:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

They should have done a film together back in the early 90s! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Ssven2, South Indian cinema itself is a stereotyped thing for Bollywood. I'm sure SRK changed his opinion on South India only to promote his Chennai Express and forthcoming releases. Sorry to say this but i don't give a damn to both Sharma and Dhanush (i feel the latter is just a poor clone of the 80's Rajinikanth minus charisma). I really felt very bad when Rohit Shetty and Juhi Chawla made fun of the Hindi spoken in South India. And, i agree with you. Rajinikanth is indeed an understated actor and IMHO Balachander's supposed bias towards Haasan was also one of the reasons. I fail to understand why Balachander agreed to produce Annamalai and Muthu if he was so concerned about Rajini the actor. BTW Doctor, you're right. Norris and Rajinikanth would have made Sir Isaac Newton dumb by teaming up for a film. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Pavanjandhyala: Bang on regarding SRK, Pavan. It is a very good point. But, it was before Chennai Express (ever since Hey Ram (2000) though). Well, regarding bias, one can clearly spot Haasan's and KB's student-mentor relationship in Uttama Villain (beautifully depicted BTW. Also, loved the Server Sundaram reference KB makes "Long, long, long ago, So long ago no one knows how long ago."). Doc, do try to watch some of Rajini's 1970s and early-to-mid 80s films and you'll see what I mean about him being more than just a bunch of Chuck Norris facts. Pavan, I guess the Uttama Villain story mirrors more of Rajini's life than Kamal's life if you look closely.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Pavanjandhyala: As far as stereotypes go, 2 States (2014) sums it up (though as a film and storywise, it's good, albeit cliched). Ironic regarding Shetty, considering he's originally from Karnataka (hence a South Indian himself). BTW, I don't remember Juhi stereotyping South Indians though. Remind me which film it was again?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 08:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ssven2: SRK began this "performance" since Chennai Express only, i bet that. Not in a film, in an interview, Juhi felt that South Indians can't speak Hindi properly and mocked the way they speak. I didn't watch 2 States and i don't have the intention to watch such stuff. I also believe that film's just reflect, they can't reveal. Example is the narcissist scripting of Uttama Villain. I don't think so that it was Rajini's life in Uttama Villain (i understand that you quote the stardom related thing). I watched both the film closely and Haasan himself during the film's promotion in the city i live. I spoke with him and i understood that he isn't someone we think of (i mean not a straightforward and bold person), but i understood that so much of darkness lurks in his creativity, just like Upendra whom i met at Bangalore this May 2015 (both are sane and pleasant guys, though). Well, lot of stress took a toll on your mind Ssven, ilaj karale apna. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Suggested edit

genuine sexist abuse -> sexist abuse. Using genuine in that context reads like your implying some editors are "making it up." I know that's not what you intend to say but may be interpreted that way. NE Ent 17:22, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You're looking way too much into it but I meant "blatant".♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

I was increasingly irritated with you lately, but your self reflective statement on Jimbo's talk page really changed my feelings. Well done, and I thank you for it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Well I'm honest, sometimes people warmly embrace that, sometimes people cringe at it. I still don't like the tone of the Atlantic article, but if women have really complained about blatant abuse in droves that I had no idea about then I'm at least man enough to admit being wrong about them complaining and I certainly understand how some of them might feel.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

As I made clear in an earlier comment in that conversation, I thought that article did more harm than good. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Well I'm glad you agree, I've not heard many of the others agree with that, I got the impression that they totally disagreed with me on everything.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:11, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rational observer

I'm not one to hold a grudge. Even with somebody like you. It's not my style. I still remember the good work you did and your kindness with helping address points in reviews. When you're functioning properly you can even be a pleasant person. I couldn't give a monkeys what you do on here with your time now, though it's sad to see that you've largely given up on content now. I tried to get you to focus on content but this month you've gone back to your old ways, all because I had to trim a 205kb article and you objected to me having to trim the small amount that you wrote. But if you go harassing me on the forums here every time I comment and liken me to one of the disgusting officials of the Holocaust it's not going to be long before you're banned from here. Every comment you post now it just comes across as pure trolling and you come across as a really spiteful person. It's so obvious that you're trying to provoke a reaction or for me to say something to get blocked that it's insulting in fact that you think I'm on the level. I see right through it. You're proving all of those people months back who thought you were nothing put a nasty troll right and me wrong that you're not capable of rising above it and producing great content long term.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't trolling you, Blofeld. I honestly believe that denying sexism exists contributes to sexism, or any other ism for that matter. My comment was 100% good faith, and I was genuinely proud of you for having altered your stance. What's most frustrating here is that you can't seem to get it through your head that I wasn't upset about your trimming that section. I was upset that you verbally abused me when I asked you to reconsider two specific points, but no matter how many times I explain this you insist that I got upset over the cuts only, which just isn't true. You've used the word troll three times in this section, so don't act like you are above the dysfunction here, as you continue to insult me. I'll say this one last time. I wasn't as upset about the trimming as you keep saying, I was upset about your total lack of leadership skills in working with others and the fact that when I asked you to reconsider two minor points (in a section that you made for that exact reason) you immediately became verbally abusive. No. I'm not working on any new content right now because I'll be retiring in a few days, after the Wikicup concludes. Yes. I thought you were my friend, but I see now that you were only my friend so long as I never disagreed or challenged you. That's not real friendship, and I'm not going to put myself up for more abuse here, as it's not worth it. Good luck in the future. I sincerely hope Wikipedia can heal its terribly negative culture. RO^(talk) 17:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

The reason I started the thread on the talk page with the trimmed early life suggestion was so you could actually edit it yourself to the version you wanted. You were still free to have done that after I proposed it. If I didn't respect your work on it or opinion I'd have simply gone ahead with the chop of it, and not even asked. It was because I actually proposed and sought input from you and respected your opinion on what you wanted and you didn't seem grateful of that which was why I snapped. I just made an initial suggestion. I thought you were objecting to any slight cut of the whole thing because you'd only recently added it, and you did say some things offwiki which made it seem you were getting difficult with it. I lost all faith in you when you started the Kelley thread as it looked like retaliation. Nobody else who actively works with me thinks I lack leadership skills in working with them, most collaborations are a success, largely because people I often work with are liberal with each other's editing and don't mind what each other edits. There's a reason why Myself, Rosie and Nvvchar have produced so many DYKs together, we're totally fine with the trimming or altering of each other's work. The moment another editor gets defensive of it there is a problem.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I apologized for the Kelley thread, admitted it was bad form, and haven't complained to you about anything since. So I don't know why you continue to insult and berate me, as I find the troll comments very hurtful. I'm really sorry we miscommunicated, but it wasn't 100% my fault. I'll take the blame for 50%, but not more. You said all kinds of bad stuff about the Kelley book, and you said it was as though they were trying to paint Frank in a the worst possible light, so I feel a little setup about that whole thing. You told me We hope suggested replacing all the Kelley cites in Early Life with Kaplan, and that's all I was trying to do. All I wanted to do was help you achieve your goal, and I accept that some trimming of early life was needed. Earlier this month and last month I worked with Squeamish Ossifrage at Perovskia atriplicifolia, and they removed or altered lots of stuff I had added there, but we never had a cross word about the article, which is now an FA. It wasn't just the trimming, it was your utter lack of patience and respect. I say this was a failure of leadership because you said one thing and then did another, which was confusing and frustrating. I don't know what else to say, but it breaks my heart to leave like this. I'm glad you can admit that you snapped, but can you see that that's what upset me the most, not the cutting? RO^(talk) 18:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

You really don't remember what you did when Caden complained about me and then what you said to him on his talk page? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't see any chance for making up at that point, and I didn't think it was right that you and your friends bullied Caden and closed the An/I threads when they sought redress. In hindsight, I should have stayed out of that, but I was so saddened by how you treated me I couldn't stand by as you went after Caden. I wish you'd use your influence around here for good, not evil, but that's your choice. RO^(talk) 18:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd never, even if you'd been extremely abusive to me on here, would have turned up at ANI and done that sort of thing [10][11]. I suggest you go back and really examine your edits on 12 October, half of them have been crossed out by an admin. If you'd called somebody an officious prick or called an admin a wanker you'd not have got me turning up to say things like you did. It would be entirely your own business, and if I'd seen somebody turning up on the talk page page of Chetro or Perovskia atriplicifolia trying to force or remove content I'd have perfectly understood why you might have called somebody a wanker or whatever and wouldn't have commented. And I most certainly never would have turned up on the "victim's" talk page with all that you did, and then seemingly befriending him, him conveniently supporting you in return. You even acknowledged later (I think actually you didn't see what happened before you chimed in and only saw it later) you even said here that you could see why I took offence. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) But if you look at all my comments to Caden, you'll see that lots of them were just good advice. I also said they came at you rudely and aggressively, so the reaction was not that surprising ([12]). Had you seen that diff? Those edits at my talk were revdled because they mentioned that two editors that regularly tag-team people here are facebook friends, not because of anything I said about the Caden incident. I'm truly sorry I got involved in that incident. I was hurt and acting irrationally, but I can't change that now, so I don't know what else to do except retire. RO^(talk) 18:33, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I haven't eaten anything yet today, so I have to go get a meal. I'll be back later on. RO^(talk) 18:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Caden was an editor who turned up with a very aggressive comment at a time when I was trying to get some stability with the article, totally unprovoked to support an editor who is one of wikipedia's most notorious trolls and abusers of copyrighted images on here who is banned from past articles I've been involved with. That's hugely disruptive to me. I simply had a joke to another editor about his awful user page boxes and "loving porn" and jerkin the gherkin, vulgar yes, but his user page did basically exclaim "I like to masturbate". I didn't even respond to him directly. And you befriended him? Why? Because you could see "great he's anti Blofeld, that's an alliance I can form with against that lot". What have I done to you since except say the facebook stalking report was creepy and say that you were trolling me on Wales's talk page? " I was hurt and acting irrationally, ". Yes, that was my perception of what happened with Sinatra too. I swear most of the time you genuinely seem to forget things you've said and done on here, the times you do seem to retaliate irrationally do seem to add up. Yes I snapped at you once for not seeing that I was trying to respect your input on how the early life section could be cut when all the others I simply went ahead and did it. But it was what you've done to me since, treating me like one of the most awful people on the site. If you'd simply have not retaliated originally and said "I don't care Blofeld what you think, I insist we include this, there we go added it OK? I'd probably have accepted it and things would have continued in writing it. But you'd have objected again at some point and I could see it wasn't going to work because the Sinatra article needed to be liberally edited without having to ask for permission. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't befriend Caden, but I thought you were acting inappropriately, and I told him so, and I stood up for him. You have no idea how cruel you look sometimes when you team up on people. It's not your best side. You also don't seem to remember how many times you said Sinatra would get way too big at first, but we'd trim it later. Then you woke up one day and sort of freaked out at the size, which of course was nothing to worry about until GA, PR, and FAC, and it was only that large because you added tons of stuff during the preceding weeks. But you started trimming my additions as soon as I started work, when I was on just page 8 of the Kaplan book. I also think the timeframe you put Sinatra on was hectic, and it contributed to the chaotic copyediting environment. In hindsight, maybe we should have trimmed out all the crappy parts before adding anything. That might have eased the tension regarding what we should include. I'm sincerely sorry I was such a raging bitch about it and the Caden incident, but what's the point in apologizing now that you've basically said everybody was right to want be banned 7 months ago? I don't care about this place anymore, and I don't want to put myself up for more verbal abuse and accusations. MBW has been hammering on me for nearly 10 months now, and nobody will ask her to stop. Now the only way I can get free from it all is to retire. If you want to blame me for everything that went down between us that's fine, but I can't deal with this anymore. RO^(talk) 19:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

If somebody crosses me or says something which is particularly disruptive directly then yes, I can be a nasty piece of work. Be nice or stay away if you don't want to be on the receiving end. I don't go about the site picking on people, As for Sinatra, there never were any particularly "crappy parts". It was exactly your comments like that which caused me to eventually snap at you in the first place. I'd already cut about 20 kb from it that day, I did cut the rest first and left the early life life till last as I knew you were working on it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

See, you're too touchy, and I can't stand the pressure of having to choose every single word precisely so as to not risk offending you. Crappy was the wrong word, but if the parts you trimmed were really good they should have been farmed out to other articles instead of removed from Wikipedia. Anyway, I'm tired of going around in circles on this. Sorry I let you down. It was all my fault. RO^(talk) 21:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

So what has changed now then RO? That you realize that actually perhaps I'm not quite the petty, retaliative type you thought I was?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what's changed. You made this thread, and I saw it today so I thought I'd try one last time to reconcile. I don't think you're a "petty or retaliatory type", but you could be a little kinder to people who are/were only trying to help you make the best article possible. It was frantic from the start, and I should have listened to my instincts and declined the offer to work on it. That's my bad. RO^(talk) 21:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It underwent a big expansion in early October because I wanted to get the bulk of the work out of the way and keep our options open on its development. I edit very quickly and efficiently, not frantically. However, I admit I changed my mind a lot on how to approach the expansion as I'd never approached an article of this scale before and if I'd not "frantically" chopped it it would have ended up over 250kb before we knew it. Even up to recently I've been concerned about the length but people point out that Presley, Jacko and Reagan are all comparable lengths and you need a huge article to really cover mega biographies like them. Generally I'd rather not go over 150kb overall on articles but for somebody as huge as Sinatra you can't possibly make it a lot shorter without affecting the comprehension of it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

See. I didn't mean to offend by using frantic, but to take a 12,000+ word article that's not even GA to FA within a few weeks seemed rushed to me. That's just my opinion, but Ritchie basically agreed with me (he said it would take a minor miracle). And you made several threads about how tight the schedule would be, so I'm not sure why you can't admit things were a little rushed there. Anyway, you aren't getting anything from my replies, so I'll stop here and wish you all the best in everything you do. I hope you continue to be a positive mentor and influence whenever you can, because Wikipedia desperately needs people like you to take positions of community leadership. Thanks once again for helping me out when pretty much everybody else wanted me gone, and I apologize one last time for all the bitchy stuff I said and did. RO^(talk) 21:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Ritchie is practically anti-FA. He can't stand the process and won't take articles which would fairly straightforwardly pass to FAC. Of course he was going to say that. I went a good ten days without even editing Sinatra properly, it could have been at the level it's at now last week and a peer review opened and at FAC now, but I didn't think it worth the extra effort. I would never normally work on an article so much each day, I prefer in fact to do it in my own time among other things, but his centenary on Dec 12 for the target. and I wanted to see how it went.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I thought he'd written some FAs. I guess deadlines stress me out too much, as the thought of messing something up and getting raked over the coals for it like I did earlier this year just terrifies me now. That was pretty traumatic. RO^(talk) 22:24, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, you said you're retiring soon so you won't have to put up with us for much longer!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra

Congratulations, doc! So what next, Preparing for the Main Page for December? Frankie _talk 09:00, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. In all honesty, I don't think I'll go for it at least this year as I envisage trouble and the way I feel about the project currently it's a put off. I still have a bit of trimming and work to do on it which I'll do over the next few days but it can be DYKed as the main entry on his anniversary. Perhaps we could arrange for it to be the top DYK for 24 hours on Dec 12th. I'd rather get on with something else which badly needs the work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Doc, you can try to get O'Hara and Gardner to GA and we'll do Grant when I get back in mid-November to active editing. Do try to get him to the main page though (either TFA or DYK). You did it with Carl Nielsen before. It would an apt reward for your hard work.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Ssven, yes of course, I've proposed a 24 hr exception as a main DYK at Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Sinatra. I may need to ask for support for it on the DYK talk page though I'm note sure.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Emailed BTW. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Replied, punk.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Replied again.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for participating in Women in architecture

Thank you for your participation in the Women in Architecture Virtual Edit-a-thon, 15–25 October 2015, sponsored by the Guggenheim Museum, and hosted by Women in Red. In addition to upgrades, we created about 170 new articles. Your contributions are appreciated! --Ipigott (talk) 15:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Commons uploads

The recent upload spree of c:User:Michael0986 could probably stand a look by a subject matter expert if you don't mind. I'm guessing at least some are well known images, and looks like a lot are probably actually movie stills, not publicity photos. Revent^talk 17:03, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Try [13]. Mmm on the surface I can certainly see why you'd be suspicious. I haven't the time unfortunately to look at images at the moment though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:11, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Not terribly urgent. Sorry for missing the link, my cat spilled coffee in my Bluetooth keyboard so until I get it all dried out I have to use my tablet if I want to actually 'type' anything. (sigh) I'll do some actual searching once I get it fixed. Revent^talk 17:14, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Fantastic work bringing Frank Sinatra to GA, feel proud! Loeba (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Violeta Chamorro

I don't know how to deal with this IP editor. I reverted his edits this morning. He is back with inputting POV. I posted on the article's talk page, but it won't ping him, so I also posted on his talk page. Any suggestions? I refuse to engage in an edit war with him, so I guess I just abandon the good article nomination? SusunW (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I did incorporate some of hisher language, as it was indeed more neutral but all of the POV stuff about Ortega I left out. Odd that he doesn't think I made it lopsided about US involvement (I really did try not to whitewash their meddling) but he wants positive statements about Ortega inserted, which have diddly to do with her. I explained to him that he can certainly work on improving Ortega's bio which would be the appropriate place for discussing Ortega's election and/or public policies. Hopefully it will restabilize as heshe did not post anything last night. SusunW (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Let me know if they continue reverting SusunW.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:55, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I don't know what you did, but Jaguar reviewed her today and she passed :) SusunW (talk) 23:16, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Spectre rating

Lookie here. You might have expected more there. Think it's gonna go somewhere more closer to Quantum of Solace?  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:02, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't expect more, 81% is very good for Rotten Tomatoes. The really commercial films always have a hard time from critics. I wasn't impressed with the trailer or the song and choice of singer, Ritchie's was far better ;-), but most critics do seem to view it as a solid entry in the Bond cannon and a very good film overall. It's always going to be difficult to live up to Skyfall.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, it was going to be difficult to live up to Skyfall's expectations. BTW, I've added Cary Grant's books on the project grant page.  — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:29, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't want to scare Kara at WMUK though! I've mentioned for later in November!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I saw Spectre in the cinema two hours ago. It. Was. Amazing. The "hype" may have been amplified a bit in the theatre, but a great film nevertheless. I'll try not to spoil anything, but trust me - don't listen to any of the critics this time. IGN's review is just obnoxious, but then again I don't take them seriously as critics any more because they once criticised a game for "having too much water in it". I admit I didn't like the 1997-like CGI in the Mexico City opening, but it actually gets better the more the film progresses. I thought they set the standards too high with Skyfall, but for me this film was just as tense. Oh, and I don't like Sam Smith. He sings through his nose! I wish I could tell you more, but, spoilers... JAGUAR  18:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

It'll be better than Quantum of Solace and View to a Kill I'm sure!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Much better than Quantum of Solace. The trailer for the film really doesn't do it any favours! JAGUAR  18:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Wishing You...

A typical Goa afternoon at the Fisherman's Wharf for an effortless respite.

calamari

Congratulations on your great work with Sinatra! Just went through it.

Maybe, someday, I'll be able to do a quarter of that! Kaayay (talk) 12:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Awesome Kaayay, thanks! I love Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco so learning there's one in Goa with nice food is a wonderful treat. Mr Nvvchar, myself and Rosie will have to do one on Goa someday!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

• Congrats on Sinatra!!! Excellent work! Montanabw^(talk) 18:40, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

"My wife's gone to the West Indies."

"Jamaica?"

"No, she's a bit of a Goa." Martinevans123 (talk) 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

LOL! Thanks MBW, much appreciated!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:54, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Congrats on Sinatra! OMG, I could never do that! --Rosiestep (talk) 04:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Here is one on Goa, Goa State Museum which you and Rosiestep may like to add and edit.Nvvchar. 07:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou Rosie, that's a lovely looking pie!! Nice work Char, will look at it now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Rosiestep and Dr. B. may like to suggest a suitable hook.--Nvvchar. 15:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Aloysius Larch-Miller

Who do we know that can clean up a picture? I am thrilled that I found this and could care less if we have to use it as "Fair Use", but I think it needs work. Ideas? bottom right SusunW (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Light show is brilliant at cleaning up pictures, he'll never turn them into it looking like they're wearing makeup! I'm kidding. Email me the exact image link and I'll see what I can do.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:18, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Sent you what I have. Thank you :) SusunW (talk) 19:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

@SusunW: File:Miss Alberta Raffl.jpg, you'll need to add the proper license though and a rationale. Sorry—not much could be done with it. It’s newsprint, which isn’t always high quality. While at newspapers.com, I saw another copy of the photo but it was in worse shape than this. I checked Tineye to see if there were any identical ones on the net of better quality, but no luck.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Miss Alberta Raffl.jpg

Did something go-wrong with the template addition, I'm only seeing 'd' in the fields? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It's a fair use image but I was going to set Susun add the rationale as this name confused me as the article is Aloysius Larch-Miller.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm totally confused? That image is Alberta Raffl Pfeiffer and is already on her file see Alberta Pfeiffer The one I sent you for Aloysius Larch-Miller is here: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/3499679/photograph_aloysius_larchmiller/ SusunW (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I didn't actually get the email from you. I must have clicked the wrong link in your paper clippings?? I'll have it to you by later hopefully.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

How weird is that? Sorry for the confusion. My e-mail says it left me at 1:32 p.m. Mexico Central Standard Time yesterday. Apparently it is now searching cyberspace to arrive in the UK? LOL. The Raffl image was rough, but you could at least get a simblance of what Pfeiffer looked like. I get a hint that Larch-Miller was lovely, but truly this image, is very poor. I have been searching for another, but I doubt that I will find much. SusunW (talk) 16:07, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Odd, must have got drowned in the Atlantic, or it hit an iceberg. They still send emails by ship don't they? LOL.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

File:Aloysius_Larch-Miller.jpg

No idea how you got it to clean up that well, but I am thrilled! Thank you very, very much! SusunW (talk) 19:19, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

De nada!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walter Chiari unknown.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Walter Chiari unknown.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Luigi Zampa.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Luigi Zampa.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Il Vedovo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Il Vedovo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Shamsher Gazi

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Shamsher Gazi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Shamsher_Gazi. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Worldbruce (talk) 02:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:La congiuntura.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:La congiuntura.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Francesco Camusso.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Francesco Camusso.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TitinaDeFilippo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TitinaDeFilippo.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LuigiComencini.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LuigiComencini.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:María Félix.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:María Félix.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LuigiPistilli.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LuigiPistilli.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Hualien River.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Hualien River.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rada Rassimov 66.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rada Rassimov 66.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mario Bava 66.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mario Bava 66.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Help please re architecture

Hi there, I see from your user page that you have an interest in architecture. Would you have any interest in looking at the Leadville Historic District page that I have been working on? I am looking for info re the architectural styles of the buildings that are presented in the article. The photos are (mostly) from a new editor that does very good work, and he has some questions as well (see the "Leadville CO" section on my talk page. Gandydancer (talk) 16:01, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Looks good but I'd move the table down a bit and make it span the width of the page.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:09, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I had hoped that you may be able to identify some of the architectural styles. Gandydancer (talk) 22:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Newspapers.com request

I'm not sure if this is easy to find or not, but I'm looking for a photo of Fan Noli that I can verify as being pre-1923. All of the photos on en.wiki/commons now are potential copyright violations and/or unsourced. Noli lived in the US for much of his life so it's possible that he was covered in US newspapers. Let me know if you can easily search newpapers.com for this! Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Calliopejen1, just 95,321 matches, not many! I'll ask somebody.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:34, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Calliopejen1: Found one on LOC which has been added.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:07, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks so much! Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:23, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 30 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Maureen O'Hara page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)