User talk:Boson/Archive 4

Two years ago ...
German history; and institutions
	... you were recipient; no. 880 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Merge question

Hello. You answered a question for me about merging on Drmies' talk page the other day and I was hoping you would help me again. After completing a merge, when adding the {{merged-to|destination page|date}} to the talk page of the merged article, I've been removing existing Wikiproject tags at the same time. It seemed logical to me because the tags were either no longer applicable (such as a Wikiproject Songs tag on an article now merged into an album article) or redundant (such as for Wikproject Korea tag on both the unmerged and merged versions). I haven't deleted any past discussions on the talk pages. But I notice someone re-added one of the tags I removed, so maybe I did something wrong. Can you provide any guidance? I'm merging a bunch of song articles to their relevant album/EP articles and don't wanna be screwing anything up. Thanks so much! :) Shinyang-i (talk) 01:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Where was this? Sounds strange. And Boson, thanks for helping out--it's appreciated. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- You mean where did someone re-add the tag? Lemme see... Talk:I'm Your Girl (S.E.S. song). The person might have just done it without looking, thinking someone had removed it by mistake. Shinyang-i (talk) 02:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  - I'm not an expert, and I don't recall actually encountering this issue with the projects I have worked on, but it does appear to be deliberate and envisaged by the system. If you look, you will see that the other editor changed the class to "class = redirect", and the project template (which I would guess invokes a general template) assigns Category:Redirect-Class song articles. Other projects also have an equivalent category. I suppose it makes sense for the project to be able to easily find all the pages it is "responsible" for, but I suspect that in most projects nobody bothers to (a) remove the tag or (b) change the class (unless there is a bot that detects incorrect classes). I occasionally have a bout of checking assessments and categories, so I might even have changed a class to "redirect" myself in the past, when checking the statistics and finding a redirect page with, say, class=stub.

I would guess that the proper thing to do when a page is redirected is for someone to change the class to redirect for all project banners, but I might notify the project when making such changes to banners of projects that I am not a member of. On the other hand, I can't imagine anyone objecting to the class being corrected; if the project wants to do something else, it is, at least, handy to have all the affected pages in one category.

PS: If you look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs##Progress, you will see that there are over 14000 redirect-class pages, so it looks as if the project uses the information. --Boson (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

PPS You may be interested in this utility], which enables you to generate assessment statistics (summary or details) for any (?) project. --Boson (talk) 03:25, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Boson, this is all great info. From now on I will drop a note to WP Songs that I'm changing class to redirect and then do so when editing the songs' talk pages. This is good info I didn't see at WP:Merging (or maybe I overlooked it). I had no idea that was even a "thing". I'll check out the utility, too. Thanks!! Shinyang-i (talk) 03:39, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi, Boson! I'd like to invite you to comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Irataba/archive1. The article has been significantly improved since the failed FAC, and I'd appreciate your input at the peer review prior to re-noming the article for FA. Rationalobserver (talk) 16:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

West Germany - reverting edits

Hi. I would like to know why you reverted by edits to West Germany as Berlin was the symbolic de facto capital (as stated in the article) whilst Bonn was the actual capital. How was it "a good-faith miscorrection"?

You changed the text in the infobox from

capital= Bonn"

to

capital= Bonn (de facto) West Berlin (de jure)

So you were stating that West Berlin was the de jure capital.

This is – to say the least – not uncontroversial as a matter of law, and should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice.

It is inconsistent with the statement in the article

"While legally not part of the Federal Republic of Germany, as Berlin was under the control of the Allied Control Council, West Berlin aligned itself politically with West Germany and was directly or indirectly represented in its federal institutions."

In other words, the West German government had no authority to determine the de jure status of Berlin – as the reservations of the occupying powers also made clear when they consented to the Grundgesetz.

The provision

"Die Hauptstadt der Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist Berlin." (now Article 22 of the Grundgesetz)

was not added until some time after re-unification (in September 2006), though Berlin became the de jure capital in September 1990, when the Einigungsvertrag (Article 2) came into force.

The status of Berlin is too complex to be discussed in the infobox, but additional information on the position of West Germany, East Germany, and the Allies could possibly be provided in the body of the article (with reference to reliable sources). The issue is, however, quite complex and would probably warrant a separate article to avoid giving undue weight to details in a high-level article.

--Boson (talk) 13:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Irataba

Thankyou for your input at the peer review. Irataba is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

RFA Nomination

Howdy, I would like to nominate you for Adminship. There has been a significant divide in the admin requirements and I feel that you are more than suitable for the Mop. If you would like to accept this nomination, please let me know so I can complete the process. Thanks, Nakon 05:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your trust. I would be happy to accept the nomination. --Boson (talk) 11:25, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Irataba FAC3

Irataba is back at FAC: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Irataba/archive3. We look forward to your comments there. RO ^(talk) 16:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Precious again

German history and institutions
Thank you, vetera editor with "special knowledge of Germany, German history and institutions", for quality contributions to articles such as Walter Hallstein, for watching articles related to the European Union, for precision and clarification, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 880th recipient of my Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:19, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Help request

Since you're an active editor with knowledge of German and English, would you be willing to help with a translation? de:Udo Hebel looks like he'd easily qualify for an English article, but he doesn't have one yet. Nyttend (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Assuming it's OK with you, I will shortly create the article as a rough translation, hopefully meeting minimum sourcing requirements. It will probably need copy-editing and additional footnotes. --Boson (talk) 14:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. I noted that the text generally wasn't inline-cited, but not being particularly familiar with de:wp standards, I wondered if perhaps most of it were drawn from the Weblinks section. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 15:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Additional help with AIFMD?

Hi Boson, thanks again for all your help with the AIFMD article. I recently proposed a new section here looking to update the article with information on marketing and the AIFMD passport. If you have a spare moment, could you take a look at what I've put together and let me know what you think? Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I have commented on the article talk page. --Boson (talk) 13:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 6 July

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 Apostrophe page, your edit caused a duplicate page number 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) 00:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Blatant flattery

You are a miracle of diplomacy. EEng (talk) 13:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I try to be like the Dalai Lama's pizza. --Boson (talk) 13:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Gracious! Of course, even The DL has his limits. [1] EEng (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Policy page 'Civility' under discussion

Sir/Madam, Sorry for my perhaps misunderstanding your posting on Wikipedia talk:Civility#Proposed section: 'Offensive language' in my first and hasty reaction on it, 28 July. I've now posted a much more thorough reaction there, addressed mostly at you. Be a good chap/girl and have a look at it (no offence meant). --Corriebertus (talk) 16:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

No offence taken, but I would recommend avoiding phrases like "be a good girl and ... ". <smile> --Boson (talk) 00:00, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Advice taken. New post (for you), on mentioned talk page. --Corriebertus (talk) 21:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I concur with Boson on that, as a wandering bystander. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 21:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Reply from SMcCandlish

Moved from User talk:SMcCandlish § Formatting of this page

– By request

Original post: 'I came here because you referred to your talk page at Talk:Harassment. Starting with the section "One of the reasons gardens are walled" and continuing to the end of the page, the formatting of this page on my screen is so messed up that it is practically impossible to read it. Have you any idea what could be causing this? Perhaps some formatting code at the beginning of that section needs deleting. Given that I can't read your talk page properly, perhaps you could reply at my page. Thanks! --Boson (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2015 (UTC). PS: It appears to be trying to render everything as part of a table. --Boson (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)'

The issue is question has been hatted with {{Collapse top}} on my talk page, and peace achieved with that editor (for now; we're in frequent conflict, for about 2 years now). The short version is, I was accused of a sexist attack for having mentioned working on (to de-sexism-ize, ironically; see the RM on it's talk page) the article presently at Shrew (archetype), and mentioning this in a talk page discussion, about doing similar rewriting at that other article, in which a female editor was present. Her assumption that "shrew" was an insult referring to her, instead of an article I'd worked on with similar issues, like I said it was, was pursued in a bad-faith-assuming way on my talk page, and it closely mirrored a similar accusation from a month or two ago, from the same editor, simply for using "woman" in an example sentence (that didn't say anything negative about her or about women). I'd also been previously repeatedly attacked for having the gall to AfD or CfD some things that mentioned "women" or "woman" in their names, like unnecessarily gender-forked categories, and a couple of pseudo-articles of trivia that should have upmerged, after removal of unsourced junk, into Women's sport in Australia.

The gist being that even with things as they are presently, and no special new topic-specific anti-harassment policies, certain parties are already WP:GAMING the rules to demonize debate opponents, for flimsy rationales that few if any other editors will question publicly, because it opens them up to the same accusations. It's not limited to sexism accusations.

The article at which the "shrew" stuff turned pointlessly ugly is also one that potentially could attract racist trolls, and my accuser has been heavily agitating to get rid of this article, Race (biology) (being RM'd to Race (taxonomy)), in language suggesting that anyone who wants to keep this article is a racist troll. But the article is about reliably sourced usage of "race" in taxonomy (biology) (e.g. a study about whether two races of the same Philippine insect should be considered separate species or not) and isn't closely connected (at least in modern times) to race (human categorization). In another discussion I've seen something like "prejudiced against people with disabilities" used to attack someone opposing some HTML/CSS tweaks (regarding tables, I think) that would comply with WCAG accessibility standards, but which were changes that would be difficult to implement on WP presently, and which are not among the Category A (more important) WCAG requirements, but "it would be nice if", lower-tier suggestions. And so on. I think we've all seen examples like this of someone from a particular group (or as often as not stepping in to "represent" people from some other group whom the activist feels doesn't have an adequate voice; see the transgender-related flamewarring at Village Pump) to accuse others of wrongdoing when what's really going on is that not everyone shares the same level of hypersensitivity.

As for my talk page, can you tell me your browser & version, OS & version, and screen resolution? I can probably fix whatever the problem is. I'll start looking at the page code where you said the issue started up, in case it's something obvious like some unclosed <div>. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 21:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

I think I've found the problem. Strangely, the problem seems to be the div in the 4th line of the page that is not closed. Presumably things get out of whack when another div occurs. --Boson (talk) 22:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

PS: It seems to be OK now, even looking at the version where I added my comment, so it looks as if you must have fixed a template or something. Thanks again!--Boson (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

NP. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 06:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Potential admin

Hi, I notice you're on Wikipedia:List of administrator hopefuls. Wikipedia would benefit from more admins. If you have been editing for more than 12 months (preferably 24+ months), and have been editing fairly consistently for the past 6 months (preferably 12+ months) with at least 100 edits a month (this tool will help) - or an explanation for any gaps, and haven't been blocked in the past three years - or a good explanation for a recent block, don't have a recent history of edit warring or arguing with other editors, feel you can explain why you wish to be an admin, can demonstrate some understanding of Wikipedia's procedures and processes, or know where to go for guidance, and are confident enough to go through a RfA, please get in touch with me. We can talk about it some more, and if all looks OK, I'll nominate you. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your (potential) support. I am interested in pursuing this. I have never been blocked or banned. I have been editing fairly consistently since late 2006, with average contributions of over 100 per month. --Boson (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Cool. We can talk further here. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:28, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Checking in on AIFMD

Hi Boson, hope you're well! Just wanted to check in with you to see what you think about the suggested update for the AIFMD introduction and whether you'd be able to take another look at that. Also, in case this is of interest to you, I've also recently opened requests to update and expand two related articles: European Market Infrastructure Regulation (request here) and Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (request here). Thanks again, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 14:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I had been waiting to see if there was any more feedback. I have now implemented the amended proposed text and added attributed quotations to the Background section to replace the tagged statements formerly in the lede. --Boson (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

02:22:10, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Horton225

Horton225 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:West Who (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I made considerable changes from the first draft for the West Who micronation entry. It seems to be in line with many of the articles about other micronations. Can you give me some specific ways to improve the page so that it will be accepted. Thanks.

Horton225 (talk) 02:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page. --Boson (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Review of Submission on George Alfred Besaw

Hi Boson. I am attempting to edit the article on George Besaw so that it can be published. Would this intro help?

George Alfred Besaw (March 2, 1880 ~ Jan 19, 1970) was a photographer and publisher of real photo postcards in the early 1900s. Besaw’s images captured life at the turn of the 20th century in California, Oregon, Nevada and Wisconsin. Over 100 years later his iconic postcards are sought after by collectors who may pay $100 or more for a rare and pristine card.

The photographer should also be added to the list of notable residents of Reedley, California but I don't know how to do that.

As for existing publications, "History of America, Reedley, by Kenneth Zech, published by Arcadia Publishing, copyright 2015, ISBN 978-1-4671-3267-1 contains endless references to George Besaw's post cards. And, so does "Postcard History Series, Kings County" by Michael J. Semas, published by Arcadia Publishing, copyright 2005, ISBN 0-7-7385-3109 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum-x. Finally, "The Reedley Exponent" Souvenir Centennial Issue published on October 27, 1988 published the article “Besaw recorded Reedly history on film” in Section S.

Thank you for your help. Vic Mizrahi VicMizrahi (talk) 01:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Replied at user's talk page. --Boson (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

VicMizrahi (talk) Happy Tuesday Boson. Thank you for your reply about establishing notoriety. I suggest the following references to the first paragraph:

George Alfred Besaw (March 2, 1880 ~ Jan 19, 1970) was a photographer and publisher of real photo postcards in the early 1900s. a ^[1] Besaw’s images captured life at the turn of the 20th century in California, Oregon, Nevada and Wisconsin. B ^[2] Over 100 years later his postcards are sought after by collectors.^[3]

Will that work?

Thank you kindly.

VicMizrahi 22 Sept. 2015

References

^ {{“Besaw Recorded Reedley History on Film”, The Reedley Exponent, Reedley 27 October 1988.
^ Zech, Kenneth (2015). Reedley. Images of America. Arcadia. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4671-3267-1.
^ Bulls, Jim. “A Snapshot in Time: Reedley Photographer George Besaw, An Early Pioneer of the Postcard”, “Kings River Life”, 2 April 2011.

@VicMizrahi: I have altered your code, above, very slightly (normally a "no-no" on talk pages, so don't copy me) because it messed with the page formatting. I also added the Reflist-talk template, so that the references are listed immediately after your post; otherwise the footnotes would be placed at the bottom of this talk page. References are a bit difficult at first, but it gets easier with practice. There are some tools that help. I can probably give you some hints but I would need to know how you normally edit article pages. I am assuming you are editing from a desktop PC and are using the classic "code" editor (not visualEditor). If so, you can set your preferences to display forms for entering citations. Do you see a button with the word "CITE" above the editing box when you are editing this page.? There is also a button with a symbol like a signature for adding your signature, i.e. the 4 tildes (~). If you don't see that, you can of course sign your talk page posts by adding --~~~~ manually.

Your suggested addition looks good. I've fixed some of the formatting things below:

George Alfred Besaw (March 2, 1880 – Jan 19, 1970) was a photographer and publisher of real photo postcards in the early 1900s.^[1] Besaw’s images captured life at the turn of the 20th century in California, Oregon, Nevada and Wisconsin.^[2] Over 100 years later his postcards are sought after by collectors.^[3]

References

^ "Besaw Recorded Reedley History on Film". The Reedley Exponent. Reedley. October 27, 1988.
^ Zech, Kenneth (2015). Reedley. Images of America. Arcadia. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4671-3267-1.
^ Bulls, Jim (April 2, 2011). "A Snapshot in Time: Reedley Photographer George Besaw: An Early Pioneer of the Postcard". Kings River Life. Retrieved September 24, 2015.

Before you try re-submitting your article, I think it would be best if you removed a lot of the detail (you can keep a copy for future reference). Think what the reader of an encyclopedia would expect, and, at least at first, stick to what you can find in books and magazines. --Boson (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Boson-

I am struggling with citations and especially how to handle references to the Federal Census or the State of CA Death Index. Yes, I have been using a desktop PC to write the article and classic code/wikitext to edit. It is so cumbersome! Should I move to Visual Editor?

Meanwhile I have further edited down the article (which was already much more condensed than the full biography that I wrote). Once I figure out to handle the citations, I will attempt to re-submit the article.

Again thank you for your help and patience.

VicMizrahi 24 Sept. 2015 VicMizrahi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

As regards VisualEditor, you might like to ask for feedback from others at the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions. As someone who has been responsible for software quality control in real life, I am somewhat loth to advise a new user to use a feature that is still classified as being in beta test. Having said that, I think it might be helpful for you. It cannot be used on talk pages, so it's not helpful on this page, of course. One good thing is that once it is enabled you can edit the same article using either the VisualEditor (selecting the Edit tab, or using the WikiText editor (using the Edit Source tab). You can enable VisualEditor from the Beta tab under Preferences. If you need assistance, ask at the Teahouse or Help Desk or let me know here.

There are other tools that may be of help with the WikiText editor. Directly above the editing box, you may see a toolbar. If you don't, you can enable it under Preferences|Editing: Show edit toolbar (requires JavaScript). You may als want to check Enable enhanced editing toolbar .

If the edit toolbar does not include a Cite button, this can be enabled at Preferences|Gadgets: Editing, refToolbar.

Using the editing toolbar you can, for instance

sign your talk-page posts (mouseover tool tip: Your signature with timestamp)
display a form for creating citations (mouseover tool tip: Insert citation)
make selected text bold (mouseover tooltip: Bold text)

Hope this helps. --Boson (talk) 15:14, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Boson-

I have decided to publish my entire article on George Besaw first, hopefully with Arcadia Publishing and then re-submit the short bio later. It occurred to me that if I published the book, I would have to cite Wikipedia and would not be able to use my own words in the book format without quoting Wikipedia as the source. If I reverse the order of 'publication', this problem evaporates.

Most likely you will be put in the position of advising me again on the submission process in about six months or so. Until then, I wish to thank you for your help and patience.

Sincerely, VicMizrahi 27 Sept 2015 VicMizrahi (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Good luck with the book! You might want to consider obtaining professional advice regarding what rights you assign to the publishing house, etc. If you submit an article to Wikipedia that is similar to something previously published, you should ensure that you are in in a position to establish that you own the copyright and are able to grant a licence to Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. --Boson (talk) 08:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Today

Music in your ears and heart! (in a box) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:09, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Chairman

Nice work on the image! Lou Sander (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

2016 year of the reader and peace

Thank you for support, with my review, the peace bell by Yunshui, and best wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Click on bell for the soft sound of peace (and jest) ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Ping. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Rita Schwarzelühr-Sutter

Hi Boson, thank you for your message - sure, please add some meat to the bones by adding sources, the person in question is mentioned several times on wikipedia.org already!! Thank you so much Terartis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.87.224.97 (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon

You are invited...

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon

Host: Women in Red

Sponsor: Art+Feminism

1 to 31 March 2016

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list)
--Ipigott (talk) 08:51, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Singular They

Hello.

I would like to ask you a question about singular they. I could not find answer to it on it's page.

As "they" can be used as singular neutral gender, how would be verb "to be" used with it? They are or they is? It is singular, so it is confusing.

Random sentence: "As spectator, user cannot affect anything they ____ watching."

Thank you very much for your answer. Jade D Face (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I suppose the key sentence is

"The so-called singular they is morphologically plural, and is accompanied by a plural verb."

but that could be expressed more clearly and much more prominently.

The article also has the following

"Singular they has the same inflected forms as the "normal", plural they, i.e. them and their. They are usually both used with the same verb forms, i.e. "when I tell someone a joke they laughs" would be non-standard."

I'm not sure what happened to that bit of text, but I will take a look at it. --Boson (talk) 13:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rita Schwarzelühr-Sutter has been accepted

Rita Schwarzelühr-Sutter, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

gobonobo ⁺ ^c 21:59, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Religion in the European Union

Good Evening

According to the UN Resolution No 817 7/4/1993, "Macedonia" is called FYROM and this name is being used by the UN on every official document.

Now if you think that wikipedia should not use the Resolutions of the UN that is fine for you.

I thought that the people of the international community and internet pages like wikpedia that tends to follow the decisions of the international community should accept and follow the Resolutions of the UN and this is why the Security Council was summoned for.

By the way look at this, I think that you should do something about it unless wikopedia does not give a dam for the Resolutions of the UN. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_817

Best Wishes George — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.86.74.255 (talk) 00:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Resolution 817 makes it clear that "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" is not the recognized name of the Republic of Macedonia but a provisional designation for use within the United Nations Organization "pending settlement of the difference that has arisen over the name of the State". This designation is also used internally by the EU and in other diplomatic contexts. It was also considered as a possibility for Wikipedia articles, but ultimately rejected (except in the very limited circumstances described in the naming convention).

With editors from different parts of the world, there were, in the past, very long and difficult discussions, as there have also been with other topics such as the Republic of Ireland and Depictions of Muhammad. I do not know how familiar you are with Wikipedia's mechanisms for resolving content and conduct issues, but following severe disruption and an inability to reach consensus, the issue was taken to arbitration, and a number of decisions were subsequently made by consensus that resulted in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia), which links to parts of the discussions. The decisions were not taken lightly and are intended to be binding.

--Boson (talk) 02:07, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Archiving

I am archiving all potential admin discussions here, as I currently do not have the time or energy to deal with these matters, and it's not clear at the moment when I will have the time and energy. Sorry for the inconvenience. When matters change, and if you're still not an admin, but would like to be, we can resume the discussions. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Thanks for being a member, - news go here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

\

sorry all I had was some American cookies. Thebaconfairy (talk) 23:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

GAR input sought

Hi, I followed here from Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement and I am reaching out for an opinion; as the member of the project I hope you could provide input on the topics of sourcing, neutrality, extraordinary claims, and level of detail in the articles, as well as general Wikipedia policies.

It has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The issues above are included in the review, so I hope this also aligns with your interest in European history. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz; no specialist World War II knowledge is required to be able to contributed to the GAR.

I would welcome feedback or a review of the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would also welcome any feedback you'd be willing to share. Thank you and happy editing. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:58, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Transport and the European Union has been nominated for discussion

Category:Transport and the European Union, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. 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. Tim! (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Health and the European Union has been nominated for discussion

Category:Health and the European Union, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. 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. Tim! (talk) 11:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Micronation West Who

Hello,

Several months ago I tried to submit an article on the Republic of West Who, also know as West Who. Wikipedia has about thirty micronations listed and I would like to add West Who. Micronations are an obscure area of interest. West Who has been mentioned in several news articles but none as the focus nation. West Who was a website (www.westwho.com), Facebook, Twitter and other social media accounts. Over the past three years, 40,000 visits to the Republic of West Who website have been recorded by Webnode. I have looked at the other micronation entries on Wikipedia and West Who is noteworthy. Do you think you would approve the entry?

Sincerely, John Farr (Horton225) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horton225 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but I can find no significant coverage of West Who in independent, reliable sources. Some of the references given seem to be incorrect, in that there is no mention of West Who. --Boson (talk) 08:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I made the corrections you pointed out. I replaced one of the footnotes with an article that does mention West Who. A number of micronations listed on Wikipedia have no significant media coverage. (Horton225 (talk) 05:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC))

The Bloomberg reference is a step in the right direction, but the requirement is significant "coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". A brief mention is not sufficient. If other micronation articles appear not to meet the requirements of WP:Notability, it may be appropriate to propose their deletion. --Boson (talk) 10:16, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Miscorrection Indeed

I notice you have reverted my correction to the 'Budget of the European Union' Article. The references you cite (miscorrection. See OED, Garner, Gowers, Fowler, MWDEU, etc.) are too vague to be accessible to me, however, I wonder have you really read or understood them ? For my case I will present the following reference for you to study: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015/06/grammar-myths-among-or-between/ it's general thrust is to point out that among need not be used in place of between when more that two items are being considered which would support your position. It terms this notion a myth. It does however point out that this is not always the case, in particular I would draw your attention to the paragraph:

Specifics versus generalities

Beware! Note that I said ‘within certain contexts’. Among and between are not interchangeable in every case or with regard to every meaning. .....

And the examples which follow:

A treaty was drawn up between France, Germany, Italy, and Greece.

but

There was agreement among members that fees should not be raised.

So unless you can find a credible reference to refute this specific point I think you'll have to agree I'm correct. I'll leave it up to yourself to correct your mistake, like a kind of test of character :) :) :) Me fail English, that's unpossible ! Usjes (talk) 14:10, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible infobox

How did you set the color for the collapsible box? When I created one it came out a different color. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:19, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

If you're talking about Talk:Noël Coward, I didn't. Someone else collapsed it.--Boson (talk) 07:25, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

You are invited to a discussion at MOS talkpage.

Hi, Boson,

I merged part of WP:BANDNAME into MOS:THECAPS in an attempt to make things less confusing, only to have it rudely undone without any explanation by Prickzi, I have asked him or her to please, then, discuss the reversion on the talk page, which he/she has so far refused to do. Will you please enter your opinion on if we should leave the merger in place or why not to have it in place, here: [2]? Nancy Pantzy (talk) 01:18, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

C104 article notes

Thanks for adding hyperlinks from the notes! JamieHanlon (talk) 18:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

CDU changes

Why do people keep calling the CDU a far-left party? Thanks for the updates.Friedenj (talk) 18:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Nazi party symbols

The eagle didn't always face left or right. On the eagle recovered from the Graf Spee, it faces straight ahead. Illwill4781 (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Why are you telling me this? --Boson (talk) 06:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Request to review Syntactic Structures

Hello, I have been working on the article on and off for a long time now. I would be happy if you took some time to read the article and gave me some feedback so that I can improve it in terms of content, language, tone, neutrality, precision, concision, etc. Thanks in advance. Zaheen (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll add it to my in-tray, but don't expect anything soon. --Boson (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. No pressure. I'd be happy to read your eventual feedback. Zaheen (talk) 07:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Collaboration products newsletter: 2016-11

Latest news from the Wikimedia Collaboration team, about Notifications, Flow and Edit Review Improvements. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you.

What's new?

Our quarterly goal is to add filters to the Recent Changes page, that show ORES good-faith and damaging tests and filters around new users. The work on this is proceeding mostly as planned. We hope it shall be available as a Beta feature (only on wikis where ORES is available as a Beta feature) before the end of the quarter.

Edit Review Improvements [More information]

Recent changes

The filters design prototype for Special:RecentChanges is now stable. Development of these filters will now start. [3][4]

Flow [More information • Help pages]

Recent changes

Notifications concerning Flow are no longer all grouped together in your preferences. The "Edits to my user talk page" category will now include Flow notifications about your user talk page (if your user talk page uses Flow), and the "Mentions" category will now include mentions on Flow pages. Previously, all notifications related to Flow were grouped together in the "Structured Discussion" category. [5]
The orange bar will now also be displayed when a message is posted on a your user talk page if your talk page uses Flow; previously, it was only displayed if you had a wikitext talk page. [6]

Collaboration team's newsletter prepared by the Collaboration team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 17 November

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 Durgawati 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) 00:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Boson. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Boson. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nabomita Mazumdar

Hi there, I justed wanted to let you know why I removed most of this edit you made to the Nabomita Mazumdar article to make sure that my removal of a large amount of text doesn't look like I was vandalising the article. I left the changes you made in text, but took out the long list of references and the categories because they were already there before your edit. I'm thinking you didn't see the duplication before you saved, but if there was some reason behind the duplication, than note my removal was made in good faith because I didn't know why the content was added again. If I need to be reverted, can you let me know so I know what's happening. Cmr08 (talk) 05:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that! I was just changing the numbered list (#) into a bulleted list (*), so I have no idea how I managed to duplicate the list (and the remaining part of the article) in the process. --Boson (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

^[FBDB]Hah! And you call yourself admin material! E Eng 14:43, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Just another example of my diplomacy. I think it was the computer that did it, but it's only human! --Boson (talk) 15:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Collaboration products newsletter: 2016-12

Latest news from the Wikimedia Collaboration team, about Notifications, Flow and Edit Review Improvements. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you.

What's new?

A decision has been made about how the Recent Changes filtering scheme will affect current ORES beta feature users. When this new filtering system rolls out as part of the beta, it will replace the current ORES display on the Recent Changes page. That means the automatic color coding, the red “r” symbol and the “hide probably good edits” filter will go away, to be replaced by the new, more nuanced set of filters and user-defined color coding. All other pages that have ORES features, like Watchlist and Related Changes, will remain as they are now for ORES beta users. We think those pages could also benefit from the new filtering system. But we'll wait to see how users react to the beta test—and make any necessary changes—before we start spreading the new UI around. That's the plan as it currently stands. As always, please let us know if you have any thoughts, in any language.

Edit Review Improvements [More information • Help pages]

Recent changes

The Filters for Special:RecentChanges description page is now finished and ready for translation.
On wikis that use ORES, new colors have been chosen for damaging changes displayed on a list of changes. [7]

Notifications [More information • Help pages]

Problems

Sometimes, after marking an important number of cross-wiki notifications as read, the counter remained at 1. This is now fixed. [8]

Flow [More information • Help pages]

Recent changes

Due to a bug, it was not possible to activate Flow on user talk pages as a Beta feature. This is possible again for wikis that have that feature. [9]
Flow boards can be moved without constraints. However, this requires the move-Flow-board right. [10]

Miscellaneous

The MoodBar extension has been removed from all wikis. [11]

Collaboration team's newsletter prepared by the Collaboration team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

10:09, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~

Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!

Hello, Boson! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia!
Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Linguist If you reply to me here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to the start of your message 12:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Good luck with your RfA!

Merry Christmas

Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 20:54, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Your successful RfA

Congratulations Boson! Your RfA was successful. You are now an administrator on the English Wikipedia. I hope you have just as happy a time editing in the future as you did before your RfA. You may want to look at the New Admin School to read up on any tools you are unfamiliar with.

Congratulations!

It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator!

Useful Links:	Administrators' guide • Administrators' reading list • Administrator tools • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for edit warring • IRC admin channel (#wikipedia-en-admins ^connect)
Your admin logs:	blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads

Welcome to the admin corps. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

[1] {{“Besaw Recorded Reedley History on Film”, The Reedley Exponent, Reedley 27 October 1988.

[2] Zech, Kenneth (2015). Reedley. Images of America. Arcadia. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4671-3267-1.

[3] Bulls, Jim. “A Snapshot in Time: Reedley Photographer George Besaw, An Early Pioneer of the Postcard”, “Kings River Life”, 2 April 2011.

[4] "Besaw Recorded Reedley History on Film". The Reedley Exponent. Reedley. October 27, 1988.

[5] Zech, Kenneth (2015). Reedley. Images of America. Arcadia. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4671-3267-1.

[6] Bulls, Jim (April 2, 2011). "A Snapshot in Time: Reedley Photographer George Besaw: An Early Pioneer of the Postcard". Kings River Life. Retrieved September 24, 2015.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[1]

[2]

[3]