User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 98

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Email from ArbCom[edit]

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

Why does this kind of post sound kinda ... ominous to me? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Standard Arbcom arrangements. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 07:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ritchie, will you come in please. I wish to talk to you. EEng 07:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Email from TRM[edit]

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

Isabel Pell[edit]

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

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

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

@SlimVirgin: This seems to be an artifact of the MediaWiki software. I used the same procedure for restoring Isabel Pell as I did for other articles started by Elisa and deleted per G12. You can see the same issue in the history for Allanah Harper, where I appear to add 2K of prose, despite the overall size of the article going down.
As far as I recall, somebody moved Green Tomato Cars without a redirect while I was copyediting it; resulting in me re-creating the article without realising it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ritchie, thanks for the explanation. What should have happened at Isabel Pell is that, once you'd realized the mistake, someone should have asked Jimfbleak or another admin to undelete. The admin who undeleted would also have removed the copyvio tag, so the history would show tag added, tag removed. Then, with the article restored, you could have made your copy edit.
Instead, you recreated the article as your copy-edited version, then undeleted its history, which meant (1) you acted as admin and editor on the same article; (2) the article was added to your list of creations, even though you didn't create it; and (3) the article history looks odd (one minute tagged as copyvio, the next an addition of 12,577 bytes described as a copy edit). The way to avoid this in future is to make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article, except perhaps for issues such as BLP violations. You can ask any admin to undelete (or whatever admin action is needed), and that leaves you free to edit. SarahSV (talk) 16:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Passing comment, I imagine that rev deleting a cv is appropriate, but slightly agree with caution in recreation. Despite the awareness of copyright amongst active contributors here, which is largely ignored elsewhere. adding something missing is a worthy task and deserving of attribution and guidance. But could be I am missing the point. cygnis insignis 10:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article" While this is generally good advice, in this specific case I assumed I had general consensus to restore the article after it was pointed out I had made an error and there was no obvious disagreement. "In straightforward cases, the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion." If a third party had complained that the article should not have been restored and should have remain deleted per G12 then yes, that would be involved. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Simple undeletion wouldn't have been an issue. It's that you copied the deleted text, changed it, created the article as your own, then undeleted the history. That created an entry in your creation log showing you as the article's creator. I've never seen an admin do that before. I thought it worth mentioning so that it can be avoided in future. SarahSV (talk) 02:15, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox[edit]

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

DYK nom?[edit]

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

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

@Ssilvers: Sure - Template:Did you know nominations/The Debut (Jackie Evancho album) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! Let me know if I can help you out with any proofreading/copy editing, which is my forte. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

question of procedure[edit]

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

I assume we're talking about King of Hearts unblocking Wnt. Since the blocking admin endorses the unblock, unless you have further information that Wnt is being disruptive and should be blocked now, there is no need for any further action. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The blocking admin did not recognise a consensus to unblock, but did not register an objection; not quite the same thing. I don't, of course, have any new information (as they were blocked), just my personal conviction they should not be contributing any time soon. I did request a hypothetical response, not forthcoming so I will leave you to it. Have a good one. 11:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Ref HELP, again, FYI. Paragraph Deleted Again[edit]

Hello Ritchie. Thank you for taking an interest.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you

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

And Someone Deleted the transsexual parts of that paragraph again

Hello Ritchie,

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

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

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

Thank you

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

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

Hello Ritchie,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Making Progress

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. I see the sentence fragment got fixed, but

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

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

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

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

I hope we find a way to include.

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

(talk page stalker) @Hathalm: you probably got caught in an edit conflict, don't worry it happens all the time. Just while I'm here, could I ask that you don't start a new section ever time you reply? Just reply beneath the other editor using a progressive series of colons; see WP:INDENT for examples. Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 16:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As Godric has said, he can't find any sources in newspapers.com that talk about you and transsexuality. If he had found any, he would have put them in the article and that would have ended the dispute. I have asked Megalibrarygirl for assistance as she is a professional librarian and has full access to many offline journals and periodicals, including a lot of local news sources, that aren't widely available on the end of a Google search.
From my personal point of view, if you look like a woman and act like one, I'll treat you as one. There's more stuff about transsexuality I can talk about but it involves real-life friends of mine that I'm not at all comfortable mentioning on-wiki; suffice to say I don't have a problem with it at all. And it is important to get the issues to discussed out there. (I note above that I confused transsexuality with transgender - the two are different, but I do have a friend in each of those "categories") In the meantime, you could stick User:Ritchie333/Userbox Trump on your userpage, it might not be able to get the article fixed quicker, but it will at least make you feel better. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:00, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ritchie! I looked at several databases and tried searching under both "Jenna" and "Jennifer." However, I see no reason not to include the information about Joseph Ware's personal life. It's written about here and I'd consider it to be a reliable source and it's not written by Jenna. Clearly, his open mind and his marriage of 22 years would have an effect on his life and should be part of the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The applicable policies are verifiability and biographies of living persons. Hathalm, you need to be aware that Wikipedia does not deal in personal knowledge, since without independent verification, that would go against the policy on original research. But the place to discuss article content is its talk page, which is Talk:Joseph F. Ware Jr. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Ritchie, for your helpful comments and insight. :)

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

Two articles that could do with a little support[edit]

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

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

DYK nomination of The Debut (Jackie Evancho album)[edit]

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

@Ssilvers:, you probably want to check this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:47, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, don't worry, I am watching it and will follow up. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Notice

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

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

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

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

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

What has this got to do with me? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You moved it into mainspace, so were the logged page creator. ——SerialNumber54129 12:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)I imagine that they notified you because you were the first registered editor to edit it. StudiesWorld (talk) 11:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail[edit]

Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Arbitration motion[edit]

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

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

DYK for Elizabeth Williams Berry[edit]

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

You've got mail![edit]

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

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

Arbitration motion regarding Ritchie333 and Praxidicae[edit]

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

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

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

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

Whaaat?[edit]

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

Take a break and do come back[edit]

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

Seconded. Best wishes, El_C 07:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In triplicate Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:26, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

?[edit]

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

Die Fliege

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

love's labour's lost
Thank you for pink cat, written with Fylbecatulous in mind. (Why is the article not in it's navbox? ... and the image not in the category?) I'll write Britten's Purcell Realizations with you in mind. I went over my images from "it is enough" to "life is too short" but think a cat may fit best. Wishing you well, and hoping that you'll be with us again some day, - a selfish wish because the place is much sadder without you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ps: then I found that today is Fylbecatulous day, and have to fight tears reading her "bestow pink kittens for moment of silence...", pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
remember open arms? 28bytes just removed the black bar. We hope! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This happened; a secret Arbcom case with no (publicly visible) case request, request for evidence, or finding of fact. While I've explained at length recently why this kind of Nacht und Nebel action is sometimes unavoidable, I find it even less likely that Ritchie333 can be classified under the violent criminals and genuine lunatics which that star chamber clause was intended to address than I do Fram. ‑ Iridescent 09:05, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. That's quite disconcerting. Not to say worrying. Does this mean Threesie now has some kind of "gagging order" over this? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm subject to an in camera IBAN handed to me by Arbcom, but that was for very different circumstances. There's no reason at all that this was conducted in a similar manner. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 09:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I'm sure Gerda will remind us all, there is no need for any of us to be told the reasons. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Franz Kafka: Das Schloss
... about alienation,
  • unresponsive bureaucracy,
  • the frustration of
  • trying to conduct business
  • with non-transparent,
  • seemingly arbitrary
  • controlling systems ...
if you need to see it again, - we really have too much of this frustration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very sorry indeed to see this. I hope you'll feel able to come back after in the future. You will be missed!, Best Johnbod (talk) 13:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can only imagine this is aggravating, but your presence is really valued here Ritchie, and I hope to see you back. I emailed you yesterday ignorant of this mess, and while you obviously have bigger things on your mind now, if you've seen it you know at least one of us values your judgement very highly. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 13:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry to see this , You're a great editor and you're a fucking great admin too!, I hope you'll come back in the near future, In the meantime I wish you all the very best, Thank you for everything you've ever done here!, Take care, Regards, Dave 14:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Man alive[edit]

I was just about to finish up the M25 GAN review. I hope you haven't been "got". Don't be a stranger. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 08:01, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see what's happened, and completely understand your frustration. Good luck dude. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 09:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m hoping this is just a "petulant frenzy".

Also hoping you have a well-deserved break and return when ready. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, copyright restrictions prevent me from linking directly, but I trust you will treat yourself, while you are away, from the same album, with Frank's wistful and poignant "Illinois Enema Bandit". Terry Bozzo 123 (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC) Ray White's amazing vocal, on the 2011 version posted by Boaxune, is highly recommended.[reply]
I'd just like to clarify that I was not trying to imply that anyone at ArbCom is actually from Illinois. Nor even that you are necessarily a "college educated woman". Sorry for any misunderstanding. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Please don't retire permanently[edit]

Damn. I saw the AN posting and I could just tell it was bad. Fuck's sake, why the hell wasn't this a public case with public statements? I hope this is a temporary "I need a break Wikipedia" retirement and not a "Apparently I'm not wanted here" – you definitely are – or "I'm done with this shit" – well... it's shit, I'll give you that much – retirement. Now, I'm not gonna see random roads and railways in the UK pop up on my watchlist anymore :( Mr rnddude (talk) 09:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just to piggyback on the above heading. The project would be unquestionably worse off without you. I wouldn't have even made it to RfA without your assistance! Kosack (talk) 13:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ritchie, I discovered this upon logging in today, and I feel absolutely awful about it. Please do understand that there are many of us who very much value your work here. Please do come back when you feel comfortable doing so. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed; I said nice things about you at WT:ACN earlier today, but I'll say them here too. I don't really know what happened, but I really hope you'll come back after the sting subsides. You're a real talent, a decent human, and someone who cares about the encyclopedia; we need that here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. I have no clue on details, but I'm thinking WTF? Montanabw(talk) 23:50, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ritchie, you're a good person and a good editor. Stay strong. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 01:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I, too, understand why you want to take a break from the project at this difficult time for you. I truly hope that you enjoy your time off, and that when the right amount of time has passed, that you will decide to return to the encylopedia. Be well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The world has run amok and we are living in strange times indeed. I do hope that this is not a permanent thing and that when the dust settles you will return. You are a valuable editor, who gets collaboration, and beyond that, you know how to navigate the ins and outs of this quagmire and steer through the drama. I cannot state enough how much you have helped me through the years and am shocked and confused that this has happened. SusunW (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of M25 motorway[edit]

The article M25 motorway you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:M25 motorway for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 06:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Ritchie. Never mind the drama boards, this here is what Wikipedia is all about - writing good-quality and accurate articles on topics such as this, which benefits 700 people every day. I hope we'll see you back soon. UK motorways good topic anyone? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:41, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement![edit]

Now you're retired we can have that beer! Govvy (talk) 09:52, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I won't allow it![edit]

I WON'T ALLOW IT! However, in case a Fram-like situation develops that merits a shortcut, so far I've got WP:WHICHWITCHDITCHEDRITCH? EEng 10:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EASY-PEASY-SLEEZY-SQUEEZY-ON-THREESIE? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:27, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

just a thought[edit]

Hey Richie,

Been a long time since we interacted, but thought I'd drop by given current events. My thoughts:

  1. I do applaud you sticking to your principles
  2. It's harder to change the system from the outside than it is from the inside.

After reading your post at AC/N - I can certainly understand your frustration and trepidation. I hope your retirement is temporary and that given time to sort things out and developing a M.O. that you'll consider returning. You're very good in administrative tasks, I'd hate to see anything chase you away from that. All that being said - I do wish you the best. — Ched :  ?  — 18:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Carpenter head shot.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Richard Carpenter head shot.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. 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. 1989 (talk) 03:26, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you with open arms[edit]

... as a thank-you-click didn't work (because of too many GA symbols for Cirt), thank you for reverting censorship. Sylvia Geszty (pictured as Cleopatra in the East) - did you know that article dates back to April? I like the pic a lot! Thanks also to GRuban who dug it up, and David who cropped it. Celebrating open arms (vs. secret police, with no appeal). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need a caption competition for that - I'll start the ball rolling with "I beg of you, please let my hook be in prep by next week!" Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:58, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
28bytes, not again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I changed to just "welcome!", but the blue blues days are still with me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How about: "Welcome to review, TRM!"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:London encyclopedia[edit]

I think it should be {{London encyclopedia|###}}. I just tried it and it works, although differently than the Butt-Stations template, as with yours, the value of ### is irrelevant, or maybe that's want you wanted? 82.14.227.91 (talk) 09:58, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any strong feelings about the template; I just created it because I cite the London Encyclopedia a lot, and I got fed up with copypasting the cite book template again and again and again. I don't know what the ### does; maybe Redrose64 can help. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:00, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, never mind. I can see you're not assed either way. 82.14.227.91 (talk) 10:03, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The |### does nothing because the template doesn't contain any code to process parameters. So {{London encyclopedia}} is the only valid form. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question on how to make a wikipedia link work in Gmail if there's a period at the end of the Wikipedia link.[edit]

Links for these two pages...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr. and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr.

...are not working when used in a Gmail. The link is made with a Command C, copies well including the period at the end, but when a receiver clicks on the link, it doesn't work because the period at the end is not being included in the link.

Does anyone know how to make this work?

Hathalm (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hathalm, That is... strange! I was able to reproduce it in gmail. If you change the last period to %2e (the Unicode encoding for "full stop"), it appears to work. It's an ugly workaround for sure, ex: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr%2e. SQLQuery me! 16:22, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hathalm: expressly include the full url. If you are composing an email, use the insert link command and enter the entire path. Note also, this problem occurs elsewhere as well, for example your links above don't work, but you can make them work like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr.
That one doesn't work
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr.
That one does work.
xaosflux Talk 17:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SQL: FYI above. — xaosflux Talk 17:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Xaosflux, The issue is that gmail converts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr. to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Sr when you paste the link into an email. That being said, using the insert link button works as well to properly link the article, without ugly utf-8 encoding. SQLQuery me! 17:31, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all. You solved it. (Embrace.) :) 184.88.249.16 (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propriopceptive Writing and Linda T. Metcalf Articles - since deleted[edit]

Dear Reviewers,

Proprioceptive Writing is a legitimate intellectual and psychological method of endeavor, and of exploration. The content itself reinforces this - one has but to look into the scholarly sources, references, and associations to see that presentation of the discipline is more than a matter of mere promotion. Add to that, the associations with numerous listed academic institutions, credentials of creators and contributors, and relationships with noted centers for reflection, and we affirm that our dispute with it being labeled "advertising" is just and sound.

If the reviewers would like more information, they are welcome to look into the sources within the article itself, or to email any of the following persons to seek a better grounding in the nature of the subject:

Derek Williams, PWC/PWCSE web admin - jdw0408@gmail.com - Anne Bright - Ann Bright, PWCSE Chief Instructor - anne@thewayofwriting.org - Linda T. Metcalf - PW Co-founder, Principal Proprioceptive Writing Instructor - linda@pwriting.org

Please also consider the following existing Wikipedia articles, to help contextualize the work of PW and its founders:

Peter Elbow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Elbow

Ira Progoff - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_Progoff

We more than welcome recommendations for edits/revisions to format and tone, if that would be preferable.

Best and Thank You,

Ddubb0044 (talk) 17:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC) and The PW Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddubb0044 (talkcontribs) 17:49, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ddubb0044: The problem wasn't so much what the article was about, but how it was written. As Wikipedia is a collaborative process, other editors want to be able to help copyedit the article, add sources, and generally improve it, but if it's structured in such a way that makes it difficult to understand what the subject material is about, that can't happen.
By comparison, I was looking at this Metcalf Consulting piece about how to motivate 12 year olds at school by focusing on positive things; that immediately grabbed my attention and gave me a better understanding of the topic. Obviously you can't compare an encyclopedia article to an essay, but an article needs to be presented in a calm and neutral manner describing the facts; that way it will grab people's attention and make them understand the subject matter.
Moving forward, I think it would be easier to start an article on Linda Metcalf. The good news there is that she seems to have a confirmed post as Professor of Graduate Counseling at Texas Wesleyan University which sounds like she meets the notability guidelines for academics, so it ought to be possible to write an article about her. The other good bit of news is we have an established project, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red which is dedicated to writing and improving articles about women, and I can call on several people to help write the article. I'll have a look and see what I can do and get back to you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've put a follow-up post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Linda T. Metcalf. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am not sure that this is the place to write to contact Richie333. The Linda Metcalf that you linked to is not the Linda Trichter Metcalf who is the founder of the Proprioceptive Writing Method. I am a certified teacher of Proprioceptive Writing, and a practioner of over 20 years. I have written on Proprioceptive Writing in relationship to Adult Development and Carol Gilligan's ground-breaking work on Voice and girls' development at the Harvard University Graduate School of Education in 1996/1997. I would like to edit the article off-line and then repost for consideration. Does that make sense? JhydeP42 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhydep42 (talkcontribs) 18:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BKFIP?[edit]

You asked the other day if 101.98.126.25 is this guy. I didn't have a strong feeling at the time, apart from noting a similarity of attitude, but now I'm starting to wonder. XOR'easter (talk) 23:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@XOR'easter: It does like BKFIPish; however, as other editors have said, you went over the three revert rule on the article and were lucky not to get a block; while WP:3RRNO says you can revert banned editors without being sanctioned, you shouldn't rely on that and should have rock solid evidence they're banned and that the edits they are reverting to are definitely disruptive. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)
Yes, this whole incident is making me realize that, whatever small good I manage to do around here, it's not a kind of interaction I am well-suited to... Where does one file a report about suspected long-term bad editing? Is there even a point to doing so when they change IP address twice a day? XOR'easter (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you're sure it's the same person, you can start a thread at WT:BKFIP, which I see you've done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I had hoped that would be the end of it, but see Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Links_from_lead_sections_to_parts_of_the_article. XOR'easter (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have declined that unblock request, and reminded him that in the past, an administrator has been in conversation with his employer about abusive conduct on Wikipedia. He is (AFAIK) still community banned, so anyone has a policy-backed reason to instantly block with talk page disabled. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hopefully the discussion there can go on in good faith now (and it seems to have entered a better regime). What's the best thing to do if they come back there from another IP, as seems plausible given their habits? XOR'easter (talk) 19:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Opinions vary. In my view, if they are cleaning up articles and improving prose and nobody is reverting or complaining, I won't do anything. It's only on the first disagreement and disruptive act that it is then worth blocking for sockpuppetry. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sonny West (DYK)[edit]

Just an afterthought but I was thinking of adding the image from the article - any idea how to add it to the nomination? Dan arndt (talk) 02:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dan arndt: The easiest way to do it is to find an existing nomination with an image (I picked Template:Did you know nominations/Trafalgar Square off the top of my head) and copy and paste the section immediately below the line starting "{{DYK nompage links", including the div and the main page image template, adjusting the filename to suit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - do you need to sign off that the image is okay, given that I added it after your assessment? Dan arndt (talk) 08:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, that should be okay, as the image is on Commons and verified as having a suitable free licence. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hhggtg3279[edit]

Hi, on July 8, you blocked Hhggtg3279 for edit-warring and personal attacks. Now, the user has continued to be disruptive. I can't list all the reverts (there are a lot), but here are some from the last 24 hours: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. DeluxeVegan (talk) 06:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plus this one [16] two minutes ago. DeluxeVegan (talk) 06:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DeluxeVegan: The disruption on Spider-Man: Homecoming has stopped (presumably everyone has got tired of edit warring with everyone else and gone to bed); however be advised I am keeping an eye on the article and if it starts up again, people (not just Hhggtg3279) who go over the three revert rule are at risk of getting blocked. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CherryPlayer[edit]

Hello. Could you please explain why article about CherryPlayer was deleted from Wikipedia while the ones about Media Player Classic, VLC Player, etc. still present there? Oldfriend (talk) 13:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oldfriend: Breaking sticks tagged the article with {{db-g11}}, asking it for it to be deleted and recreated because it was written in a way that was fundamentally unsuitable to be an encyclopedia article. Nobody has recreated it yet. To start off with, you could use a source such as this review from GHacks and this German review from the Swiss IT Magazine, using basic information from those. VLC Player is still present because it has sufficient sources of information to easily stand as an encyclopedia article without being challenged. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:05, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies and explanation[edit]

Hello,

I noticed that you canceled some of my CSD requests. One of them seemed to have a message stating that I "was trying to place as many tags as possible". [17] I can assure you that is not the case. I am currently working on reducing the huge backlog at the stale drafts wikiproject/drive. It has lost traction a bit and I am trying to maintain its work. All articles I mark have been stale and are taking up space for possible articles. The Student Center at Yale had no content, was stale, and the user who created it had very little edits outside of it. That warrants a web host violation.

However, since you are the administrator, I respect your reasoning but would like a bit more info on the situation.

Thank you AmericanAir88(talk) 13:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AmericanAir88: "I am currently working on reducing the huge backlog at the stale drafts wikiproject/drive." Can you show me a link to this drive, what its aims are, and how it is compatible with writing an encyclopedia? "All articles I mark have been stale and are taking up space for possible articles" I don't think the Wikimedia Foundation are desperately short on disk space; if they were you would see emergency equipment fundraising drives advertised on the site. I suspect more disk space is being used on vandals' sockpuppet accounts mocking administrators. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts/Stale drafts which is part of the WikiProject Abandoned Drafts. By saying "taking up space for possible articles", I meant that user space drafts that are notable are being overshadowed by all the stale ones. Also, what do you mean by sock puppet accounts mocking admins? Do they really do that? AmericanAir88(talk) 16:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I note the project appears to have been started by two indefinitely blocked editors, which makes me somewhat suspicious of its purpose. And yes, vandals really do this stuff, and I think it would benefit for the project for all those blocked editors' accounts with 0 edits to be deleted, and the remainder redacted. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: Oh my. Thats shocking. Even you had some socks trying to mimic you. The purpose of the project is mentioned on the official wiki project page. I'll make sure to be on the look out for any mimics. Anyway to find new users? Also, one of the leads of the project was LegacyPac. Sigh. He was a big contributor who helped a lot, but sadly his temper and immaturity caused his downfall. What do you suggest we do with the project. AmericanAir88(talk) 16:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to recall trying to ask for clemency about Legacypac on ANI, but it didn't take consensus. I'm not sure what to do with this project; the problem is, with a few exceptions such as Milhist and occasionally Food and Drink, projects tend to not get much focus anymore, so I'm not really sure if there's a good place, other than possibly the Village Pump. I would be interested to know if there's some follow-up just to determine its purpose and nature, and also if it's technically possible to redact usernames. I know that policy states you can't delete users because of attribution, but Fuck this I will go vandalize another fucking site (talk · contribs) has absolutely no business existing on Wikipedia, full stop, has been blocked for over a decade, and has no contributions whatsoever. I don't see a technical reason why it can't be expunged. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: I agree that users should be able to get removed entirely, all logs gone. The stale draft drive does benefit wikipedia by allowing notable drafts to be recognized more. Also, there are so many G11 and U5's out there that the drafts need to be in check. For WikiProjects, I have seen Aviation, US roads, United States (The 50k drive), GOCE, Orphanage, CheckWiki, Cleanup, and Portals be constantly focused on. I have been trying to revive certain Wikiprojects such as "Move image to Commons" and "Missing articles", but it is hard doing a WikiProject that has been nearly abandoned. I mean look at This. Its sad to see WikiProjects slowly fade out of existence. My fear is that they will suffer the same fate as portals, mass deletion. What should the plan be for everything? AmericanAir88(talk) 17:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best plan for projects is to downsize them and merge them into a larger project. Although I rebooted Wikipedia:WikiProject Led Zeppelin because I fancied doing a bit of work on some album articles, that's very much the exception than the norm; similarly Wikipedia:WikiProject Pink Floyd which saw huge input from Parrot of Doom, pigsonthewing and John, but since PoD and John have largely disappeared and Andy is busy elsewhere, it's kind of fallen by the wayside. I think the conclusion is that projects don't have a long shelf-life without a disproportionate amount of effort put into them. That said, there is still plenty of activity on the encyclopedia; in particular a lot of IPs do writing and fixing up established articles more often than you realise. I wonder how many of them are retired / banned editors who are still bitten by the editing bug? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:55, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: That is probably the case with retired editors. It would be sad to let WikiProjects go. I wish there was a way to get more editors aware of all the various drives such as abandoned drafts or the huge missing article page. TAFI seems to loosing steam. AFC, GA, DYK, and FA are going strong though. The one thing that needs more attention is the backlog. The backlog is growing and its not reducing by much, apart from the Orphaned articles. We need a way to drive more attention to it. Theres so much to do, yet I feel like it isn't claimed by people kind of like the ocean, so much potential exploration but only 5 percent explored. Anyway, I personally love being given tasks to do as I get a huge sense of accomplishment such as a backlog reduction. If you have any work to do or need any help. Im always here to help out. AmericanAir88(talk) 19:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]