User talk:Rrburke/Archive 14

Amphitheater at Lixus

The text I removed from Amphitheater at Lixus had been incorrectly included from the description of Carnuntum. Sfsheath (talk)

powernet

opinion was not biased it is the honest opinion of a majority of their clients please replace the article - if anything the mission statement provided by themselves is biased and untrue.

regards

Rodrigue Tremblay

This information is completely true, Rodrigue is my grandfather, I would know. So i feel this contribution shouldn't have been deleted.

Chuck DeVore

Thanks for working to correct my Wiki entry. The person who you are correcting must have me confused with someone else.

I have two unmarried daughters, not three.

I was born in Seattle, not in Iowa.

I have no idea whom this person is referencing.

My sincere thanks!

Sup Rrburke

Hey Rrburke Thanks for correcting my page. But you didn't have to I just added that we are also showing saint Symbolism. Btw Please reply and tell me how to send links, I just started my account thanks! :)

Royal British Legion edit

Hi it appears that i am on a shared i p address as i certainly did not make any changes to the Royal British Legion page.And if I did they would not be in the tone of the edit that was made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.236.128 (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

About becoming an administrator

Wikipedia needs you! Take the poll.

Thank you for your all contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project.

Have you ever thought of becoming an administrator? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia.

If you would like to find out about your chances of a successful RfA, please visit:

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

If you have already taken the poll recently, please disregard this notice.

Thank you!

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Rebecca Barnard

Both photos are album covers. Fair use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubberbandme2015 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Rubberbandme2015. I'm afraid fair use is not a blanket term that permits use of any non-free content. The fair use rationale you've added for each of the album covers states that the purpose of including these images is "to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question". However, the covers are not being used in this way. There are no articles dedicated to Everlasting or Fortified. Instead, the images are being used merely to decorate the article on the artist, which is a bad FUR. Please see WP:NFCC criterion 8 for more information. In my opinion, the use of these album covers in the article Rebecca Barnard fails this test. -- Rrburke (talk) 10:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Knocked Up

Hello, I just removed the actor, because he doesn't take part in the movie. If you don't believe me just look at internet movie database IMDb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.15.128.191 (talk) 10:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, but in future please use an edit summary so it doesn't appear you are just deleting content at random. -- Rrburke (talk) 10:56, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

The death and life of John F. Donovan Inc.

Good morning,

Please do not put the poster back on the page.

As part of the production team of The Death and Life of John F. Donovan, my job is to insure the correct information of this movie are kept on all websites, and fans always post the wrong synopsis and the wrong poster.

The poster that I deleted is a fan made poster and is NOT the official movie poster.

Thank you for your understanding.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by JFDinc. (talk • contribs) 12:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I see from this article in IndieWire that what you're saying is correct. I will ask that the image be deleted. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Wanted to drop a note here. The "production team" of that Xavier Dolan movie has no right in controlling that article. It is a direct, blatant violation of WP:OWN. As long as your edits meet Wikipedia standards, you have nothing to worry about. Happy editing! Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 18:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Mango

Hello sir.Glad to see your message. Because it is now confirmed that some one monitoring but there some content is biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usman3915 (talk • contribs)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Phrasing like "mouth watering fragrance" does not belong in an encyclopedia article. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Pre-Settlement Funding

Hi,

That article is flagged for three flaws, so I'm trying to improve it. I'd like to understand what your logic was in reverting my changes? If there's an issue with anything I've done, please let me know. If you check out the talk page you'll see that I've been asking questions for a few weeks now, since as early as April 4th:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pre-settlement_funding

So please engage with me, and let's make that page much better. As it is right now, it's poorly written and doesn't have adequate sourcing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.128.134 (talk) 16:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Whoops, wasn't logged in. Not sure how to tag myself, but I'm "Chzrm3".

Hi, Chzrm3. Welcome to Wikipedia. The problem with your edit wasn't the content, but the fact that, except for the section on NYSTLA, you didn't cite any sources. One of the principal problems with the article is the lack of citations, so please make sure that anything you add is backed up with references to reliable, published sources. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information. If you have difficulty, please let me know what I can do to help. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

PROD now applies to files

Just to let you know, you can tag files with {{subst:prod}}. Alternatively, you can use Twinkle to PROD files. --George Ho (talk) 19:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, George. Thanks for the tip! -- Rrburke (talk) 10:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) George Ho (talk) 13:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Chicken tikka masala

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8161812.stm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.80.2 (talk) 10:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

A single news story does not represent a consensus. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Multiple chemical sensitivity

Hi- is this where I reply? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Neil (talk • contribs) 11:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Here is fine, or you may want to take the issue up on the article's talk page, Talk:Multiple chemical sensitivity. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok I'm new to editing and probably erased something on accident. I find the MCS article to lack cohesion and contain a distinct slant toward a dismissive and anti-scientific approach.

I am attempting to revise it into something more objective, but still addressing the arguments at play. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Neil (talk • contribs)

If you're looking to make large-scale changes, you may want to think about proposing them on the talk page first to see if there's a consensus for such changes. Consider starting a thread at Talk:Multiple chemical sensitivity.

As for the content of your changes, you removed the article infobox with the edit summary "non-objective assessment". I don't see anything objectionable about the infobox. Here you made a change that makes a statement entirely contrary to the cited source that anchors it. Finally, here you replaced a external link with one that doesn't work. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The infobox states that it is pseudoscience. This is not a qualified referenced statement.

Quackwatch is a blog- it is not up to the standards of scientific rigor to use as a citation. I'm still learning the editing tools. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Neil (talk • contribs) 11:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

And for that reason I would really recommend you take the topic up on Talk:Multiple chemical sensitivity to try to forge a consensus. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

One issue that I see is that making statements determined by consensus can be problematic, as most of the people helping to compose this article lack a scientific background, or requisite clinical experience to qualify anything that they are saying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Neil (talk • contribs) 12:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

That is a potential problem in a great many articles, and the best way to obviate it is to provide reliable sources in support of your point of view in the context of a discussion on the article's talk page. Wikipedia editors may not be subject-matter experts, but many are nevertheless adept at evaluating the merits of sources and assigning them due weight. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:32, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The Death and Life of John F. Donovan Inc.

Hi Rrburke,

I do not know how to use Wikipedia, and can't find the place where to write to you, so sorry if I have to edit another message of yours.

I am part of the production team for The Death and Life of John F. Donovan Inc.

Someone keeps putting on the page wrong informations (synopsis) and wrong poster. The poster that is currently shown on the page for the movie is a fan made poster and our team has been trying take it down since the beginning.

Please do keep my edit to remove the said poster as it is a fan made poster and not the actual movie poster.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by JFDinc. (talk • contribs)

I have asked for it to be deleted. -- Rrburke (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

How to add disambiguation

Hi, I am facing issue in creating an article with the name 'Surendra Pratap Singh' who is an author because an article with the same name exists about an Indian Journalist. How to add disambiguation? TIA. Larissaddn (talk) 12:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

You could name the article Surendra Pratap Singh (author). -- Rrburke (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, about the stelvin closure - I looked it up and saw the name was not correct.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.60.93.35 (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

History of Closter, NJ

Dear Rrburke,

I just noticed your note concerning my removal of a section of the history portion for the Wikipedia page for Closter New Jersey. First, let me introduce myself, I am Chairman of the Borough of Closter Historic Preservation Commission, and past President of the Bergen County Historical Society. I have researched and traced out the "Frederick Closter" story and found it's origin (see the report I wrote for the Mayor and Council on the subject below).

Although repeated in some publications, when one traces the full "Frederick Closter" story back to it's earliest form in print one finds it is pure fiction. As a historian with 42 years experience studying Bergen County History I can assure you "Frederick Closter" does not exist in a single primary source record. The story becomes ludicrous when one simply looks at the alleged "facts." The story claims "Frederick Closter, received a grant of several thousand acres as a military reward from King Charles I of England" - that is impossible since King Charles I of England was executed in 1649, and The English did not capture New Netherland till 1664!

For a reliable history of the early land owners in the Closter area please refer to this source, Genealogical history of Hudson and Bergen counties, New Jersey by Harvey, Cornelius Burnham, Published 1900 https://archive.org/details/genealogicalhist00harv_0 , in particular the key map between pages 6 & 7 and the text on pages 27 & 28. You will also note that these reliable sources do not contain the "Frederick Closter" tale - History of Bergen and Passaic counties, New Jersey, by Clayton, W. W. (W. Woodford); Nelson, William, 1882 https://archive.org/details/historyofbergen00clay , History of Bergen County, New Jersey by James M. Van Valen, 1900 https://archive.org/details/historybergenco00valegoog , History of Bergen County, New Jersey, 1630-1923, Frances A. Westervelt, 1923 https://dcms.lds.org/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE218714

Surely if there were any shred of truth to the "Frederick Closter" legend one would find it in a historical publication prior to WWII (and the internet age), but alas the story is fiction - regardless of what "Alternative, sources indicate." Although as Joseph Goebbels said "If you repeat a lie long enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself."

If you would like to discuss this further you may email me at tim@timadriance.com

Please remove any reference to the fictional story and retain my edits.

Thank you, Tim Adriance 98.109.115.130 (talk) 14:16, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

The true origin of the name for the Borough of Closter and correct early history for the Borough web site

By Tim Adriance

It is time to for the Borough of Closter to bury the fictional character “Frederick Closter.”

Currently the Borough’s website contains the following account of the origin of the town’s name – “It is believed that Closter was named after Frederick Closter, who received a grant of several thousand acres as a military reward from King Charles I of England.”

Absolutely no one by the name of Frederick Closter exists in the historical record pertaining to the early land grants anywhere in or near Closter, or in Bergen County, or even in neighboring Rockland County. As a matter of fact King Charles I of England was executed in 1649, and at that time Bergen County, Rockland County, and the whole of the Hudson valley were under Dutch control (The English did not capture New Netherland till 1664!). The first land grant in New Jersey wasn’t given till 1661 when the last Director-General of New Netherland, Peter Stuyvesant, granted a charter to the village at Bergen (now Jersey City), establishing the oldest municipality in the state.

The completely fictional “Frederick Closter” and the story of “his land grant” first appears during World War II when a serviceman from Closter, who full of civic pride, writes an account of his wonderful hometown and it’s rich history for a military newspaper. Unfortunately this figment of a G.I.’s imagination has been repeated over and over without a single thread of historical documentation!

It is a shame that such a wonderful town with such a rich history is attached with a ridiculous story fabricated out of whole cloth, and that the Borough continues to perpetuate this fairytale on the Borough’s official website, which in all truth makes the Borough look rather foolish.

So where does the name of the Borough actually come from and when does it first appear? Within the Auryansen Family document collection the name (and its evolution) first appears in the historical record. The first documented mention of the name “Closter” in association with this geographic area is from a deed dated August 7, 1745.

The following should replace the first two paragraphs on the Borough’s website –

The Lenni Lenape Indians tilled the soil, hunted in the woods, and fished in the rivers and streams before the Dutch arrived in the early 18th Century. The Dutch settlers, though, left an indelible mark on the area. Early records show that after the English take over of New Netherland English Governor Philip Carteret in 1669 granted a real estate speculator named Balthaser De Hart a strip of property which extended east and west from the Hudson River to the Tiena Kill, and north and south from today’s Cresskill into Palisades New York, it is within these geographical boundaries that lies what is now known as Closter, New Jersey. The northern half of this tract of land consisting of 1,030-acres (extending from what is Closter Dock Road northward) was purchased by Barent and Resolvert Nagel on April 25, 1710 who along with the Vervalen family first settled what is now Closter.

The name Closter is of Dutch origin and it first appears in 1745, when Arie Arieaense purchases “A certain tract of land lying on Tappan in Orange County and in the province of New York at a certain place called Klooster” (At that time, Closter, New Jersey was considered part of New York State.). Klooster, means “a quiet place, a monastery or cloister.” This location in 1710 when the Nagel brothers first settled it was a quiet place, with very few people in the immediate area. The topography gave a sense of isolation and protection, tucked behind the highest point of the Palisades and protected by limited access. The original settlers must have felt “cloistered,” as if in a monastery. The name was originally pronounced with a “ow” sound, phonetically, “Klowster.”

Later, just before the American Revolution, these isolated settlers began to feel the imposing hand of the British Crown in their lives – not only in governmental affairs but also by the influx of English culture upon their own language and culture. And as a result the “K” in Klooster was dropped and was replaced with a “C” so the now growing village became known as Clooster.

By 1795 with the emerging new American culture the second “o” in Clooster was dropped, and the American English “long o” sound was adopted which led to today’s pronunciation of “Closter.”

Reminders of Closter's early “Dutch” history abound - with local streets named after some of the early families (Bogert, Demarest, Durie, Naugle, Parsells, Vervalen, Auryansen, Haring, and Westervelt), and a rich collection of unique Jersey Dutch houses.

y

butt y pelz no — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.4.208.122 (talk) 13:51, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

plez

plez let me edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.4.208.122 (talk) 13:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Rrburke. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rrburke. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Kirkby Mallory Edit

Hi, thanks for your message. The edit on the Kirkby Mallory page wasn't intended to be a test - it's factual, with a 3rd party reference source ....and looked ok to me! So I'm not sure why it wouldn't be suitable? Could you give further explanation as to what makes it appear like a test? NWHBHeritage (talk) 12:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@NWHBHeritage: Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. My message pertained to this edit. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:03, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Season Greetings

Merry Christmas Rrburke


Hi Rrburke, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
May next year be prosperous and joyful.
   –Scopecreep ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 12.18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Thanks! Merry Christmas to you, too! -- Rrburke (talk) 12:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thorstein Veblen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spencer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Schlesinger

I can find no reference that says Joe Schlesinger is still alive. Unless you can find one kindly stop changing his article to imply he hasn't died. 199.119.232.220 (talk) 21:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@199.119.232.220: Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. You added his date of death without a source. If you have a source for the date, please feel free to re-add it. Until then, please don’t. -- Rrburke (talk) 21:57, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Joe Schlesinger death

You're absolutely right. Many sources with today's date (11 Feb 2019) stating that Schlesinger has died; none that I can see actually declare that he died today. I'll revert my edits until I can confirm the date. Thanks for pointing this out! Oakvillian1 (talk) 22:15, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome

Ten years!

We give thanks, we give thanks ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jean Chrétien, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Union Nationale (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sobibor Uprising Survivors.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sobibor Uprising Survivors.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Hi, @WolfmanSF: Please don’t put erroneous vandalism warnings on users’ talk pages. Semi-automated tools like Twinkle and Huggle are only to be used in cases of incontrovertible vandalism and never to revert good-faith edits even when they are erroneous, which these weren’t. Please see MOS:ELLIPSIS and https://style.mla.org/changing-initial-capital-letter/ if you wish to understand the rationale for the edits in question, which I have restored. -- Rrburke (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I was indeed hasty and mistaken regarding the ellipsis. I wonder why the ellipsis symbol is deprecated here. However, regarding your change of the initial capital letter, I still disagree. I'm not going to revert you, but I suggest you reconsider. Given that the sentence indicates a quote follows the comma, there is no "need to lowercase the initial letter of the first word to fit the quotation syntactically into your sentence". WolfmanSF (talk) 01:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

@WolfmanSF: No harm, no foul. I was trained to use MLA style but if WP’s MOS differs on that point, I defer. Anyway, thank you for your work and happy editing. -- Rrburke (talk) 01:49, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of The Base (hate group) for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bitter Oil (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Sentences

When I was at primary school, one of the first lessons in formal English I was taught was that a sentence ends in a full stop. Why are you continually reverting otherwise? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Ritchie333: Question marks and exclamation marks are considered terminal punctuation, which is a full stop, and adding a period after one is superfluous even when quoting a title, according to both the MLA style guide and the Chicago Manual of Style, on which WP:MOS is modelled. I no longer have a subscription to Chicago, but in case you do the rule is 6.124. For the MLA, please see the discussion at https://style.mla.org/punctuation-with-titles/ under the heading "Titles Ending in Question Marks or Exclamation Points in Your Prose". I note there is no corresponding section in WP:MOS. There probably should be. -- Rrburke (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, @Ritchie333: I was wrong about there not being a relevant section in the WP:MOS: it’s MOS:CONSECUTIVE. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Move reverted.

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your bold move of Michael Cohen (lawyer) has been reverted because an editor has found it to be controversial. Per Wikipedia:Requested moves, a move request must be placed on the article's talk page, and the request be open for discussion for seven days, "if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested". If you believe that this move is appropriate, please initiate such a discussion to form the appropriate consensus. Again, please note that moving a page with a longstanding title and/or a large number of incoming links is more likely to be considered controversial, and may be contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BD2412 (talk • contribs)

Hi, @BD2412:. Thank you for your note. That’s fair enough. However, the problem remains: Cohen is not a lawyer, so the current article title is plainly inaccurate. Nor is his situation similar to that of someone who has voluntarily retired from a profession and for whom the title might continue to be used. Like a defrocked priest, a disbarred lawyer is a peculiar kind of lawyer whose defining characteristic is not actually being a lawyer at all. "Former lawyer" is not a suitable alternative because it fails to convey that the person was stripped involuntarily of the title, and would not distinguish him or her from a retired lawyer and thus fails WP:PRECISION. I confess I can’t immediately think of a plausible alternative. -- Rrburke (talk) 01:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of disambiguators. John Mathews (lawyer) died in 1802, so is obviously not currently a lawyer, but is disambiguated with "(lawyer)" because that is the characteristic for which he was notable. We have countless articles disambiguated at titles that describe the subject's profession despite their death, incapacity, retirement, disbarment, or other drumming out of the profession. The question is not whether the title describes the current status of Michael Cohen, but whether it is sufficient to inform the reader that of the dozen or so notable people named "Michael Cohen", this one is not Michael Cohen (musician) or Michael Cohen (doctor) or Michael Cohen (politician), though in point of fact the musician and the doctor are dead and the politician lost his seat a decade ago. BD2412 T 02:08, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Frost, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shaftsbury.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

George Murphy

Thanks. I don't think that's usable — I never thought of "local news site" vs. "some dude's blog" as being a sliding scale rather than a strict dichotomy, but damned if that isn't perched somewhere in between the two (trying to be a true community news outlet which professes its adherence to RTDNA standards, but still clearly a one-man operation rather than an established media outlet of record) instead of being strictly one or the other — but I do appreciate and thank you for trying to help since my attempts to locate a source hadn't even found that yet. Bearcat (talk) 12:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cowessess First Nation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Milk River.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

GA reassessment for First Macedonian War

First Macedonian War has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 15:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Rrburke!

Happy New Year!

Rrburke,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See this for background context.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 22:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 22:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shakespeare Theatre Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curtain wall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)