User:Dr. Blofeld/February 2014

ArtAndFeminism

Hi Dr. B. I'm focusing today on creating women's biographies. Don't know if you're super busy with other things, but thought you (or your page stalkers) might want to participate in today's international edit-a-thon. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

What a guy... Get to work, mister! Where's my whip? LOL ;) --Rosiestep (talk) 17:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech

• WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech

There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 18:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah, but does it mean that it applies to wikipedians too? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Ralph Richardson

So glad you asked the name of the church where the funeral mass was held. Following up your enquiry I find that the authorised biography has its facts wrong, and I have got the correct answer from The Times, together with a most illuminating snippet about RR's love of the old form of ritual. Excellent result! Tim riley (talk) 11:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Excellent, nice work!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Greetings Dr. Blofeld, I hope you are well. After observing this ANI discussion I am convinced that bad faith is a mis-characterization of Msnicki! I suspect you have gleaned this as well, and wonder if you are amenable to a clarifying retraction? I sense Msnicki's distraught and believe she deserves the respite of compassion! I hope you find reason to agree. Nevertheless, I wish you the best. Cheers—John Cline (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It is a her? I assumed User:Msnicki was a he. Perhaps I'd have been a little less aggressive if I'd known but there's absolutely no excuse for nominating new articles for AFD within half an hour and not at least trying to look for sources and improve it. If she acts like that she can't expect to be treated in any other way. Rosie's articles yesterday were actually part of a womanathon thing in San Francisco to try to improve content on women in wikipedia, so Msnicki being female and trying to delete articles as part of that effort doesn't exactly make the situation any better. Nominating such articles is a waste of time and negative drain on article creators. Unless she starts at least doing a google book search and waiting for a few days before nomming then a ban from AFDing articles is definitely the right thing to do. I'm not bully and I'm not picking on her, I assume an aggressive stance against anybody who is a threat to content or content contributors, but she has to play a fair game if she wants compassion from myself. That she's stated that she's willing to try to improve her quality of patrolling is at least a step in the right direction and I wish her luck with it. If she's uncertain about articles she's quite welcome to approach me and ask me if I can find any sources.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for elaborating these things for me! I agree with the tenets you've outlined, and anticipate Msnicki will moderate his or her behavior accordingly. I simply believe the failings noted, primarily abrogations of wp:before, were a matter of competence; and not a consequence of bad faith. While either can result in sanctions, the one is a predetermined cunning; nefarious, and calculating, whereas the other is much less intentional; often the byproduct of ignorance.

I should clarify that Msnicki has not identified by gender and the pronoun classification is my own weightless assumption that inadvertently slipped into my post—pardon my error. I saw the user name as an amalgamation of Ms Nicki and reacted as if it actually was. I'd like to believe that gender had no bearing on how I consider a matter, but that is more an ideal, I suppose, than reality. Perhaps I'd have joined the lambasting had I assumed a male user; imposing my masculine superiority, and multiple facets of my importance and comely features. Damn I wish the name had been Mrnick; I'll probably have to knuckle-rub a bald spot in my neighbors head to get over this—oh well.

As an aside, I noticed that Msnicki has 202 editing contributions to the list of fashion designers and wonder if a wp:coi underpins this matter? I will ask him or her to consider the possibility; as it may relate. Cheers; my brother from a different mother.—John Cline (talk) 18:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Seeing her response on her talk page John, she still doesn't seem to get it and still continues to see me as some sort of brute rather than somebody who is trying to help improve fellow editors. I didn't attack Msnicki personally when I could have easily done so and my comments to her were perfectly civil. Now she's playing the victim and by the looks of it Drmies is falling for it. Somehow I doubt it'll be long before somebody else is showing concern..♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Hemenway Southwestern Archaeological Expedition

I'm going to work on Hemenway Southwestern Archaeological Expedition as a current GA project. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that for sure, plus improvement work. But I think it'll be fun to work on. Mogadusihu, too. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I wish you hadn't - but that is just me

Hello DB. I am not sure why you replaced the previous article with this Nostromo (television miniseries). In the first place using the term "miniseries" for British programming of this era is a misnomer - and yes I know IMDb uses the term. This particular serial would have filled a four week block of time devoted to dramas. In other words this wasn't a special event that preempted regular programming the way a miniseries does in the US. I have always applied WP:ENGVAR in dealing with articles like this. Now I have too much respect for you as a WikiP editor so I am not going to split hairs over this and, since you feel that this is the correct term, so be it. The thing I don't understand is why you didn't just move the previous article to the terminology that you prefer. Numerous editors had worked on the original article and now that edit history is gone. I wish you would reconsider and take the steps necessary to move rather than redirect the previous article. If any of this offends you than please accept my apologies as that was not my intention. As ever thanks for your continual work improving this encyclopedia and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't spot the article or realize it had been created until after I created it. And my version contains more content and seemed a more suitable title. I created the article in the first place. If you don't list the series on Nostromo (disambiguation) what do you expect? I have to disagree on serial, searching in google books turns up quite a few hits for "miniseries" and it's called that on imdb. If you really want to move it back do so, I just don't know why you had to approach me in this manner as if what I did was outrageous. If I'd spotted the existing article before creating I'd likely have added more content to the TV serial article without moving it. This is a perfect example of how listing on a dab page helps editors find things! By all means move it back if you can show me sources which refer to it as a serial.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:23, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I have not approached you in an outrageous manner and I am sorry that you have taken the attitude that I have. Since when is using words like "respect" and "apologies" outrageous? To say nothing of my thanks in the last sentence. I did not ask to have it moved back - I asked that you move the original article to your preferred title. Also, since you created the original article why didn't you add it to the DAB page? Ah well, since this is the way that you felt you needed to respond I will take your talk page off my watchlist so that I don't risk offending you again. Once again apologies for wasting your time. MarnetteD | Talk 20:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I probably created it with a ton of others a few years back so didn't stop to add it on the dab page! No need to be like that, I just didn't like the way you approached me with "I wish you hadn't" as if it really matters. I really don't mind either way but I was simply looking at the sources and "television miniseries Nostromo seemed to be the norm. It amazes me actually that you'd have it on your watchlist actually! No offense taken and hope it's reciprocated. If we do have a custom in naming minseries a serial then we should really be consistent. I don't do much work with TV so wouldn't know.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your message! I had it on my watchlist because I really enjoyed the series (being a big Claudia Cardinale - Pink Panther and Once Upon a Time in the West among so many others) when it aired. Unfortunately it hasn't been released on DVD and my VHS version is fading as the years go by. I am not sure what is best - I don't want to lose the upgrades that you made to the article today/yesterday. Can they be added to the old article after removal of the redirect and then have the new one merged/deleted? As I mentioned, per RNGVAR, serial would be preferred but it isn't a must. Since all of this might require work that you would prefer not to do I'll leave it up to you on how you want to proceed. Thanks again for your note and I am glad that I can return your talk page to my watchlist as I have learned some interesting things here over the years. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't seen it, but I was only saying to Loeba earlier I reckon it would be very good. I love Claudia Cardinale of course! I'll move it back as it is shortly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for working on this. Your time and efforts are much appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 00:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

@MarnetteD:. De nada. One thing though is why 1996 seems to often be mentioned when a lot of sources state 1997. The source I've used says it aired on British TV in February 1997 not 1996. I have a feeling though that 1996 is probably more likely to be correct?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. From the info in the article and from what I can find online it looks like it was first seen at an Italian film festival in 96. Then aired on TV in various countries in 97. Since the infobox reads "First aired" I would be inclined to change the infobox date to 97 and leave the info about the film festival in the article to answer any questions. Conversely we could add (Prix Italis) next to the date. Which ever of these you think best is fine with me. MarnetteD | Talk 16:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I think 1997. Most films are made the previous year and we call it 1997 film or whatever when it's released formally.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Italian films

Thank you for your appreciation Blofeld, it is really a hard work, maybe my harder venture here on WP! Not difficult but very long and, at times, boring... I plan to "finish" the first step of work on the 1970s and 1980s lists next week, and the 1990s this month. Thanks for fixing the IMDB links, they are a good helper. --Cavarrone 22:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for creating the article, as a big fan of Gloria Guida it was in my to-do-list. Not so urgent, as the film is pretty terrible! Strange how almost all the Google images refer to the alternative title, according to the book Dizionario dei film italiani stracult "L'affare si ingrossa" was just the working title and the film was only released with the official title... who knows? --Cavarrone 12:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
• I assume that pre-1940 and post-2000 are the most underdeveloped lists as they are related to the less interesting and productive eras of the Italian cinema, at least I think so! Before working on them I planned to work a bit on the 1950s and 1960s... while there are a bunch of titles, I would at least fill the directors/actors boxes and fix several wrong links... about linking the year to the list, I was used to do it until a few months ago when a couple of editors, reviewing the articles, started delinking the lists (eg see here), so I stopped for now. About the rest, feel free to focus on French films lists, actually they need a lot of expansion as well. Cavarrone 14:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
• 1930s Italian cinema was certainly not so impressive compared to the golden era (from Neorealism to 1970s). Fascist cinema was nothing special IMHO, with the film production largely consisting of propaganda films and some non-memorable Telefoni Bianchi stuff. However obviously there are a bunch of good films and even some masterpieces (eg a lot of stuff by Alessandro Blasetti), but in general I am not a great fan of films of that epoch. Cavarrone 15:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
• Obviously I have seen Amarcord! Probably the best Fellini's of 1970s. Even if I prefer some other films by him, namely La Strada, Le notti di Cabiria and Satyricon.

About linking the year, as I said above, 90% of my articles have the years linked, but when a cople of months ago a couple of editors started removing the links I assumed there was something wrong in them, so I stopped, what can I tell you... Cavarrone 17:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

• Never seen Novecento, I have always been scared from its length! About the removal of links, as I can see from the link above one of the removers was Bovineboy2008, in the same period one another user removed a couple of links, I don't remember who was (maybe Aspects??) I should dig a bit in my history... however if you say the links are OK we can simply review all the bluelinks of the lists and add the links... almost none of the film articles created by editors other than me and you have such links! Cavarrone 17:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
• Never seen Novecento but I know that infamous De Niro-Depardieu-Casini bed scene, lol! About Italian films I understand what you say, pretty sad... especially I assume that Commedia all'italiana films are largely unknown outside Italy and rather rare to be found with subtitles, and it's a shame... there are a bunch of undisclosed gems there. Cavarrone 18:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
• Seriously? I am indeed not surprised. There are a bunch of users with about zero content-contributions to the encyclopedia whose role in WP is just put stupid rules and obstacles to the few productive editors. Cavarrone 11:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Abuja

You were right to purge this one, but I am reluctant to put much effort into re-expanding it, even though it is a large and important subject. I started a lot of articles on Nigerian subjects, thinking the country is immensely important, and find that almost all non-cosmetic edits to them are POV-pushing with wild disregard for accuracy or citations. So "He was convicted on charges of massive corruption.^[2]" turns into "He has been recognized internationally for the many benefits he has brought to the people of his state.^[2]" (same citation). The Wikipedia model of collaborative editing, assuming most people mean well, may not work for all types of subject. I suspect this is one. Without two or three editors dedicated to keeping it in shape it will just slide rapidly downhill. Where are those dedicated editors? Is it worth the effort? Aymatth2 (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

• I don't like the implication either, but given the small number of active editors, fighting to maintain quality in areas of high vandalism is probably not worth while. It may well distract from work on the many uncontroversial subjects that are missing coverage. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Tower House GA

Now passed for GA. Not a hard decision for a reviewer: it is first rate stuff, and has FA written through it like seaside rock. There's a referencing glitch that neither KJP nor I know how to fix, which you probably know how to deal with just like that. Tim riley (talk) 14:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well done! I found it a very interesting article.--Ipigott (talk) 18:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help copyediting!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Sir Ralph

After my most stimulating and comprehensive PR ever, I have Ralph Richardson up at FAC. If you have time and inclination to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley (talk) 21:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cómo seducir a una mujer

The article Cómo seducir a una mujer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The article is not notable. The articles do not indicate notability, nor does cite any reliable sources that establish notability

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. KJ ^{click here} 08:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Phantom Killer (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Frank Ellis, John Hamilton, Robert Carson and Karl Brown

Foreign Agent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to David Clarke, John Shelton and Max King

Gallant Lady (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Richard Clarke and John Ince

Lady Caroline Lamb (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Pamela Brown and Charles Carson

Bitterne Manor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to River Itchen

Esbjerg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Meatballs

John Hoesli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The African Queen

List of American films of 1942 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Shelton

List of British films of 1921 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Leslie Faber

List of British films of 1928 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Leslie Faber

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Delete discussion

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of populated places in Turkey.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Why the break?

This is the second time I am using this section header, now you are leaving. Well good luck for that but come back soon or at least specify a date. Soham 14:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Duty

When you return, you my want to look at actor and director Nikolaus Paryla ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

+ Diogenes Verlag --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

+ expand Walter Renneisen, birthday 3 March --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm on a mini break at the moment but I'll try to start them in a day or two.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, no rush, enjoy your break! (You know why I don't want red links on my user? To prevent another The Company of Heaven ;) - There are some left in the 2013 archive.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I started the publisher myself, for one red link less on Der Kontrabaß, DYK today, - but only a stub, there's a lot more in German, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Varanasi

Hi, I remember that you asked me to have a look at this article a while ago. I can re-write sections like Geography, Demographics, Education. However, I'm not really comfortable with History. Rest all looks fine —Vensatry _(Ping) 16:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll look into it in a few days. It will require a lot of maintenance, it gets a lot of unwanted edits...♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

New Category to your User Page

I have added a new Category to your User Page, Category:Wikipedians who edit Wikipedia. If you don't like it, you can of course remove the Category.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

What! You don't consider yourself a Wikipedian?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely not! Die hard wikipedians follow rules rather than common sense and are afraid to be bold in fear of becoming unpopular!! The culture of being a wikipedian also means that Jimbo is to be treated as the divine being and authority on everything, and to act as if everything is being run smoothly :-] I consider myself an encyclopedian as I'm sure any other decent editor does here who is well aware of the problems that wikipedia presents in the way that it is run. I simply happen to be an encyclopedian who happens to edit wikipedia because it's the best the web has to offer at the present.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:02, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. It gets me thinking on the term common sense. Thanks for opening up this world to me further for a wider perspective in life.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I am just going to throw this out. Of course, its your choice on how you want to select. I notice that Category:Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian is a red link. So if by chance you did wish to be in Category:Wikipedians who edit Wikipedia, you are not selecting BOTH categories. I consider you a Wikipedian (because you do use much common sense) and you certainly do edit Wikipedia - so I see you as fitting this Category and NOT the red link Category. This Category I made is just a little humour! Besides as our article on humour says: "it derives from the humoural medicine of the ancient Greeks, which taught that the balance of fluids in the human body, known as humours (Latin: humor, "body fluid"), control human health and emotion." So, its good for the body and soul! --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

An interesting observation I came across: I can not find the term per say of "encyclopedian" in any dictionary. It is not in Wikipedia and is a redirect to Encyclopédistes. I don't think you are in this group. Perhaps you made up this word, oui? I can find although the term Wikipedian = an individual contributor (usually a volunteer) to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. I see you fitting into this term as one of the smartest Wikipedians we have, that uses much common sense - something we all could use much more of and could use tutoring from you. Anyway, that's my observation. Like you say Wikipedia is the best the web has to offer at the present.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

LOL you ponder on a lot of things don't you. I believe the correct term is "encyclopedist", I intentionally meant to say encyclopedian which infers wikipedian and librarian on here without the "wiki" governance connotation!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

See what I mean. You are way smarter than I. I hope you stay around for a long time so I can learn more stuff from you. Check out my latest creation. I love her opera on "Ben Bolt"! See External links.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Max Anderson (British director)

Hi Dr B. I don't know if you can help with this biography and save it from deletion. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:29, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

British cinema

I'll try and do it but I've got a bit of non-WP work building up, so I might have to do it over a bit of a while. I'll add it to my to-do list. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 22:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the 'welcome back' notice and the barnstar. Much appreciated. Regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Infobox decisions

Hi Blofeld, although I'd love to see more ways in which visitors could control the presentation of articles for themselves, most of our readers are not registered and therefore do not have access to preferences. We'd have to have a different system for allowing them to store things like "display/no display of infoboxes".

I was, however, dismayed by the second part of this comment of yours: It's just everytime we have an article on the main page this "why doesn't it have an infobox" argument breaks out, when all 10 arbitrators have decided it's up to the article writers to decide and they're not compulsory.

I believe you have fundamentally misunderstood the ArbCom Finding of fact, "Whether to include an infobox, which infobox to include, and which parts of the infobox to use, is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." The "editors at each individual article" - especially when linked to WP:CON - cannot be restricted solely to those who have edited the article previously. It is a fundamental contradiction of the wiki-way of doing things, particularly achieving consensus, and no editor should be trying to ring-fence an article from other opinions.

If you agree that you were wrong in your interpretation of that ArbCom decision, then I'd like you to make a clear statement at the Hattie Jacques talk page indicating that; and I'd like you to alert User:MrDannyDoodah that you accept that he has a right to comment and seek a consensus for his views on that page. --RexxS (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Deary me Rex, are we still going on about this? You misinterpreted me actually, I'm not mistaken in my interpretation, I am well aware that the arb were pretty vague with how consensus is decided and that potentially several hundred people could comment on having an infobox issue to come to a true consensus, but in practice the decision to use an infobox really is generally decided by discussion and consensus between a small group people who have written the article in question and I'm sure the arb would acknowledge this. It isn't practical to request hundreds even dozens of editors to comment on one infobox in every article. The three of us as normal came to the decision not to use an infobox, that's consensus, just not wider consensus. Mr Danny has the right to say whatever he likes, it is just disrespectful to editors who bother to promote articles and have to deal with this sort of thing every time an article hits the main page and if you can't see that then you're lacking a sensitivity chip. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I disagree entirely with your interpretation and I don't believe that ArbCom intended any content decision to be taken solely by a small self-selected group. As a consequence I have asked for clarification at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment #Clarification request: Infoboxes. --RexxS (talk) 19:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

You're something of a troublemaker aren't you? Why do you always go crying to arb whenever anybody disagrees with you?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. You have new messages at Nedim Ardoğa's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

:D (Happy)

I'm happy you thanked me for my edit on Talk:Hattie Jacques! What I was doing in that page was saying I don't care about infoboxes because they are small and unimportant compared to articles that already have information. That edit you thanked me for was my acceptance of comments by Pale Clouded White and SchroCat about my thoughts on infoboxes. IX|(C"<) 22:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@Mr. Gonna Change My Name Forever: You did get your wires a crossed a bit and they were right to indicate that you were wrong on the last part of what you said, "If they don't exist , nobody complains" is about as inaccurate a perception of the situation as you can get, quite the opposite. But I could see generally what you were getting at and that they're not worth the fuss and that you meant well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Civil parishes of County Clare

Why are you adding Category:Civil parishes of County Clare to articles about places? A lot of them don't describe any parish, not civil and not religious... The Banner talk 22:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Please, don't add the civil parishes to the County Clare navigation template. That list of civil parishes is a total disaster with most places incorrect! The Banner talk 23:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Assume good faith @The Banner:. Funny you say that as the list was taken from the County Clare article itself!! I intend to clean them up and create the missing ones if there's no objections? Is my work today on Lahinch "incorrect" too? Subdivisions of a county belong in a main nav template, perhaps it should be renamed? i can create a different template if you want?♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of List of civil parishes of County Clare for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of civil parishes of County Clare 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/List of civil parishes of County Clare until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 23:27, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@The Banner: It's rather sad Banner that you're not willing to draw a line on our Dorchester dispute and try to work with me in improving Irish articles and make an effort to get along with me. I'm not this impossible asshole that you think I am and I'll be very reasonable if you in turn show me an ounce of respect and courtesy. I'm not going to comment at the AFD in anger at what you've done, but if you could point out why you think it's grossly inaccurate for a start we might get somewhere. This source indicates that there's 81 civil parishes and all 81 in the list and which you reverted from the nav template as horribly wrong are all there. Civil parishes and their main settlements centres are typically covered in one article for the British Isles articles. Village and civil parish in one is quite acceptable, especially as the quality is poor and its easier to improve that way. That doesn't make it an error calling a settlement which is also a civil parish as such and categorizing as such. As for not including civil parishes in the template, baronies aren't places either but they're listed.. Let us move forward more smoothly please and at least give me a chance.

If you specifically object to having civil parishes in the main template as not being places, I can create a new one, but on that criteria we'd have to also move baronies to it as baronies are rather like sub districts aren't they. I'm quite happy to create templates for baronies and parishes by county and simply just link List of civil parishes at the bottom of the main template. What do you reckon? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Justin Bieber RfC

If you have time and the desire to re-engage in the debate over legal issues and polls at the Justin Bieber article ....pls comment at Talk:Justin Bieber#RfC: Behaviour and legal issues Thank you for your time. -- Moxy (talk) 04:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Kazandibi

	Kazandibi
	Thank you for your everything you do to keep wikipedia a better place.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Aw thanks User:Antidiskriminator, I certainly feel sometimes that some people take the work I do here for granted! Once in a while it would be nice to see a "thankyou" click on articles I've expanded from some different people for a change, I thank different people all the time...♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Gardens

	So I added a book to the list ...
	but if gardens aren't your cup of tea, no worries. Rosiestep (talk) 05:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Re:María Antinea

Have put the lady on my "to do" list. :) We hope (talk) 16:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, Doc. File:María Antinea.jpg was already at Commons. I found no dating on the the non-La Doctora Castañuelas photos there so that would be a problem--proving that they meet the Argentine PD requirements. With the film, we're able to point to outside sources such as IMDB to prove it dates from 1950. See if these two help. We hope (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Media related to La doctora Castañuelas at Wikimedia Commons

Yeah it's 1950. Thanks for that!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:30, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Dr. B and @We hope - Thanks for the teamwork on María Antinea. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Japanese cinema

Hello, Dr. Blofeld. You have new messages at Michitaro's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians.

You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. We contacted you on 1/27/2014. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. Thank you again for all you do! --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 05:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@JMatthews (WMF): Much appreciated of course, thankyou, but I'm unlikely to wear or need them. Feel free to pass them on to somebody less fortunate than myself.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: Thank you for your response! I will do as you ask and pass the gift along to somebody less fortunate. Thank you again for all that you do! --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@JMatthews (WMF): Thanks. I'm joining WMUK later this week to request some assistance with funding some books I need so hopefully that works out! The thought is much appreciated, have a great day!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: You as well. Have a good one! --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ballynacally (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Faction fighters and Samuel Lewis

Here Comes Kelly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Richard Clarke and John Ince

María Antinea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Santander and Carlos Fernandez

Philip Seymour Hoffman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Sam Shepherd and Vanity Fair

Spotlight Scandals (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Frank Fay and James Bush

Dough Castle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Donal O'Brien

Edmund Burns (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Charles Barton

Intermezzo criminal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Carlos Castro

List of civil parishes of County Clare (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dysert

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

YGM

Hello. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

```Buster Seven Talk 17:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Municipalities of Algeria

I made a proposal to revert your usage of the French-based term, see Talk:Communes_of_Algeria#Requested_move_2 . Statoids switched since some hours to use "municipality". That is then one translation for all items named baladiyah. Maybe you like to review your point of view and help all Arab entities be represented more consistently and less influenced from Colonial times. Cheers Androoox (talk) 02:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Theatres in Madrid

12 done, 42 to go. At one a day, we'll be done in 6 weeks, although I'm thinking we could pass on the ones which don't have an img. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:26, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Really like the new look of your userpage. Muy bueno. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Carnebone for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carnebone 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/Carnebone until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 10:01, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help on the horse breeds of France navbox. Robsinden is causing a lot of problems on multiple navboxes, and I don't know how to get him to drop the stick. All help much appreciated. Montanabw<sup>(talk)</sup> 19:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I had similar problems with him on Template:William Beaudine which is now almost complete. Nobody likes red links but they're vital in building this encyclopedia and working towards full coverage. if there's some notable breeds missing and you intend adding them from French wiki linking them ready in the nav box is the most constructive way forward. He has a point I guess about navigation being for navigation but he's taken WP:REDNOT to an extreme level to the point it is infringing on the freedom and goodwill of editors to liberally work on what they want.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, this one may sharpen the horns of the dilemma. Check it out. Template:National_members_of_the_International_Federation_for_Equestrian_Sports, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2014_February_14#Template:National_members_of_the_International_Federation_for_Equestrian_Sports, Template talk:National members of the International Federation for Equestrian Sports. Montanabw<sup>(talk)</sup> 22:29, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hakan Kıran

Hello Dr. Blofeld, a user has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Justin Bieber RfC: second survey

Hi Dr. Blofeld, thank you for your contribution to the RfC on Justin Bieber's behaviour and legal issues. Some users have posted that the RfC is currently a mess, and that we need to be very explicit in what we agree to include and what we don't. As such, I have created a second survey, which cuts the content into points. Could you take the time to post your opinion on each point, whether you think it should be included or not, or summarized, or changed. It will be a bit tedious but we need your detailed input to move forward. Thanks again. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 05:23, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Francisca Cualladó Baixauli‎

There's a photo of Francisca Cualladó Baixauli‎ on the Portuguese language article in .png format. Can it be converted or something so that the img can appear on her en language article? I had hoped someone would come along and fix my blunder, but instead, it was removed. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Mullum Malarum/GA1

This is my second review, can you look through and see if I made any mistakes? Soham 16:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks very good at first glance, both the article and review. I'll give it a full read tomorrow. Hope you and Kailash are well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

• Okay thanks. Yes I am well and I hope Kailash is too. Soham 14:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• Blo, I see that you nommed Enid Blyton for GA, I am willing to give you an impartial review but it will take some time (working my butt off for studies). So if you are willing to wait then I'll reserve the review and then do it after 7 days, if its okay with you? Soham 15:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I've asked Tim riley to review it. He might refuse though. I might have something else in mind soon which you could review!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

• Umm... Lets see what you have in store for me. Soham 15:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

So Blofeld, did u check Soham's GA review of Mullum Malarum as he asked? I'm sure he did pretty well. And I of course nominated the article, which is my fifth consecutive GA. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll read it this evening, watching The Barefoot Contessa right now. You could reserve Pinocchio (1940 film) Soham until a week for now. I'm still yet to add my additions.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Better idea, why don't I help with it? I have experience with films and I would love to be of some help to Koala and you. School has made my stress levels shoot through the roof! For reviewing I need a calmer mind which I suppose some content contributing will help in. Soham 15:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Seven Tickets to India, Please, and Reservations for an Adventure|publisher=''The New York Times]]''|date=4 May 2012|accessdate=18 February 2014}}</ref>
• novembre"]. Retrieved 28 May 2012.</ref> and at the [[Glasgow Film Festival]] on 17 February 2012,> before being released widely in the United Kingdom and Ireland on 24 February 2012. This was

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

And I added the page for the right one! Wgolf (talk) 20:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Shaku India returns

The adamant user Shaku India's never-ending efforts to "clean" the colourisation section of Mughal-e-Azam are back again. Bcos he claims all the cited material is "wrong" and keeps removing them with no-one to support him, I request u to check the sources and see if he was correct. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I did check the sources and the information before the FAC and as far as I could see it was accurate. Even if there was an error or two that wouldn't justify nuking the entire section as he's done would it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I believe everyone who took part in the FAC of MeA checked the sources to find the info accurately written, and that is why the article became FA. Bcos Shaku does not seem to stop his actions at any cost (even after Bollyjeff sent him authentic sources), I have reported him. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

If you're still in doubt that he might be right ask Vensatry or Dwai or somebody to double check.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Antonio Castellanos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Hidalgo and Escuela Nacional de Artes Plásticas

Brett C. Leonard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hung

Eulalia Ramos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cartagena

George Lynn (actor) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to To Be or Not to Be

Jordan Hoffman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

My New Gun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Michael Flynn

W. Mott Hupfel III (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Wilmington

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

NNBW

Nieuw Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek is a find! Wish I could translate from Dutch. How can we work on these? --Rosiestep (talk) 14:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

This is why we need to involve college students around the planet. If every en-speaking college student in the Netherlands translated one article a day... --Rosiestep (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

More Grundheber

More on Franz Grundheber got more red links, and there's the growing list List of female dancers, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

some ideas

I know you have a bit more experience with some of our entities, like commons, than I do. I have recently finished a page about some bigger and smaller things which might be useful, with the hope, maybe, perhaps, to get some made subjects for discussion around here. The page, which wound up being a lot longer than I expected, can be found at User:John Carter/Opinions. If at any time you were to have the time to look it over, and maybe offer additional ideas or criticism of some already presented, I would very much welcome it. John Carter (talk) 16:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@John Carter: not sure what I can add to it. Of course nothing beats raw hard work needed in articles themselves.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

PR request

Hi Doc, Could I put in a request for a PR when you have a chance? It's for the writer E.W. Hornung, who is only remembered nowadays for one of his characters, rather than the rest of his considerable output. There's no rush, so whenever you get the chance, it would be much appreciated! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Sure, wow that an excellent expansion, I'll take a look this evening probably.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Image has no source information

I recently updated an image that you have uploaded long ago. File:AVMeiyappa.jpg But a bot keeps tagging the file, asking for source information. Can you take a look and do the needful to avoid the file getting deleted. Thanks for your attention. -- Sriram <sup>speak up</sup> 14:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I noticed the same message on the file. I think that the problem is that the file uses {{navbox}} instead of one of the standard FUR templates – I asked the bot operator about a similar issue with another file some time ago. The file obviously has a source, so no administrator will delete it as unsourced. The bot seems to tag files for which new revisions have been uploaded recently, so maybe it will be re-tagged if new revisions are uploaded at some point in the future. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah its my old rationale box, the bot doesn't recognize the external link inside the box. Probably best to just replace the template with an uptodate rationale template.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

For the barnstar and chiming in...looks like the IP will move the debate to notability notice board; perhaps it'll be the right forum to get Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features) to be upgraded to a guideline. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome @Carlossuarez46:. It should be a guideline. The way I see it is that although you could argue that creating a big tabled list of villages with population and coordinates by district might be initially more feasible for the reader, eventually the Internet is going to become so global and that by the 2020s or whatever they'll be poorly educated Iranians in wiki editing creating crappy unsourced new stubs for these villages haphazardly and it's best they're started properly and consistently. The concern of course is that like with India and Pakistan they'll attract spammers. We'll need to address that when it comes, the problem will become increasingly apparent in Africa too I think. But if you look into it enough there's likely local news outlets which have information about these villages which given time should become available online. It's a worthy cause and your dedication to the task has been exemplary.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thank you for editing Mullum Malarum and making it look more GA-worthy. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

• Make it two, one from me as well for being an exemplary mentor! Soham 14:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome, keep up the great work on older Tamil movies!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The cite needs the title and a date of the hearing, not just part of the title of the compilation. That does seem reasonable. I added "Progress on Weirton-Steubenville Bridge" as the possible title, although I suspect it is a sub-heading, not the main title of the hearing, and "Status of Main Span of the Weirton-Steubenville Bridge" is another sub-heading. Incidentally, the article got the facts wrong. The senate report was for the fiscal 1983 appropriations bill (presumably issued in 1982), and the dates for plans to be received and the project approved were the proposed schedule in this report, not necessarily what actually happened. The title of the Senate report may be Discretionary Bridge Funding. I can't find the date of the report or of the hearing. I give up. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:21, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Franz Grundheber

Thanks and have a good weekend Victuallers (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Medicine women

Category:Medicine women, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Enid Blyton

Hi there, can you explain why you reverted my edits to Enid Blyton? Caiaphodus (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

@Caiaphodus: My rather tired eyes last night initially took your comma after xenophobia and that mentioned above as making it detached from at odds with the liberal environment which is wrong as it was intended to indicate that they were part of the problem. I don't think also is needed in the last edit, but feel free to edit it now as in looking again your edits to it were legit.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:00, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Blo, the article uses serial comma, therefore is it written in British English? I saw criticise so I went and added a notice to the tp to solve confusions like this in the future. I am here just to confirm it. —Soham 09:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Criticise is British yes. I typically write in American English, and my computer program red lines Criticise as an incorrect spelling so that's part of the reason I avoid it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

• So the article is [written] in BE right? —Soham 09:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Presumably, I haven't checked. I write in American by default but Eric might have gone through and put it in British English. I think it probably should be written in British English. Dr. Blofeld 09:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Puzzle

Anybody watching I have something to figure out

The number choices are 36, 54, 40, and 50

The numbers go before the letters which stand for some words so it would be

xx C in a PIJ and xx W M for GWA

the last one I figured out was 21 S on a D =21 spots on a dice, the one before that was xx FO in a P =20 fluid ounces in a pint. So it would be something like 50 captains in a Palestine Islamic Jihad. Can anybody think what PIJ and GWA might stand for? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

• 54 Cards in a Pack Including Jokers. Not sure about the other one. Moswento <sup>talky</sup> 10:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Awesome Moswento, thanks!!

now

xx W M for GWA

xx can be either 36, 40 or 50. 50 Women Men or Working Men for Getting Work Accomplished mmm I think not.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

50 Golden Wedding Anniversary. —Soham 11:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yup you've got it, well done, it's Y M not WM so yeah 50 years married for a Golden wedding anniversary!! Excellent, thanks both!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Do you want more? I have lots of them. I can mail you some. Wait I need to handle few Good-faith noobs first, one is a social crusader the other is a... If you are interested take a look at Highway (2014 Hindi film): Revision history, Daan0001's tp and Talk:Highway (2014 Hindi film). —Soham 12:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Nope, it was for a competition, enough mind bending for one day! Still not as bad as this!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yup! —Soham 12:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Crowne Plaza Hotel (Lebanon)

Hi Dr B. I just thought you'd like to know that the article you created for Crowne Plaza Hotel (Lebanon) is at AfD. Thanks. Lugnuts <sup>Dick Laurent is dead</sup> 13:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Notable @Aymatth2:?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Sacarello's

Hi Doc. Don't know if you remember but around the time you created articles on Gib's hotels you asked me to list some notable food & drink establishments... I've just published one of them and would be very grateful if you could review it. My post here refers. Any suggestions for a DYK hook? --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 19:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

That one looks very good @Gibmetal77:! nice job on that! I'm afraid I have nothing to do with DYK anymore and was only credited recently by Vic. If ever you want anything reviewed for GA though I'm happy to do it. Can you add the coordinates and mention the location of it in the lead?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Cheers for the kudos!

I meant a general review, as you've now done. Things gone sour (again) at DYK? This nom has been my first in quite a while.

Never gone for GA, nor have I given it much thought before... Do you reckon I should give it a go with Sacarello's?

Will add the coords and mention location in the lead now. Thanks very much for pointing this out. --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 20:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I think there's quite a few of your past articles which could be brought up to GA status. Much more worthwhile than DYK. Meh, probably best I don't talk about DYK as I don't want to offend anybody who does good work here but happens to contribute to it. Let's just say that you'll be much more respected on wikipedia for getting articles to GA than contributing to DYK and will receive a lot less complaints... Both have a good purpose but DYK is problematic in many ways which I shan't go into. I'm happy to help you get some deserving Gibraltar articles up to GA if you're interested. Probably best to start with some of your general history or bastion articles first I'd say.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! How about King's Bastion? --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 21:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Needs a fair bit of work, could use a restructure and stronger sourcing, but I'm happy to help you promote it to GA if you're interested.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I'm interested as it's something I've never done and would like to give it a shot. If you think that one will be a little troublesome, how about one of the articles Anne created before she vanished? --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 22:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes those were very good weren't they. Can you suggest some? Not troublesome but it'll need maybe a couple of hours to improve it before nomming. Perhaps it's best to go with the ones which are already close first as you say.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, how about one of these: Europa Point Lighthouse, Rosia Bay, Synagogues of Gibraltar, Flat Bastion, Flat Bastion Magazine, Main Guard... Here's her full list of articles. --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 23:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I'll look tomorrow. Of course we could always take Flat Bastion Road to FAC eh Fram ;-]♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Haha that would be good!

Cool, let me know. --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 23:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Let's start south, Europa Point Lighthouse seems a good place to start. I've made the necessary changes needed to pass it and have nommed it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for this! Now I guess we wait for the reviewers comments? I see you're also planning Flat Bastion :D --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 13:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll look at that tomorrow probably.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

After Chopin

Cher docteur - apologies and all that. I moved to a review for GA a bit earlier than I had anticipated to avoid a morass of Polish-oriented detail which other editors were pressing for, but which I felt was over the top as far as GA was concerned. As regards FAC I gladly cede you the lead for that (the poisoned chalice strategy) and will be glad to support you. Best, --Smerus (talk) 08:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Europa Point Lighthouse

Awesome! I was expecting at least a few comments but that was completely painless. Thanks for tweaking it to meet the criteria before nominating it. Let me know if I should carry out any work for the next one. --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 12:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The lead needs expansion on Flat Bastion. I'll look at it later.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Burmese Harp.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Enid Blyton

Hi Dr. Blofeld, well done on the recent GA. I have nominated it for DYK here. Thank you very much for getting it there; I think all Brits loved her stories as children. Best, Matty.007 19:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks @Matty.007:. You're the first one who has said anything! I consider it a core article on here, a pity that Eric is missing and can't use his books to get it up to the FA standard it deserves.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Tamu Agung

Orlady (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Isaac Hughes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gravesend

John Sanders (painter) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Clifton

List of American films of 1931 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Gilbert

Philip Seymour Hoffman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Scent of a Woman

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Dwarka

Would you take a look at [1] which led me to Dwarakadheesh Temple which I didn't know about. I understand why you removed the material you did last November (and I missed that), but that's left it open to the fringe stuff. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC) Just revert it if unsourced @Dougweller:♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Archiving of Clarification request: Infoboxes

The above Clarification Request initiated on 8 February 2014 has been archived. You can view it here. For the Arbitration Committee, Rockfang (talk) 15:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

RIP, Paco de Lucía

RIP, Paco de Lucía, flamenco guitarist extraordinaire. You died much too young. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

RIP, Paco de Lucía. I've seen you and your fantastic band of Andalusians at the Upper Square in Olomouc, July 2013. I remember the evening was hot as hell, I remember the top of the Holy Trinity Column and steeples of old Olomouc churches protruding behind the stage. No words from you. Just music. Both contemplative and wild. Pure perfection. Now I'm sad ... El Amor Brujo plays in my head since morning. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Vejvan, yeah you really had to hear him to appreciate him. Unfortunately I never had the privilege of seeing him live as you and Gerda had. I dedicate this to him.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I hate it when articles like this get so much exposure. People start changing images and adding POV etc and altering what's not been touched in over a year. Annoying. I'll have to wait until it dies down to repair the damage..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

He played St. Michael's Cave in 1980, sadly I wasn't even thought of back then and never got a chance to see him live before he passed. I wonder how he got round the closed border back then. Te echamos de menos Paco, maestro eterno... --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 23:30, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah I see I thought 77 was your birth year! A loss for Gibraltarpedia too, him coming from Algeciras. I'm sure they'll have some sort of public mourning in the town, would be good if somebody could photograph it but I guess you live in Gibraltar not in Spain!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Nah, that would make it to easy for the identity thieves . Yeah I do live in Gib and I don't have a long enough telephoto lense! The unfortunate situation at the border has also kept me here since August. @Falconaumanni: is from Algeciras where they've given 3 days of official mourning. ¿Carlos, nos echas un cable? --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 23:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Saw this on the main page and thought of you... Hope all is well (apart from this, obviously). Best, Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Jen, hope you're well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I heard about this yesterday, I'm so sorry to hear on what happened to him. He was one the best. He inspired me to start playing guitar. :( ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

He made even simple chords like C, F, G, A7, D7, E 7 etc seem amazing, check out this. Haha keep watching 2.41-2.51 over and over.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

It's stunning. I don't know how he did it! Even though legends always go too soon, his legacy will live forever. By the way, I know this might sound irrelevant to his section but I'm planning on bringing Bentworth to FA standard soon, easier said than done of course! I'm wondering if you could see what problems the article currently has? Colonel Ukiws has been out of combat for a few months now, I think it's safe! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think Bentworth has FA potential. It needs some specialist local history books and other resources really to get the best possible article. The prose just doesn't flow like an FA because a lot are just random facts. I'm worried that the article will actually get worse in preparing it. I honestly don't think it's worth it. Better to spent the time getting some of the others East Hampshire towns and villages up to GA. Aalborg would stand a better chance.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree, I've already made a start on cleaning up the article and removing some nonsense Ukiws put on the article (half of it is made up of who passed down a manor to who, for example!). I'm going to go out tomorrow and take some pictures of some houses and the school in Bentworth if the weather is nice. I could also get some specialist history books for the local area if I can. And I agree with you on bringing some East Hampshire articles to GA, I could make a start on some! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that it's a fairly small village so it's not going to have a good balance of material you're going to find for larger towns and cities. Pick a town or village in the county you want to work on and we'll get it to GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Gibmetal77: Unfortunately (today more than ever) I'm not living in Algeciras at this time, but in Valencia. I'll try to find someone to take photographs of the acts but perhaps it will be easier to find free images on the web in the next days. Falconaumanni (Carlos para los amigos) 11:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

@Falconaumanni: Thanks Carlos, any luck? --Gibmetal 77<sup>talk 2 me</sup> 12:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Theater Kiel

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts for this, especially the heroic addition of the infobox, facing to wiki-torture and sanctions by The Committee. Mourning Paco, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, can you find anything on those other theatres?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

not really (probably ot much to say anyway), also more interested right now in an excommunicated bishop and a classical composer using cattle call (all in German, sorry), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

thinking of you: the cantata that you reviewed for GA, - I proposed it for FA (my first try), link from the top of my user, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, you got my attention by mentioning me at the FAC! I'll comment later. Best of luck!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! new red link there: Alfred Dörffel, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes

Why did you revert adding these films into a sortable table? [2] AldezD (talk) 00:13, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes 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/List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AldezD (talk) 03:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Reflective reviews

In Mullum Malarum, I gave the name "Reflective reviews" for the section that contains modern-day reviews of the 1978 film. Is that an appropriate title? Or is there any better title than that? Kailash29792 (talk) 06:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I like it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment :) If it was not an appropriate name, most James Bond film articles (like From Russia With Love, Thunderball, Licence to Kill and others) would not have used it. And they all are GA's. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hornung

Following a very productive and useful PR (for which, once again, my thanks), E.W. Hornung has made his way to FAC for wider consideration. Any further thoughts or comments would be most welcome. - SchroCat (talk) 13:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

East Hampshire towns

Hi Blofeld, unfortunately the weather right now is terrible and I can't go out and take pictures on what I wanted to last night. I looked for a few towns to bring up to GA and Alton, Hampshire seems like a good one as I can take a few pictures and get some research for that article. The downside is however is that Alton was written by a five year old. I mean really, I removed the lines "as it came at harvest time and the farmers were not happy about that" and "In 1001 Danish forces invaded England, plundering, ravaging and burning, and spreading terror and devastation" doesn't sound very encyclopaedia like LOL! I'm going to make a start copy editing it now, if you want to you can help with it or pick another place? This is a good chance for another GA. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

@Jaguar: It really is in a bloody awful state, embarrassingly poor. Yeah, disperse the chronology into prose while you're at it! Make a start I'll look in at it on the weekend. I'd be tempted to nuke it entirely to just the lead and empty the contents into your sandbox. Then section by section it can be readded once written properly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I knew it would be a challenge! Don't worry, I've already made a start copy editing and fixing various refs. I will make a start on the chronology today. I will also go and see on what research I could find tomorrow... wow, if I keep all this up I might remove that 'semi-retired' tag from my page LOL! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

thanks for the barnstar. I will work on Lae main page once I finish the sub pages and yes will take more photos but the one "above" photo is already taken from the highest building already

cheers Phenss (talk) 21:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)