User talk:Grutness/archive58

This file is an archive - please do not add new discussion here - add it to my Talk page

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Suburbs of Dunedin

I think you have probably noticed my working through the suburbs of Dunedin adding demographics and making general improvements. You seem to have been the main author on most of these. When several suburbs are covered in the same article with redirects, eg Kenmure and Bradford being included in Kaikorai Valley, I've mostly left that structure as is. Sometimes I've split those articles into new ones, as with Concord, because the fundamental character of Concord seems at odds with Burnside. I'm happy to go back and split some of the existing multi-surburb articles, or combine statistical areas in different ways, if you think that would be more appropriate.

Kew and Corstorphine are next on my list. Should I create an new article for Kew? Should I split Forbury from St Clair? Should I combine Forbury with South Dunedin instead? The three schools in South Dunedin are technically in the Forbury statistical area. The other one that's coming up: should I split Tainui, New Zealand out of Andersons Bay, and if I do, should I split Ocean Grove out of Tainui?

You or any other editor are always welcome to tweak the surrounding suburbs or any other aspect of my edits. I don't have the local knowledge so I've probably got some things wrong.

If you post messages to me on the talk pages of any of these articles, please ping me, because I don't usually put them on my watchlist.-gadfium 04:10, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi G - Forbury could be split out (it's probably more similar to Caversham than to either St Clair or South D in any case), and definitely Ocean Grove can be split - it has quite a different feel from Tainui. Tainui could probably combine with Musselburgh as easily as it could with Andy Bay; there'd be nothing wrong with having it as a separate article though. I originally only added them as redirects because there were so many of them and the boundaries aren't really that strict for the most part - also it would have led to some very small articles unless I was willing to put in the hard yards on research, and I was too lazy :) Grutness...wha? 05:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the advice. I take it you don't suggest Kew should be split from Corstorphine. I'll probably add demographics to them later tonight.-gadfium 05:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I missed that one! It probably could be, but it wouldn't be a priority. Grutness...wha? 05:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship!

Thank you! Grutness...wha? 00:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Just added a stub template...and again fondly remembered you...I hope life treats you well. You are still going strong I see. Time flies, really. Toodle pip :). Lectonar (talk) 13:43, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that @Lectonar: yes, it's been a while since we've been in touch! I'm here on and off, when the Real World allows... then my obsessive-compulsive side comes out and I do a few thousand edits in a week :) Hope things are fine with you! Grutness...wha? 14:51, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Elridgevillmap.png

The file File:Elridgevillmap.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Redundant to File:Belize location map.svg which is hosted on Commons

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Salavat (talk) 09:44, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Salavat: Good Lord... is that old thing still in existence? I made it as a temporary stopgap 17 years ago! Delete at will. Grutness...wha? 11:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, must of managed to slip through the cracks. 17 years just sounds like an unimaginable time frame for anything on Wikipedia. Salavat (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

State Highway maps

Kia ora Grutness - I noticed that you seem to be the user behind many of the route maps for the NZ state highway / other route articles. I'm planning on whipping up some articles in the near future for some of the red links (Thermal Explorer highway, Wine trail and so on), and was wondering whether you'd be interested in doing accompanying maps for the articles so that they're able to stay consistent? Turnagra (talk) 04:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - that was ages ago! Yes, if I can find the template I used, I'll do that :) Grutness...wha? 07:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boring -> Born

Hi there, thanks for picking up on that unfortunate typo on my end over at Nicola Toki. Nauseous Man (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was the funniest typo I'd seen all week! :) Grutness...wha? 02:50, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Red House (paris)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Red House (paris) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 19#Red House (paris) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:19, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's why I moved the article in the first place. Grutness...wha? 02:55, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed your Otago update to Template:Seismic faults of New Zealand

You are rather more active on Wikipedia than me. Once lived in house in Dunedin that in retrospect I was convinced was likely to have been built on a historic fault escarpment related perhaps to the Kaikorai Fault. If so the escarpment displacement indicated a past event of 7+ Mw on this rarely active fault. Less relevant to major faults with higher risk I was there for the 1974 4.9 Mw that brought down neigbours chimmeys ChaseKiwi (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few faults round Dunedin, but thankfully they are at the least dormant. You're right though - the 1974 one was a rattler. FWIW, I live out at St Clair. Let's hope there are no more 7+ quakes in the immediate future! Grutness...wha? 03:24, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Ditchfield

Hi. I noticed that you'd edited The Tumbleweeds recently. I happened across Ditchfield's article which, at the time, was about his brief cricket career. They're definitely the same person though, so have incorporated some details from the band article as well as the draft article that was created on Ditchfield. You might want to have a look and see if there's anything else obvious that needs adding. Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - thanks for that. I can't think of anything else. All I was really doing was trying to save an article from deletion - the Tumbleweeds at least are worth an article, even if individual members are perhaps less so. But if Bill was also a first-class cricketer, that changes matters and his article is definitely worth having too. Grutness...wha? 03:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Islamic organizations established in 1935

A tag has been placed on Category:Islamic organizations established in 1935 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Someone must have emptied it. Ah well, so be it. Grutness...wha? 08:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...we had some problems with empty categories recently, see here. Might be a glitch. Lectonar (talk) 08:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could be connected, but I doubt it. It would make more sense if someone's just decided to make these categories by decade instead of by year though. Grutness...wha? 11:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source?

The fact that much of low-life is unsourced is no reason to add another unsourced statement: please add a ref. Thanks. (Feral (disambiguation) is on my watch list). PamD 07:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it is unsourced is also no reason not to add another statement either. And I was busy hunting for some references after my network went down. I'm adding them now. Grutness...wha? 12:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dignan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Dignan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mccapra (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra: If you'd taken ten seconds to look, you'd see that a vandal had removed text from the page. It has been a perfectly sensible redirect to Ó Duibhgeannáin for more than a decade. I thought there was also a guideline not to boilerplate such notices on long-standing editors (with 18 years on WP - 16 of them as an admin - and over quarter of a million edits, I doubt I need reminding about using the sandbox!) Please check a page's history before slapping a speedy deletion notice on it! Grutness...wha? 02:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hear, hear. Schwede 66 04:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies and thanks for pointing out my mistake. Mccapra (talk) 06:30, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - apologies from me for being grumpy! :) Grutness...wha? 07:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Eighteenth First Edit Day!

Thank you! Grutness...wha? 02:32, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Thank you! Grutness...wha? 02:32, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost/paranormal sections

Can I ask why you are adding the above to articles. Aside from the fact they appear completely uncited, I'm at a loss as to how you think doing so enhances the 'pedia. KJP1 (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In what way does it not enhance the encyclopaedia? It is extra meaningful and relevant information about the subject of the articles. As it happens, I simply added the ones from the Paranormal Lockdown article where there was no cross-reference to the location articles. All the other locations with articles that were dealt with in that series already had similar information in their articles. Why the double-standard where some of those links are perfectly acceptable and other identical links to other articles aren't acceptable? In any case, many articles for locations which have a reputation for hauntings have information about those purported hauntings in their articles. And that information is there because it is relevant information about the locations. And before you suggest it, it doesn't matter whether hauntings are real or not - the fact that the fame of these places is in part because of their reputation is no less relevant than talking about a myth relating to a city's origin or name. As for being uncited, all the citations are in the Paranormal Lockdown article. Grutness...wha? 14:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can I suggest you don’t edit war, hardly suitable behaviour. If you really want this nonsense to appear, then make a case for it on the relevant Talkpage. And Other Stuff Exists is an extraordinarily weak argument for an admin to use. Crud exists all over the place on here, because people haven’t noticed it/had the opportunity to clear it up. I remove all paranormal nonsense from every historic building article I see, unless it has at least a half-way decent cite. And mentions on TV programmes that specialise in this sort of garbage don’t constitute reliable sources. KJP1 (talk) 14:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whose edit warring? I simply added references, as you suggested. Please stop deleting my perfectly acceptable additions to articles. You don't own them. Grutness...wha? 14:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An admin, who thinks a promotional site for a ghost tours business, [1] constitutes a Reliable source. Wonders will never cease. KJP1 (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're ignoring the BBC source, then? By the way, are you really claiming that I am using "Other stuff exists" - a fallacious argument in deletion discussions - for adding something to an article? Not really the same thing at all. Firstly, it wasn't added as part of a deletion discussion (so doesn't apply), and secondly, any encyclopaedia should aim for internal consistency. If you wish to start a larger-scoped discussion about removing all mentions of hauntings from Wikipedia, so be it - but don't pick and choose individual articles. Grutness...wha? 01:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon H Brown

Hi there,

I have just put up a page for Gordon H Brown the New Zealand art historian. If you have a moment could you give it a quick look to make sure there are no terrible mistakes! I wondered about using a disambiguation as there are so many Gordon Browns. If you thought this was called for I would go for (art historian). Cheers mmd

Manymanydogs (talk) 02:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look, though I don't know much about Gordon H Brown. As long as there are no other Gordon H Browns I don't see the need for parentheses, though make sure he's listed at Gordon Brown (disambiguation). Grutness...wha? 11:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page to Gordon H. Brown (with a full stop) as is standard, added a link to the dab page I mentioned, and added a group of categories. Other than that, from what I can tell it looks pretty good! Grutness...wha? 11:39, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I've made a redirect from his full name Gordon Harold Brown and added him to List_of_people_with_surname_Brown#Art_and_architecture. And Yes, Success: he is linked from List of honorary doctors of Victoria University of Wellington by his full "Sunday" name. It happens quite often, so it's always worth adding a link from the full form of someone's name (as used in honours lists etc) and also from any other version you find in any source, or which could otherwise be likely. Sometimes it needs a dab page entry or a hatnote. Always worth then checking the "What links here", just in case you've found a guitarist or tennis player with the same name, so that some disambiguation or piping is needed. PamD 16:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, really appreciate it Manymanydogs (talk) 17:50, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Pam - good work all round :) Grutness...wha? 01:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]